魏晉南北朝佛教「格義」再論??從道安經序析論其「格義」取向

Revisiting the Buddhist“Geyi”Method in the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties: An Analysis Based on Daoan’s Sutra Prefaces

漢末魏晉時期，佛教傳法與譯經興起。彼時僧人譯講佛經，為使士人解義，常援引中國傳統思想觀念與術語，此一方式名為「格義」。「格義」的定義，文獻中首見梁代慧皎《高僧傳》記竺法雅「以經中事數擬配外書，為生解之例。謂之格義。」竺法雅講授佛經，採用佛經與「外書」相互比配說解，為使學者能因此得明佛法。然而，對於「格義」之法，在當時已有質疑之聲，與竺法雅同學於佛圖澄的釋道安，便說：「先舊格義，於理多違。」此語看似道安批評「格義」，但他深諳格義之法，其所著經序中亦多有使用，究竟道安對格義的態度為何？本文考察道安生平與經序，分析其禪學、律學與般若學，認為道安並不反對格義，且支持此法，但是運用時必須有所限制，即對於內典與外書均應熟稔。道安批評的「先舊格義」，應指運用不當的情況，並非反對格義之法。從道安經序，可知其深明佛理，於外書運用嫻熟，能恰當地以老莊之語闡釋佛學。此外，道安非常重視佛經的翻譯，相較於經序可靈活使用「格義」，他對於譯文則忠於佛經之旨。從道安對「格義」的態度與使用，可見得魏晉南北朝佛教傳入中土時所使用的「格義」，確實對於佛教在中國傳播有一定助益，而道安也將「格義」推至高峰。

During the late Han and Wei-Jin periods, propagation of Buddhism and the translation of Buddhist scriptures flourished. At that time, monks translated and explained sutras to scholars who were educated but unfamiliar with Buddhist thought. In order to help these scholars understand the sutras, the monks often referenced traditional Chinese ideas and terms. This method was called“geyi”格義. The earliest recorded definition of geyi is found in Shi Huijiao’s釋慧皎Biographies of Eminent Monks高僧傳. In this work, Zhu Faya竺法雅is described as“correlating the numerations of terms and concepts in the sutras with non-Buddhist writings as instances of lively explication; this was called‘categorizing concepts’(geyi格義).”Zhu Faya taught Buddhist scriptures and used geyi to help scholars understand the Dharma. However, the method was questioned even at the time. Shi Daoan釋道安, a contemporary of Zhu Faya, expressed that“the old geyi often deviates from Buddhist principles.”Still, Daoan was well-versed in the geyi method and frequently employed it in his sutra prefaces. What, then, was his true attitude towards geyi? This paper examines Daoan’s life and sutra prefaces, analyzes his Zen and Prajna studies, and proposes that Daoan did not oppose geyi and supported it as a method of preaching the Dharma to outsiders. He did believe that the usage of geyi should be limited, that is, the person using it should be well-versed in both Buddhist and secular literature. Therefore, Daoan criticized his predecessors for using geyi incorrectly, rather than opposing the method itself. From the prefaces written by Daoan, it can be seen that he had a deep understanding of Buddhism and could use external works such as those of Laozi and Zhuangzi to skillfully explain the Dharma. In addition, while Daoan was flexible in his use of geyi in sutra prefaces, he emphasized and exemplified the importance of faithful translation when it came to the sutras themselves. Daoan’s attitude towards and use of geyi reveal that this method played a significant role in the transmission of Buddhism to China during the Wei, Jin, Southern, and Northern Dynasties, and that Daoan brought the geyi method to its peak.