Output:
suddenly saw the whole thing in a clear light, and became enlightened. It is said in
Platform Sutra: “they cannot realize it themselves because of the wandering of
the conditioned mind; that is why they need a good knowing advisor to point it out
and guide them to perception of essential nature.” Ma-zu was inspired by
Huai-rang, but Hui-leng became enlightened by himself; either Ma-zu or
Hui-leng has to “realize the good knowing advisor within the essential mind.”
That is to say, one has to rely on one’s immanent essential mind to attain the
transcendental state. The saying “until I see the world when rolling up a curtain” in
Hui-leng’s verse is the crux of his enlightenment, because as far as Chan Buddhism
sees, there is no need to deliberately make a certain thing to be enlightened and
become a Buddha, and one should naturally see the Way in ordinary daily life, just
92                                8 Immanence and Transcendence in Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output:
like “clouds floating in the blue sky and water filling in the bottle,” and everything
goes naturally and ordinarily. There is a verse in Wu-men-guan [Gateless Gate]
written by Wu-men (1183–1260):
     In spring, hundreds of flowers; in autumn, a harvest moon;
     In summer, a refreshing breeze; in winter, snow will accompany you.
     If useless things do not hang in your mind,
     Any season is a good season for you.


Output:
This spiritual state of Chan Buddhism is a state letting go with the nature: one
views the blooming of hundreds of flowers in spring, enjoys serenity under a harvest
moon in autumn, feels the sudden coming of a refreshing breeze in summer, and
watches thickly falling snowflakes swirling in winter. Let everything go by itself at
ease and without any obstruction, then “every daytime is a good day,” and “every
nighttime is an enjoyable night.” If one attaches to sitting in meditation, one is
bound by the method itself and cannot be liberated. Lin-ji said: “There is no place in
Buddhism for using effort. Just be ordinary and nothing special. Relieve your
bowels, pass water, put on your clothes, and eat your food. When you are tired,
go and lie down. Ignorant people may laugh at me, but the wise will understand”
(Gu-zun-su-yu-lu, Vol. 11). If one wants to become a Buddha and attain the state of
Nirvana, one should not rely on the extrinsic practice, but be enlightened suddenly


Output:
as Hui-leng experienced. A monk asked Ma-zu: “How to cultivate the Way?”
Ma-zu said: “the Way cannot be cultivated. If one says it can be cultivated, even
if it has been cultivated, it will disappear eventually” (Gu-zun-su-yu-lu, Vol. 1).
How can the Way be cultivated? By relying on so-called cultivation, one has to
manage it with a contrived effort; certainly “it will disappear eventually.” There-
fore, cultivating the Way cannot be searched deliberately out of ordinary life. A
Vinaya Master You-Yuan asked Hui-Hai, “Do you make efforts in your practice of
the Way?” Hui-Hai answered: “Yes, I do.” The Vinaya Master asked: “How?” Hui-
Hai answered: “When hungry, I eat; when tired, I sleep.” The Vinaya Master asked:
“And does everybody make the same efforts as you do, master?” Hui-Hai answered:
“Not in the same way.” The Vinaya Master asked: “Why not?” Hui-Hai answered:
“When they are eating, they think of a hundred kinds of necessities, and when they


Output:
are going to sleep they ponder over affairs of a thousand different kinds. That is how
they differ from me.” An ordinary person eats with preference of the fat or the lean
in the food, sleeps with going off into wild flights of fancy, and has different
preferences and attachments, and there is no chance for liberation. Those who
truly know Chan should “sleep if need to sleep and sit if need to sit,” “enjoy the
cool if hot and warm at a fire if cold.” A monk told Zhao-zhou (778–897): “I have
just entered the monastery. Please teach me.” Zhao-zhou asked: “Have you eaten
your rice porridge?” The monk replied: “I have.” Zhao-zhou said: “Then you had
better wash your bowl.” At that moment the monk was enlightened (Zhi-yue-lu,
Vol. 11). After eating, naturally it is time to wash the bowl. This is so ordinary. Only
through this can one meditate when sitting, meditate when sleeping, meditate when
resting, and meditate when moving; therefore, eating and shitting are both fine


Output:
Ways. If meditation is not necessary, there is no necessity to keep all kinds of
8.3 Chinese Chan Buddhism Did Not Worship Images, Rather Abused. . .                 93


Output:
precepts. Lu-xi-sheng asked Yang-shan: “do you still observe precepts, master?”
Yang-shan said: “I don’t” (Wu-deng-hui-yuan, Vol. 9). Li-ao (772–841) asked
Yao-shan (751–834): “what are sila [precepts], dhyana [meditation] and prajna
[wisdom]?” Yao-shan said: “we don’t have these idle fitments here!” (Jing-de-
chuan-deng-lu, Vol. 14). Sila [precepts], dhyana [meditation], and prajna [wisdom]
are the “three practices” of Buddhism, an indispensable gateway for Buddhists, but
Chan masters see them as something useless. It seems that this negation means that
every practicing method is unnecessary; hence, Chan Buddhism negates anything
extrinsic and formal. The reason why Chan Buddhism sees like this is based on “the
mind of everyday life is the mind of the Way.” There is no “mind of the Way” apart
from the mind of everyday life, and also no need to live any special life apart from
everyday life. With this realization, the immanent mind of everyday life can be the


Output:
transcendental mind of the Way. It is just as Yin-shun (1906–2005) put in his The
History of Chinese Chan Buddhism: “The nature is both transcendental (away from
all forms and its body pure and clear) and immanent (all Dharma cannot be different
from the nature). Only when one can enlighten into the transcendental from
everything here and now, at the same time being not different from everything,
and completely enlighten everything is just no other than the magical application of
the nature, can one go into the world or renounce the world at one’s will, get the
substance and its application, integrate the matter with its principles, and have one’s
feet firmly planted on the ground.”2


Output:
8.3    Chinese Chan Buddhism Did Not Worship Images,
       Rather Abused the Buddhas and Berated the Masters,
       but Claimed “One Who Is Enlightened in One Thought
       Is a Buddha”


Output:
Indian Buddhism cannot keep from the influence of Indian culture which strongly
marked the character of mysticism, especially after Shakyamuni Buddha. For
example, there are so-called twenty-eight heavens and eighteen hells, attached to
which are adjacent heavens or hells, and there are also innumerous Buddhas and
Bodhisattvas who have supernatural powers. Certainly all these are influenced by
Indian traditional culture. Even the much simpler Indian Chan which is considered
as “transmitted beyond teaching” is still of mystical character. It is said that all 28
masters of Indian Chan have so-called six supernatural powers: (1) the power of
divine audition, (2) the power of divine vision, (3) the power of awareness of the
minds of others, (4) the power of the knowledge of previous lifetimes, (5)
unimpeded bodily action, and (6) the power of the extinction of contamination.
Even four meditative states—“The Four Meditation Heavens”—Indian Chan


Output:
2
  Yin-shun: The History of Chinese Chan Buddhism (in Chinese), Taipei, Taiwan: Zheng-wen
Press, 1987, p. 375.
94                                8 Immanence and Transcendence in Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output:
practiced are also very mystical. Chinese Chan Buddhism after Huineng is very
different. Huineng said: “my mind inherently has a Buddha in it; and the inner
Buddha is the real Buddha” (Platform Sutra). Based on this, Chan Buddhism was
against supernatural powers and worshiping images. Wu-deng-hui-yuan records:
Dao-ying (?–902) “built a house nearby a place called San-feng, and did not go to
hall for a couple of weeks. Dong-shan (807–869) asked him: ‘why didn’t you go to
have meals recently?’ Dao-ying said: ‘a heavenly god served the food everyday.’
Dong-shan told him: ‘I thought you are a man, but still have this kind of idea. Come
to my place at night.’ Dao-ying came to Dong-shan’s place at night. Dong-shan
called his name: ‘Dao-ying!’ Dao-ying replied. Dong-shan said: ‘if you neither
think of good nor think of bad, then what leaves?’ Dao-ying came back and sat
silently. Since then Dao-ying couldn’t find the heavenly god any more. After


Output:
3 days, there was completely no such thing in Dao-ying’s idea” (Vol. 13). The
point Dong-shan criticized Dao-ying lies in how could a man like Dao-ying believe
these mystical supernatural powers. What is the meaning of “neither think of good
nor think of bad”? This is the teaching from Huineng that one should never attach to
those things created by one’s imagination. It is recorded in Chan-zong-zhuan
[A Biography of Chan Buddhism]: “Hui-ming asked the Dharma from Huineng.
Huineng said: ‘You should shut out all desires and not conceive a single thought of
good or bad.’ Hui-ming did what Huineng told him to do. Huineng told him: ‘When
you neither think of good nor think of bad, what is your original face?’ At these
words, Hui-ming was greatly enlightened and said to Huineng with his deep
gratitude: ‘I am like a man who takes a drink of water and knows for himself
whether it is cold or warm.’” The so-called a heavenly god served the food was just


Output:
an illusion of Dao-ying; once he became aware, the illusion disappeared and the
heavenly god couldn’t be found any longer. A man is essentially a man and has his
original appearance; therefore, everything has to count on the man himself and does
not need any help from the extrinsic transcendental powers at all. In Platform Sutra
(Qi-song Edition), there is a verse called Wu-xiang-song [Verse on Freedom from
Forms]:
     When the mind is even, why bother to keep precepts?
     When action is straightforward, what’s the need to practice meditation?
     If you are grateful, you take care of your parents respectfully;
     If you are dutiful, above and below are mentally sympathetic.
     If you are deferential, high and low harmonize amicably;
     If you are tolerant, myriad evils cause no disturbance.
     If you can drill wood and produce fire,
     You will produce red lotuses from the mud.
     Harsh words are clearly good medicine;
     If it offends the ear, it’s surely faithful speech.


Output:
Reform your errors, and you will develop wisdom;
     Defend your faults, and you betray an unsound mind.
     Always practicing altruism in your daily life;
     Attaining the Way does not come from donating money.
     Enlightenment is only to be sought in the mind;
     Why bother seeking mysteries outside?
     Hearing my explanation, practice on this basis,
     And the Heaven is right before your eyes.
8.3 Chinese Chan Buddhism Did Not Worship Images, Rather Abused. . .               95


Output:
This verse not only denies the existence of the extrinsic mystical powers but also
denies the existence of so-called Heaven and Hell, believing one should live in the
real life ordinarily and responsibly, and by means of one’s own Buddha nature
(immanent essential nature) in the life here and now can one become a Buddha. It is
just as Da-hui (1089–1163) said: “Dharma of secular world is Buddha Dharma and
vice versa” (Da-hui-pu-jue-chan-shi-yu-lu, Vol. 27).
    It is recorded in Wu-deng-hui-yuan: Tian-ran (739–824) “met a bitter cold
weather when visiting Hui-lin Temple, so he burned a wood Buddha statue for
warmth. The head of the temple bawled him out: ‘Why did you burn my wood
Buddha?’ Tian-ran prodded the ashes with his staff and said humorously: ‘I am
looking for sharira [relics] by burning it.’ The head retorted: ‘how can a wood
Buddha statue have sharira [relics]?’ Tian-ran laughed: ‘Now that it doesn’t have
sharira [relics], take two more statues and burn them’” (Vol. 5). A wood Buddha


Output:
statue is an image; how could it have Buddha sharira [relics]? Burning a wood
Buddha is only burning a wood-made statue. The denial of the image in his mind is
the realization that “my mind inherently has a Buddha in it; and the inner Buddha is
the real Buddha.” Lin-ji climbed up into the loft of Xiong-er Tower, and the guard
of the tower asked him: “do you prostrate yourself first before the Buddhas or first
before masters?” Lin-ji said: “neither of them” (Jing-de-chuan-deng-lu, Vol. 12).
Chan masters paid no respect to the Buddhas and masters at all and even abused the
Buddhas and berated the masters. De-shan said: “there are neither Buddhas nor
masters down here. Bodhidharma is an old foul foreigner, Shakyamuni Buddha is a
pile of dried dung, and Bodhisattva Manjusri and Samantabhadra are men who
carry the dung” (Wu-deng-hui-yuan, Vol. 7). As Chan Buddhism sees, everyone is
originally a Buddha himself, and elsewhere can a Buddha be found? What are


Output:
abused and berated are nothing but the images in one’s mind, the worship of which
would certainly obstruct the development of one’s essential nature. It is recorded in
Jing-de-chuan-deng-lu: “someone asked Huai-hai (720–814): ‘What is Buddha?’
Huai-hai retorted: ‘Who are you?’” (Vol. 6). In the same book, it is also recorded:
“Ling-xun just came to study with Gui-zong, and asked Gui-zong: ‘What is
Buddha?’. . .Gui-zong said: ‘Just you are’” (Vol. 10). Everyone by himself is a
Buddha. How can one ask “what is Buddha?” By asking “what is Buddha,” one is
searching Buddha outside of one’s mind. Nevertheless, one should not attach to this
idea of becoming a Buddha. Huang-bo said: “if you will conceive of a Buddha, you
will be obstructed by that Buddha!” (Wan-ling-lu [Recorded Sayings in Wan-Lin]).
If one bears the idea of becoming a Buddha in one’s mind constantly, one cannot
live naturally and obstructs himself from becoming a Buddha by this searching.


Output:
A monk asked Dong-shan when he was weighing some flax: “What is Buddha?”
Dong-shan said: “This flax weighs three pounds” (Wu-deng-hui-yuan, Vol. 15).
A monk asked Ma-zu: “What is the intention of Bodhidharma to come to China?”
Ma-zu struck him and said: “If I don’t strike you, those who know would laugh at
me” (Jing-de-Chuan-deng-lu, Vol. 6). Dong-shan gave a reply far from the mark in
order to break down the attachment of becoming a Buddha, and Ma-zu even tried to
prevent the searching of extrinsic Buddhist Dharma, because as Ma-zu saw, “you
all should believe that your essential mind is the Buddha, and right this mind is the
96                            8 Immanence and Transcendence in Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output:
mind of Buddha” (ibid.). This is the essential spirit of Chan Buddhism, as it is said
in Platform Sutra: “Buddhahood is actualized within your own nature; do not seek
it outside the body. If your own nature is confused, a Buddha is an ordinary person;
if your own nature is awakened, every ordinary person is a Buddha.”
    As we have discussed above, we can see that the central thoughts or fundamental
subject of Chinese Chan Buddhism is “witnessing the mind and seeing the nature”
and “seeing the nature and becoming a Buddha.” The fundamental concepts used in
Platform Sutra are “mind” and “nature.” “Mind” is also called “one’s own mind”
(zi-xin), “the essential mind” (ben-xin), “one’s own essential mind” (zi-ben-xin),
etc. “Nature” is also called “own nature” (zi-xing), “the essential nature” (ben-
xing), “Dharma nature” ( fa-xing), “one’s own Dharma nature” (zi-fa-xing), etc.
“Mind” and “nature” have quite similar meaning and both refer to the subjective in


Output:
everyone’s immanent life. They are originally pure and empty, but transcend the
phenomenal world; at the same time, their activities can appear as all kinds of
different things. As Platform Sutra says: “The extent of mind is vast as space. . .the
emptiness of physical space contains the colors and forms of myriad things, the sun,
the moon, and stars, the mountains, oceans, rivers, and lands, the springs and valley
streams, the grasses, trees, and forests, bad people and good people, bad things and
good things, heaven and hell—all are within space. The emptiness of the essential
nature of people in the world is also like this.” It also says: “The essential nature of
human beings is originally pure. All things come from the essential nature; when
you think about all evil things, it produces bad behaviors; when you think about all
good things, it produces good behaviors. Thus all things are in your own nature, and
your own nature is always clear.” Good and bad, Heaven and hell, the mountains,


Output:
rivers, and lands, the grasses, trees, insects and fishes, and so on—all are realized
from your own nature by means of “thinking” (si-liang) function of “the mind.” The
appearance of everything cannot deviate from “the own nature,” just as everything
is within space. If one’s “mind” is confused, one cannot see “one’s own nature”,
hence only an ordinary person; if one’s mind is always clear, one “sees the nature”
and becomes Buddha or Bodhisattva. It is said in Platform Sutra: “My mind
inherently has a Buddha in it; and the inner Buddha is the real Buddha. If there
were no Buddha-mind, where would we look for the real Buddha?”
    As Chan Buddhism sees, one’s own nature (or one’s own mind) is originally a
vast space without anything, and it is not a deathly stillness, but rather it can “think”
and everything comes from this “thinking.” If this activity of “thinking” goes
without any trace, it lays no influence on one’s “own nature,” and one’s own nature


Output:
can always stay in the clear state. “One’s own nature always clear” is just like the
sun and the moon always shining, only that sometimes they are covered by clouds,
and appear dim when seen from the ground so that one cannot see the original face
of the sun and the moon. If a sudden wind of wisdom (suggests the instruction
and inspiration of a good knowing adviser) blows off the clouds or mists, the always
shining sun and moon would appear naturally. It is said in Platform Sutra:
“The nature of worldly people is always drifting, like the clouds in the sky. Wisdom
is like the sun, insight is like the moon: knowledge and insight are always light,
but when you fixate on objects outside, you get your own essential nature covered
8.3 Chinese Chan Buddhism Did Not Worship Images, Rather Abused. . .                              97


Output:
by the drifting clouds of errant thoughts, so you cannot have light and clarity. If you
meet a spiritual benefactor and hear truly authentic teaching, you get rid of
confusion so that inside and outside are thoroughly clear, and myriad things appear
within your own essential nature.” A good knowing adviser can only inspire
someone, but whether one can be enlightened or not counts on oneself. “What is
meant by liberating yourself through your own essential nature? That means the
beings in false views, afflictions and ignorance are liberated by accurate insight.
Once you have accurate insight, you get the prajna [wisdom] to break through the
beings in folly and delusion, so each one is self-liberated” (Platform Sutra).
   The phrase “Buddha nature” appeared only a few times in Dung-huang edition
of Platform Sutra, but many times in its Zong-bao edition. “Buddha nature”
mentioned in two places of Platform Sutra is quite important: one is the verse


Output:
Huineng composed when he studied with his master: “Buddha nature is always
clear,” another is when Huineng answered the question of Governor Wei, he said
“building temples, charity, sustaining, etc.. . .haven’t any virtue actually,” and
“virtue lies in dharmakaya [truth body], not in field of merit; one’s own Dharma
nature is the inside virtue and honesty is the outside virtue. While one sees the
Buddha nature inside, one will naturally hold in reverence outside.” The first place
shows that the essence of “Buddha nature” that has the same quality as “own
nature” is “always clear”; hence, so-called Buddha nature is “one’s own nature,”
which is the essential nature of human being and the subjective in everyone’s
immanent life. The second place shows that “Buddha nature” is “one’s own Dharma
nature” which is also the immanent essence in everyone. Based on the ideas above,
Chan Buddhism established its theory of “witnessing the mind and seeing the


Output:
nature” and “seeing the nature and becoming a Buddha.” “Witnessing the mind
and seeing the nature” tells that if one can realize one’s own essential mind, one can
realize that “one’s own nature is always clear”; attaining “one’s own nature always
clear” means the revelation of the immanent essential nature as the transcendental
Buddha nature. Hence, it is true that “witnessing the mind and seeing the nature,
attaining the Way of Buddhahood by oneself” lie in “the wisdom is accomplished
when enlightening.”
   In that case how can one “witness the mind and see the nature”? Chan Buddhism
pointed out a direct and simple practicing method that they established, that is,
“freedom from thought as the source, freedom from form as the substance, and
freedom from fixation.” It is said in Platform Sutra:
   Since time immemorial this school of ours has first established freedom from thought as the
   source, freedom from form as the substance, and freedom from fixation as the basis.


Output:
Freedom from form means detachment from forms in the midst of forms. Freedom from
   thought means having no thought in the midst of thoughts. As for freedom from fixation,
   while the basic nature of humanity is in the midst of the world, with good and bad, beauty
   and ugliness, enmity and familiarity, words and speech, offense and attack, deception and
   contention, one considers it all empty and does not think of retaliation, not thinking about
   the objects in the surroundings. If thought after thought, previous, present, and subsequent
   thoughts, go on uninterrupted, this is called bondage. When thought after thought does not
   dwell on things, then there is no bondage. Thus freedom from fixation is basic.
98                            8 Immanence and Transcendence in Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output:
“Freedom from form” means no attachment to any phenomenon (detachment
from form), because ordinary people always attach the phenomena as the substance.
For example, one may think that by sitting in meditation, one can become a Buddha,
which is certainly attached to sitting in meditation; one may think that by worship-
ing Buddhas, one can become a Buddha which is certainly attached to the worship-
ing Buddhas; all these are “taking form and attaching to it.” “Taking form and
attaching to it” can obstruct the own nature just as the clouds and mists can cover
the bright empty sky. When one “detaches from appearances while in the midst of
appearances,” one can suddenly see the original clearness of the body of nature, just
as the clouds and mists are blew off and the bright clean empty space is revealed.
Therefore, freedom from form not only means no attachment to any phenomenon
but also means detachment to appearances and revelation of “one’s own nature


Output:
always clear.” It is said in Platform Sutra: “If you can be detached from forms and
appearances, then the substance of nature is pure. Thus freedom from form is the
substance.” “Freedom from fixation” means one’s own nature originally has no
fixation thought by thought, that is, the previous, present, and subsequent thoughts
are consecutive, and if once dwelling on one object, it is not going on uninterrupted
but fixing on every thought; hence, “the mind” is “bound.” “When the mind does
not dwell on things, the mind is fluid. If the mind dwells on things, the mind is
bound” (Platform Sutra). If the mind is not dwelling on everything, once a thing has
gone, it has gone and left no trace; it is like a wild goose flying across the vast sky
that leaves no trace at all and also like a white screen on which a movie is projected
for viewing; once the movie ends, nothing is left in the screen; only by this can one
not be bound by anything. Hence, one should regard “freedom from fixation as the


Output:
basis.” “Freedom from thought” does not mean “not thinking of anything at all, and
get rid of all thoughts entirely” (ibid.), but when getting in touch with objects, the
mind is not affected by the external objects, that is, “the mind does not arouse over
objects” (ibid.). “Thought” is the function of the mind, and what the mind faces is
the external objects. Ordinary people’s thoughts arouse over the external objects; if
the objects are nice, thoughts arouse over them and cling to them; on the contrary,
thoughts again arouse and get angry. Therefore, the “thoughts” of ordinary people
just arouse along with the objects and move in accordance with the objects, and the
“thoughts” of this kind are “erroneous thoughts,” always drove by the objects
without freedom. “When the mind is not influenced by objects” (ibid.), one could
not be disturbed by the external world, and although one lives in the secular world,
one is still not defiled and contaminated but comes and goes at ease, always


Output:
has one’s own clear nature, and attains the Buddhahood by oneself. “Freedom
from form,” “freedom from fixation,” and “freedom from thought” discussed
above are the function of the only mind, and the difference between the ignorant
and the awakened just lies in one thought; hence, attaining the Buddhahood should
rely on the sudden enlightenment.
   According to the discussion above, we may conclude as follows:
   First, the reason why Chinese Chan Buddhism belongs to Chinese traditional
thoughts, distinguishable from Indian Buddhism lies in its “immanent
transcendence” which is also the characteristic of Chinese Confucian and Taoist
8.3 Chinese Chan Buddhism Did Not Worship Images, Rather Abused. . .               99


Output:
philosophy. The reason why it could deeply influence Neo-Confucianism of Song
(960–1279) and Ming (1368–1644) dynasties (especially Universal Mind School of
Lu-Wang) also lies in the “immanent transcendence” of its thought. It is said that
the quest of Confucian thought with the characteristic of “immanent transcendence”
is morally ideal personality which transcends “the self” and becomes “a saint,” the
quest of Taoist philosophy with the characteristic of “immanent transcendence” is
the spiritually absolute freedom which transcends “the self” and becomes “an
immortal,” and then the quest of Chinese Chan Buddhism being characteristic of
“immanent transcendence” is a mystical state in momentary eternity which tran-
scends “the self” and becomes “a Buddha.” On this point, Chan Buddhism still has
some smack of religion.
   Second, although Chan Buddhism still has some smack of religion, by virtue of
releasing all extrinsic bondage such as chanting scriptures, sitting in meditation,


Output:
worshiping Buddha, etc., it is bound to contain the implication of denying itself as a
religion. That is to say, the secularization of Chan Buddhism makes itself an
unreligious religion influencing China, and it leads people to realize the purpose
of transcending the reality in the real life by denying the supernatural concepts
of Heaven and hell, suggesting the secular spirit of “Dharma of secular world is
Buddha Dharma and vice versa.”
   Third, as a religion, Chan Buddhism not only breaks all rules of traditional
Buddhism, but also believes that it relies not on extrinsic power but rather on the
immanent self-awareness of Chan masters themselves to attain the Buddhahood.
Therefore, it transforms a religion with the characteristic of “extrinsic transcen-
dence” into an unreligious religion with the characteristic of “immanent transcen-
dence,” turns the direction from renouncing the world to going into the world, and
hence avoids the inclination of duality. Whether or not this transformation means


Output:
Chan Buddhism has some inclination to get out of traditional religious mode. If this
can be deduced, certainly it would have important implication to study the history
of Chan Buddhism for investigating the religions in real social life.
   Fourth, it is said there was a tradition strongly imprisoning the mind of people in
China, and then can we say that there were still some resources to be appealed to for
breaking everything imprisoning the mind of people? If there were such resources,
Chan Buddhism must be an important one of them. Chan Buddhism denies all
extrinsic bondage, breaks all attachments, removes the traditional and realistic
authority, and lets everything listen to the essential mind; it is in this sense that
one can be the master of oneself. This open-mindedness is very valuable in feudal
despotic society in China and deserves our attention. Of course, Chan Buddhism
thereby built the authority centered by the immanent subjective of the “self” and


Output:
made up the infinite transcendental power of the “self,” and in turn one could again
be bound by the immanent subjective of the “self,” and this probably is an
inextricable contradiction to Chan Buddhism.
   Fifth, the ideological system of Chan Buddhism with the characteristic of
“immanent transcendence” is of obvious subjectivism, and inevitably leads to the
100                           8 Immanence and Transcendence in Chinese Chan Buddhism


Output:
denial of any objective criterion and validity, which is a disadvantage to the
investigation of the extrinsic world and establishment of objective valid social
system and legal order, and has defects in the investigation of ultimate care of the
universe and human life. Therefore, we may suggest an issue: is it possible to build
a better philosophical system which contains the thought with the characteristic of
“immanent transcendence” and the thought with the characteristic of “extrinsic
transcendence?” I think this issue deserves attentions in the development of
Chinese philosophy.
    Sixth, if it is possible to build a Chinese philosophical system which contains the
thoughts of both “immanent transcendence” and “extrinsic transcendence,” then
is it possible to find the resources of “extrinsic transcendence” within Chinese
traditional philosophy itself? I think Chinese traditional philosophy has this kind of
resources. There are two aspects in the thought of Confucius: on the one hand, he


Output:
advocated the idea “human-heartedness is something that must have its source in
oneself” (Analects, 12.1) and “it is man that can make the Way great, and not the
Way that can make man great” (Analects, 15.29) which can be considered as the
aspect of “immanent transcendence”; on the other hand, he insisted that one should
“fear the will of heaven, fear great men, and fear the word of the divine sages”
(Analects, 16.8), which can be considered as the aspect of “extrinsic transcendence”
or at least a suggestion of it. Later Confucianism has developed the former aspect
while leaving the later one undeveloped at all. Is it possible to build a Chinese
philosophical system which contains the thoughts being both “immanent tran
scendence” and “extrinsic transcendence” from the direction of Confucius by
developing and combining both aspects of Confucius’ thoughts? In my opinion, it
is an issue that deserves our study. There was another philosopher—Mo-zi, born


Output:
shortly later than Confucius—whose philosophy features “extrinsic transcen-
dence.” Mo-zi’s philosophy includes two interrelated parts: “all-embracing love”
being human spirit and “the will of Heaven” being religious. It seems that there is a
little bit of contradiction between the two parts, but actually “all-embracing love” is
the fundamental principle of “the will of Heaven”; therefore, “the will of Heaven”
is the kernel of Mo-zi’s thoughts. Mo-zi’s “the will of Heaven” means “Heaven” has
wills which are the supreme and ultimate standard to judge everything, can reward
the good and punish the bad, and are the transcendental power outside of human or,
we may say, are of obvious “extrinsic transcendence.” Therefore, the later Mohist
School suggested a scientific view and had the thought of logic and epistemology,
but it is a pity that these thoughts were left undeveloped after the Warring States
(403–221 B.C.) in China. Is it possible to use Mohist thought as resources to build a


Output:
Chinese philosophical system which contains the thoughts of both “immanent
transcendence” and “extrinsic transcendence”? I think it is also an issue we can
study.
Chapter 9
The Introduction of Indian Buddhism
into China: A Perspective on the Meaning
of Studies in Comparative Philosophy
and Comparative Religion


Output:
Here I do not intend to analyze or study the entire history of the introduction of
Indian Buddhism into China; rather, I wish simply to investigate the relationships
which existed between Buddhism, after it was introduced into China in the period of
the Wei, and Jin, and the North and South dynasties, and the previously existing
ideologies and cultures in China at the time, and to illustrate thereby the meaning of
studying comparative philosophy and comparative religions.

9.1     The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China
        and the Popularization of the School of Prajna
        Teachings [bo-re xue] in the Wei and Jin Periods

9.1.1    The Beginnings of Buddhism in China


Output:
9.1.1    The Beginnings of Buddhism in China

There are diverse theories regarding the timing of the introduction of Buddhism
from India to China. There is, however, a general consensus that the introduction
of Buddhism commenced with the dispatching of an envoy to the lands of the
West by Emperor Mingdi of the Eastern Han Dynasty during his reign of Yongping
(58–75 A.D.) to seek the Buddhist teachings. According to even earlier legends, the
emissary Zhang Xian, who had been sent to the Western lands, heard of the

Tang Yijie, “On the Significance to Study Comparative Philosophy and Comparative Religion
through the Study on the Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China.” Zhexue Luncong
[Collection of Philosophical Discourses], no. 8, August, 1983, pp. 272–301.
Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, Christianity and Chinese Culture, 1991: 89–137


Output:
© Foreign Language Teaching and Research Publishing Co., Ltd                         101
and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Y. Tang, Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, Christianity and Chinese Culture,
China Academic Library, DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-45533-3_9
102                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
teachings of foutu (Buddha) and had been commissioned by the monarch of
Darouzhi to preserve and transmit the teachings of the futu jing (Buddha’s classic
or sutra). Even disregarding this, I am convinced that the introduction of Buddhism
into China predated the dispatch of the imperial envoy during the Yongping reign to
seek out Buddhist teachings. In the eighth year of the reign of Yongping, Emperor
Mingdi decreed that those criminals who had incurred the death penalty might
atone for their crimes by offering jian cloth to the state and thus escape the
execution of their sentences. Prince Ying, a brother to Mingdi, sent in 30 bales of
jian, whereupon the emperor issued the following explanatory edict:
   Prince Ying of Chu has been reciting the refined teachings of Huang and Lao [Huangdi, or
   the Yellow Emperor, and Laozi (Lao Tzu) are together revered as the founders of the Daoist
   school of philosophy, and particularly of its so-called Esoteric or Immortal school—Tr.]


Output:
and has worshiped at the benevolent shrine of Buddha. He has undertaken to cleanse
   himself and has fasted for three months, observing his vows to the gods. [In the Chinese
   Buddhist contexts, fasting does not necessarily mean abstinence from food altogether but
   usually refers to the assumption of an exacting vegetarian diet avoiding the taking of life,
   which is known as zaijie—Tr.] He has repented and should be considered to have expiated
   any crime he may have perpetrated or any suspicions he may have provoked. He is now, by
   way of atonement, submitting his property to add to the grand fete of the Upasaka
   [Buddhist disciples] and to the glory of the temples of Buddha.


Output:
The fact that Prince Ying worshiped Huangdi, Laozi (Lao Tzu), and Buddha at
the same time and in the same fashion tells us that Buddhism certainly already had
been introduced into China for quite some time prior to the eighth year of the
Yongping reign. Therefore, it would be quite late to take the sending of the imperial
envoy to seek out Buddhist teachings during the reign of Yongping to be the point
of beginning of the introduction of Buddhism into China. Still, although Buddhism
was not introduced into China after that event, it would perhaps be generally correct
to say that it was only during, or even after, the reign of Yongping that Buddhism
became a religion of some influence in China. After its introduction into China,
Buddhism did not attain the height of its influence until the Eastern Jin Dynasty,
meanwhile undergoing several significant stages of propagation and evolution.
    During the Eastern Han Dynasty, Buddhism was propagated in China as one


Output:
of several Daoist practices [daoshu] popular at the time. Daoist teachings and
practices had gained great currency since the beginning of the Western Han
Dynasty and remained in vogue throughout the two Han dynasties. At that time,
all Daoist practices, whether the [philosophical] teachings of Huangdi and Laozi
(Lao Tzu) or the sorcerous practices of the magicians, were indifferently known as
daoshu [Daoist practices or techniques]. The techniques practiced and taught by the
magicians covered a very wide area: worshiping at shrines and temples, ancestral
worship, ways to immortality and longevity, and such methods as jiushi [long
vision]. According to the Fangshu zhuan [Biographies of the Magi] in Hou Han
shu [History of the Later Han Dynasty], at that time, many people studied diverse
things and the teachings of many schools such as “Numbers of Steps according to
the Yin and Yang,” “The Writings of He and Luo” [Huang He, or Yellow River,


Output:
and the Luo River], “The Tortoise and Dragon Graphs,” “The Methods of Ji Zi,”
“The Book of Wei [Latitudes] and Hou [Seasons],” “The Talismanic Graphs of the
Decision of the Bells,” and “The Book of Shi Kuang,” as well as such techniques as
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                  103


Output:
“Wind Horn,” “Transmutation and Transportation,” “The Seven Ways,” “Cardinal
and Primal Breathing,” “The Seven Divisions of the Six Days,” “Divination
for Chance Encounters,” “Omen of the Day,” “Firmness and Singularity,”
“Instantaneity,” “Solitude and Emptiness,” and so on. The following passage explains
the reason for this proliferation of these Daoist practices and methods at that time:
   In the Han dynasty, since Emperor Wudi turned his favor toward the methods and crafts of
   the Daoists, scholars throughout the land who possessed the least learning on those subjects
   could not afford to miss taking advantage of the situation; they converged upon the royal
   court, each with his books and with his hands clasped together [in the sign of salutation].
   Thereafter, Wang Mang [The ‘usurper’ who dethroned the Han emperor and founded the
   short-lived Xin dynasty from 8 to 23 A.D.—Tr.] usurped the throne by falsely assuming the


Output:
mandate under the guise of receiving talismans for that effect secretly. Later on, Emperor
   Guangwudi [25–57 A.D.] was found to be fond of portents and oracles and believed in them.
   Thus the scholars who had learned to be attentive to the fashions and ways of the times strove
   to compete with one another on the field of these techniques and practices and ideas.
   Whenever they could, they would bring their crafts to the attention of His Majesty and
   would debate about the validity and relative virtues of these things whenever they could.


Output:
According to the records of the day, “Huang-Lao” and Buddha were equally
regarded as Daoist techniques. In the ninth year of the reign of Yanxi of Emperor
Huandi (166), Xiang Kai memorialized the emperor, saying:
   We hear that shrines for Huang-Lao and for Buddha have been erected in the palace. These
   teachings exhort people to purity of mind and tranquillity of the soul; they place inaction
   and quietude at the top of their list of values; they emphasize the value of life and abhor
   killing; they exhort people to restrain their desires and purge themselves of extravagant
   ways. But Your Majesty is shorn neither of desire nor extravagance, and your habits of
   killing and punishing people have extended beyond the bounds of reason. Since you
   violated their way, how can you expect to receive their mandate?


Output:
Even the disciples of Buddhism referred to their own teachings as the craft of the
dao (tao) [Way]. In Li Huo Lun [Discourse on the Disposition of Error], Mouzi
wrote, “There are ninety-six types of people adhering to the teaching of Dao; of
these, none is as great as or is more exalted than the teachings of Buddha.” The
Sishi’er Zhang Jing [Sutra of Forty-two Chapters] [a sutra often attributed to
Kasyapa Matanga and Gobharana, the first Indian monks to “officially” arrive in
China as envoys from a Buddhist state—Tr.] also referred to its own teachings as
fodao [or, Way of Buddha]. Furthermore, the Buddhist teachings at that time
contained elements which coincided with, or bore resemblances to, the Chinese
Daoist teachings—for example, when it taught:
   Arhan [worthy men, or saints] are beings which can fly and are capable of transformation;
   their longevity is the kalpa [age] that is past, and they live and move throughout the heaven
   and the earth (Chapter 1 of the Sishi’er Zhang Jing) and:


Output:
those who have learned the Way should purge their minds of impurities and they shall
   instantly become pure and clean. (Chapter 35)


Output:
At such times, the Buddhist sutra came very close to the “immortality teachings” of
the Huang-Lao school of Daoism (Taoism).
   At that time, the principle contents of Buddhist teachings were such things as
“the imperishability of the spirit, or soul,” yin-guo [causes and effects as the basic
method of understanding the development of things] and baoying [retribution].
104                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
For example, in the book Hou Han Ji [The Chronicles of the Later Han Dynasty],
Yuan Hong wrote:
   [Buddhism] also posits that when the person dies the spirit does not perish but would
   subsequently take on new form. For all one’s deeds in life, whether good or evil, there will
   be retribution. For that reason one must value the performance of good actions and the
   cultivation of the dao, so as to persist, and continue to persist, in the tempering of the
   soulspirh, until it arrives at the realm of wuwei [inaction or quietude], and at that point
   one would become Buddha.


Output:
This was an idea that existed previously in China. In the Chinese form, the idea
of the imperishability of the soul was expressed in the long held you guei lun
[theory of the existence of ghosts]. The poem Wen Wang [King Wen] in the Da ya
section of Shi Jing [Classic of Odes] described the “presence of the three hou
[secondary, or humane sovereign spirit] in Heaven” and the ascension to that realm
of the refined spirits and ghosts [jing ling] [of mortals]. In the chapter Yang sheng
zhu [Lord Nurturer of Life] in the book Zhuangzi, there was a parable which spoke
of the “continuation of the flame even though the tinder has expired,” and in the
chapter Jing shen xun [Exhortation on the Spirit] in Huai Nan Zi, the idea was
posited that “the form indeed has its limitations, but the spirit does not dissolve.
Therefore, [the relationship between spirit and form is one in which] something that
is incapable of dissolving is adapted to something that does dissolve; the result is


Output:
that there can be myriad such adaptations; one cannot in any way see these ways of
changing and permutation as finite.” It was precisely because of the prevalence of
this thought, and in response to it, that opponents such as Huan Tan argued for the
theory of “the simultaneous destruction of the form and the spirit,” and Wang
Chong suggested that “when a man dies he is not transformed into a ghost.” These
latter were all critiques of the idea of the “imperishability of the soul.” The idea that
the imperishability of the spirit or soul itself depended on the exercises of tempering
and cultivation [in mystical or metaphysical ways] was a concept which also
already existed in the tradition of China. As for the ideas of causes and effects
and retribution, although these theories of Buddhism in general were not entirely
similar to previously existing Chinese theories, the popular forms that they assumed
during the Han Dynasty corresponded to certain ideas which the Chinese already


Output:
held at the time, such as the idea in the Kun Gua [Changes through the Feminine
Symbol] section of Yi Jing (I Ching) [Book of Changes] which held that “good
fortune would come to those who performed good deeds, and ill fortune to those
who are evil” or that “the family which accumulates good actions will be rewarded
with exceedingly great causes for celebration, whereas households which pile up
evil deeds will have much cause for suffering.”
    By the time of the transition between the Han and the Wei dynasties, owing to
the gradual expansion of Buddhism, more and more Buddhist sutras were translated
into Chinese. Translations at the time included both Hinayana [Theravedic, known
in Chinese as xiao cheng] and Mahayana [da cheng] sutras. Consequently, the
processes by which Buddhism was popularized in China fell into two main
channels: the history of the An Shigao school, which belonged to the Hinayana
category, and that of the Zhi-lou-jiacan school, which belonged to the Mahayana


Output:
and emphasized the teaching of prajna [wisdom].
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                     105


Output: 9.1.2     The An Shigao of Hinayana School


Output:
This emphasized the teachings of dhyana [meditation exercises, in Chinese,
chan]. In the first year of the reign of Jianhe of Emperor Huandi of the Han Dynasty
[147 A.D.], An Shigao arrived at Luoyang and began a prolific career in translating
sutras. [An Shigao was the Chinese name of the Buddhist pandit who went to China
from Parthia or Persia. The name An translates as tranquillity and may have derived
from the monk’s Persian identity, since Parthia was, at the time, and for much of
Chinese history, known to the Chinese as Anshiguo, or land of tranquillity. We have
no knowledge of the monk’s Persian name—Tr.]
   The most influential of his translations were the An Ban Shou Yi Jing [Sutra on
the Maintenance of Thought by the Practice of Anapana] and the Yin Chi Ru Jing
[Sutra on Entrance to Truth by Covert Maintenance]. The first described a method
for practicing chan, or meditation exercises; it was a book on breathing methods
designed to “keep one’s thoughts in place,” which methods were in some ways


Output:
similar to the breathing and respiration exercises and techniques espoused by the
Daoists, and particularly by the School of Immortals. The latter sutra was an
exposition of the esoteric significance of names and numbers in the Buddhist
canons and bore some resemblance to the line-by-line and phrase-by-phrase
exposition of the classics, a method of scholarship known as zhangju xue. This
was practiced in general by many Han Confucianist scholars in their various
annotations and exegeses of the Confucianist classics, often attempting to find
“true” meanings that were camouflaged by the words of the scriptures.
   This methodology in the studying of the Hinayana scriptures continued in the
An Shigao school until at least the third generation of his disciples, chief among
whom was Kang Hui the Monk [Kang Zeng Hui], who lived during the time of the
Kingdom of Wu [222–280]. This school’s theory of life was fundamentally based
on the concept of yuanqi [original breath]. It maintained that “original breath” was


Output:
the same as what the Chinese have called the wu xing [five elements or five agents]
or the wu yin [Five Negatives of Five Feminine Qualities] [later this was translated
into Buddhist terminology as the wu yin, or Five Inward Contents, similar in
meaning and identity to the Sanskrit term skandhas, of which there were also
five—Tr.]. The Sutra on Entrance to Truth by Covert Maintenance explained the
wu yin zhong [five yin species] thus:
   The five yin species make up the body. . .this is similar to the original breath [yuanqi]. . .
   the original breath contains the escalation and demotion of all things, as well as their
   establishment and ruin. When it reaches its end it will begin again and will continue to go
   on through the triloka [Three Realms]; it does not end, but is infinite; that is why it is called
   the zhong [species, or seed].


Output:
This brand of Buddhism believed that in the beginning, the human being was
made up of the accumulation and aggregation of the five yin [elements]; thus the
Sutra on Entrance to Truth by Covert Maintenance translated by An Shigao posited
that “yin was the accumulation of all appearances.” The theory of yuanqi [original
106                        9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
breath] had been popular in China since pre-Qin times, and it flourished in the two
Han dynasties. Moreover, there was an intimate connection between the idea of
original breath and the issue of the form-spirit relationship for it was maintained
that whereas form was made up of the chuqi [crude breath], the spirit was the jingqi
[refined breath]. Such a theory had a great deal of connection with the teachings of
yangsheng [the cultivation and nourishment of life essence] as espoused by the
School of Immortality.
    In the book L€ u Shi Chunqiu [Spring and Autumn Classic by Master Lu], the
point was made that in order to become immortal and to achieve jiu shi [long vision]
the qi, or breath, must circulate without impediment of any kind in the body; only
then will the “refined breath [spirit] be rejuvenated everyday and the evil breath
be daily abated,” so that “the spirit shall reside at peace within the form and one’s
days and years shall be stretched to everlasting.” At that time, the adherents of


Output:
the An Shigao school of Buddhism also learned to bring together the ideas of
the five yin and yuanqi and claimed that, if one were able to coordinate one’s
original breath well, one’s mind would be tranquil, at ease, and the body would be
also free of sicknesses; whereas if the original breath were not well coordinated and
if the yin and the yang in a person, and the five elements [wuxing], were not
properly blended, the body would succumb to illness. The Fo Yi Jing [Buddha’s
Medical Sutra], translated in the time of the kingdom of Wu by Zhu Luyan and
Zhi Yue, said:
   In the human body there are four illnesses: one is related to Earth, another to Water, a third
   to Fire, and a fourth to Wind. As the Wind increases, the qi [breath] arises; as the Fire
   increases, the heat arises; as the Water increases, the cold would rise; as the Earth increases,
   the strength [of the person] would wax. It is from these four [basic] illnesses that the four


Output:
hundred and four illnesses have arisen. Earth belongs to the body, Water to the mouth,
   Fire to the eyes, and Wind to the ear.


Output:
Such sayings bore much resemblance to the medical theories popular during the
Han Dynasty, in which emphasis was given to the methods of creating a balance or
coordination system within the body for the yuanqi. This was seen in terms of the
need to orientate the development of the yuanqi in a good or correct direction and
away from the evil or wrong direction. It was felt that, if the mind and the spirit
were tranquil, the person would be able not to generate or create any desires or
worries and that it was only because the mind and spirit moved or acted, thereby
generating thoughts, that all sorts of worries and troubles were created.
   As to how all these various worries may be eliminated, the Hinayana school of
chan or meditation believed that one simply had to nourish the mind and cultivate
the spirit, in which the main thing was to “keep thoughts [yi] in their proper place”
[namely, in the state of nonbeing or the state prior to when thoughts were created].


Output:
The meditation exercises were therefore intended to prevent the generation of
thoughts or ideas by means of concentrating. The An Ban Shou Yi Jing said,
“One must maintain one’s mind and keep it in place—i.e., before any thoughts
have been generated. Once thoughts are generated the maintenance will have been
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                  107


Output:
broken.” The Chu Jing [Sutra on Abiding in That Which Is Fixed] translated by An
Shigao told the following story:
   Buddha said to the gathered bhiksu [mendicant disciples]: You must learn to understand all
   things by sitting in meditation, but you must also learn to be able to speak the words of the
   Law. Those who cannot do so must block out their vision and screen sounds and learn to
   keep their minds in place and be good at listening only within themselves. In this way they
   may find their way [to Enlightenment or Buddhahood]. When the congregated bhiksu heard
   Buddha make this proclamation, their hearts were glad and understood Buddha’s words,
   and immediately they found the way to becoming Arhat [saints].


Output:
The method of keeping one’s mind in place was known as an ban [anapana], in
which ana referred to inhalation and pana referred to exhalation. This was similar to
the tu na breathing exercises espoused by both the Huang-Lao school and the
Immortality school of Daoism (Taoism), both of which were popular in the Han
Dynasty. Thus, the An Ban Zhu Xu [Preface to the Annotations on Anapana] written
by [the monk] Dao An explained: “By anapana we mean exhalation [externalization]
and inhalation [internalization]” and “One can entrust one’s breath to anapana and
maintain, or preserve, simply that which is achieved already.” If one could keep one’s
mind in place, so the argument went, one’s mind and spirit would become clear and
serene, and if one’s mind and spirit were clear and tranquil, one would become
Buddha. Thus, also Kang Hui the Monk said in the An Ban Xu [Preface to Anapana]:
   He who cultivates anapana has a totally clear mind; if he should raise his eyes, there is no


Output:
darkness or gloom within the scope of his vision which he may not pierce. . .there is nothing
   so far away in the distance that he cannot see, no sound so obscure that he cannot hear. His
   understanding shall encompass the uncertain, the ambiguous appearances, and the false
   impressions and resemblances; he shall be completely free in his existence; he shall be big
   enough to contain within himself all that is within the bounds of the Eight Extremes and
   yet also small enough to penetrate the stem of a hair or a quill. He shall control the heavens
   and the earth, and stay the progress of time and longevity. His godly characteristics and
   powers shall be so fierce as to destroy Heaven’s own arms, and he shall have the power to
   remove the trisahasra [the Three Thousand Things, or All Things] and all the temples on
   earth. The Eight Unthinking [Non-Thoughts] are unfathomable by even the Brahman, and
   the Virtuous Character of the God knows no limitations. This is the origin of the six


Output: paramitas [methods].


Output:
From the above, it is clear that the Hinayana chan [dhyana, or meditative]
techniques espoused by the An Shigao school were certain ideas which had already
gained popularity in China before that time through the espousal of the Huang-Lao
school and the Immortality school in Daoism (Taoism) and that what we have seen
was an obvious attempt to use prevalent Daoist techniques [daoshu] to explain and
popularize Buddhism.

9.1.3     The Zhi-lou-jia-qian of Mahayana School

This system of thought was quite different as its Mahayana teachings emphasized
prajna [wisdom]. Zhi-lou-jia-qian had a disciple called Zhi Liang and a
third-generation disciple called Zhi Qian; together they were known as the
108                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
“Three Zhi’s.” Zhi-lou-jia-qian arrived in Luoyang in the last year of the reign of
Emperor Huandi [167] and, in 169, translated the Daoxing bo-re boluomi jing
[Prajnaparamita Sutra on the Cultivation of the Truth]. Later, Zhi Qian retranslated
this sutra as the Daming Du Wuji Jing [Sutra on the Transition by Way of the Great
Enlightenment to Infinite Endlessness]. This system of thought, espoused originally
by Zhi Qian, emphasized that the fundamental principle of life was to make the
spirit revert to its original, virginal truth or reality and that life would then conform
to the dao [or the Way of Natural Things]. With this postulate, the ideas of Laozi
(Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi exerted a profound influence over this particular school of
Buddhism.
   It becomes even more obvious that Zhi Qian’s purpose was to make Buddhism
conform to the school of Chinese metaphysics which at the time had as its core the
ideas of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi when in the title of his new translation of the


Output:
Prajnaparamita sutra he substituted “The Great Enlightenment” or “The Great
Light” for “prajna.” [Technically, the Sanskrit for the Chinese term ming, meaning
brightness or enlightenment, is vidya, and not prajna—Tr.] This reflects the idea
contained in the saying in Laozi (Lao Tzu) [or Dao De jing]: “Zhi chang yue ming”
[To know the constant is Enlightenment]. Also, the translation of “paramita” as du
wu ji [ferrying across to infinite endlessness] appears to refer to the arrival at the
realm of oneness or unity with the dao. [Actually, the term du, meaning to make a
crossing or transition, is contained in the Sanskrit term paramita itself, which
means ferrying across and hence saving—Tr.] Therefore, in the annotations
which Zhi Qian made for the first pin [folio] of the Sutra on the Transition by
Way of Great Enlightenment to Infinite Endlessness, we find the following passage:
   The teacher [Zhi Qian’s mentor Zhi Liang] said: The Bodhisattva’s mind treads on the


Output:
Great Way in order to be able to understand and empathize with the Way. The mind became
   one with the dao [Way]. This takes no form; that is why it is simply described as the Void.


Output:
Here, the idea of mind “being one with the Way” seemed to be the same notion as
that expressed in Daoism (Taoism) as “[having the spirit] revert no more to the yin
corpus [i.e., the dead body], but join the dao (tao) in oneness.” This was described in
fuller detail later on in the Fo shuo si wen qing jing [sic?]. [There seems to be a
typographical error in the Chinese text at this point. We have not been able to
identify this particular sutra as it is here presented or even a term in Buddhism
corresponding to the phrase si wen qing. Perhaps, the term zi was mistaken for the
character qing here. In Buddhism, the term si zi qing refers to the so-called four
self-injuries, i.e., four ways in which people bring damage to their own bodies
and minds. It is possible that there may have been a sutra on the subject—
Tr. J translated by Fa Hu [Zhu Fahu].] This idea also bore resemblance to the
notion of “simultaneously accomplishing the Deed of the Way” [yu dao ju cheng],


Output:
which was described and proposed by Ruan Ji in his Da Ren Xiansheng Zhuan
[Biographies of Great Men and Forebears]. The sentence “There is no form;
therefore it is described as the Void” is very similar to Laozi’s (Lao Tzu) dictum,
“The Constant Way has no form.” Therefore, it was understood that the mind and
the spirit also have no traceable form.
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .   109


Output:
According to people such as Zhi Qian, the human mind-spirit originated from
the Way, and only various post-natural influences [such as temptations of desires
and appetites] made it impossible for the mind-spirit to return to the state of being
one with the Way. In order to be free of these limitations and trammels, therefore,
the mind-spirit must empathize with the Way and must understand it. If the mind-
spirit was capable of understanding its own original source, it would be able to once
again become one with the Way and thus become Buddha. In fact, this uses the
ideas of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi to explain the tenets of Buddhism.
    During the time of the Wei and Jin dynasties, the metaphysical ontology of the
xuanxue [Daoist metaphysics] school, which accepted Laozi (Lao Tzu)’s and
Zhuangzi’s ideas as its framework, was very popular. Its main focus was the
questions of ben-mo [the relationship between the fundamental and the incidental]


Output:
and you-wu [existence and nonexistence]. The ideas of prajna in Buddhist thought
came very close to this sort of metaphysical thought. Therefore, at the time, it was
convenient and expedient for Buddhist monks to use this sort of Chinese [Daoist]
metaphysics to explain Buddhism. The methodology and approach that they
adopted was a metaphysical method of the xuanxue school which moved gradually
from the principle of geyi [study of meanings] to the principle of de yi wang yan
[discarding the word when the meaning has been attained] or ji yaii chu yi
[extrapolating the meaning which originates from, and transcends, the word
which was its temporary abode].
    One very notable phenomenon of the period was that there were many similar-
ities between the ways in which the great monks of Buddhism perceived things and
the way in which the great scholars [of the Daoist metaphysical school] looked at
the things of the universe. Moreover, they seemed to take pride equally in being free


Output:
of worldly matters, unconventional, unconfined by normal ethical constraints,
and “above it all.” While the famous scholars employed the so-called san xuan
[Three Metaphysical Observations] to develop and promote their xuanxue [Daoist
metaphysics], the great monks of the period similarly used the doctrine of san xuan
to explain the principles of Buddhism. In the Western Jin Dynasty, a renowned
monk, Zhi Xiaolong, befriended such great scholars of the day as Ruan Zan and Yi
Kai and became known to the people of the time as Ba da [He Who Reached Far in
All Eight Directions]. In the Eastern Jin, Sun Zuo wrote the book Dao xian luti
[On the Good People in the Dao] in which he compared seven famous monks to the
legendary “Seven Scholars of the Bamboo Grove.”
    At the time, many Buddhist monks became extremely well versed in the
teachings of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi. It was said in the historical record
that the Monk Fahu (Zhu Fahu) “was well-read in all the Six Classics, and has been


Output:
widely exposed to the teachings of all the Hundred Schools [of the pre-Qin
period].” Furthermore, the Monk Zhi Dun praised the Monk Yu Falan for “having
a comprehensive understanding of the meanings of the xuanxue.” Zhi Xiaolong
claimed that he himself “became a free spirit capable of roaming without restriction
[xiaoyou] when he achieved the goal of paoyi [the Daoist principle of maintaining
singularity, or becoming one with and undifferentiated from the Dao] and arrived at
mie [Nirvana, or extinction] by way of the cultivation of tranquillity.” The Monk
110                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
Dao Qian [Zhu Daoqian] “roamed freely for 30-some years teaching and preaching;
in some cases he transmitted the teachings of the Vaipulya sutras; in others he
explained the doctrines of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi.” The Monk Zhi Dun was
“fond of the teachings of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi” and annotated the chapter
“Xiao yao you” [The Roaming of a Free Spirit] in the book Zhuangzi. The Monk
Dao An made a comparison between the [Daoist] doctrines of ke dao [the Way of
Possibilities] and chang dao [the Constant Way] and the Buddhist doctrine of the
two salya [er li]. [The two satya or two forms of noble statements of the truth sees
dogma as existing in two forms—or the universal truth as able to be expressed in
two dichotomized ways—one, the samvriiisatya or vulgar and common statement
in which truths are expressed as if phenomena are real and, two, the paramartha-
satya or true statement by the enlightened who has already understood the true


Output:
unreality and nonexistence of phenomena (Tr.)] When the Monk Hui Guan anno-
tated the Fa hua jing [Saddharmap-undarika sutra, or Sutra of the Lotus of the
Wonderful Law], he studied the teachings of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and Zhuangzi.
The Monk Hui Yuan was known also for having “broadly studied the Six Classics,
and [he] was particularly adept at interpreting the teaching of Laozi (Lao Tzu) and
Zhuangzi.”
   At the time, the majority of the famous monks preached the doctrine of
prajna, and, as we have seen already, they were also prone to discuss, if not
advocate, the teachings of Lao and Zhuang. Indeed, objectively for the most part,
the Buddhist teachings introduced into China from India and other “Western
countries” at the time belonged to the prajna school, but there were other factors
which rendered the popularity of the prajna school in China at that time far from
accidental.
   In the article Bei nai ye xu [Preface to the Vinaya, or Discipline, Pitaka], the
Monk Dao An wrote:


Output:
Monk Dao An wrote:
   Of the twelve volumes herein collected, the most voluminous is the collection of Vaipulya
   sutras. This occurs because in this country the teachings of Lao and Zhuang have already
   gained much headway among the people. [These teachings] are quite similar to the
   teachings of the fangdeng [vaipulya] sutras; there is much that they share in common.
   That is why the people have already adapted their behavior and ways of life to the teachings
   [of our sutras].


Output:
The “vaipulya” teachings belonged to the category of the fangdeng
[or fangguang, both being the general categorical title given to the Mahayana
sutras]. The prajna [wisdom] teachings also belonged to the category of fangdeng.
From Dao An’s explanation, we can see that the popularity of the prajna teachings
in China during the Western and Eastern Jin dynasties had a great deal to do with
the influence of Daoist metaphysics or xuanxue. However, even so, the major pin
[segments] among the prajna sutras, namely, the Fangguang bo-re boluomi jing
[The Prajna-paramita Sutra Emitting Light] and the Guangzan bo-re boluomi jing
[The Prajnaparamita Sutra Praising Light], did not become truly popular until the
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                    111


Output:
early years of the Eastern Jin. That is why the Jian bei jing xu [The Account of
the Gradual Fulfillment of the Sutras] said:
   Although the great pin has appeared for some decades, at the time of its appearance the
   learned people for the most part did not study it or practice it. One wonders why the various
   masters should have done so?. . .However, this situation has gradually changed, and since
   [through translation] the major pin has arrived in toto [in China], there is not a single pandit
   today, of either East or West, who does not make it his career and goal to teach it.


Output:
The Guangzan bo-re boluomi jing was produced in translation by Zhu Fahu in the
seventh year of the Taikang reign [286], and the Fangguang bo-re boluomi jing was
translated by Zhu Falan in the third year of the reign of Yuankang [291]. Both became
popular only in the early years of the Eastern Jin Dynasty [i.e., circa 320]. This
popularity was intimately related to the sociohistorical conditions of the period.
Since the Wei Dynasty and the beginning of the Jin Dynasty, there had been a
continuous enlargement of the power and influence of the ruling cliques made up of
the men fa shizu [grand noble families and gentry clans]. One can say that this
influence reached its peak in the reign of Yuankang [291–299 A.D.] The subsequent
“rebellion of the Eight Princes,” the invasion of the northwestern minority national-
ities and their domination of the Central Chinese Plains, and the southward move of
the royal house and central government of the Jin Dynasty of the Sima family


Output:
accelerated the degeneration of the ruling cliques. By this time, this ruling power
structure had become extremely helpless and pessimistic about its own fate and the
destiny of society. It was natural, therefore, that they then turned their attention to the
problems of life, death, and liberation of the individual. This was also one of the
reasons for the increasing popularity of the two religions—Buddhism and Daoism
(Taoism)—toward the end of the Eastern Jin Dynasty.
    A society wherein people are seeking a world which transcends the mundane and
real provides a very important context and purpose for the emergence of religions. For
religions, they are able to propose to people that solutions can be found in their own
particular worlds of fantasy for the many sufferings which exist in such common
measure in the real society where they cannot be resolved, including such problems as
living and dying. Buddhism is no exception to this generalization. After the introduc-


Output:
tion of prajna Buddhist teachings into China, it remained in a stage of translation until
the Eastern Jin Dynasty. That is, the Chinese Buddhist monks had not yet formed their
own understanding or interpretation of the prajna teachings. In the Eastern Jin,
however, sects and subgroups which represented different understandings of the
teachings of prajna Buddhism began to emerge. Later, it was as discussions and
responses to the schools of prajna teachings which has emerged since the Eastern Jin
Dynasty. The Monk Zhao [Seng Zhao] wrote the Bu zhen kong lun [Treatise on the
Fallacy of the Doctrine of True Nothingness or Nonexistence] to criticize the refute of
the three schools, namely, the ben wu [Original Nonexistence or Nothingness] school,
the zhi se [identity of appearances] school, and the xiti wu [Nonexistence of the Mind]
school; during the Song Dynasty, Tan Ji wrote the treatise Liu jia qi zong lun [On the
Six Schools and Seven Sects]; and the Monk Jing [Zeng Jing] wrote Shi Xiang Liu Jia


Output:
Lun [The Six Schools of the Sect of the Reality of Appearances].
112                         9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
We do not propose to spend much time in this essay in discussing in any
detail the various prajna teachings popular at that time, but two notable issues
were the very questions which had occupied the center of attention in the Daoist
metaphysical teachings [xuanxue] of the Wei and Jin periods, namely, the questions
of ben-mo [relationship between the fundamental and the incidental] and you-wu
[substance and unreality, or existence and nonexistence]. These were the very same
questions posed by the various schools of prajna Buddhism popular at the time.
In the following paragraphs, I shall attempt to illustrate this problem by taking, in
turn, the three schools contradicted and criticized by the Monk Shao in Bu zhen
kong lun.
   The meaning of the doctrine of the nonexistence of the mind [xin wu yi].
In Bu Zen Kong Lun, the Master Monk Shao wrote:
   By saying that the mind does not really exist they [the adherent of this doctrine] are actually


Output:
saying that the mind does not have existence in any thing, but they do not actually say that
   all things do not really have existence. This doctrine is good in that it leads people toward
   tranquillity of the spirit, but it is faulty in that it is really things, rather than the mind,
   that are empty and non-existent.


Output:
According to Ji Kang (Chi Kang), in the Er ti yi [The Meaning of the Two
Statements]:
   Those who espouse the dogma of the non-existence of the Mind have for too long taken the
   truth of this doctrine for granted. Even before the time of the Great Pandita Kumarajiva, and
   going as far back as to the time of the Masters Dao An and Zhu Fahu, this dogma has
   existed. Those who speak of the non-existence of the mind cite the sutras, saying: “Those
   who say that the nature of appearance is empty and non-existent are in fact clear that
   appearances cannot by themselves be empty and nonexistent but are empty or non-existent
   in the mind. It is because one can achieve this emptiness of vision [of the mind] that one can
   say that appearances are non-existent. In the final analysis, however, the appearance
   cannot be non-existent.” Master Shao dispelled this dogma; he understood its goodness
   to lay in its exhortation to the tranquillity of the spirit, but he also faulted it for its ignorance


Output:
of the fact that it is matter, or things, which are non-existent. To achieve tranquillity of the
   spirit one must indeed understand the emptiness, or non-existence, of the mind; in this
   respect the word of that dogma is good, but, in claiming that appearances may not
   themselves be non-existent, this dogma has exposed its own weakness.


Output:
The idea here is to claim that “the significance of the dogma of the nonexistence
of the mind” is that “the mind, not the appearances [of matter], is empty and
non-existent.” To say that it is not the appearances which are nonexistent is to
say that “all things are not [necessarily] non-existent.” In the Tang Dynasty, in his
annotations to Shao Lun So [Commentary on the Arguments of the Grand Monk
Shao], Yuan Kang wrote, “It [the dogma of the non-existence of the mind] affirms
that matter has substance and is not non-existent” and “it did not understand that the
nature of matter is non-existence; [the Monk Shao] called this its fallacy.” To “not
understand that the nature of matter is non-existence” is to understand the nature of
matter as substance or existence—this is an idea that bears much resemblance to the
thought of Guo Xiang.
   Although a Daoist metaphysician, Guo Xiang opposed the notion of “taking wu
[non-existence, or nonbeing] as the point of origin.” He believed that wan you


Output: 9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .    113


Output:
[all that is or all existence] does not originate from wu [nonexistence] or have
wu for its original ontological reality. To Guo Xing, you [existence] is the only real
being, and it exists on the basis of the fact that each matter has its own zi xiang
[particularity of nature of self-nature]. Therefore, he said, “Each matter, or thing,
has its nature.” To speak of the nonexistence of the mind would therefore be to
project the emptiness, or nonexistence, of the mind into all things. Yuan Kang
annotated this notion, saying, “[To say that the mind is non-existent] is to say that
one must also not generate a definite, appropriating mind on the basis of matter,
this is what is meant by emptiness or non-existence.” This, too, was rather similar to
the ideas espoused by Guo Xiang.
   In annotating and commenting on the seven “inner” chapters of the book
Zhuangzi, Guo Xiang wrote a set of essays which explained, from his viewpoint,
the meaning of the title of each of those chapters. In three of these essays, Guo


Output:
espoused the idea of “the non-existence of the mind [wu xin].” The essay on the
chapter Ren jian shi [The Interhuman World], for example, said, “Only those who
have no existence of the mind and are not self-serving can go wherever the changes
Eead and yet not feel the burdens [of change].” The essay on Da zong shi [The
Great Ancestor and Teacher] said, “Out of the great expanse of the universe and the
richness of all things, there is only one thing which is worth learning from, and of
which it is worth one’s while to become master, and that is the emptiness, or
non-existence, of the mind.” In the essay on the chapter Ying di wang [Response
of Emperors and Princes], Guo said, “Those who have no existence of the mind and
have learned to allow changes and transformation to come whither they will and
lead whither they will are worthy of becoming emperors and princes of men.”
According to these sayings, it is evident that Guo Xiang believed that the sage has


Output:
no existence of the mind and simply follows the [natural] course of matter and is
therefore capable of “going wherever changes may lead, and feels no burden.”
   Nonetheless, although we may say that the [Buddhist] doctrine on the nonexis-
tence of the mind resembles Guo Xiang’s thinking on the subject in many ways, we
have no evidence that the doctrine was directly derived from Guo Xiang’s system of
thought. We can say only that at that time, under the prevailing influence of
xuanxue [Daoist metaphysics], Buddhism often focused on the same problems on
which this school of xuanxue concentrated.
   The meaning of the doctrine of the identity of appearances [ji se yi]. It was Zhi
Dun [Zhi Daolin] who advocated the doctrine of the identity of appearances. It was
said that he wrote about twenty essays [on the subject], including the Shi zhi se ben
wu yi [The Buddha’s Notion of the Identity of Appearances Originating in Noth-
ing], the Ji se you xuan lun [Treatise on the Free Roaming in the Realm of


Output:
Metaphysics of the Doctrine of the Identity of Appearances], the Miao guan
zhang [The Chapter on the Wondrous Vision or Meditation], and the Xiao yao
lun [Treatise on Free Roaming]. Most of these have been lost and only fragments
remain. In the segment Wenxue [Literature] in the book Shi shuo xin yu [New
Specimens of the Talk of the Times], Zhi Dun’s essay Miao guan zhang [Chapter on
the Wondrous Vision or Meditation] was cited in one of the notes, and in this
114                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
citation [the article to which it was attached was itself lost], a certain fragmentary
passage read as follows:
   The nature of appearances is that appearances do not exist naturally or in and of themselves.
   Since appearances do not exist naturally or in and of themselves, there are appearances that
   are kong [empty, or insubstantial]. That is why we say: Appearance [se] is empty, and yet
   appearance is also separate, or different, from emptiness.


Output:
Furthermore, in the Shao Lun Shu [Commentary on the arguments of the Grand
Monk Shao], the Monk Hui Da was quoted as saying:
   The Master of the Laws [fashi] Zhi Daolin said, in the Ji se lun [Treatise on the Identity of
   Appearances]: I believe that the saying: “The identity of appearances is emptiness, not that
   the appearances perish, but that they are empty, or nonexistent” is a most correct statement.
   (This saying is derived from the text of the Wei mo jing [Vimalakirti nirdesa Sutra].) Why?
   Because the nature of appearances lies in that appearances are not by themselves naturally
   appearances. Although they are appearances, they are empty.


Output:
The saying that “appearances are not by themselves appearances” meant
that physical phenomena do not have their own nature or character [zi xing, or
self-nature]. The saying, “appearances do not exist by themselves or naturally”
meant that there are no supporting materials or substances behind things in the
natural state. By “self-nature” [zi xing], we are actually referring to “substance in
itself” [zi ti] or ontological substance [ben ti]. If things did not have their own
substances, although there are myriad separate and diverse phenomena, they are all
not real. This is the reasoning behind stating that “although they are appearances,
they are empty”; i.e., although there are myriad diverse phenomena, there is in
reality not a single true substance. In the time of the Wei and Jin dynasties, the term
kong [emptiness] was often conceived to be interchangeable with the term wu
[nonexistence, nonbeing], and xuanxue scholars [metaphysicians] [or adherents of


Output:
the Buddhist religion who were influenced by the ideas of xuanxue] of the day
often also argued that kong [emptiness or insubstantiality or unreality] or inter-
changeably wu [nonexistence] was the ontological substance of all things. (This,
for instance, was the contention of the ben wu yi [Doctrine of the Nonexistence
of Origin], with which we shall be soon dealing.) Therefore, on the point that it
made regarding the absence of ontological substance behind matter, or things, Zhi
Dun’s idea also came very close to the ideas of Guo Xiang.
    The notion of “the non-existence of substance” [wu-ti] proposed that behind se
[phenomena or appearances], there is no ontological substance in the kong or wu
[i.e., the kong (emptiness) or wu (nonexistence) is not actually ontological substance
for the se (appearances)]. Although there is phenomenon, there is no ontological
substance, and thus “Appearances are also separate from emptiness.” Since there is


Output:
no ontological substance to appearances, one cannot say that it is only when appear-
ances have perished that they become “empty” [or, revert to emptiness]—hence the
saying: “Not that appearances perish, but that they are empty.” From this angle, Zhi
Dun’s Ji se lun [Treatise on the Identity of Appearances] could have been more
appropriately called the Je se ben wu yi [Doctrine of the Identity of Appearances
Originating in Nothing]. From one angle, Zhi Dun’s idea appeared to be quite similar
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                     115


Output:
to Guo Xiang’s thought, as when they seemed to hold in common a belief that there
is no ontological substance behind things. From another facet, however, their ideas
were different. Zhi Dun’s belief, as we have seen, was that if things did not have
ontological substance behind them, it meant that things were “empty” to begin with.
   From the angle of their separate interpretations of the essay, Xiao yao you
[Free Roaming] in the book Zhuangzi, it becomes even more obvious that there
were differences between Zhi Dun’s ideas and Guo Xiang’s thought. According to
the “Zhi Dun zhuan” [The Biography of Zhi Dun] in Gao Seng Zhuan [The
Biographies of the Great Monks]:
   Liu Xizhi et al., when discussing the chapter Xiao yao bian of the book Zhuangzi, said:
   “Each must accommodate its own nature and only then can it roam totally freely.” Dun
   [Zhi Dun] disagreed, saying: “That is wrong. Jie [a tyrant, and last ruler of the Xia Dynasty]


Output:
and Qi [a notorious bandit and rebel of the late Spring and Autumn period] are by nature
   cruel and ruinous. If it were indeed all right, and necessary, for each to accommodate its
   own nature, would not Jie and Qi also be free roaming now?” On that [Zhi Dun] retired to
   write his own annotation of the Xiao yao bian.


Output:
The idea of “each accommodating its own nature and thereby becoming a free
roaming spirit” was, of course, precisely the dominant thought in Guo Xiang’s own
annotation and interpretation of the Xiao yao bian. In the prefatorial note of his
commentary to this chapter of Zhuangzi in which he laid down his arguments by
way of explaining the chapter’s title, he said:
   Although things may differ in size, if they were each placed in its own appropriate place,
   where it fits the circumstances, each matter would be able to let loose its own nature and
   each thing will be suited to its ability; each will be in its proper portion, and all things will
   be equally free to roam. How then can differences be driven between things?


Output:
Moreover, the first annotation in Guo Xiang’s annotative commentary on Xiao
yao you read, in part,
   Zhuangzi’s general idea was that one must be essentially free to roam and travel totally free
   of confinements. One must therefore obtain oneself—be independent—by putting oneself
   in non-action. Therefore the smallest is also the greatest. One must hence understand the
   principle of fitting one’s nature to one’s portion.


Output:
From the above, we can see that it was precisely to this idea of Guo Xiang’s that
Zhi Dun objected. What then were Zhi Dun’s own views on “the freely roaming
spirit”? The full text of his commentary on the Xiao yao bian is no longer extant.
However, a fragment of it was cited by an annotation in the Wenxue [Literature]
portion of Shi shuo xin yu:
   Xiaoyao [free roaming] means the fulfillment of the enlightenment of the mind of the
   Ultimate Man. The Young Master Zhuang established through the Word the Great Way, by
   putting his ideas into the words of the roc [peng] and the wren [yan]. The roc’s pathway of
   life is a broad one; to accommodate it he has to lose himself outside of his own body; the
   wren, on the other hand, is but close to the ground, yet it jeered at that which was far away
   and high up in the heavens. He had a sense of arrogance and conflict in his own mind.
   The Ultimate Man rides on the wings of the Propriety of Heaven and is glad; he roams in the


Output:
realm of Infinity and is entirely footloose. To objectify objects and not be objectified by
   objects is to roam freely and not return to one’s condition; to contain a sense of xuan
   [the metaphysical principle] and not to engage in action, to move swiftly and yet without
116                        9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
any haste, is to roam freely and be able to go wherever one wishes. That is what is meant by
   xiaoyao. If one had a desire in one’s mind which has to be met, and if one is content with
   meeting the desires whose fulfillment meant contentment, then, though one’s happiness
   may appear similar to natural naivete, it would, in fact, be nothing but like the desire of the
   thirsty for the contentment of a single drink. How can one lose the sense of luxurious food
   simply because one has been filled up by one good dinner? Or can we put an end to the
   reality of the grandeur of the ceremonial wine after we have imbibed some rich quaff? The
   Ultimate Man does not speak of xiaoyao [free roaming] until he is truly satisfied.


Output:
It was Guo Xiang’s belief that although things differed in magnitude, they were
equal in terms of the ability to “roam freely” under the principle of “each according
to its own nature.” From this opinion, Zhi Dun differed. In his point of view,
whether or not one was capable of roaming freely depended on one’s perspective.
If one could “objectify all objects and not be objectified by objects” [i.e., be in
control of all things and not be oneself trammeled by things] and “contain a sense of
xuan [the metaphysical principle] and not engage in action, be swift without being
in any haste” [i.e., respond objectively to all things and yet not ask, or need,
anything of things; respond to change but not change oneself], then one would be
capable of “free roaming” that is indeed worthy of that description.
    On the other hand, Zhi Dun believed that if one were to “roam” only to satisfy
the requirements of one’s own nature and portion, then it would be nothing more


Output:
than a hungry man seeking a meal or a thirsty man asking for the gratification of a
drink. To him, such low levels of demand and satisfaction cannot be considered
“free roaming.” Therefore, only that which satisfies the ultimate can be called
“roaming freely.” Zhi Dun thought of “satisfying the Ultimate” as “riding the
wings of the Propriety of Heaven” (according to Zhuang zi’s text, the proper
citation should have been “the Propriety of Heaven and Earth”) and “being glad,
traveling in the realm of Infinity and being completely unconfined.” This meant
living in the universe and yet not being limited by the limited world and absolutely
transcending of the world of matter and being unconfined, unfettered in thought.
That is what he meant when he said, “To roam freely is to attain the full enlight-
enment of the mind of the Ultimate Man.” In Zhi Dun’s view, “roaming freely”
depended solely on the ability of the mind of the Ultimate Man to transcend the
limitations of time and space.


Output:
limitations of time and space.
    Another essay that Zhi Dun wrote, known by the title Ji se you xuan lun [Treatise
on Free Roaming in the Realm of the Metaphysical by the Doctrine of the Identity
of Appearances], is also no longer extant. It is possible to deduce, however, that it
contained a theory which was derived from a combination of his “doctrine of the
identity of appearances” [ji se yi] and his doctrine of “free roaming” [xiao yao yi].
If the Ultimate Man was able to realize the principle that “appearances are not by
themselves appearances” [se bu zi se], then he would be able to “objectify all things
and not be objectified by them” and to “contain a sense of the principle of the
metaphysical and not engage in action, to be swift and yet not in haste”; such a
person would “roam freely everywhere and be able to go wherever he wishes.”
In other words, such a person’s mind would be fully capable of transcending all
the limitations of time and space. Therefore, in Zhi Dun’s view, to become


Output: 9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                 117


Output:
Buddha meant, in fact, to roam freely and to become completely unconfined
by convention—this was precisely the same goals which the xuanxue [Daoist
metaphysics] scholars strove to achieve. From this viewpoint, there is, between
his “doctrine on free roaming in the realm of the metaphysical by the principle of
the identity of appearances” [ji se you xuan lun] and his “doctrine of the identity
of appearances originating in nothingness” [ji se ben wu lun], no inconsistency of
theoretical contradiction.
    From the above analysis, we can see that the questions discussed in Zhi Dun’s
doctrine of the identity of appearances were the same as those which were raised in
the circle of xuanxue. Furthermore, from his own views on the question of xiao yao
[free roaming], we can see that he was himself a xuanxue scholar [Daoist
metaphysician]. Although his views differed from those of Guo Xiang, they were
in fact quite close to the original ideas of Zhuang Zhou [Zhuangzi].


Output:
The Meaning of the Doctrine of Original Nothingness [ben wu yi]. From the
Liu jia qi zong lun [Treatise of the Six Schools and Seven Sects] written by the
Monk Tan Ji and the Zhong Lun Shu [Commentary on the Prannyaya mula sastrtika
or Treatise of the Meditation of the Mean] written by the Monk Ji Kang (Chi Kang),
the ben wu yi [doctrine of Original Nothingness] bifurcated into two major chan-
nels. One was the ben wu zong [School of Original Nothingness] and the other was
known as the ben wu yi zong [the Variant Sect of Original Nothingness]. The former
school espoused the form of the doctrine as championed by the Monk Dao An; the
latter was espoused by the Pandita Shen [or Fa Shen, a.k.a. Zhu Daoqian]. In reality,
they resembled each other in major ways and differed only in minor areas.
Here, therefore, we shall not dwell on the differences but analyze only Dao An’s
“doctrine or original nothingness” [ben wu] in order to illustrate the relationship of
this doctrine to the teachings of xuanxue.


Output:
this doctrine to the teachings of xuanxue.
    In the Zhong lun suo, Ji Kang (Chi Kang) wrote:
   Before the arrival of Kumarajiva the Pandita, there were three schools of Buddhist
   teachings in Changan [the Tang Dynasty capital of China]. One was the school of the
   Monk [Shi] Dao An, which was represented by his teachings on Original Nothingness, in
   which he argued that wu [nothingness, or nonbeing] existed prior to all creation and that
   kong [emptiness or non-existence] was the beginning of all forms. He also argued that what
   was holding people back [from their enlightenment] was the sense of you [existence, or
   being] when you is in fact a product rather than a point of origin. If people could only rest
   their minds in contentment with Original Nothingness, they would be able to quell all
   devious thought.. . . To understand this significance is to maintain tranquillity in the
   universal enlightenment of Original Nothingness. All the myriad dharma [fa, or things]


Output:
have, as their original nature, emptiness and extinction; that is what we mean when we say
   Original Nothingness.


Output:
This quotation suggests that Dao An first of all posited that the prior existence of
all dharma, together with all their forms and phenomena, was wu [nothingness, or
nonbeing] and kong [emptiness or nonexistence]. However, kong wu [nonexistence
and emptiness, or nonbeing] was not the same as xu kong [void]. Dao An, therefore,
said “Wu [non-existence] existed before the original transformation [or creation];
kong [emptiness] was the beginning of all forms [formed substance]; that is what we
mean when we speak of original nothingness. This does not mean that it was from a
118                       9 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China: A Perspective. . .


Output:
[specific] void that all things were given birth.” (See the citation of Tan Ji’s Liu jia
qi zong lun in the Ming Zeng Zhuan chao [Handcopy of the Biographies of the
Renowned Monks].) Therefore, when Dao An argued that “the wan you [all things]
were generated from kong wu” [emptiness and non-existence], the term kong wu
did not mean xu kong [void]; the meaning, rather, was that kong [emptiness] or wu
[nonexistence] was the original ontological substance of wan you [all things].
Only in this way could it exist “prior to all existences” [wan you].
    It should be noted that Dao An’s understanding of the Kong zong [Emptiness
Sect, or Sect of Nonbeing] in Buddhist prajna teaching was not quite in conformity
to that sect’s understanding of its own teachings, in which “Original Nothingness”
seemed to have been taken to mean that “all dharma did not originally have a nature
unto themselves [zi xing]” or, in other words, nothing has a real ontological


Output:
substance in itself. (We shall have more to say on this issue later.) Instead, Dao
An’s doctrine of Original Nothingness can be said to have borne certain resem-
blances to Wang Bi’s idea of “accepting wu [nonexistence] as the origin” [yi wu wei
ben]. In fact, it may be closer even to the ideas of Zhang Zhan. Like Wang Bi,
Zhang Zhan posited “non-existence as the origin” [yi wu wei ben], but when he
spoke of wu [nonexistence], he seemed to have been referring to something outside
of [and over and above] you [existence]. For example, he said: “Because there is
such a thing as Ultimate Non-existence [zhi wu], it can therefore be the origination
and source of all changes and transformations [from which came creation].” He also
said: “That which is not born can therefore be the origin of all that is born.” In these
illustrations, Zhang Zhan affirmed in his mind that there was, above and beyond
wan you [all existence], a transcendental absolute which served as the origin from


Output:
which and by which all existence is born.
    This viewpoint differed substantially from that of Wang Bi. Wang believed that
although “nonexistence” [wu] was the ontological substance of “existence,” it did
not exist outside of you. He said: “Non-existence cannot be without name; it must
have cause in existence.” Also, Wang believed that substance [ti] cannot be
divorced from usage. He said: “We shall take non-existence for usage; we cannot
abandon non-existence as substance alone.” On the other hand, Dao An, when he
talked of Original Nothingness, saw wu [nonexistence] as existing prior to wan you
[all existences, or all being]. He was, therefore, closer to Zhang Zhan’s ideas.
Furthermore, Dao An, in a way similar to Zhang Zhan, even used the “theory of
the Original Breath, or Spirit” [yuan qi lun] to explain the construction of the
Universe and the formation of all things. It was thus recorded in Tan Ji’s Liu jia qi
zong lun:


Output:
zong lun:
   In the first place, thus spoke the Founder of the Sect of Original Nothingness: Ru lai
   [He That Was as He Came, i.e., Buddha] came to prosper the world. He taught the doctrine
   of Original Nothingness to extend his teachings. That is why the profound vaipulya sutras
   all contain enlightenment on the doctrine of the original nothingness of the wu yin [the five
   negative elements, or agencies]. For the longest time, the doctrine of original nothingness
   has been accepted and broadened. . .. How so? Prior to primal and Covert Creation, there
   was nothing but the frame. It was when the Original Spirit or Breath began to mold and
   transform that the myriad phenomena began to be endowed with forms. . .. This is not to say
   that it is out of Emptiness that the many things were born. What holds people back is that
9.1 The Introduction of Indian Buddhism into China and the Popularization. . .                    119


Output:
they remain stagnated [in their understanding] in the realm of the you [being] which is
   merely the product, or result [and not the origin]. If a person is capable of investing his mind
   in the Original Nothingness, he would be able to shed this very burden. This is what we
   mean when we say that, if only one would pursue and exalt the origin, the inconsequential
   ends would be put to rest.


Output:
By wu [nonexistence], Dao An meant the original spirit or breath [yuan qi]
which he conceived to be a frame without form or phenomenon. This viewpoint was
consistent with the interpretation which the Buddhist monks, from the Han-Wei
period up to this time, held with regard to the notion of the formation of the universe
and followed from those interpretations. The Monk Kang Hui, when he translated
the Liu Du Ji Jing [Collected Sutra of the Six Paramitas], wrote, in its volume 8,
under the Cha Wei Wang Jing [Sutra of the Observations of the Covert Meanings
of the Words of the King]:
   What we have observed has rendered us profoundly aware that, when Man was in a
   primitive original state, he was born of the Original Nothingness. Then the Original Breath
   became differentiated: that part which was solid and strong became earth, that which was
   soft became water, that which was warm became fire, and that which was mobile became


Output:
wind. . .. These four things met in harmony and the Knowing Spirit was born. Arising, it
   became enlightened as to its capacities and senses, and it ceased to desire, becoming thus
   empty of mind, and the spirit was reverted to Original Nothingness. This Breath, or Spirit,
   of the Knowing and the Origin was delicate, subtle, and imperceptible.