|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
試論南山律家之「大乘圓教」戒體論 ── 為紀念弘一大師「專弘南山」而作=The Concept of Precept Substance in Mahayana Complete Teachings according to the Nanshan Vinaya School: In Memory of Venerable Hong Yi’s Devotion to the Nanshan Vinaya |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
釋昭慧 =Shih, Chao-hwei
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
法印學報=Journal of Dharma Seals
|
|---|
| 巻号 | n.3 |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2013.10 |
|---|
| ページ | 75 - 102 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 財團法人弘誓文教基金會 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
https://www.hongshi.org.tw/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 桃園縣, 臺灣 [Taoyuean hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| ノート | 作者：玄奘大學宗教學系教授、系主任兼文理學院院長
Author: Professor and Director, Department of Religious Studies, Hsuan Chuang University |
|---|
| キーワード | 弘一大師=Venerable Hong Yi; 新律=the New Vinaya; 舊律=the Old Vinaya; 南山律宗=the Nanshan Vinaya School |
|---|
| 抄録 | 本篇論文針對弘一大師由新律（《根本說一切有部毘奈耶》）轉持舊律（《四分律》），分析其心路歷程，非僅來自徐蔚如之一句勸諫：「繼承前人事業，不宜另辟蹊徑」。
弘一大師之所以專弘南山律宗，應該是在他精研律籍之後，於舊律中看到了新律所欠缺的核心價值──「戒體論」。然後溯源印度部派時代有關「無表」的論師異說，再依《在家備覽》宗體篇以為線索，研尋南山律籍中所陳述的三家戒體學說（實法宗、假名宗與圓教宗），最後再就「緣起論」的佛法觀點而作一回應。
接著上溯《阿含》本教，以「緣起」正理探討戒體屬性，並用來檢視有關「戒體論」的爭議，認為各家戒體論中最有爭議的，反倒是與「緣起」正理稍有隔閡的真常唯心戒體論，而那恰恰是弘一大師最為推尊的戒體論。
The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the spiritual journey of Venerable Hong Yi when he switched his attention away from the new Mūlasarvāstivāda-Vinaya to promulgate instead the old Cāturvargīya-vinaya (Four-Part Vinaya in Chinese). We sometimes oversimplify his diversion by reducing it to only follow a Buddhist layman Xu Wei Ru’s advice: to build on the contributions of his predecessors, not to blaze a new trail. In reality, however, the Venerable master should have more complex arguments to support his choice.His devotion to spreading the Nanshan Vinaya as we know today should be a result following his thorough study of vinaya collections. After having compared two versions of monastic rules, Venerable Hong Yi should perceive a core value in the old vinaya, a value inherently related to the substance of precepts.
To elucidate the Venerable master’s vision, this paper discusses the substance of precepts in more detail. It begins by tracing the ideological differences of early Buddhist schools about the property of precept substance (avijñapti in Sanskrit). It explores then three philosophic outlooks on the issue illustrated by the Real Dharma School, the Unreal Names School and the Complete Teaching School, as defined in Nanshan Vinaya texts. Such research is based on evidence retrieved from the book the Venerable master compiled: the Guide to the Nanshan Vinaya for Lay Buddhists (Chinese edition).
By referring to the Buddha’s basic teachings in āgama sutras, the law of dependent origination, this paper ends with a deliberation on the property of precept substance, and offers some observations over disagreement between different schools. It seems that the specific definition from the doctrine of Tathāgata-garbha (embryo of Tathāgata ) is the most controversial as it is estranged slightly from the principle of causality; nevertheless, the idea has been held in high esteem by Venerable Hong Yi. |
|---|
| 目次 | 一、弘一大師「專弘南山」原委 78
二、簡述各家戒體論 81
三、道宣與元照的戒體論 84
四、南山戒體論之商榷 92
五、結論 98 |
|---|
| ISSN | 22241299 (P) |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 537 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2020.06.12 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
