青海瞿昙寺 精美壁画呈现汉藏佛教文化融合北大核心

瞿昙寺位于青海省海东市乐都区,建于明洪武二十五年(1392),是目前西北地区保存完整、规模宏大而又质量精良的明代寺院建筑群。“瞿昙寺”是明太祖朱元璋应当时西宁卫的僧人之请而赐寺额。     

青海瞿昙寺瞿昙殿、宝光殿中文殊金刚四十三尊曼荼罗图像考证

本文根据《究竟瑜伽鬘》第二十章"文殊金刚四十三尊曼荼罗",考证了瞿昙寺瞿昙殿、宝光殿东西两壁的十身多面多臂像的壁画内容,对于这些尊像身份的确认,有助于我们了解《幻化网怛特罗》、文殊金刚四十三尊曼荼罗在十五世纪流传的史实。瞿昙寺位于青海乐都县城城南21公里处,由西藏三罗喇嘛开创。全寺由前、中、后三进院落构成,主要建筑有山门、左右碑亭、金刚殿、瞿昙殿、宝光殿、隆国殿、护法殿、三世殿以及左右回廊、钟鼓楼等。据瞿昙殿内正栋枋底面"大明洪武二十四年(1391)秋岁在辛未季秋乙酉朔越六日庚寅"[2]的墨书题记,可知瞿昙寺建于明洪武帝时期。     

甘肃永登鲁土司妙因寺与《金刚鬘》教法在安多的传播

一、鲁土司及其相关藏传佛教寺院永登妙因寺位于甘肃省永登县西南大通河畔的连城乡。此地古称"庄浪",位于乐都县北,与明初安多地区最大寺院瞿昙寺所在的湟水流域仅一山之隔,为地处蒙古与藏区之间的战略要道。明洪武初,蒙古原属阔端(Go tan)后裔的当地望族脱欢(Tho kan)归附,至三世,因迭有战功,"业可比周公",赐姓为"鲁",为鲁失加(?-1447),汉名鲁贤,成为明廷于西北边陲、世守庄浪卫的土司。[1]     

汉传佛教与藏传佛教寺院壁画艺术特色之比较——以瞿昙寺壁画为例

汉传佛教、藏传佛教以及南传佛教并称为佛教的三大体系,其中藏传佛教与汉传佛教为佛教中重要的两大派系,但是由于时间、地点以及传入方式的不同也各自呈现出不同的特点。从教义上讲,汉传佛教为大乘显教,而藏传佛教为显教和密教合而为一的教派。明代瞿昙寺壁画将藏传佛教绘画与汉传佛教绘画艺术巧妙融合,是汉藏文化交流大环境中不可或缺的一部分,更是十分有利于我们对于同时间、同地域的汉、藏两种佛教寺院壁画风格进行比较分析。     

五世纪初期河西走廊大乘禅法探源

<正>一、引言根据相关文献、史料、石窟题名的记载,有诸位禅僧在公元五世纪初期到访过河西走廊。例如《高僧传》记载到:“外国禅师昙无毗,来入其国,领徒立众,训以禅道。”^[1]且炳灵寺169窟第6龛(420年前后)中,也有比丘道融与昙摩毗的造像与题名。^[2]此外《高僧传》中,也记载了禅僧玄高在西秦(409-431)隐居在麦积山,     

访石壁玄中寺明达法师感赋

交城石壁寺者,四周石壁拱立,背倚峰峦,清幽绝尘而向阳,北魏延兴年间由昙鸾祖师创建道场,并有道绰、善导继承发展,由此净土宗流布海内外。今盛世昌明,旅     

武宁县杨州乡农民为老僧代耕

江西省武宁县的杨州乡弥陀寺(原名西瓜寺),创建于明代万历年间,近年经政府拨款修建,并由赵朴初居士题写寺名和佛殿匾额,是该县的有名禅林。寺内老僧体弱多病、不能从事重体力劳动。寺     

北京白塔寺塔刹佛教文物的发现及乾隆御笔《般若波罗蜜多心经》赏析

北京白塔寺塔刹佛教文物的发现及乾隆御笔《般若波罗蜜多心经》赏析黄春和白塔寺位于北京阜成门内大街路北,始建于辽寿昌年间。原名永安寺,元代改名大圣寿万安寺,明代又改名妙应寺;因寺中有一座元初由尼泊尔工匠阿尼哥修建的大白塔,所以俗称白塔寺。寺庙自辽迄今,经...     

公主寺水陆画新释

<正> 公主寺位于山西繁峙县公主村,寺内水陆殿保留有大量明代弘治年间的水陆画壁画,是迄今艺术性较高,保存较完整的明代水陆壁画精品。本文就公主寺水陆壁画人物造型及图像做一探究,并结合汉传佛教水陆法会仪文《天地冥阳水陆仪文》对其进行具体的图象分析与释读。从我国汉传佛教水陆壁画的仪轨和绘画风格来看,公主寺水陆壁画属于北水陆系统,其北水陆仪轨与水陆壁画的艺术风格特色,     

昙曜兴佛及其历史地位

昙曜在北魏佛教发展中起了举足轻重的作用。在文成帝的支持下,昙曜通过开凿石窟、改革僧官制度、新设寺户和撰译佛教典籍等实践活动,不仅实现了他“弘教护法”的愿望,而且又取得了意想不到的效果。这些在中国佛教史上都占有很重要的地位。     

文章结构清晰度对修改的影响研究

研究了文章结构清晰度对文章修改的影响。高低水平的作者各分别修改结构清晰度不同的材料。实验结果表明,文章修改质量的水平差异显著;文章结构清晰有助于修改者在修改过程中建构文章的整体模式,从而促进意义错误的修改。文章结构清晰度对修改的影响主要是通过影响工作记忆资源的分配而实现的。     

Some remarks on the bearing of model theory on the theory of theories

The present paper offers some remarks on the significance of first order model theory for our understanding of theories, and more generally, for our understanding of the “structuralist” accounts of the nature of theoretical knowledge that we associate with Russell, Ramsey and Carnap. What is unique about the presentation is the prominence it assigns to Craig’s Interpolation Lemma, some of its corollaries, and the manner of their demonstration. They form the underlying logical basis of the analysis.     

外科医生面临的困惑和思考

外科医生面临越来越大的压力和严峻的挑战,由于外科技术的局限性和人体差异的复杂性以及社会诉求价值过高等因素决定了外科是一门高风险的职业。如何规避职业风险?我们可以从加强责任心、严格执行医疗常规、提高医疗技术入手;但这还不够,一个外科医生智慧与技能的发掘以及处理问题的能力与技巧,还需要良好的职业素养、崇高的职业精神、科学的思维方法、和睦的医患关系。     

Searle on the unity of the world

According to mentalism some existing things are endowed with (subjectively) conscious minds. According to physicalism all existing things consist entirely of physical particles in fields of force. Searle holds that mentalism and physicalism are compatible and true—“the world is one”. The aim of this paper is to show that Searle fails to make the compatibility between mentalism and physicalism intelligible. The paper has three parts: first, I criticize drawing an analogy between solidity and consciousness as macro-features of systems with micro-features. Second, I argue that Searle’s defence of the ontological irreducibility of consciousness is terminologically confused and that his argument for the trivial nature of that irreducibility is unsuccessful. Third, I defend Nagel’s argument for the causal irreducibility of conscious minds by answering some of Searle’s objections to it.

Nietzsche on the Nature of the Unconscious

Abstract

This paper argues that Nietzsche develops a novel and compelling account of the distinction between conscious and unconscious mental states: he argues that conscious mental states are those with conceptual content, whereas unconscious mental states are those with nonconceptual content. I show that Nietzsche’s puzzling claim that consciousness is ‘superficial’ and ‘falsifying’ can be given a straightforward explanation if we accept this understanding of the conscious/unconscious distinction. I originally defended this view in my ‘Nietzsche’s Theory of Mind: Consciousness and Conceptualization’ (2005, European Journal of Philosophy 13: 1–31); since then, the view has come under criticism on several fronts. Brian Leiter and others suggest that there is not enough textual evidence for the view. In addition, Leiter, Mattia Riccardi and Tsarina Doyle argue that, rather than aligning the conscious/unconscious distinction with the conceptual/nonconceptual distinction, Nietzsche endorses a higher-order thought model of consciousness. Riccardi also objects that Nietzsche must treat some unconscious mental states as conceptual. In this essay, I defend the interpretation in light of these objections. I provide new textual evidence for the interpretation, show that Nietzsche extracted aspects of the view from Schopenhauer’s work on consciousness, consider the possibility that Nietzsche endorses a higher-order thought theory, and respond to Riccardi’s objection.