於中國佛教中除了禪宗之外，以天臺與華嚴⼆宗最為重要。⼀⽅⾯天臺建基於《法華經》⽽成就⼀「性具」思想，另⼀⽅⾯華嚴⽴⾜於《華嚴經》⽽開出⼀「性起」系統。⾧期以來兩者⽴場便處於⼀種勢同⽔⽕之對⽴局⾯。近代儘管佛教早已無復當年之盛，但上述這種對⽴之局⾯仍於當代的佛學研究中出現，這特別是⾒諸於唐君毅先⽣和牟宗三先⽣對天臺華嚴所作的詮釋上。其中，唐先⽣認為華嚴優於天臺，但牟先⽣則主張天臺⽐華嚴更符圓教之義。事實上，唐牟⼆先⽣對天臺華嚴所作的詮釋不但涉及對傳統中國佛學之理解，且由於唐先⽣之「⼼靈九境說」深受華嚴的辯證性進路所啟發，⽽牟先⽣之「儒家圓善論」則以「天臺式圓教」為⽴⾜點，所以對於當代新儒家之發展亦會有不容漠視的影響。準此，本⽂嘗試探討兩者能否仍存融合的可能性。於結構上，本⽂分成兩主要部分：⾸先分別勾畫出唐牟⼆先⽣對天臺華嚴所作的詮釋，其次對這兩種詮釋加以⽐較，並進⼀步論證兩者相通之可能性。此中本⽂指出唐先⽣之華嚴釋不但透露了其辯證性格，且通過凸顯其唯⼼論之實踐⽴場，使之避過來⾃天臺的批評。這可幫助⾒出於何義上既可⽀持唐先⽣會通天臺華嚴之道，⼜能調和其與牟先⽣對天臺華嚴所作的詮釋。

Tiantai and Huayan Buddhism are two major schools in traditional Chinese Buddhism. While Tiantai Buddhism was found on the Lotus Sūtra, Huayan Buddhism was founded on the Flower Garland Sūtra. In the past, these two schools constituted a zero-sum game. This tension recurred in modern scholarship on Chinese Buddhism. Tang Junyi and Mou Zongsan, as the two major founders of modern Confucianism, developed different interpretations of Tiantai and Huayan Buddhism. Whereas Tang maintained the superiority of Huayan Buddhism, Mou identified Tiantai Buddhism as the only perfect theory. In fact, both Tang’s and Mou’s Confucian doctrines were formed under decisive influences from Buddhism. It is accordingly of significance to explore the possibility of harmonizing their interpretations of Tiantai and
Huayan Buddhism.