 |
|
| 《觀音玄義》作者再考 = A Re-examination of the Authorship of the Guanyin xuanyi | ||
| 作者 | 曾稚棉 (著) |
|---|---|
| 出處題名 | 佛光學報=Fo Guang Journal of Buddhist Studies |
| 卷期 | v.9 n.2 |
| 出版日期 | 2023.07 |
| 頁次 | 85 - 158 |
| 出版者 | 佛光大學佛教研究中心 |
| 出版者網址 | https://cbs.fgu.edu.tw/ |
| 出版地 | 宜蘭縣, 臺灣 [I-lan hsien, Taiwan] |
| 資料類型 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
| 使用語言 | 中文=Chinese |
| 附註項 | 作者單位：佛光大學佛教學系助理教授。 |
| 關鍵詞 | 《觀音玄義》=Guanyin xuanyi; 《一切經音義》=Yiqiejing yinyi; 灌頂=Guanding; 天台典籍作者=authorships of Tiantai texts; 中國佛教音韻=phonology of Chinese Buddhism |
| 摘要 | 關於天台宗典籍撰號與實際撰者之間的相關議題，佐藤哲英提醒，一些以智顗（538-597）之名流傳於世的天台教典，除了有門人增添、刪減個人思想，有些更是後世假托之作，或有後人著作混入之嫌。筆者認為，《觀音玄義》也是其中著作之一。佐藤哲英指出，有一卷現存的鎌倉末期寫本沒有撰號，而江戶時代的慶安元年（1648）刊行的本子則在首題記下附上「天台頂法師記」的撰號。同時，他也提到這種《觀音玄義》在撰號上從無到有的情況，值得被注意。雖然當前學界的研究已指出《觀音玄義》的作者是灌頂，但基於上述例證，本文將更進一步探究這部著作的實際撰者，是否就真的只有灌頂一人。本研究將透過特定語詞的梵漢對音之漢字轉寫情形，點出有些對音轉寫的漢字使用，有出現不一致的情況。這樣的情況可以說明我們目前所見的文本，撰者並非只有灌頂一人，部份內容可能是後人在唐朝增添。換句話說，筆者認為，《觀音玄義》的原作者仍然是灌頂，但部份內容為後代天台門人在唐朝增添。這將是本文主要探討的議題。 Regarding the issue of the authorship of Tiantai texts, Tetsuei SATO reminds us that some Tiantai texts attributed to Zhiyi (538-597) were not only altered by his disciples to incorporate their own ideas, but were also later fabricated or mixed with works by other authors. Research has shown that the Guanyin xuanyi 觀音玄義 (A Profound Meaning of Guanyin) is one such example, leading some scholars to conclude that it was actually written by Zhiyi’s disciple Guanding (561-632). SATO points out that a manuscript of the Guanyin xuanyi from the end of the Kamakura period (1185-1333), preserved in the Kanasawa Bunko collection, does not bear an author’s name. It wasn’t until the Keian era of the Edo period (1648) that the printed edition included the inscription “Recorded by Master (Guan) Ding of the Tiantai school” on its title page. SATO suggests that the process of establishing the authorship of the Guanyin xuanyi is therefore worth further examination. Although current scholarship has identified Guanding as the author of the Guanyin xuanyi, this paper will further explore the actual authorship of this work, questioning whether Guanding was indeed the only author involved. The paper does so by closely examining the transcription of specific Sanskrit words into Chinese characters and highlighting instances where inconsistent transcriptions occur. Such cases demonstrate that the texts we have today were not solely authored by Guanding, suggesting that some parts were later added by Tiantai monks during the Tang dynasty. |
| 目次 | 摘要 85 一、序言 88 二、《觀音玄義》原作者再探討 97 （一）《觀音玄義》與吉藏著作的關係 97 （二）「觀世音」一詞相關翻譯和梵漢對音轉寫漢字音韻之情形和討論 101 三、《觀音玄義》第二作者之探討：以「曇無讖」的梵漢對音轉寫為主的討論 131 （一）梵漢對音轉寫漢字中古音韻討論：無、摩 131 （二）梵漢對音轉寫漢字中古音韻討論：懺、讖 141 四、結論 151 引用書目 155 |
| ISSN | 24143006 (P) |
| 點閱次數 | 227 |
| 建檔日期 | 2023.08.02 |
| 更新日期 | 2025.09.11 |
建議您使用 Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) 瀏覽器能獲得較好的檢索效果，IE不支援本檢索系統。
