龙树与奥古斯丁之时间观差异研究

A Study on the Differences in the Conception of Time between Nāgārjuna and Augustine

摘要: 本研究聚焦于龙树《中论·观时品》与奥古斯丁《忏悔录》卷十一两个核心文本，对二者于时间本质问题上的根本差异进行系统性比较。龙树主要运用遮诠与辩证逻辑，批判时间作为独立实体的实在性，揭示其仅为依托现象运动而假名安立的施设，其自性本空；并通过对时间连续性及流动性的逻辑解构，最终导向超越一切时间戏论、寂灭分别执著的圆成空性境界。奥古斯丁则通过内省与现象学描述，将时间性问题转向心灵内部，提出时间是“心灵的延展”，由记忆、注意与期望三种意识功能协同构成，并在与上帝“永恒的现在”的对照中，阐明时间作为受造世界的有限属性，以及灵魂在此时间性中朝向上帝的归依之路。本文围绕“时间本质”“时间结构与流动性”“时间与永恒”“方法论分歧”以及“思想交汇”五个核心维度展开系统的对比分析，指出二者差异不仅源于方法论上“遮诠”与“内省”之别，更深植于“缘起性空”与“存在奠基”两种截然不同的本体论与目的论框架。本研究旨在通过这一具体的哲学对话，深化对东西方时间观念及其背后思想体系的理解，为跨文化哲学比较提供一个学理上具体而深刻的范例。

Abstract: This study focuses on two core texts, Nāgārjuna’s “Chapter on Time” in the “Madhyamakaśāstra” and Augustine’s “Confessions” Book XI, systematically comparing their fundamental differences on the essence of time. Nāgārjuna mainly employs the method of negation and dialectical logic to criticize the reality of time as an independent entity, revealing that it is merely a provisional designation based on the movement of phenomena and that its self-nature is empty. Through the logical deconstruction of the continuity and fluidity of time, he ultimately leads to the state of nirvana, which transcends all temporal delusions and extinguishes the grasping of distinctions. Augustine, on the other hand, through introspection and phenomenological description, turns the issue of temporality inward, proposing that time is “the extension of the mind,” constituted by the three mental functions of memory, attention, and expectation. In contrast to God’s “eternal present,” he clarifies that time is a limited attribute of the created world and the path of the soul’s return to God within this temporality. This paper conducts a systematic comparative analysis around five core dimensions: “the essence of time,” “the structure and fluidity of time,” “time and eternity,” “methodological differences,” and “points of convergence.” It points out that the differences between the two not only stem from the methodological distinction between “negation” and “introspection,” but are more deeply rooted in the two fundamentally different ontological and teleological frameworks of “dependent origination and emptiness” and “God’s creation.” This study aims to deepen the understanding of the time concepts and the underlying ideological systems in the East and West through this specific philosophical dialogue, providing a concrete and profound example for comparative philosophy across cultures.