清代臺灣傳統佛教伽藍建築在日治時期的延續

在臺灣的歷史舞台上，其政治政權之轉移頻繁，從明鄭、清代、日治，到戰後的國民政府。這些政權的背景文化雖都屬佛教圈，但因民族、地區與時代潮流之不同，各自發展出不同的佛教建築伽藍特色。這些佛教伽藍都出現在臺灣，因此或有機會思考不同的伽藍的底層，什麼才是它們共通的特色？本文是探討臺灣傳統佛教寺院建築初期變遷之研究，亦即將焦點聚於佛教傳來臺灣的初始階段，看看在政權由清代轉入日治時，其原有清代的佛寺或是在日治時期新蓋伽藍建築時其形態的選擇，是否存在一定之延續性？關於本文的研究案例之選擇，是以日治時期日人對臺灣宗教的分類，以及戰後臺灣佛教的研究成果為基礎。首先選取了臺南開元寺、臺北龍山寺作為自清代以來純粹佛教寺院與道教化後的世俗佛教寺院之代表。其次在日治時期，存在臺灣佛教四大門派之說，因此也選取四大門派的祖庭，分析其伽藍創始之初，各寺院之形態選擇與後來的發展。另外，知道清代至日治的臺灣僧侶都前往福建福州鼓山湧泉寺受戒，因此本文也追查了湧泉寺的伽藍配置情形，比較其與臺灣佛教寺院之異同。又因湧泉寺主流屬於禪宗的曹洞宗派，也同具部分的臨濟宗色彩，所以檢驗了日治時期日本佛教曹洞宗臺北別院、鎮南臨濟護國禪寺的伽藍配置。經過追溯各寺院伽藍配置的歷史發展沿革後，澄清了部分的歷史事實，發現從清代至日治時期的臺灣佛教具有下列幾種現象。一是以臺南開元寺為代表之正統臺灣佛教伽藍配置。二是由臺北龍山寺所代表的道教化「殿堂型」佛教伽藍。三是只要是臺灣人主導的寺院新建，即使在日治統治之下，也明確地採用臺灣傳統建築形態。四是隨著日本的殖民統治，日本近代佛教伽藍配置也出現在臺灣。總而言之，雖然在1895 年以後，臺灣成為日本的殖民地，除了開元寺及龍山寺的臺灣固有傳統伽藍配置形態，仍被堅定地維持並未受日治統治的政治力量的影響。同時代下，即使屬於新建的佛教寺院，如靈泉寺與法雲寺的情形，從其組織至佛教寺院建築之配置，除了可以獨立於中國佛教系統，又保有不同於日本佛教建築的純粹臺灣形式的伽藍，經過日本的統治時期，其實也逐漸在成形當中。

關鍵字

佛教伽藍配置；四大門派；近代日本佛教；日本殖民統治；佛教建築之傳承

並列摘要

All of the major regimes in Taiwan including Koxinga, Qing, Jaese and the KMT, have been strongly influenced by Buddhism. However, due to their ethnic, geographic, and historical differences, each regime fostered certain unique characteristics in Buddhist architecture. Therefore, we can find a great diversity among Buddhist monasteries in Taiwan. At the same time, the essence of Buddhist monasteries may continue despite the change of alien regimes. This study attempts ot analyze the characteristics of traditional Buddhist monasteries in Taiwan and their transformation under Jaese colonialism. I will trace the continuity of Buddhist monasteries from the Qing dynasty to Jaese colonial period. Of the hundreds of Buddhist monasteries in Taiwan, selecting one that is most representative is a difficult problem. Based on Jaese reports and contemporary research in Buddhism, this paper chooses the Kaiyuan Monastery in Tainan as a pure historical Buddhist monastery and the Longshan Monastery in Taipei as a Taoism-influenced historical Buddhist monastery. During the Jaese colonial period, there were the so-called four head Buddhist monasteries in Taiwan. This study chooses two of them as examples to explain the layout and the development of these head monasteries. According to Qing imperial decree, Buddhist monks in Taiwan were to go to the Yongquan Monastery in Fuzhou, Fujian, for their ordination. This practice was continued in the successive periods. I will also examine the layout of the Yongquan monastery, because it contained elements of both Caodong and Linji lineages. Likewise, I will examine the plans of Taibei bieyuan and the Huguo chansi, which are branch monasteries of Jaese Soto and Rinzai head monasteries respectively. Through the study of these examples, this paper clarifies some historical errors regarding Buddhist monasteries and unveils some interesting phenomena between the Qing dynasty and Jaese colonial rule. The major findings can be summarized as follows. First, there was a truly orthodox Buddhist layout in Taiwan, represented by Kaiyuan monastery. This traditional layout continued from the Qing dynasty through Jaese colonization to modern time. Second, a typical pattern in Buddhist monastic layout, represented by Longshan monastery (called ＂palace-type＂ layout), continued to be built even during the Jaese colonial period. Third, the head monasteries, represented by Linquan si and Fayun si, were erected under Jaese colonial rule while the traditional Taiwanese building style was adopted. Fouth, modern Jaese monasteries, represented by Soto school's Taipei Bieyuan and Rinzai's Huguo chansi, were erected in colonial Taiwan. Generally speaking, after Taiwan became a Jaese colony, the orthodox Buddhist layout in Taiwan, as well as the representative, ＂palace-type＂ layout were maintained, while the monasteries that were built under colonial rule still employed the traditional Taiwanese model. Yet, from the viewpoint of organization and building prototype, they departed from Chinese monasteries gradually, and maintained independence from Jaese political influence.