摘要
"无情有性"说,是由隋代的吉藏首先明确提出的。道教经过一个阶段的探索和动摇才确立了"无情有道性"的立场。麦谷邦夫对于"道之遍在性"的强调实际上混淆了"道之性"意义上的"道性"与"道性清净之心"意义上的"道性"概念。仔细考察,即便是相似的两个命题——"一切无情皆有佛性"与"一切无情皆有道性",由于其中的关键范畴"佛性"与"道性"的内在含义在许多场合并不在一个层面上,因此,尽管可以大致承认潘师正所言的"一切有形皆含道性"的命题为道教"无情有性"说滥觞,同时也应该指出,其逻辑基础仍然是"道之性",而绝非"道心"。孟安排熟练运用佛教中观学方法,借鉴吉藏"草木有佛性"之说,提出"道性"是"不色不心""而色而心"的,而这一结论是"无情有道性"说最重要的哲学基础。
The theory of" Being heartless but owning nature" was firstly put forward by Jizang in Sui Dynasty. After a phase of exploration and sway, the Taoism finally confirmed their theory which was" Being heartless but owning Dao nature". For the theory of" Dao's Universality", in fact, Mugitani Kunio's emphasis confused the" Dao nature" in the" Nature of Dao" sense with the" Dao nature" in the" Pure mind of Dao nature"sense. With careful inspect, although the theory of" All the heartless beings are owning Buddha nature" and the theory of" All the heartless beings are owning Dao nature" look similar, the core concepts" Buddha nature" and" Dao Nature" are not in the same level in many occasions. Therefore, we roughly admit that Pan Shizheng's proposition" All tangible beings own Dao nature" was the origin of Taoism's theory" Being heartless but owning nature", but at the same time, we should point out that this theory's logical foundation is" the nature of Dao", instead of" Dao Mind". Meng Anpai expertly used the method of Buddhist Madhyamika and took Jizang's theory of" Vegetation owns Buddha nature" for reference, and then put forward his theory that" Dao Mind" was" Being not material or mind" and" Being material and mind". This conclusion is the most important foundation of the theory" being heartless but owning Dao nature".
出处
《哲学分析》
CSSCI
2018年第3期41-54,196-197,共14页
Philosophical Analysis
基金
国家社科基金年度一般项目"佛典汉译史的诠释学研究"(项目编号:12BZJ004)
国家社科基金重点项目"汉传佛教解经学研究"(项目编号:13AZD030)阶段性成果
关键词
无情有性
无情有道性
吉藏
孟安排
道教义枢
being heartless but owning nature
being heartless but owning Dao nature
Jizang
Meng Anpai
作者简介
杨维中,南京大学中美文化研究中心、南京大学哲学系教授.
