buddha-nature and human nature - a discussion of the differences and similarities between the...

8/13/2019 Buddha-Nature and Human Nature - A Discussion of the Differences and Similarities Between the Teachings of Co

1/31

LAIYONGHAIBuddha-nature and Human Nature:A Discussion of the Differences andSimilarities between the Teachings ofConfucianism and of Buddhism andTheir Mutual InfluencesBuddhisms p rofo und and longlasting impact o n Chinas tradi-t ional cu l tu re h as co m e t o b e increas ingly acknowledged andunder s tood . A t th e s am e time , the g rea t impac t tha t Ch inast rad i tional cu l ture has o n th e teachings of Buddhism has alsoc o m e to be increasingly studied and emphasized by the circlesof Buddh is t t eachers . Thus , th e s tudy of th e relat ionship andinteract ion between Buddhism and C hinese culture has bec om ea major com pone nt of th e cu r rent s tudy of culture.Because b o th Buddh ism and Ch inese cu l tu re a re sub ject st h a t e n t a i l t h e s t u d y of mass ive numbers of t e xt s a n d d o c u -ments, an d bot h cover a vast territory, at this point w e have n oi n t e n t i o n , or th e capac i ty , t o d iscuss th e tw o , or the i r r e la -t ionship , in such a way as to touch on every facet . What wein tend t o d o is simply to exp lore , to th e ex t ent of our limitedcapabilit ies, both the relationship and interaction between thetheory of Buddha-nature Foxing), which is th e co re problem ofBuddhist teachings, an d th e theory of human na tu re renxing),which is a fundam ental issue of traditional Con fucian teachings.

L a i Yonghai, Foxing yu renxing-lun ru fo zhi yitong ji xianghu ying-xiang, in Zhaceyun j iu Stud ies in philosophy), no. 11 1989), pp. 55-61. T heauthor is a member of the Dcpartmcnt of Philosophy, Nanj ing University.3


2/31

4 CHINESE STUDIES IN PHIL.OSOPHY

Buddhisms abstract ontology and Confucianismsdoctrine of humanism renbenzhuyi)On the subjec t of the d is tinct ion be tween Buddhism and C on-fucianism, M r. Lian g Shum ing once said:

Confucianism never says anything that is divorced from thecondition of human beings. Where i t plants itself is wherehumanity plants itself. Whatever i t may say, in t h e end i talways comes back to humanity; i t does not go outside of, orbeyond humanity. The same is not tru e of Buddhism. It stands,rather , on a plane far above that of humanity. It always speaksoutside o f, and in transcendence of, humanity, and whatever itsays, in t he end, i t does not come back to humanity; instead, itultimately comes back to Buddha. The former is an earthly,worldly teaching-its method and laws are of this world. Thelatter is a teaching that does not belong to this world but istranscendent of it-its laws and methods are to go out of thisworld. The differences between t h e two are therefore plain tosee.

Mr. Liangs viewpoint is ind eed ins ightful , an d i t seem s t o hi tthe nail o n th e head with regard to the l inc of demarca t ion be-tween Buddhism and Confucianism. This is because, to be s u re ,th e t cach ings of th e Confuc ianis t schools , f rom tha t of C o n -fuc ius h imse lf and Mc ncius to t h a t of th e neo-Confuc ian is t sf hue j i n ) , though the w ords a r e many an d t he t eachings cop i -ous , th e main an d essentia l pr inciple under lying all of t h e m ist h e p r i n c i p l e a b o u t h u m a n i t y . I t d is cu ss es t h e or ig i na l a n d

fundamenta l na ture of Man, discusses the moral cultivation ofhum anity, a nd its purp ose, Ultimately, is to teach human be ingsto be , or become, sagely, saintly human beings. This is n o t t r u eof Buddhism. Although Buddhis t teachings and doctr ines mayb e extremely broad-indeed, they claim to enc om pass Eigh ty-four Thous and Pa ths of th e Law-the ultim ate and essentialpoint of convcrgcnce is nothing b u t the ques t ion of descr ibingand exp la in ing wha t it m eans to b e Buddha-what is th e es-


3/31

FALL. 1991 5

senceof Buddha? D oes a num an being possess Buddha-nature?Is it poss ib le for a human being to be com e Buddh a, or attainBuddha-hood ? And if a hum an being can become B uddha, thenon what basis, an d how may a hum an being become Bu ddha ?T h e Confucianists teaching ab ou t humanity is generally knowna s t h e t h e o ry of h u m a n n a t u r e. As for Buddhisms teachingsabou t Buddha , it is the theory of Bud dha-n ature which makesup the co re ques tion in all of Buddhism as a whole but particu-larly with M ahaya na Buddhism).

T h e te rm Foxing Buddha-nature) is the Ch ines e translationof the Sanskri t term Buddha-ata. It is also sometimes re nd ere das Fojie Buddha-dhatu, or th e s t a te , or realm, of Buddha) , asFozang Buddha-tipitaka, or th e treasury of Buddha) , as Rulaijie Tathagata-dhatu, o r th e realm of Tha t W hich Is as It Is), o ra s Rulai zang Tathaga ta - t ip i taka , or t h e t r e a su r y of T h a tWhich Is a s I t Is). B u d d h a - n a t u r e is a ls o t h e c a u s e , o r s e e dyin),of the en l ightenment of all living things, a nd th e reas onfor the possibility of all living things beco ming Bud dha. Th is isth e mos t bas ic and genera l un der s tand ing of t h e c o n c e p t ofBuddha-nature on t he par t of Buddhist circles in China. How-ever , th e t e rm for na ture in Bu ddha -nature was or iginallyt h e t e rm dhatu in I nd ian B uddh ism, which is t ranslated inChinese as jie,or realm but which in the original has theme a n i n g of subs tance , o r rea l ity . ) A nd so by Buddha-nature , we a lso m ean to refer to the subs tance-nature orsubstance-essence of Buddha. Subsequently, with the ongo-ing deve lopm ent of Buddhism as a teaching , t he m eaning ofdhatu also continuously changed and evolved. By the time ofthe dom inance of Mahayana Buddhism, the term dhatu c a m eto acquire an even deep er meaning, and cam e to b e a synonymfor metaphy s ica l t ru th . In th is way, t hen , the term B uddha-na tu re ca m e to possess ontological significance.If w e go back all th e way to the most foundational theory ofB u d d h i s m , n a m e ly , t h e d o c t r i n e of c a u s a ti o n , h o w e v e r , w ewould say that f rom that perspective Buddhism negates onto-logical reality, or onto logica l subs tance . Mo reover , we would


4/31


5/31

FALL 99 7

Th at W hich Is as I t Is) and Faring wuo, or th e Self of Buddha-n a t u r e , a n d so t h e d o c t r in e of Div ine Se l f , wh ich ea r lyBuddh ism d i sca rded , was invi ted t o r e tu rn th roug h th e backdoor. Thus , the theory of Buddha-nature, t h e cor e of MahayanaBuddhism, c am e to b e es tablished, in terms of epistemologicalform, en ti re ly o n the foundat ion of a n ab stract ontology.It w as very difficult for t h e C h i n e s e b e f o re t h e t i me of t h eJin an d Song dynasties to co mp rehend th e meaning of th e doc-t r i n e of real i ty of a p p e a r a n c e a n d t h e t h e o ry o f B u d d h a -na tur e insofar as they did possess a n ontological significance.Th is is because th e t r ad i tiona l m ethod of thinking in ancientChina was c loser t o t h e theory of origins or sources-forexample, t he theory of essential energy jingqi), th e theory ofthe Five Elemen ts wu ing ) , he theory of the Natura l Beingof the Original Spirit yuanqi ziran), and so on. The refore , inanc ien t Ch inese though t th e concep t of procreat ion chan-sheng) often replaced th e con cep t of realization tixian),andwh en that happ ened , th ere was a very ser ious misinterpretat ionof th e teachings of Indian Buddhism. In particular, t h e re was, inancient Ch ina, a deeply roo ted idea of the soul of th e individu-al tha t possessed an ontological significance. Th us, w he n t h etraditional C hin ese notion of soul was applied to unders tandthe Buddh is t doc t r ine of B u d d h a - n a t u r e , a ss u min g t h e im-perishability of the soul , and the immorta l i ty of th e spiritwas unders too d to be a fundamental meaning of Buddhism andBuddhis t law, then these became the major character is t ics ofCh ines e Buddhism in th e Wei and Jin periods. In reality, the reis a very great difference between ancient Chinas doctrine ofthe soul and th e doct r ine of Bu ddh a-na ture in Indian Buddhismin terms of their respective modes of thinking. In t h e ca se ofthe former, th e notion of soul refers to th e soul of th e indi-v i d u a l ; in t h e c a s e of t h e l a tt e r, t h e c o n c e p t r ef er s t o t h eontological reality of th e universe; t he tw o should in no waybe confused . Never theless , because Chinese in te l lec tual andp h i l o s o p h i c a l c i r c le s p r i o r t o t h e t ime s of t h e W e i a n d Jindyna st ies pract ical ly had no concep t of n o u m e n o n benti),


6/31

8 CHINESE STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY

Chinese th inker s w ere n o t ab le to under s tand accurate ly orgrasp th e related ideas in Buddhism. In t he W ei an d Jin periods,metaphysics xuanxue) became popular. The metaphysicians ofthe time we re very adept at discussing th e questions of beingyou) and nonbeing wu), nd indeed delighted in absorbing

themselves in efforts of th e mind in o r d e r t o c o mp r e h en d t h emean ing of n o u me n o n benti), or root-substance. In this waythe concept of ontological reality gradually bec am e som ethingunderstoo d an d accepted by th e intellectual circles of China. I tis only because of this, and in its wake, th at in th e time be tw ee nthe Jin dynasty and t he Song dynasty of th e Sout hern dynastiesperiod) the Buddhist monk Z hu Daosheng inaugurated th e dis-cussion of th e Chinese theory of Buddha-nature, and began toexplain m ore accurately a doc trine of Bud dha-na ture that wasbased o n th e theory of onto logical reality.In fact, within th e param eters of Buddhist teaching, it is notonly th e theory of Buddha -na tu re tha t is e stab li shed on th efounda t ions of a notion of t h e n o u m e n on of Buddha-nessFo benti); th e totality of Mahayana Buddhism itself stands, anddepends, on a certain abstract noumenon. T his noum eno n mayb e called many names-Zhenru or the T ruth as It Is), shixiangor Reality of Appearance),fajie or t h e S p h e r e of the Law), orFoxing or Buddha-nature)-no matter how varied th e descrip-tions and terminology, however, th e essen ce is stil l the s am e;

they al l mean the ontological or igin of the universe and a l lthings laws) within it. For, in Buddhist teaching, all things ofbeing wanyou) in the world, and in the universe, including allliving things, a re bu t s om e kind of false image, so m e illusion orhal lucinat ion; only Bud dha-n ature , or t he rea li ty of a p -pearance is real. In this perspective, the purpose, for anyone,to study Buddhism and to learn its teachings and ways is nothingbut to realize and v er ih ones own B uddha-nature and thus re-vert to ones ontological reality, shed of all illusions. Therefore,in th e teachings of Buddhism, Buddha-nature or reality ofappe arance , as th e abs t rac t onto logica l rea li ty , is bot h th epoint of de part ure and the point to which all returns.


7/31

FALL 1991 9L e t us now examine th e teachings of Confucianism, which

w e may assum e to b e Chinas t rad i tional cu lture . T h e centra lmeaning in th e teachings of Confucianism, in a certain specifics e ns e , m ay b e s u m m e d u p i n o n e w o r d - r e n , or humanity.T h e fulcrum of th e though t of Confucius himself, the founderof th e school of Confucianism, is th e teaching of hum an kind-ness renxue). Fro m a n etymological perspective, ren is thecomb ina t ion o f two hum an beings . Th e book Shuowen offersth e following definition: Ren, intimacy, form ed o f ren h u ma nbe ing) and er two) . W hat Confuc ius d id was t o endow theterm ren with moral and ethical properties, and th en u se it toexplain and describe the relationship that exists among humanbeings. In th e book Lun yu Th e analects of Confucius) , Con -fuc ius used an d exp la ined th e no t ion of ren in va rio us ways.Som et im es it i s s imply def ined as caring for o t h e r people .T h e n th er e is th e saying: Because you wish t o be edified your-self, so edify oth ers ; because you w ish to b e fulfilled yourself, sofulf i l l others . There is also the famous saying: Never vis i tupon o th er pe ople tha t which you d o no t wish for yourself. Al-though these an d ot he r sayings may n ot b e entirely th e sam e inmeaning, they all point to a cert ain relationship betw een selfand others, or between o n e human being and another . If in-deed w e say tha t th e doct r ine of human kindness is the focusof th e teachings of Confucius , then t he con cept of humanitywould be the point o n which th e entirety of Confuciuss teach-ings stand. O n e might well arg ue th at t he re is, to date , no com-ple te ly uni ted consensus regard ing the s ta tus of Confuciussteachings in the intellectual history of Ch ina, but i t is undeni-able and generally acknowledged tha t t he focus of Confuciussa t t en t ion was humani ty and tha t he s t rov e w i th a ll h i s in -tellectual might to e levate th e s tatus of humanity. Specialistsin th e research of in te l lec tual h is tory in m odern an d contem -pora ry t imes have r epea ted ly po in ted o u t tha t th e concep t ofhu m an kindness in Confuciuss thinking represented a histor-ic discovery of humanity; it is this discovery that turnedpeoples eyes away from th e heavens and pointed them toward


8/31


hum an beings. Suc h an argume nt is in conformity with historicalreality. W e must rem em ber th at Confucius lived in th e times ofth e Eas tern Z h o u dynasty, which was an epo ch in which Heav-e n t ian) a nd God shen) ruled over everything. AlthoughConfucius did n ot actively an d publicly reject th e concepts ofH eav en an d G od, h e did, repeatedly, emphasize that ifo n e do es not understand this l ife, how can o n e even begin tound erstan d th e l ife here after? Should o n e be incapable ofserving th e interests of living people, how can o n e expect to b ecapable of serving th e interes ts of dead spiri ts? and L et usnot talk of bizarre things, things of unknowable power, thingstha t a re of disorder, an d things of God. This intellectual in-clination to emphasize the affairs of hum an beings, an d stayaloof from the dead spirits and divinities indeed had a shock-ing impact o n th e intellectual circles of the Spr ing and Autum nera. It awakened th e sages and celebrity thinkers of the t ime tot u rn t he i r e ye s a wa y f rom t he pa t t e rns of t h e h e a v e n s t ianwen) to t he pa t te rns of humanity renwen) . Since then,the idea of humanism renben zhuyi), which takes hum an beingsas its intellectual an d moral core, has always be en at t he c en ter

of the mainstream of Confucianist teaching an d learning.In th e school of Confucianism, Mencius occupies a positiontha t is merely a s te p ben ea th tha t of Confucius himself, and

Mencius is oft en called th e Second Sage. T h e fulcrum ofMenciuss teaching is in the theory of human nature and thedoctrine of benevolent government remheng). The c o re oft he d oc t r ine of benevolen t gove rnment is t o a d v o c a te t h a tth ere must first be a caring mind that cann ot stand to se e hu-man beings suffer befo re th ere ca n be a governmental systemtha t would no t s tand for the suffe r ing of humanity. O n theothe r hand, th e theory of human natu re is dedicated to t he ex-plorat ion of the original nature benxing) of humanity. Bothtake hum anity as their object and their point of ultimate rest.All subsequent Confucianists have followed the same lines ofthought as those of Confucius and M encius. T h e vast majorityof the i r teachings and arg um ents would not b e fa r remo ved


9/31

FALL 99 11

from t h e c o n c e p t of humanity. They saw humanity as t h e mo r a l c h a r a c t e r of H eav en a nd E ar th , as the mind of t h eu n i v e r s e , or a s t h e r e f i n e d energy a n d s p i r i t of th e f iveelements . T he re was, to b e sure, som e deviat ion in t he l ine ofthough t fo l lowed by D o n g Z h o n g s h u i n t h e H a n d yn as ty , inthat h e advocated th e mutual charismatic co rrespond ence be-tween He aven and humanity tianrengunying). However, eve nthe re h e could not completely divorce himself f rom the idea ofhumanity. He s til l considered hum an beings to b e tha t whichis exalted ov er all things a nd is most precious in all th e world.A no ther hightide of Confucianis t teaching cam e in th e Songdynasty. A t th e t ime, u nder t h e inf luence of th e Buddhis t ideasof Bu ddh a-n atur e as ontological reality Foxingbenti) a n d t h eontological reality of t h e n a t u r e of th e mind xinxingbenti)th e So ng Confucianis ts also began to s pea k of t he ontologicalreality of the Way of H e a v e n tiunduo benti) and the on to log-ical reality of t h e n a t u r e of t h e mi n d xinxing benti). T h e ydeclared: T he G rea t Origin of the Way comes ou t of Heaven ,and The universe is nothing but my mind; my mind is nothingbut t h e universe. Nevertheless , eve n then, the pu rpo se of t h eneo-Confuc ian i s t s Zkue jia) i n r e a s o n i n g o u t t h e o r ig i na lsource of Heaven , Ear th , and All Things was for the sak e ofbeing a ble to explain humanity, explain hu m an n atur e, a nd ex-p la in t h e n o r m s of in te rhuman mora l i ty and e th ics . All t h ecopious teachings an d writings of th e neo-Confucianists ret urnsimply to o n e purpose-to teach peo ple how to discipline th emind an d cultivate ones natu re, how t o reta in t h e principlesof heaven and d iscard the des i res of h u ma n n es s a n d h o w t obec om e a sagely or saintly human being. Although, be cau se theConfucianist teachings of th e t ime w ere profoundly influencedby th e Buddhist theory of Buddha-nature, and th eref ore carriedw i t h t h e m a n u n us u al ly p u n g e n t f l av o r of religiosity, theirultimate interest a nd p urp ose still rested with hum anity.

In sho rt, to a very considerable exte nt, th e teachings of C o n -fucianism a re s imply teaching s abou t human beings, o r abou thumanity. T he y a re teachings ab out th e relationship am ong hu-


10/31


man beings, and a moral philosophy that is based on t h e con-cept of humanity. The y a re u nlike Buddhism, which starts withan abstract ontology as the point of depar tu re and r e tu rns toth e abstract ontology a s the point wh ere it alights. Th e re mayvery well b e o th er specific distinctions an d differences be tw ee nConfucianism an d Buddhism, bu t we should probably acknowl-edge this particular difference to b e th e one tha t is surely th emost fundam ental.A t this p oint, th ere is a que stion tha t should b e discussed.W h e n people t a lk abou t the doc t r ine of humanism renbenzhuyi) in Confucianism they tend to conne ct it with the doctr ineof humanism in W es te rn though t . U nques t ionab ly , beca useboth are doctr ines of humanism, the re must be com mon pointsshared by t he two, and the se would be th at they bot h focus o nhumanity, both t ak e human beings as the cen ter of thought, andboth strive to elevate th e status of human beings. Nevertheless,because of th e different social-historical c ondit ions betweenCh ina and th e We st including th e differences in intellectualand cultural background), th ese two doctrines of humanism arenot entirely similar in intellectual content. In particular, there isa substantial difference betw een th e two in terms of what theyunderstand an d mean by humanity. W he n Western humanistslook a t the hum an being , they t end to a pproach i t f ro m t h ebiological, or physiological angle, in which they then considerthe human being as an individual ent i ty that possesses emo-tions, will , and rational intelligence. When the Confucianistsdeal wi th the con cept of humanity, they would more oftenthan no t emphasize t he human beings social charactcr or groupnature , and ap proach th e subjec t th erefore f rom th e angle ofth e relationships between o n e human being and an oth er or be-tween t he hum an being and the society, considering th e huma nbeing as a mem ber of a society or a social group . If we are to saythat in the Western concept of humanism th e human being isof ten comparatively lacking in social character, the n we w ouldalso have t o say that in th e humanism of Confucianism, to usethe words of Max Web er , the human being would not have


11/31

FALL 1991 13ye t fo rm ed a k ind o f indep ende n t pe r sona l ity fo r h imsel f orherself . In real ity, for th e hu m an being t o b e hu ma n, th e cr iteriashould be bo th biological a nd social; th e hum an being has t o b ean ind epen den t en t i ty , ye t a l so a mem ber of a group. In thissense, the exchange be tween Ch inese cu l tu re and t he cu l tu re ofth e W est, indee d between Chin ese culture an d any foreign cul-ture, is absolutely necessary a n d essential.The theory of Buddha-nature in Buddhism and thetheory of human nature in ConfucianismConfucianism emphasizes humanity; Buddhism em phasizes a b-s t rac t onto logy; th is d i f ference between th e two philosophieshas led to many discrepancies and divergences between Con-fucianism and Buddhism o n fun dam enta l points of view.First, although both Confucianism a nd Buddhism em pha sizeth e theory of nature, they differ in wh at they m ean by na-tu re Xing). W he n Buddhism speaks of na tu re , it generallyrefers t o th e original na ture of the abstract ontological reality;when Confuc ian i sm speaks of nature, it refers primarily tothe original natu re of humanity, or hum an beings.Second, because th e ontological reality for Buddhism is ab-stract and not personal, or personified, when Buddhism speaksof nature , i t tends genera lly to appro ach t he ques t ion f romt h e a n g le of t h e d i st i n c ti o n b e t w e e n c o n t a m i n a ti o n a n dpurity. For Confucianism, o n t he o th er h and, humanity is asocial living being, a nd th e subject of morali ty . Th ere fore , w henC o n f u c i a ni s m s p e a k s of n a t u r e , i t t e n d s t o a p p r o a c h t h ea r g u m e n t f r o m t h e s t a n ce of th e d is t inc tion between goodan d evil i.e., th e question of whether human na tu re is goodor evi l) . In t he pas t, the re have be en Buddh is t s cho la r s tha thave discerned this difference between Buddhism and Confu-cianism, bu t they ha ve n ot b ee n able to indicate why this dif-fere nce exis ts or where, methodologically speaking, it comesf r o m . I n f ac t, t h i s d is t in c t i o n b e t w e e n C o n f u c i a n is m a n dBuddhism exists because they a re exploring dif fer en t issues.


12/31

14 CHINESE STUDIES IN PHILOSOPH Y

Naturally, this discrepancy betw een Confucianism an d Bu d-dhism is not an absolute one . In particular, since th e Ta ng an dSong dynasties, because Buddhism cam e to b e affected by t hetraditional C hinese culture with its emphasis o n hum an na tur eand human nature of th e mind, it that is, Buddhism) also be-gan t o gradually follow th e pa th of emphasizing human natureand th e questions of t he na tu re of the [human] mind, and m oreand m ore B uddhists began to discuss n atur e Xing) in term s ofgood and evil. At th e sam e time, Confucianist teachings be-gan to be affected by the Buddhist teaching of taking Buddha-na ture as an ontological reali ty , and so t he re a l so appearedwithin Confucianist teachings a tendency t o tak e human na tur eand the nature of th e mind as ontological categories. F or exam-ple, consider t h e first united Chinese Buddhist sect, which m ad ei ts appearance fi rst in the Sui dynasty, namely, the TiantaiHeavenly Te rra ce) sect; it gave much atten tion to the discus-sion of the nature of th e mind xinxing). In general, the teach-ings of th e Tiantai school gave th e highest priority an d focus tothe concepts and doctrines of Madhyamaka Mid dle Way) real-i ty of app cara nce . T h e Tian ta i Buddh is ts o f t en cons ideredMadhyamaka reality of appearance as tantamount to Buddha-nature , as the original source of all dharma phenomena, orlaw). This idea clearly carries with i t traces of Indian Bud -dhisms emphasis on t he abstract noum enon , and yet, at thesame time, when th e Tiantai school discussed th e reality of ap-pearance of all dharma, it frequently brought th e notion of t hevariety of the real phenom ena of things back to the con-ccpt of th e co nce ntra ted mind-the mind of o n e t h ou g h tyinianxin).It believed that t he mind is th e roo t of all dhamza;th e mind is the totality.2 This meant that in its teaching, themind is the ontological source of all dharma, tha t is, th e com-mon root source of all phenomena. H er e we can see that theteachings of th e Tiantai school have already shifted from Ind ianBuddhisms emphasis on th e abstract ontology to t he emphasison t he mind. T h e Tia ntai school spilled a g reat deal of inkover the discourse and explanation of t he s t a tement Among


13/31

FALL. 99 ISthese three -the Mind , Buddha , an d All Living-there is n od i f f e rence , wh ich is f o u n d i n t h e Huayun jing t h e F l o w e rS p l e n d o r s u t ra ) . H e r e t h e c r e e d i s th a t t h e m i n d of s e l f okh ,the mind of All Living zongshengxin)and the mindof B u d d h a Foxin) a re eq ua l an d a re mutual ly inclus ive, ormutually possessing. This argum ent, to a cer t ain de gr ee , con-nected t he mind of Bud dha as an abstract ontological ent i tyw i th t h e m i nd of s e l f a n d t h e m i n d of All Living as aspecif ic , subs tan t ive natu re of th e mind. Second , the T ian ta ischool also summ ed u p Buddha-nature-as a n abstract ont olog -ical enti ty-as t he mind of en l ig hte nm en t juexin). It said:W ha t is enlightenm ent in Buddhas terms is mind in naturesterm^. ^ I t a lso said: T he supe rior s tate of tranquility is whatwe call Buddha-nature ; wh en one can directly view th e na tur eof t h e m in d, w e call t ha t t h e su p e r i o r t r a n q ~ i l i t y . ~n theseways, Budd hist schools of thought have summed up th e conceptof B u d d h a - n a t u r e a n d t h e i d e a o f b e c o m in g , or fulfillingB u d d h a - h o o d c h e n g f o ) a s t h e n a t u r e of t h e m i n d a n dviewing introspectively an d retrospectively th e sou rce of t hemind, respectively.T h er e is also a similar situation in th e H uay an school. To be-gin with, th e Huayan school took th e Huayan jing Lotus su t r a )a s it s fo u n d a t io n , a n d t h e t e n e t of T h e M i n d of Purity andClarity Har bo red in th e Self-nature of Tathagata-That WhichIs as It Is pointed to an abstract ontological entity from whichis bor n all things. H owever, as th e Huayan school began t o ex-p l a i n o t h e r r e l a t e d i d e a s of t h e Huayan jing, i t f r equen t lyconcre t i zed or speci f ied th e Mind of Purity and ClarityH arb ored in th e Self-Nature of Talhagata-tipitaka as a mindof spiritual knowing which the n com es t o possess a subjectiveflavor. Furth erm ore, t h e school also uses th e categorization ofthe ignorant m i ) and the en l ightened w u ) t o classify a ndse pa ra te all living zongsheng) f rom the B uddhas zhu fo).It said: It is bec ause th er e is a difference-some a re ignora ntand som e ar e enl ightened-that the re are those tha t be long toall living a n d t h e r e a r e th o s e w h o be lo n g t o t h e B ~ d d h a s . ~


14/31


15/31

FALL 1991 17

mind, and th is t ransforma t ion i t se lf be gan w i th Weinengsteaching of shifting th e focus of Buddhist vision an d perce ptio nf rom th e abs t r ac t on to logy to th e r ea l , and p ractical hum anb e i n g . O n e of th e sa l ien t character is tics of Weinengs Bud-dh i s t t each ing is tha t h e l iked to spea k ab ou t h um an be ingsd i rec t ly , abou t human mind , and human na tu re , r a the r thandea l with m etaphysical an d abstractly philosophical d edu ction sand a rgu m enta t ion s as d id the B uddh ist th inker s before histime. For example, in the Platform sutra, Weineng repeatedlydiscussed Bu ddha -nature f rom th e angle of human nature . Hesaid: T he na ture of human beings of th e world is pure , l ike theclear blue sky; its bene volenc e is l ike th e su n; i ts wisdom is illu-minated like th e moo n, human na tur e is originally pure. It isbecause of false thoughts th at th e R eal Being As It Is is cov eredup ; w i thou t f a l s e though ts n a tu re wou ld be s imply pu re andclean. H e also claimed: The n a t u r e of hu m an beings of t h eworld is originally p ur e a nd clean; all things reside in their ownself-natures. This idea, an d way of posing things, which sum sup B uddh a-nature in the real and practical sense of h u ma n n a -ture, is very different from t h e idea in traditional Buddhism tha tascribes Bu dd ha-n ature to a n abstract ontology. T h e shifting ofthe focus of vision from th e abstract ontology to hu m an beingsa l s o l e d t o a n o t h e r f u n d a me n t a l t r a n s f o r ma t i o n i n C h i n e s eBuddhism, which is t o shif t th e focus from th e tradi t iona l em -phasis o n transcendentalism chushi) or other-worldliness tot h e e m p h a s is o n th is -wor ld liness and m un dan e-n ess infact, ru shi,o r enter ing th e world) and t o th e advocation ofseeking a way to becom e emancipated, o r l iberated, within th eworld, rather tha n ou t of it.A t this point, we a re faced w ith t h e following question: Whyis i t t h a t t h e r e a r e , in t e r m s of ideo log ica l and in te l l ec tua lcon tent , these fundamental t ransformations in th e C han school,wh ich is, fo r a ll in ten t s and purposes , th e r ep rese n ta t ion ofCh ine se Buddhism? Unquest ionably, Chinas eco nom ic condi-tions an d political systcms in traditional times all played a sig-nificant role in shaping these transformations. Nevertheless, if


16/31

I8 CHINESE STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY

w e were t o dwell o n the angle of intellectual an d cultural back-ground, w e could probably a rgu e that t h e intellectual style ofConfucianism, with its emphasis on humanity and o n th e realand practical, most certainly was a major reason for all thesetransformations in the thou ght of Chine se Buddhism.W e must admit, nevertheless, tha t to look a t th e impact ofCon fucianist thought-as a ma jor pa rt of Chinas traditionalcu l t ur e- on the teachings of Buddhism would b e t o look a t onlyo n e s id e of th e issue. I n t h e interact ion an d relationship be-tween Confucianist teaching and Buddhist teaching, the dynam-ics of influence is often not one-sided, but two-directional. I not he r words , because Buddhism was introdu ced into China, i td id receive the impact of Chinas t radi t ional cul ture, and sogradually b eca m e s inif ied, bu t i t a lso, and o f te n, in tu rn, in-fluenced Chinas traditional cu ltu re itself, so that in time thist rad i t ional cu l tu re of anc ien t Ch ina wou ld come to bear thed ee p and indelible imprint of Buddhism itself. This is expressedin a par t icular ly clear fashion in the Confucianis t teachingsfrom th e Tang and the Sui dynasties on. For example, althoughfor many centuries the Confucianist teachings have placed theiremphasis o n humanity, o n hum an nature, and did no t speak ofan abstract ontology, since t h e times of the Sui and the Tangdynasties, Confucianist teachings began to go against the tradi-tion of eschewing ontology, and began t o espo use a theory ofth e ontology of the nature of th e mind in which unity of Heav-e n and H uman i ty is conceived . M oreov er , in the area of t h eteachings regarding th e me thods of men tal a nd spiritual cultiva-tion and disciplining of human charac ter , Confucianist teac h-ings also cam e t o receive th e influence of th e Buddhist methodsof disciplining behav ior, or conduct modification xiu Xing)-therules of illuminate the mind and reveal nature rningxin j i u nXing), viewing th e source of the mind introspectively Cfanp u n x n yuan), and so on. Confucianist teachings th en began t ospeak of such things as revert t o th e persons n atu re cfu Xing),reverting t o goodness shun fun), cultivating th e mind andnurturing nature xiuxin yungxing), and so forth.


17/31

FALL 1991 19

The book, Fuxing shu O n revert ing t o n a tu re ) , wr it t en byt h e Tang dynasty thin ker Li Ao is a specially notab le p iece ofwriting for those tha t would wish to s tudy th e im pact of T angand So ng dynasty Buddhis t teachings on th e teachings o f C on-fucianism. T h e Fuxing shu is in th ree chapters . T h e firs t cha pteris a gener a l d iscou rse o n h u m a n n a t u re a n d h u ma n t e mp e r a-m en t, and a discussion of th e charac te r of th e sage . T h e second,middle cha pter discusses t he me thods of becoming a sage. Th elas t cha pter exhorts peop le t o s trive in the ir effor ts to b eco m ecult ivated in sagely natu re a nd character. T h e book as a wh oletakes as i ts own mission t o re s tore t he tradi tion o f t he teachingduotong) of Confucius and Men cius , and res ts o n the textuala u t h o r i t y of s u c h s c r i p t u r e s a s Zhou yi T h e Z h o u b o o k o fchanges), Daxue Great learning), and Zhongyong Th e way ofthe mean). ts sup rem e moral paradigm is to op en up peoplesearnes t a nd s incere minds an d to i lluminate th em , to arr ive atthe s t a te of m oderat ion and harmony, a nd to eliminate pe tule ntem otions but revert t o t rue hu m an nature. In deed, i t prescribestha t if peop le would not try to o hard to th ink and specula te , orworry too much , they wou ld no t g ive r is e to t h e s e p e t u l e n temot ions and could then re turn to their tr ue nature-that is th eonly way. On th e surface, i t seems that the book is essentiallyConfucianist-for th e gr ea te r part it is based o n th e Confucian-ist classical texts; most of what it says is cast in Confucianisticlangu age , and i ts pu r po se l i e s in r es to r ing and r ev iv ing th etradition of th e teaching of Confucius and Mencius. However,if w e p e n e t r a t e d i n t o t h e d e e p e r p a r t s o f t h o u g h t t h e re i n, itwould not be diff icul t for us to discover tha t in in te l lec tuali n t e n t a n d me t h o d of express ion , the re is mu c h of this booktha t is approx imate w i th and co r respon den t to the theory ofBu ddh a-na ture in C hin ese Buddhist teachings, so mu ch, in fact,that o n e might even say in a cer tain sense th e Fuxing shu wasusing th e l anguag e of Confuc ian i sm to d iscuss th e Buddh is ttheory of Buddha-nature.Confucianist teachings received a n eve n s trong er inf luen cefrom Buddhist teachings in t h e Son g and M ing dynast ies . T h e


18/31


vast m ajority of th e Song and Ming neo-Confuc ian is t h u e )thinkers opposed Buddhism, and yet at the same time many ofthem also smuggled in a great deal of the Buddhis t theory ofB u d d h a - n a t u re un d e r t h e m a n n e r of ant i -Buddhism. In thisway, Song-Ming neo-Confucianism became a vast and eclecticsystem of th e philosophy of human life with the Confucianisttexts of Lun yu T h e a n a l e c ts of Confucius), Mencius, DaxueGreat learning), and Zhongyong Th e way of the mean) as itsgeneral framework, with Buddhisms theories of mind and na-tu re or t h e n a t u re of th e mind) as its ou t l ine and backbone ,and wi th res to r ing the P r incip le of H e a v e n ; E l i m i n a t e t h eDesires of H um an F lesh as its standard.Beginning with Zh ou Lianxi Z ho u Dunyi) , the Song neo-Confucianist scholars greatly tur ne d aroun d th e traditional styleof th e Confucianists that scarcely pays atte nti on to t he sub jectsof na tur e and th e divine destiny tiunrning)and simply doe s no tpay any attention at all to ontology. In place of this style, theysubstituted a cosmology, or worldview, that has the notion ofth e uni ty of Heaven and humani ty as a character is t ic and atheory of human na ture that takes the natu re of the mind as anontological base.

T h e teachings of Master Z ho u Dunyi) carried with them avery heavy characteristic of focusing o n t he meaning of the Wayof Heav en as on to logy t i unduo benti , or h u ma n n a t u r e a sontology renxing benti). O n th e on e hand , he pulled the con-cept of the Way of He aven a classical Confucianist co nc ep t) toth e level of human e thics . O n th e o ther hand, he a t the sa m ctime pulled the concepts of human ethics up to the conceptuallevel of th e Way of Heaven. Furthermore, the purpose for hispulling the Way of H e a v e n to th e level of h um an e t h i c s - o rethicizing th e concep t of th e Way of Heaven-was precisely sothat h e could raise human ethics to the level of a cosmology, orto transform ethics into t he Way of Heaven. T h e essential pur-pose of the book Tuijitu shuo A discourse on the meaning ofth e diagrams of the Taiji , or th e S uprem e Ul t imate ) was, a sarticulated, to illuminate th e source of th e principles of Heav-


19/31

FALL 1991 21e n ; t o s tu d y t h e b e g in n in g a n d t h e e n d of All Things. How-e v e r , w h e n i t c o me s t o t h e point of res t , th e d iscourse of tenre turns to t he g enera l norms of humanity, of h um an nature , ofhum an morals and ethics, and of hum an relationships . T h e pur-pose for Zho us search for the i llumination o f the source , orbeginnings, of H eaven and E art h an d All Things was to dem -ons trate , ultimately, th at th e major so urc e of the W ay was com-in g o u t of H e a v e n . T h e l in e s of r eason ing and in te l l ec tua ldev elo pm ent followed by this theory we re essentially t h e sa m ea s t h o s e f o l lo w e d b y t h e t h e o r y of B u d d h a - n a t u r e in t h eBuddhism of th e Sui and Ta ng dynasties in humanizing th e con-cept of Buddha-nature-that is, pulling Bu dd ha-n ature int o th erealm of hum an nature-so that , in th e end, hum an na tu re maybe pulled to th e level of Buddha-nature.A no th er majo r Confuc ian i st s cho la r of the ear ly So ng dy-nasty, Z ha ng Z ai, was equally deeply influenced by t h e t e a c h -ings of Buddhism. A mo ng t h e Song Confucianists, Zh an g wasth e on e wh o re jec ted Buddhism wi th the g rea tes t vehemence.Indeed, he disparaged the Buddhists teachings of th e empt i -n es s o f n a t u r e xingkong) and t r ans fo rmat ion of i l lus ionhuanhua), and said with dr ipp ing sarcasm that the Buddhasees the m oun ta ins and th e r iver s and th e g rea t l and as mereblight. And yet, from an epistemological angle, Zh an g Za i wasalso th e o n e t o b e m os t s ignif icantly inf luenced by Buddhis tteaching.

T h e teachings and the scholarship of Mas te r Zhang may bedescribed as th e first system of philosophical thought in the his-tory of Ch ines e philosophy to con tain, and possess, a r igorousmeaning of ontology. Fu rthe rm ore, on e may eve n say that hisdoctrines of t h e n a t u re of Heaven and Ear th tinndi zhixing)a n d t h e n a t u re of th e quali ty of energy an d sp i r i t qizhi zhiXing) w ere t he first theories in history to atte m pt to explain hu-man na tur e a nd its essential, o r ontological, quality thro ugh th eperspective of th e categories of ontological essence ti) a n dapplicatory use yong).This theory overcame th e theore t ica lcontrad ic t ions an d in te l lec tua l d if ficu lt ies tha t had been con-


20/31

22 CHINESE STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHYsistently en co un ter ed by all sorts of theories of hum an na ture inth e past, and pushed all th e theories of hum an n at ur e in history,in th e aspect of theoretical thinking, forward by a major step.Furthe rmo re, i t also op ene d u p a new path for t he theory of hu-man na tur e in Song-Ming neo-Confucian thought, a nd became,indeed, a pionee r before i ts own time, for th e concep ts of t h enature of Heavens manda te and th e nature of human energiesand qualities an d t he distinction between Heavens principleand human desires. Zhang Zais theory of human nature in-dee d m ade an indelible contribution to th e general body of t h etheory of hum an n atu re that was pursued and posited by all th eSong and Ming scholars, and, from a n epistemological perspec-t ive, this theory was an outcome of Buddhisms ontologicalphilosophy.T he two Chengs the brothers Cheng H ao and Cheng Yi)a l so he ld a two-faced a t t i tude toward the t each ings ofBuddhism. Whi le oppos ing and re j ec t ing them, on th e o n ehand, they also absorbed and assimilated from the m, o n th eother. They believed that Buddhism belonged to the categoryof the unethical and t he unreasonable and en joined scholarsto distance themsclves from th e teachings of Sakyamuni asmuch as they would distance themselves from obscene sound sand false beauty. O n t he o th er hand, however, they heap edp rai se o n t h e t h ree co m p o n en t s of learn ing of Buddhism-namely , the teachings of disc ip l ines of ab s t i n en ce j ie , inChinese , and vinaya, in Sanskri t ) , of meditat ive t ranquil i tyding, or d hy a na ) , a n d of wisdom hui,o r prajna) . F o r t h eChengs, t he principle of their three-step access to learning andmoral cultivation, namely sitting in quietude, application ofthe mind of respect, and arriving at knowledge, was, to acertain extent, deduced ou t of the inspiration of the three bran-ches of Buddhist teac hing -dis cip line, meditation and wisdom.T h e attitud e that was held by Z hu Xi, the grand composi-to r of t he t each ings of n eo -Co n fu c i an i sm l ixue) t o w ardBuddhism was, in general, similar to that held by Zhou Dunyiand the Chengs. O n t he on e hand, Zh u Xi opposed and dis-


21/31


22/31


If the h u e neo-Confucianists could be so dee ply affected byth e teachings of Chan Buddhism, how much m ore deeply wouldt h e xirucue school of th e m ind) neo-C onfucianis ts be influ-e n c e d ? O n t h e q u e s ti o n of th e mind and nature, Z hu Xi dif-fered in his opinion from t he teachings of Chan. He advocatedthat a rigorous line of distinction b e drawn betw een th e mindand nature. He believed that t he mind belonged to t he categoryof th e sp i r i t , or energy qi),whereas na tu re be longed to thecategory of pr incip le Zi) a n d t h a t , t h e r e f o r e , t h e mi nd a n dnatu re we re two different things, not o n e and th e same. Usingmainly th e C ha n sects methodology of thought, or epistemol-ogy, as his foundation, Lu Jiuyuan, on th e o th e r hand, criticizedZ hu Xi o n th is subjec t , op in in g th a t Z h u was s imply pi lingstructure upon structure, l ike building on e ho use o n t op of an-other needlessly. Instead, he advocated that nature and princi-ple could both b e brought back to , and broug ht into, th e on emind. He said:

A thousand ages ago, a sage emerged; he had this mind, and hehad this principle. Ten thousand ages hence, a sage willemerge, and he will have the same mind and the same princi-ple. In t h e East, in the West, in the North, and in the South,there are and will be sages emerging, and they w ill be of t h esame mind and the same p r in ~ ip le .~He also said: There is one mind and one principle; this mindand this principle; t he re is really no room for any othe r. In factth er e really is no t much d iffe ren ce between this idea of t h emind is th e principle xin zhi i) on the part of Lu Jiuyuan andthe Chan Buddhist sects idea of the mind is Buddha xin zhifo).This is because what Lu Jiuyuan meant by mind, similart o t h e m e a n in g of th e te rm m ind in Ch an Buddhism, is anontology that encompasses the universe and all time, past andpresent and future. Furthermore, in the a rea of the methodol-ogy of cultivating and nurturing the mind, Lu went even fur-ther, to ec ho C han Buddhisms teaching of illuminate th e mindand reveal na ture rningxirzjiclrucing)with his own idea of de-


23/31

FALL 1991 25velop a nd illuminate th e original m ind fuming benxin). As forhow t o deve lop and i l luminate th is or iginal m ind, Lu J iuyuanemphasized that the way cannot be sought for ou ts ide of t h eself , and ask of thyself, re ve rt t o thyself. H e bel ieved tha tth e original mind bemin)was something tha t every personpossesses within, and that while it is correc t to apply t he ef for tto ones own self, th er e is really no sense, o r nee d, in trying t of in d t h e w ay o u t s i d e of o n e s self. T h i s is s im i l ar t o t h eadvocation of Ch an B uddhism th at th e selfs mind is Bu ddh a,a n d t h e r e is no need to s eek for the truth elsewhere. In short ,th e similarities betw een th e teachings of Lu J iuyuan and C hanBuddhism, an d t he d egre e to which L u en te re d in to Chan Bud-d h is m , a r e g r e a t a n d e x tr eme l y p ro f o u n d . O n e p i e c e o f e v i-den ce may b e that when Z h u Xi and th e neo-Confucianists ofsubseq uent ages cri ticized th e argum ents and th e s tyle an d in-ten t ions of L u J iuyuan, they have o f te n said that it is al l theteachings of Ch an; only the nam e an d label is changed, and t h e l e a r n in g of J inxi [Lu J iuyuan] is rea l ly and t ru ly Chanlearning,9 an d in general o n e may say that [Lu] was using th eprinciples and meanings of th e C han schoo l; however , on theou ts ide h e a lways fa lls back o n t h e l anguage of th e sages, ino r d e r t o s t r e t c h t h e s e w o r d s a s mu c h a s p o s s ib l e to f it t h emeanings of S a k y a m ~ n i . ~A n o t h e r r e p r e s e n ta t iv e of th e Song-Ming School of Mindx i m u e ) philosophy, W ang Yangming, w ent e ven fur ther than

did Lu J iuyuan in the area of absorbing from and assimilatingth e t each ings of C h a n B u d dh is m. O n t h e f o un d a ti o n of Lusteaching, Wangs teaching wen t as far as to e spo use t he no tionth at everything, from t h e trilling of th e birds to th e smiling ofth e flowers, from the towering of th e mountains to th e flowingof th e rivers, was simply the evolving an d transform ing of onesown mind, and nothing more. He advocated that conscienceor good knowing Ziangzhi)gave birth to heaven and ear th ,a n d c r e a t e d , o r f o r me d t h e s p i ri ts a n d t h e p o w e rs ; t h a t t h isZianghiwas th e genius of creat ion and the root of all things.In precisely this way, Wa ng Yangm ing pushed th e philosophy of


24/31


t h e min d t o its very extreme, an d m ade this philosophy m uchcloser and more in harm ony w ith th e absolutistic idealism ofCh an Buddhism.

Of all th e ideas in th e t each ings of W ang Yangming , th emost influential was, unquestionably, th e doc trine of fiangzhigood knowing, or conscience, or intuitive m oral knowledge).This Ziangzhi is, in fact , th e no tion of ontological reality inBuddhist teachin g, s imilar to w hat th e Chan Buddhis ts m eanw h e n t h e y refer to t he orig inal face of human beings andthings benlai mianmu). Wang Yangming himself admitted asmuch. He said:

The liangzhi, or power to know good morally is nothing morethan a faculty in human beings for t h e principle of heaven andfor nature to be illuminated, to become aware of, to be dis-covered and revealed; just tru th, sincerity, pity, and compas-sion is its original substance [or ontology].

O n ano ther occasion, W ang said: T he original face is what th esages of ou r s choo l of teaching call fiangzhi, or the power toknow good.12 In addition t o this, in th e a rea of the methods ofcultivating proper behavior, the teachings of W ang Yangmingalso resemble th e teachings of Chan Buddhism in many ways.Chan Buddhism holds that th e Bud dha-nature is pu re and cleanto begin with; it is only because of i ts being covered by somealien dust, such as worries and troubles, that it canno t s ee it-self. If one could separate oneself from the il lusions of phe-nomenon Zi xiung) and rid oneself of thoughts wu nian),o n e would be able to attain Buddha-hood, or at least become aBodhisattva. For his part, W an g Yangm ing believed tha t th eoriginal substance or essence benti, or ontological reality) ofth e huma n m ind was clear and clean to begin w ith, bu t becauseof the accumulated practices of seltish desires and contamina-tion, th e hum an mind could n o longer s e e itself clearly. If a per-son could learn, and thus elim inate these areas of blindness, hewould recover the clear and illuminated original essence of t h e


25/31

FALL 1591 27mind, that is, the Zhngzhi, and then he would not be far frombeing a sage or a saint. The Monk Huineng once used the anal-ogy that human nature was originally pure just as the sky wasalways clear, and the sun and the moon always shone, and onlybecause of the covering of the dark clouds did the sky becomeunclear, to explain the relationship between accidentality andthe influence of alien dust and worries. Wang Yangming alsohad his argument that the moral knowing of the sage is like theclear sky without a single cloud; the moral knowing of the goodman is like the sky with a few lightly floating clouds; and themoral knowing of the foolish man is like the sky with dark andlooming clouds. One of the major characteristics of Chan Bud-dhisms methodology of moral conduct cultivation is its strongemphasis on not establishing the teaching of words, but point-ing directly to the source of the mind, not to rely on theteaching of the sutras, and transcending Buddha and the patri-archs of tradition.

For his part, Wang Yangming also taught a methodology ofcultivation in which he opposed being restrained and obstruct-ed by the words of the classical texts and by the meaning of thewritings. He believed that the six classics are all merely recordsof my mind. He emphasized that the learner must have confi-dence in himself, and must not speculate after, or emulate, orrely on the classics and the texts. Instead, he advocated thatpeople should arrive at the faculty of moral knowing by theirintuition zhiZiangzhi and accomplish a virtuous nature chengdexing); do not waste your energies and your efforts in theheaps of old papers. The same is true of the latter-day scholarsof the Wang school; they, too, resembled the latter-day ChanBuddhists in their advocacies concerning the methodology ofmoral and knowledge cultivation. Latter-day Chan Buddhists, inthe area of the methodology of cultivation, moved from thedoctrines of directly pointing to the source of the mind andsudden enlightenment and revelation of true nature to thetheories of a total laissez-faire method of following nature,caring naught for food or sleep, and so on. As for the latter-day


26/31


followers and scholars of th e W ang Yangming school, since thetime of people such as [Wang Gen] Xinzai and [W ang Ji] Long-xi, they, too, took to th e style of naturalism and nonactivity.They believed that everything, every vis ion -co lor s of all kinds,th e f l ight of birds in t h e a ir , a n d t h e j u mp i n g of fish in t h estream, is nothin g but th e vacillation of a moment of heaven,that such things as the falling of th e petals of a flower and thechirping of a bird, th e towering of the mountain or the flowingof a river, we re all merely th e revelation, o r th e expressive ou t-flowing, of th e intuitive moral mind, the Zianghi So they advo-cate that th e effort to arr ive at human nat ure is to be rooted innature; outside of nature there is really nothing to be taught,to not move a s ingle o n e of th e seven emotions, th e HeavenlyLord is at peace; but if the re is the merest thought, the m om entit is sproute d, th e M ind H or se will becom e wild. T hey alsosaid: If you can ga ther in and restrain this mind, then you ar e agood man; when you can restrain i t to the extent that the m indbecomes naught, then you will know nature and Heaven. Inot he r words , they see k to teach people to s trive to reach thepoin t of being just as naive as a young child, a kid, and thenevery piece of laughter and every playful action will be just asnatura l as th e phenom ena of fish leaping or birds flying. Theysaid: It is in fact such that o u r human minds and bodies can b eso l ively. Whether in intel lectual content or in intel lectualstyle, the teachings of W ang Yangming and th e teachings of thelatter-day scholars of the W ang school were extremely close tothose of Chan Buddhism; in fact , so close tha t it became dif-ficult to te l l which was the teaching of Cha n Buddhism andwhich was the teaching of Wang. That is why later thinkerssimply called t h e teaching of W ang Yangming Ch an teaching.Buddhist ethics and the rules of moral re lationship sand behavior in ConfucianismWhile the Song and Ming dynas ty neo-Confuc ian i s t s wereprofoundly affected in their mode of thought and even th e con-


27/31

F f i 1991 29ten ts of their tho ugh t by Buddhism, a nd par ticular ly by C h a nBuddhism, nevertheless, in th e are a of the rules of moral rela-tionships and in ethics, the neo-Confucianists, and, indeed, theancien t Confucianis ts of China themselves, ado pted an at t i tu deof r e j e c t i n g a n d r e p u d i a t i n g B u d d h i sm r es o lu t el y . T h i s is ama j o r r e a s o n l e a d in g t o t h e p r o t r a c t e d a n d i n t e n s e co n fl ic tbetw een Confucianism and Buddhism.

T h e e th ica l t each ings, indeed , doc t r ines , of Confucianismform ed th e intellectual foundation for th e clan-law zonsfa)sys-tem in ancient an d traditional China. In particular, t h e theo ry of T h e T h r e e R u l e s o f h u m a n r e l at io n s, a n d t h e F iv e N o rmssun gang wu chang), which se rved as th e co re of the e th ica ld o c t r i n e of Confuc ian i sm, was th e key t o th is founda t ion ofChinas traditional zongfia system. Further , these Three Rulesand Five Norms can be reduced, from a certa in perspective, t osimply two concepts-loyalty zhong) an d f il ia l resp ect xiao) . Loyal ty means th a t th e vassal s and sub jec t s o f th es t a t e mu s t b e lo ya l a n d f a i th f ul t o t h e s o v e re i g n , t h e r u l e r.Fi li al r e spec t mea ns tha t a ll peo p le , a s ch i ld ren , mu s t ber espec t fu l and o bed ien t to the i r pa ren t s . T h e idea tha t suchloyalty an d f il ial resp ect an d obe dien ce ar e the basic rules ofe th ics a nd th e f ir st a m ong a l l d iscip lines of c o n d u c t h a s t h ede ep est and most longlasting roots an d influence in Chinas tra-ditional society. It is for this reason th at Confucianism fre qu en t-ly used this to attack a nd reject Buddhism. In or de r to surviveand develo p o n Chin ese soi l, Buddhism had long engaged i tselfin atte m pts t o explain itself an d de fen d itsel arduously, an d yet,bec au se Buddh ism, u l t ima tely , is a t r ansce nde n ta l r e lig ion ,the re are , indeed , many fundam enta l d if ferences betw een th ee t h ic a l t h o u g h t it e s p o u s e s a n d t h e e t h i c al t h o u g h t of C o n -fucianism. C onsequently, throug h th e ag e of the T an g and So ngdynast ies , the ethical thought of Buddhism cont inued to be amajor targ et of t he a tta ck by Confucianists. This situation, his-torically , raised a problem for C hin es e Buddhism-unless i tma de so m e changes in its ow n ethica l view, i t would be very dif-ficult fo r Buddhism to survive in China over th e long run, much


28/31


less be develop ed in any significant way. This very practical an drealistic need ultimately compelled Chinese Buddhism in theTa ng and Song periods t o com e up with a ra ther significant a d-justment of its own view of ethics.In the beginning, Buddhism saw itself as a foreign guest inChina , and therefo re it advocated that i ts adhe rents not b erestrained, o r constrained, by the customs and th e rites of t h esecular world in which they lived. It op pos ed th e ri tual ofkneeling and kowtowing to rulers and parents, and, in th e ar eaof ethical thinking, i t also rejected the notion of assimilatingand adapting t o circumstances, but used t he co nce pt of turningb ack t h e ro o t an d seek i n g t h e o r ig i na l m ean i n g of t h eGreater Fi l ial Respect da x iao) to boy cott t he secularpractices of serving ones par ents o r keeping th e rites of Con-fucianist piety. H owever, u nd er t h e influence of Chinas tradi-tional culture, in the Tang and Song periods, Buddhism beganto make certain transformations in this area. For example, therenowned Buddhist monk of th e Song dynasty, Q i Song, wr ote atreatise, entitled Xiuo fun Discourse o n filial respect) tha t dis-cussed and explained the Buddhist teachings on filial respect ina co mp reh ens ive way. In this essay he claimed: All religionsand teachings honor the notions of filial respect for ones par-ent s, an d Buddhism exalts i t in particular. He said: Filialrespect is th e rule of Heaven, the essential principle of Earth ,and th e rightful practice of Man, the virtue of th e sage beginswith filial respect. Fu rth erm ore, h c listed parents as o n e ofthe T hr ee Major Foundations of All Un der the Sun. He ad-vocated that the rules of discipline for the sons of Buddhismmust demand that they take from th e resources of their mendi-cant robe s and their me ndican t bowls [ tha t is , the f inancialresources with which the Buddhist establishment is supported]in order that they may first succor their parents. This wentaga ins t the t each ings of t he G rea te r F ilia l Respec t tha tBuddhism had sup por ted in t h e past, and instead came muchcloser to th e teachings of filial respect as always espoused byConfucianism. Ming dynasty Buddhist monks, moreover, wrote


29/31

FALL 1991 31such things as Xiuowen shuo Records of stories of filial resp ec tin t h e faith), Guangxiuo xu A pre face to p rom ote t he b roade rprac t ice of f ilia l respec t) , and so on , in which Bud dhists dis-cussed t h e pr inc iples of fil ial resp ect at length. M oreo ver, inSo ng an d Ming society, filial monks ap pe ar ed frequently, an dthey advoc a ted such things a s carrying o u t t h e r itua l of t helamenta t ion of t he mind for thre e years a f te r th e dea th of ap a r e n t , a n d so on . All t h e s e d e m o n s t r a t e q u i t e f u lly a n dadequate ly tha t s ince the T ang and th e S ong periods , Ch ineseBuddhi sm h ad b ecom e mora li zed in t h e Ch inese t r ad i ti ona lfashion to a certa in extent . At the s am e time, the se examplesalso dem ons trate that qu i te often th e t radtional Confucian cul-tur e has a t rem end ous pow er in t ransfo rming any kind of im-po rted alien culture.In ad dition, th e traditional Confucianist philosophy of ethicsn o t o n l y im p a c t e d t h e d o c t ri n e s a n d t e ac h i n g s of C hi ne s eB u d d h i s m p r o fo u n d l y in t h e a r e a of t h e c o n c e p t s of filialrespect , bu t a lso had a great impact on Ch inese Bud dhism ingeneral in th e area of the notions of human relat ions and the irnorms, especially the Five Norms. In traditional times, manyof Chinas Budd hist mo nks a nd bel ievers in th e rel igion fre-que nt ly and cus tomari ly eq ua ted Buddhisms F ive Ru les ofAbst inence wu jie) with Confucianisms Five N orm s of hu-man relationships. For example, in t h e period of t he Sou t herndynasties, Y an Zh itui pointed ou t, in his Guixin biun Essay o nreverting to the mind) that: W hen the disciplines ar e set u p fo rt h e novices in t h e teaching internally, five types of restrictionsa r e established; the se a re similar to th e Five Norms of benevo -lence and principled righteousness that a re writ ten in th e o u te rbooks. Similarly, the Xi00 Zun of the a forement ioned Qi Songof th e So ng dynasty also equ ated th e Five A bstinences of t heBud dhists wi th Confucianisms Five Norms. Fu rtherm ore,h e said: Confucianism and Buddhism ar e both th e teachings ofsages; ev en thou gh they co m e from different sources, they e n din th e sam e place-rder, thus expressing th e belief tha t th etw o religions of Confuc ianism and Buddhism sh are the sam e


30/31


destination, ev en though they follow differe nt paths. I n truth,from th e Tan g and th e Song dynasties on , Confucianist teachingand B udd hist teach ing have ind eed become increasingly con -fluent, an d t h e teachings of neo-Confucianism, which becameso strong an d popular in the Song and Ming periods, we re pre-cisely a pro duct of this confluence.Finally, the re is o n e question that must b e pointed o u t here ,and p ointe d o u t wi th em phasis: Why is i t tha t Ch inese Bud-dhism after t h e Sui and T an g dynast ies would be humanizedand eth icized ? In regard to this quest ion, we bel ieve tha t i tmight not be correct for us simply to assume that these trans-form ations we re merely an d simply posturings or concessionso n t h e p a r t of Buddhism in a dapt ing t o Chinas t radit iona lthought just so that it might avoid being assaulted and rejected.Instead, we believe tha t th ese transformations took place be-cause Chinese Buddhism after th e Sui and Tang eras no longerfocused i ts a t tent ion on the issue of an abstract ontologicalreality th e way that traditional Buddhism did earlier. R at he r, ithad become a religion that increasingly focused its attentionso n hum an beings, had increasingly reduced th e con cep t of t h eabstract ontology to th e observation of real human nature, andhad become a secularized and humanized rel igion. Conse-que ntly, to pay atte ntio n to th e practical and realist ic ethicalrelationships among human beings has becom e a n internal ne edfor Chinese Buddhism after th e Sui and Tan g periods; it is no tsimply a m atter of concession or strategy.Notes

1 . Liang, Zhongguo wenhua yu Z ho ng po zhexue Chinese culture and2. See Fahua ma nyi The mysterious meanings of the Fahua jing-the3 See Dasheng zlziguan fumen The entrance to the law of Mahayana ces-4. See Zhiguan dayi The essential meaning of cessation of view), in the

Chinese philosophy), p. 429.Dhartnapundarika sutra), pt. 1 vol. 1 in the Tu kho Tripituka,vol. 33, p. 685.sation of view), vol. 2.TaLho Tripitaka,vol. 46 p. 406


31/31

buddha-nature and human nature - a discussion of the differences and similarities between the...

Documents