辨名析理與儒佛交涉——以南朝「達性」論諍為例

Interpretation of Variations and the Communication between “Confucianism” and “Buddhism”: Focusing on “Da Xing Luen” in Southern Dynasty

劉宋何承天的〈達性論〉，是一篇典型「以儒非佛」的作品，所謂「達」，暢通也、參透也，如《莊子》有〈達生〉篇，參透人生性命的本質；何氏所著〈達性論〉則從「三才同體」、「神明特達」等義理出發，闡發儒家人本主義的精神，強調人道協同天、地以治生理物的特性，同時駁斥佛教受生輪迴與因果報應的思想。故此論一出，為當時護法名士所反對，其中顏延之則著〈釋達性論〉以儒、玄通佛，並與何承天論難往返數番。
南朝清談，猶有魏晉流習，何、顏之「達性」論諍雖非於談座上論，卻儼然仍被視為當世「名理」，故本文欲從二者辨名析理之詮釋向度，藉由對玄學論題的應用，來看其中名理的意義與特質。特就二人文中環繞於：一、「人道」與「眾生」範疇的理解歧異。二、利養「人道」或慈護「眾生」的詮釋偏向。三、「形斃神散」與「受形致報」立場之對揚等三大面向，來觀察當時三教交涉中「儒」「佛」論諍的現象，如何從經典中概念的詮釋、容受的歧出之異，舖陳出相對異化的宗致價值觀，至終呈顯出整個論理體系的對揚趨勢，即顯明在對傳統觀念以「儒」「非佛」或「通佛」（即「儒／佛」一致）不同的安頓上。

The “Da Xing Luen” written by Cheng-tian Ho is a typical work which “criticizes Buddhism with the perspective of Confucianism.” The so-called “Da” stands for “reaching” and “penetrating,” which is like the penetrating the nature of life in the chapter “Da shen” of Zhuangzi. The “Da Xing Luen” written by Ho demonstrates the spirit of humanism of Confucianism and emphasizes the characteristic that mankind rule the world by cooperating with heaven and earth. On the other hand, “Da Xing Luen” stands against the Buddhist thoughts of transmigration and karma. Therefore, the issue of this book was opposed by famous scholars and protectors of Buddhism at that time. Among these famous scholars of Buddhism, the “interpretation of Da Xing Luen” written by Yen-chih Yen interprets the ideas of Buddhism with the perspectives of “Confucianism” and “Xuanxue （Neotaoism）” and he had debated with Cheng-tian Ho for several times.
The trend of practice of pure conversations in the Southern Dynasty still was lasting remaining influence in Wei Jin Dynasties. Although the discussion on “Da Xing” between Ho and Yen was not discuss on the lecture, it still was viewed as “The principle of naming” by people at that time. Therefore, the study tried to investigate the meaning and characteristics of this principle through the interpretation aspects of these two writings and the applications of Xuanxue issues among them. The study especially focused on the following three major aspects in the writings of these two people to observe the phenomenon of the argument between “Confucianism” and “Buddhism” in the communication among three religions at that time and how the differences in religious values were told through the interpretations of classics: 1） Divinity is wise especially: the differences in understanding the scope of “the realm of people” and “all living creatures;” 2 ） Ruling the world with humaneness: the interpretation of cultivating “the realm of people” or protecting “all living creatures;” 3） Debates on the Mortality Immortality of Soul: the opposite meanings of “The mortality of the soul” and “The immortality of the soul” In the end, the study demonstrated the overall opposite trends, which is to demonstrate the differences in traditional concept of “criticizing Buddhism with the perspectives of Confucianism” or “penetrating Buddhism with the perspectives of Confucianism” （ i.e. the consistence of “Confucianism” and “Buddhism”）.