唐代诗僧文学批评研究

【作者】 胡玉兰；

【导师】 韩泉欣；

【作者基本信息】 浙江大学 ， 中国古代文学， 2006， 博士

【摘要】 唐代诗僧是唐代文学史上一个特殊的创作群体。唐代诗僧不仅自觉地创作诗歌，还自觉地评论诗歌，具有创作主体与批评主体合一的性质。但是长期以来，学界的研究重点大多放在诗僧的生平、交游、创作艺术的分析方面，也就是重在对诗僧创作的分析，而对唐代诗僧文学批评的研究相对薄弱一些。本文以“唐代诗僧文学批评”作为研究对象，对唐代诗僧作为“诗人”文学身份的确认、诗僧的文学批评形式、批评范畴、诗僧批评家各自的诗学体系特征等几个重要问题进行了研究。 唐代诗僧文学批评的产生除了跟佛教、诗歌发展有关系之外，还跟唐代诗僧作为“诗人”文学身份的确认有密切的关系。因为诗僧只有意识到自己是诗人，才会以诗人的身份来要求自己的创作，来评价自己与他人的创作。只有诗僧的文学身份得到社会的广泛认可，诗僧的文学批评才能具有社会影响。诗僧创作的自觉与批评的自觉是诗僧文学身份确认的具体表现，这两方面的自觉意识体现在他们一系列诗歌活动中。唐代诗僧在不同的历史阶段以不同的文学批评形式介入文学批评。初唐的慧净以选本的形式论诗，盛唐后期的玄鉴以摘句的形式论诗，中晚唐的诗僧则采用诗格的形式论诗。唐代诗僧所采用的文学批评范畴，既跟传统的文论有关系，也跟佛学有多方面的关系，这尤其表现在对意境、门、势三个范畴的运用上。唐代诗僧的文学评论从形式到范畴都在继承六朝文论的基础上有所创新，体现出很强的继承性与创新性。 唐代诗僧批评家根据与世俗的疏离关系可以分为三类。第一类即自幼出家，成年还俗的，如：上官仪、贾岛；第二类为中年出家，不再还俗的，如：皎然；第三类是童年出家，不再还俗的，如：贯休、齐己。他们与世俗的亲疏关系不仅仅影响到他们的诗歌创作，同时也影响到他们的诗学理论。上官仪与贾岛是唐代还俗诗僧的代表，他们的诗学体系跟他们为僧的经历息息相关。上官仪与初唐佛学，尤其与“三论宗”的关系，影响了他的诗歌创作与理论。贾岛诗学与中唐禅宗的流行有密切的关系。皎然由儒士转变成诗僧的身份转换在他的诗学理论中也留下了痕迹。皎然对诗歌本质的认识，对诗歌史的看法，对意境理论的发挥都跟他的这种身份相关。贯休与齐己的诗歌理论比较隐蔽，深藏在他们各类诗歌当中。本文通过细读贯休、齐己的诗歌，把他们零散的诗歌理论整合成为一个整体。本文认为，贯休和齐己的诗论虽然在审美追求上有差别，即贯休重清奇，齐己重清雅，但在提倡要广泛地阅读与苦吟作诗的创作态度是一致的，都是对诗歌创作的具体指导。唐代三类诗僧文学批评家的诗学观念都体现出很强的实践性与时代感。 唐代诗僧对唐代的诗论发展都起了重要的作用。唐代诗僧开启了以禅喻诗更多还原

【Abstract】 The poem-monk group in the Tang Dynasty is a special creation group in the Tang Dynasty literature history. Poem-monks not only created poems consciously, but also commented on poems, they were the combination of creation subject and literary review subject. But in a long time the relevant researches mainly focused on poem-monks creation analysis, such as their life history, their relations, and their creation art. Comparatively there are less works on the literary review of poem-monks in The Tang Dynasty. This paper selects "literary review of the poem-monks in The Tang Dynasty" as the research object, and investigates several important topics, including: the affirmance of the "poet" figure of the poem-monks in The Tang Dynasty, the poem-monks literary review form, the category of literary review, and the poetics system of a single poem-monk reviewer.The appearance of the Tang Dynasty poem-monk literary review were not only correlated with the development of Buddhism and poem, but also correlated with the affirmance of the poem-monks’ "poet" figure. Because only poem-monks thought themselves as poets, they would create poem, and would comment on their own works and the other people’s works. Only the poet figure were recognized extensively by the society, the literary review of poem-monks would have social influence. The consciousness of creation and review are the material embodiment of the affirmance of the poem-monks’ "poet" figure, and a series of poem-monks’ works showed the consciousness. In different history stage, poem-monks adopted different literary review methods. Huijing who lived in the early Tang Dynasty reviewed poem by means of anthology; in the middle age Tang Dynasty, Xuanjian who lived in the afternoon Tang Dynasty criticize poems by taking passages; in the middle-late age Tang Dynasty, the poets commented on poets by utilizing the form of poetry rule. The literary review categories adopted by the Tang Dynasty poem-monks are relevant with both the traditional literary review and Buddhism, especially on the utilization of three categories: the artistic conception, class and power. From form to category, the Tang Dynasty poem-monks literary review is an innovation on the foundation of the Six更多还原