《修習次第》後篇; 蓮華戒; 止觀; 瑜伽行中觀派; Bhāvanākrama III; Kamalaśīla; Śamatha and Vipaśyanāmeditation; the school of Yogācāra-Mādhyamika
摘要
活躍於七、八世紀印度大乘佛教時期的論師蓮華戒（Kamalaśīla），歷史上以作為「桑耶論爭」的主角為名，曾著作《修習次第》三篇（Bhāvanākrama I. II. III），被視為落實「瑜伽行中觀派」理論的具體修行指南，其中揭櫫的修習次第思想系統影響西藏佛教深遠。本論文選擇《修習次第》後篇的梵文本進行中譯，分析其中止觀修習的內容，發現具備瑜伽行派術語之採用、從「諸法唯心」到「諸法無自性」的次第觀修、修止的教導相對簡要、富涵哲學思辯等實修特性。 長期以來有梶山雄一、一鄉正道等學者，認定師承寂護的蓮華戒與其著作《修習次第》，隸屬於「瑜伽行中觀派」。然根據松本史朗教授的研究，寂護只是以唯識作為修行次第上的方便，思想上完全是中觀派而非「瑜伽行中觀派」。透過對《修習次第》後篇之術語及內容的考察，發現後篇所顯示的修觀歷程，已經不只是在修習次第或方便上依照唯識的「方便唯識說」，確實具有安立世間於唯識的內容與作法。不過，後篇所表現的修觀歷程，尚未如梶山依據初篇所認定之「瑜伽行中觀派」修習次第那般完整。間接回應著一鄉對《修習次第》三篇著作順序的推論，後篇可能是三篇中最早的著作，表達出蓮華戒對止觀實修次第最初的雛形。
Kamalaśīla, a Mahāyāna Buddhist scholar during the 7th to 8th century in India, is famously known as one of the main debaters in the historical bSam yas Debate held in Tibet. He is the author of the three theses (Bhāvanākrama I. II. III), which are considered the practical guidebooks for implementing theories formulated by the school of Yogācāra-Mādhyamika. Among these theses, the disclosed system of the sequential practice of Śamatha and Vipaśyanā has profound influences on Tibetan Buddhism. This paper selects the Sanskrit version of Bhāvanākrama III and translates it into Chinese in order to analyze its content and characteristics of its meditation practices. Firstly, it is found that the thesis adopts terminologies used by the Yogācārin. Secondly, the teaching of Vipaśyanā consists of contemplation methods developed from the idea of cittamātra and śūnyatā successively but the teaching of Śamatha is relatively brief in comparison. In general, Bhāvanākrama III is rich in philosophical reasoning for practical purposes. It has been asserted by scholars such as Yuichi Kajiyama, Masamichi Ichigo and others that Kamalaśīla, a student of Śāntarakṣita and also the author of the three Bhāvanākrama’s, belongs to the school of Yogācāra-Mādhyamika. According to Professsor Shiro Matsumoto, however, this assumption is not justified since Kamalaśīla’s accommodation of the Yogācāra’s methods in Bhāvanākrama is only for the convenience of explaining the sequence of mediation practice and that he is truly a Mādhyamika thinker in essence. Through analyzing the content and terminology of Bhāvanākrama III, this paper discovers that the author establishes the mundane truth (saṃvṛti) according to Yogācāra’s ideology during the contemplation process. In other words, the finding supports the idea that Kamalaśīla does indeed belong to the school of Yogācāra-Mādhyamika. On the other hand, it is worth noting that the contemplation system explained in Bhāvanākrama III is less complicated than Bhāvanākrama I. This leads to the speculation that Bhāvanākrama III was completed before the other two theses. This view also corresponds with Masamichi Ichigo’s supposition that Bhāvanākrama III is the earliest writing among the three theses and that it appears to be Kamalaśīla’s prototype of meditation theorem.
