試論聖嚴法師對「空性」與「佛性」之詮解與貫通

Ven. Sheng-Yen's Exposition and Integration of the Concepts of Śūnyatā and Buddhatā

林建德(Kent Lin)

《法鼓佛學學報》 21期 (2017/12) Pp. 131-180

https://doi.org/10.6889/DDJBS.201712_(21).0004

摘要

聖嚴法師晚年曾清楚定位自己為「一個帶動思想的人」，認為自己不是學問家、不是學者，但承認自己是一個宗教思想家；法師以思想家自我定位，其對佛教思想的詮釋和理解有哪些特色，成為可關注的點。本文試著從聖嚴法師對「空性」與「佛性」之詮解與融通，進行初步的分析論述。「空性」與「佛性」兩大概念之間，在印、漢、藏佛教思想史上早有廣泛討論，包括近來學界亦有諸多反思乃至論辯。本文以聖嚴法師觀點為主，在漢傳佛教的脈絡底下作探討，先介紹近代漢語學界三種觀點：第一以太虛法師為例，簡介佛性高於空性之說；第二以印順法師為例，概述空性高於佛性之說；第三以牟宗三先生為例，說明佛性與空性不同但卻互補的立場。對上述三種觀點，聖嚴法師顯然有不同看法，他認為佛性即是空性，佛性和空性相通，只是表達方式的不同。本文藉由聖嚴法師與近現代華人思想家判釋異同之對比，向佛學界介紹聖嚴法師的特見，並進一步分析、評論他對佛典的解讀及論證，盼能從中看出現今漢傳佛教弘揚者對於佛性和空性之主張，顯示聖嚴法師兼容互攝、調和（合）的思想特色。

關鍵字

佛性 ； 空性 ； 太虛 ； 印順 ； 牟宗三 ； 聖嚴

並列摘要

In his old age, Master Sheng Yen once identified himself as ＂Buddhist thought leader＂. He considered himself not an academic nor a scholar but a religious thinker. Since Master Sheng Yen identified himself as a Buddhist thinker, the unique features of his interpretation and understanding of Buddhism are worth exploring. In this paper I try to analyze and discuss Master Sheng Yen's exposition and integration of ＂emptiness＂ (śūnyatā) and ＂Buddha-nature＂ (Buddhatā). The relationship between emptiness and Buddha-nature has been discussed extensively in the ancient Indian, Chinese, and Tibetan history of Buddhist thought, and there have been some reflections, and even debates, in modern academic circles. Here I focus on the views of Master Sheng Yen to see how he responds to this issue. In the beginning I introduce three positions in modern Chinese circle: firstly I take Master Tai Xu as an example to illustrate the viewpoint that the teaching on Buddha-nature is superior to the teaching on emptiness; secondly I take Master Yin Shun to illustrate the view that the teaching on emptiness is superior to the teaching on Buddha-nature; thirdly I introduce Mou Zong San's viewpoint to present the view that the teachings on Buddha-nature and emptiness are distinct but complementary. Compared to the aforementioned views, Master Sheng Yen obviously has a different understanding. He suggests that Buddha-nature and emptiness are simply different ways of expressing the same idea. Comparing the differences and similarities of his views with these contemporary thinkers, I wish to introduce Master Sheng Yen's syncretic interpretation of emptiness and Buddha-nature to the Buddhist academic circle. I further analyze and comment on his viewpoints on Buddhist scriptures and arguments, not only illustrating the standpoints of a contemporary advocate of Chinese Buddhism, but also representing his unique form of syncretic thought.

並列關鍵字

Buddha-nature ； Emptiness ； Tai Xu ； Yin Shun ； Mou Zong San ； Sheng Yen

參考文獻

「中華電子佛典協會」（Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association，簡稱 CBETA）電子佛典系列，2014 版光碟。

《大般若波羅蜜多經》，T07, no. 220。「中華電子佛典協會」（Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association，簡稱 CBETA）電子佛典系列，2014 版光碟。

《小品般若波羅蜜經》，T08, no. 227。「中華電子佛典協會」（Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association，簡稱 CBETA）電子佛典系列，2014 版光碟。

《大法鼓經》，T09, no. 270。「中華電子佛典協會」（Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association，簡稱 CBETA）電子佛典系列，2014 版光碟。

《大方廣佛華嚴經》，T09, no. 278。「中華電子佛典協會」（Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association，簡稱 CBETA）電子佛典系列，2014 版光碟。