【作者】 张晖；

【导师】 范金民；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 中国古代史， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 寺田是佛教寺院所有的公产,它是僧人生活的主要来源,也是寺院维持的重要保障。清代江南地区经济文化发达,寺院的经营多种多样,有香施、佛事、刻经、房产等多项产业,但是田产仍然不可缺少。寺院参与地方各种公益事业诸如维护桥梁、办理闸工、免费供应茶水、管理救生船、看守义冢等等也需要专项田产作为支撑。清代江宁大报恩寺的经济结构与明代相比发生了很大变化,房产和刻经收入所占比重明显上升,田产收入所占比重下降不少,但田产始终是该寺的经济基础和支柱。明代江南的大寺院因为皇帝的赏赐而拥有大规模的田产,分布相对集中,寺田的管理较为严格,寺田的买卖更是在所禁止。清代江南寺院也拥有田产,但呈现出明显不同的特征：一是主要来源于私人的施舍,而非皇帝的赏赐、官府的拨给；二是规模缩小、分布零散；三是租佃制更为盛行,寺院直接与佃户交涉,官府很少干预；四是买卖限制的放松,僧人私自典卖寺田与施主子孙变卖寺田的现象都很常见。四个特征中寺田来源的变化最为重要,它决定了寺田规模、分布、经营与买卖的变化。明代寺田赋税政策因田产来源的不同而有所区别：钦赐田地免除税粮,常住田日地仅免杂派,僧人不许充当差役。明中后期朝廷变更政策,寺田赋额有不断加重、向民田靠拢的趋势。清代寺田赋税政策较为单一和稳定：寺基钱粮全免,寺院通常不应差役,并在纳税手续上享有一定的便利,除此之外寺田与民田没有差异。清代浙江省一些县份的《赋役全书》中“僧田”、“寺田”与民田并列,科则也比民田重,但这些田地实际都属民户产业,只是沿用明代旧有的名称,与当时的寺院没有任何关系。清代前期,无论是僧人典卖、瓜分寺田,还是施主把持、收回寺田,都受到对方的牵制以及官府的监督,寺田能够得到有效的保护。清代后期,江南寺院先是遭受太平天国战争期间的浩劫,无主寺田多被土豪占据；后又受到欧洲天主教会势力的排挤、侵夺,争议田产大量转手。清末的庙产兴学运动是江南寺院面临的最大挑战,地方官与绅士群起提充、占用寺产作为兴办学校、实业款项,甚至中饱私囊、挪为己用。清廷担心激起变故,很快调整政策,纠正官绅的过火行为。僧人也深受触动,开始组建自己的团体中华佛教总会,寻求新的出路。民国初年,佛教会主张政教分离、自行管理寺产,但是没有得到政府的承认。寺田所有权始终含糊不清,也就无法避免政府与地方势力的侵害。如何界定寺院财产的所有权,同时照顾到僧人与施主双方的利益,直到今天仍是一个有待探索的问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 As the public properties of the Buddhist temples, the temple land of Qing Dynasty is the main source of the monks’ subsistence and the important guarantee for the temples’maintenance. Well developed economically and culturally as Jiangnan region is, the land is indispensable to the temples though the temples there have various ways of running, such as the charity, the Buddhist ceremony, the printing of the Buddhist Sutras, the house property. With the special land for its support, the temple can join various kinds of good causes, for example, the defense of the bridge, the repair of the sluice gate, the free tea for the passenger, the running of the lifeboat, and the keeping of the public burial ground. The economic pattern of Nanjing Porcelain Tower Temple in Qing Dynasty is different from that in Ming Dynasty, the proportion of the printing of the Buddhist Sutras and the renting of the house property in gross income increases noticeably, correspondingly, the proportion of the renting of the land decreases too much, but the land is still the economic base and mainstay of the Porcelain Tower Temple.The big temples of Jiangnan region in Ming Dynasty owns large estates because of the awards from the emperor, these estates’distributions are centered in some area. The management of the temple land is strict, and the transaction of the temple land is forbidden in law. The temple land of Qing Dynasty, in comparison with that of Ming Dynasty, has significant different characteristics. Firstly, the land is mainly derived from the private donation rather than being bestowed by the emperor, or the allocation of the government. Secondly, the land dimension has shrunk, and the land distribution has decentralized. Thirdly, the land tenancy system becomes more popular. The temple deals with the tenant directly, with little intervention from the government. Fourthly, the restriction of the temple land’s transaction is loosened. The monk hocks or sells the land without explicit permission, or the descendants of the donor withdraw and sell off the land are both common phenomenon. Among the four characteristics, the source of the temple land is the most important, for it determines the size, the distribution and the transaction.In the early Ming Dynasty, the tax policy of the temple land is different between the part of emperor’s largess and other part, the former is exempt from all taxes, and the latter is only exempt from extra taxes. In the mid and late Ming Dynasty, the taxation of the temple land is increasing from time to time, till it’s close to the taxation of the common land. In Qing Dynasty, the tax policy of the temple land is single and stable, the house site of temple is tax-free, the monk cannot afford the corvee, and the temple enjoys the preference in the taxation procedure. Everything else is alike between the temple land and the common land. In the lists about taxes and corvee of some counties in Zhejiang province, the amount of tax of the monk land and the temple land are much more than the common land. But these monk or temple land belong to the commoner rather than the monk, the taxes lists only follow the old names in fact.In the early Qing Dynasty, whether mortgages or sells of the temple land by the monk or the domination or withdrawing of the temple land by the donor are both under supervision of the other part. And the government would watch over them. Thus, the temple land is under effective protection. In the late Qing Dynasty, many temples in the south of Yangtze River are ravaged by the Heavenly Kingdom War. Most of the temple land losing landlord is occupied by the local bullies. Soon afterwards, the Christian Church from the Europe also grabs the temple land. And there is plenty of controversial land change hands. In the end of 19th century, the temple faces the biggest challenge—the Movement of Establishing schools by temples’ property. In this movement, both the government officials and the local gentlemen begin to deprive and occupy the temple land for the funds of establishing schools or businesses. Some of them even uses the land for his own private emolument or his own use. The central government worries about happening of some unforeseen events, so it adjusts the policy afterwards, and corrects the too much breadth behaviors of the officials and the local gentlemen. But the monks are deeply stirred by the movement; they begin to build their own group-the China Buddhist Federation and find a new way. In the first years of the Republic, the Buddhist Federation advocates a complete divorce of government and religion, and the freedom of management their own property. But the government disavows this viewpoint, and insists on his right to control and punish the temples. The ownership of the temple land is uncertain, which is the root of the temple land’s running off. How to define the ownership of the temple’s property, at the same time, protect both the monk’s interest and the donor’s is still an unknown question.更多还原