禪宗無情教義的流變與展演：從《楞伽師資記》到《碧巖錄》=The Development and Performativity of Doctrine ofthe Insentient Beings according to the Chan School: From the Record of the Masters and Disciples ofthe Laṅkāvatāra to the Blue-Cliff Records
The “Doctrine of the Insentient Beings” (a general designation defined to refer to three notions: that insentient beings possess Buddha-nature, insentient beings can preach Dharma, and insentient beings are able to attain Buddhahood) was raised and supported by the Northern School (北宗), the Niutou School (牛頭宗) and the Shitou School (石頭宗), and eventually became accepted by all other Chan schools. It developed from the 8th to the 12th centuries, following the main stages of development of the Chan school, that is, Early Chan, Classical Chan and Song-dynasty Chan, which are regarded as the most important periods of the formation and shaping of the Chan School. On the other hand, it is a profile of the development of the Chan school, and its texts and the form of performativity also change according to the different stages of development of Chan. This thesis will focus on the Chan School’s materials and survey the notion of the “Doctrine of the Insentient Beings” therein, including the Record of the Masters and Disciples of the Laṅkāvatāra (楞伽師資記), the Treatise on the Transcendence of Cognition (絕觀論), the Patriarchs’ Hall Anthology (祖堂集), the Record of the Transmission of the Lamp [Compiled During the] Jingde [Period] (景德傳燈錄) and the Blue-Cliff Records (碧巖錄) which are representative of different stages of the Chan School from the 8-12th centuries, to clarify how a “doctrine” was performed as a symbol and to present what kind of function it fulfilled. This thesis’s main title: “Who can hear the Dharma preached by insentient beings?” is a doctrinal issue which some patriarchs who emphasized discourse and analysis wished to explain. Secondly, it is also a symbol of: “I am able to hear, but you cannot” in the context of sectarian identity. Thirdly, it is also a way and method to raise doubt to get enlightenment. Fourthly, it is asking a question about what is the “author’s saying” and the “reader’s listening,” moreover, who it asks, who is an author and who is a reader? Fifthly, in the contexts of Encounter Dialogue (機緣問答) and Gongan (公案), the part of “discourse” is almost entirely absent. At same time, signified became an overtone of insentient beings, and it means we cannot get significance on literals. Sixthly, the development of texts of the Doctrine of the Insentient Beings also shows the mechanism about the text’s reading, the production of significance and the authority of knowledge between writer, author and reader. It not only concerns how ancient Chan School disciples read these texts and derived significance or even enlightenment therefrom, but also how researchers (i.e., ourselves) understand them as readers.
