摘要
壇經流傳的版本甚多，本文不作考訂。壇經的思想系統，雖用般若經，實則是沿襲如來藏的觀點，用般若的空慧，實證真如佛性，即是明心見性。壇經中引用《金剛般若經》者凡五見，引用《文殊說般若經》者一處。其目的是在證明相無而性有，強調本心及本性實在，所引般若經典，乃在取其作為修證的觀行方便，那便是般若三昧及一行三昧。壇經引用《維摩經》者計六例，共有五種觀念：頓悟、守心與直心、行住坐臥的日常生活即是修行、動靜一體、不二。此外尚可在壇經中見到《大涅槃經》、《菩薩戒經》、《法華經》、《華嚴經》、《觀無量慧經》、《大乘本生心地觀經》等的思想。壇經的心經實踐，名為「無念法門」，它已有無住、無著、無相等不同的名稱，以無念得智慧，以無著離煩惱，以無相證佛性。壇經的生活實踐是以懺悔、發願、受三皈依戒為準則，而又將之導歸心理實踐的「無相法門」。
關鍵字
無資料並列摘要
Faith and tradition have held that the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch (Liu Tsu T'an Ching) was preached by the sixth patriarch of the Ch'an school, Master Hui-neng (638-713). However, since the discovery of the Tunhuang edition of the text, there has been much controversy among Japanese and Chinese scholars concerning the authorship of this classic. Was it based on the Sixth Patriach's thought, or was it a forgery by Shen-hui (668-760)? In this paper I will not discuss these debates. Instead, I will concentrate on the thought of this text. There are two different editions of the Platforms Sutra contained in the 48th volume of the Taisho Tripitaka. The first one, which is commonly called ＂The Sixth Patriarch's Platform Sutraunearthed from Tun-huang＂, has a very long title: Southern School Sudden Doctrine, Supreme Mahayana Great Perfection of Wisdom: The Platform Sutra Preached by the Sixth Patriarch Great Master Hui-neng at the Ta-fan Monastery in Shao-chou (Nan-tsung t'un-chiao tsui-shang ta-cheng mo-ke-pan-jo p'olo- mi ching Liu Tsu Hui-neng Ta-shih yu Shao-chou Ta-faṅ ssu shih-fa t'an ching). The second edition is entitled The Dharma Treasure Platform Sutra of the Great Master the Sixth Patriarch (Liu Tsu Ta-shih fa-pao t'an ching). This edition is the most widely circulated and has been commonly usde in China. It was compiled by the monk Tsung-pao during the chih-yuan era (1335-1340) of the Yuan dynasty, while the Tun-huang edition was compiled by Fa-hai who was the disciple of the Sixth patriarch. It would seem that the Tun-huang text should be more reliable. Moreover, because the Tsung-pao edition reads more smoothly, we may presume that this was the result of improvements made by later generation through transmission, copying and literary embellishments of the text. Recently, a third edition which is known as the Ts'o-chi text has also come to light. This was a variant copy of the Tsung-pao edition. There are considerable differences among the three texts in terms of wording. The Tun-huang edition in particular differs from the other two in the sequence and order of its paragraphs. From these we can conclude that the three editions belong to two different textual traditions. We should not, however, assert that the original materials contained in Tsung-pao's edition necessarily postdated those found in the Tun-huang edition. Suchacademic questions concern evidential study of the redaction of texts-an issue which I shall not go into here.[1] What I would like to discuss instead in this paper is the thought of the Platform sutra. In doing so, I shall consult all available editions of this text. Using the commonly shared materials which are found in these editions, I will offer a comprehensive analysis of this scripture, synthesizing the key points emphasized in the three editions.[2]