|印順法師「修心」就是「修定」一說之分析、詮解與反思=A Critical Analysis, Interpretation and Reflection on Master Yin-Shun's View that Cultivating Mind Is Cultivating Meditative Stabilization
臺大中文學報=Bulletin of the Department of Chinese Literature N.T.U.
|213 - 254
|臺北市, 臺灣 [Taipei shih, Taiwan]
|印順=Yin-Shun; 如來藏=tathāgatagarbha; 修心=cultivation of meditative stabilization; 修定=cultivation of mind; 修慧=cultivation of wisdom
In his article “Cultivation of Mind and Meditative Stabilization, Mind-Only and Esoteric Vehicle,” Master Yin-Shun relies on historical texts to justify his claim that cultivation of mind is in fact no different to cultivation of meditative stabilization, and argues that the formation and later development of the tathāgatagarbha doctrine is closely linked to this practice. The author of this present article first analyzes this claim by summing up Yin-Shun’s viewpoints as follows: (1) In certain texts of Early Buddhism, the meaning and significance of the “cultivation of meditative stabilization” is often conveyed through use of the term “cultivation of mind.” (2) Similes pertaining to the cultivation of mind and meditative stabilization subsequently give rise to the idea of “pure mind” – a concept confluent with both the belief in “eternal and inextinguishable being” as found in later Buddhism, and the theory of “true self” advanced by proponents of the tathāgatagarbha. (3) As these theories become widespread the focus of Buddhist practice gradually shifts from learning of wisdom to that of meditative stabilization. The author then notes the deep
religious concern behind Yin-Shun’s claims that the decline of Chinese Buddhism may have in part been due to this shift. The author also suggests that the cultivation of mind in Chinese Buddhism, like Chán Buddhism, similarly focuses on cultivating meditative stabilization rather than cultivating wisdom. The author further draws
a preliminary comparison between mind and meditative stabilization cultivations and wisdom cultivation with different kinds of similes as well as differences between “non-discriminative mind” and “non-discriminative wisdom” and between “profound theory” and “the wisdom realizing Emptiness.” Finally, the author argues that the view that cultivating mind is cultivating meditative stabilization cannot be interpreted in either a narrow or extreme sense, but rather needs to be understood within the context of Yin-Shun’s attempts to reform tathāgatagarbha teachings and his adherence to the view that Buddha Nature is closely related to Emptiness. One outcome of this is that the mind cultivation shall entail wisdom cultivation rather than be limited to meditative stabilization. Since they are not dichotomous, YinShun considers the liberation achieved through the perfection of mind cultivation to be consistent with the liberation achieved through wisdom cultivation. In giving due consideration to both the practical and theoretical aspects of Buddhism, Yin-Shun tries to balance his scholarly endeavors with his life as a Buddhist monk.
|Table of contents
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE