您找過以下的關鍵字

尚無搜尋紀錄

正覺學報 第五期

正覺學報 第五期

作者 : 張志成/ 張火慶/ 蔡志成/ 江正崇

出版社 : 正智出版社有限公司

※ ※ 無庫存

無庫存

定價 : NT 300

售價9折, NT270

內容簡介


求真求實的精神是探求宇宙真相者必備的要素,佛教實證的精神就是依據正真如實的要領,最後成就究竟清淨的佛道。這些佛教義學的內涵乃是釋迦牟尼佛及過去諸佛,透過實踐菩薩道而親證法界實相心,依次轉依修行而最後成就佛道;又為應眾生需要而開示佛法義學的內涵,讓後繼者能夠依之實踐與親證。因此對於真理的追求過程中,實證性與實踐性是不可或缺的要素。然而在實踐佛教義學內涵的同時,法義的正確性與一致性則是其重要指標,有智者應當以此指標加以簡擇而行。然而正確佛法的弘傳非常不易,因為大多數人皆屬未實證者,常常會錯解佛法義學的內涵與次第;這樣以訛傳訛的流傳下去,就會出現具有相似性的錯誤法教而流行於世。這類相似佛法在許多地方是類似實義佛法的說法,然論其實質內涵與法教,卻是與佛法正真的義理相違背,在佛法經論中,有時說之為「相似像法、相似正法、像似正法、相似法」等,此等相似佛法的氾濫愈到末法時期就愈顯嚴重。因此,對於一個求真求實而探求法界實相的佛學學術人士,必須要依智慧來簡擇「實義佛法與相似佛法」的同異,具此智慧才不會落入盲信與迷信之中,才會有正確而如實的佛學研究結果。

由此之故,本期學報以「實義佛法與相似佛法」的核心義理為主題,依實質面的內涵與次第,配合三量的論證作為方法,從「唯識正義與邪說的論證、藏傳佛教空行母定位之考察,以及一貫道剽竊本質的探源」三個方面為案例,發表三篇優秀論文,依此說明「實義佛法與相似佛法」的差異性,以利今世與後世追求真理者。本期學報採用三篇不同領域的論文來論證佛法正義,發表的論文如下:

1、第八識「種識一異」論題之抉擇—以「四重二諦」為本的考察兼評印順的說法(張志成)
2、空行母悲歌—女性在藏傳佛教的角色與命運(蔡志成、張火慶)
3、一貫道的「剽竊」本質—以「彌陀淨土」及「正法眼藏」為例(江正崇、張火慶)

張志成著作的〈第八識「種識一異」論題之抉擇—以「四重二諦」為本的考察兼評印順的說法〉,係以「實證佛學」的基礎來論證唯識正義,考察佛法的心識論與諸法間「一、異」等關係,並循唐朝奘、基師資依《瑜伽師地論》所建立的「四重二諦」為研究之方法論,此「四重二諦」的方法論乃是完備且可為大家所共許。

該文從釋印順所主張的內容和《成唯識論》所主張不同點,考察其各自主張差異的問題所在;作者發現真正主張差異的根源是在於「有無實證第八識」,因為本身對於第八識(如來藏、阿賴耶識)親證與否,對同一個議題會提出不同的觀點,而且主張完全相反。這樣的差異是反應在兩個主要議題上面:第一、探究「第八識到底有無自體」的議題,《成唯識論》的主張是基於實證第八識如來藏而立論,因此玄奘提出五教證和十理證來證明第八識有其自體,並且是「諸識差別」的「八識論」;然而釋印順卻是以未曾親證的學術界「佛法思想是演化的」角度來看待第八識,因此認為六識論的「中觀應成思想」為了義說,傾向主張第八識乃是「唯名無實」、「自性空之空性」的代名詞而已。作者發現釋印順以此錯誤的預設來詮解唯識經論義理,因此常常有依己意扭曲經論本義的情形發生,或者常常有依己意來擴大解釋經論本義內涵的現象,並有引導讀者傾向否定「八識論」而相信中觀應成派「六識論」的意圖。

……

蔡志成及張火慶教授合著的〈空行母悲歌—女性在藏傳佛教的角色與命運〉,是以藏傳佛教(喇嘛教)中「性力角色」的重要代表—空行母、明妃,作為論文主軸來探討,進而考察空行母在整個藏傳佛教(喇嘛教)中的真實定位。該文從藏傳佛教空行母的類別、內涵、由來、演變等方面,辨析論述「具格空行母」必須具備之條件,以及空行母在四部密續中之地位。由這樣的論證解析可知,空行母的角色功能是涉及整個藏傳佛教根本且核心的教義,也就是以「無上瑜伽、男女雙修、樂空雙運」等為核心的「淫樂」理論。從古印度到西藏的流傳,乃至今日的藏傳佛教諸喇嘛、上師、活佛著作中,都可以看到這類空行母角色內涵的說明。根據探討空行母的來源與演變,知道整個藏傳佛教中的空行母、明妃、佛母,在修行上的「性力定位」是具一致性的。又依此空行母的「性力定位」為線索,來探討兩個相關議題,檢視藏傳佛教(喇嘛教)與真正佛教截然不同的差異性,依此來彰顯藏傳佛教所謂「欲貪為道,即身成佛」的本質,其實是與真正的佛陀教法完全不同。

……

江正崇與張火慶教授合著的〈一貫道的「剽竊」本質—以「彌陀淨土」及「正法眼藏」為例〉,探討一貫道信仰的根源,亦從其核心義理與傳教本質來論。從古今一貫道自編的傳承歷史,以及他們祖師之著作中,整理爬梳各個階段轉型的內容改變來考察,始終皆是不離剽竊的本質。

該文從一貫道前身先天道的發展過程檢視中,發現:一向自詡為彌勒信仰的一貫道,其實是仿傚自彌陀信仰而來;從其理天的建構與無生老母(萬靈真宰)的演變過程,都不難發現有彌陀信仰烙印的痕跡;並且隨著時代逐漸轉變其教義內容,究其原因則是源於創教時即屬於盜法的本質而導致。而這些痕跡,就是來自於一貫道所承襲的明清民間信仰。後來,為了因應民間信仰版「龍華三會」的彌陀信仰,不符佛教真正龍華三會的彌勒成佛說的理論困境,因此才轉變偏向於彌勒信仰。從現存的一貫道經卷中,依稀存在著對彌陀信仰所留下來的蛛絲馬跡;也就是說,從先天道到一貫道,其仿傚的信仰內涵由彌陀變成彌勒,從這中間的轉變,可以發現一貫道乃是雜竊、多變的剽竊本質!由這種本質的繼承流傳,結果是繼續盜法而導致現在的一貫道法義之中,不免混入許多儒家及一神教的法義,因此產生極多教義混亂、自相矛盾的現象,與竊盜佛教教義的藏傳佛教教義自相混亂的情況類似。

The truth-seeking spirit is essential for those who explore the true reality of the universe. The positivist spirit of Buddhism is based on the principle of correctness and truth to eventually accomplish the ultimate and pure Buddhahood-Way. The contents of these Buddhist doctrines are as follows: Buddha Sakyamuni and all Buddhas in the past have personally realized the ultimate reality of the dharma-realm through practicing the Bodhisattva Way; then, they convert to the ultimate reality, with further practices in sequence, and finally achieve Buddhahood; in response to the sentient beings’ need, the Buddhas expound the contents of Buddhist doctrines, based on which their followers can practice and personally realize Buddhism. Hence, during the truth-seeking process, positivism and practice are two indispensable elements. However, during the practice of the Buddhist doctrines, the correctness and consistency of doctrines are the important guidelines for practitioners; the wise should follow these guidelines to choose the correct Buddhist practice. Nevertheless, the propagation of correct Buddhism is no easy task. It is because most people have no actual enlightenment and often misunderstand the contents and the practice sequence of Buddhist doctrines. They convey incorrectly what is already incorrect, and as a result, erroneous teachings resembling the true dharma become popular. This kind of resembling Buddha dharma is seemingly similar to the real Buddhist teaching in many ways, yet its substantive contents and teachings violate the real Buddhist doctrines. In Buddhist sutras or treatises, it is sometimes referred to as “semblance dharma, resembling correct dharma, seemingly correct dharma, and resembling dharma.” Such resembling Buddhist dharmas spread even more widely in the dharma-ending age. Hence, any Buddhist scholar who truthfully seeks the ultimate reality of the dharma-realm should, based on wisdom, distinguish between “real Buddhism and resembling Buddhism.” Only with such wisdom will one not fall into blind faith or superstition, and therefore correct Buddhist research results can be obtained as they really are.

For this reason, the theme of this issue focuses on the core doctrine about “real Buddhism and resembling Buddhism”; based on the substantive contents and practice sequence, using Three Valid Cognitions as the argument method, and from the three perspectives—“a discussion on correct meanings vs. evil teachings of Vijnana-Only, a study on the role of dakinis in Tibetan Buddhism, and exploring the origin of plagiarism in I-Kuan Tao,” three excellent papers are presented to explain the difference between “real Buddhism and resembling Buddhism” and to benefit the truth-seekers of this and future lives. Focusing on the correct meanings of Buddhism, three articles of different study fields are accepted in this issue:

1. Are the Eighth Vijnana’s Seeds and Entity Identical or Different?—A Study Based on “Two Truths with Four Layered Statements” and A Comment on Yinshun’s View (Chang Chihcheng)
2. An Elegy about Dakinis—The Role and Destiny of Women in Tibetan Buddhism (Tsai Jyhcherng and Chang Hwoching)
3. A Study on “Plagiarism” in I-Kuan Tao—Citing the “Pure Land of Buddha Amitabha” and the “Right Dharma-Eye Store” as Examples (Chiang Chengchung and Chang Hwoching)

In Chang Chihcheng’s article “Are the Eighth Vijnana’s Seeds and Entity Identical or Different? —A Study Based on ‘Two Truths with Four Layered Statements’ and A Comment on Yinshun’s View,” the author discusses the correct meanings of Vijnana-Only based on “Positivist Buddhism” and examines the Buddhist theory of mind and whether the relationship between dharmas is “identical or different.” Chang also follows the principle of “two truths with four layered statements,” which was established by Xuanzang and Kuiji of the Tang Dynasty according to the Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice. As a research methodology, the principle of “two truths with four layered statements” is perfect and commonly acceptable.

……

In the article “An Elegy about Dakinis—The Role and Destiny of Women in Tibetan Buddhism,” coauthored by Tsai Jyhcherng and Prof. Chang Hwoching, its theme focuses on the dakini, or female consort, who represents the important “sexual role” in Tibetan Buddhism (Lamaism). The authors explore the true role of the dakini in the whole Tibetan Buddhism (Lamaism) and discuss the necessary requirements for a “qualified dakini” and its position in the four divisions of tantras from the perspectives of its category, content, origin, and evolution. From the authors’ analysis, we can see that the role and function of the dakini involves the fundamental core doctrine of the whole Tibetan Buddhism, namely the “sexual pleasure” theory which takes the “Highest Yoga Tantra, Couple-Practice Tantra, and Dual Operations of Bliss and Emptiness” as its core doctrine. During its propagation from ancient India to Tibet, the description of the role connotation of those dakinis can be found even in the writings of lamas, gurus, or living “Buddhas” in Tibetan Buddhism nowadays. According to the exploration into the origin and evolution of dakinis, the “sexual role” of dakinis, female consorts, or “Buddha”-mothers in Tibetan Tantric practice is consistent. Furthermore, based on the “sexual role” of dakinis as a clue, two related topics are studied to examine the difference between Tibetan Buddhism (Lamaism) and real Buddhism. The authors show that Tibetan Buddhism, which claims that “greed is the Way and one attains Buddhahood in a lifetime,” is entirely different in essence from the real teachings of the Buddha.

……

In their article “A Study on ‘Plagiarism’ in I-Kuan Tao—Citing the ‘Pure Land of Buddha Amitabha’ and the ‘Right Dharma-Eye Store’ as Examples,” Chiang Chengchung and Prof. Chang Hwoching explore the origin of I-Kuan Tao and also discuss its plagiarism from its core doctrines as well as its preaching nature. According to the transmitted history edited by I-Kuan Tao and the writings of their patriarchs, the authors examine the changing contents in every transition stage and conclude that I-Kuan Tao is always plagiaristic in nature.

本書特色
第八識「種識一異」論題之抉擇
—以「四重二諦」為本的考察兼評印順的說法

摘要

第八識(阿賴耶識)是瑜伽行派義學主張之根本,有關第八識的體用、性相,自古以來即因實證與否而有許多不同的主張,有關「種識一異」—第八識心體與其所含攝種子兩者間之關係的論題即是其一,而此論題攸關佛法的修證與義學核心—第八識只是有名無實的施設,或是可以證解的實存心體?

本文以為,窺基依《瑜伽師地論》建立的「四重二諦」在考察佛法的心識論與諸法間「一、異」等關係方面,是相當完備且可為共許的方法論。依之考察此論題的意涵,本文發現,《攝大乘論》提出第八識與種子兩者是「非一非異」的關係;而《成唯識論》依「四重二諦」的原則深入詮釋兩者如何是「非一非異」的關係,即在第二、第三、第四世俗(或第一、第二、第三勝義)的「安立諦」層次,第八識與種子是可分別(「不一」)的,然而兩者有「全體」(自證等四分識體)與「部分」(相分)、「體」與「用」的關係,因此也是「不異」的。而印順將此論題侷限為「第八識與種子是同體或是不同體」的層面,並提出:「無著、世親的本義是『種識是一』或『一種七現』—第八識的全體即是種子的集合體,其自身並不現行,現行的只有七轉識;而《成唯識論》是主張『種識不一』或『八識現行』—第八識會現行且種子只是現行識的部分,且此種說法是機械的分割說、固執不通,偏離了無著、世親的本義。」

本文並以「實證佛學」的觀點指出:印順和《成唯識論》不同主張的根源在「有無實證第八識」,而反應在「第八識有無自體」和「第八識若有自體,是否有現行」此二問題上。《成唯識論》基於實證第八識而立論,因此提出五教證和十理證來證明第八識有其自體,且是「諸識差別」的「八識論」;並提出「四分說」,表示第八識有「見分」的現行,可了別作為「相分」的根身、器界和種子,因此是「八識現行」說。而印順以學術界「佛法思想是演化的」角度來看待第八識,依「中觀應成思想」為了義說,傾向第八識是「唯名無實」、「自性空之空性」的代名詞;並以此預設來詮解唯識經論義理,因此有依己意扭曲或擴大解釋經論本義的現象,並有引導讀者傾向否定「八識論」而相信中觀應成派「六識論」的意圖。本文並舉教證、理證駁斥印順主張的「無著、世親本義是一種七現」此種說法,反而證明此二大師的本義是「八識現行」說。

最後本文以三量在「佛性」、「染污末那的所執境」、「末那識的所依」、「定後等位的身受」各層面來抉擇此論題的是非,證明「一種七現」說是不符合三量的說法,護法、奘基師資一系的「八識現行」說才是符合法界實相的義學主張。
看更多 隱藏