|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
飲水由波：隱伏於紫柏真可禪教觀中的本質主義=Drinking Water from Waves: Essentialism in Zibo Zhenke's Perspective on the Relationship between Chan and Doctrine |
|
|
|
| Author |
林悟石 (著)=Lin, Wu-shi (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
法鼓佛學學報=Dharma Drum Journal of Buddhist Studies
|
|---|
| Volume | n.31 |
|---|
| Date | 2022.12 |
|---|
| Pages | 59 - 118 |
|---|
| Publisher | 法鼓文理學院 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://www.dila.edu.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 新北市, 臺灣 [New Taipei City, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者爲法鼓文理學院佛教學系博士生 |
|---|
| Keyword | 紫柏真可=Zibo Zhenke; 禪教關係=the Relationship between Chan and Doctrine; 脈絡化=Contextualization; 文化本質主義=Cultural Essentialism; 宗教經驗修辭=the Rhetoric of Religious Experience |
|---|
| Abstract | 紫柏真可（1543-1604）被後世追為明代萬曆三高僧之
一，藉由主張禪與教之間是不可分割的體用關係如水與波
般，因此我們無法不透過波去飲水，不能繞過教去契及禪，
以在禪門內大力宣揚經教的重要性。本文的主要問題是紫柏
採用了何種的詮釋學策略，以合法化其不同於 9 世紀以來的
主流「教外別傳」之禪教觀，以及現代學人如何解釋紫柏為
何強調經教。本文將針對該問題的回應分為兩進路：脈絡化
進路與文化本質主義進路。脈絡化進路旨在將所解釋的對象
予以脈絡化處理而歸因於外在環境的影響，但也帶來了「一
切皆為權宜說法」且相反於本質主義傾向的建構論難題。紫
柏則與鈴木大拙都採用了同種形式的文化本質主義進路，
即訴諸某種無法言說的經驗或精神境界作為本質，如「悟
／心／禪本身」。就此而言，儘管 Robert H. Sharf 認為「宗
教經驗修辭」很大程度是「現代」產物，但這兩位禪宗門
人在解釋進路上的相似處的背後，仍或多或少地隱伏著某些
來自「前現代」的遺贈，如將開悟界定為一種非智識可契及
之經驗的知識論立場。最後，本文試圖指出這種本質主義解
釋進路，在導向長青主義式（perennialist）的「宗教多元主
義」（religious pluralism）的同時，也展現了宗教傳統的同
一性意欲，並恰好契合了紫柏思想的存有論基礎，亦即佛性
學說。
Zibo Zhenke ( 紫柏真可 , 1543-1604) is regarded as one of the three
eminent monks during the Wanli ( 萬 曆 ) era in the Ming Dynasty.
Zibo promoted the importance of doctrine in the Chan community by
claiming that the relationship between Chan and doctrine is inseparable
like essence and function, like “water and waves.” As one can only
“drink water from waves,” one can only attain Chan enlightenment
through the doctrine. The main questions addressed in this paper are
what hermeneutic strategy Zibo adopted to legitimize his perspective on
“Chan and doctrine” which is different from “a separate transmission
apart from the doctrine” ( 教外別傳 ), the mainstream view of the Chan
community since the 9th century, and how modern scholars explain why
Zibo emphasized doctrine.
I will categorize these responses into two approaches; one being the
contextualization approach, and the other being the cultural essentialism
approach. The former approach aims to contextualize the object to be
explained and attribute it to the influence of the external environment.
This way, however, also leads to the problem of constructionism against
essentialism. Zibo and D. T. Suzuki adopted the same form of cultural
essentialism approach, which appeals to an ineffable and spiritual
experience regarded as the essence, such as “enlightenment,” “mind” or
“Chan/Zen itself.”
In this regard, despite Robert H. Sharf’s view that “the Rhetoric of
Religious Experience” is largely a “modern” product, there are still
vestiges of the “premodern” behind the similarities of Zibo’s and
Suzuki’s approaches, such as the epistemological position that defines
enlightenment as an experience that is not accessible to the intellect.
Finally, this paper attempts to point out that this essentialist approach,
while leading to perennialist “religious pluralism”, also shows the
will to identity of religious tradition, which is in accordance with the
ontological basis of Zibo’s thought, that is, the doctrine of buddha
nature ( 佛性 ). |
|---|
| Table of contents | 一、前言：教外別傳的別傳 62
二、脈絡化與對抗脈絡化：傳法敘事的詮釋策略與難題 68
（一）法不無因生：權宜方便與脈絡化解釋進路 69
（二）真如不他生：絕對真理與本質主義解釋進路 79
三、經驗修辭的前現代性：諸教融通與貶抑智識 92
四、結語：本質之水與現象之波 103 |
|---|
| ISSN | 19968000 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 344 |
|---|
| Created date | 2023.03.13 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2023.03.13 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
