慧思禪觀體系中之般若觀行法門 -- 以慧思傳記及其著作中對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》之引用及詮釋為中心=Huisi's Meditation System in Terms of his Interpretation and Practice of the Mohe bore boluomi jing 摩訶般若波羅蜜經 (Pañcaviṃ?atisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā sūtra)
本文擬由兩個方向來探討慧思（515-577）禪觀體系中的般若思想，第一是由慧思傳記中與《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》相關的記載來討論《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》在慧思生命脈絡中的重要性。第二是由慧思對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》及《法華經》之詮釋之差異為起點，嘗試為天台禪觀體系提供一個新的思考面向及解讀的角度。在《續高僧傳》中的慧思傳，有兩個重要事件與《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》特別有關，一是其在大蘇山期間，「以道俗福施，造金字《般若》二十七卷，金字《法華》，琉璃寶函，莊嚴炫耀，功德傑異，大發眾心。又請講二經，即而敘構，隨文造盡，莫非幽賾。」在此段敘述中，金字《般若經》被造出的時間，似乎是早於《法華經》。另一個與《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》有關之事件，是「後命學士江陵智顗，代講金經，至一心具萬行處，顗有疑焉，思為釋曰：汝向所疑，此乃《大品》次第意耳，未是法華圓頓旨也。吾昔夏中，苦節思此，後夜一念，頓發諸法，吾既身證，不勞致疑。」由此段慧思與智顗師徒間的對話看來，《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》與《法華經》之間的關係及差異，正代表著天台思想中一個極為關鍵之環節與昇進的轉折點，因此本文特別處理天台思想中一個極為重要，但卻被忽略之問題：即在慧思著作中所見的《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》及其對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》之詮釋。以慧思對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》及《法華經》之詮釋之差異為起點，嘗試為天台思想提供一個新的思考面向及解讀的角度。此外本文分析慧思之兩部重要著作，即《諸法無諍三昧法門》與《法華經安樂行義》中對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》之引用與詮釋。《諸法無諍三昧法門》乃慧思以般若觀行為主之著作，而《法華經安樂行義》則呈現了慧思之法華觀行。透過比較慧思如何在這兩部著作中對《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》作不同的引用及詮釋，當可更深入理解慧思之禪修體系及其中的般若觀行法門。 This article is an investigation of Huisi’s reading of the Mohe bore boluomi jing 摩訶般若波羅蜜經 (T8, no. 223; Pañcaviṃ?atisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra) through an analysis of Huisi’s biographies and his own writings. Two incidents in Huisi’s biographies suggest the importance of the Mohe bore boluomi jing in his meditation system. The first incident is his making of the Mohe bore boluomi jing in golden characters at Mt. Dasu. In this incident, it is mentioned that Huisi made both Mohe bore boluomi jing and the Lotus Sūtra. However, given the importance of the Lotus Sūtra in Huisi’s meditation system, one would be surprised to find that it is implied that Huisi made the Mohe bore boluomi jing in golden characters before his making of the Lotus Sūtra. The second incident involves a dialogue between Huisi and Zhiyi about whether one specific chapter of the Mohe bore boluomi jing is “sudden” or “gradual.” This dialogue reveals the difference between Huisi and Zhiyi’s understanding of the differences between these two sūtras, which are of utmost importance for what is later to be known as the Tiantai meditation system. With the questions raised by these two incidents as starting points, I attempt to analyze Huisi’s interpretation and practice of the Mohe bore boluomi jing, especially using his Zhufa wuzheng sanmei famen 諸法無諍三昧法門 and his Fahuajing anle xingyi 法華經安樂行義.
