惠洪覺範在明代──宋代禪學在晚明的書寫、衍異與反響

Rewriting Huihong Juefan in the Ming Dynasty

本文以宋代著名的禪僧，「文字禪」的倡始者──惠洪覺範（1071-1128）在晚明被接受與重新詮釋的過程為例，藉以思考禪學體系當中關於知識、語言、文化論述之傳播與接受的衝突與融合，並經由檢視惠洪覺範其人在晚明所引起的思想論爭，說明縱使原初看似反對經典與教條的禪宗思想，在其長遠的發展過程中，經典詮釋其實也是不容忽視的重要環節。惠洪覺範在晚明時曾引起當時叢林廣泛的注意與討論。當時密雲圓悟與漢月法藏兩者之間的論爭甚囂塵上，對禪悟修證過程中關於知識與實踐見解不同，其相互詰難交鋒之狀極為熾烈，往往以惠洪覺範所著《智證傳》一書作為討論之焦點。惠洪覺範此書付梓之初，其反響雖然不若《禪林僧寶傳》、《石門文字禪》熱烈，但在明代時，卻由紫柏真可引爆，由漢月法藏承續，特別是其所體證的「綱宗」思想，掀起叢林中一陣論辯的浪潮歷久不歇，直到雍正時期，由於帝室威權的介入，此一現象才劃上了休止符。這場歷時良久的叢林論爭涉及神聖經驗與經典知識之間的不同立場，也牽涉到禪學發展歷程中「反教條」與「教條化」思維傾向的糾葛。本文以晚明叢林對惠洪覺範的接受過程著眼，同時配合檢視惠洪覺範於晚明知識社群與佛教叢林互動脈絡之文化圖像，希望就禪學體系中（一）晚明禪林的價值取向；（二）晚明禪學論爭經過與彼此立場之重新釐清；（三）禪學詮釋方法與社會文化的相互定位；（四）禪學思想體系當中不同修證路線間的融合與衝突等不同面向能有進一步的助益。

This paper attempts to examine conflict and reconciliation between knowledge, language and cultural discourse within Ch'an teaching in the late Ming by shedding light on the revival of the teachings of the famous monk Huihong Juefan (惠洪覺範, 1071-1128), the first advocate of Wenzi Ch'an. It will also investigate the role of canonical texts in the spread of Ch'an teaching; Ch'an thought at first seems antithetical to doctrine and scripture, but actually canonical texts are crucial within its development. In the late Ming, an intense dispute erupted within Buddhist circles between Miyun Yuanwu (密雲圓悟, 1566-1642) and Hanyue Fazang (漢月法藏, 1573-1635). The two often voiced incongruous ideas, focusing on Huihong Juefan's works, particularly his Zhi Zheng Zhuan (智證傳). Zibo Zhenke (紫柏真可, 1543-1603) dedicated himself to disseminating Huihong Juefan's works and ideology; in fact, he was the first to give consideration to the Zhi Zheng Zhuan, thereby inciting a heated debate that was to last until the reign of Emperor Yung-zheng. At the heart of this long-drawn-out quarrel lay the conflict between the understanding of Ch'an teaching based on holy experience and that based on canonical knowledge; the dispute between the two ideological veins of mysticism and intellectualism also came into play. The aim of this paper is to further our understanding of late Ming Buddhism by exploring four dimensions: (1) the orientation of the values of late Ming Ch'an teaching; (2) the specifics of the debate over the teachings of Huihong Juefan and the positions of the opposing sides; (3) interrelation between hermeneutical strategy and cultural context; and (4) commentaries on the Ch'an practices of different schools.