| 摘要: | 「禪」是一種宗教修行？或是一種哲學思維？還是一種生活的態度？在最近的十年，「禪風」字眼不時的出現在各大產品上，舉凡食、衣、住、行日常生活都可以瞥見商人不斷的灌輸消費者「禪風」一詞。唐、宋時期的日僧從中國將「禪宗」引進日本之後，不但深深影響了日本人的哲學思維及生活態度；創造出風格鮮明獨特的「日本禪風美學」。 本研究緣於個人在禪堂生活的美好經驗，期能將此經驗，透過理性的研究，從宗教生活藝術出發，卻突破宗教理解的界限，提供喜愛禪風居家風格的人，一條較靠近禪的途徑。 禪，不可說；說了就不是禪，那麼禪空間何以稱為禪空間？禪的表現能否找出可循之跡？本文預備回到漢傳禪佛教，從中國禪宗的發展歷史、禪在中國繪畫的表現、傳統禪寺及禪堂空間的建築形式與禪堂規矩的內涵入手，進而以台灣當代具禪宗法脈傳承並於近二十年啟建的禪堂建築：高雄「佛光山」、南投「中臺禪寺」、台北「法鼓山」為例，對各個道場的禪堂建築空間之特色、動線、禪修活動、禪眾起居等逐一檢視，探究禪堂空間體現了哪些場所精神與可能被經驗的美感？試圖從中尋找禪修經驗空間化的可能。 在禪宗典籍中，經常發現禪宗祖師大德的開悟，往往緣於一個(純粹的)現象，也就是說禪者的覺悟並非直接參悟空性，而是透過色去參悟；這種由內而外，由外轉內相互交融主客一體的特性，本文將從認識論出發，運用現象學論說的特性；以最自然卻全面的方式，闡明人的意識如何捕捉感覺？而什麼是捕獲這些感覺最有利的條件？其條件下所形塑的空間和極簡風格、有機建築又有哪些異同？
Is Zen a kind of religious practice, philosophical thinking, or an attitude of life?This research examines the spatial aesthetics of Zen halls, with the researcher’s experiences there as points of reference. Departing from religious life, this research intends to break through religious boundaries to offer people interested in Zen space ways to get close to the religion. Zen is unspeakable. If it is said, it will not be Zen anymore. Then, why can we call Zen space as Zen space? Can we fathom the trajectory of Zen representations? This thesis traces back to the origins of Chinese Zen to explore the history of its development in China, the representation of Zen in Chinese painting, the architectural form of and rules in traditional temples and Zen halls, and to compare with modern Zen halls such as Fo Guan Shan in Kaohsiung, Chung Tai Chan Monastery in Nantou, and Dharma Drum Mountain in Taipei, which continue the legacy of Zen for more than 20 years, in Taiwan as examples. Focusing on the architectural features, routes, Zen practices, and Zen worshippers’ everyday life activities, it attempts to find out what is the site spirit and aesthetics that can be experienced in Zen hall spaces. Departing from epistemology, the researcher explains how people experience feelings with their consciousness in the most natural and holistic manner, with phenomenology used as the method in order to sort out the criteria for capturing these feelings. However, the hypothesis of Zen is unspeakable and those words that are spoken are not Zen. It attempts to examine the representation of Zen although it may arouse the suspicion of “over-interpretation.” It finds out that all representation means are merely copies of the “Zen experience,” which appeals to “transform a moment into eternity” in order to create more opportunities for people to encounter Zen. Although experiences can be reproduced, these reproductions are only similarities not exactitudes. |
