南禪28號潮州讀書會 3
有大德問我說：台灣諸多留日的法師，人家回來什麼都不講，為什麼你要講？
這個問題在我的腦海盤旋了一個多月，
想到陳寅恪先生，再把日本學術的研究拉在一起，答案就出來了！
華人喜歡章回小說般的佛法，而我們修行者必須探討出一個真相才能往前走，
地圖畫錯了，從來都是最可怕的事！
我沒有辦法知道，為什麼很多留日的大德，回來不講他們學習到的辨證佛法，或許他們講了，一樣被排斥，所以大家都封口了！
而且章回小說般的佛法確實易於流傳。
然而，我回不去章回小說了！
就扮演一次過河卒子，也跟佛教告別了，我只是一個佛法修行者，不隸屬宗教。
（台灣有道場說：她們在她們自己的佛法期刊上都有寫到被考證過的佛法，
我清楚也有看過，期刊上的文章屬於論文能讀懂的人並不多，
是啊，台灣很多道場很用功，我知道，謝謝你們！
收到，也澄清一下。🙏）
（最後一次聲明，我只是佛法的修行者，已經寫過了，如果真的看不懂我也沒辦法）
半寄
NanZen Study Club in Chaozhou on March 28 3
A layman once asked me,“Many Taiwanese monks studied in Japan. When they come back, they don’t talk about what they learned. Why do you?”
This question lingered in my mind for more than a month. When I thought of Mr. Chen Yinke and connected his spirit with the methods of Japanese academic research, the answer gradually became clear.
Chinese culture tends to favor a storytelling style of Buddhism, much like traditional chapter-based novels.But those who truly practice must search for the truth in order to move forward. If the map is wrong, it is very dangerous.
I don’t know why many monks who studied in Japan do not talk about the critical and analytical Buddhism they learned. Maybe they did speak, but were rejected, so in the end they chose to stay silent.
And indeed, a narrative, story-like Buddhism spreads easily.
But I can no longer return to that storytelling style. I will play the role of a pawn crossing the river once, and also bid farewell to institutional Buddhism. I am only a practitioner of the Buddhadharma, not affiliated with any religion.
(Certain Buddhist centers in Taiwan have explained that they publish well-researched and verified Buddhist teachings in their own Dharma journals.
I am fully aware of this and have personally reviewed those publications. However, the articles in these journals are academic in nature, and not many people are able to fully understand them.
Indeed, many Buddhist centers in Taiwan are very dedicated and hardworking in their cultivation and studies. I acknowledge this and sincerely thank you.
I have received the message, and I would also like to clarify this point. 🙏)
(This is my final clarification: I am only a practitioner of the Buddhadharma. I have stated this before. If it remains unclear, I can do nothing further.)
Master Banji
南禪28號潮州讀書會4
（記念心儀敬重的大德）
有一陣子非常仔細看過陳寅恪，俞大維兩位先生的資料，
他們的高節人格超越了許多的修行者，
我曾經想過這樣的人物，跟證入佛法果位間有著多大的距離？
通過漫長的摸索、思考才懂，這是心力放在哪裡的問題！
我必須承認佛法證入裡面加入時間、空間後，可以了解的深度與廣度非常的遠，
而基本的優良人格是一個必須有的基礎，
就好像大家走路的目標不一樣，結果也會不一樣，
所要解決的問題也不同。
否則這些大德們，讓他們修持佛法，也是萬萬人所不能及的。
半寄
以下AI資料： 陳寅恪先生考據實例： 〈三國志曹沖稱象故事借用印度故事考〉 在《三國志·魏書》中，記載了曹操的兒子曹沖年僅五、六歲時，利用排水量原理稱出一頭大象重量的天才事蹟。千百年來，這被視為中國神童教育的典範。 但陳寅恪透過比對發現，這極可能是一個「移植」過來的印度佛教故事。 1. 疑點的發現：地理與時間 陳寅恪指出，在曹魏時代的北方，大象並非產物。雖然孫權曾送象給曹操，但在當時的技術與環境下，一個五歲小孩能想出如此精確的物理實驗，在史實上存在疑慮。 2. 佛經中的「原型」 他在**《雜寶藏經·卷一》**中找到了一個極其相似的故事： • 情節：天神問難耆婆（或國王），如何得知大象的重量？ • 解決方案：故事中提到「置象船上，劃水齊深，後卸象，以石填之，稱石即知」。 • 語言學證據：陳先生指出，《雜寶藏經》是在北魏時期由沙門吉迦夜與曇曜譯出，而其核心素材來自於更早傳入的印度民間故事（佛經本生故事）。 3. 結論與史學意義 陳寅恪認為，曹魏時期佛教正處於傳入與本土化的早期階段，許多外來的佛經故事（民間傳說）被附會到了當時的名人（如聰穎的曹沖）身上，以增加故事的流傳度。 核心觀點：陳寅恪並非要否定曹沖的聰穎，而是要揭示**「史實與傳說的混雜」**。他證明了魏晉南北朝的史料中，滲透了大量隨佛教傳入的印度文化元素，若不通曉佛經，就無法分辨歷史的真偽。 這個研究的獨特性 這個案例之所以出名，是因為它體現了陳氏研究的三個層次： 1. 博通經史：不僅熟讀正史，更遍覽大藏經。 2. 懷疑精神：不迷信傳統史料的記載。 3. 文化交融：將中國中古史置於整個「亞洲文化圈」（包括印度、西域）的背景下考察。 |
NanZen Study Club in Chaozhou on March 28 4
(In memory of the great people I admire and respect)
For a period of time, I studied in great
detail the lives and works of Mr. Chen Yinke and Mr. Yu Dawei. Their noble integrity surpassed that of many religious practitioners. I once wondered how great the distance might be between such individuals and the attainment of realization in Buddhism.
After a long period of exploration and reflection, I came to understand that the essential issue lies in where one invests one’s inner strength. When realization in the Buddhadharma is viewed through the dimensions of time and space, its potential depth and scope become immensely vast. However, upright moral character remains a necessary foundation. Just as travelers with different destinations arrive at different results, the questions they aim to solve also differ.
Had these distinguished men applied themselves to Buddhist cultivation, their accomplishments would have been beyond the reach of the vast majority.
Master Banji
AI Data Mr. Chen Yinke’s Historical Research Example: “A Study of the Story of Cao Chong Weighing the Elephant in the Records of the Three Kingdoms as Borrowed from an Indian Tale” In the Records of the Three Kingdoms (Book of Wei), there is a famous story about Cao Cao’s young son, Cao Chong. When he was only five or six years old, he supposedly figured out how to weigh a large elephant by using the principle of water displacement. For centuries, this story has been regarded as a classic example of a child prodigy in Chinese tradition. However, through careful comparison of texts, Chen Yinke suggested that this story was very likely “borrowed” from an Indian Buddhist tale. 1. Discovering the Doubts: Geography and Historical Context Chen pointed out that elephants were not native to northern China during the Cao Wei period. Although Sun Quan once sent an elephant to Cao Cao, it would still be questionable—given the technology and environment of that time—that a five-year-old child could design such a precise physical experiment. From a historical perspective, the story raises doubts. 2. The “Prototype” in Buddhist Scriptures Chen found a remarkably similar story in the Miscellaneous Treasures Sutra(Volume One). • Plot: A heavenly being challenges Jivaka (or a king) with the question: How can one determine the weight of an elephant? • Solution: The story describes placing the elephant on a boat and marking how deep the boat sinks in the water. Then the elephant is removed, and stones are loaded onto the boat until the water reaches the same level. By weighing the stones, one can know the elephant’s weight. • Linguistic Evidence: Chen noted that the Miscellaneous Treasures Sutra was translated in the Northern Wei dynasty by the monks Jikaya and Tanyao. Its core material, however, came from earlier Indian folk stories, especially Buddhist Jataka tales. 3. Conclusion and Historical Significance Chen Yinke argued that during the Cao Wei period, Buddhism was still in its early stage of transmission and adaptation in China. Many foreign Buddhist stories and folk legends were gradually attached to well-known historical figures—such as the clever Cao Chong—to make them more appealing and easier to spread. Core Insight: Chen was not trying to deny Cao Chong’s intelligence. Rather, he aimed to reveal the mixture of historical fact and legend. He demonstrated that many historical records from the Wei, Jin, and Northern and Southern Dynasties were influenced by Indian cultural elements brought in through Buddhism. Without knowledge of Buddhist scriptures, it would be difficult to distinguish history from borrowed legend. Why This Research Is Important This case is famous because it shows three key characteristics of Chen Yinke’s scholarship: 1. Vast Learning: He was deeply familiar not only with official historical records, but also with the entire Buddhist canon. 2. Critical Spirit: He did not blindly accept traditional historical accounts. 3. Cultural Perspective: He examined medieval Chinese history within the broader context of the Asian cultural sphere, including India and Central Asia.
|
