November 12, 2010

Nov. 13-14, 2010 Workshop Program

2ND INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON “PHILOSOPHY‧SIGN‧NARRATIVE”

Featuring “Congruence” and “Discourse”

13-14 November 2010‧Soochow University‧Taipei



CONFERENCE I 13 November 2010 Saturday



TIME

EVENTS



09: 00-09: 20

Preparation and Registration預備-報到

09: 20-09: 30 Opening Ceremony開場

Michael Chien-kuo MI米建國

Chair, Department of Philosophy, Soochow University

Zone I第一區

09: 30-12: 10

Person人稱─詞格與詞位

09: 30-10: 50 KEYNOTE LECTURE

Philippe Roussin, Centre de recherches sur les arts et le langage,

CNRS-EHESS

«Narratologie - narratologie innaturale» (“Narratology and Unnatural Narratology: Some Observations on, in Particular, Knut Hamsun's Novel Hunger”)

Moderator: Cristal Hsiao-hui Huang黃筱慧, Soochow University

To be conducted in French and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



10: 50-11: 00

Break

11: 00-12: 10 CHEN Hsueh-i陳學毅, National Taiwan Normal University

“Analyzing the Problem of Identity from the Perspective of Simulacrum and Metalepsis” (〈擬仿物與轉喻角度分析認同問題〉)

Moderator: HUANG Kuan-Min黃冠閔, Academia Sinica/National Chengchi University

To be conducted in French and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



12: 10-13: 30

Lunch便當午餐

Zone II第二區

13: 30-17: 00

Sequence序列─敘事與文本

13: 30-15: 00 KEYNOTE LECTURE

John Pier, Département d’anglais, Université François-Rabelais de Tours and Centre de recherches sur les arts et le langage, CNRS-EHESS

“Natural or Unnatural? A Few Comments on Storyworlds”

Moderator: Emerald Ku古綺玲, Asia University

To be conducted in English and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



15: 00-15: 30

Break

15: 30-17: 00 CH’EN Jieh-hua陳界華, National Chung Hsing University

“Fragmenting Discourse into Form and Content: Notes Toward a Politics/Poetics of ‘Congruence’”

Moderator: Kai Marchal, Soochow University

To be conducted in English and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.

To be continued to CONFERENCE II, 14 November 2010, Sunday.





2ND INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON “PHILOSOPHY‧SIGN‧NARRATIVE”

Featuring “Congruence” and “Discourse”

13-14 November 2010‧Soochow University‧Taipei



CONFERENCE II 14 November 2010 Sunday



TIME

EVENTS



09: 00-09: 30

Preparation and Registration預備-報到

Zone III第三區

09: 30-12: 10

Esseme義素─存有與/的敘事

09: 30-10: 30 Cristal Hsiao-hui HUANG黃筱慧, Soochow University

“Narrative in Time as an Entry to Discoursing”

Moderator: CHEN Hsueh-i陳學毅, National Taiwan Normal

University

To be conducted in French and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



10: 30-10: 50

Break

10: 50-12: 10 Special Session on “Congruence and Discourse (I): A Practice in Chinese-Philosophical Narratology” (「鄰接與話語」(I):中哲敘事學標的文本實習場)

Chao-Shun KUO郭朝順, Huafan University

“’Evils’ in Buddhism: Text and Narratology” (〈佛教中的魔─文本與敘事〉)

Kai Marchal, Soochow University

“Neo-Confucian Text and Narrative” (〈宋明理學─文本與敘事〉)

LEE Hsien-chung李賢中, Soochow University

“A Study of the Thinking Way in ‘The Will of Heaven, I’ in Mozi” (〈《墨子‧天志 (上)》的思路探究〉)

Moderator: HUANG Kuan-Min黃冠閔, Academia Sinica/National Chengchi University

To be conducted in Chinese and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



12: 10-13: 30

Lunch便當午餐

Zone IV第四區

13: 30-17: 00

Congruence鄰接

13: 30-15: 00 Special Session on “Congruence and Discourse (II): A Practice in Philosophical Narratology” (「鄰接與話語」(II):哲學敘事學標的文本實習場)

Cristal Hsiao-hui HUANG, Soochow University

CH’EN Jieh-hua, National Chung Hsing University

“René Descartes: Description and Analysis”

Moderator: Cristal Hsiao-hui Huang黃筱慧, Soochow University

To be conducted in Chinese and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



15: 00-15: 30

Break

15: 30-17: 00 Semi-seminar: “Congruence: Philosophical Narratology ‘As Such’” (II)

Speakers: Roussin, Pier, Lee, Marchal, Kuo, Chen, Ch’en, Huang C

Moderator: Cristal Hsiao-hui Huang黃筱慧, Soochow University

To be conducted in French and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.

17: 00-17: 10 Closing Remarks結語

LEE Hsien-chung李賢中, Soochow University

To be conducted in English and in English-Chinese-French SI and SSI.



Shangxi Campus Map and Parking Information

2ND INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON “PHILOSOPHY‧SIGN‧NARRATIVE” Featuring “Congruence” and “Discourse”

Soochow University, Shangsi Campus:
G101 Meeting Room


Public Parking : Second Academic Building--NT$30/hour

November 3, 2010

Texts for Special Session on “Congruence and Discourse (I): A Practice in Chinese-Philosophical Narratology” (「鄰接與話語」(I):中哲敘事學標的文本實習場)

Texts for Special Session on “Congruence and Discourse (I): A Practice in Chinese-Philosophical Narratology” (「鄰接與話語」(I):中哲敘事學標的文本實習場)

李賢中:
Text Source: http://ctext.org/mozi/book-7/zh

郭朝順:
《雜阿含經》卷39:「(一○九二)
http://www.cbeta.org/result/T02/T02n0099.htm

馬愷之:
Mencius 5A/3
http://ctext.org/confucianism/zh

陳界華:
Descartes, René. Meditations. (Any edition will do.)

黃筱慧:
Aristotle, Poetics, Part XIV
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/poetics.mb.txt

--------------------------------

 相關資料如下:

如是我聞:

一時,佛住欝鞞羅聚落尼連禪河側,於菩提樹下成佛未久。

時,魔波旬作是念:「今沙門瞿曇住欝鞞羅聚落尼連禪河側,於菩提樹下成佛未久。我當往彼,為作留難。」即化作年少,往住佛前,而說偈言:

「獨入一空處,  禪思靜思惟,

 已捨國財寶,  於此復何求?

 若求聚落利,  何不習近人,

 既不習近人,  終竟何所得。」

爾時,世尊作是念:「惡魔波旬欲作嬈亂。」即說偈言:

「已得大財利,  志足安寂滅,

 摧伏諸魔軍,  不著於色欲。

 獨一而禪思,  服食禪妙樂,

 是故不與人,  周旋相習近。」

魔復說偈言:

「瞿曇若自知,  安隱涅槃道,

 獨善無為樂,  何為強化人。」

佛復說偈答言:

「非魔所制處,  來問度彼岸,

 我則以正答,  令彼得涅槃。

 時得不放逸,  不隨魔自在。」

魔復說偈言:

「有石似凝膏,  飛烏欲來食,

 竟不得其味,  損觜還歸空。

 我今亦如彼,  徒勞歸天宮。」

魔說是已,內懷憂慼,心生變悔,低頭伏地,以指畫地。

魔有三女,一名愛欲,二名愛念,三名愛樂,來至波旬所,而說偈言:

「父今何愁慼,  士夫何足憂,

 我以愛欲繩,  縛彼如調象。

 牽來至父前,  令隨父自在。」

魔答女言:

「彼已離恩愛,  非欲所能招,

 已出於魔境,  是故我憂愁。」

時,魔三女身放光焰,熾如雲中電,來詣佛所,稽首禮足,退住一面,白佛言:「我今歸世尊足下,給侍使令。」

爾時,世尊都不顧視。

知如來離諸愛欲,心善解脫。如是第二、第三說。

時,三魔女自相謂言:「士夫有種種隨形愛欲,今當各各變化,作百種童女色、作百種初嫁色、作百種未產色、作百種已產色、作百種中年色、作百種宿年色,作此種種形類,詣沙門瞿曇所,作是言:『今悉歸尊足下,供給使令。』」

作此議已,即作種種變化,如上所說,詣世尊所,稽首禮足,退住一面,白佛言:「世尊!我等今日歸尊足下,供給使令。」

爾時,世尊都不顧念。

「如來法離諸愛欲。」如是再三說已。

時,三魔女自相謂言:「若未離欲士夫,見我等種種妙體,心則迷亂,欲氣衝擊,胸臆破裂,熱血熏面。然今沙門瞿曇於我等所都不顧眄,如其如來離欲解脫,得善解脫想。我等今日當復各各說偈而問。」復到佛前,稽首禮足,退住一面。

愛欲天女即說偈言:

「獨一禪寂默,  捨俗錢財寶,

 既捨於世利,  今復何所求?

 若求聚落利,  何不習近人,

 竟不習近人,  終竟何所得?」

佛說偈答言:

「已得大財利,  志足安寂滅,

 摧伏諸魔軍,  不著於色欲。

 是故不與人,  周旋相習近。」

愛念天女復說偈言:

「多修何妙禪,  而度五欲流?

 復以何方便,  度於第六海?

 云何修妙禪,  於諸深廣欲,

 得度於彼岸,  不為愛所持?」

爾時,世尊說偈答言:

「身得止息樂,  心得善解脫,

 無為無所作,  正念不傾動,

 了知一切法,  不起諸亂覺,

 愛恚睡眠覆,  斯等皆已離。

 如是多修習,  得度於五欲,

 亦於第六海,  悉得度彼岸。

 如是修習禪,  於諸深廣欲,

 悉得度彼岸,  不為彼所持。」

時,愛樂天女復說偈言:

「已斷除恩愛,  淳厚積集欲,

 多生人淨信,  得度於欲流。

 開發明智慧,  超踰死魔境。」

爾時,世尊說偈答言:

「大方便廣度,  入如來法律,

 斯等皆已度,  慧者復何憂?」

時,三天女志願不滿,還詣其父魔波旬所。

時,魔波旬遙見女來,說偈弄之:

「汝等三女子,  自誇說堪能,

 咸放身光焰,  如電雲中流,

 至大精進所,  各現其容姿,

 反為其所破,  如風飄其綿。

 欲以爪破山,  齒齧破鐵丸,

 欲以髮藕絲,  旋轉於大山。

 和合悉解脫,  而望亂其心,

 若能縛風足,  令月空中墮。

 以手抒大海, 氣歔動雪山,

 和合悉解脫,  亦可令傾動。

 於深巨海中,  而求安足地,

 如來於一切,  和合悉解脫。

 正覺大海中,  求傾動亦然。」

時魔波旬弄三女已,即沒不現。」(CBETA, T02, no. 99, p. 286, b22-p. 287, c6)





《方廣大莊嚴經》卷9〈21 降魔品〉:「佛告諸比丘:「魔王爾時又命諸女作如是言:『汝等諸女!可共往彼菩提樹下,誘此釋子壞其淨行。』於是魔女詣菩提樹,在菩薩前,綺言妖姿三十二種媚惑菩薩:一者揚眉不語。二者褰裳前進。三者低顏含笑。四者更相戲弄。五者如有戀慕。六者互相瞻視。七者掩斂脣口。八者媚眼斜眄。九者嫈嫇細視。十者更相謁拜。十一以衣覆頭。十二遞相拈搯。十三側耳佯聽。十四迎前躞蹀。十五露現髀膝。十六或現胸臆。十七念憶昔時恩愛戲笑眠寢之事而示欲相。十八或如對鏡自矜姿態。十九動轉遺光。二十乍喜乍悲。二十一或起或坐。二十二或時作氣似不可干。二十三塗香芬烈。二十四手執瓔珞。二十五或覆藏項領。二十六示如幽閉。二十七前却而行瞻顧菩薩。二十八開目閉目如有所察。二十九迴步直往佯如不見。三十嗟歎欲事。三十一美目諦視。三十二顧步流眄。有如是等媚惑因緣,復以歌詠言詞嬈鼓菩薩,而說偈曰:

「『初春和暖好時節,  眾草林木盡敷榮,

 丈夫為樂宜及時,  一棄盛年難可再。

 仁雖端正美顏色,  世間五欲亦難求,

 對斯勝境可歡娛,  何為樂彼菩提法?

 我等諸女受天報,  其身微妙咸可觀,

 如是天身不可求,  仁今果報宜應受。

 諸仙見我猶生染,  況復人能無染心?

 修彼禪定竟何為?  菩提之法甚懸遠。』

「爾時菩薩聞彼妖惑之言,心生哀愍,即以妙偈化其魔女:

「『我觀五欲多過患,  由是煩惱失神通,

 譬如火坑及毒匳,  眾生赴之而不覺,

 我久已離諸煩惱,  自心覺已方覺他。

 世間五欲燒眾生,  猶如猛火焚乾草,

 亦如焰幻無有實,  亦如泡沫不久停,

 如彼嬰孩戲糞中,  如彼愚人觸蛇首,

 一切皆無有實法,  是身虛妄從業生。

 四大五蘊假合成,  筋骨相纏而暫有,

 智者誰應耽著此?  凡夫迷故生欲心。

 如是諸幻我已知,  是故於中不貪著,

 欲求畢竟自在樂,  今當於此證菩提,

 我已解脫於世間,  如空中風難可繫。』

「爾時菩薩身如融金,面如滿月,深心寂定如須彌山安處不動,猶如明珠無有瑕疵,如日初出照於天下,猶如蓮花不染淤泥,心無所著亦無增損。

是時魔女復以柔軟言詞白菩薩言:『仁者道德尊重,天人所敬,應有給侍,天遣我來供養仁者,我等年少色如優鉢羅花,願得晨夜興寢親暱左右。』菩薩報言:『汝昔有福今得天身,不念無常造斯幻惑,形體雖好而心不端,譬如畫瓶盛諸穢毒,行當自壞,何足可矜?汝為不善自忘其本,當墮三惡道中,欲脫甚難。汝等故來亂人善事,革囊盛糞非清淨物,而來何為?去!吾不喜。』其諸魔女媚惑菩薩既不能得,即以建尼迦花及詹波花散菩薩上,右遶三匝作禮而去。歸魔王所,告魔王言:『大王!我等昔來未曾見有如是之士,於欲界中覩我姿容而心不動。我為媚惑能竭人意,譬如旱苗見日燋枯,亦如春蘇置於日下自然銷融。今此丈夫何緣乃爾?惟願大王!莫與此人共為嫌隟。』即說偈言:

「『其身猶如蓮花藏,  其面猶如清淨月,

 其光猶如猛火焰,  其色猶如紫金山。

 百千生中修正行,  所有誓願皆成就,

 自度生死能度他,  救濟眾生無懈倦。

 善哉願王莫瞋彼,  天上人間最尊勝,

 眼目清淨如蓮花,  熙怡微笑無貪著,

 須彌崩壞日月落,  其人不可而傾動。』」

佛告諸比丘:「是時白部魔子導師啟其父言:『菩薩清淨超過三界,神通道力無有能當,諸天龍神咸共稱讚,必非大王所能摧屈,不煩造惡自招禍患。』於是波旬告其子言:『咄!汝愚小智慧淺劣,未曾見我神通道力。』導師復言:『大王!我實無知智慧淺劣,不願大王與彼釋子共為怨對也。所以者何?若有眾生以惡心來欲害於彼,不以為恨;復有眾生以善心來供養於彼,不以為欣,處此二間,心生平等。大王!假使有人能畫虛空作眾色像未足為難,手捧須彌而以遊行亦未為難,假使有人浮[3]渡大海亦未為難,繫四方風亦未為難,欲令一切眾生同作一心亦未為難,欲害菩薩甚為難也。』

「是時魔王波旬不受子諫,詣菩提樹告菩薩言:『汝應速起離於此處,必定當得轉輪聖王,王四天下為大地主。汝可不憶往昔諸仙記,汝當作轉輪聖王?汝若起受轉輪王位,作自在主威德無上,如法理國統領一切。今此曠野甚可怖畏,獨無伴侶恐害汝身,速當還宮恣受五欲,菩提難得徒自勞形。』作是語已默然而住。

「爾時菩薩語波旬言:『汝今不應作如此說。我意不樂五欲之事,故捨四方及以七寶。波旬!譬如有人既吐食已,豈復更能取而食之?我今已捨如是果報,必定證得無上菩提,盡於生老病死之患。波旬!我今已坐金剛之座,當證菩提,汝宜速去。』於是波旬瞋目發憤向菩薩言:『汝今何故獨坐於此?豈不見我夜叉軍眾?』即拔利劍來就菩薩,作如是言:『我當以劍斬截於汝,速疾起去勿復安坐。』

「爾時菩薩語波旬言:『假使世間一切眾生盡如汝身,悉持刀杖來害於我,我終不起離於此座。波旬!寧以四大海水及此大地移於餘處,日月星辰從空隕墜,須彌山王可令傾倒,而我是身終不可移。』

「時魔波旬聞是語已,惡心轉熾發憤瞋吼,其聲如雷,語諸夜叉:『汝等速宜擎諸山石,將諸弓弩、刀劍輪矟、干戈斧鉞、矛[矛*贊]鈎戟種種器仗,喚諸毒龍,擬放黑雲雷電霹靂。』是時夜叉大將統率自部夜叉、羅剎、毘舍遮鬼、鳩槃茶等,變化其形作種種像,復嚴四兵象馬車步,或似阿修羅、迦婁羅、摩睺羅伽無量百千萬億種類,一身能現多身,或畜頭人身,或人頭畜身,或復無頭有身,或有半面,或有半身,或有二頭一身,或有一身三頭,或復一身多頭,或復無面有頭,或復有面無頭,或復無面而有三頭,或復多頭而無有面,或復多面而無有頭,或復無眼,或唯一眼二眼三眼乃至多眼,或復無耳,或唯一耳二耳三耳乃至多耳,或復無手,或唯一手二手三手乃至多手,或復無足,或唯一足二足三足,乃至多足,或有全身唯現骸骨,或頭現髑髏身肉肥滿,或唯頭有肉身是骸骨,或身體長大羸瘦無肚,或復纖長其腹橫大,或長脚大膝牙爪鋒利,或大面傍出,或頭在胸前,或脣垂至地,或上褰覆面,或身出黑煙,或口吐猛焰,或血肉枯竭皮骨相連,或身出膿血更相飲吮,或自截支節撩亂委擲,或眼目角睞,或口面喎斜,或舌形廣大,或縮如壃石,或持人頭,或執死人手足骨肉肝膽腸胃而噉食之,或執毒蛇而食,或以蛇纏頸,或手擎髑髏,或著髑髏之鬘,或復面色全赤全白全青全黃,或有半黃半青半白半赤,或作煙熏之色,或作死灰之色,或復身毛如針,或毛出火焰,或張目閉目,或口吐白沫。或於身上現百千面,一一面狀甚可怖畏。或從眼耳鼻口出諸黑蛇而噉食之。或飲融銅,或吞鐵丸,或刖手足肘膝而行,或身出煙焰象頭戴山,或被髮露形,或衣青黃赤白之服,或著師子虎狼蛇豹之皮,或頭上火然瞋目奮怒,交橫衝擊遍滿虛空,及在地上形狀變異,不可勝載。

「是諸天鬼,或布黑雲雷電霹靂,或雨沙土瓦石,或擎大山,或放猛火,或吐毒蛇,或有努爪,或有揮劍,或有彎弓,或有舞矟,或有揮鉞,或有搖動脣頷,或有張口欲噬,或哭或笑,或飛或走,或隱或顯,哮吼呌呼惡聲震裂。如是兵眾無量無邊百千萬億,畟塞填咽菩提樹邊,煙焰欝蒸狂風衝怒,震動山岳蕩覆河海,天地掩色星辰無光。魔軍集時其夜正半,是時無量淨居天眾作如是言:『菩薩今者證大菩提。』復有天言:『魔眾熾盛,由此或能損害菩薩。』爾時菩薩報彼天言:『我今不久當破魔軍悉令退散,猶如猛風吹微細花。』於是端坐正念不動,觀諸魔軍如童子戲。魔益忿怒轉增戰力。菩薩慈悲令舉石者不能勝舉,其勝舉者又不墮落,揮刀擲劍停在空中,或有墮地悉皆碎折,惡龍吐毒變成香風,沙礫瓦石雨雹亂下,皆悉化為拘物頭華。所有彎弓射菩薩者,其箭著絃皆不得發,或有發者停住空中,於其鏃上皆生蓮花,火勢猛熾化為五色拘物頭花。

「爾時波旬猶故瞋忿毒心不止,仗劍前趨語菩薩言:『汝釋比丘,若安此坐不速起者,吾自殺汝。』於是東西馳走欲近菩薩不能前進。是時魔王長子前抱其父作如是言:『大王!今者會自不能殺彼沙門,徒生惡念必招罪咎。』魔不受諫向菩薩走。

「是時淨居天子在虛空中語波旬言:『汝不自量,欲害菩薩終不能得,猶如猛風不能傾動須彌山王。』即向波旬,而說偈言:

「『地水火風性,  可違堅濕煖,

 菩薩志牢固,  終無退轉時。

 在昔發弘誓,  永離諸煩惱,

 於彼生死病,  當作大醫王。

 人多墮邪路,  方開正見眼,

 眾生處黑暗,  將然智慧燈。

 欲濟生死海,  能為作船筏,

 此是大聖主,  方開解脫門。

 忍辱為柯幹,  信進為花葉,

 生諸大法果,  而汝不應毀。

 汝今有癡縛,  彼已得解脫,

 當破汝煩惱,  勿為障礙因,

 莫復於此人,  而生于惡念。

 無量劫習法,  今者皆圓滿,

 還如昔諸佛,  於此證菩提。』」

佛告諸比丘:「爾時菩提樹神,以十六種言詞毀呰魔王,淨居諸天以無量妙音讚歎菩薩。是時魔王瞋猶不解,作如是言:『今此比丘得度彼岸,當教無量無邊眾生遠離我境。』更勵魔眾駈逼菩薩而不能得。

「爾時菩薩語魔王言:『魔王波旬汝當諦聽!我今於此斷汝怨讎,滅汝惡業,除汝嫉妬,成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提;汝宜廻心生大歡喜。』復告波旬:『汝以微善今獲天報,我於往昔無量劫來修習聖行,今者當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』時魔波旬語菩薩言:『我昔修善汝所能知,汝之累德誰信汝者?』爾時菩薩徐舉右手以指大地,而說偈言:

「『諸物依何得生長,  大地能為平等因,

 此應與我作證明,  汝今當觀如實說。』

「爾時地神形體微妙,以種種真珠瓔珞莊嚴其身,於菩薩前從地踊出,曲躬恭敬捧七寶瓶,盛滿香花以用供養,白菩薩言:『我為證明,菩薩往昔於無量劫修習聖道,今得成佛,然我此地金剛之齊,餘方悉轉此地不動。』作是語時三千大千世界六種震動,出大音聲有十八相。

「爾時魔眾,皆悉退散憒亂失據,顛倒狼藉縱橫而走,先時所變雜類之體不能復形,魔王是時神氣挫恧無復威勢,聞大地聲心生惶怖悶絕頓躃。時有地神,即以冷水灑魔王上而告之言:『汝魔波旬!速疾起去,此處當有種種兵杖欲來害汝。』

「爾時魔王長子於菩薩前,頭面禮足作如是言:『大聖!願聽我父發露懺悔,凡愚淺劣猶如嬰兒無有智慧,將諸魔眾恐怖大聖,我先諮諫不受我語。今乞大聖恕寬我父,惟願大聖速證阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。』

「爾時大梵天王、釋提桓因、無數天子畟塞虛空,咸見菩薩破魔軍眾,皆大歡喜作天伎樂,雨天曼陀羅華、摩訶曼陀羅華、曼殊沙花、摩訶曼殊沙華、優鉢羅華、拘物頭華、波頭摩花、芬陀利花,以天栴檀細末之香散菩薩上,各以偈頌稱讚菩薩。是時魔王波旬與其眷屬退散而去,還其自宮。」」(CBETA, T03, no. 187, p. 592, b22-p. 595, a19)



《大智度論》卷5〈1 序品〉:「魔有四種:一者、煩惱魔,二者、陰魔,三者、死魔,四者、他化自在天子魔。是諸菩薩得菩薩道故,破煩惱魔;得法身故,破陰魔;得道、得法性身故,破死魔;常一心故,一切處心不著故,入不動三昧故,破他化自在天子魔。」(〈1 序品〉:CBETA, T25, no. 1509, p. 99, b11-16)





《摩訶止觀》卷8:「通是管屬皆稱為魔,細尋枝異不出三種,一者埠惕鬼,二時媚鬼,三魔羅鬼。三種發相各各不同。埠惕發者,若人坐時,或緣頭面,或緣人身體,墮而復上,翻覆不已,雖無苦痛而屑屑難耐;或鑽人耳眼鼻,或抱持擊攊,似如有物捉不可得,驅已復來,啾[口*祭]作聲鬧人耳。此鬼面似琵琶四目兩口(云云)。

二時媚發者。《大集》明:十二獸在寶山中修法緣慈,此是精媚之主。權應者未必為惱,實者能亂行人。若邪想坐禪多著時媚,或作少男、少女、老男、老女、禽獸之像,殊形異貌種種不同,或娛樂人,或教詔人。

今欲分別時獸者,當察十二時何時數來。隨其時來,即此獸也。若寅是虎乃至丑是牛。又一時為三,十二時即有三十六獸。寅有三:初是貍,次是豹,次是虎。卯有三,狐兔貉。辰有三,龍蛟魚。此九屬東方木也。九物依孟仲季傳作前後。已有三,蟬鯉蛇。午有三,鹿馬麞。未有三,羊雁鷹。此九屬南方火也。申有三,狖猿猴。酉有三,烏雞雉。戌有三,狗狼豺。此九屬西方金也。亥有三,豕貐猪。子有三,猫鼠伏翼。丑有三,牛蟹鼈。此九屬北方水也中央土王四季。若四方行用即是用土也,即是魚鷹豺鼈。三轉即有三十六,更於一中開三,即有一百八時獸。深得此意依時喚名,媚當消去。若受著稍久,令人猖狂恍惚妄說吉凶不避水火(云云)。

次明魔羅者,為破二善,增二惡故。喜從五根作強、軟來破。《大論》云:「魔名花箭,亦名五箭。」各射五根,共壞於意。五根各一剎那,剎那若轉,即屬意根。意根若壞,五根豈存。眼見可愛色,名花箭,是軟賊;見可畏色,名毒箭,是強賊;見平平色,不強不軟賊。餘四根亦如是,合十八箭,亦名十八受。以是義故,不應受著。著則成病,病則難治,永妨禪定,死墮魔道。

復次魔內射不入,當外扇檀越、師、僧、同學、弟子,放十八箭。昔諸比丘得魔內惱,又得檀越譽毀,強軟不捷。魔即哭去。行者善覺,師徒檀越,或法主異語,徒眾即瞋;徒眾怨言,法主則怪。如是因緣,廣說如《大品》。又魔善巧,初令乖善起惡,若不隨者即純令墮善,起塔造寺使散妨定。若不隨者,令墮二乘,魔實不解二乘,但行當之,使不入大耳。如童蒙人,初被行當,捨大乘習小,功夫已多,後悔無益。能行當者,實不解大小。又化人入無方便空,謂無佛無眾生,墮偏空裹。或偏假裹,種種蹊徑令不入圓。阿難、笈多學阿鞞跋者,皆為魔所惱,何況初心寧免自他三十六箭。若知魔佛皆入實際,則無怖畏。《大經》云:為聲聞人,說有調魔,為大乘者,不說調魔。一心入理,誰論強軟耶。」(CBETA, T46, no. 1911, p. 115, a20-c13)

---------------------
Part XIV




Fear and pity may be aroused by spectacular means; but they may also

result from the inner structure of the piece, which is the better

way, and indicates a superior poet. For the plot ought to be so constructed

that, even without the aid of the eye, he who hears the tale told

will thrill with horror and melt to pity at what takes Place. This

is the impression we should receive from hearing the story of the

Oedipus. But to produce this effect by the mere spectacle is a less

artistic method, and dependent on extraneous aids. Those who employ

spectacular means to create a sense not of the terrible but only of

the monstrous, are strangers to the purpose of Tragedy; for we must

not demand of Tragedy any and every kind of pleasure, but only that

which is proper to it. And since the pleasure which the poet should

afford is that which comes from pity and fear through imitation, it

is evident that this quality must be impressed upon the incidents.



Let us then determine what are the circumstances which strike us as

terrible or pitiful.



Actions capable of this effect must happen between persons who are

either friends or enemies or indifferent to one another. If an enemy

kills an enemy, there is nothing to excite pity either in the act

or the intention- except so far as the suffering in itself is pitiful.

So again with indifferent persons. But when the tragic incident occurs

between those who are near or dear to one another- if, for example,

a brother kills, or intends to kill, a brother, a son his father,

a mother her son, a son his mother, or any other deed of the kind

is done- these are the situations to be looked for by the poet. He

may not indeed destroy the framework of the received legends- the

fact, for instance, that Clytemnestra was slain by Orestes and Eriphyle

by Alcmaeon- but he ought to show of his own, and skilfully handle

the traditional. material. Let us explain more clearly what is meant

by skilful handling.



The action may be done consciously and with knowledge of the persons,

in the manner of the older poets. It is thus too that Euripides makes

Medea slay her children. Or, again, the deed of horror may be done,

but done in ignorance, and the tie of kinship or friendship be discovered

afterwards. The Oedipus of Sophocles is an example. Here, indeed,

the incident is outside the drama proper; but cases occur where it

falls within the action of the play: one may cite the Alcmaeon of

Astydamas, or Telegonus in the Wounded Odysseus. Again, there is a

third case- [to be about to act with knowledge of the persons and

then not to act. The fourth case] is when some one is about to do

an irreparable deed through ignorance, and makes the discovery before

it is done. These are the only possible ways. For the deed must either

be done or not done- and that wittingly or unwittingly. But of all

these ways, to be about to act knowing the persons, and then not to

act, is the worst. It is shocking without being tragic, for no disaster

follows It is, therefore, never, or very rarely, found in poetry.

One instance, however, is in the Antigone, where Haemon threatens

to kill Creon. The next and better way is that the deed should be

perpetrated. Still better, that it should be perpetrated in ignorance,

and the discovery made afterwards. There is then nothing to shock

us, while the discovery produces a startling effect. The last case

is the best, as when in the Cresphontes Merope is about to slay her

son, but, recognizing who he is, spares his life. So in the Iphigenia,

the sister recognizes the brother just in time. Again in the Helle,

the son recognizes the mother when on the point of giving her up.

This, then, is why a few families only, as has been already observed,

furnish the subjects of tragedy. It was not art, but happy chance,

that led the poets in search of subjects to impress the tragic quality

upon their plots. They are compelled, therefore, to have recourse

to those houses whose history contains moving incidents like these.



Enough has now been said concerning the structure of the incidents,

and the right kind of plot.
------------------------------