|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
慧琳〈白黑論〉儒佛交涉之思理探微 ── 以其運用「得意」方式為主所作的觀察=A Study on the Thinking of Interplay between Confucianism and Buddhism in Hui Lin's Bai Hei Lun ── An Observation Mainly Based on "Getting the Meaning" Used in the Book |
|
|
|
| Author |
紀志昌 (著)=Chi, Chih-chang (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
文與哲=Literature
|
|---|
| Volume | v.18 |
|---|
| Date | 2011.06 |
|---|
| Pages | 201 - 240 |
|---|
| Publisher | 國立中山大學中國文學系 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.chinese.nsysu.edu.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 高雄市, 臺灣 [Kaohsiung shih, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者單位：國立中山大學中國文學系助理教授=Assistance Professor, Department of Chinese Literature, National Sun Yat-sen University. |
|---|
| Keyword | 慧琳=Hui Lin; 白黑論=Bai Hei Lun; 竺道生=Zhu Dao-sheng; 得意=Getting the meaning; 儒佛交涉=Interplay between Confucianism and Buddhism; 非佛=Anti-Buddhism |
|---|
| Abstract | 慧琳的〈白黑論〉，向來被視為揚「儒」抑「佛」的作品，它的出現，激發了當時一連串「儒」「佛」之間的論諍，故在三教交涉史上，有一定的角色與意義。唯慧琳以釋子身分非佛，顯然有些不可思議，筆者由此出發，重檢相關本事，將慧琳之學行、生平際遇等背景與其撰作〈白黑論〉的動機、內涵作出比對，來鉤勒其撰作〈白黑論〉的箇中隱喻與真相。
首先從慧琳游於「名教」、「佛教」之界域來觀察其思維特質，進而切入其「佛教觀」，發現慧琳之〈白黑論〉恐不是片面之「非佛」所能定義，佛教界仍有其精神與志意的出口所在，此中尤以其與道生的關係值得注意。經由與相關線索的繫聯與比對，筆者認為：從動機來看，〈白黑論〉之撰作，除了非議佛跡之弊，就其內容與主旨觀察，亦應有呼應生公對佛學融通淘汰精神的成分，此即「略跡」而「得意」也，這成為他運用以融會「儒／佛」殊途同歸的方式。本文根據此一線索，嘗試順著行文脈絡，分從：（一）空觀理解──性理空而事用不空（二）對幽冥之理的理解──遺其所寄之說（三）儒、佛之殊途同歸──宜尋所立之旨三面向作出觀察與疏理。期藉由慧琳服膺生公的精神向度，攫發其中可能涵藏回應生公學說的聯想與隱喻，進而提供學界評議〈白黑論〉一種較為圓通而豁達的視野與評價。
Hui Lin’s Bai Hei Lun has always been viewed as a work praising “Confucianism” and depreciating “Buddhism.” Its emergence triggered many disputes between “Confucianism” and “Buddhism” at that time. Therefore, it plays an important role in the history of Interplay between three beliefs. However, it was unbelievable that Hui Lin, as a Buddhist, censored Buddhism. This study re-inspected relevant details, including Hui Lin’s background of learning process, favorable or unfavorable turns in life, and relationship with Buddhism, in order to deduce his writing motivation, reflect on metaphors in the book, and further obtain more reasonable and possible truth.
This study preliminarily observed Hui Lin’s thinking based on his intercourse of border between “Confucian Ethical Codes” and “Buddhism” and further investigated his “Buddhist concept.” This study found that Hui Lin’s Bai Hei Lun could not be simply defined as a work Anti-Buddhism because it still advocated the spirit and meaning of Buddhism. In addition, his relationship with Zhu Dao-sheng is particularly noteworthy. Based on the comparison with relevant clues, this study suggested that, in terms of motivation, besides reproaching Buddhism for the rule abiding turning out to be a mere formality, the contents revealed his approval for Zhu Dao-sheng’s Buddhist spirit, namely, “informality” and “getting the meaning.” These concepts enabled him to integrate Confucianism with Buddhism. Based on the above, this study investigated the texts of the book from three aspects:（1 understanding of the concept of “Śūnya”; （2） understanding of the concept of the nether world; （3）the same goal of Confucianism and Buddhism. It was hoped that the metaphors and response to Dao-sheng’s theories in the book revealing Hui Lin’ approval for Dao-sheng could be identified in this study and be provided for academic circles to criticize Bai Hei Lun from a broader and more objective perspective. |
|---|
| Table of contents | 一、前論：慧琳〈白黑論〉寫作的相關背景 202
（一）生平際遇 202
（二）師承或交遊之因緣 207
二、〈白黑論〉內容分疏 214
（一）空觀理解 ── 性理空而事用不空 215
（二）對幽冥之理的理解 ── 遺其所寄之說 220
（三）儒、佛之殊途同歸 ── 宜尋所立之旨 227
三、總結：〈白黑論〉的檢討與評價 234
引用文獻 237
英文摘要 239
|
|---|
| ISSN | 17287130 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 578 |
|---|
| Created date | 2014.09.09 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2024.02.20 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
