山海逆战317 山海逆战炎帝**

Study of the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras

1.From the very beginning of introduction of Buddhi** into China, the study of Prajñāinterested many gentry people and it came to a climax in Eastern Jin which resulted in the six houses and seven schools of thought 六家七宗.

2.People interested in Prajñā studies were from emperors to literati. Monks were wellversed not only in Buddhist studies but the Laoziand the Zhuangzi as well. Thus, Prajñābecame the main thought of Eastern Jin dynasty.

3.The eminent Buddhist monk of that time Daoan said, “Of the twelve sections[if Buddhist teachings], the vaipulya sutras are much more. This occurs because in this country the teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi which have already gained much head way among the people.They are quite similar to the teachings of the vaipulya [fangdeng方等] sutras. That is why the Buddhist teaching of vaipulya became wide spread.” 道安在《鼻奈耶序》講道：「經流秦地，有自來矣，隨天竺沙門所持來經，遇而便出，於十二部，毘曰羅部最多。以斯邦人莊老教行，與方等經兼忘相似，故因風易行也。」(CBETA,T24, no. 1464, p. 851, a11-14)

4.According to Sengrui 僧叡, before the coming of Kumārajīva, there were two stages of Prajñā learning: “matching the meaning”and “the six schools”.

5.In the first period of “matching the meaning”, which is a way of using technical terminologies found in the Laozi and the Zhuangzi to explain Buddhist thought, it is from Zhu Faya 竺法雅to Daoan.

6.This method was founded by Zhu Faya 竺法雅who first learned Confuciani**, then Daoi** and at last Buddhi**. Therefore,around him there were always many people including Daoist monks studying from him. But they did not have the knowledge of Buddhi**.

7.Therefore,it is said in his biography that Zhu Fayan “compares the teachings in the sūtras with non-Buddhist texts in order to understand the meaning. This is named Geyi (matching the meaning), a teaching method.”

8.This method was widely used at that time, even eminent monks used this method such as Daoan and Huiyuan.

9.But later Daoan found out that this method was not good and it always misleading.Therefore he turned to Abhidharma which explains Buddhist terminologies by giving definitions first. This methodis better and precise and Geyi can never compare this method. Thus Daoan rejected Geyi, matching the meaning.

10.The second period is the six schools according to Sengrui, but he did not give the names of the six. However we haveno sufficient information regarding these six schools since most of the works concerned are lost.

11. Sengzhao僧肇, a clas**ate of Sengrui,only named three of them. Later Jizang 吉藏of Sui dynasty following Sengzhao alsolisted three with some elaboration. It is only in the Zhaolun Shu 《肇論疏》, acommentary on the Zhaolun, written byYuankang 元康 of Tang who quoted from awork entitled Xu****n 《續**》 by Baochang 寶唱 of Liang dynasty, that Tanjiwrote a work named Six Houses and SevenSchools 《六家七宗論》 inSouthern dynasty.

12. 《肇論疏》卷1：「江南本皆云六宗七宗，今尋記傳，是六家七宗也。梁朝釋寶唱作《續法論》一百六十卷云：宋莊嚴寺釋曇濟，作六家七宗論，論有六家，分成七宗。第一本無宗，第二本無異宗，第三即色宗，第四識含宗，第五幻化宗，第六心無宗，第七緣會宗。」(CBETA,T45, no. 1859, p. 163, a14-19)

13. The seven schools are:

(1) the School of Original Nonbeing 本無宗,

(2) the Variant School of Original Nonbeing本無異宗, some scholars think that this school is asubdivision of the first,

(3) the School of Nonbeing of Mind 心無宗,

(4) the School of Matter as Such 即色宗,

(5) the School of Stored Impressions 識含宗,

(6) the School of Phenomenal Illusions 幻化宗,

(7) the School of Causal Combination 緣會宗.

14. Actually all these names can be found in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras and it summarises the Prajñā study during the Eastern Jin. According to Sengzhao 僧肇, only the first three are important when taken the first two as one school.

15. According to Sengzhao,the School of Nonbeing of Mind 心無宗means that the mind doesnot attach to anything while the phenomenal world still exists. This means that the school only subjectively eliminates the disturbances from the mind, butdoes not negate the existence of the phenomenal world. The representative of this school is Zhi Mingdu 支敏度.

16. 《中觀論疏》卷2〈1 因緣品〉：「第三溫法師用心無義，心無者無心於萬物，萬物未甞無。此釋意云：經中說諸法空者，欲令心體虛妄不執，故言無耳，不空外物，即萬物之境不空。肇師詳云：此得在於神靜，而失在於物虛。破意云：乃知心空而猶存物有，此計有得有失也。」(CBETA,T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a25-b1)

17. The School of Original Nonbeing 本無宗, according to Jizang吉藏, Daoanis the representative of this school. Daoan’s idea is thatNonbeing is that before all activities and emptiness is the beginning ofphenomena world.

18. “First, Shi Daoan explains the meaning of benwu本無 (tathatā)as that nothingness is before the appearance of all phenomena, emptiness is the beginning of all (physical)shapes. The people’s hindrance lies in wanting, if their wondering mind is originally empty then the wondering thoughts will subside.”吉藏《中觀論疏》卷2〈1 因緣品〉：「一者釋道安明本無義，謂無在萬化之前，空為眾形之始，夫人之所滯，滯在未有，若詫心本無則異想便息。」(CBETA,T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a4-7)

19.Thus Daoan’s interpretation of Benwu 本無is not pure Buddhist in meaning,but a mixture of Buddhist and Daoist philosophy. The term “Benwu” 本無 in the Daoxingbanruo Jing (道行般若經,the A??asāhasrikā) is an early translation of the Sanskrit term tathatā,which means suchness.

20.Jizang吉藏further explained, “Master Daoan’s explanation of the meaning of benwu is that all dharmas are empty of self nature so it is named as benwu. This is the same as it is explained inthe Vaipulya ures and the disciples of Kumārajīva.” 吉藏《中觀論疏》說︰「安公明本無者，一切諸法，本性空寂，故云本無。此與《方等》經論、什肇山門義無異也。」(CBETA,T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a10-12)

《中觀論疏》卷2〈1 因緣品〉：「一者，釋道安明本無義，謂無在萬化之前，空為眾形之始。夫人之所滯，滯在未有，若詫心本無，則異想便息。睿法師云：格義迂而乖本，六家偏而未即。師云：安和上鑿荒途以開轍，標玄旨於性空，以爐冶之功驗之，唯性空之宗最得其實。詳此意，公明本無者，一切諸法本性空寂，故云本無。此與《方等》經論、什肇山門義無異也。」(CBETA, T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a4-12)

21. SoJizang thought that Daoan’s explanation of the meaning of benwu is the closest to the real meaning of the Prajñāpāramitā doctrine as revealed by Kumārajīva.

22. According to the Prajñāpāramitāteaching, this tathatāor suchness exists in everythingand everywhere.

23. According to the text, this real nature (tathatā)is in everything including the Tathāgata and remains one and the same without change at all times. The tathatā of the Tathāgata therefore is not different from the tathatā of all dharmas,and the tathatā of all dharmas is the same as the tathatā of the Tathāgata. The tathatā of the Tathāgata is undiscriminated and undifferentiated at all times and in all dharmas, because there is only one single true tathatā that is unmade,uncreated in all things at all times.

24.The Variant School of Original Nonbeing 本無異宗 teaches that all things come from nothingness which is the source of all phenomena world. This is similar to the Laozi saying that“existence comes from emptiness.” 有生於無so it was criticized by other Buddhist schools. The representative of thisschool is Zhu Faseng 竺法深 and ZhuFatai 竺法汰.

25.《中觀論疏》卷2〈1 因緣品〉：「次琛法師云：本無者，未有色法，先有於無故，從無出有。即無在有先，有在無後，故稱本無。此釋為肇公不真空論之所破，亦經論之所未明也。若無在有前，則非有本性是無，即前無後有，從有還無。經云：若法前有後無，即諸佛菩薩便有過罪，若前無後有，亦有過罪。故不同此義也。」(CBETA,T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a12-18)

26. The School of Matter as Such即色宗 teaches that “physical form itself cannot be physicalform, thus physical form is no form.” The representative of this school is ZhiDaoling支道林.

27.Zhi Daoling支道林(or 支遁 314-366)is the most famous monk of Prajñāstudy. The contemporary commented on him saying that he was no less than Wangbi王弼 and was compared withXiangxiu 向秀.

28.He had close friendship with most of the literati of the time and wrote many workson Prajñā study such as the Shi jishe benwu lun 〈釋即色本無論〉, the Jisheyouxuan lun 〈即色游玄論〉, the Daoxing zhigui (〈道行旨歸〉and the Miao guan zhang 〈妙觀章〉.

29.Inthese works, he explained the prajñā concept of emptiness by comparing to the Zhuangzi.

30.《中觀論疏》卷2〈1 因緣品:「第二即色義，但即色有二家，一者關內即色義，明即色是空者，此明色無自性，故言即色是空，不言即色是本性空也。此義為肇公所呵。肇公云：此乃悟色而不自色，未領色非色也。次支道林著《即色遊玄論》，明即色是空，故言：即色遊玄論，此猶是不壞假名，而說實相，與安師本性空故無異也。」(CBETA,T42, no. 1824, p. 29, a18-25)

Reference

Fo Tucheng佛圖澄

Wright, Arthur F., “Fo-t'u-teng: A Biography”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies,Vol. 11, No. 3/4. (Dec., 1948), pp. 321-371. It is also found in his book Studies in Chinese Buddhi**. edited by Robert M. Somers. New Haven: Yale University Press,c1990. 294.30951 W9

Daoan道安

CUMMINGS, MARK. “Dao'an” Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. LindsayJones. Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan ReferenceUSA, 2005. p2170-2172. 15 vols.

Link, Arthur. “The Biography of Shih Tao-an,” T'oung pao 46 (1958): 1-48. XS 950 T72 P2

STORCH, TANYA. “Dao'an” Encyclopedia of Buddhi**. Ed. Robert E. Buswell,Jr. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan ReferenceUSA, 2004. p197. 2 vols.

Link, Arthur. “The Taoist Antecedents of Tao-an's Prajna Ontology,” History of Religions Vol. 9, No.2/3 (Nov., 1969), pp. 181-215.

釋道安，任繼愈主編：《中國佛教史》I, II, III, 北京：中國社會科學出版社，1998年，149-197.

Huiyuan慧遠

BLUM, MARK L. “Huiyuan” Encyclopedia ofBuddhi**. Ed. Robert E. Buswell,Jr. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan ReferenceUSA, 2004. p348-349. 2 vols.

Liebenthal, Walter; “Shih Hui-yuan's Buddhi** as Set Forth inHis Writings,” Journalof the American Oriental Society, Vol. 70, No. 4. (Oct. - Dec., 1950), pp.243-259.

TANAKA, KENNETH, “Huiyuan” Encyclopedia ofReligion. Ed. LindsayJones. Vol. 6. 2nd ed. Detroit: MacmillanReference USA, 2005. p4156-4157. 15 vols.

Kumarajiva

MCRAE, JOHN R. “Kumārajīva”, Encyclopediaof Buddhi**. Ed. Robert E. Buswell,Jr. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan ReferenceUSA, 2004. p442-443. 2 vols.

TODARO, DALE. “Kumārajīva” Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. LindsayJones. Vol. 8. 2nd ed. Detroit: MacmillanReference USA, 2005. p5262-5264. 15 vols.

Daosheng道生

BLUM, MARK L. “Daosheng” Encyclopediaof Buddhi**. Ed. Robert E.Buswell, Jr. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. p201-202. 2 vols.

CUMMINGS, MARK. “Daosheng” Encyclopedia ofReligion. Ed. LindsayJones. Vol. 4. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005. p2216-2218. 15 vols.

Liebenthal, Walter. “A Biography of Chu Tao-sheng,” Monumenta Nipponica 11 (1955): 284-316.

Dharmaksema

Chen, Jinhua, “The Indian Buddhist Missionary Dharmaksema(385-433): A New Dating of his Arrival in Guzang and of his Translations” T’oung Pao, Volume90, Numbers 4-5, 2004, pp.215-263(49)

Other

Hurvitz, Leon;“Chih Tun'sNotions of Prajna,” Journal of the American OrientalSociety Vol. 88, No.2 (Apr., 1968), pp. 243-261.

Jackson,RogerR., “MatchingConcepts: Deconstructive and Foundationalist Tendencies in Buddhist Thought.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion. Vol. 57, No.3 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 561-589.

Lai, Whalen., Limits andFailure of "Ko-I" (Concept-Matching) Buddhi**, History of Religions Vol. 18, No. 3 (Feb., 1979), pp. 238-257.

Liebenthal, Walter. "The World Conception of ChuTao-sheng." Monumenta Nipponica12 (1956): 65-103.

Liebenthal,Walter., “ChineseBuddhi** During the 4th and 5th Centuries,” Monumenta Nipponica Vol. 11, No.1 (1955), pp. 44-83.

Mather, RichardB., “Vimalakirtiand Gentry Buddhi**,”History of Religions Vol. 8, No. 1 (Aug., 1968), pp. 60-73.

Ui Hakuju's ShakuDoan kenkyu (Tokyo, 1956) reviews Tao-an's career and includes annotatededitions of his major prefaces.

Wagner, R. G. “The Original Structure of TheCorrespondence Between Shih Hui-Yuan and Kumarajiva,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies,Vol. 31. (1971), pp. 28-48.

Hui-yuan's major essay, The Sramana Does Not Pay Homageto the Ruler (Shamen pu-ching wang-che lun), is fully translated by LeonHurvitz in "`Render unto Caesar' in Early Chinese Buddhi**," inLiebenthal Festschrift, "Sino-IndianStudies," vol. 5, pts. 3-4, edited by Roy Kshitis (Santiniketan,1957), pp. 80-114.

《中觀論疏》卷2〈1因緣品〉:「此四師即晉世所立矣。爰至宗大莊嚴寺曇濟法師著《七宗論》，還述前四以為四宗。

第五于法開立識含義，三界為長夜之宅，心識為大夢之主。今之所見群有，皆於夢中所見，其於大夢既覺，長夜獲曉，即倒惑識滅，三界都空。是時無所從生，而靡所不生。難曰：若爾大覺之時，便不見萬物，即失世諦。如來五眼何所見耶？

第六壹法師云：世諦之法，皆如幻化，是故經云：從本已來，未始有也。難曰：經稱幻化，所作無有罪福，若一切法全同幻化者，實人化人，竟何異耶？又經借虛以破實，實去而封虛，未得經意也。

第七于道邃，明緣會故有名為世諦，緣散故即無稱第一義諦。難云：經不壞假名而說實相，豈待推散，方是真無。推散方無蓋是俗中之事無耳。次齊隱士周顒著《三宗論》，一不空假名，二空假名，三假名空。不空假名者，經云：色空者此是空無性實，故言空耳，不空於假色也。以空無性實故名為空，即真諦。不空於假故名世諦。晚人名此為鼠樓栗義。難云：論云：諸法後異，故知皆是無性，無性法亦無，一切法空故，即性無性，一切皆空，豈但空性而不空假。此與前即色義不異也。空假名者一切諸法眾緣所成，是故有體，名為世諦。折緣求之都不可得，名為真諦。晚人名之為安苽二諦。苽沈為真，苽浮為俗。難曰：前有假法，然後空之，還同緣會，故有推散即無之過也。

第三：假名空者，即周氏所用。大意云：假名宛然，即是空也。尋周氏假名空，原出僧肇《不真空論》。論云：雖有而無，雖無而有。雖有而無所謂非有，雖無而有所謂非無，如此即非無物也，物非真物也。物非真物於何而物？肇公云：以物非真物，故是假物，假物故即是空。

大朗法師關內得此義授周氏，周氏因著《三宗論》也。今總詳之，然若封執上來有所得，皆須破之。若心無所寄無所得，適緣取悟，皆得用之，亦但府經論者。釋道安本無，支公即色，周氏假名空，肇公不真空，其原猶一，但方言為異，斯可用之。」(CBETA, T42, no. 1824,p. 29, b1-c10)