理不迁、物不迁与心不迁——憨山德清对僧肇“物不迁”义旨的诠释

正憨山德清的《肇论略注》在晚明佛教界多年"物不迁"诤论的背景下应运而生,该注既整合各家的注疏,又融入自身的禅观体验,是晚明注释《肇论》的重要论述。本文通过着重分析《肇论略注》以及憨山涉及"物不迁"义理的其他著述,说明其在诠释"物不迁"义理时所展现的特点。具体说来,憨山"物不迁论"义理的诠释特色主要体现在以下三个方面。     

镇澄对僧肇《物不迁论》的批评

僧肇，东晋十六国时著名青年佛教哲学家。他才思幽玄，长于抽象思维，解“空”弥深，又精于撰写，曾著《般若无知论》、《不真空论》和《物不迁论》等名篇，在中国佛教哲学史上享有极高的声誉。然《物不迁论》问世后，到了唐代，有清凉国师澄现含蓄地批评了该论的“不迁”说。受澄观评论的启发，明代五台山狮子窟沙门镇澄更撰《物不迁正量论》专文批驳《物不迁论）｝，在佛学界掀起了轩然大波。这是中国佛教思想史上的一场大辩论，是关于事物存在形态，或者说是关于动静关系的重要论辩。这里我们先简述一下澄观对《物不迁论》的评价，之后再…     

僧肇物不迁义平议——以镇澄《物不迁正量论》为中心的考察

明代镇澄批判《物不迁论》“宗似因非”引起了一场丛林论辩。镇澄认为《物不迁论》以“性住”为因的论证方式不符合性空之义,又依据华严四法界理论构造了一套论证不迁的理论框架,并以此来回应对其批判的反驳意见。通过深入考察镇澄的批判,可知镇澄所理解的“性住”非《物不迁论》的“性住”。《物不迁论》以“缘之如如自在”而称“性住”,符合性空无常之义。     

析"物不迁义"之双重论旨--兼评澄观镇澄对物不迁义之诘难

<物不迁论>之主旨非言物性,乃言动静关系,物不迁义含俗谛义、真谛义双重论旨.以俗谛义解之,物不迁义乃以俗谛破俗谛,重在破执;以真谛义解之,则有"立"之意义,立万法假有性空、动静皆空义,契合般若空观.此二义前者为明为显,文之所重;后者为暗为隐,隐而未发.以此双重论旨解之,则对物不迁义之聚讼纷争及澄观、镇澄所提诘难皆可迎刃而解.     

僧肇《物不迁论》的哲学思想

《物不迁论》是阐发般若性空学说,以“即动即静”之义阐明“即体即用”之理论。物不迁,即物象虽有生起、流转等现象,然其本体永恒不迁（不动）。事物的存在只是当下的,转瞬即逝的,不会从古至今,也不会从今返古,各性只住于一世,事物是静而不迁的,世界也因而是不真实的。物不迁思想的存在,这主要和其人时空观是密不可分的,时间过去并不具有实在性,或者不如说是实在性的消亡。《物不迁论》所要破除的是实体性的时间,引导我们认识时间的空性。     

《肇论》的现象学阐释

本文应用现象学的方法紧扣僧肇提出的“即物”和“照”两个范畴 ,将《肇论》诸篇联结为一个有机整体 ,从而确定《肇论》的如下顺序 :一、般若无知论 ,二、物不迁论 ,三、不真空论 ,四、涅无名论。《肇论》成为一个以般若照真谛从而明了物不迁和名不真之理 ,进而达涅之境的佛教认识论体系。从而为重新树立肇论在中国哲学史上的地位与意义提供一些启示。     

《庄子》内七篇与惠施考论

庄惠之交是了解庄子的一个视角,历来为学者所注意。《庄子》内七篇均与惠施有一定渊源:从《齐物论》《逍遥游》看,惠施于"齐物"有所得,庄子有所取鉴,但惠施所论不醇,"齐物"而不能"逍遥",遂与庄子之学分道扬镳;《人间世》论士人进退存身"形就心和"之道,思想背景与惠施一类纵横策士有关;《养生主》论"无用"之"保身",亦发端于《逍遥游》庄惠辩"无用";《德充符》论"不与物迁、命物之化"之"德",与惠施"弱于德""逐万物而不反"形成鲜明对比;《大宗师》论生死哲学甚精,是庄惠围绕"鼓盆而歌"论生死的延展与深化;《应帝王》走向对政治的完全厌弃,汲汲于政治的惠施是一个主要参照点。但庄子创作七篇非因惠施,惠施亦只是庄子笔下众多"质"中之一员。     

由“迁想”之“妙得”——浅谈顾恺之“迁想妙得”论

能够理解"迁想妙得"在我们绘画创作中的重要作用,可以使我们在绘画创作实践中能够自觉地运用所学理论拓宽创作思路,让作品品位提升,并且自觉地不断丰富自身的艺术修养和文化积淀,使我们在创作中能够飞扬流畅地"迁想","妙得"到优秀的艺术作品. 一、"迁想妙得"的审美内涵 "迁想妙得"是顾恺之《传神论》的主要观点,也是中国绘画理论中创作论的重要思想.那么什么是"迁想妙得"呢? 《中国绘画理论》评价道:"恺之迁想妙得一语为中国绘画理论上最初有力之启示,足开谢赫六法之先河,其想不迁,其得决不妙."《中国画法研究》也说:"不待迁想不同于说不可迁想,作者的想是无物不可‘迁’入的.只要想能‘迁’入,便自有神可写."     

摄论学派与早期华严宗的形成

摄论学派对<华严经>的研究,是以昙迁为中心人物而展开.智俨的师承:杜顺、达法师、法常、灵辨、静琳、智正,后四位皆曾受教于昙迁,都具有融合<摄论>与<华严经>的学风.昙迁<亡是非论>阐明"亡是非"、"无心"与"性起"观念中的"离相"、"不起"等观念相合,所以能够"顺性起".智俨是针对<瑜伽论>、<成唯识论>为三乘始教,而强调<摄论>为三乘终教;但是,他又将<摄论>置于"从始入终"的位置,唯识学经过<摄论>的中介作用,最后进入<地论>、<起信论>的终教.法藏通过接受摄论学派的"三无性同一无性",而提出"三性一际",最后归入<起信论>的如来藏缘起,建立了"法界缘起".     

从《肇论》看中观般若学的非本体性特征

《物不迁论》、《不真空论》的立论基础是中观般若学的缘起性空论,中观学既非传统西方哲学知识论框架下的概念本体论,也非魏晋玄学的境界本体论,而是缘起性空论,其理论建立在般若现观的体证基础上,故而不能仅从知识论的角度将其视为魏晋玄学的发展和延伸。     

Anaesthesia or psychotherapy: Eradicating thoughts or working them through

The author presents two sessions from the analysis of a depressive narcissistic doctor, which are characterised by a mixture of co-operation and pseudo-co-operation. The dialogue is in parts intellectualised, complicated, lifeless and schizoid. Points at which the patient shows surprising insights are then partly denigrated by him, on the basis that change is not to be expected. Semi-lifeless contact assists the defensive claustrophobia that he experiences in meaningful contact. It becomes very clear that he is then afraid of entering into an openly aggressive conflict that entails the existential threat of object loss. However, this has so far been avoided. The secret pleasure in an anal-narcissistic, sadomasochistic addiction to doubt persists in the partial denigration. The patient's artificially maintained self-doubt and doubt of the object reinforce a genuine confusion that consists in never knowing exactly what lies behind the helpful and needed object.     

Field or print

Hard-nosed physicists are content with elementary quantum mechanics as it is. Deep searchers desire a deeper comprehension of the theory or rather of reality. Observable internal correlations in micro-systems and external correlations between widely separated parts can be calculated at the office. But how can for that purpose indispensable information be observed, coded and stored and transmitted in the real systems? A spectacular example is Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen entanglement. ‘How can one part know what has been or will be happening at the other distant part?’.     

Danger or Opportunity

SUMMARY

Countertransference is the sine qua non of all human relationships. The manner in which the couples therapist deals with countertransferential feelings can have a powerful impact as either a force for healing or a force for destruction. Based on the tenets of Integrity Therapy, this paper offers a philosophical and clinical examination of countertransference in couples therapy. Focusing on the areas of rigid adherence to therapeutic dogma, emotional expression at all costs, negative countertransference and projective identification, teaching unauthentic ways of interacting, and co-therapy issues, this paper explores the ways in which traditional dynamic, humanistic and emotionally centered couple therapies can both therapist and patient into a betrayed of self and of the couple relationship.