- 期刊
略評釋印順的「以佛法研究佛法」
Brief Comments on Shi Yinshun's A Study of Buddha Dharma Based on Buddha Dharma
摘要
一實相印和三法印本來是用來檢驗是否爲佛法的標準，釋印順卻取來作爲研究佛法的方法。他研究佛法的成果，最特別的是大乘三系佛法的判教，而中國傳統以如來藏修證爲中心的傳統佛教，被他判爲真常唯心系而說具有外道神我色彩的思想。釋印順之追隨者，亦繼承了他「以佛法研究佛法」的研究方法，和三系判教的研究成果。 然而「以佛法研究佛法」，實際上是陷入倒果爲因的邏輯錯誤。釋印順過度低估了唯一實相和三法印的難度，以爲是一經提示，即可輕易理解的佛法－這無疑是違反經教與事實的。實際上，他是以自己所錯解的一實相印和三法印，來研究佛法，凡是與他的偏見不符合者，便打入外道、疑偽的一邊。 釋印順的錯誤，還包括把不變易的佛法核心，也當成會變遷的世諦流布。對於世間文獻學的「文字研究」，錯誤地推崇爲可以親證涅槃寂靜的方法。唯識學主要是對於有情心識的現量事實的深入研究，他卻把唯識學當做是演變中的思想，完全忽略有情心識功能亙古不變的事實。又主張「證法」不是吾人所應該要下工夫研究的對象，使他自己侷限於「教法」的想像中，導致他不能親證佛法。因此釋印順對於佛法的研究方法，流於自我主觀的揣測與臆想中，而追隨其主張者，亦將不能避免同樣的過失。 經典當中，其實已經有研究佛法的方法，那就是所謂的「四依、四不依」及論藏三量所指向的親證的方法。這四依與三量的原則，即使以現代學術的標準而言，也仍然正確無誤，只要依照當代科學研究的精神，將四依加以解釋運用，便足以適應學術的要求，不需做太大的調整。
並列摘要
The reality-seal and the three-dharma-seals are the principles originally used to examine whether a discourse is the Buddha dharma or not, but Shi Yinshun used them as the methods to study Buddha dharma instead. One of the outcomes of his research, most especially, is the classification of Buddha dharmas of the great-vehicle into three different categories. He classified the traditional Chinese Buddhism, which is centered on the practice and realization of Tathagatagarbha, into the category of true permanent mind-only and regarded the traditional Chinese Buddhism as having the Divine-self thought of non-Buddhism. The followers of Shi Yinshun also continue taking the same approach to ”studying Buddha dharma based on Buddha dharma” and accepting his research result of the three categories of Buddha dharmas. However, ”studying Buddha dharma based on Buddha dharma” itself is in fact a logical mistake, which regards the result as the cause. Shi Yinshun underestimated too much the difficulty of the unique reality-seal and the three-dharma-seals, and thought them easy to understand once a hint was provided. No doubt his view violates the teaching of sutras and the fact. Actually, he took the incorrect understanding of the unique reality-seal and the three-dharma-seals to study Buddha dharma, and categorized every that did not agree with his personally prejudice into the non-Buddhist, questionable or false group. Another mistake Shi Yinshun made was to consider the unchangeable Buddha dharma to be the changeable worldly truth. For the ”textual research” of worldly philology he wrongly praised it as the method that can be used to personally realize the tranquil nirvana. The consciousness-only theory is a deep research primarily on the fact that can be experienced by the mind consciousness of sentient beings. However, he considered the theory as an evolving thought and totally ignored the fact that the functions of the mind consciousness of sentient beings are not changed forever. Besides, he claimed that the ”realization methods” are not the objects that should be studied with efforts. With this view he was limited to the imagination of the ”teaching methods” and not able to personally realize the Buddha dharma. Therefore, his study of Buddha dharma becomes the self-subjective conjecture and illusion and his followers cannot avoid the same fault either. In fact, in the Buddhist sutras, there are already a method of studying Buddha dharma, which is personal realization that ”the four kinds of reliance and the four kinds of non-reliance,” and the three-ways-of-knowing of the Buddhist treatises indicate. Even for the present academic standards, these principles, with the scientific spirit of research, are still correct and applicable to academic research without much adjustment.