| dc.contributor | 中文系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 涂艷秋 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Tu, Yen-Chiu | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2018-07 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 27-三月-2020 15:32:37 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 27-三月-2020 15:32:37 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 27-三月-2020 15:32:37 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/129170 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 中國佛教的注經幾乎緊隨譯經之後就開始了，自東漢末年安世高與 支讖翻譯出大、小乘經典之後，三國時吳(229-280)陳慧、康僧會等為其 注釋而後佛經註釋的工作便不曾間斷過直至今日。 橫超慧日認為最早的中國佛經註釋，其特色為尚未出現科判的蹤 跡。這個時期約略可以分為三個階段，第一階段的佛經註釋，其目的在 幫助讀者明瞭佛經的內容與意義，尚未出現作者個人意見的表述。但稍 晚的一個階段，已可以清楚的看到作者意見的提出。到了最後的一個階 段，我們甚至可以發現作者藉由經文的註釋發揮他個人獨特的見解。 其次，前期注釋者為使讀者易於理解經文，所以使用各種方法標示 出經文中必須注意的地方；後期的注釋者，很可能即是翻譯者，如鳩摩 羅什重譯《維摩詰經》，同時也是此經的注釋者之一，他們自己在翻譯 時，就先避免掉可能產生疑難的地方。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The annotation of Buddhist texts in China began almost immediately after their translation. The end of the Eastern Han dynasty witnessed the translation of a series of Buddhist texts into Chinese by An Shigao 安世高 and Zhi Qian 支讖. Soon after, in the Three Kingdoms period, figures such as Chen Hui 陳慧 and Kang Senghui 康僧會 composed annotations of the translated texts. As the annotation of the Ānāpānasmṛti-sūtra (Anbo shouyi jing 安般守意經) by Kang Senghui had been lost, Chen Hui`s annotation of the Yin chi ru jing 陰持入經 and Zhi Qian`s annotation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāramitā-sūtra (Da mingdu jing 大明度經) are probably the earliest extant annotations of Buddhist texts. This style of annotation resembles that of the Mahānidāna-sūtra (Ren benyusheng jing 人本欲生經) by Daoan 道安 and that of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa-sūtra (Weimojie jing 維摩詰經) by Sengzhao 僧肇 in terms of style and form. Neither of them contains the device of structural analysis (kepan 科判), which is more commonly seen in later annotated texts. Enichi Ōchō, for this reason, regards all these texts as representative works of the earliest stage of annotation for Buddhist texts in China. The question remains, however, whether in addition to the absence of structural analysis, these early texts actually contain something else. What were the attitudes of the composers of these annotations? Further, although they are included in the same period, the four above-mentioned texts did not appear at once. Between the emergence of the first work and the last, there is an interval of one hundred and fifty years. During this time, did the annotation of Buddhist texts remain unchanged? Or had it been going through a progressive development, constantly varying and ever-changing? | |
| dc.format.extent | 1609563 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 佛光學報, Vol.新四卷, No.第二期, 1-49 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 佛教注經 ; 康僧會 ; 陳慧 ; 道安 ; 僧肇 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Buddhist annotations ; Chen Hui ; Kang Senghui ; Sengzhao | |
| dc.title (題名) | 科判出現前中國佛教注經方法研究 | |
| dc.title (題名) | Approaches to Annotating Buddhist Texts before the Rise of Structural Analysis (kepan) | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
