In this thesis, I hope to make a small contribution to the study of of Chinese Buddhism. The preliminary discussion in the first and second chapters takes the form of a historiographical overview of some concepts that developed within the Three-Treatise tradition of Chinese Buddhism between the 5th and 6th centuries. This serves to illuminate the intellectual practices of this unique tradition of thought, which has been largely underrepresented in Western-language studies of Buddhism. In the subsequent chapter, I will clarify the exposition of these ideas within Master Jízàng’s commentary on the Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikās《中論》, the Zhōngguānlùn-shū《中觀論疏》 (completed in 608 C.E.). The examination of this work and its immediate contexts promises to shed light upon the development of Mādhyamika thought in East Asia, especially with regards to the basic exegetical strategies of the Three Treatise tradition. The third and fourth chapters elucidates Jízàng’s interpretation and commentary upon two seminal chapters within Nāgārjuna’s Zhōnglùn, the “Contemplation of the Three Characteristics”〈觀三相品〉 and the “Contemplation of Time”〈觀時品〉. The content of these two chapters reflect the doctrinal and philosophical diversity of the intellectual terrain in early 7th-century China. Jízàng’s analysis in these chapters unfolds into a systematic refutation of the “false doctrines” of the Indian Ābhidharmika sects, which, in turn, illuminate the divergent intellectual currents of Jízàng’s milieu, as well as revealing the encyclopedic breadth of Jízàng’s Zhōngguānlùn-shū as well as other monumental commentarial works of the period. The examination of Jízàng’s refutation of the Sarvāstivādins in the fourth chapter – an as of yet unexplored facet of his considerable corpus – serves to enlarge our current comprehension of both Chinese intellectual culture during this critical juncture in Chinese history, and to enrich our understanding of the variegated exegetical and philosophical approaches of the great thinkers of 6th- and 7th-century China.

本文將就佛教修行五道中的見道進行討論。首先本文討論了有漏凡夫如何首次生起無漏法的問題：說一切有部傾向於主張無漏法可以由有漏法生起，而瑜伽行派則主張有漏法和無漏法異質，無漏法需要從無漏種生起。由於此種差異，雙方在種姓問題的態度也不盡相同。 本文接著指出：在見道位中，說一切有部所描述的見道狀態，傾向於有分別的見道。主要原因是，說一切有部認為見道相關的智皆為「見性」（推度性）；迅速切換所緣和無分別的思維模式存在矛盾；瑜伽行派也認為說一切有部所述的見道屬於後得位。而瑜伽行派將見道分為了根本位及後得位，見道被分為了無分別及分別安立兩個階段。兩派在此問題的差異，主要來源於兩派對見道所觀真理的差異。 最後，說一切有部認為見道有十五心，瑜伽行派則認為有十六心。瑜伽行派從基礎上迥異於說一切有部，在將見道分化為根本及後得之後，說一切有部在見道為十五心或十六心的問題上的基礎已被瓦解。另外，說一切有部認為見所斷煩惱及修所斷煩惱的主要差別是兩者是否產生自「我執」，若是則為見所斷煩惱，若非則是修所斷煩惱。瑜伽行派則更注重煩惱現行及習氣的差異，若是現行則為見所斷煩惱，若是習氣則為修所斷煩惱。