|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
湛然教学の諸問題―：対破者の議論をめぐって=Problems in Zhanran’s 湛然 Thought |
|
|
|
| 著者 |
長倉信祐 (著)=Nagakura, Shinyu (au.)
|
|---|
| 掲載誌 |
印度學佛教學研究 =Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies=Indogaku Bukkyōgaku Kenkyū
|
|---|
| 巻号 | v.68 n.1 (總號=n.149) |
|---|
| 出版年月日 | 2019.12.20 |
|---|
| ページ | 207 - 213 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 日本印度学仏教学会 |
|---|
| 出版サイト |
http://www.jaibs.jp/
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 東京, 日本 [Tokyo, Japan] |
|---|
| 資料の種類 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 言語 | 日文=Japanese |
|---|
| キーワード | 湛然; 対破者; 大乗の諸師; 初期禅宗; 『金剛錍』 |
|---|
| 抄録 | The Tang dynasty monk Zhanran 湛然 (711–782) added detailed commentaries to the three major treaties of Zhiyi 智顗 (538–1857), and criticized various sects promoted in the Tang dynasty, declaring the ideological superiority of Tiantai theory. There have already been many studies that have examined Tiantai Lotus philosophy, and the position in the history of Chinese Lotus philosophy has been shared by researchers. However, in recent years, Mr. Kashiwagura has published his view, which concludes that the historical fact that Zhanran critiques the Lotus sūtra view of the Tang dynasty emerging sects is a baseless story. There is some confusion in his assumptions. In this report, therefore, I would like to clarify the problems surrounding the opponent in Zhanran’s Jingangpi 金剛錍 (Adamantine Scalpel) proposed by Mr. Kashiwagura, and rethink the probability of the assumption that the “Mahāyāna teachers” belong to the early Chan sect. |
|---|
| 目次 | はじめに 207
柏倉氏の対破者定義とその批判 207
柏倉氏の湛然観とその批判 209
『金剛錍』の「大乗の諸師」 210
初期禅宗における「大乗」の標榜 210
むすびにかえて 212 |
|---|
| ISSN | 00194344 (P); 18840051 (E) |
|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.68.1_207 |
|---|
| ヒット数 | 55 |
|---|
| 作成日 | 2022.09.22 |
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2022.09.22 |
|---|
 |
Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac)での検索をお勧めします。ＩＥではこの検索システムを表示できません。
|
|
|
