僧肇「不真空」義及其對三家般若學的評破－－以「肇論」注疏的詮釋為討論範圍

Seng-zhao's "Bu Zhen Kong"and His Criticism of the Retorts to the Doctrine of Prajna of the Three Schools – Based on an Interpretation of the "Zhao Lun" Commentaries

魏晉思想的發展，到東晉時，核心問題已從玄學轉移到佛學，尤其是對般若學的消化和理解，形成此期另一個思辨的高峰。當時流傳頗廣的六家七宗般若學說，實不出本末有無之辨的思惟模式。前人的研究，多是從整個思想史的脈絡來探究到底僧肇的般若空義為何，甚少從《肇論》注疏來討論空義詮釋意蘊的轉變，因此，本文是以〈不真空論〉歷代注疏的詮釋為範圍，來討論諸家注疏對僧肇所立之「不真空」義，及其對「心無」、「本無」、「即色」三大般若學派的評論和破除所作的解釋，一方面將僧肇以前的般若學說做一總評；另一方面，也從歷代注家對僧肇評破內容的解釋，理解般若學的發展脈絡，以期更細緻地辨析僧肇般若空義的多重詮釋意蘊。

As Wei-Jin Thought developed, the main focus was transferred from Metaphysics to Buddhism in the Eastern Jin Dynasty; especially with regard to interpreting the Doctrine of Prajna. At that time, the key point in this popular Doctrine was thought to be the differentiation of existence/ non-existence. Predecessors' understanding of the Doctrine of Prajna of Seng-zhao were based on the history of thoughts. However, there was relatively less discussion of the “Zhao Lun” and its Commentaries on the meaning of Sunyata. Therefore, this article sets out（1） to interpret the long pre-existing tradition of “Bu Zhen Kong Lun” Commentaries,（2） to discuss in detail the various schools' Commentaries on the meaning of Seng-zhao's “Bu Zhen Kong,” and（3） to analyze Seng-zhao's responses to these Commentaries and to the critiques of him and to the doctrine of Prajna set forth in the three schools（”Xin wu”, “Ben wu” and “Ji se”）. Thus this article will provide a general overview of Seng-zhao's Doctrine of Prajna, and also look at how later commentators understood the meaning of Prajna Sunyata（e.g. in the “Zhao Lun” Commentaries） and Seng-zhao's later responsed to these interpretations. In so doing the author hopes to present a range of possible implications of Seng-zhao's Sunyata.