藏传佛教般若中观中国化的诠释学解读

Hermeneutic Interpretation of Sinicization of Tibetan Buddhism Prajna Madhyamaka

佛教中国化问题的提出和讨论由来已久,并且延续至今仍在研讨,但由于缺乏其衡定的学理准则,还存在众多疑问需要厘清。如果按旧有的语义和路数探究下去,尽管还有很多新的史料可能披露,但因方法论上的瓶颈所限,很难在理念上有新的突破。这说明佛教中国化的研判面临着学理衡定和范式转换的挑战。本文以大量尚未汉译的藏传佛教般若中观论的系列藏文史料链为依据,以藏传佛教般若中观发展的历史脉络为线索,辅以汉地佛教在地化的时空间距为参照,以西方诠释学与中国传统诠释话语双轮驱动的视角聚焦佛教在中国西藏与汉地自我诠释与意义增长的本体论事实。本文提出佛教中国化过程经历了以印度佛教的文本原义与作者原意为主的方法论诠释,即我注六经;以中国汉地和西藏的读者及文本为主的本体论诠释,即六经注我,从而形成了印度佛教与中国佛教主体间性的双本体论结构体系,二者既一又异,通而不同,由此走了中国佛教三大语系各自的本土化历程。藏传佛教般若中观论域中六大特色命题的产出及各教派人士见仁见智的解读便是典型案例之一。本文的结论是,既要肯定和注重印度佛教文本义理事情本身的共相诠释学解读,又要肯定和强化中国佛教诠释者基于自身生活世界而对印度佛教文本义理内容创造性建构的本位性、合法性、合理性的殊相诠释学的认同。本文在此双重诠释基础上提出"共殊本体诠释学"概念。意在我们应从学理、历史、现实三位一体的向度,推动中国三大语系佛教各自照着讲、接着讲、我在讲的历史进程。这正是我们力求达到的学术境界。

The Sinicization of Buddhism has been proposed and discussed for a long time, and the discussion of which continues today, but due to the lack of its equitable academic principles, there are still many questions to be clarified.If the exploration is continued according to the old semantics and approaches, although there are many new historical materials that can be disclosed, it is difficult to make new breakthroughs in the concept due to the methodological bottleneck.This indicates that the localization of Buddhism in China faces the challenge of learning theorem and paradigm transformation.Based on a large number of Tibetan historical material on Tibetan Buddhism Prajna Madhyamaka which have not yet translated into Chinese, and following the historical context development of Tibetan Buddhism Prajna Madhyamaka accompanied by the space-time distancing of localized Buddhism in Han China as a reference, the article proposes for the first time in the academic history, a perspective driven by both western hermeneutics and Chinese traditional interpreted discourses as the two two engines towards the ontological facts of self-interpretation and significance enhancement of Buddhism in ethnic Tibet and ethnic Han China.It propose that the localization of Buddhism in China experiences the methodological interpretation of original text meaning and original writer’s meaning of Indian Buddhism;ontological interpretation of ethnic Han readers and ethnic Tibetan readers as well as texts-oriented interpretations. Thus, the dual ontological structure system between Indian Buddhism and Chinese Buddhism is formed up. The two are both the same one but generally different, thus completing the localization process of Chinese Buddhism in three families of languages. The coming-out of the six characteristic propositions and the interpretation of the various sects on Tibetan Buddhism Prajna Madhyamaka is one of the typical examples. The conclusion of this paper is that we should not only affirm and pay attention to the common hermeneutic interpretation of Indian Buddhist texts themselves, but also affirm and strengthen the recognition of Chinese Buddhist interpreters in the creative construction of Indian Buddhist texts based on their own living world.On the basis of this dual interpretations, this paper proposes the concept of "co-specific ontology hermeneutics", In Chinese people’s interpreted words, we have fulfilled the historical process of introducing, continuing and promoting Buddhism into the three families of languages in China, and are yet to realize the goal of interpreting Buddhism through "our own view". This is what we try to attain as our academic goal.