天台宗為中國佛教最主要的宗派之一，其圓教思想尤其精彩 高妙，故向為學界與教界所重。然而，對於圓教修行法門卻存有 許多重要之詮釋異猶待解決，這是本文之研究動機所在。 本文分為五個章節作探討。第一章「緒論」敘述研究動機與 目的。第二章「當今天台圓教觀法研究概述」論及當今學界對天 台學研究之概況，尤其是在圓教觀法方面。整體而言，天台學相 關著作多依天台文獻描述解說，較少問題之論究。對於圓教修行 法門，則不同於智者大師（智顗）圓教觀法只適宜上根菩薩修習 之說法，多有將之詮釋為可適合於一般人之主張。 第三章「天台圓教觀門之不同詮釋問題」歸納學界之不同詮 釋有六種觀點：1、三種止觀都屬圓教，所有人均是圓教根機。2、 一心三觀易於在日常生活中落實，為一般人普遍可行。3、法華三 昧懺儀即是一心三觀之具體實踐，亦為人人可行。4、隨自意三昧 可讓一般人於日常生活中隨境修觀。5、可用持息念法門修一心三 觀、覺意三昧。6、四種三昧須搭配二十五方便及十乘觀法修習。 此六項主張的共通觀點是認為圓教修行法門，包括一心三觀、法 華三昧、隨自意三昧，是一般大眾皆適宜修習的。持息念亦可發 展為圓頓止觀之修行方法。第四章「天台圓教觀法普及化觀點之反省」分別檢視探討上 述前五項詮釋是否成功。研究結果筆者認為：1、三種止觀並非皆 屬圓教，亦不能說眾生皆是圓根。2、一心三觀並非一般人皆普遍 可行。學者之詮釋無法真正達到一心三觀之實踐，甚或只是空觀 或次第三觀（別相三觀）而已。3、法華三昧懺儀尚不能解說至接 續一心三觀，成為大眾之具體修習方法。4、隨自意三昧亦非一般 大眾皆適宜修行之法。5、持息念發展為一心三觀是頗具創意的想 法，但是猶待詳細之論證建構。 第五章「結論」歸納本文之研究成果。總結而言，筆者認為 對圓教實踐法門之普及化的嘗試與努力均尚未竟功，猶待努力。

T’ien-t’ai Buddhism is one of major schools of Chinese Buddhism. Its “Perfect-teaching” (圓教) is specially marvelous, so academic and religious circles always pay much attention to it. But there are some important divergent interpretations of practice’s ways of Perfect-teaching. It is why I did this research. This paper consists of five chapters. Chapter one expresses the motive and aim of research of this paper. Chapter two introduces the summary of contemporary researches for T’ien-t’ai Buddhism, especially practice’s ways of “Perfect-teaching”. Generally speaking, most of the researches are explanations according to the scriptures of T’ien-t’ai Buddhism. There are few discussions of subjects of debate. About practice’s ways of Perfect-teaching, some scholars interpreted them to be suitable for general people, different from Zhi-yi’s (智顗) declaration that they are suitable only for bodhisattva of best “practice root” (根機). Chapter three induces different interpretations of “Contemplation Ways of Perfect-teaching of T’ien-t’ai Buddhism. To sum up, there are six contentions of different interpretation. a. “Three Kinds of Contemplation” (三種止觀) all belong to Perfect-teaching. All human beings are the “practice root” of Perfect-teaching. b. “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” (一心三觀) can be done easily in daily life by general people. c. Practicing “Dharma Lotus Samadhi” (法華三昧) can be the same as “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind”. And it is suitable for everyone to do. d. “Pursuing Your Mind Samadhi” (隨自意三昧) can be done in daily life by general people. e. One can practice “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” or “Aware Mind Samadhi” ( 覺意三昧) by the way of “Breathing Meditation” (持息念Anapana-Smrti). Chapter four reviews those interpretations introduced in chapter three. After researching I disagree with the interpretations above. My conclusions are as follows: a. It’s not all of “Three Kinds of Contemplation” belong to Perfect-teaching. And it’s not all human beings are the “practice root” of Perfect-teaching either. b. “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” (一心三觀) is not suitable for general people. Those interpretations made by scholars are not really what “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” means. They just mean “Contemplation of Emptiness” ( 空觀) or “Separate Threefold Contemplation” ( 別相三觀). c. The interpretation of declaring that practicing “Dharma Lotus Samadhi” can be the same as “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” and it is suitable for everyone is not enough. d. “Pursuing Your Mind Samadhi” is not suitable for general people. e. Developing “Breathing Meditation” to become “Threefold Contemplation in One Single Mind” or “Aware Mind Samadhi” is a constructive idea, but it is not fulfilled yet. Chapter five is conclusion of this paper. In conclusion, the popularization of practice’s ways of “Perfect-teaching” still hasn’t succeeded.