|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
智顗與法藏「相即」思想淵源研究=The background of the idea of “Inseparability”(xiangji相即) according to Zhiyi and Fazang’s |
|
|
|
| Author |
郭秀年 (著)=Guo, Xiu-nian (au.)
|
|---|
| Date | 2018 |
|---|
| Pages | 178 |
|---|
| Publisher | 華梵大學 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://www.hfu.edu.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 新北市, 臺灣 [New Taipei City, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 博碩士論文=Thesis and Dissertation |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Degree | doctor |
|---|
| Institution | 華梵大學 |
|---|
| Department | 東方人文思想研究所 |
|---|
| Advisor | 郭朝順 |
|---|
| Publication year | 106 |
|---|
| Keyword | 相即; 一心三觀=one mind three contemplations; 一念三千=three thousand in one mind thought; 三諦圓融harmonious integration of three truths; 六相; 十玄門=ten profound gates; 法界緣起=the condition arising of dharma realm; mutual identity |
|---|
| Abstract | ｢相即｣一詞在印度佛教時期尚未形成一特殊概念，開始成為一個重要的語詞，應是與天台、華嚴思想有關，而為智顗(538-597)與法藏(643-712)特別強調所造成的。（宋）四明知禮(960-1028)提出 ｢非二物相合、背面翻轉，直須當體全是，名為『即』｣目的在指出相即有不同的表達形式，而強調天台「相即」之殊勝且。學界對相即思想之探討不多，雖有少數文章論及，但未有二者之比較研究。本文之研究擬以：｢相即｣之詞義考察，及二宗教觀相即思想發展與哲學義理詮釋法三方面，進行比較二者對｢相即｣思想之相關研究。
｢相即｣一詞為佛教譯語所形成的語詞，｢相｣字表示前後語句關係，｢即｣字的本義指｢靠近，接近｣。漢譯經文如：｢色即是空，空即是色｣之｢即｣，可對應梵文｢yad…tad…｣（凡（色）…就是（空）…），指色與空是同位格關係。就語義而言，「即」指（凡）色不離空而有，（就）空也不離色而有，色與空彼此有相互肯定，也都是全體之一部分，二者有相即不離的關係；生死即涅槃的關係也可以這樣的理解。
佛教典籍中之「相即」具有整體「相融、互攝」意義，類似｢具｣、｢不二｣同義字異，一體不分的概念，說明彼此相依相成不可相離，無法獨立而成，有平等不二之意。但｢相即｣在不同佛典中有不同的意義指涉，智顗以《法華經》：｢唯有一佛乘，無二亦無三｣，｢三車誘引，但與大車｣，引生智顗詮釋為｢三乘即一乘｣與｢權實相即｣。至於《般若經》、《大智度論》之三智則作為智顗三諦、三觀與一念三千教觀相即的根源。而《華嚴經》從佛覺悟之際｢身遍座一切道場｣、｢於一念頃，一切現化｣，啟發法藏｢一即一切｣之事事相即無礙，｢六相｣與｢性起正法｣成為華嚴宗法界緣起之經典依據。
智顗與法藏二者所依經論雖各自不同，但彼此的共同點都從圓教脈絡，用不同形式發揮相即思想，以回應輪迴與解脫諸問題。智顗依《法華經》表現為｢二法相即｣與｢三法相即｣特色，二者同屬敵對形式。天台立足於世間泯除凡聖區隔，煩惱與菩提，法性與無明二者相對性的價值之相即不二，於世間實踐不斷斷之菩薩道。法藏據《華嚴經》從覺悟者清淨圓滿的立場，圓觀法界一切現象是｢性起法爾如是｣，雖有差異但彼此是緣起相由，一多無礙。故華嚴｢一與一切｣之｢一多｣模式指主與伴，個體與整體，如一與十的相即關係，一可成十，十不離一。｢緣起相由｣就無盡與無量之諸法平等不二，開展一乘圓教之無盡法界緣起，特別是事事相即，法界一切差別事法，彼此互為圓滿無盡。「相即」在智顗的理解下世間即出世間，煩惱即菩提化解教觀分裂局面而成教觀相即不二。法藏之「相即」義則成功的凸顯華嚴從教出觀，一多無礙即教即觀，也融會了佛教中觀、唯識、如來藏三大傳統思想於華嚴法界圓融。
The term "mutual identity" did not form a special concept in Indian Buddhism. Perhaps it became an important term in academia may be due to Tiantai and Huayan thoughts, since Zhiyi and Fazang placed particular emphasis on the term. Due to the fact that (Song) Siming Zhili pointed out "Not the two objects combined, over flipped on the back, it directly needs to be in the immediate essence completely, then it is named 'identity'", that we realized that there are different forms of expression for the term "mutual identity". There are not many studies on the idea of "mutual identity" in academia, though there are a few articles on the discussion, however there is no comparative study between the two. The research in this dissertation is intended to proceed on three fronts: an investigation of the term "mutual identity" in terms of its semantics, the development of thought and the hermeneutic philosophical argumentation, in order to conduct a comparative study between the two on "mutual identity" and related issues.
The phrase "mutual identity" is the expression of the Buddhist language, and the word "mutual" means the relationship between the preceding words and the subsequent words, and the meaning of the word "identity" is "close and near". In Chinese translated sutras, verses such as: "form is identical to emptiness, emptiness is identical to form", the word "identical" may correspond to the Sanskrit "yad ... tad..." (Where (form) ... is (emptiness) ...), refers to the form and emptiness are in apposition relationship, "evam" is an adverb meaning "such as, so"; "yad ... tad ...." On the pragmatics, (where) form is not separated from emptiness to have existence, (on) emptiness is not separated from form in its existence, both form and emptiness have mutual affirmation of each other, the two are in a mutual identity non-separated relationship, the relationship between life / death and Nirvana is also the same.
In the Buddhist texts the phrase "mutual identity" has the meanings of "mutual integration, inter-penetration", similar to the synonyms of "embody", "non-dual", explained the inter-dependent complementary nature of both terms, cannot be separated, cannot be established independently, it has the meaning of equal non-duality. "Mutual identity" has different referential meanings, "The Lotus Sutra": "There is only one buddha vehicle, there is no two nor three", "three carts to induce, but given the big cart", the reference interpreted by Zhiyi as "three vehicles are identical to one vehicle" and "the identity of the provisional and reality". The "Three wisdoms" in "Prajna-paramita Sutra" and "Mahā-prajñā-pāramitā-śāstra " as the origin of the identity of Teaching and Contemplation in Zhiyi's Three Truths, Three Contemplations and Three thousand in one Mind thought. On the occasion of the Buddha's enlightenment |
|---|
| Table of contents | 第一章 緒 論 1
第一節 問題意識 1
第二節 文獻回顧 2
第三節 研究方法 24
一、思想史回溯法 24
二、語言與歷史文獻研究法 25
三、哲學義理詮釋法 27
第四節 本文結構與各章提要 28
第二章 漢譯經典中「相即」概念及其思想發展 33
第一節 「即、相即」之詞義考察 33
一、佛經翻譯前之「即」義 33
二、佛經翻譯中之「即」義 36
三、「相即」一詞之出現 38
第二節 梵語中與「即」一詞相關的表述 38
第三節 漢語佛典中「相即」之語義分析 39
第四節 般若、唯識、如來藏經論中相即思想之淵源 41
第五節 魏晉時期中相即思想之淵源 44
第六節 關河舊學與相即思想 46
第三章 智顗對大乘經論詮釋所開展出相即思想 51
第一節 《法華經》 51
一、三乘與一乘 52
二、如來壽量 53
三、正直捨方便 55
第二節 《般若經》 57
一、假名性空 57
二、三智 59
第三節 《維摩詰所說經》 60
一、 不離文字之解脫 60
二、入不二法門 61
三、無住本立一切法 62
第四節 《大般涅槃經》 63
一、眾生即佛性 64
二、空與不空 64
三、佛性三因 65
四、涅槃三德 67
五、常樂我淨 67
第五節 《大智度論》 70
一、三智 70
二、四悉檀 72
第六節 《中論》 75
一、八不中道 75
二、世諦與第一義諦 76
第七節 《華嚴經》之心、佛、眾三無差別 79
第四章 法藏對大乘經論詮釋所開展出相即思想 83
第一節 《華嚴經》 84
一、始成正覺 84
二、性起正法 85
三、一切具足 89
四、一切菩薩所行 93
第二節 《楞伽經》如來藏藏識 97
第三節 《大乘起信論》真如門與流轉門 99
第四節 《攝大乘論》之三性 101
第五節 《十地經論》之三界唯心 103
第六節 《成唯識論》之種子六義 105
第七節 《十二門論》 109
一、因世諦說第一義諦 110
二、有無相違 111
第五章 智顗的圓教解脫觀及其相即思想 115
第一節 智顗的解脫觀 115
一、藏教、通教、別教解脫觀 116
二、圓教解脫觀 117
第二節 智顗「相即」形式及其意涵 118
一、二法相即 119
二、三法相即 122
第三節 智顗止觀法門中的「相即」 125
一、次第三觀 126
二、圓融三觀 128
第六章 法藏的圓教解脫觀及其相即思想 133
第一節 法藏的解脫觀 133
一、小教、始教、終教、頓教解脫觀 133
二、圓教解脫觀 135
第二節 法藏相即形式及其意涵 136
一、一多相即 136
二、緣起相由 137
第三節 法藏止觀法門中的相即 142
一、次第止觀 143
二、圓融止觀 144
第七章 結 論 147
第一節 智顗與法藏相即思想之比較 147
第二節 智顗與法藏圓教相即解脫觀之特色 148
第三節 智顗與法藏圓教相即之形式差異 149
第四節 智顗與法藏圓教實踐法門之差異 150
第五節 相即思想在智顗與法藏佛教思想的價值 152 |
|---|
| Hits | 405 |
|---|
| Created date | 2020.02.04 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2023.01.18 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
