日治時期與戰後國家權力介入下的臺灣「巖」──以嘉義半天巖、高雄翠屏巖與高雄崗山巖為例

Giam Temples under the State Power in Taiwan During Japanese Rule and after World War II: Case Studies of Puanthinn-Giam in Chiayi, Tshuiping-Giam in Kaohsiung and Kang Suann-Giam in Kaohsiung

「巖」（或寫作「岩」），又稱為「巖仔」，是臺灣常見的寺廟類型，為與「山」的概念有關的宗教建築，最早是作為一種地理景觀或名勝被記錄，後來引申為某種祭祀空間的名稱。清領時期，隨著中國福建、廣東地區的移民來到臺灣，「巖」的寺廟名稱也被帶入，統合了「佛教信仰」與「民間信仰」兩種宗教屬性，並作為地方社會的連結點，成為地方民眾團結的「聯庄廟」與信仰中心。本文探討受到國家權力介入下的「巖」建築，其過程可分為兩個階段，第一階段為日治時期的舊慣調查，隨著西來庵事件的爆發，日本政府也開始進行全島性的慣習與宗教寺廟調查，部分「巖」為求自保，因而被歸入日本臨濟宗妙心寺派之下，和日本佛教產生連結，有些則登記為佛教，並產生管理人一職，戰時則成為皇道佛教的宣揚場所。第二階段為二次世界大戰後的中國佛教會，透過大仙巖戰後第一次的三壇大戒取得臺灣佛教界的主體地位，這些僧侶也被聘請至「巖」做住持，被劃入佛教的「巖」也因此和中國佛教會開始有直接或間接的接觸，並在戒嚴時期和政府維繫某種關係。本文挑選三個重要建築案例進行探討，分別是嘉義的半天巖、高雄的翠屏巖與高雄的崗山巖；這三間巖仔原先鈞為在地信仰中心，而後駐錫的住持僧侶，皆與日治時期大崗山法脈及戰後大仙巖傳戒脈絡有所關聯。本研究從空間配置、祀神安排、建築形式等三個面向切入探討，分析這三間巖仔與國家權力介入的關係。在國家權力介入下，這三間巖仔必須面臨「民間信仰」與「佛教信仰」之間的選擇，兩種選擇迫使巖進行妥協與調適，並充分體現在空間配置、祀神安排、建築形式等面向上。研究發現，選擇民間信仰取向的巖，較重視藉由香、煙與爐的靈力傳達；選擇佛教信仰取向的巖仔，則較重視宇宙觀與佛教經典之體現；更者，巖亦可能試圖讓兩種取向共存於空間與儀式中。

Giam is a popular type of temple in Taiwan, also called ''Giam-a'', referring to religious architecture related the concept of ''mountains''. This type of temple was initially recorded as a geographical landscape or scenic attraction and was subsequently extended to indicate a specific form of worship space. As immigrants from the Fujian and Guangdong regions moved to Taiwan during the Qing dynasty, the names ''Giam'' was introduced to Taiwan. Giam temples integrated the attributes of two religions, namely, ''Buddhism'' and ''folk religion''. Moreover, Giam temples served as a connection point in the local society, thereby becoming a central temple of multi-village associations and religious hub unifying local villagers. This study explores the Giam architecture under the intervention of state power. The intervention process could be divided into two stages. The first stage involved the Investigation of Traditional Customs during the Japanese rule. With the eruption of the Selai Temple Incident, the Japanese government launched an island-wide investigation into traditional customs and religions. Some Giam temples fell under the Myoshin-ji branch of the Rinzai sect for self-protection, thereby establishing connections with Japanese Buddhism. Other Giam temples registered themselves as Buddhist and created the position of temple managers. The second stage involved interventions by the Buddhist Association of the Republic of China (BAROC) after World War II, intervened in the precept transmission assembly held in Taisian-Giam, and thus obtained the dominant status in Taiwan’s Buddhist community. The monks were recruited as the abbots or administrators of Giam temples. Therefore, the Giam temples classified as Buddhist began to have direct or indirect contact with the BAROC. This study uses three significant Giam temples cases: Puanthinn-Giam in Chiayi, Tshuiping-Giam in Kaohsiung, and Kangsuann-Giam in Kaohsiung. The abbots and monks of these three Giam temples were associated with the lineage of Tu-kang-suann during the Japanese rule and the thread of precept transmission at Taisian Giam after World War II. This study analyzes the relationship between these three Giam temples and the intervention of state power from three dimensions: spatial lay out, deity worship, and architectural form. Under the intervention of state power, these three Giam temples were faced with the choices of ''folk religion'' or ''Buddhism''. The two options compelled them to make compromises and adjustments that were fully reflected in the aforementioned dimensions. This study arrives at the following findings: folk religion-oriented Giam temples placed greater emphasis on the transmission of spiritual power through incense, smoke, and censers, whereas Buddhism-oriented Giam temples focused more on the embodiment of cosmology and Buddhist sutras. Furthermore, some Giam temples might even attempt to enable the coexistence of the two religious orientations in the spaces and rituals.