本文嘗試以一個位於閩南與臺灣的地方道教傳統「道法二門」為中心，考察歷史與當代地方道教的幾個基本問題：地方道教的源流與現況？當代地方道教儀式與古代道教儀式間的關聯？地方道教傳統與其他宗教傳統的互動與競合？在官方標準化與地方多樣性的交互作用下，地方道教傳統如何被形塑？最後，嘗試通過不同視角的歷史與當代地方道教比較研究，幫助我們思考何謂「道教」。主要發現如下：(1)在閩南專指醮儀傳統（天師、玄天上帝）的道法二門，演變為臺灣北部複合醮儀與驅邪儀式（天師門下、閭山門下）的「新」道法二門。醮儀的「法」是指以玄天上帝為法主，以內煉變神、召將發遣為特色的宋代新法。考察道法二門的歷史流變有助於反思道教史上新興儀式傳統（道派）可能的發展脈絡。(2)通過歷史縱向比較，發現地方道教通過手抄本、口傳與祕傳的傳承方式，保存科文、科法的能力並不亞於官修道藏的「主流」傳統。通過當代和古代科儀文獻比較，也有助於更準確地理解道教科儀的歷史流變。(3)通過地區、教派的橫向比較，可以發現臺灣南、北二大道教傳統所保存的靈寶、正一教派特徵，以及相對應的齋儀、醮儀本位。(4)通過地方社會需要道教提供儀式（而非義理），地方宗教儀式總匯以「醮」為名的現象，反映「儀式」做為道體核心的真實影響，也有助於我們了解地方道教與道教儀式就是地道的、活的「道教」。

This paper, through a focus on the local Daoist traditions of Daofa ermen from Southern Fujian and Taiwan, investigates several basic questions concerning historical and contemporary local Daoism: What are the historical origins and the present day conditions of local Daoism? What are the connections between contemporary local Daoist rituals and historical Daoist rituals? How have local Daoist traditions and other religious traditions interacted with or contested one another? Under government standardization or in the interplay with local religious diversity, how were local Daoist traditions shaped? Finally, through comparative research on the different perspectives of historical and contemporary local Daoism, I attempt to help us reflect on what is meant by the term ‘Daoism.’The main findings are as follows: 1) The Daofa ermen tradition of southern Fujian, which specializes in offering rituals (jiao 醮), has evolved into a 'new' Daofa ermen tradition, a composite ritual tradition that conducts both jiao and exorcist rituals in northern Taiwan. The ‘methods’ of jiao rituals indicates the new methods of the Song Dynasty, which specify the Upper Thearch of the Dark Heavens (Xuantian shangdi 玄 天上帝) as master of methods and internal refinement to transform the spirit (neilian bianshen 內練變神) and the summoning and dispatch of divine generals as distinguishing features. Exploring the historical changes of the Daofa ermen tradition helps us to rethink the potential developmental trends in the rise of ritual traditions in Daoist history. 2) By comparing the longitudinal relationship between the southern Fujian and Taiwanese traditions, we discover that local Daoism’s capacity to preserve liturgies and ritual methods through transcribed manuscripts and both oral and esoteric transmission methods is no less than that of the ‘mainstream’ traditions found within the imperiallysponsored Daoist Canon. Such a comparison of contemporary and historical liturgical documents also helps us to more precisely understand the historical development of Daoist ritual. 3) Through a cross-sectional comparison of the regions and their Daoist branches, we can discover the characteristics of the Numinous Treasure (Lingbao 靈寶) and Orthodox Unity (Zhengyi 正一) schools that are preserved in the two great Daoist traditions of southern and northern Taiwan, as well as the place of the fasting rituals (zhai 齋) and jiao rituals in the respective traditions. 4) That local society needs those rituals offered by Daoism (not its doctrines) and that local religious ritual converges in the renowned phenomenon of the jiao reflects the idea that ritual serves as the true impact of the core of the embodied Dao. This also helps us to understand that local Daoism and Daoist ritual are the authentic, living forms of ‘Daoism.’