Vimalakīrtinirdeśa=《維摩詰經》; chiasmus=交錯結構; apophasis=否定論述; Buddha field=佛國; Vimalakīrti=維摩詰; Tathāgata body=如來身體
摘要
This study examines aporia paradox in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. We apply two methodological approaches, chiastic structures and apophatic rhetorical discourse, to examine three pairs of key passages in the text. The Buddha’s revelation of His Buddha field (pure land) to Śāriputra in Chp. 1 of the text, and descriptions of the layman lead character Vimalakīrti in Chp. 2-3, have often been used to support claims of lay over renunciant roles in early Mahāyāna Buddhism vis-à-vis Hīnayāna Buddhism. Amidst these is a description of the Tathāgata’s body. Taking the text as a whole, however, reveals another display of Akṣobhya’s field Abhirati at the end of the text, immediately following a radically different description of Vimalakīrti’s identity and the Tathāgata’s body. This latter material, all in Chp. 11, has received much less attention than the aforementioned in the text’s interpretation. In order to understand the text as a whole, we propose that both of these portions be simultaneously taken into consideration. Comparing the relevant passages in Chp. 1-2 and Chp. 11 reveals chiastic inverted parallelism, formed in two opposing and complementary halves, which we shall read synoptically. Moreover, the mode of rhetorical discourse in these passages also shifts between the two halves of the text. The former half utilizes juxtaposed affirmative statements which accord with traditional Buddhism systems of thought. The latter half then negates these juxtaposed systems through performance of an apophatic “meaning event”, which directly confronts the original aporia paradox of the doctrines in question. The inverted parallelism of the text’s chiastic structure is thus matched by the inverted parallelism of its apophatic rhetorical mode of discourse. The two methodological approaches can be seen as complementary critical and hermeneutical methods for such a text and its teachings. The implications for an overall interpretation of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa’s key themes include a challenge to the readings of Vimalakīrti’s layman status, and the immanence of the Buddha field. We end with a hypothesis of what the remaining center of the text should hold on the basis of our ascertained chiastic and apophatic parallelism.
Abstract 199 中文摘要 201 1. Structure & Rhetoric in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 204 1.1 Vimalakīrti’s Aporia 206 1.2 Two Locations & Paired Names of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 210 2. Chiastic Structure in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 215 2.1 Śākyamuni’s Buddha Field, a Tathāgata Body & Layman Vimalakīrti 218 2.2 Akṣobhya’s Buddha Field, a Tathāgata Body & Alien Vimalakīrti 220 2.3 Proposed Chiastic Structure 221 3. Apophatic Rhetoric in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 225 3.1 Where is the Buddha Field? 229 3.2 Who is Vimalakīrti? 234 3.3 What is a Tathāgata Body? 240 3.4 Proposed Discourse Structure 247 4. A Chiastic & Apophatic Rereading of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 250 4.1 A Reinterpretation of Key Themes & Content 251 4.2 Chiasmus & Apophasis as Textual & Rhetorical Structures 253 4.3 The Silent (W)hole in the Middle 256 Acknowledgements 260 Bibligraphy 261 Classical Sources 261 Modern Translation Sources 261 Secondary Sources 262 Figures Figure 1 Lamotte’s “Localization” of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 213 Figure 2 Proposed Chiastic Structure (Chp. §1-2 vs Chp. §11) 222 Figure 3 Chiastic Structure of Affirmative & Negative Statements 223 Figure 4 Proposed Discourse Structure 248
