天台智顗「即」字悖論的語用學——以四明知禮「當體全是」義為詮釋線索

The Paradoxical Significance of the Term “Ji” in Chinese Tiantai Thought: Discussing the Examples of Zhiyi and Siming Zhili

天台宗原典常以「悖論式論辯」的形式進行義理論述或敘事，此一特殊的語言模式，甚且是根植於大乘解脫學的救度觀；本論文認為這是該佛學宗派在語文實用學上的特色，特別能展現天台原典的特徵。本論文的主旨在於回溯及陳述天台思想發展中悖論式論辯的形成過程，且將以智顗、湛然、知禮的著作為研究基礎，進一步分析及探討悖論式論辯在智顗天台學以注疏漢譯經文為解脫智慧之實修法門中，在其以「教觀相資」為主的佛學思想上所扮演的角色及實用性。因此本論文將討論的重點聚焦於富有歧義之「即」字上，並且把此一天台原典常用的字眼，視為揭開悖論式論辯在天台佛教哲學發展及形成的重要環節過程中的一個線索。尤其是四明知禮以「即」字為立場界定天台宗思想與其他佛學派別之不同，〈十不二門指要鈔〉曰：「應知：今家明即永異諸師，以非二物相合，及非背面相翻，直須當體全是方名為即。」事實上，「當體全是」這句話集中體現了天台宗師們的主要關切，因為該說法意味著修行者對佛法的理解必須進入詮釋學循環：從無明中解脫而得證悟真心意味著對一切迷惑妄心有全面的洞察力，反之，要獲得這種洞察力就需要證得解脫，故在證悟的理解活動中出現真妄不離之循環。為了找到一個適當的方法來理解天台對「即」一詞的用法及其複雜的哲學含義，本篇討論集中在智顗的觀點上，並參考了四明知禮後來的定義。換言之，本篇對該議題的切入方法，在於從詮釋學循環之原理上對天台以「教觀相資」為救度學的基礎中所含「即」字的悖論涵義做解析。

The primary sources of the Tiantai school in Chinese Buddhism often resort to the means of “paradoxical discourse” to present their doctrinal frameworks. This specific linguistic strategy is rooted in the Mahāyāna concept of liberation and was adopted and developed by Tiantai’s textual tradition.
The purpose of this article is to retrace and reconstruct the process of formation of the paradoxical discourse in Tiantai’s exegesis of the translated Indian doctrinal literature. The main thesis, focusing on the works of Zhiyi, Zhanran, and Zhili, is that paradoxical discourse plays a crucial role in Tiantai’s “practice qua exegesis,” which is meant to lead the practitioner of Buddhist doctrine to wisdom, liberating her/his mind from its self-induced deceptions.
An important clue to the formation process of Tiantai’s paradoxical discourse could be the ambiguous word “ji 即”, sometimes translated as “identical to” or “to approach to”, since the three Tiantai masters paid special attention to this term when elaborating the inner connection between contemplation of the mind and doctrinal exegesis, called “mutual complementariness between doctrine and contemplation”(jiaoguan xiangzi 教觀相資).
In particular, Siming Zhili sought to highlight Tiantai’s interpretation of Buddhist doctrine, which he saw as superior to other Chinese schools, by arguing for a very specific understanding and use of this term that only the Tiantai masters have achieved in their own works. He summarizes its meaning in the following formula: “Each embodiment [of reality] entirely is the [opposite of itself]” (dangti quanshi 當體全是).In fact, this idiosyncratic statement epitomizes the main concern of the Tiantai masters because it implies the hermeneutic circle into which the practitioners’ understanding of the Buddhist teachings must enter: liberation from delusion means gaining full insight into all delusions, just as, conversely, such insight requires realizing liberation.
To find an adequate approach to understanding the Tiantai usage of the term “ji” and its complex philosophical implications, the discussion focuses on Zhiyi’s perspective with specific reference to Siming Zhili’s later definition.