《大乘起信論》中的「唯心」義新解－以「眾生心」為焦點的宗教修行心理解讀嘗試=A New Interpretation of the Meaning of "Mind Only" in the Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna: An Attempt at a Psychological Interpretation of Religious Practice Focusing on the "Sentient Being Minds"
The Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna (AFM) is a treatise that has profoundly influenced Chinese Buddhism. Its theory of "One mind two aspects" is often interpreted as a metaphysical idealism. Other interpretations of this theory have been proposed: Mou Zongsan argues that is a kind of "fiction metaphysics", Toshihiko Itsutsu calls it the "metaphysics of consciousness", and Hayao Kawai argues that "sentient being minds" in the AFM are not only like Jung's collective unconsciousness (as Toshihiko Itsutsu argued), but also include the meaning of everyday-life consciousness, showing more possibility of psychological understanding. Inspired by the reflections and clues of these alternative explanations, this article focuses on the concept of "sentient being minds" and attempts to read and interpret the AFM from the perspective of the psychology of religious practice. This attempt shows that the metaphysical idealist one is not the only possible interpretation of AFM, and if it can be released from the presuppositions of the idealistic ontology of the AFM, it can be shown that it has the religious meaning of spiritual experience. This is because "sentient beings" in the treatise refers to all beings who seek to be free from suffering and achieve happiness. These sentient beings suffer in the world, and when they go beyond this world, they get rid of suffering and obtain happiness. All sentient beings move back and forth between the two ends, between the world and beyond this world, so sentient beings can also be called "suffering/cultivating sentient beings". As for the "One mind two aspects" concept, it shows that in the experience of meditation and living, there is a two-way experience from delusion to truth, and a contrast between the truth and the birth and death of delusion. This shows that metaphysical idealism is not the only viable interpretation, and also provides a psychological interpretation of the experience of religious practice in the AFM, which can be used as a reference for further dialogue between Buddhism and psychology.
