隋唐宗派佛教从何而来?——以汤用彤佛教史研究为例
|
摘要
隋唐是中国佛教史上最为鼎盛的时期。然而,南北朝佛教如何过渡到隋唐的问题始终悬而未决。学术史中汤用彤对此的论述无疑是重中之重。汤氏借助中国佛教南北差异问题完成了对此问题的阐释。而在南北差异问题上其历经了三次不同表述,这也对应了其佛教史研究的三个阶段。在赴西南联大之前的第一阶段,汤用彤以纯粹佛教史研究为本位,认为南北朝时期佛教北统上承汉代经学,南统下接魏晋玄学,而隋唐佛教主要继承了北统。到第二阶段,汤用彤学术中心转向魏晋玄学。由此,他在南北差异问题中加入了价值判断,即魏晋玄学更为先进。所以汤氏将隋唐佛教继承北统的结论修正为前期受北方影响,后期则富南方风气。第三阶段,以对日本学界宗派问题论述的批判为契机,汤用彤将南北朝佛教如何过渡到隋唐佛教的问题从南北差异的论述中抽离出来,并最终通过从学派到教派这种宗教史内在脉络的梳理方式替代了南北差异问题的理论意义。
The Buddhist history in Sui and Tang Dynasties was in a period of the greatest prosperity,but the problem that how could Buddhism in the Northern and Southern Dynasties transit to Sui and Tang Dynasties is still unsolved. The discussion of Tang Yongtong in academic history undoubtedly is the priority among priorities. Tang used the Chinese Buddhism's differences between the South and the North to elaborate this issue. In fact,the issue of the differences between the South and the North experienced three different statements,which corresponded to three stages in the study of Buddhist history. In the first stage before going to the Southwest Associated University,Tang Yongtong considered the pure study on Buddhist history as the standard,showing that Buddhism in the period of Northern and Southern Dynasties undertook Han's study of Confucian classics in the north and linked Wei Jin metaphysics in the South.Buddhism in Sui and Tang Dynasties inherited the northern order. In the second stage,Tang Yongtong's academic center was turned to Wei Jin metaphysics,and then he increased value judgment in the difference between the South and the North. Actually,Wei Jin metaphysics was more advanced,thus Tang corrected the conclusion that Buddhism in Sui and Tang Dynasties inherited the northern order as the northern affection in early stage. The later period was filled with southern custom. In the third stage,with the opportunity of discussing the sect issue in Japanese educational circles,Tang Yongtong came out of the discussion on the difference between the south and the north as analyzing how could Buddhism in the Northern and Southern Dynasties transit to Sui and Tang Dynasties and finally used the systematic mode from the school to denomination to replace the theoretical significance of the differences between the South and the North.
The Buddhist history in Sui and Tang Dynasties was in a period of the greatest prosperity,but the problem that how could Buddhism in the Northern and Southern Dynasties transit to Sui and Tang Dynasties is still unsolved. The discussion of Tang Yongtong in academic history undoubtedly is the priority among priorities. Tang used the Chinese Buddhism's differences between the South and the North to elaborate this issue. In fact,the issue of the differences between the South and the North experienced three different statements,which corresponded to three stages in the study of Buddhist history. In the first stage before going to the Southwest Associated University,Tang Yongtong considered the pure study on Buddhist history as the standard,showing that Buddhism in the period of Northern and Southern Dynasties undertook Han's study of Confucian classics in the north and linked Wei Jin metaphysics in the South.Buddhism in Sui and Tang Dynasties inherited the northern order. In the second stage,Tang Yongtong's academic center was turned to Wei Jin metaphysics,and then he increased value judgment in the difference between the South and the North. Actually,Wei Jin metaphysics was more advanced,thus Tang corrected the conclusion that Buddhism in Sui and Tang Dynasties inherited the northern order as the northern affection in early stage. The later period was filled with southern custom. In the third stage,with the opportunity of discussing the sect issue in Japanese educational circles,Tang Yongtong came out of the discussion on the difference between the south and the north as analyzing how could Buddhism in the Northern and Southern Dynasties transit to Sui and Tang Dynasties and finally used the systematic mode from the school to denomination to replace the theoretical significance of the differences between the South and the North.
引文
[1]汤用彤.汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2015.
[2]梁启超.中国地理大势论[G]//中国现代学术经典·梁启超卷.石家庄:河北教育出版社,1996.
[3]梁启超.中国佛法兴衰沿革说略[G]//佛学研究十八篇.上海:上海古籍出版社,2011.
[4]刘师培.南北学派不同论[G]//中国现代学术经典·黄侃刘师培卷.石家庄:河北教育出版社,1996.
[5]汤用彤.隋唐佛学之特点[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
[6]汤用彤致王维诚信一通[G]//胡适遗稿及秘藏书信(24).合肥:黄山书社,1999.
[7]汤用彤.魏晋玄学论稿及其他[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2010.
[8]赵建永.汤用彤与现代中国学术[M].北京:人民出版社,2015.
[9]汤用彤.佛教宗派问题摘抄(戊类)[G]//汤用彤全集(七).石家庄:河北人民出版社,1999.
[10]汤用彤.隋唐佛教史稿[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2008.
[11]汤用彤.论中国佛教无“十宗”[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
[12]汤用彤.中国佛教宗派问题补论[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
(1)有关《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》的成书过程,参考赵建永的《汤用彤与现代中国学术》,人民出版社,2015年第158—163页。根据赵建永的分析,第一稿是汤用彤1926年冬在南开大学完稿的讲义《中国佛教史略》的前半部分。现存东南印顺公司代印中央大学讲义《汉魏六朝佛教史》(1927—1931年间讲授)是第二稿。
(2)按照赵建永的考证,汤用彤早在1932年就已经开始了对玄学的研究。参见赵建永的《汤用彤与现代中国学术》,人民出版社,2015年第240页。
(3)其实早在1933年《癸酉(1933)读书札记》第一册中,汤用彤就对易学问题作过笔记,为此后易学研究进行了准备工作。
[2]梁启超.中国地理大势论[G]//中国现代学术经典·梁启超卷.石家庄:河北教育出版社,1996.
[3]梁启超.中国佛法兴衰沿革说略[G]//佛学研究十八篇.上海:上海古籍出版社,2011.
[4]刘师培.南北学派不同论[G]//中国现代学术经典·黄侃刘师培卷.石家庄:河北教育出版社,1996.
[5]汤用彤.隋唐佛学之特点[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
[6]汤用彤致王维诚信一通[G]//胡适遗稿及秘藏书信(24).合肥:黄山书社,1999.
[7]汤用彤.魏晋玄学论稿及其他[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2010.
[8]赵建永.汤用彤与现代中国学术[M].北京:人民出版社,2015.
[9]汤用彤.佛教宗派问题摘抄(戊类)[G]//汤用彤全集(七).石家庄:河北人民出版社,1999.
[10]汤用彤.隋唐佛教史稿[M].武汉:武汉大学出版社,2008.
[11]汤用彤.论中国佛教无“十宗”[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
[12]汤用彤.中国佛教宗派问题补论[G]//汤用彤学术论文集.北京:中华书局,2016.
(1)有关《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》的成书过程,参考赵建永的《汤用彤与现代中国学术》,人民出版社,2015年第158—163页。根据赵建永的分析,第一稿是汤用彤1926年冬在南开大学完稿的讲义《中国佛教史略》的前半部分。现存东南印顺公司代印中央大学讲义《汉魏六朝佛教史》(1927—1931年间讲授)是第二稿。
(2)按照赵建永的考证,汤用彤早在1932年就已经开始了对玄学的研究。参见赵建永的《汤用彤与现代中国学术》,人民出版社,2015年第240页。
(3)其实早在1933年《癸酉(1933)读书札记》第一册中,汤用彤就对易学问题作过笔记,为此后易学研究进行了准备工作。