本文關(guān)鍵詞：佛教醫(yī)學(xué)和中醫(yī)心身醫(yī)學(xué)思想比較研究　出處：《湖北中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)》2016年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 中醫(yī) 佛教醫(yī)學(xué) 心身醫(yī)學(xué) 生理觀 病理觀

【摘要】：目的:1探討比較中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)生命種類觀、生命起源觀及生命過程觀。2探討比較中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)生理觀。3探討比較中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)病理觀,主要包括病因觀、診斷治療觀。4探析佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)對(duì)中醫(yī)研究的啟示與借鑒。方法:本論文屬于中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)交叉學(xué)科文獻(xiàn)研究,主要運(yùn)用文獻(xiàn)分析法,包含對(duì)中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)古代文獻(xiàn)與現(xiàn)代文獻(xiàn)的文獻(xiàn)分析和理論比較。結(jié)果:從生理和病理的角度而言,中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的共同點(diǎn)在于二者都注重心身關(guān)系,因此本論文側(cè)重于從心身醫(yī)學(xué)思想的角度去比較二者的異同。建立在佛教教理上的佛教醫(yī)學(xué)和中醫(yī)的生命觀是其蘊(yùn)含的心身醫(yī)學(xué)思想的理論基礎(chǔ),本論文首先對(duì)佛教醫(yī)學(xué)和中醫(yī)的生命觀進(jìn)行簡要比較。生命觀的比較主要從生命種類觀、生命起源觀以及生命過程觀等三個(gè)方面展開。通過比較發(fā)現(xiàn):從生命種類的劃分而言,《黃帝內(nèi)經(jīng)》和佛教都把“心”的因素作為劃分生命種類的重要標(biāo)準(zhǔn),即動(dòng)物類生命有心知、植物類生命無心知,有情生命有情識(shí)識(shí)、無情生命無情識(shí)。當(dāng)然,《黃帝內(nèi)經(jīng)》和佛教對(duì)生命種類描述的差異還是很大的。從生命起源觀的角度而言,《黃帝內(nèi)經(jīng)》和佛教都明確指出了父精母血或父母精氣對(duì)于生命出生的重要性,不同之處在于,佛教更強(qiáng)調(diào)了識(shí)(即阿賴耶識(shí))對(duì)于生命出生的獨(dú)特作用。中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)都認(rèn)為,隨著時(shí)間推移、年齡增長,生命必然會(huì)由盛轉(zhuǎn)虛而終。佛教和《黃帝內(nèi)經(jīng)》在描述生命過程的不同之處在于,佛教認(rèn)為人生命的本識(shí)或阿賴耶識(shí)是不生不滅、恒常存在的,有生、老、病、死的只是每一世的身心而已。在比較佛教醫(yī)學(xué)和中醫(yī)的生命觀基礎(chǔ)上,本論文著眼于中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)思想的生理觀和病理觀兩個(gè)方面的比較。生理觀的比較主要探討各自心理與軀體(身)的特質(zhì)和關(guān)系。通過比較發(fā)現(xiàn),中醫(yī)的“形與神俱觀”和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的“五蘊(yùn)心身觀”有如下相同之處:中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)都認(rèn)為生命包含身與心兩方面,中醫(yī)稱形與神,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)稱色蘊(yùn)與受、想、行、識(shí)蘊(yùn),佛教經(jīng)典有時(shí)甚至也同樣采用形和神的稱謂來描述生命;都認(rèn)為每一個(gè)生命的產(chǎn)生都和父精母血有關(guān);二者都認(rèn)為身是心的基礎(chǔ),中醫(yī)認(rèn)為神、魂、魄、意、志等是建立在五臟、血?dú)狻s衛(wèi)的功能活動(dòng)基礎(chǔ)上的,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)認(rèn)為受蘊(yùn)、想蘊(yùn)、行蘊(yùn)是建立在識(shí)蘊(yùn)基礎(chǔ)之上的,而識(shí)蘊(yùn)的產(chǎn)生又是以色蘊(yùn)為條件(緣)產(chǎn)生的。中醫(yī)的“形與神俱觀”和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的“五蘊(yùn)心身觀”的不同之處在于:中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)生理觀在心的內(nèi)涵、種類以及起源上的解讀有別,中醫(yī)的“神”的含義是涵蓋身、心兩方面的,這一點(diǎn)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)有很大的區(qū)別,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的受蘊(yùn)、想蘊(yùn)、行蘊(yùn)、識(shí)蘊(yùn)等四蘊(yùn)、眼識(shí)、耳識(shí)、鼻識(shí)、口識(shí)、身識(shí)、意識(shí)等六識(shí)只是指心,和身(色蘊(yùn))在內(nèi)涵上完全不同。關(guān)于心的種類,中醫(yī)除了提出五神理論和七情學(xué)說,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)則有“八識(shí)”之說。關(guān)于心的起源,中醫(yī)認(rèn)為陰陽兩精相結(jié)合產(chǎn)生了神,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)把五蘊(yùn)身心比喻為“宅”,而“宅主”則是“本識(shí)”,即五蘊(yùn)身心都是本識(shí)籍外緣(條件)而出生的。二者對(duì)心身關(guān)系的解讀不同,中醫(yī)認(rèn)為神以及魂、魄、意、志分別為五臟所藏,還提出神、魂、魄、意、志以血、營、脈、氣、精為舍的理論,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)則認(rèn)為每一個(gè)生命的心(即識(shí)蘊(yùn)等四蘊(yùn))以身(包括眼、耳、鼻、舌以及眼、耳、鼻、舌之外的身體部分)為基礎(chǔ)產(chǎn)生后,是和身并行運(yùn)作,而且識(shí)蘊(yùn)等四蘊(yùn)在睡著無夢(mèng)、暈倒等五種情況下是不存在的,待這五種情況消失后再行出生。和中醫(yī)最不同之處在于,每個(gè)生命那個(gè)不生不滅的心(即入胎識(shí))是不生不滅的。中醫(yī)“形與神俱觀”和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)“五蘊(yùn)心身觀”對(duì)心身關(guān)系的主從關(guān)系的解讀也不同。中醫(yī)認(rèn)為形神關(guān)系本質(zhì)上就是物質(zhì)與精神的關(guān)系,形體是第一位的、精神是第二位的,但從神作為生命活動(dòng)的主宰層面來看的話,“神”在形神關(guān)系里面又居于主導(dǎo)地位,即神為形之主。佛教醫(yī)學(xué)則認(rèn)為,在心身關(guān)系之中,心是主導(dǎo)是非常確定的,佛教“三界唯心”的理論明確的做了表達(dá)。生理觀的比較主要探討心身疾病病因、診斷治療兩個(gè)方面的異同。通過比較發(fā)現(xiàn),中醫(yī)與佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)病因觀有如下相同點(diǎn):二者皆強(qiáng)調(diào)心理因素在導(dǎo)致軀體疾病中的主要作用,具有心身醫(yī)學(xué)病因觀的內(nèi)在特質(zhì)。而且,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)也強(qiáng)調(diào)軀體疾病的表現(xiàn)形式就是四大不調(diào)和,這一思想與中醫(yī)理論陰陽五行學(xué)說非常近似,從某種程度上來講,兩者都是從整體、系統(tǒng)的角度來看待人體的疾病表現(xiàn)形式。二者都強(qiáng)調(diào)欲望是導(dǎo)致疾病的主要原因。中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)在心身醫(yī)學(xué)病因觀上的不同之處在于:中醫(yī)在強(qiáng)調(diào)心理異常(神的異常)可能造成軀體生理病變(形的病變)的同時(shí),也認(rèn)為軀體異常(形的異常)可以導(dǎo)致心理方面的變化,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)則沒有類似的詳細(xì)說明。意業(yè)之業(yè)報(bào)致病是佛教醫(yī)學(xué)有別于中醫(yī)的比較獨(dú)特的心身醫(yī)學(xué)病因觀。通過比較發(fā)現(xiàn),中醫(yī)與佛教醫(yī)學(xué)心身醫(yī)學(xué)診斷治療觀有如下異同點(diǎn):二者在心身疾病的診斷方面都強(qiáng)調(diào)心理方面的因素,所不同在于,中醫(yī)對(duì)診斷時(shí)需要考量的心理、社會(huì)因素的敘述比佛教醫(yī)學(xué)更具體,中醫(yī)的心身疾病的診斷方法也比佛教醫(yī)學(xué)更明確。在心身疾病治療方面,中醫(yī)治神為先,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)以心治心,都強(qiáng)調(diào)心理方面的因素,所不同之處在于,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)對(duì)心的治療的理論相對(duì)比中醫(yī)更深廣些、治療方法相對(duì)比中醫(yī)更具體些。另外,中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)都有使用咒的方式治病。中醫(yī)有運(yùn)用藥物治療心身疾病之心理異常的情況,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)似乎沒有類似用藥物治療心身疾病之心理異常的情形。結(jié)論:從歷史的角度講,佛教醫(yī)學(xué)和中醫(yī)之間有很深的文化淵源,在漫漫歷史長河之中,二者一直在互相影響和借鑒。從心身醫(yī)學(xué)生理和病理的角度而言,中醫(yī)和佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的共同點(diǎn)在于二者都注重心身關(guān)系、重視心的作用,但因?yàn)楦鞣N原因,中醫(yī)在理論研究、臨床診斷治療、疾病預(yù)防、養(yǎng)生保健過程中,身心同診同治特別是心理調(diào)治方面沒有得到足夠重視,這和生命本身的生理心理并存并重的特質(zhì)不相對(duì)稱。在心理因素(如心理壓力、壓抑等)導(dǎo)致軀體病變乃至身心皆苦的醫(yī)學(xué)和人文現(xiàn)象日漸增多的時(shí)代大背景下,站在辯證唯物主義學(xué)術(shù)觀的角度,我們可以借鑒佛教醫(yī)學(xué)對(duì)心理、心理致病、心理治病等方面的理論和方法,將人的心理和社會(huì)生命真正納入中醫(yī)醫(yī)學(xué)本體研究,可以開啟中醫(yī)醫(yī)學(xué)研究的新角度。“身心二元論”是佛教醫(yī)學(xué)的哲學(xué)基礎(chǔ),也是佛教醫(yī)學(xué)重視身心同治、治心為主的理論基礎(chǔ)。站在“身心二元論”的角度,挖掘、整理中醫(yī)典籍中的心身關(guān)系理論,吸收包括佛教醫(yī)學(xué)在內(nèi)的多種醫(yī)學(xué)學(xué)科的心身醫(yī)學(xué)思想,以順應(yīng)現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)的多理論整合之大趨勢(shì),并以心身并重的理念重構(gòu)中醫(yī)生理病理理論體系,把心身并重的理念一以貫之于中醫(yī)辯證論治的整個(gè)過程之中。
[Abstract]:Objective: 1 to compare the concept of species of life, the concept of life origin and the concept of life process in traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhism. 2 to compare the physiologic view of psychosomatic medicine in traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine. 3 to compare the pathological view of psychosomatic medicine in traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine, mainly including the concept of etiology and the concept of diagnosis and treatment. 4 probe into the enlightenment and reference of the Buddhist psychosomatic medicine to the research of traditional Chinese medicine. Methods: This paper belongs to the cross disciplinary literature research of Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine, mainly using the method of literature analysis, including the literature analysis and theoretical comparison of ancient and modern literatures of traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine. Results: from a physiological and pathological point of view, the common point of TCM and Buddhist medicine is that the two all pay attention to psychosomatic relationship. Therefore, this paper focuses on the similarities and differences between the two from the perspective of psychosomatic medicine. Based on the teachings of Buddhism on Buddhism and Chinese medicine's view of life is the theoretical basis of its psychosomatic medicine thought, this paper first gives a brief comparison of Buddhism and Chinese medicine view of life. The comparison of the view of life mainly from three aspects, such as the concept of life type, the concept of life origin and the view of life process. Through comparison, it is found that from the division of life categories, Huangdi Neijing and Buddhism all regard "heart" as an important criterion for dividing life types, that is, animal life is heart conscious, plant life is unaware, sentient life, sentient knowledge and heartless life are heartless. Of course, the differences in the description of the species of life in the Huangdi Neijing and Buddhism are still great. From the view of the origin of life, the "Yellow Emperor" and Buddhism are clearly pointed out that the essence of the father mother blood or parents is important for life essence was born, the difference is that Buddhism emphasizes knowledge (i.e. Alaya) for the unique role of life was born. Traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine all think that with the time and age, life will inevitably turn from prosperity to end. Buddhism and the "Yellow Emperor" to describe the difference between the process of life lies in the Buddhism thought the person life the general or Alayavijnana is constant, there is neither dying nor born, birth and death is each of the world's physical and mental. Based on the comparison of Buddhist medicine and life view of traditional Chinese medicine, this paper focuses on two aspects of physiology and pathology of psychosomatic medicine thought of traditional Chinese medicine and Buddhist medicine. The comparison of physiological views mainly discusses the characteristics and relationships of their respective psychology and body (body). By comparison, the traditional Chinese medicine "and God club" and "the five khandas Buddhist medicine psychosomatic concept" are common: Chinese medicine and Buddhism medicine think life contains the body and mind two aspects, Chinese medicine called with God, Buddhism medicine said color and thought, and in general, in the Buddhist scriptures sometimes also used to describe the shape of God's name and life; that every life can produce and father mother blood; all two think that is the heart of the Chinese medicine foundation, God, soul, soul, meaning, history and other activities is established on the basis of the five internal organs, blood, Rong Wei, Buddhist Medicine by Yun Yun, Yun, want to line is built on the basis of knowledge in knowledge, accumulate is generated on the condition of color in the (edge). The traditional Chinese medicine "and God club" and "the five khandas Buddhist medicine psychosomatic concept is different: Chinese Buddhist medicine and psychosomatic medicine physiology are different in the heart of the connotation, types and origins of the Chinese interpretation of the meaning of" God "is covered two aspects of body and mind, this point there is a big difference between medicine and Buddhism, Buddhist medicine by Yun, Yun Yun, general think, four Yun Yun, eyes, ears, nose, mouth knowledge general knowledge, body awareness, consciousness and six general refers only to heart and body (color khandha) is completely different in connotation. Of a kind heart, in addition to traditional Chinese medicine theory and put forward five gods of Buddhist medicine has seven emotions theory, "eight" said. About the origin of the heart, traditional Chinese medicine that the essence of yin and yang two combining the God, the "physical and mental metaphor for Buddhist medicine" home "and" home "is" the knowledge ", which is the general membership of the five aggregates and the outer edge (condition) born. The two interpretation of the relationship of different Chinese medicine that God and the soul, soul, mind, who were five hidden, also put God, soul and soul, Italy, annals in blood, camp, pulse, gas, fine homes for theory of Buddhist medicine is that every life of the heart (i.e. in the four general Yun) being (including part of the body outside the eye, ear, nose and tongue, eyes, ears, nose, tongue) is based, and parallel operation, and in four in the general in the five case, fall asleep without dream faint is not exist, to disappear of the five cases after birth. The traditional Chinese medicine and the difference is that every life that the heart (i.e. neither dying nor born Rutai consciousness) is neither dying nor born. Chinese medicine "and God club" and "the five khandas Buddhist medicine psychosomatic concept" interpretation of the master-slave relationship relationship is different. Chinese medicine believes that the relationship is essentially the relation between material and spirit, body, spirit is the first second, but from God as life activities dominate the level of words, "God" and in the leading position in the relationship of form and spirit, which is the main form of god. The Buddhist medicine believes that in the relationship, the heart is dominant is very determined, the theory of Buddhism "three realms idealism" made clear expression. The comparison of physiological views mainly discusses the similarities and differences between the two aspects of the cause of psychosomatic disease and the diagnosis and treatment. Through comparison, it is found that the etiology of TCM and Buddhist medicine psychosomatic medicine has the following similarities: the two all emphasize the main role of psychological factors in causing physical diseases, and have the inherent characteristics of psychosomatic etiology. Moreover, the Buddhist medicine also emphasizes that the form of the body disease is the four disharmony, which is very similar to the theory of the five elements of yin and Yang in the theory of traditional Chinese medicine, from a certain course.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖北中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：R2-03

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 崔俊波;陳寶貴;;《內(nèi)經(jīng)》“神”的含義文獻(xiàn)研究薈萃[J];遼寧中醫(yī)雜志;2016年02期

2 羅安明;戎志斌;;佛醫(yī)學(xué)的病因觀[J];中國中醫(yī)基礎(chǔ)醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2015年04期

3 曹彥;;佛教的業(yè)報(bào)與疾病觀[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2015年03期

4 李光英;馬東輝;王健;;《中醫(yī)心身醫(yī)學(xué)》教材芻議[J];中國中醫(yī)藥現(xiàn)代遠(yuǎn)程教育;2013年13期

5 石文山;;佛教般若思想的心理治療意蘊(yùn)[J];心理學(xué)探新;2013年03期

6 李鐵華;王歡;;從身心觀之異看佛教對(duì)中國傳統(tǒng)醫(yī)學(xué)的影響[J];醫(yī)學(xué)與哲學(xué)(A);2013年01期

7 翟向陽;魏玉龍;;禪修的心理學(xué)分析與中醫(yī)養(yǎng)生[J];中醫(yī)學(xué)報(bào);2012年08期

8 田明;張國霞;;淺談情志與心身疾病的關(guān)系[J];江西中醫(yī)藥;2011年06期

9 谷忠悅;關(guān)懷玉;;“恐傷腎”在心身疾病演變過程中的意義[J];遼寧中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年06期

10 顧加棟;周祥龍;;佛教醫(yī)學(xué)思想簡論[J];南京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年01期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 牛淑平;;《內(nèi)經(jīng)》“祝由”新解[N];中國中醫(yī)藥報(bào);2015年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 陳素玲;中醫(yī)與佛教調(diào)心方法研究[D];廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2014年

2 吳麗鑫;佛醫(yī)學(xué)與中醫(yī)學(xué)養(yǎng)生觀的比較研究[D];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2011年

3 龍奉璽;《喻昌醫(yī)學(xué)三書》學(xué)術(shù)思想研究[D];北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2009年

4 李金菊;漢傳佛教養(yǎng)生的歷史研究[D];中國中醫(yī)科學(xué)院;2007年

5 陳煜輝;中醫(yī)情志學(xué)科建設(shè)及情志病證臨床防治框架構(gòu)建探討[D];廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2005年

6 林殷;命門學(xué)說研究[D];北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2003年

7 張超中;《黃帝內(nèi)經(jīng)》的道與神[D];中國社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院;2002年

8 張忠文;對(duì)針灸調(diào)整德國人心身狀態(tài)的初步觀察[D];成都中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2002年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 余兆晟（Yu Siu Shing Steve）;天臺(tái)宗禪修與疾病觀研究[D];北京中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2014年

2 彭?xiàng)罾?《四分律》佛教醫(yī)學(xué)詞匯研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2013年

3 張陽;道教醫(yī)學(xué)中的中醫(yī)學(xué)科技[D];廣西民族大學(xué);2012年

4 肖瞻;生與死[D];廣西師范學(xué)院;2011年

5 黃圣耀;道家與中醫(yī)養(yǎng)生思想研究[D];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2011年

6 王書博;試論藏醫(yī)學(xué)及其現(xiàn)代轉(zhuǎn)換[D];中央民族大學(xué);2009年

7 馬強(qiáng);魏晉南北朝隋唐道醫(yī)關(guān)系探究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2009年

8 趙穎初;基于中醫(yī)睡眠養(yǎng)生理論的睡眠模式的文獻(xiàn)研究及內(nèi)視法對(duì)睡眠的影響[D];山東中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2009年

9 周陽;中西醫(yī)結(jié)合方案對(duì)口腔扁平苔蘚患者的臨床療效觀察[D];廣州中醫(yī)藥大學(xué);2009年

10 朱立東;藏醫(yī)學(xué)在衛(wèi)拉特蒙古地區(qū)的傳播[D];蘭州大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：1344232