《維摩詰經》的宗派詮釋差異：以羅什譯本為核心的隋唐佛教宗派詮釋的開展

本文透過對於隋代三大師慧遠、智顗、吉藏關於《維摩詰經》之注釋作品之觀察、分析、比較，以究明基於鳩摩羅什譯《維摩經》所開展的經典詮釋及宗派形成之關係。分析比較的方式包括三師《維摩經》注釋出現的先後及彼此關係的考察，以及三師注經作品之科判考察及還有隨文釋篇幅之比較，同時亦及於經題「人法」並舉的解釋之分析，與三師對各品議題釋經重點之對比等。其目的在於理解三師之注釋時所運用的核心觀念及與宗派思想發展間的關係。透過上述的分析比較得出，慧遠以真心本體為核心概念以解釋經典，使《維摩經》被解讀為一真常唯心式的經典。智顗以「不思議」為核心概念，但其「不思議」雖有經典依據，但實際上是由自己結合《法華經》及《涅槃經》的思想而來，他乃將本經置於天台宗義的脈絡來進行解釋。吉藏則最重視《維摩經》的不二思想，但其「不二」的內涵是被解釋為性空思想的無相、無所得，因此他使《維摩經》被解讀為一空宗的經典。就經典詮釋與宗派思想之關聯來看，慧遠雖預取真心思想為前見，有《十地經論》及《涅槃經》、《起信論》等思想之融入，但他尚未企圖建立特殊之宗義。智顗的《維摩經》詮釋，是與其天台宗義之形成同時成長的，這是因為智顗採取一種圓教的態度，要將不同的經典，在《法華經》及《涅槃經》的基礎下，會合融通成一圓滿的系統所致。至於吉藏，則是在印度中觀學與中國三論宗義的基礎上，面對不同系統之經典而加以判釋，其目的在於既強調般若性空思想為正法，也在於擴大此一思想的詮釋範圍，其對本經所進行的詮釋也是採取這個立場來進行。「一經多義」的經典詮釋現象，呈現於三師注《維摩經》的著作之中，正如《維摩經》所稱「一音說法，隨類得解」一般。三師之詮釋不必以任一人為唯一的正解，本文旨在呈現不同的經典詮釋與其預設或者所欲成就的宗派思想之間，有著複雜的互動關係，諸說言之成理之處，也顯示其所預取的詮釋立場，若理解這一點的話，便能理解隋唐之時，何以諸宗並起，各領風騷之緣由。

關鍵字

《維摩詰經》；慧遠；智顗；吉藏；真心本體；不思議；不二

並列摘要

Huiyuan, Zhiyi, and Jizang, three Buddhist masters in the Sui dynasty, studied and made their own interpretations of Kumārajīva's translation of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa. This article compares their works to evaluate the relationship between their interpretations of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa and the developments in Buddhist schools in the Sui and Tang dynasties. I will focus on the dates of completion for their works, the differences in their context, and their interpretations of the full title of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa (inconceivable liberation), and other topics to identify the core ideas behind their interpretations and the relational development of Chinese Buddhist scholastic thought. sūtra to interpret it from a Tiantai perspective. Jizang emphasizes the concept of non-duality (advaya) and identifies it with emptiness (śūnya), signlessness (alakṣaṇā), and non-acquisition (anupalabdha), finally identifying the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa as a prajñāpāramitā sutra. Although ＂ontological true mind＂ is Huiyuan's fundamental perspective, he includes ideas from the Daśabhūmika śāstra, Mahāyāna mahāparinirvāṇa sūtra, and the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna to interpret the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa. However, he does not attempt to establish his own school yet. Zhiyi's Tiantai school was growing at the same time of his interpretation of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, and he used the idea of perfect teachings and the Lotus sūtra and Mahāyāna mahāparinirvāṇa sūtra to integrate ideas from various sūtras. Jizang inherited the tradition of the Sanlun school, taking emptiness (śūnyata) as the ultimate truth and interpreting other texts from this perspective. There are multifaceted hermeneutic points of view toward the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa. These three masters have their own explanations, although none of them is the only correct interpretation. It is just as the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says: ＂The Buddha explains the Dharma with one sound and sentient beings each attain understanding according to their capacity.＂ The phenomenon of hermeneutic difference has shown this completely.