|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Preliminary Study of Hanshan Deqing’s Zhaolun Luezhu |
|
|
|
| Author |
Shi Zhirui (著)
|
|---|
| Source |
全國佛學論文聯合發表會論文集（第31屆）
|
|---|
| Date | 2020.09 |
|---|
| Pages | 140 - 152 |
|---|
| Publisher | 佛光大學 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://website.fgu.edu.tw/zh_tw/about
|
|---|
| Location | 宜蘭縣, 臺灣 [I-lan hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 會議論文=Proceeding Article |
|---|
| Language | 英文=English |
|---|
| Note | 作者為佛光大學佛教學系研究所。 |
|---|
| Keyword | Hanshan Deqing; Zhaolun; Zhaolun luezhu; Buddhism of the Ming |
|---|
| Abstract | This paper is a preliminary study of Hanshan Deqing’s 憨山德清 (1546-1623) Zhaolun luezhu 肇論略注 (General Annotation on the Zhaolun). As the first indigenous commentary on Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka philosophy in Chinese Buddhism, the Zhaolun 肇論 (Treatises of Sengzhao) composed during the first half of the fifth century has invited many discussions. Before directly probing into the content of the text and the method how Hanshan Deqing annotated the Zhaolun, we are confronted with a dispute over the date of birth of its author, Sengzhao 僧肇(384?-414). Therefore, this paper will first recap the recent scholarship dealing with Sengzhao's life in the Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳 (Biographies of Eminent Monks) compiled in the Liang, which is the origin of this issue, and then provide a different depiction from Hanshan's Zhaolun luezhu as another possible solution to the debate. However, the purpose of this discussion is to analyze the meaning and value of these diverse annotations, instead of confirming that which record of Sengzhao’s life is more accurate than the others. Next section returns us to the historical setting of Hanshan’s age when the Zhaolun luezhu was compiled. Accounting for one of later commentaries on the Zhaolun, the Zhaolun luezhu mirrors many important characters of Buddhism in the later Ming dynasty. It was an era marked by political corruption as well as intellectual diversity, making Hanshan exert himself to reconcile relationship between Buddhism, society and politics, and to synthesize Chan and doctrine 禪教, xing and xiang 性相, and three religions 三教 (Buddhism, Daoism and Neo-Confucianism) with his sophisticated philosophy of Mind adopted from Tiantai, Weishi and, in particular, Huayan thoughts. The evidence for this can be seen in the massive use of concepts adduced from relevant sutras in most of Hanshan’s works and discourses. As Huijin 慧浸 (active during 1617) wrote in the epilogue 跋 attached to the Zhaolun luezhu, Hanshan was deemed as a conveyer of Sengzhao. Besides, Hanshan could discern Sengzhao’s main purpose of composing these treatises, and thus was able to dissolve the prejudice and various misunderstandings from historical critics for the Zhaolun. The second section aims at examining Hanshan's motivation of annotating the Zhaolun, and tries to present this text within the scope of Hanshan’s biography and ideological background. Even though recent researchers have questioned the authorship of some chapters of the Zhaolun, on which those exegists made no remarks, it is essential to analyze the structure of the text so as to unveil, clarify some basic problems, and even further understand the relationship between Hanshan and his annotation. As a result, as the final section of this preliminary study, I’m going to present some features of the Zhaolun luezhu by comparing with other exegeses chronologically and comparatively in order to see the characteristic of the Zhaolun luezhu. And find how Hanshan’s personality, ideas, and life influenced the way of compiling the Zhaolun luezhu.
本文旨在管窺憨山德清（1546-1623）之《肇論略注》。作為中國第一部闡發龍樹中觀思想的本土論著，成文於五世紀前半葉的《肇論》橫亙後世千五百多年間，已激起中外層出的論述。在逕行探討憨山德清註解《肇論略注》的動機、方式及行文結構之前，《肇論》作者的疑跡成為我們首迎且難以迴避的第一個爭論，即《梁高僧傳》中所引發之僧肇（384?-414）的生卒年問題。因此，本文首將扼要爬梳過去賢達對於僧肇生平之討論，並試圖藉由憨山德清在《肇論略注》中有關僧肇生平的敘述，為種種疑點提出另一合理且能與其他文獻相行不悖的解決方式。然而，此處重點不是為了確認哪一個人對僧肇生平的記載最為正確，而是為了真實反映其在歷史上的轉變，背後代表的意義，藉此彰顯其文獻價值。第二節將回溯憨山德清注解《肇論》的歷史背景。位列《肇論》之晚期注疏之一，《肇論略注》反映晚明的佛教特色。當時政事腐敗、科舉僵化；相形之下，佛教義理思潮卻馳騁於多元開放的風氣中。憨山處在這樣的時勢，充分發揮其融會貫通的能力。他廣攝天台、唯識、尤其華嚴等諸經論，將各宗派的立場會通於「一心」理論；立足於佛教的義理，調和其與政治社會的關係，更致力於融合教界的禪與教、性與相，乃至儒釋道三教。這點特色在憨山德清的許多著書與開示可資證明，《肇論略注》亦是一例。另據慧浸（活躍於1617年）於《肇論略注》卷尾的〈跋〉寫道，憨山可以說是僧肇的後繼者，蓋因其能洞察僧肇造論之深意，且能針對各家對《肇論》的辯難進行駁斥與辨析。因此，透由憨山的生平和思想背景，來探討其注解《肇論》的動機，將是本節重點。最後將探討《肇論略注》的架構。儘管現代學者就《肇論》部份篇章之作者提出質疑，而歷代注釋家並未有所著墨。因此，本文暫且摒除相關篇章作者的爭議而不論，僅就《肇論》與歷代注釋書的內文架構進行比對，試圖從中開顯乃至釐清《肇論略注》的特色與版本問題。期此研究能歸結憨山德清與《肇論略注》之間的關係；若能從中找出憨山德清之生平、思想、個性對《肇論略注》的影響，誠為值耗棗梨之研究動機了。 |
|---|
| Table of contents | I. Introduction 141
II. Review of the Disputations over the Life of Sengzhao 142
II. Hanshan Deqing’s Life and Motivation of Annotating the Zhaolun 144
III. Structure and Style of the Zhaolun luezhu 146
IV. Conclusion. 150 |
|---|
| Hits | 396 |
|---|
| Created date | 2022.10.13 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2023.09.22 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
