窺基《說無垢稱經疏》注釋特色研究：與唐代前《維摩經》注疏作對比=Kuiji’s Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa: The Distinctive Feature of His Exegesis Compared to the Pre-Tang Commentaries
《說無垢稱經疏》=Kuiji’s commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa; 窺基=Kuiji; 三性化=transformation of the emptiness; 染淨法區分=the distincion of the defiled and pure dharma; 二諦與三性交涉=the negotiation of two truths and three natures
Kuiji（窺基）’s commentary is the only one on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa（《維摩詰經》） which translated by Xuanzang（玄奘）. In contrast to Sengzhao（僧肇）and Jizang（吉藏）’s interpretation from Madhyamaka thought and Huiyuan（慧遠）’s interpretation from Tahtāgatagarbha thought, Kuiji interpreted the Sūtra from Yogācāra thought. His commentary represented the Yogācāra School’s viewpoint of the Sūtra. Therefore, this study attempted to survey the distinctive feature of Kuiji’s exegesis in comparison with Sengzhao, Huiyuan and Jizang’s commentaries.
The survey was conducted from three aspects: First, the thesis explored how Kuiji established Yogācāra School’s viewpoint of the Sūtra by comparing Kuiji’s prolegomenon with Huiyuan and Jizang’s in their commentaries. Second, the thesis investigated how Kuiji transferred the concept “emptiness” in Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa into the concept “three natures”（三性）that Yogācāra School asserted. Third, the thesis focused on comparing Kuiji’s interpretations on “Buddha-nature,” “the defilement or purity of the mind” and “Buddhasattva’s elimination of affliction” with Huiyuan and Jizang’s, in order to examine the differences between them and find out the distinctive feature of Kuiji’s commentary on the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa.
As a result, from the first aspect, it showed that: Kuiji connected the doctrine of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa with Yogācāra doctrines and asserted that they were the one tradition. In addition, He reconstructed the division of the Sūtra and criticized Kumārajīva’s translation of the sūtra title and chapter names. Meanwhile, he reinterpreted them with the Yogācāra teachings to establish Yogācāra School’s viewpoint in his commentary. In the part, Kuiji divided the paramārtha of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa into four levels in his exegesis.
From the second aspect, it showed that: When Kuiji interpreted the concept “emptiness” in the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, he not only applied the Madhyamaka explanation but also the Yogācāra’s in his explanation. Furthermore, he contorted Kumārajīva’s translation, and interpreted some sentences translated by Zuanzang through the concept of “three natures,” so that he transformed the concept “emptiness” in the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa into the concept “three natures.” In this part, Kuiji’s commentary revealed the negotiation between “two truths”（二諦）and “three natures.”
From the third aspect, it showed that there was a strict distincion between defiled dharma and pure dharma in Kuiji’s commentary on “Buddha-nature,” “the defilement or purity of the mind” and “Buddhasattva’s elimination of affliction.” The strict distincion must be from the Yogācāra teachings. It resulted in the feature of Kuiji’s interpretation which was very different from Huiyuan and Jizang’s.
目次
誌 謝 I 摘 要 II ABSTRACT III 表目錄 VIII 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 前人研究成果 8 第三節 研究範圍與方法 15 第四節 論文章節 16
