關於「唱導」的歧義

On Aspects of Ambiguity Concerning the Term Changdao

由於唐代俗講與六朝以來的唱導活動關係密切，自1934年向達發表〈唐代俗講考〉以來，不少學者撰文討論「唱導」的相關問題。但是有關佛教「唱導」一詞的多義性並未獲得適當地釐清，致使「唱導」的界義與範圍迄今仍顯得含糊籠統。六朝「唱導」活動的性質是以有說有唱，或者是以偏向講說的方式來引導眾生，至今仍多有歧見。究竟中國佛教的「唱導」一詞具有哪些意涵？「唱導」是否還有其他不同的方式？致使「唱導」一詞產生歧義的主要原因何在？佛教經唄的量詞「契」，與唱導之間的關係如何？這些都是本文關注的要點。本文首先爬梳「唱導」一詞在早期佛教經論中的意涵與用法，並藉由僧傳中有關「聲德」的分科與合流，來考查「唱導」歧義的發展。廣義的「唱導」泛指「說法」、「教化」，方式繁多，具有應機悟俗的作用。梁‧慧皎《高僧傳》有〈經師〉、〈唱導〉二篇，經師唱經、導師講說，分科相當清楚。慧皎所謂的「唱導」，即狹義的「唱導」，實際以講說為主；與經師的轉經、梵唄，共同隸屬於廣義的「唱導」之下。至於作為轉讀詠經、歌讚梵唄的量詞「契」，可以兼指長行與偈頌，篇幅長短並沒有嚴格限定。契可以是指經文的一節、一段，或是指一個歌讚；契也可以是一篇樂章，或是一首曲調。至唐‧道宣作《續高僧傳》，已合併經、導二技為〈雜科聲德〉，而宋‧贊寧《宋高僧傳》除沿用〈雜科聲德〉外，又進一步將「唱導」理解為有說有唱的說法方式。後世禪宗所用「唱導」一詞，則具「說法弘傳」或「唱導末技」的雙面意涵，延續慧皎經、導二技「於道為末」的觀點。

Vernacular Buddhist Preaching during the Tang period had a remote connection with its precedent-the Buddhist Lecture and Preaching of the Six Dynasties. They were closely related in their derivation. Since 1934, when Professor Xiang Da wrote a pioneering paper to elucidate the term changdao (“vernacular Buddhist Preaching＂) of the Tang dynasty, many scholars have kept up an ardent interest in studying this term and the Buddhist activities related to this subject. Despite this continuous and laborious research, however, the explanations of the meaning and implications of the term are confusing, and some ambiguity remains to be properly clarified. What was the orthodox way in which changdao activities might be precisely and repeatedly shown and demonstrated during the Six Dynasties? Was it to preach and chant in a clear voice, or simply to give oral preaching to guide sentient beings? Were there other different ways of changdao? What is the main reason that eventually results in ambiguity of the term changdao? This article focuses on the above-mentioned questions and, in addition, gives an explanation of the quantifier qi for the Buddhist sutra chanting.