本論文扣緊主題──吉藏思想是否為「一元實在論」，而以是實體論、非實體論為關切焦點，嘗試解開吉藏針對如來藏－佛性思想課題所發表的論述到底實情為何，以便據此檢視松本史朗判定吉藏為一元實在論者而其佛學思想屬於流出生成論型態的「一元實在論」之類見解及其論據的正謬。本論文的主要看法為：1、「一元實在論」之類見解不能如實反映吉藏佛學思想的真正見地、以及其闡釋佛教法義的根本導向。2、松本史朗是以其「基體論」之思想偏執，擴而施用於論議吉藏佛學思想；而且由於欠缺「世俗諦」、「第一義諦」有別的明確方法論意識，以致一向只從「世俗諦」立場去闡析吉藏佛學思想。3、吉藏針對如來藏－佛性思想課題的諸多論見，並未顯示出它們真是流出生成論型態的「一元實在論」。

Matsumoto Shiro asserts that Jizang was a monistic realist and that his Buddhist ideas belong to ＂monistic realism＂ （一元實在論） as a type of ＂generation-emanation theory＂ （流出生成論）. This article plans to unravel Jizang’s viewpoint and argument on tathāgatagarbha or buddha-dhātu so as to examine whether Matsumoto Shiro’s understanding of tathāgatagarbha or buddha-dhātu is correct. This article brings out the following major viewpoints: 1. The ＂monistic realism＂ and ＂source realism＂ （根源實在論） argued by Matsumoto Shiro cannot truthfully reflect Jizang’s thoughts. 2. The discussion in Matsumoto Shiro’s text does not go profoundly, and his assertion is not authentic. There are two reasons for this: (1) he takes the doctrine of tathāgatagarbha/buddha-dhātu as the ＂dhātu-vāda＂ and extends it in the discussion of Jizang’s thoughts; (2) he does not distinguish ＂conventional truth＂ from ＂ultimate truth,＂ so that he only takes the former approach to understanding Jizang’s thoughts. 3. The various views and argument raised by Jizang on the issues of tathāgatagarbha/buddha-dhātu do not prove that he was a monistic realist.