摘要：近年来，西方学术界对于原始佛教的定慧源流出现了一个新的潮流，他们倾向于认定原始佛教最初的解脱是以“定”为核心。而一般传统的研究大多认为“慧”为佛教解脱的核心。本论对这股思潮兴起的的原因及背景作出了分析，并在此基础上对原始佛教的定慧源流以及二者以何种方式相结合进行了讨论。

本论认为，西方部分学者之所以倾向于认定原始佛教最初的解脱是以“定”为核心，很大程度上是由于他们名没有认清四禅在智慧方面的功能。四禅之所以对佛教的解脱有如此之大的意义，并非由于四禅是最深度的禅定，而是因为四禅是最清醒状态的禅定，正因为如此，在四禅状态下智慧才能达到最大程度的发挥。也正因为这样，作为佛陀解脱所依之禅定——四禅，并非是最深状态的禅定，在佛教中，按照禅定状态的深浅，排序是这样的：四禅→四无色定→灭尽定。正是没有认清这一点，导致了一些学者认为，四禅在佛教中的地位，与四禅在禅定序列中的低级位置不符，二者之间存在不可调和的矛盾。于是这些学者都倾向于四无色定为后期加入佛教的产物。

对于佛陀悟道，佛教存在两类大记载，一种为佛陀从四禅而证得三明达而悟道，另外一种认为佛陀观十二因缘而悟道。前文所述的西方学者都倾向于第一类记载，并认为第二类记载为后期加入的。本论认为，佛陀根据不同的环境以及说法对象，会对同一事件有不同角度的表述，在第一类记载的几篇经文中，所涉及的故事背景都是佛陀为外道说法，所以佛陀更加强调了禅定与神通的证得这一方面，因为禅定与神通应该是当时外道所共认的。而在第二类记载中，佛陀都是为自己的弟子说法，所以更加强调了智慧的一面。而且第一类记载中也并非完全舍弃了智慧，而只是没有将智慧置于核心而已。

在原始《经藏》中存在一种“全分慧解脱”的记载，即不依靠任何禅定，仅仅依靠智慧而得到阿罗汉。对于这种记载Gombrich认为，“全分慧解脱”仅仅有《须深经》一例孤证，并且《须深经》的汉译本并没有“全分慧解脱”的记载。然实际上，Gombrich误读了汉译《须深经》，在汉译《须深经》中非常明确地记载了不依于任何禅定而得到解脱的慧解脱阿罗汉。

而本人通过对《经藏》阅读发现，不依于禅定的解脱并非只有《须深经》一个孤证，《杂阿含经（一○二四）》中的病中失去禅定的比丘，只要保持着对五阴无常的领悟就可以解脱，甚至《增壹阿含经·四意断品》中自杀而亡的比丘，在临终刹那思维四谛也能得到解脱，这些也都说明了不依于禅定的纯智慧解脱的存在。对于《经藏》中遗留的一些禅定解脱的痕迹，本论更加倾向于认定它们是佛陀在一些特定场合下，对于传统修行方式的一种随顺，这种随顺的结果，让我们看到了一些佛教理论的矛盾之处。对于一些禅定解脱的痕迹，本论将之归结为“定次第解脱”。这种“定次第解脱”不同于西方学者的禅定解脱。在这种解脱中，智慧仍然起到了决定性的作用，禅定只是在解脱的次第上对修行方式产生了影响。

关键词：四谛  十二缘起  四禅  四无色定  灭尽定

Abstract: In recent years, there is a new trend for the origin of Buddhism of Samadhi and Mati among the western academic circles: they tend to think the moksa of primitive Buddhism is based on "meditation". However, the traditional studies are more inclined to regard "wisdom" as the core of Buddhism moksa. The paper analyzes the reason and background for the emergence of this ideological trend and discusses the origin of primitive Buddhism of meditation and wisdom and how the two integrates with each other.

The paper is tended to believe the reason why some western scholars are inclined to believe the initial moksa of the primitive Buddhism is they look on "meditation" as the core, which is largely because they didn't recognize the functions of the four-dhyāna on wisdom. The fact that the four-dhyāna are so important to the Buddhism moksa is not because the four-dhyāna are the deepest ones but they are the meditations in the most sober conditions. Just because of that, the wisdom can be fully exerted in the condition of four-dhyāna. And as such, the four-dhyāna, as the meditation on which the Buddha moksa is based are not the deepest meditation. In Buddhism, meditations are sequenced as follows according to the depth: the four-dhyāna→fourformless concentrations→nirodha-samāpatti. Some scholars think that the position of four-dhyāna in Buddhism is not corresponding to the low position in mediation sequence and there is an irreconcilable conflict between the two due to the unclear recognition of the fact mentioned above. Consequently, those scholars tend to deem the four formless concentrations as the output which was included in the Buddhism in the later period.

There are two kinds of records concerning Buddha's enlightenment, one is that the Buddha experienced the three thorough understandings by four-dhyāna and realized the philosophic theory and the other is that the Buddha observed the twelve-linked causal formula and realized the philosophic theory. The western scholars mentioned above are all tend to believe the first kind of records and think that the second records were added in the later period. This paper holds that the Buddha presents the same thing in different ways according to the different environments and the enlightenment objects. In several scriptures of the first kind of records, the background of the stories involved are told by the Buddha for other denominations, therefore, the Buddha put more emphasis on the enlightenment of meditation and Supernatural abilitiesjust because the meditation and Supernatural abilities were widely accepted by other denominations. While, in the second kind of records, the Buddha spoke the dharma only to his disciples and thus he laid much more emphasis on wisdom. Besides, wisdom was not completely abandoned in the first kind of records but given to a secondary position.

In the original "Sutta Pitaka", there is a record of existence of "a mind delivered from the ignorance by wisdom", namely people do not need to rely on any meditation but attainarhatship only by wisdom. As for this record, Gombrich thought: "Susimasuttaṃ only has one proof and its Chinese version has no record of "a mind delivered from the ignorance by wisdom". Actually, Gombrich misread the Susimasuttaṃ of Chinese version which had precisely made record as: without relying on any meditation, people can obtain arhatship delivered from the ignorance by wisdom. But through the reading of "Sutta Pitaka" by myself, moksa without relying on meditation does not only have one proof as "Susimasuttaṃ", there are also others to proof the existence of pure wisdom moksa without relying on meditation, as follows: Buddhist monk losing meditation in the illness of Samyuktagama-sutra(1024), only if you keep the comprehension of five Skandhas impermanence, you can get moksa; the Buddhist monk killing himself in "Ekottaragama-sutra", his Four Noble Truths of thoughts could get moksa the moment he died.

As some vestiges of meditation moksa inherited in "Sutta Pitaka", this paper is more tended to believe that they are a kind of anuloma of traditional practices under some specific occasions for Buddha. The result of this anuloma let us see the contradictions of Buddhism theory. As some vestiges of meditation moksa, this paper defines it as "sequence moksa" which is different from the meditation moksa of western scholars. In this moksa, wisdom still plays a decisive role. Meditation just has influence on the practice form moksa sequence.

Key Words: Four Noble Truths   Twelve-linked Causal Formula   four-dhyāna   Four Formless Concentrations   Nirodha-samāpatti

导师：魏常海教授