Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:13 am

Qiu Jin
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 8/12/20

Image
Qiu Jin
Born: 8 November 1875, Xiamen, Fujian, Qing dynasty
Died: 15 July 1907 (aged 31), Shanyin, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, Qing Dynasty
Cause of death: Execution by Decapitation
Political party: Guangfuhui; Tongmenghui
Spouse(s): Wang Tingjun
Children: Wang Yuande (王沅德); Wang Guifen (王桂芬)
Parent(s): Qiu Xinhou (秋信候)
This is a Chinese name; the family name is Qiu.

Qiu Jin (Chinese: 秋瑾; pinyin: Qiū Jǐn; Wade–Giles: Ch'iu Chin; November 8, 1875 – July 15, 1907) was a Chinese revolutionary, feminist, and writer. Her courtesy names are Xuanqing (Chinese: 璿卿; pinyin: Xuánqīng) and Jingxiong (simplified Chinese: 竞雄; traditional Chinese: 競雄; pinyin: Jìngxióng). Her sobriquet name is Jianhu Nüxia (simplified Chinese: 鉴湖女侠; traditional Chinese: 鑑湖女俠; pinyin: Jiànhú Nǚxiá) which, when translated literally into English, means "Woman Knight of Mirror Lake". Qiu was executed after a failed uprising against the Qing dynasty, and she is considered a national heroine in China; a martyr of republicanism and feminism.

Biography

Born in Xiamen, Fujian, China,[1] Qiu spent her childhood in her ancestral home,[2] Shaoxing, Zhejiang. While in an unhappy marriage, Qiu came into contact with new ideas. She became a member of the Tongmenghui secret society[3] who at the time advocated the overthrow of the Qing and restoration of Han Chinese governance.

In 1903, she decided to travel overseas and study in Japan,[4] leaving her two children behind. She initially entered a Japanese language school in Surugadai, but later transferred to the Girls' Practical School in Kōjimachi, run by Shimoda Utako.[5] Qiu was fond of martial arts, and she was known by her acquaintances for wearing Western male dress[6][7][1] and for her nationalist, anti-Manchu ideology. She joined the anti-Qing society Guangfuhui, led by Cai Yuanpei, which in 1905 joined together with a variety of overseas Chinese revolutionary groups to form the Tongmenghui, led by Sun Yat-sen.

Within this Revolutionary Alliance, Qiu was responsible for the Zhejiang Province. Because the Chinese overseas students were divided between those who wanted an immediate return to China to join the ongoing revolution and those who wanted to stay in Japan to prepare for the future, a meeting of Zhejiang students was held to debate the issue. At the meeting, Qiu allied unquestioningly with the former group and thrust a dagger into the podium, declaring, "If I return to the motherland, surrender to the Manchu barbarians, and deceive the Han people, stab me with this dagger!"[citation needed] She subsequently returned to China in 1906 along with about 2,000 students.[8]

Whilst still based in Tokyo, Qiu single-handedly edited a journal, Vernacular Journal (Baihua Bao). A number of issues were published using vernacular Chinese as a medium of revolutionary propaganda. In one issue, Qiu wrote A Respectful Proclamation to China's 200 Million Women Comrades, a manifesto within which she lamented the problems caused by bound feet and oppressive marriages[9]. Having suffered from both ordeals herself, Qiu explained her experience in the manifesto and received an overwhelmingly sympathetic response from her readers.[10] Also outlined in the manifesto was Qiu's belief that a better future for women lay under a Western-type government instead of the Qing government that was in power at the time. She joined forces with her cousin Xu Xilin[6] and together they worked to unite many secret revolutionary societies to work together for the overthrow of the Qing dynasty.

She was known as an eloquent orator[11] who spoke out for women's rights, such as the freedom to marry, freedom of education, and abolishment of the practice of foot binding. In 1906 she founded China Women's News (Zhongguo nü bao), a radical women's journal with another female poet, Xu Zihua.[12] They published only two issues before it was closed by the authorities.[13] In 1907 she became head of the Datong school in Shaoxing, ostensibly a school for sport teachers, but really intended for the military training of revolutionaries.

On July 6, 1907 Xu Xilin was caught by the authorities before a scheduled uprising in Anqing. He confessed his involvement under torture and was executed. On July 12, the authorities arrested Qiu at the school for girls where she was the principal. She was tortured as well but refused to admit her involvement in the plot. Instead the authorities used her own writings as incrimination against her and, a few days later, she was publicly beheaded in her home village, Shanyin, at the age of 31[2]. Her last written words, her death poem, uses the literal meaning of her name, Autumn Gem, to lament of the failed revolution that she would never see take place:

"秋風秋雨愁煞人" ("Autumn wind, autumn rain — they make one die of sorrow")[14]

Legacy

Image
The entrance to her former residence in Shaoxing, which is now a museum

Qiu was immortalised in the Republic of China's popular consciousness and literature after her death. She is now buried beside West Lake in Hangzhou. The People's Republic of China established a museum for her in Shaoxing, named after Qiu Jin's Former Residence (绍兴秋瑾故居).

Her life has been portrayed in plays, popular movies (including the 1972 Hong Kong film Chow Ken (秋瑾)), and the documentary Autumn Gem.[15] One film, simply entitled Qiu Jin, was released in 1983 and directed by Xie Jin;[16][17]. Another film, released in 2011, was entitled Jing Xiong Nüxia Qiu Jin (竞雄女侠秋瑾), or The Woman Knight of Mirror Lake, and directed by Herman Yau. She is briefly shown in the beginning of 1911, being led to the execution ground to be beheaded. The movie was directed by Jackie Chan and Zhang Li. Immediately after her death Chinese playwrights used the incident, "resulting in at least eight plays before the end of the Ch'ing dynasty."[18]

In 2018, the New York Times published a belated obituary for her.[19]

Literary works

Because Qiu is mainly remembered in the West as revolutionary and feminist, her poetry and essays are often overlooked (though owing to her early death, they are not great in number). Her writing reflects an exceptional education in classical literature, and she writes traditional poetry (shi and ci). Qiu composes verse with a wide range of metaphors and allusions that mix classical mythology with revolutionary rhetoric.

For example, in a poem, Capping Rhymes with Sir Ishii From Sun's Root Land[20] we read the following:

Don't tell me women are not the stuff of heroes,
I alone rode over the East Sea's winds for ten thousand leagues.
My poetic thoughts ever expand, like a sail between ocean and heaven.
I dreamed of your three islands, all gems, all dazzling with moonlight.
I grieve to think of the bronze camels, guardians of China, lost in thorns.
Ashamed, I have done nothing; not one victory to my name.
I simply make my war horse sweat. Grieving over my native land
hurts my heart. So tell me; how can I spend these days here?
A guest enjoying your spring winds?


Editors Sun Chang and Saussy explain the metaphors as follows:

line 4: "Your islands" translates "sandao," literally "three islands," referring to Honshu, Shikoku and Kyushu, while omitting Hokkaido - an old fashion way of referring to Japan.

line 6: ... the conditions of the bronze camels, symbolic guardians placed before the imperial palace, is traditionally considered to reflect the state of health of the ruling dynasty. But in Qiu's poetry, it reflects instead the state of health of China.[22]

On leaving Beijing for Japan, she wrote a poem summarizing her life until that point:

Sun and moon have no light left, earth is dark;
Our women's world is sunk so deep, who can help us?
Jewelry sold to pay this trip across the seas,
Cut off from my family I leave my native land.
Unbinding my feet I clean out a thousand years of poison,
With heated heart arouse all women's spirits.
Alas, this delicate kerchief here
Is half stained with blood, and half with tears.


Image
Statue of Qiu Jin beside West Lake in Hangzhou

Image
Statue of Qiu Jin

Further reading

• Laure deShazer, Marie. Qiu Jin, Chinese Joan of Arc. ISBN 978-1537157085.

See also

• Poetry portal
• Feminism in China

Footnotes

1. Schatz, Kate; Klein Stahl, Miriam (2016). Rad women worldwide: artists and athletes, pirates and punks, and other revolutionaries who shaped history. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press. p. 13.
2. Porath, Jason (2016). Rejected princesses: tales of history's boldest heroines, hellions, and heretics. New York: Dey Street Press. p. 272.
3. Porath, Jason (2016). Rejected princesses: tales of history's boldest heroines, hellions, and heretics. New York: Dey Street Press. p. 271.
4. Barnstone, Tony; Ping, Chou (2005). The Anchor Book of Chinese Poetry. New York: Anchor Books. p. 344.
5. Ono, Kazuko (1989). Chinese Women in a Century of Revolution, 1850-1950. Stanford University Press. p. 61. ISBN 9780804714976.
6. Ashby, Ruth; Gore Ohrn, Deborah (1995). Herstory: Women Who Changed the World. New York: Viking Press. p. 181.
7. Porath, Jason (2016). Rejected princesses: tales of history's boldest heroines, hellions, and heretics. New York. p. 271.
8. Ono, Kazuko (1989). Chinese Women in a Century of Revolution, 1850-1950. Stanford University Press. pp. 61–62. ISBN 9780804714976.
9. Dooling, Amy D (2005). Women's literary feminism in twentieth-century China. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 52.
10. Ono, Kazuko (1989). Chinese Women in a Century of Revolution, 1850-1950. Stanford University Press. pp. 62–63. ISBN 9780804714976.
11. Dooling, Amy D. (2005). Women’s Literary Feminism in Twentieth-Century China. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 50.
12. Zhu, Yun (2017). Imagining Sisterhood in Modern Chinese Texts, 1890–1937. Lanham: Lexington Books. p. 38.
13. Fincher, Leta Hong (2014). Leftover Women: The Resurgence of Gender Inequality in China. London, New York: Zed Books. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-78032-921-5.
14. Yan, Haiping (2006). Chinese women writers and the feminist imagination, 1905-1948. New York: Routledge. p. 33.
15. Tow, Adam (2017). Autumn Gem. San Francisco: Kanopy.
16. Browne, Nick; Pickowicz, Paul G.; Yau, Esther (eds.). New Chinese Cinemas: Forms, Identities, Politics. Cambridge University Press. p. 33. ISBN 0 521 44877 8.
17. Kuhn, Annette; Radstone, Susannah (eds.). The Women's Companion to International Film. University of California Press. p. 434. ISBN 0520088794.
18. Mair, Victor H. (2001). The Columbia history of Chinese literature. New York: Columbia University Press. p. 844.
19. Qin, Amy (2018). "Qiu Jin, Beheaded by Imperial Forces, Was 'China's Joan of Arc'". The New York Times. Retrieved 2018-03-09 – via nytimes.com.
20. Ayscough, Florence (1937). Chinese Women: yesterday & to-day. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. p. 147.
21. translated by Zachary Jean Chartkoff
22. Chang, Kang-i Sun; Saussy, Haun (1999). Women Writers of Traditional China: An Anthology of Poetry and Criticism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. p. 642.
23. Spence, Jonathan D. (1981). The Gate of Heavenly Peace. Penguin Books. p. 85.

External links

• The Qiu Jin Museum (archived) from chinaspirit.net.cn
• Autumn Gem, documentary film
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Wed Aug 12, 2020 9:29 am

Zou Rong
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 8/12/20

In the spring of 1908, when Taixu was eighteen years old, the reformist monk Huashan came to the Xifang si, where Taixu was staying. According to Yinshun, Huashan was actually "the first person to start modernizing the sangha."13 Impressed with Taixu, Huashan told him about those working for revolutionary political and social changes within China, asserting that the monastic order itself must modernize and promote educational reform. Initially, Taixu was uncertain about Huashan's ideas; indeed, the two monks argued for more than ten days about what such modernization efforts would require. Challenging Taixu to broaden his reading, Huashan gave him a wide variety of provocative books with which he was unfamiliar, including Kang Youwei's utopian classic Datong shu (The Book of the Great Community), Liang Qichao's Xinmin shuo (On New People), Zhang Taiyan's (1868-1936) Gao fozi shu (Letter to Followers of the Buddha) and Gao baiyi shu (Letter to Lay Buddhists), Yan Fu's Tionyan lun (On Evolution), and Tan Sitong's Renxue (An Exposition on Benevolence).

Deeply influenced by these writings, Taixu soon aligned himself with Huashan's modernist stance. Committed to both political reform for the nation and religious reform for the Buddhist community, he formalized a special alliance of friendship with Huashan and began to consider how in practical terms a "new Buddhism" could be created in China to parallel the creation of a new nation. Writes Yinshun, "Because of Taixu's great resolve to save the world through Buddhism, he moved forward from that point and could never again restrain himself. Turning from the kind of religious path that seeks to transcend the human realm in order to enter the Absolute, rather he chose to distance himself from the Absolute in order to confront the world of humankind."14 The vow to pursue this kind of path to transform the world, Taixu stated, was a direct result of his close relationship with Huashan.15

Soon thereafter, at the Xiao Jiuhua si near Pingwang, Taixu met Qiyun, the revolutionary monk from Hunan. Qiyun was a former student of Eight Fingers who, during studies in Japan, had become an early member of the Tongmeng hui (Chinese United League) founded by Sun Yat-sen in 1905. An iconoclastic spirit, Qiyun was associated with Xu Xilin (1873- 1907), Qiu Jin (1879-1907), and other revolutionaries intent on the overthrow of the Qing government. 16 Yinshun notes that, according to the demands of each particular situation, Qiyun wore either western clothes with leather shoes or Buddhist monastic garb. When Taixu first encountered him, he was wearing the monastic robes that permitted him to hide from government officials in the monastery. It was through Qiyun's influence that Taixu was first encouraged to read political materials such as Sun Yat-sen and Zhang Taiyan's Minbao (People's Journal), Liang Qichao's Xinmin congbao (New People's Review), and Zou Rong's (1885-1905) Geming jun (Revolutionary Army). Influenced deeply by Sun's three principles of the people (sanmin zhuyi), he became filled with optimism about revolutionary proposals for broad Chinese political and social reforms. Comments Yinshun, "This was the beginning of Taixu's associations with political partisans (dangren)."17

-- Chapter 2: The Sound of the Tide for a New China [Taixu/Tai Hsu] [Bodhi Society] [Right Faith Buddhist Society of Hankou], Excerpt from Toward a Modern Chinese Buddhism: Taixu's Reforms, by Don Alvin Pittman


Image
Zou Rong
Born: 1885
Died: 1905 (aged 20)
Nationality: Chinese
Known for: Writing The Revolutionary Army
This is a Chinese name; the family name is Zou.

Zou Rong (Chinese: 鄒容; pinyin: Zōu Róng; Wade–Giles: Tsou Jung; 1885 – 1905) was a Chinese nationalist, racialist and revolutionary martyr of the anti-Qing movement. He was born in Chongqing, Sichuan Province, his ancestors having moved there from Meizhou, Guangdong area.[1] Zou was sent to Japan at an early age, where he studied the successful Japanese way of modernization.

When he returned to China, he started to write essays on how to free the Chinese nation from the Manchu regime and foreign imperialism. In 1903, he published a book on this topic: The Revolutionary Army (geming jun 革命軍). The deeply patriotic book, informed by Republicanism and Social Darwinist racial theories, was widely read and had a profound influence on the revolutionary movement. Thousands of copies of the book were distributed internationally by Sun Yat-sen[2] in support of the revolutionary cause.

Zou found the Qing government unable to deal with the contemporary crisis of colonization, weakness and corruption. For Zou, the Manchu were the source of China's inability to overcome traditional obstacles for modern reforms and he analyzed their mistakes and weaknesses point by point. Moreover, he condemned China's traditional monarchical system, which had made the Han Chinese "slaves" rather than "citizens." He was also influenced by racialist Han ideology, as evidenced in his distaste for the Manchu governing class, as he advocated “genocide [of] the five million and more of the furry and horned Manchu race, cleansing ourselves of 260 years of harsh and unremitting pain, so that the soil of the Chinese subcontinent is made immaculate, and the descendants of the Yellow Emperor will all become Washingtons.”

His calls for sovereignty of the Chinese people included the establishment of a parliament, equal rights for women, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. These seemingly liberal ideals were underpinned by a potentially genocidal ethnic nationalism; it was not the liberty of the individual, but the sovereignty of the ethnic nation-state ("A man cannot live without his country") that formed the foundations for the Republic of China as envisioned by Zou Rong.


Zou lived in a foreign concession in Shanghai where he enjoyed extraterritorial rights and could not be sentenced to death by a Qing Court. Instead, he was closely associated with Zhang Binglin and implicated in the Subao incident as a result, which rendered him a prison sentence of two years; he fell ill while incarcerated and died in April 1905 at the age of 20.

On June 29, Su Bao published another article, The Relationship between Kang Youwei and Sir Jue Luo, which not only opposed Kang Youwei for his opinion of supporting constitution and refusing revolution, but also challenged Emperor Guangxu and Empress Dowager Cixi. On the same day that the article was published, foreign concession government arrested Zhang Binglin and Zou Rong, and then closed down the newspaper. The Qing government was urged to execute Zhang Binglin and Zou Rong. However, because of huge social pressure, the concession areas sentenced them to life imprisonment in their first trial. Afterwards the authorities were forced to change the sentence of Zhang Binglin to three years and that of Zou Rong to two years.

-- Su Bao, by Wikipedia


References

1. "泸州老窖的客家故事之二 迁川往事:忘不了的根,磨不灭的志".
2. Marie-Claire Bergère; Janet Lloyd (1998). Sun Yat-sen. Stanford University Press. p. 125. ISBN 978-0-8047-4011-1.

Bibliography

Zou Rong; Lust, John (trans.): The Revolutionary Army : a Chinese Nationalist Tract of 1903. Paris: Mouton, 1968.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:22 am

Part 1 of 3

Humanistic Buddhism From Venerable Tai Xu to Grand Master Hsing Yun [1]
by Darui Long
Hsi Lai Journal of Humanistic Buddhism
Volume 1 (2000)
pp. 53-84
Copyright 2000 by International Academy of Buddhism, Hsi Lai University

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.




ABSTRACT

The present essay aims at a historical analysis of Humanistic Buddhism that was preached by Master Tai Xu in the 1930s and the great contribution Grand Master Hsing Yun has made to the development of Humanistic Buddhism.

What is Humanistic Buddhism? Why did Tai Xu raise this issue of constructing Humanistic Buddhism as his guiding principle in his reform of Chinese Buddhism? What did he do in his endeavors to realize his goal? Did he succeed in bringing back the humanistic nature of Buddhism? What contributions has Grand Master Hsing Yun made to this cause?

This essay makes attempts to answer these questions. It is divided into four parts. The first deals with the history of Humanistic Buddhism. It was Sakyamuni who first advanced Humanistic Buddhism. He lectured, meditated, propagated his way of life, and finally attained his Nirvana in the world. Hui-neng (638-713 CE) emphasized that Buddhism is in the world and that it is not realized apart from the world.

The second chapter touches upon the historical background of development and decline of Chinese Buddhism. It illustrates in detail how Buddhism declined in the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911) dynasties. Corrupt officials vied with one another to confiscate the property of Buddhism in the late Qing and early years of the Republic of China. Even the lay Buddhist scholars made strong commentaries on the illness of Buddhism and Buddhists.

Chapter 3 discusses the life and reform career of Venerable Tai Xu (1889-1947). Being a revolutionary monk, Tai Xu raised the term "Humanistic Buddhism" again and introduced it in his reform.

What is "Humanistic Buddhism"? This word witnessed three stages of development. Tai Xu first advanced this concept by using the Chinese word "rencheng fojiao" in 1916. This word "rencheng" refers to the people of rebirth among men conveyed by observing the five precepts -- people of the first vehicle. In other words, "rencheng fojiao" means "ordinary people's Buddhism." He slightly changed the word as "rensheng fojiao" (human life Buddhism) in 1928. The word "rensheng" means "human life." Tai Xu further developed his concept of the Humanistic Buddhism by the word "renjian fojiao." The original Chinese term "renjian" consists of two words "ren" meaning "human," or "person," and the word "jian" referring to "certain space" or "period of time." When the two Chinese words are combined to form one word "renjian," it means "human society," "human society, " "human world, " "the world, " or "man's world."

The Humanistic Buddhism advanced by Tai Xu aimed at bringing back Buddhism into the human world.
Tai Xu urged Buddhists to offer service to the society so that Buddhism would be widely accepted and developed. However, his life-long efforts failed in the reform due to the Japanese invasion, civil wars and inner struggles among Buddhists themselves.

It was Grand Master Hsing Yun whose efforts and talent have made Tai Xu's dream come true. Having a strong sense of responsibility for the future of Buddhism, Grand Master Hsing Yun has not only made contributions to the concrete practice of Humanistic Buddhism, but also developed the theoretical aspects of Humanistic Buddhism. Chapter 4 focuses on how the Grand Master has dedicated to the cause of Humanistic Buddhism. From an ordinary young monk, empty-handed, Master Hsing Yun exerted great efforts to disseminate Buddhism, first in remote villages and small towns, then in big cities. He has crowned his cause by building first-rate temples in the United States and almost 200 temples affiliated with Fo Guang Shan Buddhist Movement in various countries in the world. In this aspect, the Grand Master successfully carried on the cause of practical reform initiated by Tai Xu. The Grand Master is considered the Martin Luther in the practical reform of Chinese Buddhism.

Hsing Yun also made theoretical contributions to Humanistic Buddhism. He illustrated the points of modernity in Buddhism: the modernity of language, the use of modern facilities and the practice in life and building monasteries as modern school. He further characterizes Humanistic Buddhism with the following: humanity, life, altruism, delight, time frame and universality. He maintains that Humanistic Buddhism should bring people confidence, joy, hope and convenience. He aims at using the teachings of the Buddha for the improvement for our lives and the purification of our mind. The Grand Master emphasizes the importance of reality.

It is Master Hsing Yun 's vision that makes Humanistic Buddhism throw light on the future of Chinese Buddhism. The spirit of universal compassionate and the responsibility for the salvation of all has deeply infiltrated into the mind of the educated scholar class in China. The spirit of Fo Guang Shan has gone beyond its birthplace in Taiwan. If we say that Venerable Tai Xu made the first effort to re-connect us with the essential Buddhist spirit in the first half of the 20th century, then Grand Master Hsing Yun has continued this endeavor and made it realized throughout the world. In this sense, Grand Master Hsing Yun is both a practitioner and theoretician. His integration with the tradition and modernity make him unique in the history of Buddhism, unique in a way that he is truly reviving Chinese Buddhism.

1. Introduction

The present paper discusses a number of issues relating to the decline and revival of Buddhism in the 20th century. In the past, Buddhism flourished and progressed steadily in China, especially during the Sui (581-618) and Tang (618-907) dynasties. It, however, declined significantly during the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911) dynasties. Why and how did Buddhism decline? Has it always been merely a religion for funeral service, as some members of intellectual elite called it scornfully? Was it separated from society and people in those days, too? What reform and stimulation did Buddhism need for its revival in the twentieth century? Who are the key players in the revival and reform movement? To answer these questions, it is necessary to trace the historical background of the rise and fall of Buddhism in China with special reference to the late Qing dynasty (1644-1911) and early Republican period. But such a historical analysis has to be preceded by a scrutiny of the humanistic elements of Chinese Buddhism that seem to have exercised an enormous effect on its popularity.

It was Sakyamuni Buddha who first advanced Humanistic Buddhism. He lectured, meditated, propagated his way of life, and finally attained his Nirvana in the world. He said, "The Buddhas came from this world and they could not become the Buddhas in the heaven." [2] In this way, they brought the teachings of the dharma to every family. They were active in the human world.

The Vimalakiirti Suutra says that we should seek the Buddha state or Buddha land among sentient beings. We cannot find Buddha if there are no sentient beings. We cannot find the way if we are separated from the people. Here is a stanza from The Sutra of Hui-neng (638-713), the Sixth Patriarch of the Chan (Zen) School of Buddhism.

Buddhism is in the world;
It is not realized apart from the world.
Seeking enlightenment apart from the world
Is like looking for horns on a hare. ... [3]
Good friends, if you want to put this into practice, you can do it at home -- it doesn't depend on being in a monastery. Being able to practice at home is like someone of the East whose mind is good. [4]


Lai Yonghai has pointed out that such a style differed from the ways the previous five patriarchs who upheld in their reclusive practice. Venerable Xuanjue (665-713), [5] who became a convert to Hui-neng's philosophy, said in his excellent poem Yongjia Zhengdao Ge, "I have traveled many mountains and rivers, visiting masters in quest of Buddhist truth. Ever since I was familiar with Caoxi, [6] I have understood that life and death are irrelevant." After Hui-neng, the concepts of life and death, Nirvana and samsara, this world and the world beyond gradually lost their lines of demarcation. Here we have the beginning of "Humanistic Buddhism." [7]

2. Historical Background

In the Sui (581-618) and Tang (618-907) dynasties, Buddhism flourished in China. Chinese Buddhists engaged themselves in many welfare activities. Temples were involved in commercial practices such as the establishment and management of their Inexhaustible Treasury. According to Taiping Guangji (Miscellaneous Records Collected in the Taiping Reign Period) the Inexhaustible Treasury was divided into three parts. The first part was designated for the building and maintenance of monasteries; the second part was social service projects and for donations to the people suffering from hunger; the third part was for the use of monks and nuns. [8] The "fotuhu" initiated in the Northern Wei dynasty (386-534 C.E.) consisted of criminals and slaves of governmental offices. They were assigned to the monasteries to do odd work. The monastic economy provided these people with an opportunity to earn a living. It played a positive role in the stability of the society and economy. [9] The so-called "Beitian" (literary meaning "field of pity," practical meaning "fields for the aged and widowed") was intended for widows and destitute people. Many monasteries also set up "Beitianfang," homes for the aged and widowed. [10] Venerable Baizhang (720-814) established a rule: "Every day that you do not work, you shall not eat." In this way, the monks and nuns were able to lead a life of self-reliance and contribute to the welfare of society.

Time and again Venerable Shenhui (670-762) emphasized, "There is a Buddha if there is a world. If there is no world, then there is no Buddha." (Quotations from Venerable Shenhui). Another Chan Master, Dazhu Huihai, [11] strongly emphasized "this worldliness" by saying, "We seek salvation not by leaving the world." Venerable Xiyun [12] of Huangbi (ooboku sect in Japanese) thus made no difference between this world and the world beyond. He considered this world and the world beyond and sentient beings and Buddhas to be the same.

The Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911) dynasties saw the significant decline of Chinese Buddhism. Zhu Yuanzhang (reigned 1368-1398), [13] the First Emperor of the Ming dynasty, was fully aware of the role that the religion might play in a rebellion, for he himself had joined the peasant rebellion organization called "The Red Kerchief Bandits." The family members of the chief of The Red Kerchief Bandits were members of White Lotus Society. [14] Accordingly, when Zhu Yuanzhang ascended the throne, he placed strict regulations on Buddhism, and ordered monks to live and meditate in temples in high mountains. He also ordered monks to either live in mountains or travel around, but not to cities or villages where ordinary people dwell. "Two monks might keep their hermitage in the same high mountain for meditation, but no more than three or four." [15] "The abbots or wandering monks who make friends with officials are to be severely punished." [16] On the surface, the First Emperor appeared to protect the Buddhist religion, but in fact, he was restricting its development. Thus Chinese Buddhism rapidly declined as a result of the emperor's policy of separating monks from lay Buddhists. This situation worsened in the end of the Qing dynasty. Monks were either meditating in the mountains or depending on the donations of the lay people. Isolated as they were, the only social function was to perform funeral services. Consequently, Buddhism was criticized for its insignificant contribution to the welfare of society.

The late Qing witnessed changes in values, public life, and even the collapse of the empire. Corrupt and hopeless in reforming, the Qing Court was repeatedly humiliated by foreign invasions and weakened by the peasant uprisings and exhausting wars with foreigners. Shocked by the powerful weapons that the foreign troops held and frustrated by the defeat of the Qing troops, Chinese scholars and officials alike began to explore ways and means to make China strong by standing on its own feet. Zhang Zhidong (1837-1909), Governor of Hunan Province, suggested that the Chinese could stick to traditional learning for its social content while simultaneously studying those aspects of Western learning that offered practical benefits. [17] In 1898, he called for the establishment of more schools, going so far as to suggest that the Qing Court should issue a decree ordering 70% of the nation's temples to be used for educational purposes. But the trend that was set from 1901 to 1906 was to seize Buddhist lands and property without actually serving the interests of education. Local officials and warlords alike saw in it a golden opportunity to gain more money for themselves to support their military expenses. Things got no better after the downfall of the Qing dynasty. A typical example was Yuan Shikai (1859-1916), [18] who promulgated the Monastery Control Regulations that were directed at confiscating wealth from Buddhist monasteries in order to finance the expansion of his army. [19] This encroachment upon the Buddhist monastic properties ranged from bad to worse, depending upon the location. In opposition, Venerable Jing An, [20] president of the Chinese General Buddhist Association, went to Beijing with the objective of having Yuan Shikai's government ratify a proposal of his for a new charter. Unfortunately, the officer in charge of religious affairs at the Ministry of the Interior, Du Guan, was a firm supporter of policies aimed at confiscating monastic property. He obstinately refused to listen to Venerable Jing An's arguments. He ridiculed and insulted the old man who, as a result of this treatment, became so incensed that he died the next day from anger and humiliation. The martyrdom of Venerable Jing An aroused much anger among Buddhists and temporarily prevented further confiscation of Buddhist monastic property.

The confiscation of temple property taught Chinese Buddhists a painful lesson: if they wanted to survive, they had to change their old ways of staying away from society and people. They had to promote education among themselves. The famous scholar Zhang Taiyan (1868-1936) and Su Mansu (1884-1918) pointed out that:

The cause for the corruption of Chinese Buddhists lay not in outer reasons, but in the Buddhists themselves. ... Although there can be found many rules and regulations for monks to observe in the temples, the monks are actually lax in discipline. ... Many monks are not engaged in meditation in accordance with the regulations, but are enjoying a cozy and banal life. They do not preach scriptures, but devote themselves to ceremonies for the dead. When they are entrusted with the cause of dharma, they are only interested in money. The monks have conflicts among themselves over property. They indulge in the offerings from the believers. What they offer as their service just leads to the decline of Buddhism. In fact, they are generally looked down upon. Some fawn upon rich and powerful persons. They claim that they have to rely on the good emperors in order to protect the dharma. Actually they are bent on their own interests... They deserve to suffer the government policy of confiscating their property for education. [21]


Yang Wenhui (1837-1911) [22] made a comment on the same topic:

Since the end of the scripture examination and with the slack implementation of the decree banning ordination, Buddhist monks have become ignorant, incompetent and satisfied with the existing state of affairs as they are. [23]


From the sharpness of these words we see a picture of the decline of Chinese Buddhism at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century.

In a few days, the 20th century will come to an end. In this century the Chinese people have witnessed massive and untold suffering in their transformation to a modem state. As Tu Wei-ming puts it, "Without exaggeration or a stretch of the imagination, an examination of the frequency and magnitude of destructiveness in China since the mid-nineteenth century may reveal it to have been one of the most violent countries in human history." [24] It is a century that the Chinese have encountered both hope and despair. It is a century full of conflicts between the new and the old, the belligerence between warlords, imperialist aggressions, the Japanese invasion of China, civil wars between the Nationalists and Communists, endless power struggles, and conflicts among the masses themselves, and so forth. The conflicts started in the "Opium War" in 1840s and lasted until recent decades in the 20th century. They have shocked and shaped generations of Chinese intelligentsia even until today.

3. Life and Career of Venerable Tai Xu (1889-1947)

Tai Xu was one of the key reformers at this time when the very existence of Buddhism was at stake. He was born in 1889 in Congde district, Zhejiang Province. Buddhism had sunk deep roots in this place dating from the Eastern Han dynasty (25-220 C.E.) when it was introduced from India during the reign of Emperor Ming-di (reigned 58-75 C.E.). The religion has furthermore remained intact here in spite of the political changes and social revolutions that have occurred over a long two-thousand-year period.

Tai Xu's family name was Lu, and his given name Ganlin. His father died when he was still a baby. His grandmother was a pious Buddhist who often took him to nearby Buddhist temples. In 1904, he left his home with the view in mind to seek something magic pertaining to the immortals and gods he had read about in the novels [25] he greatly admired. At this young age he was still unaware of the distinction between Taoism and Buddhism. He eventually found his way to a small temple where he had previously accompanied his grandmother on a visit to pay homage. Subsequently, he decided to join the monastic order. Upon his ordination, he was given the Buddhist name Tai Xu (literary meaning "space" or "void"). In the same year, he was taken by his supervisor to visit Venerable Jing An, the Eight Fingered Monk, [26] who ordained him in Tiantong Temple, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province. Two years later, he came to realize that Taoist and Buddhist divinities were not the same. He studied the Tripitaka and practiced meditation under the guidance of Venerable Jing An, the Eight Fingered Monk, who had a profound impact on him.

In 1908, Tai Xu met a radical monk named Hua Shan, who told his young friend about new trends at home and abroad. Hua Shan introduced Tai Xu to a variety of books, such as Kang Yuwei's Datongshu (The Grand Unity), Liang Qichao's Xinmin congbao (the name of a journal), Yan Fu's translation of T. H. Huxley's Evolution and Tan Sitong's Renxue (On Humanitarianism). In 1909, he attended a class on Buddhist literature offered by Yang Wenhui. Though he studied only one semester, he was deeply impressed by Yang's lectures. That same year, he made friends with a monk who was not only a reformer, but a revolutionary as well. This monk, named Qiyun, was also a disciple of the Eight Fingered Monk. He had studied in Japan where he joined the Tong-meng Hui, a revolutionary alliance founded by Dr. Sun Yat-sen in 1905. Qiyun also lent Tai Xu revolutionary literature such as the Mingbao (People's Tribune) and Zou Rong's Gemingjun (Revolutionary Army). In 1910, Tai Xu went to Guangzhou, where he became intimate with revolutionaries. He read widely the socialist, communist and anarchist literature, authors such as Bakunin, Proudhon, Kropotkin and Marx. He was even involved in the secret activities of the Guangzhou Uprising in 1911. He escaped to Shanghai when the uprising was put down. When the Qing government was overthrown in 1911, Tai Xu began his life-long career of Buddhist reform.

What is "Humanistic Buddhism"? Let us first see the definition of this word in Chinese. Tai Xu first advanced the concept of "Humanistic Buddhism" by using the Chinese word "rencheng" in 1916 when he was staying in self-confinement at Putuo Island, Zhejiang Province. [27] This word "rencheng" refers to the people of rebirth among men conveyed by observing the five precepts. Buddhism divides people into five vehicles. "Rencheng" refers to people of the first vehicle -- the ordinary people.

Tai Xu continued his exploration in the transformation of Chinese Buddhism. He raised the issue of "rensheng fojiao" which is a combination of two words "rensheng" plus "fojiao" (Buddhism) in an article entitled "Instructions to the Chinese Revolutionary Monks" in April, 1928. The word "rensheng" means "human life." This may be considered the second stage of his thinking in "Humanistic Buddhism." He touched upon the aims of Chinese Buddhist revolution in three aspects. First, they should get rid of the superstitions that the rulers imposed on the people by using Buddhism and Taoism as instruments, and transforming the hereditary property system into a shared property system. Second, the Buddhists should change their living style of hermitage imposed by Confucians so that the Buddhists may be engaged in the service to guide the masses and bring them benefits. In addition, the Buddhists should change their orientation in offering service to the ghosts and the dead, a service requested by emperors and hierarchies down to the common people, and receiving donations from them. They should change their attitudes of being ghost-oriented and serve the people. Third, the Buddhists should work on the establishment of "human-life Buddhism," from human beings to Bodhisattvas and the Buddha. They should transform the old temples with the spirit of "human-life Buddhism" and build up the Sangha system adapted to the modern Chinese environment. They should propagate this "human-life Buddhism" to attract more followers. [28]

According to Tai Xu, therefore, the starting point of this "human life Buddhism" is to be a good person. Then the good person learns how to practice Bodhisattva and finally becomes a Buddha. Tai Xu considered the human beings in this concept of "human life Buddhism" as the basis. It is a process of evolution, from being a human to Bodhisattva and to become a Buddha.

Why did Tai Xu raise this concept of "human life Buddhism"? Let me quote Tai Xu's words to explain what he had in mind:

What is human life? I use the term "human life" to refute the fallacies in the teachings of Buddhism by some people in the past. The Buddhist teachings may be divided into two: the Buddhism of the death and the Buddhism of the ghosts. Many people thought that the aim of learning the teachings of Buddhism is to encounter death in a painless way and to have good fortune after death. This is not the true meaning of the Buddhist teaching. ... As I talk about human Buddhism, I emphasize the improvement of human life. [29]


Firstly, Tai Xu used this term "human life" to reject the focus on death in contemporary Buddhism in China. Secondly, the basic teachings of the Buddha urge people to take care of practical issues in human life. Tai Xu held that the Buddha did not teach people to leave human society for the purpose of becoming gods or ghosts or encourage people to become monks by leaving their household. The Buddhists aim at reforming the society, helping human beings make progress and improving the world environment with the teachings of the Buddha. [30] Thirdly, Tai Xu further developed his concept of the Humanistic Buddhism by the word "renjian fojiao." The original Chinese term "renjian" consists of two words "ren" and "jian." "Ren'' means persons, people, human beings, and "jian" refers to "certain space or "period of time." When the two Chinese words are combined to form one word "renjian", it means "human society," "human world," "the world," or "man's world." Therefore, the-word-for-word translation of the word "renjian fojiao" may be rendered as "Buddhism in human society," and "Buddhism in the world."

Thus, Tai Xu summarized his views under three points: (a) the existence and development of humankind; (b) relief of the masses with the great compassionate love and wisdom of Mahaayaana Buddhism; and (c) attachment of great importance to the scientific methods in tests, the order and evidence. Tai Xu was attempting to bring the Buddhist teachings into the modern world. His general view on Humanistic Buddhism is expressed as follows:

The modem human life may propel the survival of humankind while the survival of humankind may propel the existence of all things in the world. Modern life is the starting point of Buddhism. This is in conformity with the worldly trend. Buddhism helps to develop human life to perfect universal enlightenment and to perfect being. This is the only way leading to the essence of Mahaayaana Buddhism. Buddhism aims at the development of human life instead of eliminating it. Therefore, it tends to be actively involved in human life. [31]


In February 1933, be delivered a speech entitled "Start your Learning of Buddhism from Being a True Person."

From the cradle to the grave, we need food, clothing, shelter, and means of transportation. Where do they come from? ... The endowment of these sources relies on the strength of the masses -- the ability of human beings to cooperate. Your life is sustained by the shared strength of forest laborers, farmers, workers and merchants in the world. In other words, your life is totally dependent on the masses in society. Therefore, you need to serve society. [32]


The following paragraph reflects Tai Xu's orientation:

... Without the state, we cannot resist the intruders. There would be no security for the people and life. We cannot repay the grace to our parents or our society. Therefore, we must take patriotism as our presupposition when repaying the grace of the country. At this moment, enemies are invading China. We, fellow citizens, heroic soldiers and heroes, should endeavor to build our country into a powerful nation. [33]


Tai Xu was labeled a "political monk" because he kept close ties with the Nationalist Party. In fact, he was a member of that party. [34] He often employed his close ties with Chiang Kai-shek [35] to protect rights and benefits of Buddhists. He was abbot of Xuedou Temple in Fenghua, Chiang's hometown. In 1944, Tai Xu wrote a letter to Chiang Kai-shek begging him to check the case of the confiscation of Buddhist temples and property. [36]

On July 15, 1944, Tai Xu expressed his views on the issue of how Buddhists should deal with politics. He advocated the position whereby Buddhists may show concern for politics but not interfere with them. He spoke in a grave tone:

I hesitate to make a point on this issue.

If we transcend politics, we will be easily destroyed when the government and society decide to persecute Buddhism. If we are involved in politics, we will meet our doom when the government is overthrown. In present China, we do not have enough lay Buddhists to form a group in the government or society to protect Buddhism. It is so difficult for Buddhists to take this issue into consideration. Many people are discussing the question. I have to take it into serious consideration. Based on the explanation of the words of political power and power of management expressed by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, I finally found a solution to the problem. What we should do is to show concern about politics but not interfere with them. [37]


Tai Xu goes on to quote Dr. Sun Yat-sen's idea:

Dr. Sun said that politics is the affairs of the masses. It also refers to the management of the people. Political power implies that people have the right to make laws. The power of management means that the government has the power to govern the country and the people. The Sanghas are part of the people. Therefore, they have to concern themselves with their own affairs. ... Being members of the National Congress, they discuss the issues of how to eliminate the sufferings that the people experience and obtain happiness for the people in the Assembly only, and not get involved in the central and local governmental offices. In other words, they only participate in local elections and run for the post of Congressmen, but not pursue the office of governor, nor civil or military posts. [38]


Tai Xu's words aroused great controversy even among his supporters. Zhu Jingzhou, son-in-law of famous scholar Zhang Taiyan [39] wrote six letters to Tai Xu opposing any involvement in politics. [40] He reminded Tai Xu that Ouyang Jingwu [41] raised four objections to any such involvement. Ouyang claimed that any involvement in politics is a violation of both the monastic regulations and secular law.

As for the problem of how to implement the spirit of altruism in society, Tai Xu explained that Humanistic Buddhism meant to save the country at the critical moment. The soldiers of the army fulfill their duties. The farmers, workers, merchants, students and teachers, the civil officers and lawyers do their respective jobs well.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:23 am

Part 2 of 3

When Tai Xu was alive, he did not lack people who opposed his ideas of reform. Liang Shuming (1892-1987) [42] criticized Tai Xu's endeavor for Buddhist reform in the following:

Confucianism and Buddhism are just opposite in one aspect. The former focuses on the practical life and does not deal with things beyond this life. The latter focuses on things beyond this world and does not touch upon the present life. Thus, Buddhism has no room to play its role in modern world. Those who want to bring Buddhism back to society have made plans to transform Buddhism. I remember that Venerable Tai Xu wrote an article entitled "Rentiancheng" (The Two Vehicles of Human beings and Gods) in Haichaoyin. He wants to expand Buddhism in the practical life. I seem to remember that Mr. Liu Renhang [43] and some gentlemen discussed the same idea. Due to his failure to see the essence of Buddhism, Mr. Liang Rengong (also named Liang Qichao) [44] also said that Chan Buddhism could be called Buddhism in use in the world, (see his Reflections on a European Journey). He has often thought of using Buddhism in the world. He visited me, raising the issue of how to transform the aristocratic Buddhism into civilized Buddhism so that all people could make use of it. In my opinion, this reform is simply impossible. Even if it is possible, it is no longer true Buddhism. When I met Mr. Zhang Taiyan [45] in Shanghai this year, I asked what he thought about it. He said, "It would be difficult. You may extensively disseminate Ch'an Buddhism among the illiterates. However, I hesitate to say whether this universal dissemination of Chan Buddhism remains true Buddhism or not." ... In a word, Buddhism cannot be used in the practical world. If anybody wants to use Buddhism by changing its original nature, why bother to ruin Buddhism in such a way? I oppose any such proposition of using Buddhism and oppose any such transformation! [46]


Welch was also pessimistic about his reform when he wrote the following in 1960s:

It is not easy to arrive at a balanced judgment of his virtues and shortcomings. He was certainly intelligent. He had personal charm and endless enthusiasm On the other hand, he had a flair for manipulation and promotion -- particularly for self-promotion. A more serious ruling was that he does not seem to have pondered deeply enough on whether, if Chinese Buddhism was reformed in the manner he proposed, it would still be Buddhist or even Chinese. [47]


Tai Xu started his interfaith dialogues with Christianity during the period of 1920s to 1940s. [48] He probably was unaware of the term "interfaith dialogues" at the time, but he met with Chinese Christians at least seven times. (1) in the winter of 1926 in Shanghai where he gave lectures to both Christians and Buddhists. [49] (2) in May of 1931, he delivered a speech at a meeting of the Association for Young Christians in Nanjing. [50] (3) the summer of the same year, he visited Union Medical School in Beijing. (4) on November 17, 1931, he visited West China Union University in Chengdu. (5) on April 6, 1935, he met an education delegation of East-China Christians in Shanghai. (6) on June 21, 1938 he delivered a speech calling for the propagation of Christianity in China at West China Union University. (7) on January 14, 1943 Yu Bing (representing Catholics), Feng Yuxiang (representing Christians), Bai Congxi (representing Muslims) [51] and Tai Xu sponsored the Union for Chinese Religions in Chongqing.

Tai Xu and representatives of Christians held a discussion on the issues of Christianity and Buddhism in his fourth meeting with the Christians. On the question of the relations between Buddhism and Christianity, he replied:

Regarding the relations between commerce, industry, and agriculture, Buddhism and Christianity have shared relations. Each religion has, as its essence, a belief in the supremacy of man's thinking and behavior. Through their beliefs, people repent for their sins and thereby enhance their virtue. Buddhism and Christianity share this point. As far as details of their doctrines are concerned, however, they differ in certain regards. But they also may be complementary in some respects. The altruism of the Bodhisattva of Mahaayaana Buddhism can save and enlighten all beings at his own expense, just as Jesus Christ sacrificed himself to save others. Nowadays, many wise Christians are reading Buddhist scriptures in order to understand the Chinese mentality. They do this in order to make a comprehensive study of Buddhist doctrines. [52]


Tai Xu admired the educational and health care services which Christians provided. Christians attached importance to education. The missionaries opened schools wherever they began missionary activities in China. They achieved great success by doing this.

In 1903, a monk named Liyun first started his school in Kaifu Monastery in Hunan Province in emulation of Christians. The lay Buddhist scholar, Yang Wenhui, opened his school in Nanjing where Tai Xu attended courses for one semester. Tai Xu himself set up his Wuchang Seminary in 1922. The aim of the seminary was to encourage students to revive Buddhism and preach the "law of salvation" in such a way that they could meet the needs of new China. On the one hand, the students were also urged to study Christianity, which was thought to have some very good and helpful ideas, especially with regard to true compassion and self-denial. On the other hand, it was always pointed out that, in regard to the solution of the great metaphysical questions, Christianity was very much inferior to Buddhism. [53] Tai Xu became the Proctor of Minnan Seminary in the summer of 1927. He imitated the courses offered by Christian missionary schools. A variety of courses were offered, including Western philosophies, ethics, psychology, and an introduction to various religions of the world. [54]

Christians were far more successful in their educational endeavors, although the Chinese felt that education had been one of their strongest traditions. But modern education in China started only during the period that spanned the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries. Owing to the shortage of funds, Chinese Buddhists could not expand their secular education. Their schools, even Buddhist seminaries, failed to develop and were even forced to close down because of money constraints. What was more obvious was that many of them did not have a sense of what education meant for their survival. Had they recognized this earlier and taken measures to remedy the situation, they would not have suffered repeatedly from the confiscation of their property.

Christians set up around their churches hospitals to offer humane care for those people in need of medical attention. In the past, Chinese Buddhists had stayed away from society. They claimed to live in another realm far beyond the confines of this mundane world. That is why they were criticized and looked down upon by modern intellectuals. Seeing what Christians had done, Tai Xu pointed out:

Buddhists should not only fulfill their obligations as persons, but they also should do something to benefit the public. The Christians devote themselves to advancing the general social welfare. They propagate their teachings by practicing altruism. This is something of significance and we may adopt it. [55]


Tai Xu was one of the pioneering Chinese Buddhists who traveled widely in the world. Having obtained financial support from President Chiang Kai-shek, Tai Xu left Shanghai on August 11, 1928 and spent nearly nine months touring France, England, Germany, Belgium, the United States and Japan. During this journey he had aimed to propagate Buddhism abroad, especially in Europe and America. If this could be done, he thought that his reputation would greatly increase and that he could reduce the resistance from conservative Buddhists. He also wanted to see how Westerners studied Buddhism. From his previous tutor, Yang Wenhui, he knew that Westerners, mainly scholars, had made great progress in Indian and Chinese Buddhist studies. In Yang's opinion, Chinese Buddhist studies had fallen far behind those of Western and Japanese scholars. This was a painful fact which the Chinese felt reluctant to admit. Tai Xu himself, to save face, denied this fact even after his return from Europe and America. [56]

During the War against Japan, the Nationalist Government sent a Buddhist delegation to South Asian countries with the aim of winning sympathy for the Chinese resistance movement. They took a bus to Burma in December 1939. They spent about half a year in Burma (now Myanmar), India and Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). [57] After this trip, Tai Xu gained a better understanding of Theravaada Buddhism. He delivered a long speech in June 1940 at the Institute of Chinese-Tibetan Buddhism in Chongqing.

He praised the role that Theravaada Buddhism played in society, education, and lives of ordinary people with deep emotion. Tai Xu remarked:

People generally consider Buddhism of China, Tibet and Japan as Mahaayaana Buddhism whereas Buddhism in Burma, Thailand and Ceylon are considered to be Theravaada Buddhism. However, I obtained a different idea after my trip to these countries....

The Chinese fail to make a good practice of Mahaayaana theories. Chinese Buddhists, including both monks and lay people, tend to focus on self-cultivation. The Mahaayaana theory, though widely advocated and propagated by many Buddhists, is none other than the approaches of self-cultivation. Mahaayaana Buddhism in words and Theravaada Buddhism in deeds are universal in China. ... The Buddhism propagated in Ceylon, Burma and Thailand is based on Theravaada theory. However, the Buddhists there have been able to universalize Buddhism in their countries. The peoples in these countries are converted to Buddhism and follow the teachings of the Buddha. Thus Buddhism there has become the people's religion. ...

The four classes of disciples in Ceylon include bhik.su (monks), `sraama.nera, upaasaka (male observers of the five precepts) and upaasikaa (female observers of the five precepts). They do not have bhik.suniis (female observers of all the precepts), `sik.samaa.nas (novice, or observer of the six precepts), `sraama.nerikaas (female observers of the minor precepts). They have made great efforts to study the doctrines and observe the precepts. That is why many Buddhists, not only Buddhists from Burma and Thailand, but also scholars doing research on the Theravaada Buddhism in the Pali language all over the world have come to study the Buddhism in Ceylon. Buddhists in Ceylon are widely engaged in many causes, such as social welfare, culture, education, and so forth, thus giving benefits to the state, society and even the broad masses in the world. This marks a great spirit of compassionate love in Buddhism. Though Buddhism in Ceylon is generally considered to be Theravaada Buddhism, it is indeed the practice of Mahaayaana Buddhism...

There are many reasons for the decline of Chinese Buddhism, however, the root cause for the decline of Chinese Buddhism, I think, lies in our empty talk of Mahaayaana theories and the neglect of practice. There is a missing link between theory and practice. Therefore, our task of reform in Chinese Buddhism is to get rid of the bad habit of empty talk so that we may popularize Buddhism with the integration of both theory and practice. From now on, we Chinese Buddhists should experience the cultivation of Mahaayaana theory, aiming at the nation, state, and the world. The practice of the theory of Mahaayaana Buddhism is what we call the practice of Bodhisattva. [58]


Concerning the problem of how to infuse an altruistic spirit in society, Tai Xu explained that Humanistic Buddhism means to save the country at that critical moment. The soldiers of the army fulfill their duties. The farmers, workers, merchants, students and teachers, the civil officers and lawyers tend to their respective jobs well.

Tai Xu emphasized that Buddhism should not be separated from the masses. Otherwise, it cannot grow just as a tree will die if it loses its soil. Buddhists should devote to the cause of saving the world and benefiting the masses. [59]

In Tai Xu's words, the concept of Humanistic Buddhism does not encourage people to leave this world, or do something miraculous and magical. Humanistic Buddhism is in conformity with the needs of the people. It is a broad and bright path that everyone may take in the course of changes in the world. It guides human beings make improvement of their personalities. [60] He warned his followers that the country was at a critical moment and advised all citizens to fulfill his duty to save the country and the people. Someone asked him, "You are leading the new Buddhist movement. Why do some of your students do jobs and not live in temples?" Tai Xu answered, "It is better for them to do other jobs than to live in temples as long as they make a contribution to the benefits of the country and people." [61]

The Bodhisattvas, in Tai Xu's view, are supermen who have left the secular world behind, but not men who are remote from the secular world, knowing nothing of worldly affairs. They are social reformers and promoters of social ethics. They are essentially altruists dedicated to the cause of saving the majority from the sufferings. Thus, the Humanistic Buddhism reinterprets the "four infinite Buddha-states of mind," i.e., boundless kindness, boundless pity, boundless joy, and boundless equanimity, leading to "love, pity and assistance." In a word, altruism is considered the essence of all Buddhist teachings. [62]

Tai Xu's views on Humanistic Buddhism were popular in the 1940s. In 1934, Haichaoyin, a journal initiated by Tai Xu, published a special issue on Humanistic Buddhism with 18 articles in it. [63] His propositions have had great impact on Chinese Buddhism and became the essential characteristics of Chinese Buddhism. It is more flexible when dealing with the subtle issue of "this world" and other world. It favors a kind of secular life in which followers may keep up their religious service and practice for self-cultivation. Laying emphasis on this worldliness and blessings and joys of living beings, Humanistic Buddhism takes altruism and assistance to the suffering people as the essence in learning Buddhism.

Tai Xu is said to be the "Martin Luther" of China's Buddhist reform. He played a key role in the renaissance of Chinese Buddhism. In spite of all his efforts, he failed in his life-long endeavors. In his later years, Tai Xu wrote a short essay lamenting his thirty-year effort in the Buddhist reform. [64] He made a self-criticism concerning his weaknesses. He held that he fell out with the conservatives in the mainstream. He was passionate in the reform in Buddhism in the first period, he created a unique atmosphere of school and teaching in the second period and in the third period he organized and led the Chinese Buddhist Society. He said that he did things in these three periods by chance and he was not so considerate at all though he made great efforts. Fully aware of his weakness, he said that he was good at theory and teaching, but poor in practice and in leading the Buddhists in their endeavors in the movement.

Tai Xu did not gain much support from either his Buddhist colleagues or from the Nationalist Government in a period which was full of civil wars, imperialist invasions and quarrels among the Chinese Buddhists themselves. The authorities were unable to take the issues of religious reform into consideration. Although Tai Xu had made his best efforts to appeal to the government and to the oppositions for reform, the authorities and his opponents simply turned a deaf ear to him due to the unstable situation of the times.

After Tai Xu's death in 1947, his influence spread far and wide. His Humanistic Buddhism has become the fundamental principle for the Mainland Chinese Buddhist Association (CBA). The leaders of CBA also promote Tai Xu's teachings. They reinterpret the current tasks for Chinese Buddhists as "hallowing the motherland and blessing and giving joy to sentient beings." In the Second Session of the Fourth Council of Chinese Buddhist Association, Chairman Zhao Puchu made a report in which he highlighted Humanistic Buddhism. He said:

Chinese Buddhism has a long history of almost two thousand years. In the present era, which direction should Chinese Buddhism take? How can we develop the good traditions of Chinese Buddhism? These are the two vital problems that we should carefully consider and try to solve. I think that we should promote the thinking of Humanistic Buddhism in our doctrines. The essential contents of Humanistic Buddhism consist of the Five Precepts, [65] the Ten Kindness, [66] the Four all-embracing virtues [67] and the Six things that ferry one beyond the sea of mortality to nirvana. [68] The Agama Sutra says that the Buddha and other buddhas were born in this world. The Sutra of Hui-neng Grand Master of Zen says: "Buddhism is in the world. It is not realized apart from the world. Seeking enlightenment apart from the world is like looking for horns on a hare." ... We should promote Humanistic Buddhism which will help us to complete the tasks in the new historical period. [69]


One of Tai Xu's disciples, Venerable Yinshun, went on to become the most respected and influential Chinese Buddhist scholar among contemporary Buddhist intellectuals in Taiwan. (A collection of Yinshun's writings is currently being prepared for publication in English by Wisdom Press.) Another of Venerable Tai Xu's student, Hsing Yun, also went to Taiwan and established the Fo Guang Shan Buddhist movement, which is the most successful movement for the propagation of Chinese Buddhism worldwide with centers in Southeast Asia, America, Australia, and Europe. Hsing Yun has also established a Buddhist high school and several colleges in Taiwan and a Buddhist university in Los Angeles: namely, Hsi Lai University. His temple in Los Angeles, also is called Hsi Lai Temple. It is the largest Buddhist temple in America and was the host of the 1989 Cobb-Abe Theological Encounter With Buddhism Conference involving the leading Christian theologians in the West.

4. Hsing Yun's Continuation of the Cause of Humanistic Buddhism

Pursuing his studies at the Buddhist Institute at Jiaoshan, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu Province, Hsing Yun was influenced by many teachers who were greatly inspired by Tai Xu. Hsing Yun also read Tai Xu's essays and books, thus indirectly hearing what he said. He and other young monks were greatly struck by Tai Xu's words: "Everyone is responsible for his country's destiny and every monk is responsible for the survival of Buddhism."

In the March 1999 issue of Universal Gate, a popular Buddhist magazine edited by Fo Guang Shan, Master Hsing Yun recalls his encounter with Venerable Tai Xu in Jiaoshan, Zhenjiang. [70]

In July 1946, Venerable Tai Xu presided over a routine lecture of the Chinese Buddhist Association. I was fortunate to have a chance to attend it. Venerable Tai Xu excitedly called on us, saying, "We must establish the characteristics of Humanistic Buddhism!"

...I was enlightened by Master Tai Xu's words. Now I see the meaning of the following:

The Buddha was born in the human world.
He practiced the cultivation in the human world
And he became enlightened in the world.
He lectured in the world.
His whole life embodied the characteristics of Humanistic Buddhism.
For forty-nine years, he offered more than 300 lectures.
He did not speak to gods or devils, or to hells, or to those who are born as animals. He taught dharmas to people.

...The teachings of dharma are characterized with Humanistic Buddhism. The concept of Humanistic Buddhism is not the patent of Venerable Tai Xu but the essential concern of the Buddha himself. It was introduced not as something to attract attention by novelty, but to rediscover the original teachings of the Buddha. As followers of the Buddha, we should establish Humanistic Buddhism in society with the aim to propagating and glorifying it. [71]


In Taiwan, Grand Master Hsing Yun encountered a comparatively more stable situation than that Tai Xu found during his lifetime in China. Grand Master Hsing Yun was able to proceed with his ambitious reforms in a more relaxed and comfortable atmosphere. Certainly, the first few years were very difficult for Master Hsing Yun to start his new career in Taiwan. The difficulties included cultural and language differences, prejudice, exclusionism, false accusations from people who were hostile to Buddhism, and so forth. He was even arrested for some time. Upon his release, he could hardly find a place to stay. Though empty-handed, Grand Master Hsing Yun exerted tremendous efforts to disseminate Buddhism, first in remote villages and small towns, then in big cities. He finally built several first-rate temples in the United States and almost 200 temples affiliated with Fo Guang Shan in various countries in the world. In this respect, Grand Master Hsing Yun successfully carried on the cause of practical reform initiated by Tai Xu, thus, he may be considered the Martin Luther in the practical reform of Chinese Buddhism.

Yes, many people view Grand Master Hsing Yun as a practitioner of Humanistic Buddhism. In the larger sense, he has not only made great contributions to the modernization and practice in Buddhist reform, but has also developed the theoretical aspects of Humanistic Buddhism. He interprets Humanistic Buddhism in the following words:

Buddhism takes human beings as its essence. The Buddha always emphasizes in his teachings that he is one of sentient beings. He clearly indicates that he is not a god.... If we would like to become a Buddha, an enlightened one, we must practice in the human world. There is no other way to become a Buddha except as a human being. [72]


He encouraged his followers to be engaged in concrete practice of ethics within the Buddhist teachings by "helping people with confidence, happiness and hope and offering them convenience." On the question of how to develop modem Buddhism, the Grand Master maintains:

It is necessary to learn the ways that the Buddha and Bodhisattvas practiced and to build up Buddhism with great endeavors in the human world. When teaching the doctrines of the Buddha, we should speak to people with optimistic delightfulness. We should aid all sentient beings in sharing the benefits of the dharmas and understanding the wisdom of the Buddha. What we do is to aid them in benefiting their causes and meeting their demands. We should introduce compassion, wisdom, vows and performance into human society. Thus, we may make it perfect. [73]


The Grand Master went on to illustrate four points of modernity in Buddhism:

(1) The modernity of languages. He encouraged his followers to learn more foreign languages in preparing for the propagation of Buddhism in the world. He emphasized the importance of working languages in Buddhist research, such as Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan, English and Japanese.

(2) The use of modern facilities for the propagation of Buddhism. These, according to the Master, include computers, videos, TV, and all other modern technological equipment.

(3) The modernity of practice in life. The Master urged his disciples to follow the examples of great ancient masters who offered service to the community in various ways. He pointed out that the Buddhist followers may serve the society in their respective professions, such as teaching, medical treatment, art, literature and so forth.

(4) Establishing monasteries as modern schools. Grand Master Hsing Yun called for the updating of various functions of monasteries, including offering medical treatment, accommodations for the poor, and education. [74]


Grand Master Hsing Yun went to interpret Humanistic Buddhism with the following six terms:

(1) Humanity. The Buddha is not god without any trace. He is not a god that people could imagine. He was fully human. Like us all, he had parents and family life. He demonstrated his compassion, discipline, and superb wisdom in human life. Therefore, he is the Buddha in the world.

(2) Human life. Buddhism initiated by the Buddha attaches great importance to ordinary life, including food, clothes, house and means of transportation. He has offered a variety of instructions on almost all things, such as family relationships, social and state activities, and so forth.

(3) Altruism. The aim of Buddha's coming to the world is to teach sentient beings and offer them benefits.

(4) Delight. Buddhism is a religion which offers people happiness. The doctrine of compassion articulated by the Buddha aims at releasing sentient beings from suffering and bringing them delight.

(5) Time Frame. The Buddha came into this world under certain conditions. His arrival forms a connection for our future salvation in this world. Although the Buddha was born 2500 years ago and entered Nirvana, he gave us, sentient beings from generation to generation, this chance and condition for salvation. We continue to take his thinking and teaching as our model.

(6) Universality. The Buddha's life was full of universality. ... Tai Xu said that the Buddhist doctrines imply the past, present and future, but the most important thing is the universality of the present. Although the Buddha's teachings involve this world, the other world and numerous worlds, Buddhism highly values the universality of this world. When talking about sentient beings, the Buddha laid emphasis on the universality of humankind. [75]


The master emphasized that all Buddhist sects -- no matter how people categorize them into Theravada, Mahayana, exoteric, or esoteric sects, are full of human nature. This may follow the trend of our period.

Grand Master Hsing Yun further explained the following six points:

(1) Buddhism divides people into five kinds: people, devas (gods), hearers, pratyekas [76] and Bodhisattvas. The Buddhism of people and devas lays emphasis on the world. The Buddhism of hearers and pratyekas is inclined to the worlds beyond. The way to Bodhisattva-hood is a combination of this-worldly spirit of people and devas and the other-worldliness of hearers and pratyekas. We follow the objective of Bodhisattvas: the spirit of self-profit and profiting others, the spirit of self-salvation and the spirit of salvation for others, and the spirit of self-consciousness and the spirit of enlightenment of others. We consider the relationship between human beings and ourselves as indivisible. Self-profit means to strengthen oneself for the salvation of all sentient beings, thus one may benefit from this oneself. The combination of these five kinds of people is the characteristic of Humanistic Buddhism.

(2) The Five Precepts and the Ten Good Virtues are the core of Humanistic Buddhism. The master says that the Five Precepts lead to the proper management of the state and bring peace to the world.

(3) Humanistic Buddhism resides in the Four Immeasurables: that is -- the boundless kindness, the boundless pity to save all from suffering, the boundless joy on seeing others rescued from suffering and giving up all things to others. The master points out that increased money and material possessions have brought more troubles to human beings. Folk religions are based on desire. The aims of the followers of folk religions are just to gain the Bodhisattvas' or gods' protection and assistance in becoming rich. They seek security, good family life, longevity, and good fortune. Therefore their starting point is desire. We should establish our beliefs and actions on the basis of giving all things to others. Religious belief implies devotion, sacrifice, and altruism. The altruistic nature of Humanistic Buddhism is characterized by the spirit of boundless kindness, boundless pity, boundless joy, and unlimited giving all things to others. These four immeasurables constitute the main theme of Humanistic Buddhism.

(4) The Grand Master holds that the six things that ferry one beyond the sea of mortality to Nirvaa.na, i.e. the six paaramitaas and the four all-embracing (Bodhisattva) virtues are the essentials for Humanistic Buddhism. The six paaramitaas are charity, keeping the precepts, patience under insult, zeal and progress, and meditation and wisdom. The four all-embracing virtues consist of giving what others like in order to lead them to love and truth, affectionate speech with the same purpose, proper conduct profitable to others, and co-operation and adaptation of oneself to others.

(5) Cause and retribution for good or evil deeds are considered to be the basis for Humanistic Buddhism.

(6) The Middle-way of joint practice of Chan and the Pure Land schools is the practice leading to Humanistic Buddhism. The Middle-way refers to the wisdom of accommodation of non-existence (`suunyataa, emptiness) and existence. Grand Master Hsing Yun holds that Humanistic Buddhists lead both a material and a spiritual life. Both matters and spirit are equally important in life. On the one hand, people pursue an outward life, on the other hand, they have their inner world. That is to say, life implies the world ahead and the world behind. It does not encourage people to go forward blindly. The sea of bitterness has no bounds. If we repent, the shore is at hand. Therefore, Humanistic Buddhism implies both existence and non-existence, both living in groups and in seclusion. It is an accommodation of all things in the world, thus making the human world perfect.


Grand Master Hsing Yun says that Humanistic Buddhism gives people confidence, joy, hope and convenience. This has become the guiding principle for the Fo Guang Shan Buddhist Order. Again, he further stresses the need of Humanistic Buddhism in today's world.

(Fo Guang Shan) Buddhist Order advocates Humanistic Buddhism. Frankly, we want to bring Buddhism down to the human world, in our life, in the mind of everyone. Where is the Buddha? He is in my mind. Where is the Pure Land? It is in my Mind. When I close my eyes, the universe, the three thousand worlds, are in my mind. ... Everyone is pressed by the heavy burden of family, career, and so forth. If we now have Humanistic Buddhism, we have the whole universe. We may enjoy happiness everywhere, just as Venerable Wumen says, "We may enjoy the hundreds of flowers in the spring and a full moon in autumn. We enjoy the little breeze in summer and snow in winter. If we have no anxieties in the mind, that is the best season in the world." "When we have something in mind, the world seems small. When we have nothing to worry about, the world looks much bigger." No matter how big the outer world is, it is not so big as the richness of the inner world. The only way to establish the boundless world in our minds is the constant practice in our cultivation. This is the true spirit of Humanistic Buddhism. [77]


The Grand Master reiterates that Buddha was born in Lumbini in Kapilavastu, India (in what is near Nepal) more than 2,500 years ago. He was a Buddha in the world.... He was born in the world, practiced his meditation in the world, and became enlightened in the world. Thus he is the Buddha in the world and savior in the world. [78]

The Grand Master interprets the concept of Humanistic Buddhism with the following words:

True Humanistic Buddhism attaches more importance to reality than to abstruse knowledge. It shows more concern to the masses than to the individual self. It lays strong stress on society rather than on the mountain monasteries. ... Humanistic Buddhism as I understand it, aims at using the teachings of the Buddha for the improvement for our lives and the purification of our mind. We take the dharma teachings of the Buddha as the basis for our life, thus making our life more significant and meaningful. [79]


Grand Master Hsing Yun advocates the modernization of Buddhism. He does not consider this modernization as creation, but the restoration of the ancient Buddhist teachings, making these teachings known to modern people and accepted by them. [80]

The Master's illustration of Humanistic Buddhism throws light on the future development of Chinese Buddhism. The spirit of universal compassion and the responsibility for the salvation of all has deeply penetrated into the mind of the educated scholar class in China. The famous maxim that "one who is first in worrying about the world's troubles and last in enjoying its pleasures" [81] has encouraged generations of Chinese to make endeavors for the salvation of their own nation and the release of the suffering of the people. Arthur Wright said, "It would seem that so long as there are Chinese speaking the Chinese language and dealing with their problems in ways that are distinctively the product of their common heritage, an awareness of the legacy of Buddhism will help us to understand their thought and behavior." [82]

It is in this spirit that Grand Master HsingYun bravely started his ambitious plan to restore the humanistic tradition of Buddhism. He has dedicated himself to this cause of Humanistic Buddhism by bringing the original teachings of the Buddha back into the modern world. In fact, the master inherited the elements of Chinese tradition in a melting pot of universal Buddhism. Today, Fo Guang Shan has nearly 200 affiliated monasteries and institutions all over the world. Monks, nuns, and lay Buddhist devotees work diligently for the propagation of compassionate love, kindness, joyfulness and equality of humankind. The impact of Fo Guang Shan has gone beyond its birthplace in Taiwan. If we can say that Venerable Tai Xu made the first effort to re-connect us with the essential Buddhist spirit in the first half of the 20th century, then Grand Master Hsing Yun continued this endeavor and made it realized throughout the world. In this sense, he is considered a great reformer or the Martin Luther of Chinese Buddhism. Being both a practitioner and theoretician, he has made an immeasurable contribution to Buddhism.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Wed Aug 12, 2020 11:23 am

Part 3 of 3

5. Conclusion

On the whole, the definitions of Humanistic Buddhism by Tai Xu and Hsing Yun are similar. Tai Xu emphasized the causes in education, culture and social welfare. He placed his hope in the propagation of Buddhism in Europe and America. Hsing Yun also has made tremendous endeavors to implement his principles, namely: to propagate Buddhism by education and promotion of culture, to serve society with compassion, love and kindness, and to purify people's minds by pilgrimage. He has inherited the tradition and makes good use of modern facilities in the dissemination of Buddhism.

Tai Xu, however, did not succeed in his life-long efforts in the reform of Chinese Buddhism. Unfortunately, he went against the veteran monks who were conservative when he was young. The side-effect of the Jinshan Incident [83] in which Tai Xu was deeply involved in 1912 lasted almost until his last years when the old conservative monks were finally gone. The old monks bore a long-standing grudge against Tai Xu for his imprudent actions in this attempt to take over the property of the one of the biggest monasteries in East China, were always suspicious of Tai Xu's suggestions and boycotted his propositions for reform. Isolated, he barely got the control of Chinese Buddhist Association in his later years, due to the support of Chiang Kai-shek. He lamented at his failure with the following words:

By chance, I approached the thinking of revolutionaries and sparked my revolutionary zeal for Buddhism. Influenced by the zeal and vigor of the 1911 Revolution, [84] I advanced the issue of Three Revolutions in Buddhism: namely: the revolution in doctrines, in Sangha systems and monastic property. The Three Revolutions were criticized by the Buddhist journal then. I refuted their points. I set up a Buddhist Society with a group of young monks who had received the new education. I played a role in theory development. A group of young monks in Jinshan Monastery, Zhenjiang, were practitioners. We were both rash and imprudent in our actions. The opposition soon started their counter-attack. We failed. My reputation as a revolutionary soon spread far and wide. Some people showed their respect and were sympathetic with me, some feared, or disliked me....

My failure in reform may be mainly ascribed to the strong opposition. But I know my weakness: I am good at theory but weak in practice. ... I am still confident of my strong points in theory and teaching. If I can get help from persons who are good at practice and guidance, I am sure we can establish Buddhist doctrines and systems appropriate to the modern Chinese situation....

I am still dedicated to my cause, but as I am getting on in age, I might continue the cause in good conditions. People after me should know my weakness and keep on guard against these shortcomings. Please do not criticize me when you place your hope in me. I still believe my theories and teachings for Buddhist reform. Please make my failure as the mother of success. [85]


During Tai Xu's time he witnessed the upheavals in Chinese society, the imperialist aggressions, civil wars, the radical movement of "New Culture," and so forth. At the turn of the 20th century, the Chinese imperial state was threatened by foreign invaders and challenged by the resentment against its rule from people at home. When the last emperor was dethroned, the country fell into chaos. The radical intellectuals called for reform aiming at making China stronger by challenging the traditional culture. They openly challenged the values of Confucianism, mainstream of Chinese ethics Buddhism and Taoism, and all religions. Time and again, they raised the issue of confiscation of monastic property for "education," thus striking heavy blows to Buddhism and other religions. In addition, Buddhism declined significantly due to the lack of unity among the monastic community, the low education of monks and nuns, and the conservative nature of monastic leaders, and so forth. It is too natural to see that monks were united when the issue of confiscation of monastic property was raised and when the issue was solved temporarily, they started their inner fight again. We can imagine how difficult it was for Tai Xu to fight alone with his followers.

As true as Tai Xu acknowledged his failures in this melancholy way, he had his success: he planted the seeds for the revival of Buddhism. After his death, his influence spread widely. Grand Master Hsing Yun has been able to revive Buddhism worldwide. The dreams of Tai Xu have only come true due to Hsing Yun's tremendous efforts and talent.

Comparing the two masters' background, we find that Tai Xu's period was full of tempest cultural storms which made his characters more radical and imprudent. Hsing Yun has been more moderately orientated in his practice in reform. Humanistic Buddhism has matured with time. Unlike Tai Xu, whose reform was teemed with utopia thinking, the Grand Master Hsing Yun spread the seeds of Humanistic Buddhism step by step. His amicable character, his friendly smiling face, his confidence, his courage, his full awareness of the social conditions and the needs of lay devotees have made him unique in taking the lead in the Buddhist reform movement. He has taken into consideration the basic spiritual needs of the Chinese people as well as the concrete situations they live in. Thus his followers have been able to disseminate Buddhism in ways appropriate to different situations.

Today the achievements of Fo Guang Shan are well known: In education we see different schools from kindergartens to a university in the United States. In social service, we see hospitals and homes for the aged. In culture, we see the dance ensemble and orchestra, the publication houses, the translation center, mass media and publication. Tai Xu dreamed that one day Buddhists might spread the teachings of dharma and build temples in the west. These have all become true with the joint efforts of the Fo Guang Shan movement guided by Venerable Hsing Yun.

Chinese historians often remark that history makes a man and great man makes history. In tracing Tai Xu's source for "Humanistic Buddhism," Lai Yonghai stressed the point that Tai Xu had profound understanding of the Chinese philosophical traditions, especially Confucianism. As Confucianism has long represented the mainstream thinking, it is necessary to practice Humanistic Buddhism in Chinese contexts. [86] If monks stay out of social life and content themselves to be the lodgers of heaven and meditate in high mountain monasteries, separated from the people as the Chinese rulers wished, there would be no future for the development of Buddhism.

Full of humanistic compassion, love, joy, and kindness, Hsing Yun boldly carries out the good tradition of Buddhism in society. With his deep wisdom, together with his broad knowledge of the Chinese tradition and the world, he is leading the Humanistic Buddhist movement towards the next century. In fact, Hsing Yun is such a man who shoulders the great historical responsibility of Buddhist reform in China. His success lies in the fact that he follows the tradition in a way that brings back the good tradition of Buddhism to our time while bringing Buddhism all facilities appropriate to the modem conditions. His integration with the tradition and modernity make him unique in the history of Buddhism, unique in a way that be is truly reviving Chinese Buddhism.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(Note: all the publications in Chinese follow the original spelling either in Pinyin or in Wade System.)

Alitto, Guys 1986 The Last Confucian: Liang Shu-ming and the Chinese Dilemma of Modernity (Berkeley: University of California Press, second edition)

Deng Zimei 1994 Chuantong Fojiao Yu Zhongguo Jindaihua (Traditional Buddhism and China's Modernity) (Shanghai: Huazhong Shifan Daxue Chubanshe)

1998 Fo Guang Shan K'aishan Erhshih Chounien Chi-nien Ts'ungk'an, Fo Guang Shan Hsi Lai Temple 10th anniversary Special Edition (Hacienda Heights, CA.: Hsi Lai Temple)

1997, March 11 Foguang Shihchi (Buddha's Light Newsletter of Los Angeles), No.3

Fu Chihying 1995 Ch'uanteng: Hsing Yun Tashih Chuan (Handing Down the Light: Biography of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Taipei: T'ienhsia Wenhua Kufen Yuhsien Kungszu)

Gao Zhennong 1992 Fojiao Wenhua Yu Jindai Zhongguo (Buddhist Culture and Modem China) (Shanghai: Shanghai Shehui Kexueyuan Chubanshe)

Guo Peng 1997 Tai Xu Sixiang Yanjiu (Studies on the Thinking of Tai Xu), (Beijing: Zongguo Shehui Kexu Chubanshe)

Hao Chang 1987 Chinese Intellectuals in Crisis: Search for Order and Meaning, 1890-1911 (Berkeley: University of California Press)

Hong Xiuping 1995 Zhongguo Fojiao Wenhua Licheng (History of Chinese Buddhist Culture) (Nanjing: Jiangsu Jiaoyu Chubanshe)

1991 Hsing Yun Tashih Chiangyenchi (A Collection of Speeches of Master Hsing Yun), (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe), volumes 1-4

Hsing Yun 1999, March "Chienli Jenchien Fochiao Te Hsingke" (The Establishment of Humanistic Buddhism), in P'umen (Universal Gate)

Hsing Yun 1991 "Humanistic Buddhism," in 1990 Fo Guang Shan Fochiao Hsuehshu Huiyi Shihlu (Records of the Buddhist Academic Conference Held at Fo Guang Shan in 1990) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe)

Ke Yenliang 1976 Chinling Fanch'achih (Records of Buddhist Temples in Chinling), (Taipei: Kuangwen Shuchu)

Lai Yonghai 1992 Foxue Yu Ruxue (Buddhist Studies and Confucian Studies), (Hangzhou: Zhejiang Renmin Chubanshe)

Liang Shuming 1989 Liang Shuming Quanji (The Complete Works of Liang Shuming), (Ji-nan: Shandong Renmin Chubanshe)

Lu K'eng 1990 Hsing Yun Tashih Yu Jensheng Fochiao (Master Hsing Yun and Humanistic Buddhism) (Hong Kong: New Asia Publications Co.)

Lu Chenting and 1987 Women Jenshih Te Hsing Yun Tashih Liu Fang et al (Master Hsing Yun as We know), (Taipei: Ts'aifeng Ch'upanshe)

Reichelt, Karl Ludvig 1927 Truth and Tradition in Chinese Buddhism (Shanghai: The Commercial Press)

Ryoshu, Michihata 1986 Chungkuo Fochiao Yu Shehui Fuli Shihyeh (Chinese Buddhism and Its Social Welfare Service), translated by Kuan Shih-ch'ien, (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe)

Shimada, Michihata 1990 Pioneer of the Chinese Revolution: Zhang Binglin and Confucianism. Translated by Joshua A. Fogel (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press)

Soothill 1992 William and Lewis Hodous, A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (Taipei: Hsinwenfeng Ch'upan Kungszu)

1998 The Sutra of Hui-neng: Grand Master of Zen with Hui-neng's Commentary on the Diamond Sutra, translated by Thomas Cleary ( Boston: Shambhala)

1996, Winter Tai Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu)

Tu Wei-ming "Destructive Will and Ideological Holocaust," in Doedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Wang Zhiping 1998 Diwang Yu Fojiao (Emperors and Buddhism) (Beijing: Huawen Chubanshe)

Wright, Arthur Wright 1959 Buddhism in Chinese History (Stanford: Stanford University Press)

Yang Hui-nan 1991 Tangtai fochiao Szuhsiang Chanwang (On Contemporary Buddhist Thoughts) (Taipei: Tongta Tushu Kungszu)

1991 1990 Fo Guang Shan Fochiaohsuehshu Huiyi Shihlu (Records of Buddhist Academic Conference Held at Fo Guang Shan in 1990) (Kaohsiung: Foguang Ch'upanshe)

Yinshun 1995 Tai Xu dashi Nianpu (Chronicle Record of Venerable Tai Xu) (Beijing: Zongjiao Wenhua Chubanshe)

Yongyun 1996 K'ua Shihchi te Peihsin Suiyueh Chungkuo Taiwan fochiao Wushihnien Hiehchen (Fifty years of Buddhism in Taiwan) (Miseries and Happiness), (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Shuju)

Yu Lingbo 1995 Zhongguo Jinxiandai Fojiao Renwuzhi (Biographies of Modern Chinese Buddhists), (Beijing: Zongjiao Wenhua Chubanshe)

Zhou Qi 1998 "On Zhu Yuanzhang's Policy in Buddhism," in Studies in World's Religions (Shijie Zongjiao yanjiu), edited by the Institute of World Religions, Chinese Academy of Social Science, No. 3, pp.20-29)

Zhou Xuenong 1996 "Chushi, " "Rushi" Yu Qili Qiji Tai Xu Fashi De "Renjian Fojiao," Sixiang Yanjiu (A Study on "Buddhism in this World" by Venerable Tai Xu) (Beijing: Beijing University, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation)

NOTES

1. I would like to express my hearty thanks to President Naichen Chen, Professor Ananda W. P. Guruge, and Dr. Richard Kimball for their suggestions and criticisms for the improvement of the paper and to Venerable Tantra for his careful and patient proofreading. Hsi Lai University Library has provided me with rich sources on both Venerable Tai Xu and Grand Master Hsing Yun. Hereby I express my thanks to all who have helped me in writing this paper.

2. Ekottara-aagama.

3. The Sutra of Hui-neng: Grand Master of Zen with Hui-neng's Commentary on the Diamond Sutra, translated by Thomas Cleary (Boston: Shambhala, 1998), p. 23.

4. The Sutra of Hui-neng: Grand Master of Zen with Hui-neng's Commentary on the Diamond Sutra, translated by Thomas Cleary (Boston: Shambhala, 1998), pp. 28-29.

5. Xuanjue (665-713) first studied the doctrines of the Tiantai (T'ien-T'ai) School. When he heard of the teachings of Hui-neng, he converted to the Chan School represented by Hui-neng. He wrote this Yongjia Zhengdao Ge (Song to the Enlightenment), which contains 247 verses. It is one of the best poems describing the enlightenment.

6. Caoxi is a name of place situated in Shaozhou, in present Qujiang County, GuangdongProvince, China. It is famous because the Sixth Patriarch Hui-neng preached there. The word "Caoxi" implies that one has inherited the correct teachings of the Sixth Patriarch

7. Lai Yonghai, Foxue Yu Ruxue (Buddhist Studies and Confucian Studies) (Hangzhou:Zhejiang Remnin Chubanshe, 1992), p. 219.

8. Taiping Guangji (Miscellaneous Records Collected in the Taiping Reign Period, edited by Li Fang in 981 C.E.), volume 493. See Hong Xiuping, Zhonguo Fojiao Wenhua Licheng (History of Chinese Buddhist Culture) (Nanjing: Jiangsu Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 1995), p. 285.

9. We are still unaware of the effects of monastic economy. More research work is needed. See Hong Xiuping, Zhongguo Fojiao Wenhua Licheng (History of Chinese Buddhist Culture) (Nanjing: Jiangsu Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 1995), pp. 155-156.

10. Michihata Ryoshu, Chungkuo Fochiao Yu Shehui Fuli Shihyeh (Chinese Buddhism and Its Social Welfare Service), translated by Kuan Shihch'ien, (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1986), pp. 76-78, pp. 117-119. Such facilities were first established in the Southern dynasty (420-589) and the Northern dynasty (386-581). The Tang dynasty (618-906) started such a social service in the years of 701-703 C.E. during the reign of Empress Wu Zetian (r. 1684-705). In 845, Emperor Wuzong (reigned 841-846) decided to ban Buddhism. Almost all the temples were destroyed and monks and nuns were forced to return to lay people. We found a proposition made by Prime Minister Li Deyu (787-849) to the emperor. He suggested that the name of Beitianfang (field and home for the sick) be changed to Yangbingfang (home for the sick people) and local old persons who were of noble character and high prestige manage such social welfare services. See Quantangwen (Completed Prose Literature of the Tang Dynasty589-906), juan (volume) 704.

11. Dazhu Huihai was a Fujianese. His birth and death are still unknown. He was living probably in the mid of 8th century. He visited Mazu Daoyi (709-788) and spent six years with him. He became enlightened with the help of Mazu Daoyi who was largely responsible for the development of a New Chan sect in Jiangxi.

12. Xi Yun (? - 850), a native of Minxian County, Fujian Province, became a monk at Huangbi Mountain, Hongzhou. It was said that when he visited the capital, he met an old woman whose instruction enlightened him. He then returned to Hongzhou and visited Venerable Bai Zhang and became his successor. See Song Gaosengzhuan (Biography of Eminent Monks), TT. 50, p. 842.

13. See Wang Zhiping, Diwang Yu Fojiao (Emperors and Buddhism) (Beijing: Huawen Chubanshe, 1998), pp. 210-222. Also Zhou Qi, "On Zhu Yuanzhang's Policy in Buddhism," in Studies in World's Religions, edited by the Institute of World Religions, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, No. 3, 1998, pp. 20-29. Zhang Xuezhi, "The Harmonious Communication of Buddhism with Confucianism and Taoism in the Ming Dynasty Seen from Monk Zibai Zhenke," in Studies of World's Religions, No. 1, 1999, pp. 73-80. See Chun-fang Yu, The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), Chapter Seven, "Internal Causes of Monastic Decline in the Ming Dynasty (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), pp. 171-191. Sung-peng Hsu, A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: The Life and Thought of Han-Shan Te-Ch'ing (University Park and London: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979), pp. l1-58.

14. The White Lotus Society was started during the early years of the Southern Song dynasty by Mao Ziyuan, a native of Jiangsu, who had been a disciple of Jing-fan (d. 1128), a Tiantai (T'ien-t'ai) master also interested in the Pure Land doctrine. Mao organized a White Lotus Society consisting of monks and laymen devoted to the restraint of the passions and the encouragement of good karma. The activities of the society aroused the opposition from Confucianists and the orthodox Buddhists. The Mongols banned the society by the decrees in 1281 and 1308. In the end of Yuan dynasty (1206-1368), the White Lotus Society became involved in a number of rebellions. Zhu Yuanzhang was one of the members of Red Kerchief Bandits. The chief of the bandits was Han Shantong, whose forebears had been members of the White Lotus Society. As soon as Zhu ascended the throne, he immediately banned the society. See Kenneth Ch'en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), pp. 419-431.

15. Ke Yenliang, Chinling Fanch'achih (Records of Buddhist Temples in Chinling) (Taipei: Kuangwen Shuchu, 1976), chuan 2, Part I, pp. 165-166.

16. Ke Yenliang, Chinling Fanch'achih (Records of Buddhist Temples in Chinling) (Taipei: Kuangwen Shuchu, 1976), chuan 2, Part I, p. 177.

17. Zhang Zhidong was a great advocate of railroads and heavy industry in China. He made the most explicit philosophical statement of "ti-yong" dichotomy. "Ti" means "substance" or "essence" in English and "yong" means "function" or "utility." Here "ti" represents the mainstream of Chinese culture and "yong" refers to western learning. He implies that elements of western culture would be introduced only for use. Professor Joseph Levenson has made a detailed analysis of Zhang's "ti-yong" concept. See Joseph Levenson, Confucian China and its Modern Fate: A Trilogy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1958), pp. 60-69.

18. Yuan Shikai (1859-1916) was a native of Xiangcheng, Henan Province. He began his military career in a conflict in Korea in 1882. Started his "New Army" training project in Tianjin in 1895, he became a powerful army leader. At the critical moment, he betrayed young Emperor Guangxu and helped the Dowager to abort the reform. When the 1911 Revolution broke out, he became President of Republic of China. Dissatisfied with the presidency, he desired to accede to the imperial throne. As soon as he claimed to be the emperor in the end of 1915, the army led by Cai E rose against his rule and governors of other provinces followed Cai's suit. On June 6, 1916, besieged and angered, Yuan Shikai died disgracefully with his dream to become the emperor.

19. Yang Hui-nan, Tangtai Fochiao Szuhsiang Chanwang (On Contemporary Buddhist Thoughts) (Taipei: Tongta Tushu Kungszu, 1991), pp. l30-131.

20. Jing An (1852-1912), also named Eight Fingers (Ba Zhi Tou Tuo), styled Ji Chan, was Tai Xu's mentor. He was the leader of Chinese General Buddhist Association. He enjoyed high prestige that came from having served as abbot of three famous monasteries, including Tiantong Si in Ningpo, Zhejiang Province. He was good at poems and a collection of his poems was published entitled Ba Zhi Tou Tuo Shiwen Ji by Hunan Yuelu Publishing House in 1985. For English, see Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 35-37.

21. Su Mansu and Zhang Taiyan, "A Notice to All Buddhist Followers." See Deng Zimei, Chuantong Fojiao Yu Zhongguo Jindaihua (Traditional Buddhism and China's Modernity) (Shanghai: Huazhong Shifan Daxue Chubanshe, 1994), p. 146. Su Mansu (1884-1918) was born in Japan. His father was a merchant of Guangdong Province, doing business in Japan. His mother was a Japanese. He was actively involved in revolution but later became a monk in Huizhou, Guangdong Province. Not interested in Buddhist service, he wrote sentimental novels, the tragic stories and worked out translations of European novelists. Zhang Taiyan (1868-1936) was a well-known scholar and revolutionary. He showed strong criticisms against the Qing Government and was arrested in 1903. He made a careful study on Buddhism, especially the studies of Consciousness-Only and Buddhist logic. He even called for the wide spread of Buddhism in order to save the nation. See Shimada Kenji, Pioneer of the Chinese Revolution: Zhang Binglin and Confucianism. Trans. Joshua A. Fogel (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1990), and Hao Chang, Chinese Intellectuals in Crisis: Search for Order and Meaning, 1890-1911 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987).

22. Yang Wenhui (1837-1911) is widely regarded as the father of Buddhist revival at the turn of the 20th century. His contribution to the revival lies in his publishing house where millions of copies of Buddhist books were published and his influence spread far and wide. More importantly, his disciples included some of the leading Buddhist monks and laymen of the next generation. See Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 2-10.

23. Yang Wenhui: "Speech Delivered at Praj~naa Paaramitaa Society." See Deng Zimei, Chuantong Fojiao Yu Zhongguo Jindaihua (Traditional Buddhism and China's Modernity) (Shanghai: Huazhong Shifian Daxue Chubanshe, 1994), p. 146.

24. Tu Wei-ming, "Destructive Will and Ideological Holocaust," in Daedalus, Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Winter 1996, p. 149.

25. Tai Xu must have read Fengshen Zhuan (Annals of the Investiture of Deities), Xiyuji (Record of a Trip to the West). The former is a story of the imaginary battles between the forces of the Shang and Zhou peoples, in which even the gods participated, bringing with them the most ingenious weapons. Xiyuji is an account of the travel and adventures of great traveler, translator and Buddhist scholar Xuan Zang (Hsuan Tsang, 602-664) in his search for the law and the extraordinary exploits of his companions, the monkey and the pig, who helped him overcome all obstacles and dangers encountered during the journey. See Kenneth Ch'en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), p. 478.

26. A detailed description of Venerable Jing An can be found in Professor Holmes Welch's book. See The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 35-38.

27. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 5, pp. 128-152.

28. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 34, pp. 597-598.

29. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 5, pp. 218-222.

30. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 47, p. 431.

31. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 5, p. 215.

32. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 5, pp. 173-174.

33. Ibid., p. l74.

34. Guo Peng, Tai Xu Sixiang Yanjiu (Studies on Tai Xu's Thinking) (Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexu Chubanshe, 1997), pp. 3-4.

35. Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975) was born in Fenghua, Zhejiang Province. His mother, who gave Chiang great influence, was a devout Buddhist. Chiang converted to Christianity after his marriage with Meilin Soong.

36. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 34, pp. 668-670. Also Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968), p. 157.

37. Yinshun, Tai Xu Dashi Nianpu (Chronicle Record of Venerable Tai Xu) (Beijing: Zongjiao Wenhua Chubanshe, 1995), pp. 289-290.

38. Ibid., p. 290.

39. See Note 6.

40. Yu Lingbo, Zhongguo Jinxiandai Fojiao Renwuzhi (Biographies of Modern Chinese Buddhists) (Beijing: Zongjiao Wenhua Chubanshe, 1995), pp. 576-577.

41. Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943) was leader of lay Buddhist movement in the first half of the 20th century. He was president of the Institute of Inner Learning that he organized in Nanjing in 1922. Holmes Welch's book mentions Ouyang Jingwu and his viewpoints. See Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968).

42. Liang Shuming (1893-1987) was a native of Guangxi Province in Southeast China. He was born in Beijing. By self-teaching, he became professor of Peking University during 1918-1924. He was known for his stand in defending Confucian values during the New Culture Movement which started in May 1919. He embraced Buddhism in his early twenties to thirties. But he was shocked at his father's suicide and returned to Confucianism. He lonely yet firmly rejected the trend to blame all China's backwardness to Confucianism as the radical intellectuals did at the time. He deemed it his obligation to defend Confucianism as true essence of Chinese culture. Although sympathetic with Buddhism, he rejected Tai Xu's reform. See Guy Alitto, The Last Confucian: Liang Shu-ming and the Chinese Dilemma of Modernity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 52-56. The author was surprised to find that Liang still claimed himself to be a Buddhist when he interviewed him in 1980 and 1984, Cf. pp.337-338. Liang Shuming has been highly admired and respected by overseas Chinese and Chinese intelligentsia for his courage in a public debate with Chairman Mao Zedong in September 1953. Please refer to the same book on pages 1-3, 324-327 and the index on p. 393. Mao wrote a severe criticism against Liang. Please check the Bibliography of the same book, p.373.

43. Liu Renhang was a gentry merchant in Shanghai in 1920s.

44. Liang Qichao (1873-1929), also named Ren-gong, a native of Guangdong Province, was a famous reformer in the end of Qing dynasty as well as a well-known scholar. In his later years, he attended lectures by Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943, see Note 64.) in Nanjing. He wrote 18 important articles on Buddhism.

45. See Note 6.

46. Liang Shuming, Liang Shuming Quanji (The Complete Works of Liang Shuming) (Ji'nan: Shandong Renmin Chubanshe, 1989), volume I, pp. 536-537. The original book is entitled Dongxi Wenhua Jiqi Zhexue (East and West Culture and Their Philosophies) (Shanghai: The Commercial Press, 1922, p. 202.

47. Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1968), p. 51.

48. I have written an essay on "The Interfaith Dialogues between Tai Xu and Christians in the 1930s." This was the project that I did at the Center for the Study of World Religions and Harvard-Yenching Institute, Harvard University, in the year 1996-1997. This paper is going to be published in Buddhist-Christian Studies, 2000.

49. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 41, part 13, p. 331.

50. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 43, pp. 988-1002.

51. Feng Yuxiang and Bai Congxi were both high-ranking generals in the NationalistGovernment.

52. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 52, part 17, pp. 485-486.

53. Karl Ludvig Reichelt, Truth and Tradition in Chinese Buddhism (Shanghai: The Commercial Press, 1927), pp. 301-302.

54. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 34, part 9, II, pp. 555, 559, 563.

55. 'Tai Xu Fashi Jiang Foxue Ji,' in Haichaoyin Wenku Shehui Xue, p. 85, see Zhou Xuenong, "Chushi," "Rushi" Yu Qili Qiji ¡V Tai Xu Fashi De "Renjian Fojiao" Sixiang Yanjiu (A Study on "Buddhism in this World" by Venerable Tai Xu) (Beijing: Beijing University, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1996), p. 22.

56. After his return, Tai Xu delivered a speech about his tour, saying that Western scholars mainly relied on texts in Paali language and incomplete Sanskrit texts. The former belonged to the Theravaada School, and latter belonged to the Mahaayaana School. See Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 55, part 18, II, pp. 242-243, pp. 256-258.

57. Tai Xu delivered eight speeches in Ceylon. The last one was entitled "The Respectful Ceylon Buddhism." See Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 56, p. 585-597.

58. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 35, pp. 26-30.

59. Ibid., volume 35, p. 31.

60. Ibid., volume 47, p. 449.

61. See Lai Yonghai, Foxue Yu Ruxue (Buddhist Studies and Confucian Studies) (Hangzhou: Zhejiang Renmin Chubanshe, 1992), pp. 224-225.

62. Ibid., p. 224.

63. Gao Zhennong, Fojiao Wenhua Yu Jindai Zhongguo (Buddhist Culture and Modern China) (Shanghai: Shanghai Shehui Kexueyuan Chubanshe, 1992), p. 61.

64. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 57, pp. 61-63.

65. Five Precepts refer to the first five of the ten precepts which admonish killing, stealing, adultery, lying, and intoxicating liquors.

66. The ten good characteristics, or virtues, defined as the non-committal of the ten evils, including no killing, no stealing, no adultery, no lying, no double-tongue, no coarse language, no filthy language, no covetousness, no anger, no perverted views.

67. The four all-embracing (Bodhisattva) virtues refer to (1) daana, giving what others like, in order to lead them to love and receive the truth; (2) priyavacana, affectionate speech, with the same purpose; (3) arthakrtya, conduct profitable to others, with the same purpose, (4) samaanaarthataa, co-operation with and adaptation of oneself to others, to lead them into the truth.

68. These refer to the six things that ferry one beyond the sea of mortality to Nirvana, such as charity, keeping the precepts; patience under insult, zeal and progress, meditation, and wisdom. Notes 63-66 are taken from A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms compiled by William Edward Soothil and Lewis Hodous.

69. Fayin (Voice of the Dharma, organ of Chinese Buddhist Association, Beijing), No. 6, 1983. Also see Gao Zhennong, Fojiao Wenhua Yu Jindai Zhongguo (Buddhist Culture and Modern China) (Shanghai: Shanghai Shehui Kexueyuan Chubanshe, 1992), p. 61-62.

70. Grand Master Hsing Yun was a young student at the Buddhist Institute of Jiaoshan then.

71. Venerable Hsing Yun, "The Establishment of Humanistic Buddhism," in P'umen (Universal Gate Monthly), No. 3, 1999, pp. 4-11.

72. Hsing Yun, "Humanistic Buddhism," in 1990 Fo Guang Shan Fochiao Hsuehshu Huiyi Shihlu (Records of the Buddhist Academic Conference held at Fo Guang Shan in 1990) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), p. 22.

73. Speech delivered at the International Buddhist Academic Conference in 1990. See Hsing Yun Tashih Chiangyenchi (A Collection of Speeches of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), volume 4, 32.

74. See Hsing Yun, "How to Modernize Buddhism," in Hsing Yun Tashih Yenchiangchi (A Collection of Speeches of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Fo Guang Shan Ch'upanshe, 1991), volume 4, pp. 33-43.

75. Hsing Yun, "On Humanistic Buddhism," in 1990 Fo Guang Shan Fochiao Hsuehshu Huiyi Shihlu (Records of Buddhist Academic Conference Held at Fo Guang Shan in 1990) (Kaohsiung: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), p. 20.

76. Pratyeka-buddha refers to one who is enlightened by the twelve nidaanas; it is considered as an advance on the Theravaada, cf. `Sraavaka (hearer), but not yet the standard of the altruistic Bodhisattva-vehicle, the Mahaayaana. See William Soothill and Lewis Hodous, A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms (Taipei: Hsinwenfeng Ch'upan Kungszu, 1992), p. 441.

77. Hsing Yun, "On Humanistic Buddhism," in 1990 Fo Guang Shan Fochiao Hsuehshu Huiyi Shihlu (Records of Buddhist Academic Conference Held at Fo Guang Shan in 1990) (Kaohsiung: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), pp. 19-30.

78. Hsing Yun Tashih Chiangyenchi (A Collection of Speeches of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), volume 1, p. 237.

79. Hsing Yun Tashih Chiangyenchi (A Collection of Speeches of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), volume 1, p. 238.

80. Hsing Yun Tashih Chiangyenchi (A Collection of Speeches of Grand Master Hsing Yun) (Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Foguang Ch'upanshe, 1991), volume 2, p. 720.

81. This is advanced by Fan Zhongyan (989-1052), a famous scholar official in the Song dynasty (960-1127). He was a great reformer and was dismissed from his post due to the attacks from his opponents in the court. He wrote this maxim in his "Yueyanglou ji." (Note on Yueyang Tower). This maxim is generally considered as Confucian scholar's saying, but its deep structure originates from Buddhism. Many Chinese have been familiar with this maxim but do not know the source. Had modern Chinese seen the influence of Buddhism in Chinese tradition, they would not have attacked it time and again in this century. See Arthur Wright, Buddhism in Chinese History (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1959), p. 93.

82. Ibid., p. l23.

83. Most of the history books on modern Chinese Buddhism would mention this incident. Holmes Welch wrote a more detailed chapter about the quarrel and fight between Tai Xu's faction and other conservative hosts. See Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 28-33.

84. This 1911 Revolution, led by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, overthrew the Manchus' rule in China and ended the thousand years of imperial rule.

85. Tai Xu Dashi Quanshu (The Complete Works of Venerable Tai Xu), volume 57, pp. 61-63.

86. Lai Yonghai, Foxue Yu Ruxue (Buddhist Studies and Confucian Studies) (Hangzhou: Zhejiang Renmin Chubanshe, 1992), pp. 226-227.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Thu Aug 13, 2020 1:26 am

Yang Wenhui [Yang Renshan]
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 8/12/20

Image
Yang Wenhui

Yang Wenhui (simplified Chinese: 杨文会; traditional Chinese: 楊文會; pinyin: Yáng Wénhùi; Wade–Giles: Yang Wenhui; 1837-1911) was a Chinese lay Buddhist reformer who has been called "The Father of the Modern Buddhist Renaissance". His courtesy name was Rénshān (仁山). He was a native of Shídài (石埭) county (modern Shítái 石台 county) in Anhui province.

While he was young he accompanied his father to live in Beijing, but the Taiping rebellion forced them to flee to the lower Yangtze delta. Although he studied the Confucian classics as a child, in 1862 he became interested in Buddhism after reading a copy of the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana (大乘起信論 dàchéng qǐxìn lùn).

In 1866 he moved to Nanjing to manage architectural engineering projects for the government, where his Buddhist beliefs were strengthened through contact with other lay Buddhists.

It was not long after that he and several friends raised money to establish the Jinling Sutra Publishing House (金凌刻經處 Jīnlíng kèjīng chù), Jinling being an old name for Nanjing. In 1878 he left China to visit England and France, bringing back several scientific instruments which he donated to researchers in China.

Olcott left one further legacy. Authority in Buddhism is often a matter of lineage, traced backwards in time from student to teacher, ideally ending with the Buddha himself. If one were to imagine a lineage of modern Buddhism traced forwards in time, one might begin with Gunananda (who clearly saw himself as representing the original teachings of the Buddha) to Colonel Olcott, to a young Sinhalese named David Hewaviratne, better known as Anagarika Dharmapala (1864-1933).

Hewaviratne was born into the small English-speaking middle class of Colombo. His family was Buddhist; at the age of nine he sat with his father in the audience of the Panadure debate, cheering for Gunananda. But like many middle-class children, he was educated in Catholic and Anglican schools. He met Blavatsky and Olcott during their first visit to Ceylon in 1880 and was initiated into the Theosophical Society four years later. In 1881 he changed his name to Anagarika Dharmapala ('Homeless Protector of the Dharma') and, although remaining a layman until late in life, wore the robes of a monk. In 1884, when Blavatsky departed for the Theosophical Society's headquarters in Adyar, India, after a subsequent visit to Ceylon, Dharmapala accompanied her. Upon his return to Ceylon, he became Colonel Olcott's closest associate, accompanying him on a trip to Japan in 1889. In 1898 he worked with Olcott to found the short-lived Dravidian Buddhist Society, dedicated to converting (or, according to Dharmapala, 'returning') the untouchables of south India to Buddhism. Clearly more political than Olcott in both Ceylon and India, he declared that 'India belongs to the Buddhas'.

In 1891, inspired by Edwin Arnold's account of the sad state of the site of the Buddha's enlightenment and by his own trip to the site that year, he founded the Maha Bodhi Society, whose aim was to wrest Bodh Gaya from Hindu control and make it a place of pilgrimage for Buddhists from around the world. Dharmapala achieved international fame after his bravura performance at the World's Parliament of Religions, held in conjunction with the Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893. His eloquent English and ability to quote from the Bible captivated the audience as he argued that Buddhism was clearly the equal, if not the superior, of Christianity in both antiquity and profundity, noting, for example, its compatibility with science. While in Chicago, he met not only the other Buddhist delegates to the parliament, such as the Japanese Zen priest Shaku Soen, but American enthusiasts of Buddhism, including [url=x]Paul Carus[/url].

The lineage of modern Buddhism was passed to China, when Dharmapala stopped in Shanghai in 1893 on his journey back from the World's Parliament of Religions, where he met Yang Wen-hui (1837- 1911). Yang was a civil engineer who had become interested in Buddhism after happening upon a copy of The Awakening of Faith, an important Mahayana treatise. He organized a lay society to disseminate the dharma by carving woodblocks for the printing of the Buddhist canon (a traditional form of merit-making). After serving at the Chinese embassy in London (where he met Max Muller, editor of the 'Sacred Books of the East' series, and his Japanese student Nanjo Bun'yu), he resigned from his government position to devote all of his energies to the publication of Buddhist texts.

Accompanying Dharmapala to Shanghai was the famous Baptist missionary Reverend Timothy Richard, who had also attended the parliament in Chicago. After an unsuccessful attempt by Dharmapala to enlist Chinese monks into the Maha Bodhi Society, Reverend Richard arranged for him to meet Yang Wen-hui.
Yang did not think it possible for Chinese monks to go to India to assist in the cause of restoring Buddhism in India, but he suggested that Indians be sent to China to study the Buddhist canon. Here, we note another element of modern Buddhism. Dharmapala felt that the Buddhism of Ceylon was the most pure and authentic version of the Buddha's teachings and would have rejected as spurious most of the texts that Yang had been publishing. Yang, on the other hand, felt that the Buddhism of China was the most complete and authentic, such that the only hope of restoring Buddhism in India lay in returning the Chinese canon of translated Indian texts (including many Mahayana sutras) to the land of their birth. The ecumenical spirit found in much of modern Buddhism does not preclude the valuation of one's own form of Buddhism as supreme.

Yang and Dharmapala seem to have begun a correspondence that lasted over the next fifteen years, in which they agreed on the importance of spreading Buddhism to the West. Towards that end, Yang collaborated with Reverend Richard in an English translation of The Awakening if Faith, and in 1908 established a school to train Buddhist monks to serve as foreign missionaries, with Yang himself serving on the faculty, perhaps the first time in the history of Chinese Buddhism that monks had received instruction from a layman. Yang's contact with figures such as Muller and Dharmapala had convinced him that Buddhism was a religion compatible with the modern scientific world.

The situation faced by Buddhist monks in China was different from that in Ceylon. The challenge came not so much from Christian missionaries, although they were also a strong presence in China, but from a growing community of intellectuals who saw Buddhism as a form of primitive superstition impeding China's entry into the modern world. Buddhism had periodically been regarded with suspicion by the state over the course of Chinese history, and such suspicions were intensified in the early decades of the twentieth century (especially after the Republican revolution of 1911) when Buddhism was denounced both by Christian missionaries and by Chinese students returning from abroad imbued with the ideas of Dewey, Russell and Marx. In 1898 the emperor had issued an edict ordering many Buddhist temples (and their often substantial land holdings) to be converted into secular schools. Although the order was rescinded in 1905, a number of Buddhist schools and academies for the training of monks were founded at monasteries in an effort to prevent the seizure of the property and the establishment of secular schools. The monastic schools set out to train monks in the Buddhist classics, who would in turn go out in public and teach to the laity (as Christian missionaries did). Yang's academy was one such school. Although most were short-lived, they trained many of the future leaders of modern Buddhism in China, who sought to defend the dharma through founding Buddhist organizations, publishing Buddhist periodicals and leading lay movements to support the monastic community. One of the students at Yang's school was the monk T'ai Hsu [Taixu], later to become one of the most famous Chinese Buddhists of the twentieth century. New organizations included the Buddhist Pure Karma Society, founded in 1925 in Shanghai, which ran an orphanage and a free outpatient clinic, sponsored public lectures on Buddhist texts, published the Pure Karma Monthly and operated radio station XMHB, 'The Voice of the Buddha'. The Chinese Metaphysical Society was founded in 1919 in Nanjing. Originally intended for laymen, monks were later allowed to attend, on the condition that they not meditate, recite the Buddha's name, or perform services for the dead. Here Buddhism was presented as a philosophy rather than a religion, and the emphasis was placed not on the recitation of the scriptures (sutras) but on the study of the scholastic treatises, especially those of the Fa-hsiang school, regarded as a form of Buddhist Idealism. For many who participated in these groups, the support and study of Buddhism served as a means of maintaining their Chinese identity during a period of sometimes chaotic social and political change.7

-- A Modern Buddhist Bible: Essential Readings from East and West, by David S. Lopez


During another trip to England he met the Japanese Buddhist Nanjo Bunyu (南条文雄) and started a correspondence with him.

Image

Nanjō Bun'yū (南条文雄) (1 July 1849 – 9 November 1927) was a Buddhist priest and one of the most important modern Japanese scholars of Buddhism. Nanjō was born to the abbot of Seiunji Temple (誓運寺), part of the Shinshu Ōtani sect (真宗大谷派) of the Higashi Honganji (東本願寺) branch of Jodo Shinshu.

Nanjō studied Classical Chinese texts and Buddhist doctrine in his youth before being sent to Europe in 1876 to study Sanskrit and Indian philosophy from European scholars, including Max Müller, under whom Bunyu studied in England. While there he met the Chinese Buddhist Yang Wenhui, whom he helped to acquire some three hundred Chinese Buddhist texts that had been lost in China to be reprinted at Yang's printing house in Nanjing. He returned to Japan in 1884 and served as a professor or head of a number of Buddhist seminaries and universities until his death.

Major publications

(Co-editor with F. Max Müller) Buddhist texts from Japan. Oxford : Clarendon press, 1881–84.
• Nanjo Bunyu (1883). A catalogue of the Chinese translation of the Buddhist Tripitaka, the Sacred Canon of the Buddhists in China and Japan, compiled by order of the Secretary of State for India. Oxford, Clarendon Press
• A short history of the twelve Japanese Buddhist sects. Translated from the original Japanese by Bunyiu Nanjio. Tokyo, Bukkyo-Sho-ei-yaku-Shuppan-sha, 1886. Internet Archive
• (Co-author) An unabridged Japanese-English dictionary, with copious illustrations, by Capt. F. Brinkley. Tokyo, Sanseido [1896].

Image

Francis Brinkley (30 December 1841 – 12 October 1912) was an Anglo-Irish newspaper owner, editor and scholar who resided in Meiji period Japan for over 40 years, where he was the author of numerous books on Japanese culture, art and architecture and an English-Japanese Dictionary. He was also known as Frank Brinkley or as Captain Francis Brinkley and was the great uncle of Cyril Connolly.

In 1841, Frank Brinkley was born at Parsonstown House, Co. Meath, the thirteenth and youngest child of Matthew Brinkley (1797–1855) J.P., of Parsonstown and his wife Harriet Graves (1800–1855). His paternal grandfather, John Brinkley, was the last Bishop of Cloyne and the first Royal Astronomer of Ireland, while his maternal grandfather, Richard Graves, was also a Senior Fellow of Trinity College and the Dean of Ardagh. One of Brinkley's sisters, Jane (Brinkley) Vernon of Clontarf Castle, was the grandmother of Cyril Connolly. Another sister, Anna, became the Dowager Countess of Kingston after the death of her first husband, James King, 5th Earl of Kingston and was the last person to live at Mitchelstown Castle.

Image

Through his mother's family Brinkley was related to Richard Francis Burton, a distinguished linguist who shared Brinkley's passion for foreign culture.

Image

Sir Richard Francis Burton KCMG FRGS (/ˈbɜːrtən/; 19 March 1821 – 20 October 1890) was a British explorer, geographer, translator, writer, soldier, orientalist, cartographer, ethnologist, spy, linguist, poet, fencer, and diplomat. He was famed for his travels and explorations in Asia, Africa and the Americas, as well as his extraordinary knowledge of languages and cultures. According to one count, he spoke 29 European, Asian and African languages.

Burton's best-known achievements include: a well-documented journey to Mecca in disguise, at a time when Europeans were forbidden access on pain of death; an unexpurgated translation of One Thousand and One Nights (commonly called The Arabian Nights in English after early translations of Antoine Galland's French version); the publication of the Kama Sutra in English; a translation of The Perfumed Garden, the Arab Kama Sutra; and a journey with John Hanning Speke as the first Europeans to visit the Great Lakes of Africa in search of the source of the Nile.


His works and letters extensively criticised colonial policies of the British Empire, even to the detriment of his career. Although he aborted his university studies, he became a prolific and erudite author and wrote numerous books and scholarly articles about subjects including human behaviour, travel, falconry, fencing, sexual practices and ethnography. A characteristic feature of his books is the copious footnotes and appendices containing remarkable observations and information. William Henry Wilkins wrote: "So far as I can gather from all I have learned, the chief value of Burton’s version of The Scented Garden lay not so much in his translation of the text, though that of course was admirably done, as in the copious notes and explanations which he had gathered together for the purpose of annotating the book. He had made this subject a study of years. For the notes of the book alone he had been collecting material for thirty years, though his actual translation of it only took him eighteen months."

Burton was a captain in the army of the East India Company, serving in India, and later briefly in the Crimean War. Following this, he was engaged by the Royal Geographical Society to explore the east coast of Africa, where he led an expedition guided by locals and was the first European known to have seen Lake Tanganyika. In later life, he served as British consul in Fernando Pó (now Bioko, Equatorial Guinea), Santos in Brazil, Damascus (Ottoman Syria) and finally in Trieste. He was a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society and was awarded a knighthood in 1886.

-- Richard Francis Burton, by Wikipedia


Brinkley went to Royal School Dungannon before entering Trinity College, where he received the highest records in mathematics and classics. After graduating he chose upon a military career and was subsequently accepted at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, becoming an artillery officer. In this capacity his cousin, Sir Richard Graves MacDonnell the 6th Governor of Hong Kong (1866–1872), invited him out to the east to serve as his Aide-de-camp and Adjutant.

In 1866, on his way to Hong Kong, Brinkley visited Nagasaki and witnessed a duel between two samurai warriors. Once the victor had slain his opponent he immediately covered him in his haori and "knelt down with hands clasped in prayer". It is said that Brinkley was so impressed by the conduct of the Japanese warrior that this enticed him to live in Japan permanently.

-- Francis Brinkley, by Wikipedia


• B. Nanjio (ed.). The Laṅkāvatāra sūtra, Kyoto, Otani University Press 1923 [In Nāgarī]
• H. Kern; B. Nanjio (ed.); Saddharmapuṇḍarīka; St. Pétersbourg 1908-1912 (Imprimerie de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences), XII, 507 S.; Sert.: Bibliotheca Buddhica, 10 [In Nāgarī] Vol.1, Vol. 2, Vol 3, Vol. 4, Vol. 5.

Nanjo Bunyu, by Wikipedia


With Nanjō's help, Yang was able to import over 300 sutra texts from Japan that had been lost within China. In 1894 he worked with the British missionary Timothy Richard (李提摩太) to translate Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana into English.[1][2]

Image

Timothy Richard (Chinese: 李提摩太 Li Timotai, 10 October 1845 – 17 April 1919) was a Welsh Baptist missionary to China, who influenced the modernisation of China and the rise of the Chinese Republic.

Inspired by the Second Evangelical Awakening to become a missionary, Richard left teaching to enter Haverfordwest Theological College in 1865. There he dedicated himself to China, where he had an active role in relief operations during the Northern Chinese Famine of 1876–1879, and was instrumental in promoting anti-foot binding and gender equality in China.

Richard applied to the newly formed China Inland Mission, but Hudson Taylor considered that he would be of better service to the denominational Baptist missions. In 1869 the Baptist Missionary Society (BMS) accepted Richard's application, and assigned him to Yantai (Chefoo), Shandong Province.

In 1897 Richard undertook a journey to India to discover the conditions of the Christian mission there. Travelling with a young missionary, Arthur Gostick Shorrock, they visited Ceylon, Madras, Agra, Benares, Delhi, Calcutta and finally Bombay.

Timothy Richard helped the Qing government to deal with the aftermath of the Taiyuan massacre during the Boxer Rebellion. He thought the main cause of the Boxer Rebellion was due to lack of education of the population, so he proposed to Qing court official Li Hongzhang to establish a modern university in Taiyuan with Boxer Indemnity to Great Britain, and his proposal was approved later. In 1902, Timothy Richard represented the British government to establish Shanxi University, one of the three earliest modern universities in China. Timothy Richard was in charge of the fund to build Shanxi University until ten years later in 1912. During that period, he also served as the head of the College of Western Studies in Shanxi University.

In China, Timothy Richard became a contributor to the monthly Wan Guo Gong Bao, or Review of the Times, which Young John Allen founded and edited from 1868 to 1907. This paper was "said...to have done more for reform than any other single agency in China." The Review attracted a wide and influential Chinese readership throughout its thirty-nine year run. One of the ways in which the Review appealed to a broad, scholarly audience was through its discussion of current events and economics. During the First Sino-Japanese War period of 1894-1895, essay titles included: “International Intercourse, by a descendent of Confucius,” “How to Enrich a Nation, by Dr. Joseph Edkins”,
“The Prime Benefits of Christianity, by the Rev. Timothy Richard,” and “On the Suppression of Doubt and the Acceptance of Christ, by Sung Yuh-kwei.” The articles attributed practical applications to the Christian faith and portrayed Christianity as a useful concept for the Chinese, one that Allen and his contributors intended to portray on an equal level to concepts such as market economics and international law. The Qing reformer Kang Youwei once said of the publication: "I owe my conversion to reform chiefly on the writings of two missionaries, the Rev. Timothy Richard and the Rev. Dr. Young J. Allen."


Richard also translated Looking Backward into Chinese as 百年一覺 Bainian Yi Jiao, and part of Wu Cheng'en's novel, Journey to the West into English.

Richard's papers are preserved in the BMS archives at Regent's Park College, Oxford.

-- Timothy Richard, by Wikipedia


In 1907, Richard Timothy, a missionary, who lived at that time in China and cooperated with Yang Wenhui, published his own translation, which was mired in Christianized equivalents for Buddhist terms, e.g. “God” for “Thusness”.

-- Ouyang Jingwu’s Critique of the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, Excerpt from "Differentiating the Pearl From the Fish Eye: Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943) and the Revival of Scholastic Buddhism", A dissertation presented by Eyal Aviv


Yang established the Zhiheng Monastery (祗洹精舍 zhīhéng jīngshè) in 1908 for teaching Buddhism on the site of his publishing house and wrote the textbooks himself. He invited the poet-monk Su Manshu to teach Sanskrit and English.

Image

Su Manshu (simplified Chinese: 苏曼殊; traditional Chinese: 蘇曼殊; pinyin: Sū Mànshū, 1884–1918) was a Chinese writer, poet, painter, revolutionist, and a translator. He was born as Xuanying in 1884 in Yokohama, Japan. He later adopted Su Manshu as a Buddhist name. His father was a Cantonese merchant, and his mother was his father's Japanese maid. He went back to Guangdong, China when he was five while his mother stayed in Japan.

He became a Buddhist monk three times during his life; once at the age of 12, later in 1899, and again in 1903. He studied in Japan and traveled to many Buddhist countries including India, and Java. He was involved in revolutionary activity against the Qing Dynasty writing articles and papers. He mastered many languages — English, French, Japanese and Sanskrit. He died at the age of 34 in Shanghai, reputedly of eating 60 meat dumplings to win a bet

-- Su Manshu, by Wikipedia


Over twenty monks studied there, preparing to spread the Dharma. Unfortunately, due to financial trouble the school closed after only two years.

In 1910 he founded the Buddhist Research Society (佛學研究會 fóxúe yánjiù hùi) and served as its head. The lay Buddhist Ouyang Jian [Ouyang Jingwu] (歐陽漸) studied under Yang at this time, and after Yang's death in 1911 Ouyang would reestablish Yang's old publishing house and school as the Chinese Inner Studies College (支那內學院 zhīnà nèi xúeyuàn).

xx




Yang Wenhui had many students over his lifetime, including several well-known figures such as Zhang Taiyan, Tan Sitong, and Taixu.

External links

• A Short Record of Yang Renshan (Simplified Chinese)
• Yang Wenhui's Concepts of Compiling a Tripitaka (Traditional Chinese)
• Yang Renshan and the Jinling Sutra Publishing House (Simplified Chinese)
• Entry in Database of Modern Chinese Buddhism (English)

References

1. The Awakening of Faith of Ashvagosha index at http://www.sacred-texts.com
2. Tarocco, Francesca (2008). Lost in Translation? The Treatise on the Mahāyāna Awakening of Faith (Dasheng qixin lun) and its modern readings, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 71 (2), 335
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:45 am

Part 1 of 2

Ouyang Jingwu: a Biography, Excerpt from "Differentiating the Pearl From the Fish Eye: Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943) and the Revival of Scholastic Buddhism"
A dissertation presented by Eyal Aviv
to The Committee on the Study of Religion in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of The Study of Religion Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
July, 2008

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.




2.2 Ouyang Jingwu: a Biography

2.2.1 Phases in Ouyang’s career


Below is an outline of the major phases in Ouyang’s career, which are described in greater detail in the rest of this chapter. Drawing on the analysis of Cheng Gongrang, 26 I have divided the career of Ouyang into three main phases, which are further divided into subphases:

1. Early phase – Confucian education. 1877-1901

a. Traditional Education [between 1877 and 1894] -- Ouyang focused mainly on Chengzhu School of thought and still aspired to an official career.

b. The Discovery of the Luwang School [1894-1901] -- During the Sino-Japanese war of 1894 Ouyang decided that Chengzhu thought, which was the state ideology in China would neither help his personal quest “for the meaning of life and death” nor to save China. He turned then to the competing Luwang School of thought. This phase ended in 1901, when he was introduced to Buddhism.

2. Adulthood – The Buddhist phase subdivided into three stages [1901-1931]

a. First Steps into Buddhism [1901-1904] -– in 1901 Ouyang was introduced to Buddhism by Gui Bohua, a friend who studied under Ouyang’s future teacher Yang Wenhui. Gui introduced Ouyang to the Buddhist thought of Yang Wenhui’s circles, which Ouyang characterized later as “[a group that] study Huayan and venerate the Awakening of Faith.”

b. Yang Wenhui’s protégé [1904-1911] -- In 1904 Ouyang traveled to Nanjing to meet Yang Wenhui for the first time. In the period between their first meeting and Yang’s death Ouyang studied under Yang Wenhui and thoroughly investigated the different schools of Chinese Buddhism. At this stage, although he still found the Huayan-Awakening of Faith position to be the core of Buddhism, he gradually made further research into the teaching of the Weishi School and became known in Yang Wenhui’s circle as the Weishi specialist.

c. The Yogacara/Weishi phase and failed institutional reforms [1911-1923] -– after Yang Wenhui’s death in 1911, Ouyang turned his attention to reforms within Buddhism. In a few provocative and bold steps he tried to undermine monastic authority and establish an overarching association, which would oversee all Buddhist institutions. This radical move met a vehement monastic response, which led to the establishment of a new institution, “The Buddhist Association of China” led by monks. This new institution along with the failure of his own association shifted Ouyang’s focus to the realm of ideas and Buddhist education, where he was destined to make his most important contribution.

d. Harmonizing Yogacara with Prajñaparamita thought [1923-1931] -- In 1923 Ouyang lost his second son and two of his favorite students, Xu Yiming and Huang Shuyuan. Grieving over his multiple tragedies he made a vow to propagate Prajnaparamita thought. This vow was the beginning of his attempts to synthesize Prajnaparamita and Yogacara thought. At a conference that year Ouyang remarked: “For a long while now we who studied together exchanged views over the Faxiang teaching and we can say that we have already kindled some light of understanding. I wish now that you will explore the secrets of the Prajnaparamita and turn [this light] into a torch of wisdom.” He instructed his students that in addition to a thorough learning of Yogacara they must probe into the true characteristics of “Nagarjuna studies” as well. In 1928 Ouyang wrote a preface to the MahaPrajnaparamita Sutra in which he brought to completion his attempts to harmonize Yogacara with Madhyamaka thought.

3. Returning home, Ouyang’s late thought [1931-1943]

a. In the later stages his of his life Ouyang rediscovered Huayan thought and studied the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, texts and approaches, which he repudiated in his early career. In this final phase of his career he tried to harmonize his earlier thought with these new emphases. This led to the creation of his own panjiao system (a doxographical method which he had criticized in the past but found useful toward the end of his life.)

b. In his later years he also made a surprising return to Confucianism. Using the same syncretic approach, Ouyang tried to synthesize Buddhism and Confucianism, arguing that they are essentially the same and that they “return to the same source” (78). Around 1931, when Ouyang turned 60, he attempted a systematization of the Confucian canon and teachings modeled after his experience with Buddhist teachings. This attempt was intensified after he moved to Sichuan in 1937 and continued up until his death in 1943. Ouyang thought that, since they share the same principles, the current strength of Buddhism could help restore Confucianism. He remarked then, “Alas, Confucianism is dying. If we will get down to the essence of the Buddhist canon and refined prajna we will be able to revive the state of Jin by means of the State of Qin27 [and] the Dao of King Wen and King Wu will not crumble.”

2.3 Ouyang’s biography in detail

2.3.1 Early Years

2.3.1.1 Family Background


In 1936, when Ouyang was sixty-six he wrote to his uncle:

My study of Buddhism is different from others; you, my uncle, are familiar with the hardships that my mother experienced. Confucianism offered no answers to my inquiries into matters of sickness and life and death. As to the end-point, where [cultivation] and the ultimate converges, and as to the starting-point, where one takes up cultivation, I still felt as perplexed and remained uncertain. Hence, after my mother passed away, I cut off reputation, wealth, and attachment to food and sex. I set foot on the sramana path and turned to teachers and friends to ask about that path, and yet my wish was difficult to fulfill. After thirty years of study, and searching for answers among all the ancient sages from the West (i.e. Indian Buddhist teachers), [Buddhism] touched my heart and enlightened me. [Meanwhile] tragedies [haunted] my family. My daughter, Ouaygn Lan, studied with me in Nanjing. When I returned from Gansu, where I had gone on printery business, I learned that she had passed away. I howled and lamented deep into the nights, but there was nothing I could do about [her death]. Then, I made a determined effort to read [Buddhist] scriptures, often until dawn. As a consequence, I understood the meaning of the Yogacarabhumi and was enlightened to the meaning of consciousness-only (weishi, Chinese). This was why I made the trip to Yunnan, where scholars gathered daily from all directions [to study with me]. [At that time], my son Zhanyuan, an exceptional talent with high ideals, drowned while taking a swim. I was determined then to study the Prajnaparamita literature, the Huayan sutra, and the Nirvana Sutra. I then understood them one after the other. Gradually, I arrived to my current mastery of the material, where for the first time, everything is clear. [On this basis], I have come up with the definitive understanding [of the Buddhist doctrines] (Chinese) 28


This passage summarized major events that shaped Ouyang’s intellectual trajectory. As can be seen from the quote, Ouyang’s biography is closely connected to developments and changes in his thought. These vicissitudes serve as a reminder that as intellectual historians we have to be sensitive to changes and continuations in the thought of the individuals we study. In Ouyang’s thought we see that although Ouyang was mostly famous for his study of the Yogacara tradition (the phase on which this dissertation focuses) it would be a mistake to reduce him to merely a Yogacarin. In many ways, each phase has its own, slightly different, “Ouyang Jingwu.”

Ouyang Jingwu was born as Ouyang Jian (Chinese), courtesy name Ouyang Jinghu (Chinese), on October 8th 1871, in Yihuang County (Chinese), Jiangxi province. He changed his name to Ouyang Jingwu when he was in his early 50’s.

Ouyang’s ancestors were peasants. The family became known only with Ouyang Jingwu’s paternal great-grandfather, Ouyang Wenkai (Chinese, ??-1855). Wenkai did not achieve success through the imperial exams but he was a man of letters, whose poems, painting and calligraphy were known to his contemporaries. 29 The real breakthrough in the family fortune happened in the time of Wenkai’s son, Ouyang Dingxun, who passed the imperial exams at the provincial level (Chinese). After his success in the provincial examination, Ouyang Dingxun passed the imperial exams in the capital and received a teaching position at the Jingshan Imperial School. He was the first from Yihuang County to enter this path of civil service. Dingxun’s promising career was brought to an abrupt end when his father died. Upon hearing the news, Dingxun started his journey back home but it is said that he died of sorrow during the journey.

Dingxun had three children (one of them was in fact his nephew who was raised as part of the family). His oldest son, Ouyang Hui (Chinese, 1822-1876), was Ouyang Jingwu’s father. Ouyang Hui had passed the provincial exam (Chinese), lived in the capital for 20 years and, like his father and grandfather, made a name for himself as a calligrapher and as a man of letters. Despite his relative success he continuously failed to pass the national imperial exam.

The mid-nineteenth century in China was turbulent, and rebellions broke out in several places, many of which were violent and damaged the effective rule of the Qing Imperial house. But none was as devastating and bloody as the Taiping rebellion (1851-1864) The Taiping armies exposed the ineffectiveness of the Qing banners armies. The Qing rulers had to support a new form of armed forces, which helped save the dynasty, the local militias, which helped save the dynasty. Ouyang Hui, who by that time had given up the ideal of passing the national exam, returned to Jiangxi and helped build the local militia there.

2.3.1.2 Death of his father and its aftermath

Despite Ouyang Hui’s reputation and his achievement as a juren, life in the Ouyang’s household was never free of economic strain. Since Dingxun could not make ends meet, Ouyang Hui had to support his parents in addition to his own household. He found a job at the local government in Jiangsu but died shortly after in 1876.

Ouyang Jingwu’s mother was one of Ouyang Hui’s three wives. Her surname was Wang (Chinese) and she came from a village in the vicinity of Guiyang in Guizhou province. She gave birth to one son and two daughters, one of whom died young. When Ouyang Hui died in 1876, Ouyang Jingwu was only 5; suddenly the household of 8 people had no support. As a result Ouyang’s family sank deeper into poverty. Shortly after the passing of his father, his uncle Ouyang Xuan died too. Left with no other choice, the whole extended family had to rely on Ouyang Yu (Chinese, 1837- 1904), the cousin of Ouyang Hui. It was Ouyang Yu who was responsible for most of Ouyang’s early education.

Ouyang Yu passed the bagong exams (Chinese) 30 and later also the imperial exams and earned a second rank in the court exams. But, being dissatisfied with the job he was assigned to, he was not interested serving in the imperial bureaucracy and instead he devoted himself to studying. Since he gave up his official career, his family economic situation continued to be dire. In addition to his family, Ouyang Yu had to support the families of his two cousins who died prematurely (i.e. Ouyang Dingxun’s sons). His income came from tutoring children of the nobility.

2.3.1.3 Early Education

Ouyang Yu, who was responsible for Ouyang Jingwu’s early education, was a traditional thinker, and was hostile to the modern trends in his intellectual environment, resulting from the encounter with the West. Specifically, Ouyang Yu was very critical of the New Text movement and their interest in the Gongyang commentary.31 Politically, He opposed the 100 days reform movement of Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao.

After the death of Ouyang Yu, Ouyang Jingwu wrote about how he first set his mind on education, “My brother Huang gave up his studies at a very young age. My uncle shed tears and tried to talk him out of it. He beat him with a stick and cried about my father. Once he gave me a book and said, ‘Your father taught me this book, and today I give it to you’. I opened it and looked at it. Despite not understanding a word of it I was deeply moved.”32 In the following years Ouyang stayed close to his uncle throughout his journey to find new jobs, and despite the constant economic pressure, he never gave up studying or contemplated returning to the peasantry.

For young Jingwu, Ouyang Yu was more than a teacher or a mentor; he was the father figure that he had lost when he was just a child. Ouyang’s affection and gratitude toward his uncle was felt throughout his life.33 His uncle remained his role model even when he later renounced Confucianism and moved away from his teachings.

The education Ouyang Jingwu received from his uncle was broad and encompassed most of the traditional branches of knowledge that were supposed to prepare a young scholar for a path of scholarship and service. According to Wang Enyang, who was Ouyang’s student, after basic writing and reading skills, Ouyang Yu taught Jingwu the art of writing poetry and prose. Later he introduced young Ouyang Jingwu to the philological method of scholarship of the Han Studies movement. After that Ouyang Yu turned to the traditional foci of classical education, the philosophy of the Chengzhu school of Confucianism.34

Indeed, according to Gong Jun, one way to understand Ouyang’s thought is as a result of this tension between the more metaphysical teaching of the Chengzhu branch and the more scholastic methods of the evidential research movement.35 For Gong Jun, the tension between his scholastic tendencies and his normative search for the existence of moral order is also a reflection of the tension between the traditional and modern strands of thought in his lifetime.

Gong Jun’s point is valuable for our general understanding of Ouyang. Ouyang was not only the iconoclast thinker that he is remembered as. In his career and character he encompassed complexities that include both his genuine Buddhist beliefs and critical scholarship. This of course should not surprise anyone who understands Ouyang to be a scholastic Buddhist or as he might be called today a “Buddhist theologian” rather than a scholar of Buddhism in the Western academic sense of the word.

2.3.1.4 A full cup of duhkha: experiences of losses in early life

Ouyang experienced human transience early in his life. Those experiences, and his failure to find answers for the vulnerablility of human life in the Confucian tradition, were part of the reasons that led him eventually to Buddhism. His first encounter with death, as stated above, was the loss of his father when he was 5, but that was only the beginning. Ouyang outlived his entire family, and witnessed the death of his parents, siblings, wife and all of his children. Ouyang’s father had 3 wives; each gave birth to 3 children. Of his nine brothers and sisters, 4 died as children, among them Zhaodi who was his sister from of his mother. His children -- two sons, Ouyang Ge (1895-1940) and Ouyang Dong (1905-1923) and one daughter, Ouyang Lan (1899-1915) -- all died prematurely in tragic circumstances.

Intellectuals in the modern period China were in constant search for answers for the national crisis that had swept China since the nineteenth century, and Ouyang was no exception. But at the same time we must not forget the personal despair and tragic circumstances of Ouyang life, for many of the reasons for his intellectual choices were impacted by personal events of his biography as much as they were influenced by large events on a national scale.

2.3.2 Embarking on an Independent Path

2.3.2.1 Jingshun Academy and the meeting with Gui Bohua


In 1890, when Ouyang was nineteen years old he was admitted into Jingxun Academy (Chinese) in Jiangxi’s capital, Nanchang. Jingxun academy was one of the three major institutions for higher learning in Nanchang in those days. While the major emphasis of the school was on traditional learning of the Confucian canon and the dynastic histories, the school also taught Western studies, the importance of which became more and more evident in late Qing China. Moving from a small town to the capital of the province was the first opportunity for Ouyang to expand his horizons beyond the boundaries of the traditional education of his uncle. It was here for the first time that he learned about indigenous unorthodox views and the novel ideas coming from the West.

Beyond the exposure to cutting edge innovations in academic studies of those days, 36 another contribution of the Jingxun Academy period was his meeting with Gui Bohua (Chinese, 1861-1915),37 who was destined to have a far reaching impact on Ouyang’s development. Ouyang and Gui Bohua developed a strong friendship. Gui Bohua, who was 10 years older than Ouyang, exposed the young student from Yihuang County to new intellectual horizons and eventually to Buddhism.

2.3.2.2 The Sino-Japanese war and Ouyang’s conversion to Luwang thought

While Ouyang studied in the Jingshu Academy, China suffered one of its most traumatic defeats in the history of the Qing, the 1895 Sino-Japanese War, with the humiliating Shimonoseki treaty38 that followed.39 Where was Ouyang during all those dramatic developments? Despite the fact that he sympathized with the reform movement and despite the fact that, like other young intellectuals, he was shocked by the defeat in the war and its outcome, Ouyang did not actively participate in the movement. In 1895, he left Nanchang and returned to Yihuang to get married, and then stayed there to support his mother.

Ouyang deeply sympathized with the cause of the reform, but nonetheless, his reaction to the defeat was different from that of his more politically active friends, and was more intellectual in nature. Lü Cheng recalled, “The war in the East has already been conducted and the affairs of the state deteriorated day by day. The master indignantly saw miscellaneous studies40 as unhelpful, and focused on the Luwang School’s teaching as a possible remedy to the social problem of the day.”41 During these years he diligently studied Wang Yangming thought before his gradual conversion to Buddhism. It took a few years of self-study and discussion with close friends to make this shift happen.

2.3.2.3 Gradual Embracing of Buddhism – Gui Bohua’s impact

On September 21, 1898, the conservative faction of the imperial house, led by Cixi forced the emperor Guangxu into house arrest and crushed the reform movement. The failure of the reform movement had a devastating impact on Gui Bohua. Ouyang, in his biographical account of Gui Bohua writes, “After the death of the six martyrs42 and the arrests made among the ‘Kang [Youwei] Party’ Bohua hid in his village. Because of the cold winter he was sick with malaria and was lying in his bed in the middle of the night with one candle. He received a copy of the Diamond sutra, which he constantly read and which awakened him suddenly to the illusory nature of human life. Upon his recovery he went to Jinling [printery] and studied Buddhism under Yang Renshan (i.e. Yang Wenhui). It was another turn in [Bohua’s] studies.”43

Despite the fact that Ouyang did not follow Gui Bohua right away he could not stay detached from the changes his close friend went through. One time, Ouyang invited Gui Bohua to visit him at his hometown. When Gui Bohua arrived, they debated Buddhism and Wang Yangming thought, but Ouyang was not an easy convert. Despite Gui Bohua’s skills in argument, Ouyang had an excellent background in philosophical and textual studies that he had received from his uncle and in the academy. After a long and heated debate he was not persuaded. Before Gui Bohua left he made a last attempt. Ouyang relates, “He gave me copies of the Awakening of Faith and the Suramgama sutra, and said, ‘How about that for the time being, you take these and put them next to your bed? Make them your bedtime reading?’ I did not feel like taking them.”44

However, despite his reluctance, perhaps out of respect to his friend, Ouyang took the books. These two texts, which were the foci of study in Wang Wenhui’s circle, were the gateway through which Ouyang encountered Buddhism for the first time.

In addition to his commitment to and interest in the teachings of the Luwang School of Neo-Confucianism, Ouyang had another reason for which he was reluctant to embrace Buddhism. In 1897, his brother, Ouyang Huang died, and he was left the only remaining support for his family. In order to be able to earn money as a scholar, he had to tread in the path of his ancestors and take the imperial examinations. Like many other young intellectuals in the end of the Qing dynasty, Ouyang was not interested in taking the imperial exams, but the death of his elder brother and family responsibility changed his plans.

In 1904, Ouyang passed the prefecture exam but achieved only the second rank (Chinese). While those who achieve the first rank went to elite national schools (Chinese) those in the second rank often obtained minor official positions. Ouyang became an instructor in Guangchang, Jiangxi province. Since the examination system was abolished a year later. Ouyang never tried the juren exam.

Shortly after Gui Bohua’s visit to Ouyang’s hometown, Ouyang did read the two scriptures that Gui Bohua gave him. He was gradually influenced by the religiosity and the enthusiasm of Gui Bohua but at the same time he kept both feet in the Confucian world. It was a tradition in which he felt at home, a tradition that promised success and work, and one that would fulfill the destiny of his ancestors, who strove to serve the court through the official path.

2.3.2.4 Ouyang and Yang Wenhui

In addition to the two scriptures given to him, Gui Bohua also told Ouyang about his teacher, Yang Wenhui (Chinese 1837-1911). Yang Wenhui is considered to be “the father of the [Buddhist] revival,”45 and taught Buddhism to many prominent intellectuals of Ouyang’s day.46 Toward the end of the nineteenth century, Yang Wenhui established himself as an authoritative figure on Buddhism. Monks and lay people came to study under him. He is well known for his contribution to the spread of the dharma, especially through printing and teaching. In 1866, the destruction Buddhism suffered after the Taiping Rebellion (1851-1864) prompted Yang Wenhui, with a help of likeminded friends, to open the Jinling Sutra Printery (Chinese). The Jinling printery was located in Nanjing (and still is today), where many intellectuals came to study Buddhism under Yang’s guidance. Despite the fact that Ouyang knew of Yang Wenhui and developed an interest in Buddhism, it took him a few more years before he met him for the first time in 1904.

Lü Cheng recounts that after passing the imperial exams, Ouyang, on the way back from Beijing to his native Yihuang, stopped in Nanjing to visit his friend, Gui Bohua, who studied with Yang Wenhui at that time. Gui Bohua introduced Ouyang to Yang Wenhui, and the latter preached to Ouyang. After the meeting, Ouyang’s faith in Buddhism “was increased and solidified.”47 But Ouyang still was not entirely persuaded. In addition, as a loyal son, as long as his mother was still alive, he could not turn his back on his father’s heritage and embrace Buddhism. Cheng Gongrang notes that there are no concrete details about the actual content of the meeting, but he plausibly speculates that part of the conversation revolved around the different teachings of the Awakening of Faith and Wang Yangming thought, and that this question was resolved to Ouyang’s satisfaction.48 In 1905, Gui Bohua left to study in Japan, and Ouyang took on an instructor position. During this time he devoted himself to the study Buddhism, with a critical approach, but now more sympathetic.

Toward the end of his life, especially after his years in London, Yang Wenhui promoted a “return to ancient Buddhism” which for him meant, among other things, the Yogacara tradition. In their 1904 meeting, Yang urged Ouyang to study the vijnaptimatra49 tradition. For Ouyang this was to be the gateway through which he was able to fully convert to Buddhism. Yogacara eventually gave him the answers that he was looking for and which he failed to find in the Awakening of Faith. Despite the fact that he overcame his intellectual doubts, the commitment to the family’s heritage still prevented him from fully embracing Buddhism.

This last condition changed in the following year, and the event dramatically altered Ouyang’s life. In February 13, 1906, Ouyang’s mother passed away. Ouyang, who was very close to her, grieved deeply, and Lü Cheng tells us that as a result Ouyang decided to “refrain from meat and sex, stop his official career, put his trust in the Buddhadharma and strive for unsurpassed awakening.”50 After their mother’s death, Ouyang’s beloved sister who lived with his mother and served as a tutor to Ouyang’s children moved to live in a Buddhist monastery as well.

In 1907, Ouyang visited Yang Wenhui in Nanjing for the second time and spent some months there. Later in the same year, he left together with his cousin Ouyang Yi to study in Japan. Ouyang lived together with Gui Bohua in Tokyo. In Tokyo he met Kuai Ruomu (Chinese) who was one of Yang Wenhui’s disciples, and later became a government official; Kwai was to donated money to help Ouyang establish his Inner Studies Institute. Beyond these details we know little about Ouyang’s time in Japan.

In the autumn of 1908, Ouyang returned to China. Initially, he taught at Guangdong and Guangxi but he had to resign due to sickness and returned home. After his recovery, Ouyang decided to become a scholar recluse living as a peasant off the land. He moved with his Jingxuan academy classmate Li Zhengang to Jiufeng Mountain in the vicinity of Yihuang. This happy phase in Ouyang’s life did not last long. Soon the cold weather on the mountain took its toll on Ouyang’s health and he had to give this life up. Upon his recovery Ouyang decided to concentrate instead on Buddhism, and to do so in the most effective way he had to return to Yang Wenhui in Nanjing.

In 1908, Yang Wenhui was busy establishing a higher learning Buddhist Studies institute, which he called the Jetavana Vihara Academy (Chinese). 51 The institution was short lived and was closed in 1909 because of financial difficulties. Instead, In 1910 Yang Wenhui established a Buddhist Research Association with some like-minded intellectuals. Their intention was to promote a new style of lay Buddhism, which was critical of the Chan Buddhists dismissive approach toward the Buddhist scriptures. Sharing Yang’s criticism of Chan, Ouyang joined Yang Wenhui and participated in the Research Association’s activities. The Research Association later became the model for his own Inner Studies Institute.

Ouyang’s determination to turn his back on his former life and stay with Yang Wenhui came a little too late. Yang Wenhui died a year later in 1911, and his death marks the beginning of arguably the most important stage of Ouyang’s life; the phase of establishing himself as a Buddhist thinker, an educator of a new generation of intellectuals and of a promoter of Buddhist teaching that he helped to revive in China - the Yogacara teaching.

2.3.2.5 The Death of Yang Wenhui

Yang Wenhui died on August 17, 1911 surrounded by his family and his close disciples Kuai Ruomu, Mei Guangxi and Ouyang Jingwu. It was just two days before the revolution began in Wuhan, a revolution that would bring the Imperial era to an end. In his will, Yang Wenhui left the business of publishing sutras, which was his most salient contribution to Modern Buddhism, to Ouyang Jingwu. Ouyang recounted the incident, “When the master left for the West52 he entrusted the [publishing business] to me and said ‘You will come to my assembly and I will go to yours,53 [for now] I am entrusting in your hands the continuation of the engraving of the scriptures’, humbled, I bowed my head and respectfully accepted his will.”54

It is interesting to ask why it was Ouyang Jingwu who received this honor. After all, Yang Wenhui had so many disciples, many of whom studied with him longer than Ouyang. One plausible answer is that Ouyang came to Yang after he decided to dedicate his life to the study Buddhism. Based on their previous encounters Yang was already familiar with Ouyang’s philological and philosophical skills, and his critical and careful research method. He therefore probably saw Ouyang as a suitable candidate to continue the propagation of Buddhism in this new era.55

Yang Wenhui’s will was an attempt to balance Jinling printery’s needs with those of his family. The Jinling printery’s money and buildings were to be designated as a public domain, and would not go to the family. In addition, to ensure the continuation of the Jinling printery’s work, Yang divided his responsibilities among three of his disciples, Chen Xian, who was responsible for the management; Chen Yifu who was responsible for public relations and Ouyang Jingwu who was responsible for publishing and academic matters. Yang Wenhui also left clear instructions for Ouyang. First and foremost, Ouyang was to finish and publish the remaining 50 fascicles of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, a task which Yang did not finish in his lifetime,56 he was also to publish Yang Wenhui’s Commentary on the Explanation of Mahayana-sastra [Chinese] and his Miscellaneous Records of Contemplations on the Equality and Non-Equality of Things [Chinese]. Finally, Yang asked Ouyang to publish an Outline of the Buddhist canon, which would make accessible the whole range of texts that existed in the canon and that they were being engraved in the printery.

2.3.3 Carving his own path

After the death of Yang Wenhui, Ouyang felt that he and his friends shared a great responsibility for continuing the revival of Buddhism in China. However, Chen Xian passed away in 1918, and Chen Yifu resigned shortly after. These new developments left the way open for Ouyang to take over the lead of the Jinling printery, and run the place according to his own vision. Like Yang Wenhui before him, Ouyang had to establish his own reputation in order to secure funds to sustain the Jinling printery and its activities. In the following years, Ouyang dedicated himself to achieving these difficult tasks.

The laity in China has always supported Buddhist activities, but funds went only to monastic institutions. The idea that the laity might support another layperson’s institute, which would be dedicated to learning, was hard to promote among traditional Buddhist supporters.57 Since Ouyang came from a scholarly background, and since he despised “superstitious” laypeople and “ignorant” monks, his natural course of action was to turn to influential and educated people, who appreciated learning and saw merit in advancing Buddhist studies in China. But in order to convince anyone to donate money to his cause, he had to establish himself as an authoritative figure. His first attempt was in the public arena.

2.3.3.1 The failure of the first Buddhist Association

In the March of 1912, Ouyang made his first attempt to build his reputation among fellow Buddhists. He and some of his friends petitioned to the newly established government in Beijing, which was headed by Sun Yat-sen, to unite the entire Buddhist institution under a Buddhist Association. This ambitious and controversial proposal came at a time of insecurity for the Sangha and its Buddhist property. While the Imperial regime traditionally protected and supported Buddhism, the new government was far less committed. As a result, Buddhists in the early ROC found themselves facing growing threats to their institution by progressive forces, greedy officials, bandits and warlords.

In order to face Buddhist adversaries’ criticism and effectively preserve their property, Buddhists responded in a few different ways: They turned to rich and powerful lay Buddhists to make up for the lack of patronage from the central regime. They made attempts to reform their education system and adapt it to the demands of the new “modern” age. In addition, they searched for ways to unify the different Buddhist institutions under one Buddhist association, which would be able to coordinate Buddhist actions and reforms.

Ouyang’s association,58 which was proposed in March 1912, was the pioneering institute. Later, throughout the Republican era, many associations were established only to be dismantled soon after. The decision to establish the Chinese Buddhist Association [Chinese] in Nanjing was followed by the petition to Sun Yat-sen mentioned above. Its bold charter, which Holes Welch dubbed “astonishing,”59 set forth the group’s hope to supervise the entire Buddhist Sangha, lay and monastic. Since it is instructive and gives a vivid picture of Ouyang’s ambitions at that stage, I will quote the charter in full.

The Association shall have the right to superintend all properties belonging to all Buddhist organizations.

The Association shall have the right to reorganize and promote all Buddhist business affairs.

The Association will have the right to arbitrate disputes that may arise between Buddhists and to maintain order among them.

The Association shall have the right to require the assistance of the National Government in carrying out all the social, missionary, and philanthropic works stated above.

All activities of the Association within the scope of the law shall not be interfered with by the Government.

The National Government is requested to insert a special article in the Constitution to protect the Association after it has been acknowledged as a lawful organization60


Welch commented, “Here was something far more dangerous than the invasion of Jinshan61 – a plan to place the whole Buddhist establishment in the hands of men who despised the Sangha.”62

Initially, the charter was approved by the Sun Yat-sen’s government but it immediately provoked the anger of many other Buddhists, among them the most venerable monks of the age, such as Jichan (Chinese, 1852-1912) also known as the ”Eight Fingered Ascetic” [Chinese], Xuyun (Chinese?-1959) and Taixu. Their reaction was to found a new Buddhist Association in Shanghai headed by the charismatic Jichan, the abbot of Tiantong Temple. Most people in Buddhist circles accepted this association, and consequently Ouyang’s Association was dissolved by itself. According to Xu and Wang, Ouyang avoided discussing this unflattering incident, which brought him many enemies within the Buddhist world.63

Ouyang’s failure to establish himself as a public figure is not surprising, since he cut himself off from the more “popular religion” and tried to “correct flaws” in Chinese Buddhism that were dear to most of other Buddhists (e.g. ritual, meditative practices and mainstream doctrines). Ouyang was destined to leave his mark in another realm, that which he knew best, the realm of ideas and of intellectual engagement.

2.3.4 Studies in Yogacara, Financial Challenges and Growing Reputation

2.3.4.1 Yogacara (Weishi) Scholasticism


After the failure of Ouyang’s “Coup de Sangha,” he continued to devote most of his time and effort to the study of Yogacara Buddhism. As noted earlier, Ouyang had already been immersed in studies of Yogacara since his first meeting with Yang Wenhui in 1904. Eight years later, Ouyang had a much more comprehensive view of the Buddhist tradition, which encompassed a wide array of texts from different textual traditions. Ouyang did not learn Sanskrit but he was especially determined to explore the entire breadth of Indian Yogacara based on the Xuanzang corpus.64

The Xuanzang corpus had not been seriously examined since at least the Ming dynasty. The sixth and seventh centuries were the heyday of Yogacara studies in China. After the passing of Xuanzang in 664 CE, Yogacara declined for philosophical and political reasons, i.e. due to shifts in imperial patronage65 and an effective criticism of Xuanzang’s doctrinal positions.66 Many of the commentaries that elucidated the technical terminology of the Yogacara tradition were lost in the upheavals of the second half of the Tang Empire and the Yogacara teaching became “provisional” teaching.67

Yogacara study during the Ming-Qing period was scarce. Texts were only partially accessible and were considered only as a background reading to the more “perfect teachings.” When Yogacara was studied, it was done thorough textbooks such as the Eight Essential [Texts] of the Faxiang School68 [Chinese], written by Xuelang Hongen (Chinese,1545-1608), or The Essential teaching of the Mind Contemplation in the Cheng weishi lun69 (Chinese), by Ouyi Zhixu (Chinese 1599-1655). Ouyang Jingwu was very critical of the Yogacara studies that were conducted during the Ming and later. For him, while Ming Yogacarins did study important texts like the Trimsika or the Cheng weishi lun, they also left out many important texts, such as the entire Asanga corpus.70

Ouyang was more comprehensive, and studied the notable Yogacara treatises known collectively as the “One Root [text] and the 10 Branches” 71 (Chinese). The root text is the encyclopedic work traditionally attributed to Asanga, the Yogacarabhumi Sastra.72 The fact that that there was no living tradition of Yogacara studies in China and that Ouyang had to rely solely on his Chinese sources and philological training made his reading of this enormous corpus especially challenging.73

In 1915, Ouyang’s research into Yogacara deepened following a tragic event. When Ouyang Jingwu was appointed by Yang Wenhui to continue his work in the Jinling printery Ouyang Lan, his daughter, came to Nanjing from their hometown in Yihuang County. She studied there and took care of Ouyang Jingwu’s household. The relationship between Ouyang Jingwu and his daughter was close and he was very attached to her. In 1915, when Ouyang was in Gansu for fundraising purposes, Ouyang Lan fell ill, and died soon after. Ouyang learned of her death only upon his return from Gansu. In a letter to his disciple he recounted, “I wailed at night and felt utterly hopeless.”74 After her death his research of Yogacara became a therapeutic device and spiritual solace that helped him to mitigate the sadness over the loss of his daughter.

In 1917, Ouyang finished publishing the last fifty fascicles of the Yogacarabhumi as he had promised Yang Wenhui and also concluded an intensive five years of research focusing primarily on the Yogacarabhumi, which he prepared for publication. This period of focusing on Yogacara studies culminated in the publication of his influential preface to the Yogacarabhumi sastra (Chinese). Around the time of the Yogacarabhumi publication, Ouyang also published other important texts to which he added his commentaries. 75His commentaries were most often prefaces (Chinese), in which he outlined the different components of the treatise together with its philosophical content, and added his own analysis and gave the historical context of the sutra or sastra and its author. The analysis section was where he most often was more creative and innovative.

Ouyang’s commentaries were intellectually engaging and relevant for his contemporaries. He thus achieved in them both goals of keeping Yang Wenhui’s mission going, and of building his own status, which would enable him to carry on his academic and publication plans. Ouyang’s background in evidential scholarship and growing familiarity with Abhidharma and Yogacara texts brought Buddhist scholarship in China to a new level of thoroughness and precision. His depth of philosophical and philological analysis enabled him to clarify to his contemporaries the abstruse teaching and vocabulary of Buddhism philosophy, and convince leading intellectuals like Liang Qichao, Liang Shuming, and Xiong Shili of the importance of Buddhism. He also criticized the “flaws” he saw in Chinese Buddhism in a way that forced the more traditional forces in the Sangha to react with an equal level of sophistication. Some of the innovations and elucidations were so different from what Chinese Buddhists and intellectuals were used to that Lü Cheng tells us that his audience “was shocked.”76

2.3.4.2 Financial difficulties and growing reputation

Financial challenges had been a part of Ouyang’s life since early childhood and throughout his adulthood. Finances affected both his family’s situation, the Jinling printery, and later also, later, the Inner Studies Institute.

As noted above, before Yang Wenhui died he attempted to secure both the continuous operation of the Jinling printery and the well-being of his family. The solution that he found was awkward and gave rise to numerous misunderstandings. The Jinling printery was granted independence, but on the condition that the Yang family could live in two of the four main courtyards and that they, on their part, would support the Jinling printery when they are able to afford it.77 Conflicts between Ouyang and Yang family over the support of the family and real estate began right after Yang Wenhui’s death and lasted until 1936. 78

Dedicating all of his time and energy to the Jinling printery had an enormous impact on the well-being and economic situation of Ouyang’s own family. As we saw earlier, the most tragic instance was the death of his daughter while Ouyang was on a fundraising trip in 1915. Ouyang lamented his loss bitterly and the fact that he was not around when his daughter needed him the most must have caused him serious distress. Both as a child and later as an adult, Ouyang never lived a life of comfort, a price that he paid for dedicating himself to scholarship and education.

While economically Ouyang faced challenges and uncertainties, his fame and reputation as a scholar soared. His name was known already in 1912 after his failure in forming the Chinese Buddhist Association. Naturally, he was well known in Yang Wenhui’s circle, where he gradually became known as the Yogacara expert. In the years after Yang’s death, his reputation grew as an independent thinker and he was hailed by prominent intellectuals such as Zhang Taiyan and Shen Zengzhi79 for his unique contribution to the study of Buddhism.

In the following decade, Ouyang’s name was well established as a Buddhist authority. Young intellectuals came to study under him, and other prominent monks, like Taixu or Yinguang, criticized him and debated his views. His name appears in several national and international conferences and associations. For example, in 1920 the Yunnan military governor Tang Jiyao established a Dharma association and invited Ouyang to lecture on sutras. Tang invited the most important monks of his time, Yinguang, Taixu and Dixian, and none of them could (or would) come, but Ouyang agreed. Finding Ouyang on the same list as these respected monks suggests that his authority as a Buddhist teacher was already established by 1920. In addition, in 1924, Taixu tried to establish the World Buddhist Federation, and he enlisted Ouyang as one of the delegates.80 In 1925, Ouyang was invited for a conference on Buddhism in Japan.81 The quotes from the opening from James Bissett Pratt and Karl Ludvig Reichelt at the opening of my introduction above suggest that Ouyang’s name was well known enough that non-Chinese visitors to the ROC either knew about him or even visited the Inner Studies Institution and met him in person. Above all, the flock of adherents that came to his institute, together with the examples mentioned above, suggest that these were years when Ouyang emerged from anonymity to become an established authority on Buddhism, at least among intellectuals and members of the elite.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Thu Aug 13, 2020 6:51 am

Part 2 of 2

2.3.4.3 The Inner Studies Institute

Facing the challenges of running the Jinling printery as he envisioned, the constant disagreements with Yang’s family, and the growing economical pressure, Ouyang was pushed to free himself from the shackles of his commitment to Yang Wenhui, his family and the publishing business. In 1919 he established a new institution, the focus of which was on education and scholarship. He called it the China Inner Studies Institute or Zhina neixue yuan (Chinese). The institute was in the vicinity of the Jinling printery, so that he could continue to preside over both institutions. As mentioned in the introduction, Ouyang modeled his institution after Nalanda University, a fact that indicates the high hopes he had for his institution as a leading player in the propagation of Buddhism of his times.

The term neixue or Inner Studies is a peculiar one. Holmes Welch postulated that the term meant something like ‘metaphysics,’ which was contrasted the external studies i.e. science.82 According to Ouyang, however, there are three meanings for the notion of “Inner”: 1) uncontaminated (skt. anasrava ch. Chinese); 2) Realization (ch. Chinese); 3) the final or ultimate (Chinese). The notion of “studies” means the study of the uncontaminated, realization and the final or ultimate goal of Buddhism.83

As for the term Zhina, it was a problematic terms that was used by Japanese to minimize the importance of China. The traditional name for China, Zhongguo -- literally means the ‘Middle Kingdom’ – was not adequate anymore for Japanese who no longer saw China as the most dominant force in Asia. Zhina was the transliteration of the Western name and to use it was to treat China as an equal country, merely one among many. By adopting the name Ouyang was later criticized by Chinese nationalists. He tried to justify it by claiming that it is the transliteration of the Sanskrit term for “sacred country.” This apparently did not convince his contemporaries and in 1951 his disciple and successor Lü Cheng had to change the institution’s name to Zhongguo neixue yuan. 84

Ouyang established the Inner Studies Institute on the property of Mei Guangyuan, the brother of Ouyang’s friend and Yang Wenhui’s former disciple Mei Guangxi. The Institution was founded in autumn of 1919 and was officially opened on July, 1922. The initial funding came from donors such as Zhang Taiyan and from students’ tuition, which covered their room and board. In order to assist Ouyang with the management of the institute, his senior student, Lü Cheng, resigned his position as the principal of Shanghai’s School of the Arts, and came to Nanjing. Other former students of Yang Wenhui and people who were familiar with Ouyang’s work also volunteered to help.

According to two documents cited by Cheng Gongran, The General Regulations of the Inner Studies Institute (Chinese) and The Schedule of the Inner Studies Institute (Chinese), the Inner Studies Institute was divided into academic and administrative sections. The academic section was further divided into three: middle school, university and research institute. The university was subdivided into the Faxiang (Dharma-characteristics) department with a focus on Yogacara studies, Faxing (Dharma-nature) department with a focus on Madhyamaka85 and a department dedicated to Esoteric Buddhism.86 The research institute was responsible for sutra reading groups, lectures and other related activities.

In 1922 Ouyang was busy with the official opening of the Inner Studies Institute. A year later a series of tragedies led to another dramatic shift in Ouyang’s intellectual trajectory, a change that would seal his early Yogacara phase and start a more syncretic approach to Buddhism. Of all the tragic events of 1923, it was the death of his youngest son, Ouyang Dong, which affected him the most. Ouyang Dong spent his early childhood with his mother in Yihuang but after the death of his sister, he moved to Nanjing to live with his father. He was tutored by two of Ouyang’s disciples Chen Mingshu and Xiong Shili. Ouyang Dong was a very talented pupil and after studying with his father’s students he had good foundations in both Western and Chinese studies. In 1922 he followed Xiong Shili to Beijing. When Xiong received an appointment in Beijing University in 1923 Ouyang Dong was admitted to Tongji University in Shanghai as a student. Unfortunately his natural talent could not reach fruition. On 28 of September, 1923, he drowned while swimming. The sorrow that Ouyang experienced after the tragic death of Ouyang Dong was only worsened by the death of two of his close disciples in the following years; Xu Yiming (Chinese, 1902-1923) and Huang Shuyin (Chinese,1898-1923). Xu Yiming died on the very same day as Ouyang’s son.

The proximity of the deaths of these young people that were all dear to him shook Ouyang and he vowed to propagate Prajnaparamita’s thought. This vow was the beginning of his attempts to synthesize Prajnaparamita and Yogacara thought. In a conference that started that year Ouyang remarked: “For a long time now we, who studied together exchanged views over the Faxiang teaching, can say that we already kindled some light of understanding. I hope that now you will explore the secrets of the Prajnaparamita and turn [this light] into a torch of wisdom.”87 He instructed his students that in addition to undertaking a thorough study of Yogacara they must also probe into the true characteristics of ‘Nagarjuna studies.’ During the 20’s, which were the heyday of the Inner Studies Institute, Ouyang read thoroughly works on Prajnaparamita and Madhyamaka texts,88 which resulted in the 1928 publication of Ouyang’s commentary on the MahaPrajnaparamita sutra. This was his major work in this phase of an attempting to harmonize Yogacara with Madhyamaka thought.

The institute became a center for students and intellectuals who were interested in Buddhism, and found in Ouyang a Buddhist teacher who could speak in their language, and whose knowledge of Buddhism was more grounded in advanced research method compared with the kind of sectarian Buddhism preached by the leaders of the Sangha. Among Ouyang’s students and disciples the two most prominent ones were Lü Cheng; and the New-Confucian scholar Xiong Shili; the renowned intellectual and public figure, Liang Qichao (1873-1929); the Confucian thinker, Liang Shuming (1893–1988); and the Buddhist Studies scholar Tang Yongtong (1893-1964), a former Harvard student who was later the head of the philosophy department at Peking University.

Impressive dignitaries were among those who served as members of the board. Among them was the former premier Xiong Xiling; Ye Gongchuo, a calligrapher and artist who served as a minister in Sun Yat-sen’s government; Liang Qichao and Cai Yuanpei. Due to their influence, Ouyang and his Inner Studies Institute received funding to support the institute’s activities.

In 1927, during the KMT army’s Northern Expedition campaign, the Inner Studies Institute was affected for the first time by the socio-political events among which it operated. First, troops on the way to uproot warlords in the north camped inside the institution and interrupted the research and studies. Subsequently, the relative success of the KMT campaign damaged the financial foundation of the institute, which partially relied on donations from individuals associated with the warlords’ governments. After the Northern Expedition, the institute operated on a much smaller scale, before moving into Jiangjin (Chinese), Sichuan in 1937, to escape the Japanese invasion.

Ouyang did not live to see the reestablishment of the Inner Studies Institute in Nanjing; this happened 4 years after his death, in 1947. The institute was active for a few more years in the hostile environment of the early years of the People Republic, and was eventually closed in 1952, after more than 30 years of operation. It was one of the longest lasting Buddhist academies in Republican China.

When James Pratt visited the Inner Studies Institute he described a nice looking building with ten to fifteen students. According to the Wang Enyang’s Overview of the Inner Studies Institute, the teachers in the first two years were Enyang himself, Ouyang Jingwu, Lü Cheng, Qiu Xuming and Tang Yongtong. Lü Cheng taught Tibetan and Tang Yongtong taught Pali and the curriculum was based mainly on the study of Yogacara texts and thought, Buddhist logic and early Buddhist texts and thought.89 Between the 1922, when the institution was officially opened, and the death of Ouyang in 1943, more than 300 students studied Buddhism there, and numerous texts were published.90 Among those students we can find the pioneers of Buddhist studies in China, who taught in the leading universities of Ouyang’s day.

2.3.5 Later Developments in Ouyang’s thought

The forced move from a central place to a relatively remote inland town distanced Ouyang from his major donors and disciples. The Sichuan branch of the Inner Studies Institute continue to operate in Jiangjin but Buddhism and Ouyang were no longer at the heart of intellectual interest, as they were when the Inner Studies Institute operated in Nanjing during the 20’s and early 30’s.

It is the radical change in his intellectual world that constitutes the most interesting development in Ouyang’s later life. Since this dissertation focuses more on Ouyang’s earlier phase of critical evaluation of the Buddhist teaching and Yogacara studies, later stages of his career will have to be treated elsewhere. However, since these later stages are important to our understanding of the vicissitudes in Ouyang thought throughout his career, I will here briefly discuss the major shifts in his intellectual trajectory in the later part of his life.

Two developments were most dominant in his later life. The first was his move away from a critical correction of Chinese Buddhist “flaws” and the reintroduction of “true” Indian Buddhism into China, toward a more harmonious and syncretic view of the Buddhist tradition. In addition, it was a move from a more sectarian approach to Buddhism, focusing on Yogacara to a more holistic vision of Buddhism. The second development was his returning to Confucianism, almost thirty years after he renounced his ideological affiliation with the Luwang School and declared himself a Buddhist.

2.3.5.1 Ouyang’s Later Buddhist Thought

Throughout his life, Ouyang used scholastic approach to revive ‘authentic’ Buddhism, and to criticize and correct what he saw as flaws in Chinese Buddhism. This tendency to stay away from harmonizing, and to prefer the scrutiny and precision of doctrinal analysis, began to change, as we saw earlier, after the deaths of his second son and two disciples, Xu Yiming and Huang Shuyin. A decade later, in his 60’s Ouyang began to focus on the soteriological aspects of Buddhism, to paraphrasing Gombrich’s words, he was more interested in the “how” instead in the ‘what.’91

The beginning of this shift was, again, the result of a tragic event in Ouyang’s life when his sister, Ouyang Shuzhen, died in 1926, after a charlatan who pretended to be a doctor misdiagnosed her. Ouyang wrote on the death of his sister, “On the 3rd day of the first month, when the bad news arrived, my heart was unbearably heavy, and I could not restrain myself. Since she already died, there was no point [in my reaction], how could it help my elder sister? I must continue transfer merit to her, conceal [my sorrow], control it and heal it. My chest burns, my head sweats and my eyes are dizzy. My body shivers as if I had malaria. Again and again, I cannot restrain myself and again and again I keep blaming myself.”92

It was then that more existential questions reappeared in Ouyang’s thought, and that he shifted his focus from Yogacara and Madhyamaka to sutras such as the Nirvana and Huayan Sutras.

In 1934 Ouyang promised in a letter he wrote to Chen Boyan that since his health is deteriorating, he would write the summary of the canon (Chinese) that he promised to Yang Wenhui on his deathbed, and which he indeed published in 1940 as the preface to his Essentials of the Canon (Chinese). He also promised to publish the definitive teachings of his later years (Chinese), which would outline his main view about Buddhism at his present stage. 93 He never explicitly wrote such a piece, but in the summer of 1937 Ouyang lectured to his disciples about his definitive teaching. 94 A year earlier, Ouyang published a commentary on the Sutra of the Secret Adornment (Chinese), which considered to be the actual expression of his definitive views. 95 This commentary is crucial to the understanding of his later thought. Ouyang started his commentary by saying:

The Sutra of the Secret Adornment is one of the summaries for the entire Buddhist teachings and the path for the transformation of the two bases. There are numerous gates to the Dharma, which can be divided to the three aspects of teaching, practice and fruit. The fruit aspect is delineated in the Mahaparinirvana sutra, the practice aspect is delineated in the Mahaprajnaparamita sutra and the Huayan sutra and the teaching aspect is delineated in the Sutra of the Secret Adornment. This is why it is said that it is one of the summaries of the entire Buddhist teachings.96


Only in his later years did Ouyang read and commented on scriptures from all the three aspects of the Buddhist teachings identified here: teaching (Chinese), practice (Chinese) and the fruit of enlightenment (9). While in the earlier phases Ouyang put more emphasis on the teaching aspect of Buddhism, the time was ripe in his older years to try and focus more on the practice and fruit aspects. 97

In his commentary he elaborates on the meaning of the theory of the base.

All dharmas relay on the basis (i.e. asraya); one must transform the two bases in order to become a Buddha. Illusion and awakening rely on the [basis of] suchness; defilement and purity rely on the [basis of] storehouse consciousness. To transform illusion to enlightenment one achieves bodhi, to transform defilement into purity one achieves nirvana…why do we have to transform both of them when we transform the basis? Because substance (Chinese) and function (Chinese) are different, bodhi is the function while nirvana is the substance.98


The theory of the basis and the way to achieve it correlate to the two later aspects of Buddhism i.e. practice and the fruit. Later in his commentary, Ouyang argued that among the two fruits of bodhi and nirvana, the one that epitomize the ultimate goal of all dharma gates is the nirvana with no reminder (Skt. anupadhisesa nirvana Ch., Chinese) a concept which stood at the focus of Ouyang’s interest in his later years.99

2.3.5.2 Ouyang the Confucian

Ouyang’s shifting away from and returning to Confucianism is fascinating, and merits a scholarly attention that unfortunately goes beyond the scope of this dissertation. I will leave the lengthy treatment of Ouyang’s Confucianism for another occasion and give a brief summary so this important phase of his life will not be absent from this dissertation.

As we saw above, Ouyang preferred Buddhism over Confucianism because it provided better answers to the “questions of life and death;” but why did he return from Buddhism to Confucianism later in life? Ouyang’s first Confucian work was published in October 1931. The work entitled Readings in the 11 themes in the Analects (Chinese).100 In this work we already see most of the views about Confucianism that Ouyang will continue to expound in his later Confucian writings. In 1932 he published his commentaries on the Zhongyong (Readings in the Zhongyong, Chinese) 101 and the Daxue (Reading in the Wang Yangming commentary on the Daxue, Chinese).102 Later that year he also published his work on Mencius (Readings in the Ten Themes in the Mencius, Chinese).103

A small number of central themes are at the focus of concern for Ouyang’s research into Confucianism. First, Ouyang argues that we must distinguish between the real Confucianism of Confucius and his disciples in the pre Qin-Han period and the “fake”, highly metaphysical and mythological Confucianism that has developed since the Han. This was a criticism shared by many Qing dynasty evidential research scholars beginning with Gu Yanwu (Chinese,1613-1682) and Li Shugu (Chinese, 1659—1733), through Ouyang’s generation and the campaign against Confucianism in the 20’s. Second, however, what is unique about Ouyang was the links he perceived between “real” Confucianism and Buddhism. For example, he believed that since the post-Qin commentators were unreliable, the gateway to Confucianism must therefore lie in Buddhism, more specifically in the Prajnaparamita literature. This was the second most important feature of Ouyang’s late Confucian thought, i.e. his attempt to harmonize the essences of Buddhism and Confucianism.

His continuing work on Buddhism did not conflict with his work on Confucianism; on the contrary, they were complementary. While the crux of Confucianism appeared in the Daxue as “illuminating the lofty virtue in society” (Chinese); the crux of Buddhism was appeared in the Diamond sutra as to “lead people into the stage of nirvana with no reminder” (Chinese). 104 As Ouyang saw it, while their essences were the same, their function was different. Confucianism was designed to help cultivate the moral character in society while Buddhism had the role of liberating individuals and leading them to individual salvation.

Another interesting feature of Ouyang’s Confucian writing was the timing of his delving into Confucianism. Although early signs of the reemergence of his treatment of Confucianism emerged already around the middle of the 20’s, his first Confucian publication on the Analects appeared a month after the September 18th incident (see footnote 108) and was closely connected to the socio-political predicament of China and to the Japanese invasion to China. Evidence for this link between Ouyang’s Confucian thought and China’s political upheaval can be found in most of his Confucian writings. For example, Ouyang’s preface for his commentary on the Zhongyong ends with the lamentation, “Alas, [Lu] Xiangshan, society is in great upheaval, and the Confucian teaching is about to wither. How can I get to those people and meet with them shortly?”105 Or when he says in his preface to his sub-commentary on the Daxue and Wang Yangming’s commentary on it, “When the state is having a big calamity, the people help it by themselves; when there is a way to cross the road, the people figure it out by themselves. When a strong neighbor is swallowing their state, the people will rise up by themselves and fight against the invader.”106 As happened in his early years, Ouyang saw answers to China’s quandary in the Confucian teaching, but it was not in the traditional Song-Ming Neo-Confucian thought, but a return to the original message of Confucius and Mencius.

2.3.6 Later Years and Death

Tragedies continued to haunt Ouyang throughout his life. The next series of sad events occurred in 1940. In June 1940 his wife and companion of many years passed away because of sickness. A month later, his oldest son, Ouyang Ge, was executed by Chiang Kai-shek.

Ouyang Ge (1895-1940) had a successful career and was a source of pride for his father. After the death of his siblings Ouyang Ge assisted and supported his father’s Inner Studies Institute. When he was twenty years old he graduated from the naval officers’ academy in Wusong and joined Sun Yat-sen. After the death of Sun in 1925, Ouyang Ge, who held a right wing ideology, joined the Chiang Kai-shek faction in the KMT. In 1926, he took part in the Zhongshan Warship Incident, and was subsequently punished for his part in the incident.107 Later, he was promoted and served in several warships as a commander, was promoted to a rank of general in the navy, and even served as a high ranking officer advisor to the government.

Ouyang Ge’s career suffered a serious set back when following the anti-Japanese sentiments of “September 18th Incident”108 and the “January 28th incident.”109 During the battle following the January 28th incident, nineteen army posts, which came under attacked by the Japanese, asked the navy for assistance. Ouyang Ge, who commanded the navy at that time, had just signed an agreement in Nanjing with the Japanese navy delegate, which prevent “mutual hostilities.” Being loyal to the agreement, Ouyang Ge refused the calls for help. Ouyang Ge also retreated from the Madang battle in 1938,110 wishing to preserve his power. In addition, he was charged with allegations of corruption and was finally arrested. In 1940 he was executed in Chongqing. By now Ouyang had lost all his relatives and his four grandchildren were all studying outside China. He remained lonely, depressed and bitter, but was still active both in running the Inner Studies Institute and in writing.

In 1942, Ouyang wrote his last work, Readings in the Heart sutra (Chinese), in which he continued to develop his synthesis of the teaching, practice and fruit of Buddhism. Lü Cheng tells us that Ouyang focused on this short sutra during the last years of his life. He said: “In 1940, Ouyang’s family was hit by tragedies. He took an oath to cultivate a meditation of recitation on the Heart sutra through which he could taste the flavor of delusion and truth. He constantly did so, hoping to attain enlightenment. After 3 years he began [to grasp it] and his sublime words were preserved in his Readings in the Heart sutra. This was his last exquisite work.”111

A few months later, in February 1943, Ouyang, who was 73 years old and frail, became ill. A relatively mild cold deteriorated into pneumonia, from which his frail body could not recover. He died on February 23 in the Sichuan branch of the Inner Studies Institute in Jiangjin, where he was buried.

2.3.7 Evaluations and Critique

Ouyang won many admirers, as well as enemies and adversaries. Despite the fact that he was admired for his erudition and his teaching skills, Ouyang had a notorious reputation as an irritable man. Holmes Welch, for example, dubbed him as a man with a “prickly personality.” He tells how once Ouyang was invited to a dinner in which Liang Qichao (who was his disciple) was the guest of honor. When Ouyang realized that Liang received the guest of honor seat while he received the secondary seat, he decided to leave. It was only after the seats were rearranged and he was given the seat of honor that he was willing to stay. 112

Jiang Canteng also adds an anecdote on Ouyang’s temper, “When Lü Cheng first came to ask for instruction from the master, he presented him with a pact saying, ‘I vow to be with the teacher for the rest of my life.’ When the war with Japan broke out, the Inner Studies Institute moved to Sichuan to avoid the chaos, and they resided in Jiangjin. Lü Cheng came with the master and took care of his daily life needs. [Now], Ouyang was a man with fiery disposition and hot temper. Once, when Ouyang became very angry, everybody including Lü Cheng could not bear it. He then thanked the teacher and asked for permission to leave. But after Lü left, Ouyang did not have anyone to care of his everyday needs and share his hardships. Soon after, Ouyang became severely ill. He remembered the pact that Lü had gave him and that still existed, and sent someone to inform Lü Cheng in person that he must return. After Lü Cheng received the letter he returned to Jiangjin immediately. He bowed before Ouyang, and the master bowed back, then they both shed tears. Since that [incident] Lü Cheng was never even a step away from the master’s side.”113

But despite his personality, there were many who greatly admired him. Shen Zengzhi for example, wrote about the big crisis of the time, and thought that it could be corrected with self-purification and compassion. Commenting on Ouyang’s institution he said: “Sons and daughters of good families, elders and Bodhisattvas are all developing the wisdom of Mañju&ri and practicing the vows of Samantabadhra; can I be unhappy about it and not help him?”114 Zhang Taiyan said about his “friend Ouyang Jingwu:“ “[Ouyang] Jingwu thinks that Buddhism is declining, and his views are deep and transcend those of ordinary people. [Since] he does not wish to hold the secrets concealed, [he therefore] imitated the Buddha’s ‘empty-fisted’115 approach.”116

We already saw that Liang Qichao became a disciple of Ouyang. In 1922 he spent two months in Nanjing before taking on a teaching position in Tianjin. During that time he frequented in the Inner Studies Institute to listen to Ouyang’s talk. Before he left he wrote Ouyang a letter in which he said, "Master Ouyang: I attended your lectures for two months and what you have taught was immeasurable. I only hoped to hear more of your compassionate instruction in order to further establish my good roots…[although I have to go back,] I believe that, throughout my life, the benefits I received from the permeation (xun, Chinese) of your teaching will never be exhausted.”117

Another example is the well known Chinese philosopher Tang Junyi (Chinese, 1909-1978), who said about Ouyang that “this man caused you to be immediately inspired” and “I, personally, have a great admiration for these two men (i.e. Liang Qichao and Ouyang Jingwu) for their position about what is means to be an upright person.”118

More important than the different opinions on Ouyang’s personality, were the different opinions on Ouyang as a thinker and on his contribution to Chinese Buddhism and Chinese intellectual history at large. Here, again, we find a range of opinions, from supporters to those who opposed him bitterly. At the extreme end of Ouyang’s critics, we can find Buddhist conservatives such as the Pure Land master Yinguang (Chinese, 1861—1940) who, feeling threatened by Ouyang’s reactionary Buddhist position and the challenge he posed to the Sangha, said about Ouyang that he “is a great king of devils”.119 Taixu was another Buddhist opponent, whose different approach to Buddhist modernity will be treated at greater length in the chapters below; he was also critical of Ouyang’s rejection of the “flaws” he found in Chinese Buddhism.

But thinkers such as Tang Junyi demonstrated that reactions to Ouyang’s thought went beyond the limited circles of Buddhism. Those who objected to Ouyang often criticized his contribution to the “Indianization” of Chinese thought. This argument was by no means new. Blaming Buddhism for “contaminating” Chinese thought was as old as the introduction of Buddhism into China. In the modern period, the dominant voice in this direction came from the influential intellectual Hu Shi.120 In his book, Cheng Gongrang cites the famous historian Chen Yinke who said: “The Buddha’s teaching recognized no [obligation to a] father and no [obligation to the] ruler. It contains not a single principle that does not conflict with Chinese traditional thought and existing systems;” further “As [in the case of] the vijñaptimatra of Xuanzang, although it shook the hearts of his contemporaries, it reached a sad end. Even though nowadays there are people who follow [Xuanzang] and ignite again those dead ashes, I suspect that in the end, they will not be able to revive [the Yogacara teaching].”121

Another famous scholar who thought that Ouyang was not Chinese enough was Wing-tsit Chan. He said, “Ouyang deserves credit for raising the intellectual level of modern Chinese Buddhism. But his movement runs in the wrong direction. Aside from the fact that he looks to the past and defends the past, in modern Chinese religions his is the only movement toward particularization. All other schools, whether Buddhist or not, aim at synthesis.” While Ouyang was “wrong” enough to try and understand the system of vijnaptimatra on its own term, without synthesize it with other Buddhist teaching, Chen, with a palpable relief, tells us that later, “the Idealistic tide was being reverted toward the glorious spirit of synthesis in Buddhism.”122

It was this move towards “particularization,” that is, Ouyang’s insistence on doctrinal precision and the understanding of Buddhism on its own terms that characterized Ouyang’s innovative approach to Buddhism. His critical study of Buddhism as a tradition based on its Indian texts, doctrine and systematic presentation rather than a reliance on faith, experience or texts composed in China, were in sharp contrast to the Buddhism he saw around him in his time. As a product of the evidential scholarship of the Qing dynasty, he was an inspiration to a generation of young Buddhists and non-Buddhists scholars, and a challenge to Buddhists that now had to defend Chan, Huayan and Tiantai with a more philosophically and doctrinally sound answers.

2.3.8 Summary

In sum, it is evident from Ouyang biography that the story of Ouyang’s intellectual development and his unique contribution to both Chinese Buddhist and Chinese intellectual history are closely related to the time that he lived in, and the socio-political and existential uncertainties of the period.

Ouyang’s career was influenced by external dynamics, but it was also affected by his tragic life story. Ouyang was a thinker that went against the tide on several fronts. As such, he had enemies, and lacked popular support. Consequently, he appealed neither to the mainstream Buddhists nor to the younger, pro-Western studies, intellectuals. But even though it persists among a relatively small elite movement, his impact has by no means disappeared. As we will see below, his heritage continues to live and is debated among both enemies and supporters.

_______________

Notes:

26 Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought.  

27 Revive Confucianism by means of Buddhism.

28 Ouyang Jingwu, "Reply Letter to Wei Siyi [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese, (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976) ], 1554-55.

29 Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu [Chinese] (Nanchang Shi: Bai hua zhou wen yi chu ban she, 1995).

30 The bagong exam was less prestigious than the imperial exams and was designed to find young talents to serves as teachers in imperial institutions.

31 The debate between the “New” and “Old” Text schools is a long one, and goes back to the Han dynasty debate about which canon was genuine the “old” canon was argued to be the “real” canon of the pre-Qin burning of the Confucian classics, rediscovered during the Han. The “new”canon was the canon used in the early Han, and was supposed to be a reconstruction of the old canon. Modern New Text thinkers, such as Kang Youwei and the early Liang Qichao, relied on the Gongyang commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals (Chunqiu) to reject the cyclical historiography and to propagate a more linear historiography that would allow and call for reform. The New Text thinkers were also well known for introducing more “religious” elements into Confucianism, for example, by interpreting Confucius as semi-messianic prophetic leader.

32 Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 13.

33 One can see this, for example, in the foreword that he wrote to his uncle’s autobiographical “The Trivial Records of My Encounters” (Chinese) in which he supplement his uncle’s account with his own memories of Ouyang Yu.

34 Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 29, 39.

35 Gong Jun, "Three Propositions in Ouyang Jingwu's Thoughts [Chinese]," Zhexue Yanjiu [Chinese] 12 (1999), 51.

36 For example, Zhang Zhidong’s willingness to accept Western studies subordinated to the traditional Chinese curriculum under the well known formula of “Chinese studies as the essence and Western studies for practical or functional purposes” (Chinese) or the reform movement of Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao to which Ouyang was exposed through his friend Gui Bohua.

37 Gui Bohua’s original name was Gui Mingzu and he came from Jiujiang County in Jiangxi. Later he moved to Nanchang for his studies. He was an enthusiastic supporter and activist in the reform movement led by Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao. After the failure of the reform movement and with Cixi’s army trying to capture its participants, Gui Bohua hided for a short time. Later he traveled to Nanjing and studied Buddhism with the “father” of Buddhist revival in modern China Yang Wenhui (more on Yang Wenhui below). In 1910, he went to Japan to study esoteric Buddhism and befriended Zhang Taiyan. He died in Japan in 1915.

38 The Shimonoseki treaty was a major blow to the Chinese pride. Among other requirements the treaty forced China to accept Japan as a colonial power, and turn Korea over to be a Japanese protectorate after more than a millennium of subordination to the Chinese emperor. China also had to open four more treaty portsl to allow Japan to build there factories owned by Japanese and to pay Japan indemnity for the losses Japan suffered as a subsequence of the war.

39 This defeat, which resulted in heavy losses to the Chinese forces, forced the Qing government to accept the treaty of Shimonoseki in April 1895. It became clear now that despite the self-strengthening efforts of the previous decades, China was not on the right track. As Jonathan Spence put it, the result of the Sino-Japanese war was a “dark conclusion to the brightest hopes of the era of self-strengthening” see Jonathan Spence, The Search for Modern China (New York: Norton Press, 1990), 224. China could not face the might of the Western imperial forces, but now even the Japanese, which were always considered to be subordinated to the rule of the Chinese emperor, joined the growing number of imperial forces that threatened the existence of China.

There is a direct link between the rude awakening of the Qing intellectuals and the birth of the Reform Movement of 1898. Chinese intellectuals reacted immediately after the signing of the Shimonoseki treaty with protests and demands for reforms. When such a reform was finally offered by the young emperor Guangxu, it found many young supporters like Gui Bohua.

40 The miscellaneous teachings that Ouyang refers to probably relates to the traditional education that he receive in his childhood, especially the teaching of the orthodox Chengzhu School.

41 Lü Cheng, "A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang [Chinese]," in An Anthology of Materials from Chinese Buddhist Thought [Chinese], ed. Shi Jun et al (Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju Press, 1983), 354.

42 Ouyang refers to the six who were executed by the Imperial regime after the fall of the Reform Movement.
 
43 See Ouyang Jingwu, "Gui Bohua's Biography in Jingwu's Poetry and Prose Collection [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976) , 1855. Cheng Gongrang plausibly argues that Gui Bohua was exposed to Buddhist ideas even before returning to his hometown, through his interaction with the reform movement Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 33. Most of the intellectuals that were involved with the reform movement Tan Sitong, Kang Youwei or Liang Qichao for example all had deep interest in Buddhist practice and thought.

44 Ibid., 1856.

45 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 2.

46 Yang Wenhui was one of Ouyang’s biggest influences and was arguably the most important figure in late Qing Buddhism. His fame came for the depth and breadth of his study of Buddhism, for his novel approach to Buddhist education, for introducing new forms of Buddhism back into China, for his propagation of Buddhism through his printery, and for training the next generation of intellectuals who made Buddhism the foci of their intellectual pursuits. Since much has been written on Yang and in order to keep Ouyang at the center of this study, I will here discuss only the aspects of Yang Wenhui’s life that are relevant to Ouyang’s own biography. For more on Yang Wenhui see Gabriele Helga Goldfuss, "Binding Sutras and Modernity: The Life and Times of the Chinese Layman Yang Wenhui (1837-1911)," Studies in Central & East Asian Religions 9 (1996), 54-74. Gabriele Helga Goldfuss, Vers un bouddhisme du xxe siècle. Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China. (Especially the first chapter); Chen Jidong (Chin Keitoo), Shinmatsu bukkyo no kenkyu: yo bunkai o chushin to shite [Chinese] (Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2003).  

47 Lü Cheng, A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang, 354.

48 See Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 42. see also Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 48.

49 A synonym for the Yogacara teaching.

50 Lü Cheng, A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang, 354.

51 One of the students who studied under Yang Wenhui at that time was Taixu the well-known reformer monk. Cheng Gongrang quoted Taixu who said that Ouyang was also among Yang’s student in the short-lived Jetavana Vihara academy. Cheng argues that it is impossible because Ouyang was with his friend Li Zhengang on Jiufeng Mountain and could not be in Nanjing. By the time Ouyang decided to give up the farming ideal the Jetavana Academy was already closed (see Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 58).

52 Yang refers here to the Western Paradise of Amit!bha or in other words when the master died.

53 [Chinese]

54 "The Origins of the Sutra Exhibition in the Inner Studies Institute [Chinese] in Miscellaneous Writings [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwengfeng Press, 1976), 1457.

55 Cheng Gongrang adds that besides Ouyang, there were two others who could be natural candidates. One of them was Gui Bohua who was at Japan at that time and had become interested in Esoteric Buddhism; and the other was Mei Guangxi, who worked for the government, and therefore could not dedicate all his energies to propagation of Buddhism.

56 The importance that Yang Wenhui saw in the publication of the Yogacarabhumi is another indication of the growing significance of Yogacara teaching in Yang Wenhui’s later thought.

57 See Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 9.

58 Ouyang had a leading role in the intended association but it was not only his idea. He shared it with a few friends who shared his vision, such as Li Duanfu and Li Zhenggang.

59 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 34.

60 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 34.

61 An attempt in 1911 by some reformer monks headed by Taixu and and another revolutionary monk named Renshan to take over Jinshan monastery and turn it into a modern school, a bold attempt that ended up with a scrimmage that damaged the Sangha’s reputation (see Ibid., 29-33).

62 Ibid., 34.

63 Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 50.

64 He did however encourage his students to study Sanskrit and Tibetan.

65 See Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: inquiry into the nature, authors and function of the Tunhuang document S.6502, followed by an annotated translation (Napoli: Istituto universitario orientale, Seminario di studi asiatici, 1976). See also Chen Jinhua, "More Than a Philosopher: Fazang (643-712) as a Politician and Miracle Worker," History of Religions 42, no. 4 (2003): 320-58.

66 See Robert Gimello, Chih-Yen, 602-668 and the Foundations of Hua-Yen Buddhism, 352-415.

67 As a foundational Mahayana teaching, Yogacara of course never really disappeared from China. It continued to be a “provisional” teaching, a teaching which aim was to explain the Buddhist teaching and make it accessible for people who cannot grasp the more “perfect” teachings. Its vocabulary also continued to be part of the more “perfect” Chinese teachings, especially this of Huayan. In Ming dynasty, there was a small scale Yogacara revival however it did not last long and its impact was limited, especially due to the failure of the scholars involved to learn the tradition systematically as early Republic figures like Ouyang did. see Wu Jiang, "Buddhist Logic and Apologetics in Seventeenth-Century China: An Analysis of the Use of Buddhist Syllogisms in an Anti-Christian Polemic," Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 2, no. 2 (2003): 273-89.

68 The eight are: (1) the *Mahayana satadharma prakasamukha sastra by Vasubandhu (³FK¥A T45.1870); (2) the Trimsika by Vasubandhu (Chinese T31.1586); (3) the Alambana pariksa by Dign!ga (Chinese T31.1624); (4) the commentary on the Alambana pariksa by Dharmapala (Chinese); (5) the System of the Six kinds of [Sanskrit] Compound (Chinese) from the Huayan jing suishu yanyi chao (Chinese, T36.1736sby Chengguan; (6) the *Nyayapravesa-sastra by Samkarasvamin (Chinese, T44.1840); (7) the Three Parts of Syllogism by Xuanzang (Chinese X53.0861); (8) and the Verses on the Structure of the Eight Consciousnesses by Xuanzang (Chinese, Root text can be found in Putai’s T45.1865)

69 X51.0824.0297a06- 454a05. This is a Ming dynasty work that attempt to explain the Cheng weishi lun based on works from late Tang to early Ming.

70 More on the Ming dynasty revival of Yogacara in the next chapter.

71 The ten branches are: (1) the *Mahayana satadharma prakasamukha sastra by Vasubandhu (Chinese); (2) the *Pañca-skandha-prakarana by Vasubandhu (Chinese, T31.1612); (3) the *Arya sasana prakarana by Asanga ( Chinese, T31.1602); (4) the Mahayanasamgraha sastra by Asanga (Chinese, T31.1594, Xuanzang translation); (5) the Abhidharmasamuccaya by Asanga (Chinese, T31.1605); (6) the Madhyantavibhaga bhasya attributed to Maitreya (Chinese, T31.1600); (7) the Vimsatika sastra by Vasubandhu (Chinese, T31.1590); (8) the Trimsika sastra by Vasubandhu (Chinese) (9) Mahayana-sutralamkara sastra attributed to Asanga or Maitreya (Chinese, T31.1604), (10) the Fenbie yuqie lun attributed to Maitreaya (Chinese, did not survive only mentioned in other sources).

72 The Yogacarabhumi was the main focus of Ouyang’s studies at that time. It was also the main focus of others who dedicated their career and intellectual pursue to Buddhism; people like Han Qingjing (see Cheng Gongrang, "Analysis of the Characteristics of Han Qingjing's Buddhist Thought [Chinese]," Pumen Xuebao [Chinese, 1 (2001), 147-166. or Zhang Taiyan who studied this sastra while he was in a Manchu jail from 1903-1906 (see Shimada Kenji, Pioneer of the Chinese Revolution: Zhang Binglin and Confucianism (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1990).

73 This would change with Ouyang’s disciple and student Lü Cheng (Chinese, 1896-1989), who, in addition to his native Chinese, had also good command of Sanskrit, Tibetan and Japanese. Lü Cheng’s contribution to Buddhist studies is still largely ignored and unrecognized and he is certainly worthy of further scholarly attention.

74 See Ouyang Jingwu, "Another Response to Chen Zhenru [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 1591.

75 Text such as the *Pañcaskandhaprakarana the Mahayanasa'graha sastra or the *Buddhabhumisutra sastra and so on.

76 Lü Cheng, "A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang, 355.

77 Here is the account of Yang Wenhui’s granddaughter from her autobiography: “Believing that he did not have long to live, Grandfather (i.e. Yang Wenhui) called together his pupils and members of the family to arrange his affairs. The Buddhist Press was assigned to a board of three men, Chen Xian (who had taught me at Wuchang) in charge of finance and management, Chen Yifu in charge of external relations, and Ouyang Jian in charge of editorial work. He reaffirmed his previous will that the Yanling Xiang property was to go to the Press, but that his family had the right to veto the sale of the property by the management. His pupils Kuai Ruomu and Mei Guangxi proposed that a separate house should be erected by subscription for the Yangs to live in. But Father did not want any public funds to be raised for the benefit of the family. After much discussion, an arrangement was made which has lasted to the present time. The westernmost courtyard was to be made into a shrine and tomb for my grandfather, and various branches of the family were to take turns in living in that courtyard to take care of the shrine. The next row of courtyards were for the rest of the family to use. The eastern half of the premises, including the front door at 49 Yanling Xiang, was for the use of the Press, except that all the woodblocks for printing the books were housed in a courtyard behind the shrine courtyard”. Chao Buwei Yang, and Chao Yuen Ren, Autobiography of a Chinese Woman, Buwei Yang Chao (New York: The John Day Company, 1947), 90-91.
 
78 See Holmes Welsh, The Buddhist Revival in China, 319. In another of her works, Yang Wenhui’s daughter describes an argument between Gui Bohua, Ouyang Jingwu and Yang Wenhui when the two disciples wanted to move the printery to Jiangxi and Yang refused. Cheng Gongrang argued that this is impossible because Gui Bohua was around that time in Japan (Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 91), but regardless of whether this fact was true or not there is little doubt that mentioning this fact reflects bitter feelings on both sides.

79 Shen Zengzhi (Chinese, 1850-1922), a renowned poet, calligrapher and scholar in the late Qing, a Jinshi graduate who served in the imperial department of foreign relations (zongli yamem). In 1901 he was appointed the president of the Shanghai’s Nanyang Univerity (which later became Jiaotong Univerity). He had a broad interest in both Western and Chinese traditional learning, after the collapse of the Qing also immersed himself in the study of Buddhism. For more see Ge Zhaoguang, “There was no Such a Man in the World: The Forgetting Shen Zengzhi and his Scholarship [Chinese],” Dushu 9, no. 2 (1995): 64-72.  

80 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 57. In his book Welch questioned whether Ouyang and others even knew about this federation, mainly because Taixu had some tension with Ouyang and some other listed.

81 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 204.

82 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 319.

83 See Ouyang Jingwu, "Discussing the Research of the Inner Studies” [Chinese]," Neixue neikan 2 (1924): 1-3.
84 Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 319.

85 Although the term Faxing (Chinese) was used in China most often to refer to the tathagatagarbha teaching here, maybe deliberately, Ouyang uses this term to denote the Madhyamaka teachings.  

86 Ouyang’s choice of Esoteric Buddhist department is interesting. Ouyang was known as an avid opponent of the more religious dimensions within Buddhism and yet he dedicated a whole department to the study of this highly ritualized and esoteric school. His reason was, of course, the fact that he modeled his institution after Nalanda University in which, according to the sources on which he relied, the study of Esoteric Buddhism was a part of the curriculum.

87 Cheng Gongrang, "The Characteristics of Ouyang Jingwu's Biography, Career and Buddhist Thought [Chinese]," Yuan Kuang Buddhist Journal [Chinese, 12, no. 4 (1999): 175.

88 Texts such as the Dazhidulun or the Mulamadhyamaka karika

89 Wang Enyang. “Overview of the Inner Studies Institute [Chinese],” Neixue neikan 2 (1924): 189-191.

90 See Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 91.

91 See Richard Gombrich, How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings (London; New York: Routledge, 2006), 4, 16.  

92 Ouyang Jingwu, "The Inner Studies Institute Instruction Book, Part 1 [Chinese]: Instruction on Buddhist Compassion [Chinese]," Neixue neikan 3 (1926): 47.

93 Ouyang Jingwu, "Reply Letter to Wei Siyi [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 1550-51.

94 Lü Cheng, "A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang, 356.  

95 Ouyang Jingwu, Reply Letter to Wei Siyi, 1553.

96 Ouyang Jingwu, The Sutra of the Great Vehicle Secret Adornment [Chinese] in Essentials of the Canon [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwengfeng Press, 1976), 1011-12.

97 Ouyang started to read those sutras and write about them when he was 56 after the death of his older sister in 1926. This process continued throughout his older years. (see Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 196-7.)

98 Ouyang Jingwu, The Sutra of the Great Vehicle Secret Adornment, 1022-23.

99 Generally speaking anupadhisesa nirvana refers to final liberation in which the body does not exist and there is no more karmic residue.  

100 Ouyang Jingwu, "Readings in the 11 themes in the Analects [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 3029-3132.

101 Ouyang Jingwu, "Preface to Readings in the Zhongyong [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 2995-3001.

102 Ouyang Jingwu, “Reading in the Wang Yangming commentary on the Daxue [Chinese],” in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 2963-2994.

103 Ouyang Jingwu, "Readings in the 11 themes in the Analects [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976) , 3029-3132.

104 See his preface to the Sutra of the Great Vehicle Secret Adornment, Ouyang Jingwu, “The Sutra of the Great Vehicle Secret Adornment (Chinese) in Essentials of the Canon [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese], (Taibei: Xinwengfeng Press, 1976), 1011-1066.  

105 Ouyang Jingwu, "Preface to Readings in the Zhongyong [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 3000.

106 Ouyang Jingwu, "Preface to Readings in the Zhongyong, 2967.

107 A coup that was organized by Chiang Kai-shek in order to damage the alliance between the communists in the KMT and Wang Jingwei, the KMT leader of that time. The Zhongshan was a warship headed by a communist commander name Li Zhilong. On the pretext that Li was planning a coup against Chiang, Chiang, together with several of his loyal officers, Ouyang Ge among them, arrested Li Zhilong and declared martial law in Canton. They arrested the local communist leaders, among them Zhou Enlai, and forced them to go through ideological training. Later, in order to appease the Russians, Chiang had to fire a few of the people involved, and among them was Ouyang Ge (Spence, The Search for Modern China, 344).

108 The event that led to the Japanese occupation of North East China. On September 18, 1931 the Japanese army set off explosives on a railway line outside of Mukdan and used the skirmish that followed to open a full-scale attack on the Chinese forces. The result was the lose of Manchuria to the Japanese (Ibid., 391-2).

109 A battle fought between Japan and China in Shanghai in 1932 followed by an aggression of the Japanese army the killed many innocent Chinese civilians (Ibid., 393-4).

110 Another naval battle along the Yangtze River that took place on June 28, 1938 next to Madang in Anhui province.

111 Lü Cheng, A Brief Biography of My Teacher Mr. Ouyang, 356.

112 Holmes Welsh, The Buddhist Revival of China, 120.

113 Jiang, Canteng. Controversies and Developments in Chinese Modern Buddhist Thought [Chinese] (Taibei: Nantian Press, 1998), 559-560.

114 Quoted in Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 73-74.

115 Chinese (Skt. acarya-must) refers to the empty fist of the Buddha, a gesture Buddha used in his last sermon before he died to tell his beloved cousin and attendant Ananda that the Tathagata holds nothing in his closed fist. This gesture indicated that the Buddha revealed all and hid nothing from his disciples (see Mahaparinibbana Sutta DN 16). Zhang is probably quoting the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Chinese) (T30.1579.763.b9-10)

116 Quoted in Xu and Wang, A Critical Biography of Ouyang Jingwu, 74.

117 Ibid., 78.

118 Tang Junyi, "Intellectual Trends in the Early Republic and the Course of My Philosophy Studies [Chinese]" The Hong Kong Overseas Chinese Human Culture Weekly [Chinese, 2/12/1968.

119 Holmes Welsh, The Buddhist Revival of China, 119.

120 See Hu Shi, The Indianization of China: A Case Study in Cultural Borrowing.

121 Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 124.

122 Chan, Wing-tsit. Religious Trends in Modern China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1953).  
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:06 am

Ouyang’s evaluation and Critique of Chinese Buddhism, Excerpt from "Differentiating the Pearl From the Fish Eye: Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943) and the Revival of Scholastic Buddhism"
A dissertation presented by Eyal Aviv
to The Committee on the Study of Religion in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of The Study of Religion Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
July, 2008

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.




Chapter Three: Ouyang’s evaluation and Critique of Chinese Buddhism

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 Ouyang’s project


As is evident from Ouyang’s biography, once he decided to dedicate his full attention to Buddhism he began a thorough assessment of its doctrines. Being dissatisfied with the Buddhist thought and practice prevalent in his day, he sought answers in the only place a person with his intellectual background could turn, namely in Buddhist texts themselves.

However, Ouyang chose to study not the texts most frequently studied by his contemporaries and predecessors, but the Yogacara corpus, following the advice of his teacher Yang Wenhui. Now, with the texts that were sent by Nanjio Bunyiu from Japan (see chapter two, pages 37) Ouyang was equipped with commentaries that could elucidate abstract points impenetrable to Chinese Yogacarins since the Tang dynasty. Studying these texts substantiated many of his early doubts regarding the Chinese Buddhist tradition. He became confident that answers could be found in the Yogacara treatises that contained the “authentic” Buddhist teachings of Buddhism and in the idea that it was necessary to distinguish genuine Buddhism from later developments.

Ouyang was in many ways the right person for the task of reassessing Buddhism. He was a new kind of Buddhist intellectual, a lay Buddhist who did not accept monastic authority. Thus he was free of the institutional Sangha’s conventions, both in his teaching and practice. Ouyang, of course, was not the only one who held this new vision of Buddhism but he was a dominant voice in the larger movement, in both China and Japan within which a more critical approach was taken to the Chinese Buddhist tradition. As we saw in my introduction above, while these features were shared by many Buddhists in the late nineteenth early twentieth centuries, Ouyang also represented one unique case in this tapestry of “multiple Buddhist modenrinities” that of the scholastic Buddhists, whose emphasis on a systematic approach to the study of Buddhism had a far reaching influence on East Asian Buddhism and on East Asian intellectual history in general.

3.1.2 The problems of Chinese Buddhism

What exactly were the aspects of Chinese Buddhism that Ouyang found unsatisfactory? In a famous lecture he gave in 1922 on the Cheng weishi lun entitled Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra (Chinese), Ouyang outlined ten themes that he identified as most crucial to the text. In each one of the ten expositions or doctrinal schemes1he chose to focus on one of the components of the scheme.2 Before delving into each expositions (a few of which will be discussed in this and later chapters), Ouyang began by saying, “I will first explain the obstacles (Chinese) confronting modern Buddhism. What is [the reason] for these obstacles? Briefly, they have, five causes.”3 The five are:

1. The negative impact of Chan;

2. The vagueness of Chinese thought;

3. The negative impact of Huayan and Tiantai;

4. “Secular” (i.e. Non-Buddhists) scholars’ incorrect judgments of the Buddhist scriptures;

5. The lack of skill among scholars who attempt to study Buddhism;4

In essence, we can divide the five points above into three major areas of critique. (1) is the problematic nature of Chinese thought which is “vague and unsystematic” (Chinese) and “lacks careful investigation” (Chinese); the next (2) is mainstream Buddhism, especially Chan, Tiantai and Huayan (3) is the challenge and risk in the secular study of Buddhism. Beyond the dismissive remark he made about Chinese thought, Ouyang felt that two powers threatened Buddhism in China: internally, the practice and thought of mainstream Chinese Buddhism; and externally, the fact that scholars began to look at Buddhism for the wrong reasons. Ouyang did not specify who he was referring to, but one example of such an intellectual was Hu Shi, who became interested in Buddhism in that period for historical, methodological and political reasons rather than for soteriological ones.5 In other words, intellectuals like Hu Shi ignored the normative value and soteriological potential of Buddhism in favor of “narrower” intellectual concerns.

I will leave aside the criticism of “secular” scholars for the time being as it is less relevant for our concern in this dissertation. Instead, I would like to focus on the second dimension, namely Ouyang’s evaluation of mainstream Chinese Buddhism and his critique of the Chinese schools of Buddhism.

In terms of the scope of his critique, unlike other scholastic Buddhists in twentieth century China, such as Taixu, Yinshun or Lü Cheng, Ouyang never published a systematic historical criticism or an evaluation of Chinese Buddhism. Committed to the continuation of Yang Wenhui’s mission to publish critical editions of Buddhist texts, Ouyang was busy studying the texts he published. His evaluation of the tradition thus appeared then less systematically in many of his lectures, writings and letters. However, it is still crucial for us to discuss his writings about Chinese Buddhist schools since, as we will see below, his critiques, unsystematic as they may be, would guide us to where he considered the main problem of the Chinese Buddhist tradition really was.

3.2 Critique of Chan

3.2.1 The anti-Chan sentiments of late Qing and early ROC


The Chan tradition was one of the most obvious targets for Buddhist reformers and critics in the early part of the twentieth century. Chan had been the single most influential form of Buddhism among members of the Chinese elite since the eighth century, and continued to symbolize for many the essence of Chinese Buddhism. Although in later imperial China sectarian boundaries were not as strong as in the early days of the Chan School, 6 still many of the most eminent monks affiliated themselves with the Chan tradition.7 In the twentieth century we can find among them eminent figures such as Jichan, Xuyun and Laiguo. Many others who did not affiliate themselves with the Chan School still saw it as the crown of Chinese Buddhism or at least as one of its important pillars. One well-known example was the monk Taixu, who wished to revive all Chinese Buddhist schools and saw them all as essential, but still acknowledged that Chan was the most prominent among them.8

In its earlier stages, Chan was a revolutionary school in almost every possible dimension. It had an idiosyncratic rhetoric, a strong self-identity and new methods of religious practice. Chan is famous for its antinomian approach to scriptural authority and for doubting the effectiveness of words and language to express the non-dual nature of reality. At the same time, the Chan School developed one of the most elaborate corpora of literature, including unique genres, with which it communicated its message.

By the end of the Qing, however, the innovative character was long gone and the tradition was considered by many to be ossified. Both internal and external criticism of Chan was prevalent in the late Qing. One notable example is in the (auto)biography of Xuyun,9 considered by many to be the most eminent Chan figure the twentieth century. Xuyun lamented, “In the Tang and the Song Dynasties, the Chan sect spread to every part of the country and how it prospered at the time! At present, it has reached the bottom of its decadence and only those monasteries like Jinshan, Gaomin and Baoguan, can still manage to present some appearance.”10 Chan was thus “only a name but without spirit”.

For Ouyang and other intellectuals around him Chan’s decadence was inherent within its problematic practices and approach to scriptures. As we saw in the biography chapter (see chapter two, page 30-32) the evidential scholarship tradition, which became widespread in the Qing, preferred a meticulous scholastic approach over metaphysical speculation. Yang Wenhui, Ouyang’s teacher, despite admiring Chan’s achievements, was very critical of this anti-intellectual and antinomian approach to the Buddhist scripture. He said,

If one is attached to the kind of method [embodied] in the concept of ‘not relying on words and letters,’ as a fixed teaching, then he is misleading himself and others. One must know that [although] Mah!k!#yapa became the first patriarch (i.e. of the Chan School) and received the transmission, after the Buddha’s death, he saw the collection of the teaching as an urgent matter. In addition, he transmitted the Chan teaching to no other but $nanda, the preserver of the Buddha’s knowledge and words. Later, generation after generation, everybody wrote commentaries, explained the scriptures and propagated the gist of the teaching. After Bodhidharma came from the West, the receiver of the transmission was Huike, who was familiar with the scriptures but failed to understand their meaning. If Huike did not understand the meaning of the teaching, how could he understand the depth of Bodhidharma’s [mind]? When we get to the Sixth Patriarch [during the Tang dynasty], at first he appeared illiterate, in order to displaying the profundity of the unsurpassable path. [He taught that] the key [to the unsurpassable path] is to separate oneself from words and letters and gain realization by oneself. [However] later generations did not understand this idea and often understood the Sixth Patriarch to be illiterate. What an error!11


In addition to antinomianism the Chan School was also blamed for overemphasizing the quiescence of the mind. Similar criticism was leveled by Qing scholars against the Ming Confucians for appropriating Chan-like quietism. This was thought to in turn have led to detachment from real life, and as a result to the collapse of the dynasty. The connection between the Neo-Confucian Mind School and Chan Buddhism is almost self-evident. Zhang Taiyan, a Yogacara enthusiastic and a one of the last representatives of the Hanxue tradition (i.e. who used evidential research methods) remarked, “[The Chan School] treasures its own mind, it does not yield to spirit of the intellect (Chinese) and is similar to the Chinese [Confucian] Mind School”12 Given the Hanxue scholars’ traditional low esteem of the Mind School of Confucianism, equating them with Chan was by no means a compliment.

3.2.2 Ouyang’s critique

What were the criticisms against the Chan School that led Ouyang to include it as one of the obstacles for Buddhism? Here is what Ouyang has to say about Chan:

Since the School of Chan entered China, its blind adherents [mistakenly] understood the Buddhadharma to mean ‘Point directly to the fundamental mind, do not rely on words and letters, see your nature and become a Buddha.’ Why should one attach oneself to name and words? Little do they realize that the high attainment of the Chan followers only happens when reasoning is matched with those who have sharp faculties and high wisdom. Their seeds were perfumed with prajna words from immemorial aeons. Even after they attained the path, they still do not dispose with the words of all the Buddhas; these [words] are written in the scriptures and they are not subject to a single conjuncture. But blind people do not know it; they pick up one or two Chan cases (i.e. gongans) as a Chan of words, meditating on them like a ‘wild fox’ and repeatedly say that the Buddha nature is not in language. Therefore, they discard the previous scriptures of the sages of yore and the excellent and refined words of the worthy ones of old, which lead to the decline in the true meaning of the Buddhadharma.13



From the above quote it is evident that Ouyang’s main accusation against Chan is similar to that of his teacher, Yang Wenhui, i.e. that it disregards scriptural teaching and relies too much on one’s own mind. Ouyang complains that Chan adherents merely repeat over and over the cliché that Chan’s truth is outside the scriptures and beyond words. They forgot that actually “their seeds were perfumed with prajna words from immemorial aeons,” and that it is only because of that that they are now at a level of attainment.

Ouyang used the well-known Chan fox gongan to illustrate his point. This gongan tells the story of a monk who gave the wrong Chan answer to a question posed by a student of his in the times of the Buddha Kasyapa. The question was whether the laws of causality could still affect a great cultivator of the path. The monk replied wrongly that such a man is not subject to the laws of causality and as a punishment was turned into a fox for five hundreds aeons. The fox-monk later posed the same question to Baizhang, who answered that such a cultivator could not be ignorant about the law of karma. When the fox heard Baizhang’s answer he immediately attained enlightenment and his punishment was lifted.14

Ouyang brilliantly used the Chan gongan as a rhetorical device against Chan adherents themselves, accusing them of being, like the wild fox, attached to literalism without actually understanding the true meaning of the teaching. For Ouyang, even after one reaches a certain level of attainment, it does not mean that one can discard the Buddha’s teaching. One cannot make further progress on the path without the map that the Buddhas and other “worthy ones of old” had drawn for us. Abandonment of the Buddhist scriptures will ultimately lead to an erroneous path and “to the decline in the true meaning of the Buddhadharma”. We will see below how he further developed this idea in his two-fold paradigm theory, which was partially a solution for the anti-canonical tendencies within Chan.

In his preface to the Yogacarabhumi, published in 1919, Ouyang indicated that one of the problems of Mahayana followers is attachment to the notion of emptiness , and that the word “only” in the compound consciousness-only indicates the correction of this attachment that might lead to nihilism.15 Ouyang did not mention Chan explicitly, but he did allude to Chan’s tendency to negate everything. This tendency to reject the Buddha’s authority and his teaching is undermines the metaphysical foundations of the Buddhist practice. We will see below that for Ouyang it is impossible to practice the genuine teaching if one is not familiar with the path.

Interestingly, for Ouyang, as for his teacher Yang Wenhui, the adherents of the Chan tradition, despite their erroneous approach to texts, did not follow nonauthentic Buddhism as their fellows from the Huayan and Tiantai schools did (see section 3.3 below). In September 1924, Ouyang gave another lecture titled “Discussing the Research of Inner Studies,” in which he explained the importance of the research conducted in his institution. Here he argued that “Although the Chan School mingles indigenous Chinese elements in its thought, its principle coincides with that of the School of Emptiness (i.e. Madhyamaka), and it still originated from the West (i.e. India).16 In addition, in the quote above we can see that despite his critique, Ouyang still considered Chan practitioners to be at the stage of the Path of Vision (Skt. darsanamarga Ch., Chinese, i.e. very advanced on the path, having already achieved the lower stages of sainthood). Ouyang, therefore, connected the Chan tradition to the School of Emptiness and did not make a clear connection between Chan and tathagatagarbha Buddhism, of which he was very critical. As in the case of the Madhyamaka, he saw Chan’s flaws as relatively minor compared with the flaws of the other Chinese schools he criticized. In that sense, Ouyang did not go as far as some Japanese scholars from the “Critical Buddhism” (Hihan Bukkyo) movement, who argue that “Zen is not Buddhism.”17

3.3 Critique of Huayan and Tiantai

Ouyang’s critique of Huayan and Tiantai was much sharper but again suffered from lack of clarity. He did not systematically treat the Huayan or Tiantai positions. Instead, his comments are scattered throughout his lectures and letters, and they are very different in nature from the treatment he gave to the texts he chose to publish, both in scope and in depth. There is no serious evaluation of the “flaws” he found in the two traditions. In addition, Ouyang often lumped Huayan and Tiantai together as if they represent one tradition, without differentiating between them, or being sensitive to how their thought and practices developed over time. However, from the little that he did write, I will argue, that we can detect indicators that point to where he thought the problem in fact lies.

3.3.1 Tiantai and Huayan founders lack true attainments

In his Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra, Ouyang has this to say about the two schools:

Since Tiantai and Huayan began to prosper, the light of Buddhism has weakened. Among the founders of those traditions none have attained the level of sainthood (Zhiyi himself admitted that he attained [only] the five ranks),18 the views that they held were inferior to those of the Indian masters. But their followers believed that their master is a Buddha born again in the world, they confined themselves within [limited] boundaries, and satisfied themselves with attaining only a little; indeed there are good reasons why the Buddhadharma is not understood.19


As the above passage indicates, Ouyang blamed the teachers of both schools for no less than dimming the light of Buddhism, failing to achieve the level of sainthood, satisfying themselves in achieving little and being inferior to the Indian Buddhists saints.20 But what was exactly was his argument against the Tiantai and Huayan traditions? In what way were they “dimming the light of Buddhism”?

3.3.2 Tiantai and Huayan’s panjiao as creating a division in the one teaching

One specific problem that Ouyang raised is the two schools’ doxographical practice, i.e. their panjiao differentiation of teachings:

The cause and condition of this great matter (i.e. the Buddha’s appearance in the world) is also the Buddha’s only teaching (Chinese). Although the Buddha turned the wheel three times,21 and divided the teaching into three vehicles, yet there is in fact only one single teaching. [The teaching] is to lead all sentient beings into nirvana without remainder and liberate them. Ignorant people talk about sudden, gradual, incomplete and complete [teachings]. For example, in Tiantai there is a division into four teachings, and in Huayan, there is also a claim for a five teachings theory. The Tiantai School’s basis for their division in the Sutra of Immeasurable Meanings (Chinese) and the Huayan School seeks the basis for its foundation in the Sutra of the Bodhisattva Necklace-like Deeds (Chinese). Both schools differentiate [between the teachings] based on [different] concepts, [But, in fact] there is no difference between the teachings [themselves]. Therefore it is acceptable to differentiate between four or five teachings in terms of concepts and words but it is impossible to do so with the teaching 22.23


In other words, one of the main problems of the Tiantai and Huayan thinkers is that they created divisions within the teaching of the Buddha, a teaching that is fundamentally one. The only goal of the Buddha’s teaching is to deliver sentient beings and to help them attain nirvana. The rest is all conceptual differentiations for the same purpose of delivering sentient beings.

3.3.3 The flaws of Tiantai and Huayan cultivation methods

In 1924, Ouyang published an essay on meditation practice entitled The General Meaning of Mind Studies (Chinese) in which he outlined his critique of the two schools’ meditation practices. The essay as a whole is a lengthy treatment of the Buddhist theory of meditation, and his critique of the Chinese schools’ meditation practices appears briefly before he presents the classical meditation theory in depth.

First, he describes the types of meditation practice according to Tiantai’s three main manuals of meditation, all written by Zhiyi: (1) The Six Mysterious Gates (Chinese) (2) The Dharma Gate of Explaining the Sequence of the Perfection of Dhyana (Chinese) and (3) the Mohe zhiguan (Chinese). Ouyang explained briefly the methods discussed in each one of the treatises, especially that of the mohe zhiguan, on which he remarked:

The Mohe zhiguan is this school’s most important treatise; the heart of this treatise is based on the verse from the fundamental text of the Prajna School, the Mulamadhyamaka-karika of Nagarjuna, [which explains the] correct meaning of dependent co-arising. The verse says, ‘[Dharmas] which are arise based on causes and conditions, I say that they are empty; they are also called provisional designations and they are also what I mean by the middle path’.24 Based on this [the Mohe zhiguan] established the three "amathas and the three vipasyanas. At first, both "amathas and vipasyanas operate, then the three penetrate into each other just like [the three truths teaching i.e.] emptiness, the provisional and the mean. These three become one in one moment and the meaning of complete penetration (Chinese) is thus established. Especially when examining this [theory] based on the Yogacara’s school notion of the perfected and real,25 then [we see that] the perfect [penetration] is [indeed] perfect, but it is not real (Chinese). These three "amathas and three vipasyanas [i.e. the practice of the Mohe zhiguan], only possesses the general characteristics (Chinese),26 but if we analyze seeking what is real then [we will realize that] they do not exist. [This theory] should be further discussed.27


It seems that Ouyang’s main concern here is that Zhiyi’s meditation theory is perfect as an expedient means i.e. it is a useful category but it is not real (dravya).

As a perfect method it is useful up until a certain point, but it will not lead us to see reality as it is, nor will it help us to attain the higher fruits of the path.

The problem of the Huayan School is similar to that of the Tiantai:

This School follows the Huayan sutra, which is no different from following the Yogacarabhumi sastra.28 To this extent this school should talk about the immeasurable samadhis, but instead they practice the [method of] “contemplation of the dharmadhatu,” which again is also merely [concerned with] the general characteristics. Their doctrine discusses the notion that the one contains the whole and that the one is the whole in order to expound the doctrines of the four non-obstructed understandings,29 four methods for attracting people30 and the four kinds of complete identity” To that extent this doctrine is indeed subtle and thorough, but at the same time there is no clarity in regard to each one of the immeasurable samadhis. Therefore, the followers of this [tradition] confined themselves within the abstract teachings that are wayward and baseless. In the end, they do not find the gateway to the teaching of meditation (Chinese).31


Thus, in Ouyang’s mind both schools share the same problem. Their categories are only provisional and cannot lead to higher attainments. Both schools do not offer a meditation practice with a clear path and correct categories on which one should meditate, but they differ in the acuteness of the problem. While in the Tiantai case it leads to limited attainments in the Huayan it leads to a theory which is “wayward and without basis” and to a failior to find “the gateway to the teaching of meditation.”

3.3.4 Summary of the critique

As already stated, it is difficult to obtain a systematic picture from Ouyang’s writings of what exactly were in his opinion the doctrinal and practice-related problems of the two traditions. It seems that in regard to the complexity of these two traditions, Ouyang himself committed the same errors with which he charged his opponents, that is, providing an explanation with only “general characteristics.” We get the impression that his critique is too general and unfounded. But even from these few examples we can extract the gist of his contention:

(1) The Huayan and Tiantai doctrinal classifications create unnecessary divisions within the Buddhist teaching, which is essentially unified.

(2) Their meditation method is flawed and relies on general and unspecified categories, which are good skilful means at best, but will not lead us to see things as they really are.

(3) Taking into account the flawed understanding of the unity of teaching together with the school’s practice, there is little wonder that followers of those schools and even their patriarchs attained merely lower levels of attainments.

During the late Ming dynasty there was an attempt to revive the Yogacara studies in China. One would think that Ouyang would welcome a turn toward the teaching of the Yogacara School, but instead of welcoming the development, Ouyang was again very critical. Why was he so critical toward an earnest attempt to study the same tradition he propagated almost four hundreds years later? As we will see below his critique was concerned with the motives of the Ming Yogacarans and the inherited flaws outlined above, which tainted the Ming attempt to revive the old teaching.

3.4 Critique of the Ming dynasty’s Yogacara studies

During the late Tang, the three traditions mentioned above, namely Chan, Tiantai and Huayan, established themselves as the acme of Buddhism, while other forms of Buddhism, including the hallmarks of Indian Mahayana i.e. Madhyamaka and Yogacara, were marginalized. These two were thought of as merely partial or nascent Mahayana teachings. Almost a millennium later, during the Ming dynasty (1368-1644), however, serious attempts were made by the most eminent monks of the period to revive Chinese Yogacara. What was the nature of these attempts, why did they fail and what was the reason Ouyang was critical of them? These are the questions that will be discussed briefly in this section.

Given the importance of Yogacara to Ouyang’s overall project, it is not surprising that he treated the history of Yogacara in his writings. One place to learn about how Ouyang viewed the development of the school in China is his preface to the Yogacarabhumi. In this text, Ouyang carefully scrutinized the different approaches to Yogacara throughout Chinese history, stratified the historical layers of Yogacara history in Indian and China, and criticized the mistakes of the past.

Regarding the pre-Xuanzang (i.e. old) translations, Ouyang’s major complaint is that they are “not smooth” and “not good,” and that the low quality of the translation made the “sweet dew [of the Buddha’s teaching] undrinkable.”32 The situation changed dramatically with Xuanzang and his school, which improved the quality, quantity and the precision of the translation of Yogacara texts. But this phase was short lived. After the end of the Tang the authentic Yogacara teaching ceased to exist in China. In the late Tang, Ouyang tells us, “Master Yongming Yanshou systematically presented the Faxiang teaching when he wrote the Record of the Mirror of [The Chan] School (Zongjinglu, Chinese). Despite the fact that he did not establish the teaching,33 he was still able to explain it.”34 But this short transition period was followed by the decline of the teaching in China, and Ouyang tells us that at the end of the Yuan dynasty many Yogacara texts were lost and study of Yogacara ceased until the late Ming.

The attempt to revive Yogacara during the Ming is of greater interest to us since it was the Ming revivalists who set the path of Yogacara studies for later generations, a path that was still the only available approach in the republican era in which Ouyang lived. Yet, contrary to what one would expect Ouyang was critical of his Ming predecessors. Shengyan’s article about Yogacara in the Ming may provide us with an explanation. He says, “Late Ming Yogacara, despite the fact that it originated from the treatises translated by Xuanzang, had different features from the [Yogacara] of Kuiji’s period. The old texts were lost, and there was no way to study them. [In addition,] the demands of Buddhism at that time were different from those of Kuiji’s era. Kuiji established Yogacara as the sole philosophical system, which explains the entirety of the Buddhist teaching, while the late Ming Buddhists used Yogacara to tie the entirety of the Buddhist teaching to what was not sufficient and needed correction in the Buddhism of their own days.”35 If anyone during the late Ming bothered to study Yogacara at all, it was through the lenses of the Ming revivalists, and it was those lenses that Ouyang wished to replace. In order to better contextualize his critique, a brief description of Yogacara studies of the Ming is needed.

3.4.1 The Yogacara Studies revival in the Ming

As we previously saw, during the Tang dynasty the Yogacara teaching faded into the background, and very few Buddhist scholars were interested in pursuing a path that had lost its doctrinal primacy and imperial patronage. A revival of interest in Yogacara occurred only toward the end of the Ming dynasty, when, according to Shengyan, seventeen prominent monk-scholars turned their attention again to Yogacara. Among those monks we can find the most prominent names of the day, Zibo Zhenke (Chinese, 1543-1603), Ouyi Zhixu (1599-1655) and Hanshan Deqing (Chinese, 1546-1623).36

Shengyan argues that, while a minority of those monks (only two) were genuinely interested in Yogacara qua Yogacara, the rest were Huayan or Tiantai scholars, 37 or in the majority of cases Chan monks. These monks used Yogacara to support and give a doctrinal foundation to their sectarian systems or, in the case of Chan, to the school’s soteriological path. The Chan followers became aware of the fact that the Chan of their generation was in decline compared to that of the golden age of the Tang and the Song. The Ming dynasty Chan masters felt that they could only imitate the past masters’ gestures but were lacking in true understanding regarding the foundational teaching of their own tradition. They felt that the rigorousness of the Yogacara tradition might be a gateway for a better understanding of the Buddhist tradition.

Another problem for the Ming Yogacarans was that they understood Yogacara through the lenses of texts such as the *Suramgama sutra, The Sutra of Complete Awakening and the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana. It was this interpretation of his predecessors and contemporaries that, I argue, was the driving force behind Ouyang’s critique of Chinese Buddhism, especially what he saw as the erroneous views expressed in the Awakening of Faith. The full breadth of this critique will be treated in our next chapter.

But why Yogacara and not other forms of Buddhism? In his article on Buddhist logic in Ming China, Wu Jiang provides one possible explanation. According to Wu, Ming Buddhists used Buddhist logic as a tool in their anti- Christian polemics. The rise of Buddhist logic is closely linked to the Yogacara school in China, as both were branches of Buddhist knowledge translated and propagated by Xuanzang and Kuiji. When Christian missionaries began frequenting China in the sixteenth century, their usage of logic to prove the existence of a creator-god triggered the need to find an adequate response to repudiate Christian claims.38

3.4.2 Ouyang’s critique of the Ming Yogacara revival



What were Ouyang’s contentions against the Ming revivalists?

[The] Ming revivalists tried to [re]build the wall of the [Faxiang’s] teaching. They worked hard but had no achievements (Chinese). Then, for over the course of several centuries, those who wish to have a command of this teaching did not carefully study any other [Yogacara] text than the Eight Essentials Text of the Faxiang School39 and The Core Teaching of Weishi.40 Their discourse was a disunified shambles, and [they achieved only] a narrow sectarian view,41 whereas [the scope of Faxiang] is as broad as heaven and earth and they did not know it; it has the excellence of being well structured but they did not make good use of it. They only cast their eyes over the surface, and then left it at that, who [among them] bothered with [the challenges of] the Yogacarabhumi?42


In a way, it was not the revivalists’ fault. Despite their genuine interest, how could they have revived the teaching after so many texts were lost? How could they understand the different voices of the tradition and be sensitive enough to the differences between Yogacara and later Chinese Buddhism? But as the text quoted above stated, they did not even try. There was no “careful study” that attempted to understand Yogacara on its own terms, only interpretations based on sectarian views, whether Chan, Tiantai or Huayan.

According to Ouyang, this sectarian approach to Yogacara can be traced back to the Tang. It was in the Tang that monks such as Fazang (Chinese, 643-712), Chengguan (Chinese, 738-83)43 and Yongming Yanshou (Chinese, 904-975) began to approach Yogacara not as an end but as a means to establish their own teaching.

Beyond the general attitude and the wrong motives involved, one specific problem with the Ming revivalists was their disregard of the most important text in the Yogacara corpus, the Yogacarabhumi. Both Yang Wenhui and Ouyang attached great importance to the Yogacarabhumi. We already saw that completing the printing of the whole Yogacarabhumi was a part of Yang’s will before he died. How could a serious study of Yogacara be conducted without a serious study of its root text?

According to Ouyang, the big change happened only when Yang Wenhui retrieved the commentaries on the Yogacarabhumi from Japan. Then interested Buddhists reacquainted themselves with the genuine Yogacara teaching, and critical methods for reading the text were applied for its study. Consequently, the flaws of mainstream Chinese Buddhism could be exposed and treated.

Another criticism against the Ming revivalists appeared in Ouyang’s Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra. As noted above this was a lecture that Ouyang gave five years after he published his preface to the Yogacarabhumi.44 The problems of the Ming Yogacarans are discussed in the third section of this text, when Ouyang investigates the theory of two wisdoms, of which he focused on “acquired knowledge.”

Discussing the two wisdoms or knowledges i.e. “fundamental knowledge” (Skt. mulajnana Ch., Chinese) and “acquired knowledge” (Skt. prsthalabdhajñana Ch., Chinese),45 Ouyang wished to counter the over-emphasis of Chinese Buddhist tradition on fundamental knowledge. This focus on fundamental knowledge was the result of the widespread acceptance of tathagatagarbha thought in China and the doctrines associated with the Awakening of Faith. For Ouyang this emphasis on fundamental knowledge meant lack of sufficient attention to the importance of acquired knowledge. Acquired knowledge is a unique and important feature of Mahayana, because whereas fundamental knowledge is ineffable and cannot give rise to words for the benefit of others (Chinese), acquired knowledge does just that. It is the means by which the truth of Buddhism can be communicated, and therefore it has a subtle function (Chinese) that fundamental knowledge lacks.


Since the Ming revivalists followed the tendency of Chinese Buddhists to emphasize fundamental knowledge, they failed to appreciate the “purpose of the excellent function of acquired knowledge.” This is again another dimension of the former contention. The Ming revivalists did not study critically the Yogacara corpus, but mirrored former understandings of Buddhism in their reading of Yogacara texts.

3.5 The Problem of “the branches and the root”

If Ouyang’s teaching is to be understood as a response to the flaws he outlined in his Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra, why did he never fully develop those critiques? One of the main reasons was that he saw the critique of the tradition not as an end, but only as a means to continue Yang Wenhui’s mission to revive Buddhism and make it relevant for the modern age. The practical reason that Ouyang did not elaborate on his critique of the Chinese school was the mission he inherited, i.e. to publish texts in the canon that were no longer available in China and to correct texts with major editorial problems. Consequently, combining his commitment to publish texts and to scholarship, Ouyang included most of his views and assessments of Buddhism in his prefaces to the scriptural text that he published. Since he published mostly early Indian scriptures, which he deemed important, he naturally treated them in depth at the expense of later Chinese Buddhist innovations, which were more widely available and were considered by him flawed. The problems with the Chinese Buddhist schools came up mostly in the context of his treatment of old Indian teachings and texts.

The other, more significant reason that Ouyang did not elaborate on his problems with the East Asian schools was that Ouyang identified a root problem that is responsible for many later problems in the teaching of Chinese schools, especially those of Tiantai and Huayan schools. Using a metaphor often employed in Chinese philosophy, for Ouyang Chinese schools were like branches that were nourished by a problematic root. Historically, both Tiantai and Huayan Schools in late Imperial China followed the tathagatagarbha teaching, especially as outlined in the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana.46 And indeed, while he devoted much less attention to the “branches,” he elaborated much more on the “root” of the problem i.e. the problematic nature of the Awakening of Faith doctrine.

3.6 Conclusions

This chapter focused on the problems Ouyang identified within Chinese Buddhism. As we saw in the second chapter, the Buddhist tradition was a key to addressing Ouyang’s existential concerns and his path of salvation. However, it was not an easy path. One needed to be careful when seeking the “right understanding” of Buddhist teaching, and to be systematic in the study of what Buddhism “really” means. The way to understand the path was through a critical study of the Buddhist texts, which was what the Chinese tradition has failed to do.

According to Ouyang, Chinese have a disadvantage when approaching Buddhism, since they are exposed to Buddhism through translations, a large part of which are of poor quality. Luckily, Chinese also have reliable translations of texts that expose the path as reflected in the Indian heyday of Buddhism, such as the texts in Xuanzang’s corpus. Through study of those texts, with the later commentaries of reliable commentators, they can gain access to “real” Buddhism.

The problem of Chinese Buddhism was that it did not take the path described above. According to Ouyang, shortly after Xuanzang translated the texts, his teaching was forgotten, the Yogacara School declined, and many commentaries disappeared. Two dangerous developments followed: (1) the total rejection of scriptures in the Chan tradition in a way that led to a “decline in the true meaning of the Buddhadharma.”; (2) the wrong understanding and misguided interpretation of the teaching, as happened in the case of the philosophical schools of East Asian Buddhism, namely the Tiantai and Huayan Schools.

We have also seen that the above two paths in Chinese Buddhism were so ingrained in the way Chinese understood Buddhism that even in the Ming, when Buddhists felt that their traditions reached stagnation and attempted to revive it with the teaching of the Yogacara, it was too little, too late. By that time, texts were missing, transmission of the teaching was cut off, and there was no way to understand the orthodox meaning of the tradition. In addition, the Ming revivalists’ motives were not always genuine, and as happened in the twentieth century with monks such as Taixu, the Ming Yogacarans only wished to use Yogacara in order to reaffirm their own understanding of Buddhism.

This chapter, therefore, is merely a pointer to the root of the problem, having dealt as it did with Ouyang’s critique of what he considered deviations from the true teaching. What unified those cases of deviation was a reliance on fundamental doctrine that constitutes the root problem. The treatment of this root of the problem will be the main theme of the next chapter.

_______________

Notes:

1 The term he used for those dominant schemes is expositions (Skt. viniscaya Ch., Chinese), which can also mean “determination” or further analysis.

2 For example when discussing the notion of two truths he focused on conventional truth. In another section where he discussed the substance and function, he focused on the function, etc.

3 Ouyang Jingwu, “Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra [Chinese],” in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 1359.

4 Ouyang Jingwu, Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra, 1359-60.

5 Hu Shi studied especially the Chan School and was concern with the historical study of Chan as an historical phenomena and not spiritual (see Hu Shi’s famous debate with D.T. Suzuki in Hu Shih, “Ch'an (Zen) Buddhism in China its History and Method,” Philosophy East and West 3, No. 1 (1953): 3- 24).

6 Sectarian boundaries were never as tight in Chinese Buddhism as they were in Japanese Buddhism. For years, scholars in the West, influenced by Japanese scholars and Buddhists who introduced East Asian Buddhism to the west, tended to understand the meaning of the term “school” (Ch: zong, Chinese) in the Japanese sense of a different set of teachings, key texts and separate institutions. Scholars thus tended to view Chinese Buddhism as the predecessor of later Japanese Buddhism. Whenever aspects of Chinese Buddhism seemed not to fit the sectarian model it was often considered to be a sign of degeneration of the “pure” model. We now know that the meaning of “school” in China was different and more flexible than in Japan. However we are far from fully understanding the complexity and array of meanings of the term zong. What sense of identity a Buddhist felt when she was identified herself as belonging to a certain zong or school and how this notion changed over time. (For more see Robert Sharf’s appendix “On Esoteric Buddhism in China” in Robert Sharf, Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise. (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2002), 263-78.

7 For example the great Ming dynasty monks Hanshan Deqing (Chinese, 1546-1623) and Ouyi Zhixu (Chinese, 1599-1656).

8 See Taixu, “The Characteristic Feature of Chinese Buddhism is Chan [Chinese],” in The Complete Works of Taixu [Chinese] (Taibei Shi: Hai chao yin she, 1950), 549. (Hereafter TXQS).

9 The biography of Xuyun belongs to the genre of nianpu or yearly chronicle. It was not written by Xuyun himself but compiled by Xuyun’s disciple Cen Xuelü (Chinese,1882-1963) out of notes and stories collected by his disciples and was supposedly later approved by Xuyun. The third edition of the nianpu includes a letter from Xuyun saying that his eyesight and hearing prevented him from reading Cen’s manuscript thoroughly and that there were some mistakes in it that he asked his disciples to correct. See the section with the attached materials before the table of content in Xuyun, Revised and Extended Version of Master Xuyun’s Chronological Biography and Sermons Collection [Chinese] (Taibei: Xiuyuan Chanyuan, 1997).

10 Charles Luk (trans.). Empty Cloud: The Autobiography of the Chinese Zen Master Xu Yun (Dorset: Element Books, 1988), 157.

11 [Chinese! Cited in Fang Guangchang, “Yang Wenhui’s Philosophy of Editing the Canon [Chinese],” Zhonghua foxue xuebao. 13, (2005): 179-205.

12 See Deng Zimei, 20th Century Chinese Buddhism, 228.

13 Chinese, Ouyang Jingwu, Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra, 1359.

14 See the second case in the Wumenguan Chinese, T48.2005.0293a15-b29.

15 See Ouyang Jingwu, "Preface to the Yogacarabhumi [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 317. More on this topic in Chapter Five below.

16 See Ouyang "Discussing the Research of the Inner Studies,” [Chinese]," Neixue neikan 2 (1924): 5.

This was not the case with his own disciple Lü Cheng, who argues that Chan was born out of the same kind of philosophy can be found in the Awakening of Faith. See Lü Cheng, “The Awakening of Faith and Chan: A Study in the Historical Background of the Awakening of Faith [Chinese]," in Investigating the Awakening of Faith and the Suramgama Sutra [Chinese], ed. Zhang Mantao, (Taibei: Da sheng wen hua chu ban she, 1978).

17 This is a famous and controversial argument leveled by scholars such as Hakamaya Noriaki and Matsumoto Shiro. Despite the radical claim, even Hakamaya made a clear distinction between the Japanese tradition, which is not Buddhism, and the Chinese Chan Buddhism, which does have a “critical philosophy” approach. See Paul Swanson, "Why They Say Zen Is Not Buddhism: Recent Japanese Critiques of Buddha-Nature," in Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical Buddhism, ed. Paul Swanson and Jamie Hubbard, (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997), 19.

18 For more about the five grades in Tiantai thought see T33.1716.733.a12-b28 and Leon Hurvitz, “Chih-I (538-597): An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of a Chinese Buddhist Monk,” PhD Diss., Columbia Unuversity, 1959, 409. The reason Ouyang argues that Zhiyi attained “only” the five stages can be found in the colophon for Mohe zhiguan (Chinese). Guangding, Zhiyi’s disciple, tells us that Zhiyi “died while meditating, having attained the level of the five grades.”

19 (Chinese), See Ouyang Jingwu, Discussing the Research of the Inner Studies, 1360.

20 Leveling such serious accusations without providing any systematic and rational account for this criticism led some scholars, such as Jiang Canteng, to argue that the only motive behind Ouyang’s attack was nothing more than a wish to propagate his own vision of Yogacara while using weak and arbitrary argumentation; see Jiang Canteng, Controversies and Developments in Chinese Modern Buddhist Thought [Chinese] (Taibei: Nantian Press, 1998), 544-552. Although I think that his motives were more genuine and that he did have some specific critiques regarding those schools, which Jiang completely ignores, I agree that in contrast to his more careful analysis of the Indian texts his critiques of the Chinese schools were somewhat “weak and arbitrary.”

21 A reference to the Samdhinirmocana sutra which discusses the Buddha’s three turnings of the wheels. The first turning is in Benaras where he preached his first sermons on the four noble truths, the second is his teaching of emptiness in the Prajnaparamita sutras and the third time is when he proclaimed the middle path of representation-only which is the middle path between the first two turnings of the wheel.

22 A rather convoluted way to suggest that one can use concepts to differentiate between different dimensions and nuances within the teaching, but one cannot claim that there are several “teachings.” The Buddhist teaching is just one.

23 [Chinese] See Ouyang Jingwu, Discussing the Research of the Inner Studies, 1365.

24 yah pratityasamutpada( sunyatam tam pracaksmahe | sa prajñaptir upadaya pratipat saiva madhyam! || MMK 24,18.

25 Here Ouayng refers to the perfected nature (Skt. parinispanna), part of the three natures theory of the Yogacara School. The Chinese rendering that he uses literally means “the perfect and real” (Chinese) and Ouyang is playing on the two notions when he determines that the Tiantai meditation can get us only to what is “perfect” (Ch. Yuan, Chinese) but not to what is “real” (Ch. Shi, Chinese).

26 Originally general and shared characteristics (Skt. samanyalaksana Ch. ....) however according to the Tang Tiantai teacher Zhanran (Chinese, 711–782) the general characteristics are also called shared characteristics (see T46.1912.299.a01, Chinese). Usually this concept appears together with its opposite ,the “specific characteristics” of a phenomena (Skt. svalaksana Ch., Chinese). While the general characteristics include characteristics shared by a larger group, such as all phenomena are non-self or impermanent, the specific characteristic for water will be wetness and for earth solidity etc. Here it seems that Ouyang refer to a fuzzy and confused usage of categories and an incoherent teaching that follows from that.

27 (Chinese?) See Ouyang Jingwu, “The General Meaning of Mind Studies” [Chinese] in Ouyang Jingwu Writing Collection [Chinese], edited by Hong Qisong and Huang Qilin (Taibei: Wenshu chu ban she, 1988), 180-181.

28 In the sense that both are legitimate texts in the Yogacara tradition.

29 The four unobstructed understandings of a Bodhisattva (Skt. pratisamvida Ch., Chinese). These are the four skills or powers of a Bodhisattva which enable him to naturally grasp and expresse the truth of the doctrine. The four are (1) dharma or the ability to grasp and express the Dharma (2) artha or the ability to grasp and express the meaning of the teaching and make judgment about it (3) nirukti the ability to grasp and express the doctrine in any language and understand the different dialects (4) pratibhana or the ability to speak skillfully to others according to their own needs and level; see Foguang dictionary, 1778.

30 Skt. catuh samgraha vastu Ch., Chinese. These are four methods of cultivation, which attract people to the Buddhist path and can lead them to enlightenment. The four are (1) Giving (Skt. dana samgraha Ch., Chinese) (2) Sweet words (Skt. priya vadita samgraha Ch., Chinese) (3) Beneficial conduct (Skt arthacariya samgraha Ch., Chinese) and (4) Sympathizing with others (Skt. samanartha samgraha Ch., Chinese) see Foguang dictionary, 1853.

31 (Chinese) See Ouyang Jingwu, The General Meaning of Mind Studies, 181.

32 Ouyang Jingwu, "Preface to the Yogacarabhumi [Chinese]," in Collected Writings of Master Ouyang [Chinese] (Taibei: Xinwenfeng Press, 1976), 350.

33 In the sense that he did not propagate it in its own right but only to support his own teaching.

34 Ouyang Jingwu, Preface to the Yogacarabhumi, 352. Indeed the Zongjinglu quotes heavily from the writings of Kuiji, Xuanzang’s disciple. The role of Yogacara in the thought of Yanshou, a well known Chan teacher and a master of doctrine of the later Tang period, is an important link from the earlier Yogacara to the way Yogacara was later perceived in East Asia, especially in China. Traces of Yanshou can be seen in Ouyang’s writing as well, and it is evident from his comments regarding Yanshou that Ouyang perceived him as the last stand of Yogacara teaching in China before its long period of dormancy.  

35 Shi Shengyan. "Late Ming Yogacara Thinkers and Their Thought [Chinese]," Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal [Chinese] 2 (1987): 4.

36 Although lately there is a growing interest in later Chinese Buddhism, there is still a serious lacuna in the study of these figures. For a general introduction see Yu Chun-fang, "Ming Buddhism," in The Cambridge History of China, ed. D.C. Twitchet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 893-952.

37 For example the lineage that started with Shaojue Guangcheng (Chinese, ??~1600) who was Zhuhong’s disciple and wrote a lexicon of the Cheng weishi lun, Chinese. Shengyan quotes Shaoguan as using terminologies from the two schools in his writings. For example, when he says, “The esteemed theory of [Tiantai’s] Four Teachings is exactly the three Buddha lands [of the Faxing School]. The Four teachings which live together, the skillful means and the two teachings are in fact the one perfect teaching.” (Shi Shengyan. Late Ming Yogacara Thinkers and Their Thought, 27). Other examples he gives are Dazhen and the eminent Ming monk Ouyi, who also studied both traditions at the same time.

38 Wu Jiang, Buddhist Logic and Apologetics in Seventeenth-Century China.

39 A one-fascicle work by the late Ming monk Xuelang Hongwen. Xuelang prescribed the 8 essentials work of the Faxiang School and summarize their content. See X55.899.

40 A ten fascicles work of Ouyi Zhixu on the Cheng weishi lun see X51.824. Also known as Cheng weishi lun guanxin fayao (Chinese) X51.824.

41 Literally “they had a view through a hole in the door or a window,” but by extension it implies also narrow sectarian views.

42 (Chinese) ? Ouyang Jingwu, Preface to the Yogacarabhumi, 352.

43 Especially in Chengguan sub-commentary on the Huayan Sutra (Chinese).  

44 His treatment of the Ming revivalists was less comprehensive in this text, compared with his preface to the Yogacarabhumi. Cheng Gongrang argues convincingly that the reason Ouyang treated the Ming predecessors less in this text is that while in his preface to the Yogacarabhumi Ouyang was interested in reforming the Weishi school per se, at this stage, five years later, he had expanded his objective to reform Chinese Buddhism, and even the course of the general intellectual development of China as a whole (Cheng Gongrang, Studies in Ouyang Jingwu's Buddhist Thought, 149).

45 To the best of my knowledge this pair of concepts appears for the first time together in Vasubandhu’s commentary on the Mahayanasamgraha (see T31.1597.366a15-29). It is later often used in Chinese commentaries including in the Cheng weishi lun, and other thinkers often used by Ouyang such as Kuiji or Dunlun.  

46 According to Gong Jun, the Awakening of Faith did not attract the attention of Zhiyi, Tiantai’s foremost thinker. Acceptance of the Awakening of Faith as a part of Tiantai tradition that began with Zhanran in the Tang dynasty, who gave his own interpretation to the Awakening of Faith’s claim that sunchness and phenomenal world are “neither same nor different”. Zhanran did this in order to make a clear distinction between the Tiantai tradition he wished to revive and the Huayan tradition, which gain popularity during his lifetime. In the Song dynasty the well-known debate between the shanjia and shanwai factions continue to debate the Awakening of Faith where Zhili of the shanjia faction continued Zhanran’s interpretation and Wuen from the shanwai interpreted in a manner that came much closer to the Huayan interpretation. Ouyang, who rejected the notion of a monistic approach to the problem of the relationship between suchness and the phenomenal world, disregarded the inner disagreements within the Tiantai school in order to reject the doctrinal foundation of Chinese Buddhism altogether. See furthe Gong Jun, The Awakening of Faith and Sinification of Buddhism [Chinese] (Wen jin chu ban she, 1995, 158-163.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

Postby admin » Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:46 pm

Part 1 of 2

Ouyang Jingwu’s Critique of the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana, Excerpt from "Differentiating the Pearl From the Fish Eye: Ouyang Jingwu (1871-1943) and the Revival of Scholastic Buddhism"
A dissertation presented by Eyal Aviv
to The Committee on the Study of Religion in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of The Study of Religion Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
July, 2008

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.




Chapter Four: Ouyang Jingwu’s Critique of the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana

4.1 Introduction


The previous chapter outlined Ouyang’s sharp yet unsystematic critique of mainstream Chinese Buddhism, especially that of the Chan, Tiantai and Huayan Schools. We saw that his critique attempted to correct the flaws that he identified in Buddhism and that his critique targeted specific elements within each tradition, such as misleading meditation techniques, faulty interpretation of the Buddhist teaching and the rejection of scriptural authority. His critique, however, unsystematic as it is cannot fully account for the harsh language that he used when describing what he saw as these schools’ flaws and poor spiritual achievements. If he indeed considered the Huayan and Tiantai schools as accountable for the decline of Buddhism why was it that he never outlined a systematic critique of their teachings and practices? Why was Ouyang so sketchy when leveling criticism toward these schools?

In this chapter, I would like to suggest that in Ouyang’s critique, the problem of the Chinese schools stemmed from a more fundamental reason, that is, a problematic doctrine that deeply influenced these schools. Scholastic Buddhists, beginning with Ouyang, associated the origin of this “flawed” teaching with a series of texts which were highly regarded in the Chinese tradition such as the *Vajrasamadhi sutra (Ch., Chinese)1 and the *Suramgama sutra (Ch., Chinese, Shou lengyan jing).2 There was one text in particular, however, which was the subject of critique by many scholars in Ouyang’s day, including Ouyang himself. This was the text of the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana (Chinese, Dasheng qixin lun).3

Indeed, since its appearance in the sixth century, the Awakening of Faith has been a text as influential as it was controversial. During the Tang dynasty, the Awakening of Faith enjoyed growing popularity in Huayan circles, alongside some early skepticism about the provenance of the text. However, after the Song dynasty, its influence spread beyond the Huayan School and its teaching dominated the doctrines of all major schools of Chinese Buddhism, specifically those of the Huayan, Tiantai and Chan which Ouyang later criticized.


In this chapter, I will focus on the place of the Awakening of Faith in the history of modern East Asian Buddhism, putting a special emphasis on the emergence of the debate regarding its authenticity in China and on Ouyang’s role in this debate. This debate was at the heart of the attempt to question mainstream East Asian Buddhism in the modern period. It would be impossible to treat all of the people involved with their different emphases and opinions and also maintain our focus on Ouyang. Instead, I will here deal only with the dimensions of the text and its teaching which were at the center of the debate and the criticism of Ouyang and other important modern critics.

I will begin by giving a brief historical outline of the debate’s emergence in Japan and China. I will then outline Ouyang’s position and his major critique and emphasize its pioneering role in this debate (a debate, in many ways, still going on today). After gaining a better understanding of Ouyang’s criticism of the Awakening of Faith, I will show how his most famous disciple, Lü Cheng, carried this debate forward. I will then concluded with some examples of other voices, most of them apologists who tried to defend the Awakening of Faith and other apocryphal texts against the surging wave of scholastic critiques.

4.2 The problem of authentic or real religion

In his book Shouting Fire Alan Dershowitz says “[O]nce [the state] says religion is to be preferred over nonreligion, [it has] to define what religion means. You then have to define what is true religion and what is real religion.”4 As we will see in this chapter, the question, “What is real religion?” occupied Ouyang and his followers as well. Specifically they asked: What is true Buddhism? Can one distinguish true Buddhism from false?

The history and ramifications of this question are widely discussed among scholars of Religious Studies religious thinkers. For our purpose suffice it is to say that this question is often known in the field of religious studies as the search for the sine qua non or essence of religion.5 One of the candidates for the status of “essence” found most persuasive by modern religious thinkers and scholars offered was religious experience. Beginning with Enlightenment apologists, such as Fredrick Schleiermacher in the late eighteenth century and continuing with influential twentieth century scholars of religions and theologians, such as Rudolf Otto (who was influenced by Schleiermacher), William James and others, religion came to be understood as consisting of a core experience of the noumena, as a distinct and purer experience compared to those which are culturally dependent.6

The view that religious or mystical experience is the essence of a tradition found a strong hold also among scholars of Buddhism and Buddhists alike, such as the prominent Kyoto School thinker Nishida Kitaoo, the Zen apostle to the West, D.T. Suzuki, and scholars like Edward Conze,7 C. A. Rhys Davids etc. As we saw above, Ouyang did not share such a conviction. As Robert Sharf noted: “The authority of exegetes such as Kamalasila, Buddhaghosa, and Chih-i lay, not in their access to exalted spiritual states, but in their mastery of, and rigorous adherence to, sacred scriptures.”8 Sharf’s comment certainly hold true for Ouyang’s criticisms as well, stemming as they did from the Confucian tradition, which criticized the Ming dynasty Confucians for their over-emphasis on “exalted spiritual states”, rather than a close study of scriptures.


For Ouyang, as for other exegetes, real Buddhism is found not in experience, but rather in a careful study of the system of thought as outlined in canonical Buddhist texts. Ouyang said: “The doctrine (Chinese) evolves and is deducted from the teaching (Chinese) and does not part from its source (Chinese). It cannot be based relying on intuition.”9 It is therefore imperative to have a thorough command of these texts in order to get the system right. The problem, as we saw, was that, in Ouyang’s view, Buddhists in China considered inauthentic scriptures to be the perfect Buddhist teaching. When one follows an inauthentic and flawed teaching, one inevitably will follow a wrong path. This was exactly the problem he perceived in the Awakening of Faith.

4.3 The Awakening of Faith and its importance

4.3.1 The text – early reception and early doubts


Traditionally, the Awakening of Faith is attributed to Asvaghosa, the second century Sanskrit poet and supposed exponent of Mahayana, who is most famous for the poetic biography of Buddha Sakyamuni, the Buddhacarita. Asvaghosa’s fame led to the attribution of several other works to him. One of them was the Awakening of Faith, which according to tradition, was translated twice into Chinese: first by Paramartha in 554 CE, and second by Siksananda, during the Tang dynasty in 695- 700 CE. Most scholars today agree that the text is neither an Indian text nor a text translated by Paramartha and Siksananda. However, the identity of the true author of the text, and whether it was a Chinese composition or an edited work parts of which may be of a Sanskritic origin, is still debated.10

Doubts regarding the text began shortly after the text appeared in China. Buddhist texts were not translated in a systematic manner into Chinese. Instead, the translation of particular texts was influenced by the availability of Indic manuscripts, the presence of eminent translators, and a favorable political climate. There were no guidelines to determine which texts to translate and how to prioritize the translation work. The result was an influx of texts without the necessary context to understand them or the means to place them within the Buddhist teaching as a whole. In order to fill this lacuna, Chinese monks started to catalogue the available Buddhist texts throughout the empire in an attempt to see the forest created by the numerous but very scattered trees that were available.

In one of the first of these catalogues, the Zongjing mulu (Chinese) (also known as the Fajinglu (Chinese),11 after his head compiler Fajing), the Awakening of Faith appears in the category of suspicious scriptures (Chinese).12 Another interesting example is from a text called The Essentials Writings on the Three Treatises and Profound Commentaries (Chinese)13 written by Chinkai (Chinese 1091-1152), a Japanese monk. Chinkai quotes from Huijun’s (Chinese) The Profound Meaning of the Four Commentaries (Chinese) in two places, where Huijun raises doubts regarding the attribution of the Awakening of Faith to Asvaghosa. Unfortunately, the rendition that is included in the canon today does not include the two citations and it is unclear on which text Chinkai relied on.14

Despite these early doubts, during the Tang, many influential monks, such as Fazang, Zongmi and others subscribed to the text’s teaching. In the aftermath of emperor Wuzong’s persecution of 845 CE, the decline of the Cien/Faxiang School, and the rise to hegemony of the Chan School (especially among elite circles), the Awakening of Faith’s teaching became so popular that questions regarding its teaching and authenticity were marginalized.

4.3.2 Major commentaries throughout the centuries

It is hard to underestimate the importance of the Awakening of Faith in the history of Chinese Buddhism. It found an attentive audience shortly after its appearance in China, which further developed its teaching. Associated with this text are an impressive sets of commentaries, which number more than 150. These commentaries expounded the sutra’s teaching and turned it into a foundational text, respected by all major Chinese Buddhist schools. The text’s far-reaching status and acceptance as a foundational text became the context for the attack on the text and its teaching by Ouyang and other modern East Asian scholastic Buddhists.

The earliest commentary on the Awakening of Faith was Tanyan’s (Chinese) (516-588) (Dasheng qixin lun yishu) (Chinese).15 Tanyan’s commentary was followed by, among others, three commentaries known as the three great commentaries on the Awakening of Faith, namely, (Chinese) (Dasheng qixinlun yishu) (Chinese);16 Wonhyo’s (Chinese, 617-?) Qixin lun shu (Chinese),17 and Fazang’s (Chinese) Dasheng qixin lun yiji) (Chinese).18 Commentators from throughout East Asia continued to interpret the Awakening of Faith in later periods. Notable were the two commentaries written during the Ming dynasty by two of the most renowned monks of the period. These are Hanshan Deqing’s (Chinese) Qixin lun zhijie (Chinese),19 and Ouyi Zhixu’s (Chinese,1599-1656) Dasheng qixin lun liegangshu (Chinese).20

Two well-known modern commentaries are those of Yinshun (1906-2005), the Dasheng qixin lun jiangji (Chinese) and Yuanying’s (1878–1953) Dasheng qixin lun jiangyi (Chinese). I will further discuss the defenders of the text below after presenting the objections of modern Buddhist scholastics.21

4.4 The Awakening of Faith in the twentieth century

The teaching and the authenticity of the Awakening of Faith stood at the center of one of the most heated Buddhist debates throughout the twentieth century across East Asia and China in particular. Because the Awakening of Faith’s teaching had became so axiomatic among Chinese Buddhists, questioning the text became tantamount to questioning Chinese and East Asian Buddhism in its totality.

It is curious that the Awakening of Faith controversy erupted in China after so many years of consensus regarding its centrality and authenticity. There are several potential answers to this question, all of which are related to developments in twentieth century Buddhism. In China, these developments included: the growing popularity of the Faxiang or Yogacara teaching, which rejected the inherent enlightenment teaching dominant in the Awakening of Faith, the growing impact of lay Buddhists, who were less committed to the monastic party-line, and the globalization of Buddhism which exposed Chinese Buddhists to other forms of Buddhism on an unprecedented scale, and which presented Chinese Buddhism as just one form of Buddhism among other choices.

4.5 The debate over the Awakening of Faith in Japan

A major cause for the debates over the Awakening of Faith in China was the influence of similar debates that took place in Japan. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Japan exerted a tremendous impact on China in almost every aspect of life, social, political, economic and intellectual. Japan became a Mecca for many Chinese who took the modernization of China to be the country’s highest priority. The younger generation of Chinese intellectuals flocked to Japanese universities to learn how this nation, which until recently they had looked down upon as semi-barbarian, succeeded in such a short time in transforming itself into a modern country while at the same time maintaining its traditional and unique culture. This energetic group of young people was determined to transform their own culture in addition to acquiring new knowledge. The cultural upheavals back home became a powerful force that helped to create and propagate radical ideas and proposed solutions to China’s predicament.

Like other Chinese in Japan, Chinese Buddhists admired the example of their Japanese Buddhist colleagues, for they successfully transformed Buddhism in Japan from a persecuted religion into the hallmark of Japanese culture. For centuries, Confucian scholars attacked Buddhists as heresy. In the Meiji era, Japanese Buddhists also came under attack by other dominant powers, such as Christian missionaries and propagators of Western culture. Buddhism, in other words, became an impediment to Japan’s progress.

As in Japan in the early Meiji period, Buddhists in China, like other religions, was considered an impediment to modernity. The miraculous transformation of Japanese Buddhism was therefore of great interest to Buddhists in China. How was it possible for Japanese Buddhists to have transformed a symbol of spiritual decadence (Japanese: daraku) and anachronistic tradition into the hallmark of modernity and Japanese spirit? In addition, how had they managed to go beyond the boundaries of Asia and promote Buddhism as a global religion, in which Japanese Buddhism was envisioned as the spearhead of a new spirituality for the modern age?22

In his book Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji Japan, James Ketelaar outlines three major areas that Buddhist reformers identified as most damaging to the reputation and cause of Buddhists in Japan, and how these reformers responded to these attacks.23 These are:

1. The perceived socio-economic uselessness of priests and temples;

2. The foreign character of Buddhism, which had negatively influenced Japanese culture, filling it with superstitious and other-worldly traits derived from Indian culture;

3. Its mythological and unscientific presentation of history.

Ketelaar explains that Japanese Buddhist reformers responded by repackaging their traditions as “New Buddhism” (shin bukkyo). In so doing, they attempted to respond to the specific criticisms leveled against them. Against the allegation of uselessness, possibly inspired by Christian missionaries, Buddhist reformers promoted the transformation of their temples into centers of social-action.
Hospitals and clinics were established, as well as centers for short-term support in times of need for the general population, schools, hotels etc. In addition, these reformers initiated campaigns addressing a wide range of social and political issues, such as the promotion of public health concerns, and anti-abortion and anti-capital punishment campaigns. Later, they also supported Japanese military campaigns.

These campaigns and social activities fostered a sense of Buddhism as an inseparable dimension of the Japanese social fabric, and by that Buddhists responded to the supposed foreignness of the Buddhist tradition. Ketelaar explains: “So entrenched were Buddhist institutions in every aspect of Japanese ‘civilization’ by the end of the nineteenth century that the earlier critique of an ‘other-worldly’ Buddhism was no longer applicable.24 As for the third dimension, response came in the form of the establishment of Buddhist academies and universities that were, and continue to be, at the forefront of Buddhist Studies research. As we will see in the case of the Awakening of Faith controversy, arguments employed by both sides reflected a new level of sophistication and mastery of philological and historical tools available at that time.

4.5.1 The debate surrounding the Awakening of Faith in Japan

In Japan, both the critics of Buddhism as well as the Buddhist reformers held up the Awakening of Faith in support of their views, precisely because of the text’s importance to the tradition and because the doctrines it espouses had become what many consider the hallmark of East Asian Buddhism.25

The beginning of the modern study of Buddhism is often dated to 1879 when Hara Tanzan, a Buddhist scholar and Zen priest, taught a course called “Lectures on Buddhist Texts” at the Imperial University.26 The key text that he chose for the course was the Awakening of Faith, which he saw as a core text and which allowed a discussion of Buddhism in a modern manner with a focus on psychology and “Experiential (Jikken) Buddhism”. The course became widely known and attracted dignitaries from the university including the president of the university, Kato Hiroyuki.

The choice of text as the key text should not surprise us. One of the strategies the reformers of Buddhism adopted was to adopt what Ketelaar called “trans-sectarian” Buddhist culture. This occurs when reformers identify sectarianism as a weak spot that prevents Buddhists from responding effectively to external attacks. One of the key figures behind this movement was Takada Doken, who was the editor of the newspaper Tzuzoku Bukkyo Shinbun (The Common man’s Buddhist Newspaper) and of Tsu-Bukkyo anshin (The Salvation of United Buddhism). For people like Takada and other advocators of trans-sectarian there was a need for a doctrine and texts which would stand beyond any sectarian boundaries. The texts of Shinran, Honen, Dogen or Nichiren were all too closely associated with particular schools and it was the Awakening of Faith that provided the solution they were looking for. As [b][size=110]Takeda and others argue the “‘fundamental essence’ (kompongi) that penetrates every sect of both Mahayana and Hinayana teaching is most perfectly articulated in the Awakening of Faith.”27

The success of the course and the interest it aroused in the Awakening of Faith soon led to the first criticisms against the text and against Buddhism from adversaries of Buddhism. For example, in his New Discourse on Buddhism (Butsudo shinron), Takahashi Goro, a scholar of Biblical and Christian studies, blamed Buddhism and the Awakening of Faith in particular with being irrational. This critique was soon met with the refutation of Oda Tokuno, a prominent scholar of Buddhism.

The debate above, however, was only the prelude to the first major debate surrounding the text, which followed soon after. The reason for the rise of the controversy was the thesis of Kimura Takataro, who was a Japanese nationalist with a broad Western education. His thesis focused on a critique against the Awakening of Faith as fundamentally different from Western thought and Buddhism in general, and therefore as something that was unnecessary for Japan in the present historical moment. Kimura’s attack was followed by others, who defended Buddhism and the Awakening of Faith. Many of them later rose to be among the pioneers of Buddhist Studies in Japan: Ogiwara Unrai, Sakaino Koyo, Furukawa Rosen, Yoshitani Kakuju and Murakami Sensho.

It was also around this time that the Awakening of Faith was translated into English for the first time by Daisetsu Teitaro Suzuki, who chose to translate the Siksananda edition of the text,28 as a part of a Japanese Buddhist effort -- and to a certain extent a Chinese effort by figures such as Yang Wenhui -- to propagate Mahayana Buddhism in the West. Western Buddhist scholars at that time largely viewed the Mahayana as a later corruption of the earlier and ostensibly pure Theravada teachings.29 The Chicago World’s Parliament of Religion held in 1893 presented Japanese participants with a key opportunity to propagate what they saw as the true spirit of Mahayana Buddhism.

However, with the growing professionalisation of Buddhist scholars in Japan, even national pride and the relative success of the text abroad did not stop the outbreak of a second, more rigorous, wave of controversy, which began with Mochizuki Shinko’s (Chinese, 1869-1948) argument that the Awakening of Faith was of Chinese provenance. The results of his research were published later in his famous Mochizuki Shinko (Chinese), Studies of the Awakening of Faith (Daijo kishinron no kenkyo (Chinese) in 1922.

Mochizuki was not the first to argue along these lines in modern Japan. Already in July, 1901 Murakami Sensho (Chinese, 1851-1929) had sparked another, closely related, controversy, when he published his own contribution to the transsectarian movement’s first volume of the Bukkyo toitsu ron (The Treatise of Unifying Buddhism). In this work he argued, among other things, that the Mahayana scriptures are not the Buddha’s words (Skt: buddhavacana, Jap: bussetsu). Whalen Lai plausibly argues that Murakami’s approach, and later also Mochizuki’s, should be understood in the context of the quest for the historical Jesus, which had captured the attention of scholars in Europe at that time.30 Related or not, the two quests, for the true Jesus and for the true words of the Buddha’s, were both very controversial. Mochizuki’s assertion that the Awakening of Faith was not an Indian text sparked considerable discussion.

In 1922, the same year that Ouyang voiced his opposition to the text and when Liang Qichao published his own book on the Awakening of Faith, Mochizuki presented his approach systematically in his Studies in the Awakening of Faith. The controversy erupted into full bloom, with both sides arguing about the validity of the other side’s arguments.
As expected, Mochizuki was backed by Murakami, while on the more conservative side stood scholars such as Hadani Ryotai (Chinese, 1883-1974) and Tokiwa Daijo (Chinese, 1870-1945). Scholars from both sides argued about the nature of the earlier doubts: the attribution to Asvaghosa and Paramartha; problems related to the language of the text; and the identities of the translator/s or the author/s, if the author was not Asvaghosa and the translator was not Paramartha.

Despite the fact tha t most scholars in the West accept Mochizuki’s assertion, i.e. that the Awakening of Faith is indeed of Chinese origin, the debate has never ended in Japan, and continues to engage contemporary scholars of Indian and East Asian Buddhism.

4.6 The Chinese debate over the Awakening of Faith

Inspired by their Japanese colleagues, by internal growing tendencies toward a more scholarly study of Buddhism and with a growing understanding of Western methods of inquiry, Chinese Buddhists turned their attention to the authenticity of Buddhist texts as well. However, unlike their Japanese counterparts, Chinese Buddhists, while not ignoring the question of authorship, were more concerned with the philosophical and doctrinal teachings of the Awakening of Faith and their compatibility with what they understood as the authentic Buddhist teaching. Surveying the full scope of the traditional interpretation of the Awakening of Faith and the modern debate is beyond the scope of this dissertation. Instead, in this section of this chapter, I will focus on Ouyang’s contribution to this debate, as the first to identify and raise these concerns in China. To contextualize the significance of Ouyang’s position and in order to better understand the extent to which it snowballed into something much bigger, I will also mention briefly Zhang Taiyan and Lü Cheng’s contribution to the debate,31 and apologists such as Liang Qichao, Taixu and Tang Dayuan.32 As in the case of the Japanese material just surveyed, this will by comprise means an exhaustive discussion [by no means comprise an exhaustive discussion]. Rather, through it, I hope to provide the background necessary for appreciating this group’s basic argument, and Ouyang's special place within this group.

4.6.1 Zhang Taiyan – the initiator of the debate over the Awakening of Faith in China

In 1915, the famous intellectual and nationalist, Zhang Taiyan, poked the first hole in the wall of certainty surrounding the Awakening of Faith with the publication of his Debating the Awakening of Faith (Chinese). In his very short essay, Zhang treated both historical and doctrinal aspects of the problem. Basically, he argued that while historically it is an authentic Indian text, there remained major doctrinal problems and contradictions that should be taken into account.

With regard to questions of authentication, Zhang Taiyan argued along the same lines as Ouyang would seven years later. Zhang does not say in his essay if he is reacting to doubts he encountered in Japan regarding the text, but from the tone of the essay it seems very plausible, especially taking into account the fact that he returned from five years in Japan right after the 1911 revolution.

For Zhang the text was indeed of Indian provenance and was written by Asvaghosa.
He opens his article by acknowledging that the Fajinglu catalogue places the Awakening of Faith among the suspicious scriptures, and that the attribution to Asvaghosa was not mentioned in Yijing’s 691 CE, Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan (Chinese, T54.2125 records from his travels in India and South Asia), nor in Kumarajiva’s Biography of the Bodhisattva Asvaghosa (Ch:, Chinese, T50.2046), nor even in Fazang’s writings. Daoxuan’s Xu gaoseng zhuan (Ch: Chinese, T50.2060) mentioned that there was no Sanskrit manuscript of the text available in the Tang (i.e. in the time of Daoxuan, the biographies’ compiler). It was Fei Changfang in Lidai sanbaoji (Chinese, T49.2034), a contemporary of Fajing, who attributed the translation of the text to Paramartha. For Zhang Taiyan, the fact that the text has two translations clearly indicates the existence of an original work, even if the original is missing. The reason the text was included in the category of suspicious scriptures in the Fajinglu does not refer to the texts’ authenticity, but to suspicions regarding the true identity of translators.33

Doctrinally, the situation is slightly more complicated. Although Zhang was generally sympathetic to the doctrine of the Awakening of Faith and found it to be doctrinally similar to Vasubandhu and Asanga’s point of view, he did acknowledged that they differ in terminology.34 In addition to the difference in vocabulary and terminology, Zhang also points out that there is a fundamental contradiction in the analogy of the ocean that is found in the Awakening of Faith. According to this well-known analogy, mind and ignorance are likened to the ocean its waves. The mind on its own is as quiet like a still ocean. Defiled thoughts, which are likened to the waves, are not the true nature of the mind, as they only arise when the winds of ignorance stir them. According to Zhang, this is a dualism that contradicts the monism that the text is trying to promote.35


Although, historically Zhang was the first to discuss the problematic nature of the Awakening of Faith, his essay did not receive much attention at the time. It took seven more years for the debate to reach a much wider audience in China, a development caused to a large extent by Ouyang Jingwu’s publication of the Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra in 1922, in which Ouyang outlined his analysis of and critique against the text.

4.6.2 Ouyang Jingwu and the Awakening of Faith

Ouyang holds a unique place in the history of the debate over the Awakening of Faith in China. Applying evidential research methods, such as historical and philological analysis, Ouyang noticed discrepancies between the teaching of the Awakening of Faith and orthodox Yogacara texts such as the Yogacarabhumi sastra and the Cheng weishi lun. Although Zhang Taiyan was the first who wrote abut the Awakening of Faith in the context of the modern critique, it was Ouyang who turned the Awakening of Faith to the focus of debate over the nature and validity of Buddhism, as it developed in East Asia. This development -- no doubt closely related to critiques against the Awakening of Faith in Japan -– had a far-reaching effect on Chinese Buddhist orthodoxy and orthopraxy. Ouyang’s views in regard to the Awakening of Faith were severely criticized in more conservative circles and among Chinese Buddhists and were celebrated by his students and pushed forward to an even more radical conclusion.

Ouyang’s direct critique against the Awakening of Faith appeared in his Expositions and Discussions of Vijnaptyimatra, in his discussion on the notion of correct knowledge (Skt. samyagjñana Ch., Chinese) as a part of the five dharmas scheme. This scheme played an important role in the solution to the problem that Ouyang outlined, which hinges upon the correct understanding on the nature of those five dharmas.

What does he mean by correct knowledge in the five dharmas scheme? Ouyang opened his discussion with a quotation from the Yogacarabhumi sastra (the formula appears first in the Lankavatara sutra), which explains the meaning of the five. According to the Lankavatara and the Yogacarabhumi, the five dharmas are: (1) signs or Appearances (Skt. nimitta, Ch., Chinese), which the Yogacarabhumi explains as all the things (Skt. vastu Ch., Chinese) that discourses and theories (Chinese) are based on (Chinese);37 (2) names (Skt. nama, Ch., Chinese), which further describe verbalizations and categorizations in addition to that of the nimitta; (3) discriminatory conceptions or ideas (Skt. samkalpa, Ch., Chinese), which includes both the citta and caittas associated with the all phenomenal world,38 or the contaminated (sasrava) cittas; (4) correct knowledge (Skt. samyagjnana, Ch., Chinese), which includes both mundane and supramundane knowledge, and experiential wisdom (Chinese), as well as wisdom of the principles (Chinese); (5) suchness (Skt. tathata, Ch., Chinese), which is the state in which the principle of no-self is revealed, the holy teaching is actualized, and which differs from all the [things] that discourses and theories are based on.39

Ouyang then proceeds to talk about correct knowledge, which he saw as a crucial term that was distorted by the Awakening of Faith. For Ouyang, correct knowledge is that knowledge which perceives the object (Chinese) and can function as a cause (Chinese). Tathata or Suchness, on the other hand, “cannot be seeds, perfumer, or perfumed; it has nothing to do with such matters.”40 Here, Ouyang already breaks away from one of the most influential doctrines in East Asian schools of Buddhism, that which saw the “mind as suchness” (Chinese) and the “mind that arises and ceases” (Chinese) as two manifestations of one and the same mind, such that they are in fact identical, two sides of the same coin.41 For Ouyang, the two realms were irrecoverably isolated from one another.
Suchness is beyond language and discursive thought and is called suchness [calling it suchness] is merely a “forced terminology expedient” (Chinese). Ouyang utilizes the formula of substance and function (ti (Chinese) and yong (Chinese)) to further explicate his idea. This language, as we will see below, has a long history in China and Ouyang used it in response to traditions later prevalent among Buddhists commentators in East Asia, who insisted that the two are inseparable. For Ouyang the substance equals suchness and the function equals correct knowledge. Ouyang understood the substance to be completely separated from function; the unattainable substance is manifested by the function (correct knowledge). In Ouyang’s words, the correct knowledge reveals (Chinese) the substance, but it is impossible to “see” (Chinese) suchness directly, since its meaning is concealed (Chinese).42

The second problem is that Buddhist thinkers, who followed the wrong interpretation of the Awakening of Faith, saw suchness as giving rise to the myriad dharmas. This is, according to Ouyang, a pitiful mistake that stems directly from the teachings of the Awakening of Faith.43 The position that suchness gives rise to dharmas met with resistance from most scholastic Buddhists from Ouyang’s milieu, and was subject to elaborate refutations by Ouyang’s successors.


As a scholastic, who was aware of the “Westernized” scholarly method popular in Japan and was trained in evidential research methods, Ouyang then turned to the history of the text to seek the historical context for such a flaw. Historically speaking Ouyang’s position is less radical than some. It was in line with Zhang Taiyan’s position and was soon rejected even by his own students such as Liang Qichao and Lü Cheng. Ouyang accepted the Indic origin of the text and its attribution to Asvaghosa. But he qualified this acceptance with the observation that Asvaghosa was originally a follower of the Hinayana, and he understood the Awakening of Faith as a product of Asvaghosa’s earlier Hinayana thinking. Ouyang then analyzed the history of sectarian Buddhism and reached the conclusion that “Asvaghosas’s position is similar to that of the Vibhajyavadins.44 According to Ouyang, “the Vibhajyavadins (Chinese) did not establish the notion of inherent seeds (Chinese). [They claim that] the mind is originally pure. When the mind is separated from defilements, its substance (Chinese) is pure and serves as the cause for the undefiled (Chinese), just as milk can become ghee because there is [already] the nature of ghee in milk. Thus, they (i.e. the Vibhajyavadins) take the substance [of the mind] as the function [of the mind]. [If] substance is mixed [with the nature of its function], then the function is lost.”45

Ouyang went on, in this same essay to attack the terminology used by the Awakening of Faith. The text, according to Ouyang, does not establish its argument based on the notion of seeds,46 either defiled or pure. Instead it relies on an unfounded (Chinese) notion of function that arises from permeation (Chinese). Here, Ouyang specified two problems with the Awakening of Faith. The first, as we will see below, is the author’s understanding (or lack thereof) of the notion of permeation and the second is his disregard of the theory of seeds.

Ouyang’s contention in regard to the notion of permeation is that if we take the Awakening of Faith’s understanding of the term, then the metaphor of the seeds –- and it is important to keep in mind that it is a metaphor only -- loses its meaning. We should therefore define our terms clearly. What, then, is permeation? He says:

“Permeation” (Skt. vasana Ch., Chinese) [takes its] meaning [from an] analogy to a garment in the ordinary world, which in fact has no fragrance [of its own], but which takes on the perfume of an incense when it is “smoked” [“perfumes”=”permeated”, xun] with the incense. In the case of garment and incense in the ordinary world, we can only speak of “perfumation” [“permeation”] [when they are present] at the same time and in the same place; [thus, similarly,] purity and defilement cannot mutually infuse one another, and in fact, ignorance and correct wisdom cannot be established at the same time. (…) If one is talking about inconceivable permeation that is different from the above [example of the garment]: then the permeation of the perfume of a worldly [garment] cannot serve as a [proper] example (Skt. drstanta Ch., Chinese). [Only if] the two (i.e. the garment and the perfume) are [originally] separated and later are connected, can the meaning of permeation [be established.] 47


The other problem Ouyang identifies in the Awakening of Faith is that it does not address the seeds theory. He discusses this problem as follows:

The mistake of the Awakening of Faith does not stop with the fallacy of not establishing the notion of permeation but also concerns not establishing the notions of correct knowledge and uncontaminated seeds. As a result, in terms of principle, the sense of function is lost; it is mistaken concerning the notion of function (Ù). In terms of [the Buddha’s] teaching, it contradicts the teachings of the Lankavatara sutra. It (i.e. the Awakening of Faith) also talks about the three subtle and six coarse marks as strung together (sequentially).48 As a result, in terms of principle, it is mistaken concerning the notion of difference [between the subtle and the coarse marks] and violates the teaching of the Samdhinirmocana sutra. The five dharmas in the Lankavatara sutra, which are discussed in terms of suchness and correct knowledge, emerge together. In the Awakening of Faith, there are no uncontaminated seeds, and suchness is able, on its own, to transcend defilements and become pure, which conflates correct knowledge and suchness into the same thing. This is an error [in understanding both] the substance as well as the function. The Samdhinirmocana sutra discusses the eight consciousnesses “horizontally” (i.e. treats them as independent of each other); hence they are able to operate simultaneously, since they [take each other as] simultaneous bases (Skt. sahabahutasraya Ch. (Chinese). Furthermore, each consciousness has [its own] seeds. The seeds give rise to (similar seeds) but do not hinder their mutual flourishing, since both the direct (Skt. hetu pratyaya Ch., Chinese) and auxiliary (Skt. adhipati pratyaya Ch., Chinese) causes operate as simultaneous bases. The Awakening of Faith [by contrast,] discusses the eight consciousnesses “vertically.” The three subtle and six coarse marks arise sequentially [and yet it appears] as if (Chinese) they all belong to the same kind of consciousness, so no differentiation can be established (by this reasoning)”49


Ouyang then concludes,

Investigated from both an historical and a doctrinal perspective, the Awakening of Faith's teaching is generally similar to that of the Vibhajyavadins in the respects [I have discussed]. Examined from the perspective of the correct principle of the highest teaching [i.e., Buddhism], the teaching of the Awakening of Faith is not completely accurate as those [other teachings I have discussed]. Those who carefully seek the Buddhadharma ought to carefully determine the rights and wrongs of the Awakening of Faith. But for more than a thousand years, it has been esteemed as the highest treasure; inferior people keep discussing it and, in doing so, mistake a fish’s eye for a pearl. It has confused people for a long time. Indeed, it is absolutely necessary that the right discernment be made! 50


Several points are worth noting here. Ouyang’s critique is both historical and doctrinal in nature. Going over his text, we can get a glimpse of his method, which includes historical verification, doctrinal analysis and careful attention to terminology.

His style is dialectical and follows the sastric literature that he promoted. He relies on Buddhist logic, and uses traditional arguments based on scriptural proofs (Skt. agama pramana Ch., Chinese) and logic (Skt. yukti Ch., Chinese). Buddhist logic never established a solid foot in China. Its practice almost disappeared completely in post-Tang China and, with the exception of a short attempt to revive it in the Ming.51 It only regained importance among scholastic circles during the twentieth century. Here again, Ouyang had a pioneering role in the promotion of the importance of Buddhist logic for intellectual discourse.

Although Ouyang was very likely aware of the debates regarding the provenance of the text in Japan,52 he was less concerned with the origin of the text than he was with its philosophical and doctrinal problems. As stated above, Ouyang accepted the authorship of Asvaghosa,53 but related the main historical problem to the fact that Asvaghosa was not a Mahayana follower. Ouyang identified Asvaghosa’s views as closer to those expressed by other early Buddhist schools, especially these of the so-called Vibhajyavada School. Rhetorically speaking, accusing the author of the text that was held as the “highest teaching” by Buddhists in China for the last millennium of being an adherent of the “Hinayana” was polemical enough. But Ouyang went further and called into question the doctrinal core of the text as well.

Doctrinally, Ouyang accused the author of the text of blurring the difference between correct knowledge and suchness. While Ouyang saw the two as separate the author of the Awakening of Faith saw them as similar. We have here two markedly different visions of Buddhist enlightenment and the way to attain it. For Ouyang, suchness is beyond grasp but is revealed through its function, which is correct knowledge. The Awakening of Faith, as Ouyang understood it, mixed the substance with the function in a way that turns suchness into a causative factor that gives rise to phenomena.

Ouyang also had a problem with terminology that was uncritically adopted from Yogacara texts. The seeds theory was ignored in the Awakening of Faith, and gave way to a discussion of an abstract version of permeation (function that arises from permeation, Chinese). In the Awakening of Faith, the metaphor of permeation loses its impact, as Ouyang explained the metaphor is contingent on the total separation of the “garment” (the mind) and the “perfume” (external causes and conditions). If there is no real distinction between substance qua suchness and function qua correct knowledge, function has no real role since substance (= suchness) can purify itself.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36125
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron