弘一法師佛教網絡的形成、擴展與跨國傳播

Abstract

弘一法師（1880-1942，出家前俗名李叔同）精研律學、刻苦持戒，與印光（1962-1940）、太虛（1890-1947）、虛雲（?-1959）等人被合譽為民國四大高僧。弘一出家至圓寂僅二十四年，於他在世期間和身後，他究竟是如何從一富有文藝聲譽的「名僧」，轉為被不斷歌詠其超凡品格的「高僧」？其高僧典範又是如何被傳頌與產生影響？由上述問題出發，本文考察以弘一為中心的佛教網絡的形成與發展，聚焦弘一之個人風範、佛學思想與修行，如何吸引江南與閩南的追隨者（含僧俗），形成「弘一法師佛教網絡」，並分析此網絡如何傳播至海外華人社群，特別是新加坡、馬來西亞、菲律賓與臺灣，以闡釋弘一在現代中國宗教實踐和華人宗教發展上的影響與意義。 本文除第一章緒論與第七章結論外，共五章，包含聚焦弘一在世時網絡如何形成的二、三章，以及考察其網絡之海外傳播的四、五、六章。第二章以弘一的著作與書信為核心，結合民國期刊文獻，探討江南的佛教環境與人物，如何影響他出家的決定。本章指出，與杭州「有道德的僧人」以及馬一浮（1883-1967）、范古農（1881-1951）等人的交遊，促使弘一走向律宗，並選擇以書法為主要的弘法方式，吸引了不少親近者。這些親近者中，許多人是江南文化精英，並為弘一成立「晚晴護法會」，可視作弘一佛教網絡的最初型態。 第三章亦使用弘一個人書信與文集，以及大量民國佛教期刊和寺志，考察弘一至閩南弘法以至擴大其佛教網絡的歷程。本章認為，閩南佛教在1920年代的改革，為1929年弘一來此弘法提供有益的環境。弘一在閩南與喝雲派僧人交遊並長留閩南，藉由講授律學、大量發送書法結緣品與佛學著作等方式，不僅吸引閩南佛教徒追隨，亦建立起江南與閩南網絡成員間的連結。 第四章分析閩南弘一佛教網絡成員在新、馬地區的發展。本章透過二十世紀下半葉南洋地區的報紙、佛教期刊、佛教出版品、紀念刊物等文獻，結合豐子愷（1898-1975）的個人書信與結緣畫，以及本人田野考察所得之物質材料，說明這些追隨者如何在新、馬地區推動弘一相關著作的出版與紀念活動。從廣洽（1900-1994）和廣義（1914-1995）兩位法師的行止和活動可知，喝雲派僧人在推動弘一佛教網絡海外傳播上扮演極重要的角色，亦促成中國與新加坡弘一佛教網絡的聯繫，以及新、馬新一代弘一佛教網絡成員的誕生。 第五章使用菲律賓出版之紀念刊物和弘一的書信，說明弘一佛教網絡如何擴展至菲律賓。弘一好友、喝雲派的性願法師（1889-1962）於1937年到菲律賓弘法，向當地華人信徒介紹弘一，致使弘一在世時便與菲律賓佛教居士有所交流。弘一不僅曾向菲律賓發送書法結緣品，甚而希望前往菲律賓弘法，惜事情未果。到了1948年，弘一另一律學弟子瑞今（1905-2005）赴菲協助性願，則有助弘一佛教網絡進一步擴大。1950至1970年代，菲律賓出版了大量弘一著作，便是網絡成員活動的重要成果。由於其經歷、貢獻與德望，瑞今亦在二十世紀末，成為海外景仰弘一者所欽慕的對象。 第六章以林子青（1910-2002）和陳慧劍（1925-2001）居士為中心，析論臺灣弘一佛教網絡的形成。本章指出，弘一於1942年逝世後，中國在1950年之前已出版不少與弘一有關的作品，其中林子青的《弘一大師年譜》（1944年初版）尤具代表性。正是在此基礎上，陳慧劍得以後出轉精，並得益於與海外弘一網絡成員的交流，完成影響深遠的《弘一大師傳》（1965年初版）。本章亦通過陳慧劍與林子青的書信與文集，以及臺灣弘一學會之出版物，說明1990年代臺灣成立弘一紀念學會的緣由。在此過程中，中國、東南亞與臺灣的網絡成員，因欽慕弘一所生的宗教情感而建立起真摯互動，共同推動以學術研究紀念弘一的作法，形成陳慧劍所說的「弘學」，也讓弘一的典範形象，在他身後數十年仍鮮明有活力，持續在各地為僧俗人士提供信念和力量。 綜觀中國、臺灣與東南亞各處的弘一佛教網絡，可知該網絡的形成與聯繫，首先源於網絡成員對弘一超凡人格的推崇與感召。這些成員不分僧俗，有些曾與弘一親身接觸，有些則否；他們未必都信仰佛教，但都在弘一逝世後，為各種紀念弘一的活動，或出版與弘一相關的著作而相互合作。透過他們的努力，弘一佛教網絡呈現兩個重要特色：第一，景仰或追隨弘一者多愛好藝術，故紀念、仿效弘一的嘗試，往往與文藝活動相繫。第二，弘一佛教網絡成員往往因景仰弘一而產生強烈的宗教情感，這些情感不只影響他們自己一生的宗教實踐，也經常感染他們周遭的人共同投入尊奉或紀念弘一的活動。這種看似鬆散卻又以人格精神號召的網絡，至今仍能為人帶來心靈上的感動。一生精彩、悲欣交集的弘一能成為近代漢傳佛教的一種高僧典範，固然有其本身超塵絕俗、德才雙全的偉大條件，但也得益於其追隨者的真誠與努力。近代佛教史的探索，絕不能忽略這些追隨者心靈與生命的光輝。

Master Hongyi 弘一 (1880–1942), known as Li Shutong 李叔同 before his ordination, was renowned for his rigorous study and practice of the Vinaya (Buddhist precepts). Along with Yinguang 印光 (1962-1940), Taixu 太虛 (1890-1947), and Xuyun 虛雲 (?-1959), he was later celebrated as one of the four eminent monks of the Republican era. This dissertation explores how, over his twenty-four year career as a monk, Hongyi’s reputation evolved from that of a “famous monk” (mingseng 名僧) known for his artistic accomplishments to that of an “eminent monk” (gaoseng 高僧) revered for his moral and spiritual attributes. The main goal of this dissertation is to investigate how the image of Hongyi as an eminent monk was constructed and transmitted, becoming influential due in large part to his interactions with monastic and lay communities in regions south of the Yangtze River (Jiangnan 江南) and southern Fujian (Minnan 閩南) that resulted in the formation of a “Master Hongyi’s Buddhist Network.” In addition, it examines how this network extended into overseas Chinese communities in Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Taiwan, so as to assess Hongyi’s influence on modern Chinese religious practices. In addition to the Introduction (Chapter 1) and Conclusion (Chapter 7), this dissertation consists of five core chapters.. Chapters 2 and 3 explore the ways in which Buddhist networks centering on Hongyi began to take shape during his lifetime in the Jiangnan and Minnan regions. Drawing on evidence from Hongyi’s writings, correspondence, contemporary journals, and monastic gazetteers, these chapters argue that his decision to disseminate Buddhist teachings through calligraphy attracted considerable attention among Jiangnan cultural elites. Their establishment of the Wanqing hufa hui 晚晴護法會 can be understood as a prototype of what this dissertation refers to as “Master Hongyi’s Buddhist Network.” When Hongyi relocated to Minnan in the late 1920s, he received substantial support from the Heyun 喝雲 lineage and its followers, enabling him to forge connections between members of the Jiangnan and Minnan networks. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 explore the transnational dissemination of “Master Hongyi’s Buddhist Network” among overseas Chinese communities. Drawing on a wide range of publications and materials gathered during fieldwork, Chapters 4 and 5 analyze how lay elites such as Feng Zikai 豐子愷 (1898–1975) and monks from the Heyun lineage closely associated with Hongyi (Guangqia 廣洽 (1900-1994), Guangyi 廣義 (1914-1995), Xingyuan 性願 (1889-1962) and Ruijin 瑞今 (1905-2005, etc.), contributed to the construction of Hongyi’s image as a model eminent monk in Singapore, Malaysia, and the Philippines. Their efforts not only facilitated the spread of the network beyond China but also helped to reestablish connections between network members in Southeast Asia and China. Chapter 6 turns to the formation of“Master Hongyi’s Buddhist Network” in Taiwan, focusing on Lin Ziqing 林子青 (1910-2002) and Chen Huijian 陳慧劍 (1925-2001). By tracing the compilation of Chen Huijian’s influential Biography of Master Hongyi (Hongyi dashi zhuan 弘一大師傳; first published in 1965), as well as the founding of the Master Hongyi Memorial Association (Hongyi jinian xuehui 弘一紀念學會) in 1994, this chapter argues that religious sentiments grounded in reverence for Hongyi played a crucial role in connecting network members across China, Southeast Asia and Taiwan. As a result, the model of Master Hongyi as an eminent monk remained vibrant and influential among both Buddhist monastics and lay followers for decades after his passing. In sum, as evidenced by cases in China, Southeast Asia and Taiwan, the formation and cohesion of “Master Hongyi’s Buddhist Network” were made possible, first and foremost, by the deep reverence for and advocacy of his extraordinary personality on the part of his followers, who commemorated him in many ways, including collaborating to publish his writings, collect his artworks, etc. As a result of their efforts, this network demonstrates two defining features. First, many of Hongyi’s admirers and followers had strong interests in the arts, which imbued commemorative practices with a distinctly literary and aesthetic character. Second, the network’s members were often motivated by intense religious sentiments that not only shaped their own practices but also inspired others to venerate Hongyi. Although loosely structured, this network has remained influential to the present day. Hongyi’s status as a model eminent monk in modern Chinese Buddhism was grounded in his personality and accomplishments. At the same time, however, it also depended on the sustained and devoted commitment of his followers across China and East Asia. Their stories deserve recognition as an integral part of the history of modern Chinese Buddhism.