【作者】 黄崑威；

【导师】 周可真；

【作者基本信息】 苏州大学 ， 中国哲学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 《太玄真一本际经》简称《本际经》,为隋唐早期道教经典,该经自“安史之乱”后,大部分陆续散佚,故《道藏》收录不全。敦煌道教遗书中已经发现《本际经》唐写本140余件,约占道经抄本总数的五分之一,数量超过《道德经》抄本,堪称之最。(王卡:《敦煌道教文献研究》之统计)除第八卷《最胜品》外,其余各卷都可复原。《本际经》原不题撰人,唐武周时僧人玄嶷在《甄正论》中称:“至如《本际》五卷,乃是隋道士刘进喜造,道士李仲卿续成十卷”。现存敦煌遗书《本际经》各写卷尾记皆注明抄写于初、盛唐时,则可知十卷本《本际经》至迟应在唐太宗贞观年间已行于世。其写本数量反映了此经在唐代受到人们的高度重视,并甚为流行,唐代出现的各种道教类书及义学著作中多引用、继承发挥《本际经》的思想内容。通观十卷本《太玄真一本际经》,全经以祈请和解说的方式叙述了元始天尊、太上道君、太上老君向法解、妙行、天皇真人、正一真人等天真、仙人说法,宣扬道教重玄体道,“开演真一本际法门”。旨在教化三乘以导入一乘,并阐释道教真理观的一切诸法之根本。内容涉及“道体无本”的“道体论”;“道性自然”的“道性论”;“十二法印”与“三洞”分类法及“重玄”之道相结合的“判教论”;因果报应、功德行业、科仪戒律、修行次第、炼养方法等的“修道论”。唐高祖武德年间,刘进喜、李仲卿曾经积极响应了由太史令傅奕所发起的“排佛”之议,从其参予国家最高级别的三教论衡活动的史实看,他们应该位列当时道教思想界的领军人物之序,其思想代表了同时代道教理论发展的最高水平。这些因素决定了“《本际经》是总结了隋唐之际佛道论争并从新的理论思维水平上回应佛学挑战的道教作品”。南北朝末年、隋代,正是佛教三论宗流行之时,吉藏在《中观论疏》中的《本际品》里把老子学说判为“本际外道”,从思想史的因果逻辑推论,刘进喜造作《本际经》时应在吉藏此说之后。“本际”在唐初又曾经成为佛道论衡中的焦点议题之一,李仲卿作为当时道教思想界的代表,参加了以“本际”为议题的这场“庭辩”。这些也许就是促使他们“创作”本经的最初动因。佛教思想界之所以借“本际”问题发难,真正意图在于通过辨析“本际”的本源论思想内涵,把道家与道教哲学的核心范畴“自然”和“道”的本源性特征网罗入佛教“因果”论的辩证逻辑当中,攻讦“道法自然”命题之伪。既然“道法自然”,则自然是生道之因,道(果)因自然而有,故“既因他有,即是无常”。以此证明“自然”和“道”都是无常法,无常即是“无我”。那么据此可以推论出道与自然永恒长存的道教“神学”理论,乃荒诞不经之说。这也许就是促使刘进喜、李仲卿在经中进行“道体论”、“道性论”、“判教论”理论建构的动机。《本际经》的问世,是为了在新的思想及时代背景下,论证老子乃至道教哲学的合理性、合法性与神圣性。当然,不能否认这里面也暗含了为政治服务的需要。刘进喜、李仲卿的生平,此二人之间的关系,他们各自完成了《本际经》的哪些品目及内容和思想方面的接续等问题,由于历史资料缺失,已难考证。现今可见有关二人有限的点滴事迹,多载于佛教史传资料中。通过《本际经》及其作者在佛教史传资料中反复出现,并引起佛教思想界相当关注这一特殊历史文化现象,反映出它不仅是一部研究隋唐道教思想的重要典籍,而且是考量佛道论衡乃至这一时期中国哲学专题的珍贵思想资料。本文以华夏出版社新刊《中华道藏》中收录的,经王卡先生点校的敦煌写经录文为文本依据,通过哲学史、思想史的诠释视角对这部经典的思想内容,经中出现的概念、范畴、命题,进行分析、解读,期望揭示它独特的中国哲学思想价值。《本际经》在哪些方面体现了佛道论衡的思想成果,并在多大程度上回应、解决了来自佛教思想界的诘难;《本际经》的“道性论”和南北朝以来佛教涅槃佛性思想的关系;《本际经》与佛教“天台宗”思想、同著名的《大乘起信论》等典型的佛教中国化的思想成果之间的关系;《本际经》的核心思想是“将示重玄义,开发众妙门”,或“开演真一本际,示生死源,说究竟果,开真道性,显太玄宗。”“太玄宗”也就是重玄之道。同时代的佛教思想界对此道教哲学主题是如何回应的?《本际经》对南朝道教义学的传承,经中体现的南北道教交融的痕迹,该经与其前后出现的《升玄内教经》等其它道经、道书的关系;《本际经》在道教经教体系中的地位与作用,《本际经》对于同时代及此后的中国哲学,无论是在不同思想体系的内部亦或外部是否产生过影响、产生过哪些影响?在以往的学术成果中未见相关论述,这也是本文期待尝试和需要解决的问题。此时中国哲学儒、释、道三教关系在《太玄真一本际经》中体现为,儒家伦理对道教戒律、积功累德的修道观念等普世价值的潜移默化;道教的哲学转型一方面是通过重新诠释《老》《庄》经典,一方面借鉴、吸收佛教思想来完成的,这些都直接表现在《太玄真一本际经》中出现的概念、范畴、命题的阐释中。由此反映出来的佛教中国化的思想成果之所以能够被道教哲学成功地“平移”、转化、利用,也证明了“中国佛教的根子在中国而不在印度”。通过这些也折射出,中国哲学主流意识形态领域“三教合一”的哲学基础,一个宗旨——重视内省体验,知行合一的实践哲学;两种认识论与方法论——根植于中国传统文化的“神不灭论”和借用西方哲学术语时必须加以特定说明的“本体论”。贯穿在《太玄真一本际经》中的道体论、道性论、判教论,体现了该经在中国哲学史与中国思想史中的独特价值。本文主要分五个部分展开。第一章《〈太玄真一本际经〉的思想及时代背景》。《本际经》的时代背景至少可以上溯到南北朝末期。北朝末年,周武帝曾废佛道二教,名为二教俱废,其实还是想对道教有所保留,只不过这种道教必须是“三教”会通之道教罢了。甄銮《笑道论》、道安《二教论》总结了南北朝时期佛道论衡的重要内容。佛道论衡促使道教学者通过反观老、庄经典汲取哲学营养,进行理论上的反思与创新,注疏《老子》、《庄子》蔚然成风。而此时道教也正处于各派学说兼收并蓄、南北道教融会贯通的阶段。同时中国佛教思想界关注的热点问题,已经从般若性空转入涅槃佛性之有的讨论。这标志着由魏晋玄学所开创的“本体”学说向纵深的发展。第二章“本际”义与《本际经》。“本际”原为印度吠檀多哲学表示世界本源的哲学范畴,原始佛教把吠檀多哲学探讨的诸如“本际”说,看做是不能明确认识和解说的“无记”说。中国佛教思想界把老子哲学视为和本际说同类的外道学派。在道教思想内部,“本际”成为联结“本体”说与“本源”说的工具,借本际可以探讨“道体”与“道性”的本体之究竟和本源之起始。《本际经》的作者站在道教立场,对于“本际”的这种“反向格义”,也证明了“《本际经》是总结了隋唐之际佛道论争并从新的理论思维水平上回应佛学挑战的道教作品”。第三章《太玄真一本际经》的道体论思想。道体论渊源于道家哲学的“道本体”思维传统,是对《老子》之“道”本源-本体意蕴的继承、发挥。早期道教对“道”的实体化与神格化的“神学”诠释,构成了《本际经》道体论的理论基础。在《本际经》中元始天尊是“道”的化身,“道”的哲学内涵既是“无”、“无本”、“空”;又意味着“遍在”、中道、实有。然而,“道”的真实相状——“寂灭之相”却非世间语言所能言诠,只能借助中道观才能理解“通达无碍,犹如虚空”的道体实相。“一切法性,即是无性”,暗示了《本际经》的作者欲以“反向格义”的手段融摄佛教义理,达到既包容佛教又要凌驾于佛教之上的真实意图。《本际经》从“无本”道体说,到中道观的“毕竟空”的理论建构,其实都是为了回答道是“有因”还是“无因”的问题。在佛道论衡背景下,如何回应佛教思想界利用“因果”法对“道法自然”命题的诘难,《本际经》对“道”进行了重新诠释,赋予它以“空”的本质性内涵,并将自然解释为“自性”。《本际经》进一步把佛教“因果观”、“因缘说”通过道教义理的重新诠释,包装成了道教的“因果义”,突出“心”、“性”在世间因果体义中的作用,这也是联结“道性”和“众生性”的关键,故“道性”之说亦可称“心法”。道性为“因”众生性是“果”。对于来自佛教中人对元始天尊神圣性的质疑及元始天尊的“人性”与“神性”的吊诡,《本际经》在理论建树上以“法身”义回应。元始天尊是集“道”之“体”与“用”,法身为“本”诸分身为“迹”于一身的高度统一。中国佛教的“法身”理论、范畴之所以能够被道教哲学照搬、借鉴,至少说明中国佛学“法身”理论与道体论之间有玄通之处。对“神本”的探讨是由以法身为本的命题引出的,“神本”之说把道性与众生心性紧密结合起来,将“道”和“心”褂搭,根本目的在于揭示修道的正途必须从“心”上入手修心返本。《本际经》的道体论及由此衍生出的法身论、神本说使人人都具有“道性”成为众生的本性;把“道”实体化为人格神,使之成为引导人们证得“道果”的精神力量,推动众生信仰的动力。第四章《太玄真一本际经》的道性论思想。本章论述的重点在于揭示如果没有“佛性论”的刺激、影响,道教自身能否“开出”道性论,“无识有道性”与佛教“无情有性”之间的关系,“道性众生性皆与自然同”的《大乘起信论》“一心二门”式的哲学方法及此命题对玄学“自然与名教”、佛道论衡“自然与因果”主题的历史性终结。从道性论的发展历程可以看出,充分吸收《涅槃经》佛性观念,借鉴运用关河学派中观般若学乃至三论宗吉藏的哲学思辨方法,转化利用佛教中国化思想成果最全面的还是《本际经》。第五章《太玄真一本际经》的判教思想。“十二法印”与道教经教系统“三洞”分类法及由“三洞”衍变而成的“三乘”教法观念的结合,构成了《本际经》判教思想体系。“十二法印”思想内容中蕴含了道教的“大我”及“常、乐、我、净”理论特质,而这又和中古时期的佛教中国化有关。同时,《本际经》的判教思想也反映出所传承的灵宝派经教思想特征及该经在中古道教经教体系中的地位与发挥的作用。《本际经》突出强调对“重玄”之道的诠释是大乘道教的真理价值判断标准之一,代表了隋唐之际道教思想发展的一种理论诠释方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Taixuan Zhenyi Benji Scripture (a literature on the original beginning), Benji Scripture in short, is a Taoist scripture written in the early years of the Sui and Tang dynasties. After the insurrection waged by An Lushan and Shi Siming, the majority of the scripture was missing in succession. For this reason, the Taoist Canon has not collected the full version of the works. More than 140 copies of the Benji Scripture written in the Tang Dynasty have been found among the Taoist works unearthed from the Dunhuang relics, roughly one fifth of the total Taoist scripture copies. The number exceeds that of Dao De Jing, and comes atop all the Taoist works (see Research on Taoist Literatures Unearthed in Dunhuang by Wang Ka for the data source). All the volumes can be reproduced, except for Volume Eight– Zui Sheng Pin.The Benji Scripture originally didn’t bear the name of the author. Xuan Yi, a monk in the Wuzhou Period of the Tang Dynasty, claimed in On Zhenzheng that“the current Benji Scripture, which originally has five volumes, was originally written by Liu Jinxi, a Taoist in the Sui Dynasty, and later was extended to ten volumes by Li another Taoist Zhongqing.”The existing Benji Sculpture unearthed in Dunhuang indicates that each volume was copied in the early and prime periods of the Tang Dynasty in the postscript. This shows that the ten-volume version of the Benji Sculpture was already circulated in the society during Zhenguan period of Emperor Taizong’s reign in the Tang Dynasty at the latest. The number of its copies reflects this sculpture was highly valued by people in the Tang Dynasty and extensively popular. Most of the Taoist works and literatures had recited and inherited the thoughts and contents of the Benji Sculpture.In the ten-volume Taixuan Zhenyi Benji Sculpture, Yuanshi Tianzun (meaning the maker of everything in the world), Taishang Daojun (meaning the creator of the ultimate rule of the world) and Taishang Laojun (also known as Lao Zi) interpret the doctrine to their followers, including Fa Jie, Miao Xing, Tianhuang Zhenren, Zhengyi Zhenren (Zhenren means an immortal), promote the concept of chongxuan (twofold mystery) in Taoism, and thereby“create Zhenyi Benji school (Zhenyi Benji means exploring the way that the world runs).”The sculpture aims to publicize Taoism and interpret that the view of truth of Taoism is the essence of all the laws. The sculpture involves the“theory of embodiment of the Tao”advocating“the Tao has no origin”; the“theory of nature of the Tao”holding that“the Taoist law lies in nature”; the classification of "shierfayin”and“sandong”; the“theory of panjiao (classification of teachings)”combined with the thought of chongxuan; and the“Taoist practice theory”featuring the comeuppance, merit, moral and practice, religious discipline, order of practice and method of practice.In the Wude Period of Emperor Gaozu’s reign in the Tang Dynasty, Liu Jinxi and Li Zhongqing once actively responded to the proposal by Fu Yi, the then supreme official in charge of historical records, to resist Buddhism. According to the fact that both participated in the debate about the three religions, they should be the pioneers in the then Taoist circle, and their thoughts represent the highest level of the Taoist theory at that time. As a result, the Benji Sculpture is a Taoist literature that sums up the debate between Buddhism and Taoism in the Sui and Tang dynasties, and responds to the challenges from Buddhism on a new level of theoretical thinking.”The late Northern and Southern Dynasties and the Sui Dynasty saw the popularity of the School of Three Treaties of Buddhism. Ji Zang pointed out in the Benji Probe (meaning a research on the origin of the world) of Commentary on Madhyamika-Shastra that the doctrine of Lao Zi did not explain the origin of the world. Inferred from the cause-and-effect logic of the thought history, Liu Jinxi should create the Benji Sculpture after Ji Zang put forward the opinion. "Benji”became one of the focuses of the debate between Buddhism and Taoism in the early Tang Dynasty. As one of the representatives of the then Taoist circle, Li Zhongqing participated in the“court debate”on "Benji”. This probably was the initial motive that caused them to create the sculpture. The Buddhist circle attacked Taoism on the issue of“Benji”with the aim to attribute the core domains“nature”and“Tao”of Taoism and Taoist philosophy, which represent the characteristic of the ultimate origin, to the dialectical logic of the "cause and effect theory”of Buddhism by discussing the connotation of the original thoughts, thereby proving the proposition“the Taoist law lies in nature”was false. Now that“the Taoist law lies in nature”, then nature would be the cause for Tao and Tao (the effect) should come from nature, so“Tao is the result of other cause, and thus changeable”. Based on this logic, the circle of Buddhist thoughts attempted to prove that“nature”and“Tao”were both changeable, and changeability would simply mean“no origin”. Further, Tao itself and the“divinity”theory of Taoism that would last with nature for ever would be absurd. The attack from the circle of Buddhist thoughts was possibly the reason why Liu Jinxi and Li Zhongqing formed the theoretical system composed of the“theory of embodiment of the Tao”, the“theory of nature of the Tao”and the“theory of panjiao”. The advent of the Benji Sculpture was intended to demonstrate the reasonableness, legality and divinity of the philosophy of Lao Zi and Taoism created by Lao Zi in the context of new thoughts and times. Of course, it can’t be denied that the sculpture also implied the need to serve the then politics.Due to the lack of historical materials, it is difficult to study such problems as the profile of Liu Jinxi and Li Zhongqing, the relation between the two, what chapters of the Benji Sculpture completed by the two respectively, the succession between their contents and thoughts, etc. The limited information about the two available now is mostly included in the historical materials of Buddhism. That the Benji Sculpture and the authors have been found frequently in the historical materials of Buddhism has attracted much attention from the Buddhist circle. This reflects that it is not only an important literature for the research of the Taoist thoughts in the Sui and Tang dynasties, but also the valuable materials for the study of the debate between Buddhism and Taoism and even the Chinese philosophy in the period.This article, based on the Dunhuang version of the Benji Sculpture collected in the Collection of Chinese Taoist Literatures newly published by the Huaxia Publishing House and proofread by Mr. Wang Ka, analyzes and explains the thoughts, concepts, domains and propositions in this classical literature from the perspective of the history of philosophy and the history of thought in the hope of revealing its unique values in the history of Chinese philosophic thoughts.A number of questions related to the Benji Sculpture have not been covered by the previous studies, and they are the questions this article attempts and needs to resolve. These questions include: In what areas the Benji Sculpture reflects the results of thought from the debate between Buddhism and Taoism, and to what extent the sculpture responds to and resolves the attacks from the Buddhism thought circle; the relationship between the“theory of nature of the Tao”of the Benji Sculpture and the nirvana concept under the Buddhist doctrine since the Southern and Northern Dynasties period; the relationships between the Benji Sculpture and the Tiantai School thoughts of Buddhism, the famous Mahayana-shraddhotpada-shastra, and other typical results of thought of the sinicization of Buddhism; the core thought of the Benji Sculpture is to“reveal the meaning of chongxuan to open the door to many skills" or“interpret the ultimate origin, reveal the source of birth and death, discuss cause and effect, promote the true nature and display the definition of the Taixuan sect,”namely, the way to chongxuan. Then how the Buddhist thought circle responded to this philosophical proposition of Taoism; the inheritance of the Taoist doctrine in the Southern and Northern Dynasties in the Benji Sculpture, the signs for the integration of the Northern Taoism and the Southern Taoism reflected in the sculpture, and the relationship between the Benji Sculpture and other Taoist works and literatures before and after the sculpture; the position and role of the Benji Sculpture in the Taoist doctrine system; whether the Benji Sculpture influenced the Chinese philosophy in the same era or later, either inside or outside different thought systems, and if yes, what influences.At that time, the relations among Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism in the Chinese philosophy in the Benji Sculpture are reflected in such a way as the Confucian ethics created an osmosis on the mitzvah, the Taoist practice concept of accumulating merits and kind deeds and other universal values; and the philosophical transformation of Taoism was realized by interpreting the classical works as Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi, and also borrowing and absorbing the Buddhist thoughts. These are directly evidenced by the concepts, domains and propositions that appear in the Benji Sculpture. This reflects that the results of thought from the sinicization of Buddhism can be successfully borrowed, transformed and used by the Taoist philosophy, which proves“the origin of the Chinese Buddhism is in China, but not in India.”These also reveal the base of“integration of three religions”in the mainstream ideological domain of the Chinese philosophy, the principle of the practical philosophy featuring stressing introspection and combining theory and practice, and the two epistemologies and methodologies, namely, the“theory of spiritual imperishability”rooted in the Chinese traditional culture and the“ontology”which needs particular definition when borrowing the western philosophical terms. The theory of embodiment of the Tao, the theory of nature of the Tao and the theory of panjiao running through the Benji Sculpture showcases the unique values of the sculpture in the Chinese history of philosophy and thought.更多还原