《文昌帝君阴骘文》

道教书名。简称《阴骘文》。以文昌帝君降笔(即扶乩)的名义编纂而成。成书年代不详。一说不晚于十六世纪末。文昌帝君全称辅元开化文昌司禄宏仁帝君,或称梓潼帝君、梓潼神。相传为掌握人间禄籍之神,旧时士人多崇祀之。“阴骘”一词原为“默默地安     

二月初三祀文昌:文昌帝君信仰与民俗

正每年农历二月初三是文昌帝君圣,诞这一天的文略,同不有会别差域地因君有文庙,昌文的地各然虽里有文昌帝里会。哪就昌形表昌哪上本基,一之式现要主的仰信君帝昌文是会形主要内容和但式是一样的,的成了独特形民间习俗。每年农历二月初三是文昌帝君圣诞。文昌帝君又称文昌梓潼帝君、文昌帝、济顺王、英显王、梓潼夫子、雷应帝君等,是保护文运与考试的神祇。文昌帝君在道教神系中地位甚高,     

明道藏有关文昌梓潼帝君文献考述

本文就明代道藏内有关文昌梓潼帝君的典籍作了考述,分别考证它们的鸾降或编写年代、作者等,指出正文与序或附录情况各自不同;从道教文献学的角度侧重探讨宋元间梓潼神这种文化现象与道教的关系,并订正<道藏提要>相关条目的讹漏.     

梓潼神历史探微

梓潼县有潼水,自平武县山溪流出,经梓潼、盐亭注入涪江。县中潼江多梓,汉武帝元鼎元年(公元116年)置梓潼县,属广汉郡。潼江民众自古崇祀着“潼河大帝”,至今梓潼七曲山上尚有梓潼神庙,称为“大庙”。《中国名胜词典》介绍文昌宫说“一称‘大庙’。在四川梓潼县北十公里七曲山。相传为晋人张亚子祀庙。张亚子仕晋战殁,人为立庙于七曲山。唐僖宗封‘济顺王’,宋太宗封‘英显王’。道教云玉帝命梓潼神掌文昌府事及人间官禄。元加封为‘文昌帝君’。传说文昌帝君为主宰功名、禄位之神。庙建于唐以前。今存元、明、清建筑有:文昌殿、桂香殿、天尊殿、关圣殿、瘟祖殿、启圣宫、灵官楼、风洞楼、家庆堂、百尺楼、时雨亭、望水亭、应梦床、盘陀石等处。建筑依山取势,高低错落,布局有序。周围古柏苍翠,红墙碧瓦笼罩在绿荫丛中。环境幽雅静宁,游人似在仙境蓬莱。”     

文昌帝君劝善思想探析

文昌帝君 ,是道教的主要神仙之一。在中国古代史上 ,“文昌”本为星宫名称 ,属紫微垣 ,包含六颗星。如《史记·天官书》记载 :“斗魁戴匡 (筐 )六星曰文昌宫 :一曰上将 ,二曰次将 ,三曰贵相 ,四曰司命 ,五曰司中 ,六曰司禄。在斗魁中 ,贵人之牢。”《孝经援神契》云 :“文者 ,精所聚 ;昌者 ,扬天纪。辅拂并居 ,以成天象 ,故曰‘文昌宫’。”《历代神仙通鉴》称文昌帝君“上主三十三天仙籍 ,中主人间寿夭祸福 ,下主十八地狱轮回” ,足见文昌帝君神位之崇高。据《清河内传》载 :“帝君储精列宿 ,降自有周……累朝咸有大功 ,尤孜孜以忠君孝亲、…     

文昌文化在朝鲜半岛的传播和影响

根据文献资料 ,至十五世纪中叶 ,朝鲜人已开始信奉文昌帝君。1 392年 ,李成桂推翻高丽王朝 ,建立李氏王朝 (1 392 - 1 91 0 ) ,以“朝鲜”为国号 ,制定了与明王朝和睦友善的邦交国策 ,积极输入汉文化 ,努力发展朝中睦邻关系 ,开创了两国关系史上最为亲密的时代。 1 393年 ,国都由开城迁往汉阳 (今汉城 ) ,随即在汉阳北部镇长坊 (今汉城三清祠 )新建崇奉道教的昭格殿。世祖十一年(1 4 65) ,昭格殿大肆扩建 ,升格为昭格署 ,成为官方机构。在昭格署的三清殿里 ,就供奉着梓潼帝君(即文昌帝君 )的神像 ,与玉皇大帝、太上老君、普化天尊等同居一殿…     

文昌帝君的发祥地--梓潼七曲山大庙

雄奇的剑门山脉由广元逶迤南来 ,进入梓潼县境后 ,山势由险峻转为平缓 ;从西北方向流来的潼江 ,恰似一条绿绸般的飘带。山水在这里相亲相偎 ,山连水 ,水绕山 ,形成了“九曲潼江七曲山”的幽美的自然景观。七曲山上古柏森森 ,群峰凝翠。绿涛翠浪之中 ,隐现出一丛飞檐翘角 ,红墙碧瓦的巍峨宫殿 ,这便是遐迩闻名的七曲山大庙 ,文昌帝君的发祥地。七曲山位于梓潼县城北 10公里处 ,南距成都 180公里 ,北距广元 130公里。它背倚剑门群峰 ,面向川西平原 ,是蜀道由陕入川的最后一座险峰。山下 ,有清咸丰三年 (185 3)梓潼县令张香海重修之“送险亭” …     

文昌信仰的神谕性训诫研究——以文昌劝善书为中心

劝善书产生于北宋时期,是一种宣传伦理道德、劝诫世人行善去恶并建立道德规范的指导书.文昌信仰是由产生于远古的星宿信仰、晋朝武将张恶子信仰等合流的一种民间信仰.文昌劝善书是以文昌信仰为基础所造做的劝善书,成为明清时期劝善书的主流.本文主要以一些明清时期重要文昌劝善书为例,探讨文昌神谕性的训诫及其对社会的影响.     

四川剑阁的文昌帝君

四川剑阁的文昌帝君蔡运生文昌是宋朝以来中国道教中地位最显赫的一位神仙,道教称作文昌帝君、文昌神、文曲星、梓潼神等,是地道的中国神。道教认为,文昌帝君、文曲星是掌握人间功名禄位的星神,是中国古代学问、文章、科举士子的保护神。它在道教神仙系统中地位甚高,...     

文昌文化在西方社会的传播和研究

文昌文化不仅在亚洲有着广泛的传播和影响,也通过不同的渠道远传欧洲和美洲,并且引起西方学者的关注。美国西海岸,是华人较多的地区。凡是华人聚居的地方,便可发现中华传统文化的遗存以及遗风、遗俗,同时也不难发现文昌文化的流传。在旧金山的华人社区,有一座“天后庙”,位于天后街125号。该庙主祀海神妈祖,又以关帝、文昌陪祀。其中文昌塑像容貌温良和蔼,面颊无须,身着金色长袍,头戴四方金花帽,右手握印,左手按膝,显然是科举神的形象,只是穿着与国内所见文昌帝君塑像稍有不同。此庙由华人社团三邑会馆(广东南海、番禺、顺德,附三水、清远、…     

"Psychotherapy" versus "treatment"

Presents a comment on "Psychological treatments" by D. H. Barlow. Barlow proposed that we distinguish between the terms "treatment" and "psychotherapy." The author believes that not only is the distinction unnecessary, but that its implications could have negative consequences for the field of clinical psychology. It is the proposed distinguishing feature that treatments are "specifically tailored to the pathological process that is causing the impairment and distress" that is most problematic. Clinical psychology does not need a distinction that further exacerbates the split between researchers and practitioners.     

"Enmeshment" and "Fusion"

The paper examines two related concepts utilized by two different schools of family therapy. Any family seen to be "enmeshed" is also seen as "fused," and vice versa. The difference in the level of focus, on the "system containing the individuals" (structural) or the "individual in the system" (fusion), determines the difference in therapeutic approach of these two schools.     

"本体论"与"伦理学"--形而上学的两个向度

形而上学有两个密切相关的内在向度,就是本体论向度与伦理学向度.在哲学史上,哲学家们之所以在"追求形而上学"的同时,又总是"反形而上学",并非是人们的形上本性出了问题,而是因为人们总是将形而上学视为单纯的"一维性",总是用一个向度来取代或遮蔽另一个向度.而所谓的"后形而上学思想",也并不是消解了形而上学,而是指形而上学从"本体论向度"转向了"伦理学向度".     

“对的”与“好的”

什么是“对的”,和对它的证立,是道德哲学中具有争议性的核心问题,也是效用主义和道义论间的主要差异之所在。统合效用主义对于“好的就是对的”这个陈述有一套完整周延的说法。而道义论对这个问题的证立不够周延或没有足够的说服力。     

从"管制"到"平衡"--政府与公众理想关系模式的构建及其制度化

论文从行政民主的角度探讨政府与公众之间的理想关系模式及其制度化构建过程 ,将我国在改革之前的政府与公众模式概括为管制模式。论文指出 ,在制度变迁的过程中 ,这一模式日益受到挑战。而在新的制度环境下 ,我国政府与公众的关系模式应该是平衡模式。这一模式的制度化措施包括培育自主的市民社会 ,赋予公众以独立的活动空间 ;促进行政公开 ,建立一个开放负责的政府 ;推进行政法建设 ,抑制行政恣意     

PREFERRING "HOUSEWIVES" TO "FEMINISTS"

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term "women". The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both "housewives" and "feminists". The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants'values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between them-selves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.     

"石狮"、"风水"与"吉祥"

谁都知道,在古老的中国,不管是衙门、宫殿、庙宇的门前,还是豪宅、大户人家的门口,人们都能看到摆着一对石狮。据说,这对石狮子在许多中国人的心目中,它不但是一种气派的象征,而且还是一种被人认为是好的“吉祥物”。如今,旧时的衙门没有了,但遗留下来的宫殿、庙宇的门前,其中有些石狮仍有保存。然而,想像不到的是,这号称“吉祥物”的石狮今天却开始“走”进某些党政机关的大门口,它们(石狮)在那里时时都在保护着这些政府要员“平平安安”、“吉祥如意”。这不仅使我联想起一些极端的报道,有些政府官员为升迁,请算命先生定位,用风水术为政府…     

"Us" and "Them":

Abstract: In the Aristotelian tradition, politics is a matter of public deliberation over questions of justice and injustice. The Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been uniformly hostile to this notion, and it has instead promoted a jingoistic politics of self‐assertion by an America largely identified with the executive branch of its government. This is doubly disturbing, as the executive branch has sought to free itself from international law, multinational commitments, and domestic judicial regulation, even as it has sought to validate itself by demonizing its enemies. This essay draws out the disturbing echoes here of Carl Schmitt's work of the 1920s, in particular of Schmitt's conception of the sovereign as the ungrounded ground of the law and the political as the site of mortal conflict between friend and enemy. The essay argues that Schmitt's position in the twenties, for all of its evident problems, is superior to that of Bush, Wolfowitz, and Ashcroft in at least two senses: Schmitt condemns the idea of waging war for profit and recognizes that such wars will often be disguised as moral crusades waged against the “inhuman”; and he acknowledges that claiming to fight a war for humanity denies one's enemies their humanity, leaving them open to torture and even extermination.