摘要:本論文改寫專書計畫,欲將釋見勛(蔡宜蓉)的博士論文:The Path to Liberation in Early Buddhism: A Study Based on the Pāli Nikāyas,經改寫後成為一本佛教英文專書,提供早期佛教解脫道的重要知識及其相關議題討論。解脫道為早期佛教之核心理趣,但早期經典對解脫道卻有不同的描述,引發學人對其教義是否一致的爭議。原博論經由爬梳巴利尼科耶,歸納比較尼科耶對解脫道不同的陳述,對於早期佛教解脫道的多樣性與一致性,提出不偏於兩極端的中道觀點。原論文改寫為專書後,最重要的差別是將早期佛教文獻擴充至漢傳四部阿含經。漢譯阿含經和巴利尼科耶,同為代表早期佛教的經典,為使該主題研究更加完整,因此納入阿含經於專書內容中,做漢巴兩系早期佛教解脫道之比較研究。
原博論將尼科耶中對解脫道的多樣敘述,歸納為五種類型的變異:行文有所不同,解釋長短有別,增添修道輔助,次序說明有彈性,不同的修道途徑。其不同展現背後之一致性,則表現於包含共通的修道要素,以及修道的延續性、互助性、可預期性、完整性和彈性。巴利尼科耶所呈現的解脫道,可類比為串連許多樞紐的交通網絡,在此網絡中可經由不同的途徑到達最終目的:煩惱解脫。尼科耶並未強調解脫道的單一標準規範,以避免為尋求與該規範一致而造成的排外性統一(exclusive uniformity),因而掩蓋住解脫道多樣性的特色。多樣展現為尼科耶所呈現的早期佛教解脫道的特色,然其多樣性,仍統攝於解脫煩惱痛苦的終極目標下。因此早期佛教解脫道有別於其他宗教靈性修煉,不可因其可隨緣適應而歸為宗教包容多元(inclusive diversity)主義之一類。
立基於上述博論的研究成果,此論文改寫專書計畫,有幾個要點分述如下。(一)比對漢巴兩系早期佛教經典:主要將檢視以上尼科耶描述的解脫道所呈現的現象和特色,是否在阿含經中也有一樣的現象與特色,同時比對漢巴兩系早期佛教經典在解脫道上是否有不同的論點。(二)加強原博論的論述,如:解脫道為佛法核心理趣,解脫道與禪修所指涉的概念及範疇之不同,佛教是否為宗教包容多元主義等。(三)加強圖文表達:將加強背景知識描述,除原有表格以外,增加其他圖象做視覺輔助,以幫助讀者理解早期佛教解脫道的多樣性與一致性。
Abstract: This project aims to turn Dr. Jianxun’s (TSAI, Yi-jung) thesis — the Path to Liberation in Early Buddhism: A Study Based on the Pāli Nikāyas — into a monograph that explores diversity and consistency of the path to liberation in Early Buddhism. As the core teaching of Early Buddhism, the path to liberation is presented in different ways in early Buddhist texts, which raises the question whether the teaching is consistent. To explore the the path in early Buddhism thoroughly, the project will extend the study scope to the Chinese Āgmas, which are also acknowledged as the earliest layer of Buddhist texts as well as the Pāli Nikāyas are. The project will use Dr. Jianxun’s thesis as a basis to do a comparative study of the path to liberation in Early Buddhism between the Nikāyas and the Chinese Āgamas.
Based on the study of the Nikāyas as done in the original thesis, the picture of the path can be viewed as a network that is interwoven with many inter-connected and interdependent junctions. The Nikāyas do not provide a sole norm of the path. Various descriptions of the path are allowed to coexist instead of being harmonized into one standard form. This can avoid an exclusive uniformity which will overshadows multiple dimensions of the path. Nevertheless, the multiple manifestations of the path are consistent in terms of indispensable qualities, successiveness, cooperativeness, predictability, wholeness, and versatility of the path. Importantly, the same ultimate goal, being liberated from suffering, unites various methods, approaches, and routes under the umbrella of the path to liberation and establishes a boundary between the path to liberation and other spiritual paths.
Three points for doing the project are (1) to compare the given presentations of the path between the Nikāyas and the Chinese Āgamas, (2) to elaborate on theories and issues of the path in early Buddhism, and (3) to improve the comprehensibility of the original thesis. First, we will investigate descriptions of the path in the Chinese Āgamas and summarise the features of the path shown there, then compare them with the research result of the thesis mentioned above. Relevant theories and issues will be discussed in detail such as the path to liberation as the core teaching in Buddhism, differences between the path to liberation and meditation, and arguments of Buddhist inclusivism. Third, we will provide more background knowledge and more visual aids like figures and illustrations for a better comprehensibility of the readers who are non-specialists.
The result of the project will ensure that the coming book will convey a systematic and integrative presentation of the path to liberation in Early Buddhism. Besides, it will offer a middle way perspective to explain the controversy about diversity and consistency of the path to liberation in Early Buddhism via analyzing similarities and differences of the path given in early Buddhist texts.