(lai 1977) chinese buddhist causation

27
Chinese Buddhist Causation Theories: An Analysis of the Sinitic Mahāyāna Understandin g of Pratitya-samutpāda Author(s): Whalen Lai Source: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Jul., 1977), pp. 241-264 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1397998  . Accessed: 19/01/2014 22:36 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at  . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp  . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].  . University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy  East and West. http://www.jstor.org

Upload: viento2k

Post on 04-Jun-2018

224 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 1/25

Chinese Buddhist Causation Theories: An Analysis of the Sinitic Mahāyāna Understanding ofPratitya-samutpādaAuthor(s): Whalen LaiSource: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Jul., 1977), pp. 241-264Published by: University of Hawai'i PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1397998 .

Accessed: 19/01/2014 22:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

 .JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of 

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

 .

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy

 East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 2: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 2/25

WhalenLai Chinese Buddhist causation theories: An analysis of thesinitic Mahiayna understandingof Pratitya-samutpada

INTRODUCTION: BASICISSUES

Karl Potter in Presuppositions in Indian Philosophies has underscored the fact

that causation is a key and basic Indian philosophical concern. To achieve

liberation from the cycles of rebirth, samsira, and to break away from the

endless process of karma, it is important to realize the weak link in the chain

of causation and thereby to break from the world of cause and effect.' JosephNeedham, in his Science and Civilization in China,volume 2, points out, on the

other hand, that the Chinese did not have native concepts comparable to the

English terms of "cause" and effect." It was, he notes, the Buddhists from

India who first introduced such "causative" framework of analyzing relation-

ships to the Chinese.2 Needham's observation does not imply that the Chinese

in pre-Buddhist times had no sense of temporal sequence concerning what

went before and what came after as a consequence. For all practical purposes,the Chinese knew of antecedents and consequents, and her scientists in ancient

times were not ignorant of the working of the universe. What might distinguishthe Chinese perception of the sequential relationships, however, was her

tendency to use a organistic (Needham) or, biogenerative or procreatory model

to understandthe same relationship. Instead of the Western mechanical model

of "A as the cause produces B as the effect," the Chinese used a biologicalmodel instead: A as origin,pena, produces B as end, mob. The Chinese conceptsof pen/mo acted as the analytical tools to understand sequential relationships.

Representative of such an outlook would be the I Chingcconcept of Change

as life giving birth to life, or the (Confucian) notion of Heaven and Earthprocreating the myriad things or the Taoist idea of the Tao as the Mother of

all. The East-West difference is this: the mechanical model of cause and effect

tends to assume two distinguishable entities;3 the biogenerative model of penand mo suggests instead a fluid, organic continuum.4 The mechanical model

might be related to the notion of God as Creator and of Law, divine or natural.5

The pen-morelationship recalls a fertility motif. The termspen-mowere derived

from the pictograph of fertility: mother Earth or tree or wood. As the branch

is to the tree trunk, mo (the tip) is a natural outgrowth of pen (basis): that is,

the branchis an extension of the trunk. Similarly, Chinese cosmology repeatedlyinvokes the notion that the many are ultimately originated from, fathered by,and basically in harmony with, the One. "From the one pen came the myriadmo," characterized Han thought in general.6

Considering the fact that Indian philosophy was committed to the analysisof causative relationships and that the Chinese were more prompt to see the

fluidity between origin and end, it would appear that the Chinese Buddhists

would have some initial difficulties in digesting theparticulartheory of causation

proposed by Gautama the Buddha. Cultural boundaries, however, are neverabsolute, and it is to the credit of the Chinese Buddhists that they did make

Whalen Lai is Assistant Professor of Religious Studies at the Universityof California, Davis.

PhilosophyEast and West27, no. 3, July 1977. ? by The University Press of Hawaii. All rights reserved.

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 3: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 3/25

242 Lai

an effort and succeed, in many ways, in understanding the implication of

Gautama's theory of causation. However, the Chinese had to come up with

some innovative terms to translate cause (hetu) and effect (phala). They chose

the words yind and kuoe, originally meaning approximately "the basis for"

and "the fruit" for cause and effect. Even in modem Chinese usage, yin-kuo

(commonlyused to

designatekarmic

retribution)does not

fully correspondto

the English concepts of cause and effect.7

Given the indigenous Chinese proclivity for an organic world view, it would

hardly be surprising that China would eventually modify the Buddhist theoryof causation to fit her own taste. Knowingly or unknowingly, that modification

did take place when Chinese Buddhist traditions attained maturityand ventured

independently toward a new articulation of older Indian Buddhist insights.The new articulation, the modifications, should not be seen as a distortion,

for in a verysubtleway, the Chinese gave an ingenious native twist to Gautama's

initial insights. This twist was inspired or facilitated by the fact that Gautama'scausation theory criticized a naive cause-and-effect sequence. The final result

might seem un-Indian to an Indological purist. It is clearly sinicized, but it

should be remembered that the same end product would equally appear non-

Chinese and evidently Indic to a Sinological purist. It would be best to regardthe final Chinese Buddhist formulations of causation theories as reflective of

an Indo-Chinese synthesis, better still, as the expression of sinitic Mahayana

speculations on the nature of ultimate reality.8Since causation is at the heart of Buddhist

thoughtas well as of Hindu

thought in general, a full treatment of the sinicization of this Indian aspectwould be practically impossible. In this short essay, I will focus primarily on

the way in which mature Chinese Buddhists reviewed, in retrospection, the

various causation theories within Buddhism. I will analyze, in a philosophical

manner, the implications of the Chinese retrospective evaluations and the

origins of the "hierarchial" structures. I will leave the more historical aspectsto another occasion.9 It will be shown that the kind ofpen-mo fluidity outlined

earlier and the Chinese inclinations toward cosmic monism transformed the

Indian Buddhist theory of causation. At the same time, Chinese metaphysicsinherited the philosophy of identity, infinity, and spontaneity (what Garma

Chang calls Totalism) via the Hua-yenf school's understanding of the Mad-

hyamika critique of temporality. In the Hua-yen school (which later influenced

Neo-Confucianism10) we will see an extravagant theory of a cosmic, infinite,

ceaseless autogenesis of the universe by the universe itself.

Buddhist causation theory has been the object of much study. RecentlyDavid J. Kalupahana in Causality. The Central Philosophy of Buddhism

(Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1975)has provided us with an in-depth

study of the Indian side of the story and dispelled some myths and misunder-

standings of paticcasamuppada.According to Kalupahana, the early Buddhists

were empiricalphenomenalists and cause was seen as the sum total of coexisting

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 4: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 4/25

243

factors that gave rise to a consequent. Early Buddhist texts did not differentiate

between cause (hetu) and condition (pratyaya). The distinction between the

pair (with which I shall begin the discussion in the study) began with the

Sarvastivadins. Cause was then seen as comparable to a seed, and condition

as comparable to auxiliary factors (moisture, sun etc.) needed to bring the

seed to fruition as the result(phala).

Inadopting

atheory

of self-nature

(svabhdva)the Sarvastivadins risked reviving the old satkaryavadaphilosophy

(see following discussion, herein). Their attempt to salvage the Buddha's denial

of that philosophy with recourse to a new theory of momentariness (ksana) led

to a doctrine of the reality of static past, present, and future. The reaction was

the Madhyamika critique of Nagarjuna that denied any substance to the so-

called self-nature of things. Nagarjuna's emptiness philosophy (sunyavada)then led to a transcendentalcritique that went beyond the earlier phenome-nalism. The three times and causality were reinterpreted.1l

The meaning of causation clearly was at the heart of the Buddhistphilosophy.How the Chinese understood and reformulated that insight is therefore crucial

to Chinese Buddhist developments. Although the Chinese Agamas may

preserve some early Buddhist insights, by the time they were sophisticated

enough to move beyond the Taoistic exegesis, the Chinese fell under the later

influence of the Sarvastivada/Madhyamika phase. Shoson Miyamoto's "A

Reappraisal of Pratitya-samutpada"12can introduce us to the issues at hand.

THE MEANINGOF PRATITYASAMUTPADA

The theory of causation ascribed to Gautama has to be understood, at first,

in the context of other options in Indian thought.13 Gautama apparently

challenged the Upanisadic notion of a permanent soul or self, itman, and

posited what came to be known as the andtman tradition of no-self or no-soul.

Steering the Middle Path between extremes, Gautama equally avoided the

other alternative of the Ucchedavadins (annihilationists), who held the idea

that reality is totally fragmentated, and nothing ever lasts or affects what

comes after. In so steeringbetween the extremes, Gautama, often time impatient

with and indifferent to metaphysical speculations, gave no definitive answer.He left the problems to his followers to ponder upon in their metaphysical

spare time.

Closely related to the preceding, is Gautama's similar denial of parindmavdda

(evolutionism) on one hand, and irambhavdda(compositionism) on the other.

The former assumes that all phenomena evolve out of a basic ontological

source; the latter denies the existence of any basic substance/substances and

posits instead a plurality of coexisting entities that have no reference to ante-

cedent causes. The former aligns itself easily with the Vedanta or the Samkhya

traditions, the latter with the outlook of the Ucchedavadins. Gautama, in

following the Middle Path, steered between the eternalism of basic substance

source and the randomness of cut-up component elements that had absolutely

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 5: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 5/25

244 Lai

no links to one another. He wanted neither determinism nor indeterminism,

fatalism nor nihilism. He proposed then his theory of pratTtyasamutpida.

Basically, his theory proposes concomitancy: "There being A, there is B.

There being not A, there is not B." There being cravings, there is suffering.

There being the cessation of craving, there is cessation of suffering.14PratTtya-

samutpddahas been translated variously as dependent coorigination,inter-

dependent causation or simply as causation. Speaking probably from within

the "northern path" and Far Eastern tradition, Miyamoto notes:

Pratitya-samutpada is sometimes rendered 'causality' in English, but this is

very misleading because it is not mere cause-effect relationship; rather, it isan attempt to interpolate pratitya (auxiliary factor, condition) as the most

important condition in the formula of cause -- condition -> effect.15

Pratltyasamutpadaliterally means conditioned coarising. Pratyaya refers to

the condition or auxiliary cause or concomitant factor; samutpadarefers to

arising together. The Chinese had, not incorrectly, used the term yiian-ch'i9:

yiian for pratyaya and ch'i meaning rising for samutpida. Pratyaya is neither

the cause nor the effect, but, as Miyamoto points out, the key intermediate

factor in the normal sequence of cause -+ condition -> effect. Cause is hetu

(Chinese, yin), and effect is phala (Chinese, kuo). Hetu would bear phala or

cause, effect, when and only when the favored condition (pratyaya, yuan) is

present. Thus, for example, the seed (cause) would require moisture and earth

(the conditions, auxiliary causes, or concomitant factors) before it can produce

fruit(the effect). By interpolating

this intervening factor, Gautama very

ingeniously avoided the parindmatradition (evolutionism, that is, things evolve

froma basic materialcause) by insistingthat secondaryconditions arenecessary.

Similarly, Gautama avoided the irambhavada option (plurality of entities

coexisting with no reference to antecedent causes), by insisting that things

arise concomitant to and with one another (samutpada)because the mutual

conditions are ripe. Gautama, the philosopher-and-therapist,16avoided causal

determinism on the one hand and acausal coexistence on the other.

The reader by now realize that (1) the theory of pratTtyasamutpila is not

simply causation like A causes B, that is, not the naive cause-and-effect re-lationship, and (2) it was proposed within an Indian context out of a peculiar

range of options as was just explained. The difficulties facing an English-

speaking reader unfamiliar with the Indian concerns for various causalities

within their philosophical context, in this regard, are not very different from

the difficulties that faced the Chinese in the fourth to sixth centuries A.D.

China then had to acquire "causative relationships" which she never had use

for in her biogenerative (pen/mo) world view. China had to learn it outside

the philosophical context of the Indian obsession with causality. Finally,

having no prior notion of cause or effect (hetu phala), she had maybe double

the difficulties understanding the nuance of pratyaya as something between

cause and effect. China chose the right (right, perhaps by convention) term to

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 6: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 6/25

245

translate the Sanskritoriginal. She used the word yuan, which originally meant

"rim, along side" to evoke the meaning of "condition, auxiliary factor, con-

comitant cause." Like the choice of kuo for phala, the choice was forced but

eventually yiian serves its designated purpose. Miyamoto however wonders:

PratTtyasamutpidas translated into Chinese as yiian-ch'i; it remains a gravely

doubtful question whether the Buddhists and the intellectuals of the Far Eastgrasp the philosophical contents [of the original concept].17

Miyamoto notes that yiian-ch'i has been liberally used in China to simply

signify what is synonymous to yu-laih, which means whence-come, that is, a

theory of origination. Yiian-ch'i, like the English word "causality" used to

translate pratltyasamutpada, loses its more specific nuance in such common

usage. For example, prologues to treatises which tell us the reason for writing,are often called yiian-ch'i or yin-yiiani (cause-and-condition)-the book being

the result. The latter term was used in that liberal and nonliteral sense for"preface/reason for writing" as early as the sixth century A.D. in the Chinese

fabricated work, Awakening of Faith in Mahayana.18 Japanese Buddhists

followed similar practices. Legends of temples are called temple engi (engi

being the Japanese pronounciation for yiian-ch'i).

By such shorthanded understanding of pratTtyasamutpddas theory of ori-

gination, the Chinese very likely, at times, missed the nuances of the originalSanskrit. The absence of a native tradition of cause-effect thinking might have

been responsible for this reduction of a unique theory of causation to a generalterm for any causation. On the other hand, I also suspect that the very lack

actually allowed the Chinese to formulate their own theory of Buddhist

causation outside the mechanical cause-effect framework, so that they rein-

terpreted pratttyasamutpdda n an organistic manner. China in fact came upwith her own Middle Path that avoided causal determinism and acausal

indeterminism-just as Gautama did-but in her own unique Hua-yen theoryof a mysterious, spontaneous, efforescence of reality.19

To add to the complexity, Chinese Buddhists not only have to intuit what

Gautama meant by the idea ofpratltyasamutapdda,they also had to incorporatewhat the Indian Buddhist philosophers thought that Gautama had meant byit. In short, the issues involved are complicated. Generally speaking, Indian

Buddhists offered three interpretations of pratTtyasamutapdda. he Abhidhar-

mists, the Madhyamika philosophers, and the Yogacarins each have their

slightly different rendition of Gautama's insight. These slightly different

emphases by each of these, however, were enough to cause heated controversies

and schisms. As a whole, especially northern Abhidharmists were the rational-

izers who wanted to work out, in minute analysis, the conditions under which

different elements (dharmas) would arise together. They tended to interpret

pratTtyasamutpdda s (to wit) Conditioned Causation. In order to sustain a

theory of anatman, the Abhidharmists adhered to a doctrine of a plurality of

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 7: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 7/25

246 Lai

elements (dharmas)which, in combination-that is, following pratTtyasamut-

pada-produced the nominal existence of realities. They were the causalist

philosophers. Although they look for causal antecedents only in the immediate

moment-entity preceding the oncome of the next moment-entity, nonetheless,

they demonstrated a skill of causalistic analysis in listing different pratyayafactors.20 [Incidentally, medieval pious scholasticism in the West and Islamic

kalam were also interested in causuality as they too sought for the gate of

liberation from the world.]21

Nagarjuna, the founder of Madhyamika, questioned the assumption of the

elements (dharmas) n the Abhidharmic system and proposed instead an overall

theory of emptiness (svabhdva-iuinya).The theory of self-nature was shown byhim to be self-defeating. Conceptions of independent existents are empty.

Among the realities that he denied and showed to be isunyawere the qualitiesof time past, present, and future which his opponents, the Sarvastivadins,held

to be distinct categories. Nagarjuna was able to show the interdependence ofpast, present, and future, how each by itself had no claim to independentexistence as such and how any statement asserting their being intertwined (the

present preexists in the past, for example) would end up in inner contradictions

or antinomies. It is said that Nagarjuna developed the notion of pratltya-

samutpida in the direction of what Stcherbatsky would call relativity, or

better, interdependence (paraspari peksa) hsiang-i hsiang-tuij. If we use the

English term interdependent causation to designate prat7tyasamutpada, hen

we can say that Nagarjuna would accept interdependencebut negate causation.

Nagarjuna also emphasized the reality (or, to be exact, the emptiness) of the

whole, dharmatd,as opposed to the Abhidharmist fixation with the particulars;the changewas from dharmavdda o advayavdda, rom dristivada o sunyavdda.22

The Yogacara tradition offered its own understanding of the principle of

pratTtyasamutpadawithin its particular focus on the working of the [human]

psyche. Thus Yogacara was most able to show the interdependence of con-

sciousness [as subject]and name-and-form [as object], or the intricate relation-

ship between the false sense of the self and the false sense of the object in the

seventh consciousness [manas],that is, the emptiness that was in the structureofparatantra [dependent] level of reality i-t'a-hsing ch'ik. Intricate relationshipof interdependence or simultaneity was seen also in the mind's reception of the

external impressions. The impressions come simultaneously through the senses.

There is beginningless and apparently interminable mutual perfumation of

mind upon defilement and defilementupon mind. Yogacara, however, basicallyelaboratedupon Madhyamika understanding. Reality is without substance and

dependent on the subject-perceiver.23The Indian Buddhist expositions on pratTtyasamutpidawere not unknown

to the Chinese. However, in most cases, we will not encounter the Chinese

understanding of the Abhidharma, the Madhyamika, and the Yogacara

interpretation as has just been presented. Instead we find a peculiar phenom-

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 8: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 8/25

247

enon or division basic to Chinese self-understanding of those philosophies.

Among the Chinese Buddhist schools, the San-lun' (Three Treatises, Mdd-

hyamika) school and the T'ien-t'ai school are grouped as the shih-hsiangmschools that philosophize upon the Dharmata (insofar as Dharmati is often

translated as shih-hsiang in Chinese.) Shih-hsiang philosophy is generallyacausative. The Hinayana and the

Yogacaraschools are classified as the

yiian-ch'i or causation schools. These two major streams should theoreticallynot overlap, since the shih-hsiang wing was supposed to be "noumenalist"

concerned with dharmatdor the absolute-in-itself, whereas the yiian-ch'i wingwas usually depicted as being fixated only with causative phenomena involvinga plurality of dharmas or dharma-characteristics (laksana). However, it is

recognized that Madhyamika transcendentalism was reached only through a

thorough critique of phenomenalism and transvaluation of pratTtyasamutpidainto the paramirtha-void. Also, Chinese made the sinitic distinction between

Wei-hsinn (Mind Only) and Wei-shih0 (Consciousness Only). The former,represented by Ch'an (Zen), was supposed to be "noumenalist, dharmati-

orientated." The latter, represented by the school of Fa-hsiang, founded by

Hsiian-tsang, was relegated to a crypto-Hinayana, phenomenalist school. The

Chinese Buddhist school that achieved the highest synthesis of yiian-ch'i and

the noumenalist wei-hsin was the Hua-yen school. That synthesis had been

referred to as Wei-hsinyiian-ch'iP(Mind-Only Causation, noumenal phenom-

enalism) or as hsing-ch'iq (Essence Arousal; to be analyzed later). How all

these came about would require a complementary study.24 I would simply

suggest the unique Chinese rearrangements of the three basic Indian schools

in the following diagram.

IndianBuddhism

Abhidharma Chinese Re

Madhyamika a. Causative schools(phenomenal)

'arrangements/Developments

b. Noumenal schools(acausative)

Yogacara-< \ Abhidharma i) shih-hsianggroup

(all three >Consciousness only San-lun Madhyamikaabove arephenomenal \ \ T'ien-t'ai Madhyamika-schools) ii) mind-onlygroup

Ch'anResynthesis

Hua-yen < > Hua-yen <

(noumenal causative)

It can be noted that (Chinese) Madhyamika is traditionally not considered as

a causative school. There is some basis for this Chinese reading, namely, that

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 9: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 9/25

248 Lai

(1) Madhyamika is critical of the particularismof dharm-analysisand supportive

of the universalism of sunyata and dharmata-intuition,(2) the Chinese under-

stood and defined causationism largely as what is born or as origination. This

reading excluded the more intricate idea of pratTtyasamutpadas interdepen-

dence, as interpreted by Stcherbatsky. Madhyamika is thus not included in

the Chinese criteria of yiian-ch'i.25 Madhyamika indeed does not fall undersuch naive causationism.

Furthermorecausation (pratityasamutpiada, iian-ch'i), understood as theory

of origination (yu-lai), is responsible for the peculiar hierarchial classification

of four origins for causative realities.

THE HIERARCHYOF CAUSATIONTHEORIES

Takakusu in Essentials of BuddhistPhilosophy gives a clear English summary

of the four causation theories;26 that classification ultimately dates back to

the writings of Fa-tsang. The four are (1) causation by action-influence, or

karmacausation, (2) causation by the ideation-store, or ilayavijniinacausation,

(3) causation by thusness, tathatd, or, better, by the womb of the Buddha,

tathigatagarbha-causation, and (4) causation by the Universal Principle, or

Dharmadhdtucausation. These are not four separate theories but rather each

higher one incorporates the lower one(s) within itself.

The first, yeh-kan yiian-ch'it, is rather straightforward. All realities are due

to action producing necessary reactions. As such, it is not particularlyBuddhist

since all Hindus would subscribe to it. However, Chinese often lump thisoutlook on the Hinayana school (on the assumption that the higher theories,

beginning with ilayavijnana causation of Yogacara, are beyond Hinayana).

Karma causation is not the same as causation in classical Western physics.

There is no beginning and no end to samsira, that is, no firstcause, no telos

as with Aristotle. Since the chain of rebirth is circular, every stage is a cause

when viewed from its effect, while it is also an effect of an anticedant cause.27

In that general sense, cause and effect blend together. It may then be said

that there is a cause in the effect, and an effect in the cause. Strictly speaking,

the satkaryavdda position (effects preexist in causes) usually is denied by

Buddhism, although it does come into its fold.

Next is the ilaya(vijndana)causation of the Yogacara school lai-yeh yuan-

ch'iu. We will not find any corresponding compound like alaya (vijniina)

pratTtyasamutpadan Sanskrit. The term causation in alaya causation is actuallyused in the liberal sense that Miyamoto suggested earlier,namely, its originationtraced to a source in the alayavijntna, the storehouse consciousness. Takakusu

gives a rather general explanation why consciousness or mind is selected.

"Actions (karma) are divided into threegroups,

i.e., thoseby

the body, those

by speech and those by volition .... But the mind being the inmost recess of

all actions, the causation ought to be attributed to the mind-store or Ideation

store [alayavijndina]"italics mine).29 It seems that Takakusu, in his explana-

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 10: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 10/25

249

tion, recalls the favorite Shingon (Mantrayana) theme of "body, speech, and

mind" and associates alayavijn'dnareely with the centrality of mind-karma in

the first verse of the Dharmapada.30 The reason why the Chinese created

alayavijndanaausation as a causation theory is due to the recognition that, in

the Yogacara system, the origin of all illusions (and enlightenment too) is

traced to certain seeds(bUjas)

n thealayavijiina.

These seeds lie in the

alayavijniina,and sprout into the object-realm, which in turn influences the

mind by planting a new seed ... in an endless process of mutual dependence.31

Although there is no explicit alayavijnianaausation theory in Indian Mahayana

philosophy (sastra), as such it still can be accepted as a legitimate inference

from Yogacara. However, it is in the last two types of causation that we see

something that Fa-tsangv of the Hua-yen school discovered. These two types

are unknown to Indian schools. These two are unique to sinitic Mahayana

and deserve our scrutiny.

Tathata causation or tathigatagarbhacausation is the next causation which ishigher than that of ilayavijndana.Just as karma is traced, according to the

Chinese, to the mind or consciousness, the alayavijnina too has its basis in

tathata (thusness, suchness) or the tathigatagarbha (womb of the Buddha,

matrix of the Thus-come, embryonic buddhahood). This is how Takakusu

explains it:

Thusness [the noumenon] in its static sense is spaceless, timeless, all-equal,without beginning or end, formless, colorless, because the thing itself withoutits manifestation cannot be sensed or described. Thusness in its dynamic sense

can assume any form; when driven by a pure cause it takes a lofty form; whendriven by a tainted cause it takes on a depraved form. Thusness, therefore, isof two states. The one is the Thusness itself; the other is its manifestation, itsstate of life and death.32

Thusness causation, therefore, means that from out of the static noumenon

itself, the phenomenal life and death arise. Because it traces the root of reality,

the origin of all things, beyond the alayavijniina(considered in this scheme as

corresponding to a phenomenal consciousness),33 to thusness itself, it is

regarded, therefore, as superior to alayavijnina causation and is known as

ju-lai-tsang yiuan-ch'iw r chen-juyiian-ch'iX,34ausation, or better, origination

from the womb of the Buddha (ju-lai-tsang, tathigatagarbha) or thusness

(chen-ju,tathati, also translated as suchness).

The person who first discovered this theory was Fa-tsang. He found it

basically in the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, a work suspected to be a

Chinese fabrication. Takakusu's description of thusness given earlier draws

basically upon the Awakening of Faith, where it is said:

The (Suchness) Mind has two gates: the gate of Suchness and the gate of

samsira. The Mind as phenomena (samsadra)s grounded on the tathagata-garbha.What is called the alayavijniina s that in which "neither life nor death"

(nirvana) fuses with "life and death" (samsira) in a neither-identical-nor-differentiated manner.35

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 11: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 11/25

250 Lai

I have demonstrated, elsewhere, that Fa-tsang was clearly influenced by the

Taoist paradox of active inactivity (wu-wei erh wu-pu-weiy)as well as by the

logic in the I Ching (Book of Changes).36The Buddhist absolute, tathati, was

apparently seen as something similar to the TaoZ: in one aspect, static; in

another, dynamic. Just as the Chinese would see all activities as emerging out

of a primordial passivity (the Tao produces all things), the tathata causationtheory, regarded as a more profound causation, also is seen to be proposing

that life-and-death emerged from out of the static noumenal suchness itself.

There is no comparable (explicit) theory in Indian Mahayana. In fact, generally

the Indian Buddhist schools would state that Dharmata (tathata) supports

phenomena; it does not create phenomena.37 Tathatd causation as developed

by the Chinese would find a closer affinitywith the bhedibheda Vedantaschool

in Hinduism, which regards all things as somehow being generated from

Brahman (the India counterpart to the Taoist idea of Tao).38 The Chinese

Buddhist, however, would legitimatize their interpretation by finding supportin Buddhist scriptures like the SrTmalditra (Sheng-men-chingaa).

Therefore, O Lord, the tathdgatagarbhais the foundation, the support, thesubstratum of the immutable Buddha-dharmas which are essentially connectedwith, indivisible from (the Absolute) and unreleased from wisdom. [Similarly,it the tathdgatagarbhas the foundation etc.] of the worldly dharmas,producedby cause and conditions, which are by all means disconnected, differentiated

(from the Absolute) and separate from wisdom.39

Yet,it can be shown that the

Srlmaiisitra did not

supporta

theoryof the

tathigatagarbha creating the phenomenal realities or causing them to come

into being as the Chinese would see it. It only supports hem in an epistemological

way, that is, the mind is the seat of enlightenment as well as of nonenlighten-ment.40 Basing himself upon the controversial Awakening of Faith, Fa-tsangcame up with a theory of tathdgatagarbhacausation.

In the Awakening of Faith, there is a key metaphor that eventuallyprompted

Fa-tsang to see an identificationof cause and effect. That metaphor lies at the

heart of the third and fourth causation theories in the Chinese review of

causationism. That metaphor, henceforth on the lips of oriental Buddhistscompared the relationship between Suchness and phenomenal realities to the

relationship between water and the waves.

All forms of mind and consciousness are products of ignorance. Forms of

ignorance do not exist apart from the essence of enlightenment. They cannotbe destroyed and yet they cannot be not destroyed. This is like the water of thesea being stirred up by the wind.... So too it is with the innately pure mindof sentient beings. The wind of ignorance stirs it. The pure mind [water]and

ignorance were [originally] formless. [Now] the two [mind and form of

ignorance, water and wave] are inseparable.41

Using this metaphor, found in the Awakening of Faith, Fa-tsang was able to

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 12: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 12/25

251

argue that the phenomenal world [waves that rise and fall, analogy to life and

death, samsara] is generated out of Suchness [the water]. Fa-tsang went on to

underline that in essence, the two are not different-waves are still water. The

implication of this interpretation was very great for subsequent Chinese

Buddhist philosophies (especially, Ch'an),42 but in this discussion we will

only underline its ramifications for the Chinese understanding of causationism.

The water is the cause (strictly speaking, the material cause) and the waves

are the result. The wind that ruffles the water plays the role of the efficient

cause (in Aristotelian terms) or the condition, concomitant factor (pratyaya).Since the Awakeningof Faith says that the wetness of the water is not changedwhether it be static (water) or dynamic (wave), Fa-tsang said that the nature

of Suchness (the water's wetness) is none other than, or fully present in,

phenomena (the waves). "Chen-jusui-yiianpu-pienab:Suchness follows pratyaya

(the wind) without changing its essence" was the credo of suchness causation.43

The waves (phenomena) are none other than the water (noumena). It alsofollows that, when Fa-tsang applied this to his understanding of causation,

cause (water) and result (waves) are simultaneously present or coexisting,

ontologically fluid and intrinsically nondual (advaya). From this emerged the

very fascinating Hua-yen doctrine of totalistic simultaneity that can be found

in articles one, five and nine in the "Ten (Hua-yen) Mysteries or Profound

Theories" completed by Fa-tsang. I will cite again from Takakusu primarilyfor his relative availability.

1. The theory of co-relation, in which all things have co-existence and simul-taneous rise. All are co-existent not only in relation to space but also in relationto time. There is no distinction of past, present and future, each of them beinginclusive of the other. Distinct as they are and separated as they seem to be intime, all beings are united to make one entity-from the universal point ofview.5. The theory of complementarility by which the hidden and the manifestedwill make the whole by mutual supply. If one is inside, the other will be outside,or vice versa. Both complementing each other will complete one unity.9. The theory of 'variously completing then time-periods creating one entity.'Each of past, present and future contains three periods, thus making up nine

periods which altogether form one period-nine and one, ten periods in all.The ten periods, all distinct yet mutually penetrating, will complete the one-in-all principle ....44

All these contributed to the Hua-yen doctrine of simultaneity, t'ung-shihac.All

phenomena are t'ung-shihtun-ch'd, arising together at the same time, wu-aiae,

with no obstruction between one another, and hu-sheaf, subsuming each in

each, completely and wholly.The first articleproposes the simultaneous appearance of and correspondence

between cause (hetu) and effect (phala). The fifth article, influenced by the I

Ching tradition of the latent and the manifested, applies the same to the

complementation of the hidden (organic germ) and the actualized (fruit,

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 13: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 13/25

252 Lai

result) in their yin-yangag harmony. The ninth article followed the T'ien-t'ai

practice of creating a square of the number three (3 x 3) to produce nine,

which united in a One, forms the favored round number of ten (the perfect

number) in the Hua-yen world view. What is significanthere, for our concern,

is the curious interpresence of past, future, present in each other (3 x 3) and

all nine in one(the

final absolute inclusivetenth).

We can feel thathere,

in the

elimination of temporal sequence Fa-tsang was reasserting the organistic,

noncausative, native Chinese outlook outlined in the beginning of this essay.

(The elimination of spatial distinctions can be found in articles two, six, and

seven; the rest deal more with quality and quantity.45)

ACAUSATIONISM:THE MADHYAMIKACONTRIBUTION

I would like to return,at thisjunction, to the issue of the conflict and confluence

of Indian Buddhist and Chinese native assessment of time, and the curious

fate of pratTtyasamutpddan sinitic Mahayana at its peak.We said that Gautama very innovatively departed from a simple cause-effect

temporal sequence by interpolating the key component of pratyaya, auxiliarycondition or concomitant factor between cause and effect. The classical

formulation is that "A being present, B happens." Craving being present,

suffering happens. From an early date, there was a debate on whether the

chain of causation (usually twelve in number from ignorance through cravingsto life and death) involves time sequence. The usual classification is to regardit as spanning past, present, and future. (Takakusu made this clear by seeingtwo past causes, five present effects, three present causes, and two future

effects leading back to rebirth and a full circle.46) There were others who

argued that the twelve chains occur in a ksana, a split second. They would

deny that there was craving earlier and therefore there is now suffering, but

admit that there being craving, there is suffering. The denial of the reality of

past, present, and futureby the Mahasafighika,which influenced the Mahayana

and the Madhyamika school, is crucial in the abolition of time sequence, that

is, the discrete past, present, and future as held by the Sarvastivadins.

Nagarjuna of the Madhyamika school showed, through his dialectics, theemptiness of the concretized realities of past, present, and future. Since he

apparently had no positive statement, it is hard to say what his position on

time was. His position after all was to have no position. Because of his criticism

of time sequentialism, Nagarjuna was regarded by scholars as not proposingthe usual causation scheme. It is from a writing attributed to him, rightly or

wrongly, that the Chinese derived the theory (found, for example, in T'ien-t'ai)that the three times are one: san-shih i-shihah.47The Chinese harmonizing

tendency or love for a final complementary Oneness is innate to the T'ien-t'ai

understanding of Madhyamika for its own purpose. The transformation

discussed may be depicted in the following manner:

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 14: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 14/25

253

Gautama's Nagarjuna's Chih-i'saiinterpolation emphasis on appropriationofpratyaya > interdependence of Nagarjuna:between cause (paraspardpeksa) the harmonismand effect. of the three times. of the three times.

tAbsence of cause a biogenerative the fluidity

and effect concepts > sequential model >and harmony ofin China. of origin and end origin and end

There is, I think, an important difference between interdependence and

harmonism. Things can be mutually dependent without necessarily adding upto a whole, to a unity. Yin-yang harmonism, however, implies this oneness

through complementation. It can be seen that this sense of oneness or harmonyin T'ien-t'ai was derived unconsciously more from the native Chinese cosmic

monism than from Nagarjuna who might not agree with such a theory of

mutual penetration.In this sinicization process, however, Chinese Buddhists incorporated

something which was alien to their own world view: namely, the notion of

immediate identity, hsiang-chiai (A = B). Reserving this issue for another

detailed discussion, I can only briefly, if somewhat dogmatically, state this:

the Chinese had the notion that the many emerged from the one. The One is

the origin (pen); the many, born of the one, is the end (mo). The origin and

the end, the one and the many are not disjointed like cause and effect, but fluid

like the Great Tao and myriad things. Yet, prior to the Buddhist, there was

not a native theory that claimed that the Many is immediately identical with

the One or that Being is immediately Nonbeing. The evidence seems to show

show that the Chinese Buddhist initiated this mutual identity concept.48 Yet,

paradoxically, it would be difficult to find Indian Buddhists saying that Beingis Nonbeing (Sat isAsat) or that the One is the Many in any logical/philosophical(as distinct from inspirational/scriptural) context. How then did the philosophyof immediate identity (hsiang-chi)begin in China?

It began with a particular Chinese translation of the prajrnparamiti sitra,

especially in Kumarajiva'schoice of the word chi-shihak as the copula that hasto be interpolated in the translation of "rupam iunyameva" (form [is] empty

only).49 The Chinese word for "is"-namely, chi-shih-is not requiredin San-

skritin this instance. Apparently, the Buddhistusages such as samsira is nirvana

or form is emptiness introduced a strength or magnitude of meaning (signifying

symmetrical identity), perhaps not available in earlier usage of the Chinese chi

(which usually means, that is, as in "A, that is, B"). Now A is B: A B.

Nagarjuna's exposition of the prajniparamitdsitra's insight into the emptinessof all things is known as the first nondual philosophy in India. This nondualityis generally used intentionally to negate and not to affirm: that is, thingsneither come nor go, are neither the same nor different. Only in a special

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 15: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 15/25

254 Lai

context, when this neither/nor logic is applied to the whole of wholes, to

Dharmata as suinyata,nirvana as samsara, nama-rupaas sunya, would it mean

a philosophy of total symmetrical identity (A B).50 A kind of monism of

intent, of intuitive insight, or of didactic negatation of Hinayana dualism is

then proposed. Chinese Buddhists, however, extended its usage, and we beginto hear of the One is the

Two, Beingis

Nonbeing,the One is the

Many,and

in our discussion here, the Water is the Wave, the Substance is the Function,

the Origin is the End, the Cause is the Effect, the Part is the Whole. Some of

these would be too extravagant to Indian logicians.51Now if we follow the early Taoist pen-mo logic in which total identity is not

involved, it would be more proper to say, with reference to the Awakeningof

Faith, that the passive water (pen) was in time ruffled up by the wind. Initial

passivity preceded the mo, activity. However, that would not be in the best

tradition of the Buddhist mutual identity theory. It is to the credit of the

commentator Wonhyo (Yiian-hsiaoal) that he underlined firmly the paradoxthat (1) the wind of ignorance has no beginning, therefore one cannot saythat at one time there was pacificity before the advent of activity, and (2) the

whole body of the water as one unit moves, that is, not just the surface of it as

if the substance or the pen remains immobile. In other words, there might be a

logical priority of passivity but there is not a chronological priority. Thus

Wonhyo says,

... the whole body of water moves, therefore the water is not separate from

the form of the wind [the wave-form].52... The forms of samsara [like the wet waves] are none other than the en-lightened essence [the wet water] .... The immutableMind itself is one withmutability. It is not mutability fuses with immutability.53

This unity of activity and passivity should be underlined because the same

notion occurred later in Neo-Confucian thought as the idea of activity and

passivity having one source (tung-chingi-yiianam).54 The Buddhist elimination

of a naive concept of time sequence (that is, the logic of pen-mo, or there is the

passive origin and then comes the active end) and the substitution of a para-doxical unity of passivity and activity in one substance is significant because

it introduces into Chinese thought, not just the notion of spatial identity (chi,as just mentioned) but also temporal simultaneity or spontaneity. The latter

led to the fourth theory of Dharmadhatu Causation, spontaneous generationof the universe in every split second-a theory unknown to India and more

extravagant than traditional Chinese cosmogonic pen-mo theories. In the

Dharmadhatu Causation, the One is immediately identical to and is spon-

taneously the Many.We may summarize the preceding discussion on the Indian contribution to

native Chinese outlook in the production of sinitic Mahayana notion of time

and causality in the following way: Indian Buddhist thought, directly or

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 16: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 16/25

255

indirectly, introduced to the Chinese the notion of (1) immediate identity, (2)

transtemporal simultaneity, (3) interdependence or matrix-relationship.The following diagram shows how the Indian Madhyamika influence and

the Chinesepen-momonism were synthesized into the Dharmadhatu Causation

theory:

MadhyamikaIndian contribution:

-identity

-simultaneitytotal-matrix of

dependence

Chinese native

cosmogonic view:"From the passive one

comes the active Manyin harmony."Substantive Monism.

[sequential; finite]

Dharmadhatu

causation:

"The One is the Many,

simultaneously active

and passive, each

generating itself and

all others in splitsecond." [non-

sequential; infinite]

I will explain below what Dharmadhatu Causation is, reserving the historical

issues for the last section of this essay.

THE CROWN OF CAUSATION: DHARMADHATU CAUSATION

Dharmadhatu Causation is so extravagant in conception that logical languageor explanation sometimes cannot depict it as well as analogies, metaphors, or

diagrams (especially mandala). Dharmadhatuis the realm of the Dharma, the

absolute, transcendental reality which, like the tathigatagarbha described

earlier, has both the noumenal and the phenomenal aspect. Takakusu calls it

the Universal Principle. He writes:

Buddhism holds that nothing was created singly or individually [but throughpratyaya, always with one another]. All things in the universe-matter andmind-arose simultaneously, all things in it depending upon one another, theinfluence of each mutually permeating and thereby making a universal sym-phony of harmonious totality. If one item were lacking, the universe wouldnot be complete; without the rest, one item cannot be. When the whole cosmosarrives at a harmony of perfection, it is called the 'Universal One and True,'or the 'Lotus Store.' In this ideal universe all beings will be in perfect harmony,each finding no obstruction in the existence and activity of another.55

As usual, the Dharmadhatu Causation subsumes all the previous causation

theories within itself. It is "the climax of all the causation theories; it is actuallythe conclusion of the theory of causal origination [pratTtya-samutpdda]nd is

already within the theory of universal immanence, pansophism, cosmotheism,

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 17: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 17/25

256 Lai

or whatever it may be called."56 The reader who finds it hard to picture what

these mean should perhaps imagine the scene of "all beings, from the highestto the lowest, are parts of one and the same Mandala."57 The world view here

is not static but extremely dynamic, not finite but infinite. Pascal's line-"the

center being everywhere, the circumference nowhere"-describing the awe-

inspiring and intimidating Infinite that threatened his ego, would beappro-priate. However, for the Buddhist, it would be a leap of joy to behold the

endless world of light. (Had Pascal only let go of his self 58) This is because

in the Dharmadhatu, everything can be the center, the whole, the One that

absorbs within itself the essence of all other entities, "like the net of Indra,where one jewel reflects all others," or comparable to the realm of the stars in

Plotinus, where one star captures the light of all other stars.59 Takakusu

describes the implications for causation:

It is the causation by all beings themselves and is the creation of the universeitself, or we can call it the causation by the common action-influence [karma]of all beings. Intensively considered, the universe will be a manifestation ofThusness or the Matrix of Tathagata (Thus come). But extensively consideredit is the causation of the universe by the universe itself and nothing more.60

It is an endless causation or ontogenesis of the universe in all its parts in a

mysteriously concerted manner of mutual influence and penetration. One has

to visualize something like a spontaneous, instantaneous, never-ceasing,

self-generating universe to catch a glimpse of Dharmadhatu causation.

How is this causation superior to the tathigatagarbhacausation that precedesit? The water-and-wave metaphor may be a very good illustration of their

differences and relationship. In the tathdgatagarbha causation, the water

(tathati, the noumenal) generates the waves (the phenomenal samsdra)throughthe action of the wind of beginningless ignorance. It is said that the water and

the waves are one in substance, in being wet and watery. The principle of the

identity of the noumenal and the phenomenal, in a causatively immediate

manner, was established. (This is different from the dictum, "samsdra is

nirvana,nirvana is samsara," which by itself does not involve causality.) The

wave is water; the water, in toto, moves as waves. The universal water and theparticular individual waves are one.

Dharmadhatu Causation, however, is not satisfied with just this identifi-

cation. It asks: What about the identity of one wave with all the other waves,and one drop of water with the whole body of water? It, therefore, goes one

step further to establish the principle of the interpenetration of every particularwave with all other particularwaves, individually or as a whole. This is known,in the Hua-yen scheme, as the shih-shihwu-aian. phenomenal fact and fact are

not obstructed. This is the basic new ideology of the One-is-All-All-is-One

philosophy.61 One is All is like the reflection of a candle in a hall of mirrors:

the one light is reflected in all the mirrors, and all mirrors reflect one another

in an infinite manner. All is One is like the telescoping of all the mirror images

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 18: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 18/25

257

into a crystal ball placed in the center. Fa-tsang, it is said, actually used these

two means to demonstrate to Empress Wu the mystery of this new world

view.62 Readers can also turn to his sermon on the Golden Lion for another

exposition of the same.63

THE SOURCE OR INSPIRATION FOR THE DHARMADHATUCAUSATION

Indian Mahayana philosophy (sistra) does not know of a Dharmadhatu

causation theory. That theory is derived from a creative Chinese reading of

the Buddhist sitras. Already the tathdgatagarbhacausation-based on the

Awakening of Faith-points toward this higher theory of Dharmadhatu

causation. Fa-tsang of the Hua-yen school had discovered this theory within

the scriptural (sutra) tradition, particularly, the Hua-yen or Avatamsakasitra.

The superiority of the Dharmadhatu theory over the tathdgatagarbha ausation

theory lies in the new insight into the extreme mystery that the part is the

whole, that the One is the All.In the English language, there is one essay on the Hua-yen sutra by D. T.

Suzuki on "The Gandavyiha."64 The Gandavyuhadepicts the pilgrimage of

Sudhana under the direction of Mafijusri. The pilgrim finally encounters

Samantabhadra. The Gandavyiuhas an independent work in Sanskrit that

forms now the last chapter of the 80-chapter Chinese Hua-yen (Avatamsaka)sutra. The pilgrimage of Sudhana leads eventually to the Dharmadhatu,the

ultimate realm of reality. The Gan.davytuhas thus known also as dharmad-

hitupravesa, ju fa-chieh p'iena?, enteringinto the realm of the dharma. I will

select two metaphors in the Dharmadhatu-vision to illustrate what this ultimate

realm is like. One metaphor is that of light or total luminosity. Suzuki's studydescribes this well:

Therefore, the Dharmadhatu is a world of lights not accompanied by anyform of shade. The essential nature of light is to intermingle without interferringor obstructing or destroying one another. One single light reflects in itself allother lights generally and individually.65

The intermingling of one and all, singly and totally, is precisely the motif basicto the notion of Dharmadhatu Causation, the realization of the One as the

All, and vice versa.

Sudhana, the pilgrim, journeyed toward the world of the infinite until he

came face to face with Samanthabhadra. Eventually, like in Plotinus' descrip-tion of the ascent of the soul, the seer (Sudhana) and the seen (Samantabhadra)

merged into one. Sudhana literally expanded in his physicospiritual stature

until he became one with the highly luminous body of the cosmic Buddha.66

This theme of an enlightened person (in fact, all enlightened persons, buddhas)

being an emanation of the cosmic Buddha can be seen in an early Mahayana

siutra, he Lotus sfitra. In the Avatamsakasutra, this theme is given the ultimate

expression.

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 19: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 19/25

258 Lai

All these Bodhisattvas from the ten quarters of the world together with theirretinues are born of the life and vows of Samantabhadra the Bodhisattva ....

they are also able to expand their own bodies to the end of the universe ... theyreveal in each particle of dust all the worlds, singly and generally... emittinga deep, full sound form every pore of the skin, which reverberatesthroughoutthe universe... By means of their pure wisdom-eye they see all Buddhas ofthe past, present and future....67

This uncanny scene defies all our normal senses of dimension or time. Re-

peatedly we see the description that in every dust particle (the smallest) are

millions and millions of buddha-worlds (the infinite). Repeatedly we are

confronted with Sudhana's observation, that in every pore of the skin of the

Buddha, there are millions and millions of buddha-worlds. It is as if one has

stepped into a shadowless world of supreme luminosity and is confronted with

the impossible: that the smallest is immediately the greatest and vice versa.

That world is the world of the Dharmadhatu. It is based on this vision in thescripture and not on any formal philosophical doctrine of Indian Mahayanathinkers that we know of, that the Hua-yen school of Fa-tsang developed the

final theory of causation: Dharmadhatu Causation. (Sometimes the Esoteric

schools tops it with its own causation of the Five Elements but the crown of

causationism really belongs to Hua-yen.68)

However, philosophically and historically, the Dharmadhatu causation

passed through some key doctrinal hurdles before it became articulated. As

may be evident in our previous description, one of the characteristics of

Dharmadhatu Causation is that it is self-generative, autogenetic. Each of the

particular entities initiated its own emanative evolution. Fa-tsang referred to

this as hsing-ch'i, essence arousal or causation due to the Dharmata in itself.The Absolute is so absolute that it requires no external help to generate causal

phenomena. This means, in effect, that the Absolute requires no pratyaya,concomitant factors or auxiliary conditions, since it is its own generator. In

other words, strictly speaking, the Dharmadhatu Causation is no longer

yiian-ch'i, dependent coorigination (pratTtyasamutpaida)ut is hsing-ch'i, or

independent self-origination. Indeed, Fa-tsang intended hsing-ch'i to besuperior to yiian-ch'i,just as he intended Dharmadhatu causation to be superiorto tathdgatagarbhacausation.

At this point I will briefly review the latter. In the latter, tathata as water is

churned into waves of phenomena under the stimulation, that is, the condition,

(pratyaya) of the wind of ignorance. The absolute, tathata, still requirescondition (the wind) and still depends on something other than itself to become

creative. Not satisfied with this dependent status, Fa-tsang produced the

theory of hsing-ch'i. the self-arousal of the absolute into the realm of the

relative, the interpenetration of Dharmadhatu into Lokadhatu, by its ownvolition and without external help-especially not the wind of avidya, ignor-ance. In the world of light, light should be its own source of being. Once more,

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 20: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 20/25

259

Fa-tsang found in the Hua-yen sutra a justification of this new theory of

self-generation. Fa-tsang based this new theory on Ju-lai hsing-ch'iaP, he title

of chapter 32 of the 40 chapter of the Hua-yen sutra, benefitting from the

particular choice of Chinese words used in the translation. The Sanskrit

original is, as Takasaki Jikid6 has shown, Tathdgatotpattisambhava.

Here "utpatti" means the birth of the Buddha, i.e., the attainment of bodhi,while "sambhava" is used to show the manifestation of the dharmakiya invarious forms of the Buddha's activities. The former signifies Buddha's Wisdom

(ijnana)while the latter signifies Buddha's Compassion (karuna).69

Hsing-ch'i in its original Sanskrithas nothing whatsoever to do with a causation

'theory concerning the Dharmata's self-generating power of creation.

However, Hsing-ch'i can imply the awakening of the Buddha-essence in

man, and it would correspond to the concept of the arousal of the bodhicitta,

the mind of enlightenment. Hsing-ch'i was understood in that subjective,

meditative sense as the awakening of the Buddha-germ in man, by the firsttwo patriarchs of the Hua-yen school, Tu-shun (557-640) and Chih-yen

(602-668). The third patriarch, Fa-tsang, cosmicized and objectified this idea

of awakeningthe Buddha-germ.He reinterpretedthe germ, the tathagatagarbha,in ontological terms. The arousal of one's innate germ of enlightenment, the

Buddha-nature, now became the generation of the phenomenal realm from

the Dharma-essence.The germ became a kind of cosmic womb like the Mother

of all things in Taoism.

In thisway, Fa-tsang

institutedDharamadhdtu-causation,a-chieh yuan-chiaq. In it, the absolute dharmata(dharma-essence, Fa-hsingar),representing

the noumenal, generates, out of itself, causative phenomenon (yiian-ch'i). The

synthesis offa-hsing and yiian-ch'i thus produces hsing-ch'ias.Fa-tsang, there-

fore, synthesized Yogacara (yian-ch'i) and Madhyamika (shih-hsiang), and

Hua-yen could therefore claim to be the one Mind Only Causation (wei-hsin

yiian-ch'i)school.

SUMMARY

This article has surveyed the development of causative understanding, begin-ning with the classical doctrine of pratltyasamutpida, culminating in the

Hua-yen doctrine of Dharmadhatu Causation. The extent of coverage does

not permit, at times, clarifications on minute points. I hope, nevertheless, that

I have made the Chinese hierarchical classification hierarchical rationale of

Causation Theories-however esoteric and idiosyncratic it might appear on

first reading-intelligible and accountable. The esoteric Hua-yen outlooks are

not irrational; even its mysteries contain a rationale.

The presentation here does not seek to prove how Chinese misunderstood

pratityasamutpdda,but how creatively and ingeniously they had understood it

through retrospection and adopted it for their own particular independent

expression. The end product is sinitic Mahayana, a term I have coined to

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 21: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 21/25

260 Lai

designatea sinicizedMahayana hat remains aithful o the Dharma, he Lawor Truth,that wasnevermeant to be an Indianmonopoly.

All the finer points aside, the transformationof the pratTtyasamutpiidatheorycan be saidto be this:Gautama'sdiscoveryof theprincipleofpratrtya-samutpiidawithin an Indo-European ausativecontext was transposed ntothe Chinese

biogenerativeramework.The IndianBuddhist

core conceptofconcomitancy(the pratyaya-factorbetween 'mechanical'entities)has beentransformedn Chinainto thatof a cosmic and organicharmony.The rathertechnicalSanskritdependentcooriginationbecame,finally,the spontaneousautogenesis f theOne andtheAll, ajoyouscelebration f a (Taoist)animatedor animisticuniverse.From India, China learned the paradoxof identity,nonduality,relationality,and the timelesspresent.To these she contributedher nativeassumptionsof harmony,unity, fluidity,and a basic worldliness.

Together, he two culturesproduceda uniquevision of the infiniteabsolute,

within a uniquehistoryof faithfillingold bottleswithnewwine.

NOTES

1. Karl Potter, Presuppositionsin Indian Philosophies (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,

1963), pp. 93-116.

2. Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1956), pp. 271, 280-289.

3. The philosopher Hume had leveled his criticism against causalism precisely on the ambi-

guities involved in this assumption of rarifiedentities.

4. This phenomenon has been expressed in terms of the aesthetical continuum by the philo-

sopher Filmer Stuart Cuckow Northrop.5. God is not continuous with his creation in the Biblical view, and even in Aristotle, the First

Mover or Cause is unmoved or uncaused. However, Needham's thesis that the notion of "natural

law" in Science in the West was a result of Western theism oversimplifies the issues; Needham,Science and Civilizationin China, pp. 563-574.

6. The Han Confucian cosmologists like Tung Chung-shu"tor the Taoist writers of Huai-nan-

tzu"a both subscribed to this generalnotion of cosmic evolution from the one to the many. However,

it was with the Neo-Taoists that the practice of treasuringthepen and repressingthe mo, chung-pen

ch'u-moa, began.7. As with the term pao-yingaw,also meaning retribution, yin-kuo designates the mysterious

autogenetic process of natural consequence. Both terms are affiliated with the notion of kan-ying,stimulus and response, in Han thought.

8. On the definition of sinitic Mahayana, see Whalen Lai, "The Emergenceof Sinitic Mahayana:T'ien-t'ai," paper read at the Association for Asian Studies conference at Toronto, 1976.

9. On the formation of the Hua-yen review of all the Buddhist traditions leading up to itself,see Fa-tsang's Wu-chiao-chang T. 45, no. 1866).

10. For a short discussion, see especially Wing-tsit Chan's A Source Book in ChinesePhilosophy

(Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, 1963), p. 570, fn. 124; for details, see Imai Usaburo,

Sodai Ekigaku no Kenkyui Tokyo, Meiji, 1958). See also Chan's general remarks, Source Book,pp. 406-408. However, his statement that in Neo-Confucian philosophy, "the universe is ... dailyrenewed. This creative element is lacking in the Universal Causation [Dharmadhatu Causation]of Hua-yen," should be taken with the following qualification. Dharmadhatu Causation does not

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 22: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 22/25

261

subscribe to the I Ching notion of sheng-shengba,produce and reproduce, but it is extremely

dynamic, ceaselessly generative.

11. I am grateful for corrections and suggestions given by Prof. Kalupahana to this study.12. The essay, in English, is in Studies in Indologyand Buddhologypresented in honor of Prof.

S. Yamaguchi (Kyoto, 1955).13. See Karl Potter, Presuppositionsin IndianStudies, pp. 117-144.

14. The Four Noble Truths are given within the framework of pratitya-samutpida.

There is suffering. B

There is the cause of suffering. A oc B

There is the cessation of suffering. -A

There is the path to the cessation of suffering. -A oc -B

15. Miyamoto, Studies in Indologyand Buddhology, p. 156.

16. Gautama was known to avoid metaphysical issues not condusive to the task to eliminate

the pathology (nidina) of suffering, but his theory of pratityasamutpadaas a theory of the Middle

Path seems to, if not consciously, then unconsciously, offer a philosophical alternative to other

options.17. Miyamoto, Studies in Indologyand Buddhology, p. 153.

18. See Whalen Lai, "The Awakening of Faith in Mahayana: A Study of the Unfolding ofSinitic Motifs," (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard, 1975). The second so-called translation of the

Awakening of Faith apparently avoided, in one place, that usage of the termyin-yuanin recognitionof the Chinese license.

19. I would not regard the Chinese understanding as a distortion but as a structural transmu-

tation of the intention of pratTtyasamutpddan a new cultural context. Christianity underwent

similar transformations in Rome.

20. For example, there are four types of pratyaya; see Kalupahana, Causality.21. The concern for causality and fate and its opposite, liberation from causal determinism,

could have been the philosophical expression of a historical, existential awareness of the tension

between necessity andfreedom in the medieval Weltzeit. Generally, classical philosophies are not

alert to this tension, being at home with physis, Tao, etc.22. See T. R. V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism(London, Allen & Unwin, 1955),

p. 49. The term relativity upset many oriental Buddhologists who came out of the Chinese San-lun

tradition of emphasizing the absolute void (atyanta-sunyata) as pi-ching-k'ungbb;the void in

Chinese San-lun is a nondependent void. On the sinicization of Madhyamika in China, see my"The Intended Meaning of the Term 'ch'eng-shihbC,' Hypothesis," (1976, submitted to Indogaku

Bukky6gaku Kenkyi) and Th. Stcherbatsky, The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana (Leningrad:

Academy of Science of the USSR, 1927).23. Yogacara developed the Two Truths theory of Nagarjuna into its own Three Truths/

Perspectives. The following is a concise summary:

a. perception of a rope as empty of perspective A: intuition into the

self-nature. reality-as-it-is, tathati.b. everyday perception of a rope as a perspective B (paratantra): subject-object

rope, nominal reality, realistic perception.c. misperception of a rope (in the dark) as perspective C: misperception, the object is

a snake. an illusion.

See T. Stcherbatsky, Discourse on Discrimination betweenMiddleand Extremes (Moscow, 1936),and Chan, Source Book, pp. 393-395.

24. See Whalen Lai, "The Meaning of Mind Only (Wei-hsin)", Philosophy East and West 22,no. 1 (Jan., 1977): 65-83.

25. Nagarjuna, on the other hand, clearly identified his philosophy of the Middle Path (Mad-

hyamika) with causationism itself; see his Madhyamika-kdrikds ncluded in Frederick J. Streng,

Emptiness(Nashville,Tenn.:

Abingdon, 1956).26. Takakusu, (Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press, 1947), pp. 23-36.

27. Takakusu, Essentials in BuddhistPhilosophy, p. 28.

28. Satkiryavdda holds that the effect is preexistent in the cause; see Karl Potter, Presuppositions

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 23: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 23/25

262 Lai

in IndianStudies, p. 106, and earlier discussion in this essay.29. Takakusu, Essentials, p. 31.

30. Dhammapdda, rans. P. L. Vaidya (Poona, 1934); see first verse, p. 53. All realities are said

to be of the mind, the doer of good and evil.

31. Takakusu, Essentials, p. 32. See Chan, Source Book, pp. 370-395, esp. p. 371.

32. Takakusu, Essentials, p. 34.

33. On how consciousness, shihbd,became relegated to the realm of phenomena and below the

chen-juhsinbe,Thusness or Suchness Mind, see my "The I Chingand the Formation of the Hua-yen Philosophy," forthcoming Journal of Chinese Philosophy.

34. Actually, Fa-tsang used only the termju-lai-tsang yiian-ch'i but modern Japanese Buddho-

logists have learned to use the more liberal chen-ju yiian-ch'i term instead. That modem practice

might be dated back to usages in the Yoshino period in late Kamakura Japan. Strictly speaking,

ju-lai-tsang is not always symmetrically identical with chen-ju, for the dynamic tathdgatagarbha

responsible for the causation is tsai-fu chen-jubf"in bondage to phenomena." Only upon its release,is it truly chen-ju,tathatd.

35. See Hakeda, trans. Awakening of Faith in Mahayana (New York: Columbia University

Press, 1967), p. 36. The Chinese original is somewhat ingeniously ambiguous and much lies behind

the nuance of the terms hsin sheng-miehbg the Mind in its phenomenal aspect) and the sheng-mieh

hsinbh the phenomenal mind) and theirrelationship with the tathagatagarbhaand the alayavijnina.36. See my "The I Chingand the Formation of the Hua-yen Philosophy."37. The position here is that of Hsiian-tsangbi, representing (in my mind) the more orthodox

Indian position, but it was attacked by Fa-tsang.38. According to the bheddbhedaVedantins, Brahman (the Absolute) and the phenomenal

world are neither same nor different; the source of reality lies with Brahman. The Chinese Taoist

would also see reality as coming out of the Tao. Thus when Fa-tsang moved towards the Taoist

outlook, he unknowingly moved close to the bheddbhedaVedantins.

39. See Alex and Hideko Wayman, The Lion's Roar of the QueenSrTmaldNew York, Columbia

University Press, 1974), p. 105 for his translation; p. 44 for a discussion.

40. So understood, it is not too different from the moral Idealism of the opening lines of the

Dhammapdda.That the seat of power lies with a king does not mean that realities are created bythe king.

41. See Hakeda, trans. Awakening of Faith, p. 41. I do not follow the interpolations that Hekeda

added to his translation to make it more logical.42. For example, it would be difficult for an Indian Buddhist who adheres to the doctrine that

tathatd only "supports" phenomena to say, like the Ch'an Buddhist would, that a flower is im-

mediately as such the Absolute. That Ch'an statement is based on the faith in the presence of

tathata (the wetness of the water) in the flower (the wave) itself, that is, an immanentalistposition.That immanental position is thought to be derived however from Madhyamika. Tokiwa Daijo in

Bussho no kenkyu (Tokyo: Meiji Shoen, 1934), pp. 262-263, reviews the same issue from a different

angle.43. See

Fa-tsang's commentaryon the

Awakening ofFaith in T.

44, p.255c.

44. Takakusu, Essentials, pp. 124-126. A good translation of the Treatiseon the GoldenLion is

in Chan, Source Book, pp. 409-414. The essay on the Ten Mysteries was attributed to Tu-shunbj

and recorded by Chih-yenbk T. 45, No. 1868) but was more likely a Fa-tsang compilation.45. Takakusu, Essentials, pp. 124-126; see also Chan, Source Book, pp. 415-424 for another

similar treatise.

46. Takakusu, Essentials, pp. 26-27.

47. See Leon Hurvitz' "Chih-i," Melanges Chinoiset Bouddhiques12 (Brussels, 1960-1962) for

a discussion of the basic doctrines. I think there is a difference in saying, as Nagarjuna did, that

the three times are unreal, empty of self-nature and relative, and saying, with Chih-i, that the

three times are one or present in the "moment" (an Avatamsaka-suitra'snsight.)48. This can be inferred from the fact that such a Buddhist master as Chi-tsang of the San-lun

school had criticized the Taoist for "knowing about emptiness" but failing to "exhaust (that is,

to conceptually destroy even the assumption of) emptiness (as potential matter or as antitheses to

form or reality" chih-k'ung erhpu-chin-k'ungbI.

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 24: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 24/25

263

49. It seems, from my research so far, that the intentional use of a double compound-chi-shih

(both meaning "is")-was for the purpose of underlining this total identity or mutual identity,

hsiang-chi. The choice by Kumarajiva was therefore ingenious and innovative. He might have

borrowed the idea from Chih Tao-linbm,who was known to have used the word chi in his philosophyof "roving in the mysteries while abiding with forms, chi-seyu-hsiian"b. However, there the word

chi was used as a verb or adverb (Japanese: tsukub?,not as a copula sunawachi).I was alerted to

the possibly new use of the compound, che shih, in a conversation with Professor L. S. Yang at

Harvard.

50. In that sense, the Chinese interpretation of Madhyamika had this advaya philosophicalbasis.

51. It would seem, in reading Potter's book, that Indian Logicians generally would not acceptthe irrationality of the part being equal to the whole.

52. T. 44, p. 208b. The Suchness Mind is totally involved in the movements.

53. T. 44, p. 208b. The last sentence describes the "lower"layavijnina only.54. See Chan, Source Book, p. 570, and note 10 herein.

55. Takakusu, Essentials, p. 35.

56. Essentials, p. 118.

57. Essentials, p. 37. The reader of Takakusu should be aware that, from this page on, until

p.54, Takakusu was

actually describingthe Buddhist

philosophyfrom the

Hua-yenor Dharmad-

hatu perspective.58. Only those who grasp onto their persons or atmans and are unable to let go would be duely

frightened by this cosmic envelopment of the anatman no-self into the Dharmadhatu. For a

contemporary explanation of the Hua-yen philosophy, see Garma Chang's The BuddhistTeaching

of Totality (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1971), chapter 1.

59. The net of Indra, a basic Hua-yen metaphor, is filled with glitteringjewels; see Nakamura

Hajime, "Interrelational Existence" in Philosophy East and West 17 (1964), for the link between

Plotinus and Hua-yen siitra.60. Takakusu, Essentials, p. 118.

61. The "One = All" formula is the traditional summary of Hua-yen philosophy i chi tuo, tuo

chi ibq.

62. See Sung Kao-seng-chuanbr,T. 50, p. 732; retold by Chang, BuddhistTeaching, pp. 22-24.

63. Chan, Source Book, pp. 409-414.

64. D. T. Suzuki, On Indian Mahayana Buddhism, ed. E. Conze (New York: Harper, 1968),

pp. 147-226, a most brilliant exposition on the numinous realm of the Dharmadhatu.

65. Suzuki, IndianMahdyana,p. 167.

66. Suzuki, IndianMahaiyna, p. 158.

67. Suzuki, Indian Mahayyna, p. 158; see passages in the Hua-yen sitra, T. 10, pp. 237-241.

68.antric Vairocana, however, did share the numen of Dharmadhatuand Dharmakdya.69. Takasaki Jikido, "Kegonyogaku to nyoraizo shiso," in Nakamura Hajime, ed., Kegon

shiso (Kyoto: Hozokan, 1960), pp. 282-288. The quotation here is from the author's own English

summary on p. 11 from the back. Fa-tsang even freely readju-laibs(tathdgata), thus-come, in such

a way to imply "The unchanging [suchness, tathati, jul is essence (hsing); the manifested function

(yung,) [seen in the word lai] is arousal (ch'i)." Thereforeju-lai is hsing-ch'ibt.This clever twist of

words is possible because the prajdi-piramitd satras had interpreted tathigata in terms of its

relationship withathata .

a; ig q tep y A,ffi4g

jS.

k

^ ff,

s

qm

aaWaaS

e

Eefm0;

ug>ttt)

u git gac i

~f np L ^ v ^n Vad f8

Ite0wnti G X wae

3p] ()h

E13K

P

AS^NkE x 01 A akaf

^ ISN

This content downloaded from 137.132.123.69 on Sun, 19 Jan 2014 22:36:09 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Page 25: (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

8/13/2019 (Lai 1977) Chinese Buddhist Causation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lai-1977-chinese-buddhist-causation 25/25

264 Lai

ag

ah=tH-B

ai

aj f;p

ak p

an **4,SE

apN itP

""nissit&D

ar &q

asit _(&jgg)

at

av**_,X

ax 4 g

ayA 1

ba lt

bb -

bc I

""blr?g

bd 3s

bh t *T

bi t--bi

,GfJ-IE

bk tp

bl*nqXffniT

bn qp t

bo<

bq_ p . ,pp

br -i- hf P#

bsAn*

bt, p ke