|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
敦煌寫本《圓明諭》與〈阿摩羅識〉初探 -- 以傅圖188106號為中心=A Study of the Dunhuang Manuscripts "Yuanming-lun" and "Amala-vijñāna": Insights from the Fu Ssu-nien Collection's Text No. 188106 |
|
|
|
| Author |
黃青萍 (著)=Huang, Ching-ping (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊=Academia Sinica, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology
|
|---|
| Volume | v.84 n.2 |
|---|
| Date | 2013.06.01 |
|---|
| Pages | 199 - 233 |
|---|
| Publisher | 中央研究院歷史語言研究所 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www2.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 臺北市, 臺灣 [Taipei shih, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese; 英文=English |
|---|
| Keyword | 敦煌寫本=Dunhuang manuscripts; 圓明論=Yuanming-lun; 阿摩羅識=amala-vijñãna; 傅圖; 188106號=no. 188106; 北宗=the Northern School |
|---|
| Abstract | 敦煌寫本《圓明論〉與〈阿摩羅識〉為已使佛教文獻，原僅中藏「北服006」、英藏「S.6184」、法藏「P.3664+P.3559」與日藏「石井本」等四件遺書。關於《圓明論〉與(阿摩羅識〉的研究不多，且均以法藏本為主，而歸類為北宗文獻。近年新公布了俄藏「IJ:x00696」 與傅圈藏「188106號」兩件寫本，其中的傅圖藏本雖首缺尾殘，但提供了新的研究線索，據之與法藏本、石井本比對，可以發現《圓明論〉與〈阿摩羅識〉非北宗獨傳之文書。但因傅圈本為購自民間的散藏，據以研究前宜先甄別藏本之真偽。故本文將先以傅圖本為研究對象，從《圓明論〉寫本的發現及刊布史切入，篩檢是否有偽製的可能;繼之比對文書內容，整理出傅固本可補法藏本不足之處。於甄別傅圖藏本之真偽後，再據此分析《圓明論》與〈阿摩羅識〉之思想內容與修行方法，以重新審視其於佛教思想史之意義與地位。
The Yuaming-lun(圓明論) and Amala-vijñãna(阿摩羅識) are Buddhist texts found only among the Dunhuang manuscripts. In the past, there were four known manuscripts: Bei Fu (北服) 006, S.6184,“P.3664 and P.3559", and Ishii's text (石井本). Most studies are based on “P.3664 and P.3559", and regard these medieval manuscripts to be texts of the Northem School. In recent years, two manuscripts，月x00696 and no. 188106, have been made public by the Dunhuang Manuscrripts Collected in the St. Petersburg lnstitute 01 Oriental Studies of the Academy of Sciences of Russia and the Fu Ssu-nien Library respectively. The text from the Fu Ssu-nÍen collection (no. 188106) in particular offers new insights for research of the }íωnming-lun and Amala-vij舟ãna. Comparing those manuscripts, we suspect that the Yuamη ing-lun and Amala-vij品ãna were possibly not written by the monks of the Northem School. The provenance of no. 188106 is unclear; however, real manuscripts must be distinguished from imitations. Two methods employed to make such determinations are discussed in this paper. First, I try to determine whether the Fu Ssu-nÍen collection text (no. 188106) is a modem forgery. I cross-reference and compare the contents of other manuscripts, which are undoubtedly from Cave 17 at Dunhuang, and then compare them with no. 188106 in detail to prove that no. 188106 is real. Second, 1 use the six manuscripts to analyze the Yuanming-lun and Amala-vijnãna， and rethink these texts' places in the history of Chinese Buddhist thought.
|
|---|
| Table of contents | 壹、前言 200
貳、傅圖「188106號」寫本 203
一、寫本概述 203
二、《圓明論》寫本及其刊布 206
三、傅圖本與法藏本之比對 208
參、《圓明論》與〈阿摩羅識〉寫本及其思想 212
一、《圓明論》之作者與成書年代 212
二、《圓明論》與〈阿摩羅識〉寫本之研究與傳鈔 215
三、《圓明論》與〈阿摩羅識〉之緣起論與判教說 219
肆、結論 226
|
|---|
| ISSN | 10124195 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 688 |
|---|
| Created date | 2013.09.13 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2019.07.26 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
