Close

《中論》:言說與眾生的迷悟

引言 本文嘗試以《中論》「觀四諦品」的二諦思想為基礎,以了解龍樹或中觀思想對「言說」 所採取的態度。主要的原因是文中如戲論、假名及二諦等承襲般若經系的重要思想 均與言說有著十分密切的關係。再者,在「觀法品」的偈頌「諸法實相者,心行言語斷;無生亦無滅,寂滅如涅槃」及「觀如來品」的「如來過戲論,而人生戲論,戲論破慧眼,是皆不見佛」也透露了言說的關鍵角色。筆者認為龍樹為言說賦予一個相當弔詭的雙重特性:就是「若不依俗諦,不得第一義」的覺悟面向及「戲論破慧眼,是皆不見佛」的執迷面向。對言說此特性的洞察及超越與否,是眾生迷悟的關鍵之所在。筆者認為龍樹在《中論》就是要安立二諦,以言(假名)消言(戲論) ─ 論破戲論這自性見的言說,最終離言,以顯第一義諦。 在行文方面,筆者會先簡略地交代《中論》及其作者的背景資料,隨後將以言說作為探討的對象,闡明言說如何以概念的方式把緣起世界實化(reify)而生起「自性見」。再而對「觀四諦品」的主要內容作一概論,以扼要地了解龍樹的二諦思想。之後,再在這基礎上,從言說的角度了解龍樹如何理解戲論、假名及二諦等重要概念之間的關係及其與眾生迷悟之間的連繫。

A review on the set-subset relationship between co-existent cause and conjoined cause in Abhidharma-mahā-vibhāsā-śāstra

Introduction “This being, that exists; through the arising of this that arises. This not being, that does not exist; through the ceasing of this that ceases.” The doctrine of Conditioned Co-arising, as the profound teaching of the Buddha, obviously illustrates a certain kind of causal relationship. Thus in his answer to a Brahman’s interrogation to…

Controversies between Vasubandhu and Saṃghabhadra on Simultaneous Causality (sahabhū-hetu) – A brief review

Introduction Having reviewed the Abhidharmakośa-bhāsya-śāstra (AKB) and the Abhidharma-Nyāyānusāra-śāstra (Ny) on the controversies and the evolvement of the concept of co-existent cause, I would like to illustrate how Vasubandhu, a pro-Sautrāntika Abhidharmika drawn out the implicit meaning of simultaneous causality and redefined it as ‘reciprocally effects’ (互為果) in AKB. Vasubandhu used this new definition to…

分析地真與經驗地真之別

「其為人也孝弟,而好犯上者,鮮矣;不好犯上,而作亂者,未之有也。君子務本,本立而道生。孝弟也者,其為仁之本與!」《論語·學而篇》看分析地真與經驗地真。分析地真,隱喻著必然性;經驗地真隱含著或然性。然人慣以前者取代後者而生憂苦,豈不哀乎?文字之學,其患尤甚也。

滿有愁緒的夢

一個滿有愁緒的夢,憶起與故友的種種…看到了自己的無知、淺見,並以之作為生活參照的可笑— 我看到自己是怎樣走過來的。我已這樣度過了卅十多個年頭,是醒來的時候了!