透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.116.235.184
  • 學位論文

看見以往的未見:意識覺察的理念與實踐

指導教授 : 李明芬
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


意識覺察能使人超越煩惱,解決社會大眾內在之精神壓力與相關問題。本研究之目的為探討意識覺察在個人提升自我之面向的相關知識背景,以及對照中國禪宗與心理綜合有關意識覺察理念與實踐之異同,期能為學界在東、西方意識覺察之相互理解、對話與開展做初步探詢。本論文為質性研究,採用詮釋取向的文本分析,並以整全實踐的觀念架構做為中國禪宗與心理綜合之觀念分析及觀念對照之研究架構,以此釐清及對照二者在意識覺察的理念觀念與實踐方法。 研究結果發現:1.中國禪宗與心理綜合在意識構成要素雖有部份交集,但其主體則有所不同,中國禪宗以能夠轉識成智的心性本體為主,心理綜合則將意識視為主體;2.兩者均持意識獨立於物質(身體)以外之觀點;3.兩者對於意識主體之「映照」觀點相似:中國禪宗認為心是性之映照,心理綜合認為自我由真我映照而來。但禪宗認為自性本是無我,而心理綜合認為真我是實在存有;4.中國禪宗的心性覺察方法偏向於無執無住之無為法,心理綜合則偏向有為法;5.兩者均肯定與重視定靜工夫對意識覺察之重要性;6.兩者放下小我的態度雷同;7.中國禪宗修行者重視覺悟後之修行才是真修,因開悟後才能以清淨的慈悲與智慧利他利己,心理綜合之最高目標則為整合愛與意志;8.中國禪宗認為只要頓悟自心,明白煩惱及菩提,便能解脫根本煩惱,同時也更能輕易的轉煩惱為菩提,頓漸並用,心理綜合則認為身心靈之療癒需以各層面之相應方法循序漸進、各別治療,乃漸修法門;9.兩者在有關意識與心性之觀念理路與實踐方法之本質、途徑與應用有相當程度之差異。 研究者也以整全實踐的觀念架構圖分析對照中國禪宗與心理綜合兩者,在意識主體、意識覺察取徑、意識覺察方法之對照,除了運用整全實踐之觀念架構圖,也以表格對照兩者在意識覺察與心性覺悟歷程之相關概念。最後,研究者提出以視域高度的提升及整全實踐觀念架構的觀照,建構意識覺察的三維空間四大象限,期能融合中國禪宗與心理綜合在意識覺察理念與實踐精神,創造人類意識集體揚升之概念模型。

關鍵字

意識 意識覺察 自性 真我 中國禪宗 心理綜合

並列摘要


Consciousness awareness plays a critical role in helping people resolve their pressure and vexation. The purpose of this research is twofold: to construct the knowledge base about ways of self-improvement with consciousness awareness and to compare the philosophy and praxis of consciousness awareness in Chinese Chan and Psychosynthesis. The ultimate goal is to bridge the eastern and western tradition of consciousness awareness and mindfulness praxis. The research took the qualitative study approach by means of textual analysis based on the conceptual framework of Wholeness Praxis Paradigm. The findings of this research could be briefly summarized as below: 1. The essence of consciousness in Chinese Chan and Psychosynthesis are partly overlap. While Chinese Chan regards mindfulness as the subject for transforming consciousness into wisdom, Psychosynthesis treats consciousness as the subject. 2. Both Chinese Chan and Psychosynthesis are convergent on the view that consciousness is independent from the materialistic world. 3. Chinese Chan regards that the mind is a projection of Svabhava, and Psychosynthesis considers that conscious self is a projection of Transpersonal Self. However, Chinese Chan thinks Svabhava is non-self, but Psychosynthesis deems Transpersonal Self is hypostatized. 4. The practice of mindfulness in Chan is asamskrta-dharma, but the practice of consciousness awareness in Psychosynthesis is samskrta-dharma. 5. They both think serenity could enhance mindfulness and consciousness awareness. 6. They have the same attitude toward minimize our ego. 7. Chinese Chan values enlightenment of our minds as critical for practice with enlightenment could bring forth compassionate and wise practice, but Psychosynthesis focuses on love and will. 8. Chinese Chan undertakes both gradual and sudden approach to resolve our vexation or transform our vexation into Bodhi. Psychosynthesis, however, simply takes the gradual approach, dealing with our physical, mental and spiritual problems through various dimensions. 9. Both Chinese Chan and Psychosynthesis have their unique perspectives on the subject, knowledge and practice of consciousness or mindfulness. In this study, the researcher adopted the conceptual framework of Wholeness Praxis Paradigm to do textual analysis and comparison in terms of the consciousness subject and its practice approach between mindfulness practice in Chinese Chan and consciousness practice in Psychosynthesis. The researcher also uses a series of tables to highlight such comparison. Finally, the researcher proposed the heightened perspectivism with Wholeness Praxis views to construct a three-dimensional, four-quadrant model of consciousness awareness practice. It is expected that by integrating the essence of mindfulness practice in Chinese Chan and consciousness awareness practice in Psychosynthesis, an upgrading dynamic model of human’s collective cultivation of mindfulness or consciousness could be further.

參考文獻


李嗣涔(2006)。人體身心靈科學。師大演講。
夏春祥(1997)。文本分析與傳播研究。新聞學研究,54,頁141-166。
陳金定(1998)。依附行為與情緒調適能力之因果模式探討暨情緒調適團體對不安全依附者依附相關變項之實驗研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。未出版,台北市。
陳佩鈺(2004)。僧侶自我轉化經驗及其自我觀之敘事研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商學系所碩士論文。未出版,彰化市。
楊淑貞(2007)。禪坐之自我療癒力及其對壓力、憂鬱、焦慮與幸福感影響之研究。玄奘大學應用心理學系碩士論文。未出版,新竹市。

延伸閱讀