In Search of the Golden Lion

Schools of Buddhism

2007-12-11T10:14:00.000-08:00

Schools of Buddhism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

An image of Gautama Buddha with a Manji, traditionally a Buddhist symbol of infinity, on his chest. Ananda, the Buddha's disciple, appears in the background. This statue is from Hsi Lai Temple.

The Schools of Buddhism.

Buddhism is classified in various ways. The normal English-language usage, as given in dictionaries, divides it into Theravada (also known by the derogatory name Hinayana) and Mahayana. The commonest classification among scholars is threefold, with Mahayana split into East Asian and Tibetan traditions.

The article "Buddhism, schools of" in the Macmillan Encyclopedia of Religion distinguishes three different types of classification:
*movements:

Hinayana
Mahayana
Vajrayana

*nikayas or monastic fraternities; three of these survive at the present day:

Theravada, in Southeast Asia
Dharmaguptaka, in China, Korea and Vietnam
Mulasarvastivada, in the Tibetan tradition

*doctrinal schools

[edit] Terminology

The terminology for the major divisions of Buddhism can be confusing, as Buddhism is variously divided by scholars and practitioners according to geographic, historical, and philosophical criteria, with different terms often being used in different contexts. The following terms may be encountered in descriptions of the major Buddhist divisions:

Early Buddhist Schools
The schools into which Buddhism became divided in its first few centuries; only one of these survives as an independent school, Theravada

East Asian Buddhism
A term used by scholars[1][page # needed] to cover the Buddhist traditions of Japan, Korea, Singapore and most of China and Vietnam

Eastern Buddhism
An alternative name used by some scholars[2][page # needed] for East Asian Buddhism; also sometimes used to refer to all traditional forms of Buddhism, as distinct from Western(ized) forms.

Chinese Glazed stoneware of a Buddhist monk, or Future Buddha, dated to the 20th year of the Chenghua Emperor, or 1468 AD.

Samadhi Buddha statue at Mahamevuna Park in Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka carved in the 4th century AD.

Esoteric Buddhism
Usually considered synonymous with Vajrayana.[3] Some scholars have applied the term to certain practices found within the Theravada, particularly in Cambodia.[4][page # needed]
Hinayana
A pejorative term used in Mahayana doctrine to denigrate its opponents.[5] It is sometimes used to refer to the early Buddhist schools, including the contemporary Theravada, although the legitimacy of this is disputed.[6] Its use in scholarly publications is controversial.[7] By the Mahayana schools and groups in China, Korea, Tibet, and Japan the term is felt to be only slightly pejorative, or not pejorative at all.[8] By some it is used with respect proper to teachings coming direct from the Buddha. The main use of the term in East Asian and Tibetan traditions is in reference to spiritual levels[9] regardless of school.
Lamaism
An old term, still sometimes used, synonymous with Tibetan Buddhism; widely considered derogatory.
Mahayana
A movement that emerged out of the early Buddhist schools, together with its later descendants, East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism. Vajrayana traditions are sometimes listed separately. The main use of the term in East Asian and Tibetan traditions is in reference to spiritual levels[10][page # needed] regardless of school.

Mantrayana
Usually considered synonymous with Vajrayana.[11] The Tendai school in Japan has been described as influenced by Mantrayana.[12][page # needed]
Northern Buddhism
An alternative term used by some scholars[13][page # needed] for Tibetan Buddhism. Also, an older term still sometimes used to encompass both East Asian and Tibetan traditions.
Southeast Asian Buddhism
An alternative name used by some scholars[14][page # needed] for Theravada.
Southern Buddhism
An alternative name used by some scholars[15][page # needed] for Theravada.
Sravakayana
An alternative term sometimes used for the early Buddhist schools.
Tantrayana or Tantric Buddhism
Usually considered synonymous with Vajrayana.[16] However, one scholar describes the tantra divisions of some editions of the Tibetan scriptures as including Sravakayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana texts[17] (see Buddhist texts). Some scholars[18][page # needed] have used the term tantric Theravada to refer to certain practices found particularly in Cambodia.
Theravada
The traditional Buddhism of Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and parts of Vietnam, China, India, Bangladesh and Malaysia. It is the only surviving representative of the historical early Buddhist schools. The term 'Theravada' is also sometimes used to refer to all the early Buddhist schools.[19]
Tibetan Buddhism
Usually understood as including the Buddhism of Tibet, Mongolia, Bhutan and parts of China, India and Russia, which follow the Tibetan tradition.
Vajrayana
A movement that developed out of Indian Mahayana, together with its later descendants. There is some disagreement on exactly which traditions fall into this category. Tibetan Buddhism is universally recognized as falling under this heading; many also include also the Japanese Shingon school. Some scholars[20][page # needed]also apply the term to the Korean milgyo tradition, which is not a separate school. One scholar says, "Despite the efforts of generations of Buddhist thinkers, it remains exceedingly difficult to identify precisely what it is that sets the Vajrayana apart."[21]

Nikaya schools
Main article: Nikaya Buddhism
See also: Early Buddhist schools
Numerous attempts have been made to tabulate these schools. Here is one.[citation needed]

Sthaviravāda
Pudgalavāda ('Personalist') (c. 280 BCE)
Sarvāstivāda
Vibhajjavāda (prior to 240 BCE; during Aśoka)
Theravāda (c. 240 BCE)
Theravada subschools (see below)
Mahīśāsaka (after 232 BCE)
Dharmaguptaka (after 232 BCE)
Kāśyapīya (after 232 BCE)
Vatsīputrīya (under Aśoka) later name: Saṃmitīya
Dharmottarīya
Bhadrayānīya
Sannāgarika
Mūlasarvāstivāda (third and fourth centuries)
Sautrāntika (between 50 BCE and c. 100 CE)
Mahāsaṃghika ('Majority', c. 380 BCE)
Ekavyahārikas (under Aśoka)
Lokottaravāda
Golulika (during Aśoka)
Bahuśrutīya (late third century BCE)
Prajñaptivāda (late third century BCE)
Cetiyavāda
Caitika (mid-first century BCE)
Apara Śaila
Uttara Śaila

[edit] Twenty sects
The following lists the twenty sects described as Hinayana in some Mahayana texts:
Sthaviravada (上座部) was split into 11 sects. These were:
說一切有部(Sarvastivadin)、雪山部(Haimavata)、犢子部(Vatsiputriya)、法上部 (Dharmottara)、賢冑部(Bhadrayaniya)、正量部(Sammitiya)、密林山部(Channagirika)、化地部 (Mahisasaka)、法藏部(Dharmaguptaka)、飲光部(Kasyapiya)、經量部(Sautrantika). Sthaviravada─┬─ Haimavata────────────────────────────────────────────
└─ Sarvastivadin─┬───────────────────────────────────
├ Vatsiputriya ─┬────────────────────
│ ├ Dharmottara───────
│ ├ Bhadrayaniya─────
│ ├ Sammitiya────────
│ └ Channagirika─────
├ Mahisasaka─┬─────────────────────
│ └ Dharmaguptaka──────
├ Kasyapiya────────────────────────
└ Sautrantika──────────────────────
Mahasanghika (大眾部) was split into 9 sects. There were:
一說部(Ekavyaharaka)、說出世部(Lokottaravadin)、雞胤部 (Kaukkutika)、多聞部(Bahussrutiya)、說假部(Prajnaptivada)、制多山部(Caitika)、西山住部 (Aparasaila)、北山住部(Uttarasaila). Mahasanghika─┬──────────────────────┬─────
├ Ekavyaharaka ├ Caitika
├ Lokottaravadin ├ Aparasaila
├ Kaukkutika └ Uttarasaila
├ Bahussrutiya
└ Prajnaptivada

[edit] Influences on East Asian schools
The following later schools used the Vinaya of the Dharmaguptaka:
Chinese Vinaya School
Korean Gyeyul
Japanese Ritsu
The following involve philosophical influence:
The Japanese Jojitsu is considered by some an offshoot of Sautrantika; others consider it to be derived from Bahusrutiya
The Chinese/Japanese Kusha school is considered an offshoot of Sarvastivada, influenced by Vasubandhu.

[edit] Theravada subschools
The different schools in Theravada often emphasize different aspects (or parts) of the Pali Canon and the later commentaries, or differ in the focus on (and recommended way of) practice. There are also significant differences in strictness or interpretation of the Vinaya.
Bangladesh:
Sangharaj Nikaya
Mahasthabir Nikaya
Burma:
Thudhamma Nikaya
Vipassana tradition of Mahasi Sayadaw and disciples
Shwekyin Nikaya
Dvaya Nikaya or Dvara Nikaya (see Mendelson, Sangha and State in Burma, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1975)
Sri Lanka:
Siam Nikaya
Waturawila (or Mahavihara Vamshika Shyamopali Vanavasa Nikaya)
Amarapura Nikaya
Kanduboda (or Swejin Nikaya)
Tapovana (or Kalyanavamsa)
Ramañña Nikaya
Galduwa (or Kalyana Yogashramaya Samsthava)
Delduwa
forest nikaya
Thailand
Maha Nikaya
Vijja Dhammakaya
Thammayut Nikaya
Thai Forest Tradition
Tradition of Ajahn Chah

[edit] Mahāyāna schools
Madhyamaka
Prāsangaka
Svatantrika
Sanlun (Three Treatise school)
Sanron
Maha-Madhyamaka (Jonangpa)
Yogācāra (known in Tibet as Cittamatra)
Wei-Shi (Consciousness-only school) or Faxiang (Dharma-character school)
Beopsang
Hossō
Tathagatagarbha
Daśabhūmikā (absorbed in to Huayan)
Huayan (Avataṃsaka)
Hwaeom
Kegon
Chan / Zen / Seon / Thien
Caodong
Soto
Linji
Rinzai
Ōbaku
Fuke
Won Buddhism: Korean Reformed Buddhism
Pure Land (Amidism)
Jodo
Jodo Shin
Amida-shu
Tiantai (Lotus Sutra School)
Cheontae
Tendai (also contained Vajrayana elements)
Nichiren
Nichiren Shū
Nichiren Shōshū
Nipponzan Myōhōji
Soka Gakkai

[edit] Tantric schools
see also: Vajrayāna Subcategorised according to predecessors
Tibetan Buddhism
Nyingma
New Bön (synthesis of Yungdrung Bön and Nyingmapa)
Kadam
Sakya
Jonang
Gelug
Kagyu
Shangpa Kagyu
Rechung Kagyu
Dagpo Kagyu
Karma Kagyu (or Kamtshang Kagyu)
Tsalpa Kagyu
Baram Kagyu
Pagtru Kagyu (or Phagmo Drugpa Kagyu)
Taglung Kagyu
Trophu Kagyu
Drukpa Kagyu
Martsang Kagyu
Yerpa Kagyu
Yazang Kagyu
Shugseb Kagyu
Drikung Kagyu
Rime movement (ecumenical movement)
Japanese Mikkyo
Shingon
Tendai (derived from Tiantai but added tantric practices)

[edit] See also
Buddhism by region
Humanistic Buddhism
Northern and Southern Buddhism
Early Buddhist Schools

[edit] References
^ B & G, Gethin, R & J, P & K
^ Penguin, Harvey
^ Encyclopedia of Religion, Macmillan, New York, volume 2, page 440
^ Indian Insights, Luzac, London, 1997
^ Hinayana (literally, “inferior way”) is a polemical term, which self-described Mahayana (literally, “great way”) Buddhist literature uses to denigrate its opponents. - p. 840, MacMillan Library Reference Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004
^ Hinayana is a designation that has no clearly identifiable external referent - p. 840, MacMillan Library Reference Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004
^ The supposed Mahayana-Hinayana dichotomy is so prevalent in Buddhist literature that it has yet fully to loosen its hold over scholarly representations of the religion. - p. 840, MacMillan Library Reference Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004
^ It is also certain that Buddhist groups and individuals in China, Korea, Tibet, and Japan have in the past, as in the very recent present, identified themselves as Mahayana Buddhists, even if the polemical or value claim embedded in that term was only dimly felt, if at all., Macmillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page 492
^ Penguin Handbook, pages 378f
^ Penguin Handbook
^ Harvey, pages 153ff
^ Penguin Handbook
^ Penguin, Harvey
^ R & J, P & K
^ Penguin, Harvey
^ Harvey, pages 153ff
^ Skilling, Mahasutras, volume II, Parts I & II, 1997, Pali Text Society, Lancaster, page 78
^ Indian Insights, loc. cit.
^ Encyclopedia of Religion, volume 2, Macmillan, New York, 1987, pages 440f; Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, sv Buddhism
^ Harvey
^ Lopez, Buddhism in Practice, Princeton University Press, 1995, page 6
Coleman, Graham, ed. (1993). A Handbook of Tibetan Culture. Boston: Shambhala Publications, Inc.. ISBN 1-57062-002-4.
Warder, A.K. (1970). Indian Buddhism. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

[edit] External links
Mahayana vs. Theravada: a Multiform Comparison
The Sects of the Buddhists by T.W. Rhys Davids, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1891. pp.409-422
Sects & Sectarianism - The origins of Buddhist Schools
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism"
Categories: All pages needing cleanup All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements since June 2007 Branches of Buddhism

This page was last modified 12:01, 8 December 2007.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.

Koyasan

2007-12-10T12:16:00.000-08:00

This is an excellent video.

More from Shingon Morning Service

2007-12-10T12:03:00.000-08:00

Here for more videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8YTPLuEQRE&feature=related

Shingon Morning Service

2007-12-10T11:58:00.000-08:00

Kalama Sutta

2007-12-09T06:04:00.000-08:00

Kalama Sutta
The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry
Translated from the Pali by
Soma Thera

Source: The Wheel Publication No. 8 (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1987). Transcribed from the print edition in 1994 under the auspices of the DharmaNet Dharma Book Transcription Project, with the kind permission of the Buddhist Publication Society.
Copyright © 1987 Buddhist Publication Society
Access to Insight edition © 1994
For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such.

Contents
Preface
Supplementary Texts
The Instruction to the Kalamas

Preface

The instruction of the Kalamas (Kalama Sutta) is justly famous for its encouragement of free inquiry; the spirit of the sutta signifies a teaching that is exempt from fanaticism, bigotry, dogmatism, and intolerance.
The reasonableness of the Dhamma, the Buddha's teaching, is chiefly evident in its welcoming careful examination at all stages of the path to enlightenment. Indeed the whole course of training for wisdom culminating in the purity of the consummate one (the arahant) is intimately bound up with examination and analysis of things internal: the eye and visible objects, the ear and sounds, the nose and smells, the tongue and tastes, the body and tactile impressions, the mind and ideas.
Thus since all phenomena have to be correctly understood in the field of Dhamma, insight is operative throughout. In this sutta it is active in rejecting the bad and adopting the good way; in the extracts given below in clarifying the basis of knowledge of conditionality and arhatship. Here it may be mentioned that the methods of examination in the Kalama Sutta and in the extracts cited here, have sprung from the knowledge of things as they are and that the tenor of these methods are implied in all straight thinking. Further, as penetration and comprehension, the constituents of wisdom are the result of such thinking, the place of critical examination and analysis in the development of right vision is obvious. Where is the wisdom or vision that can descend, all of a sudden, untouched and uninfluenced by a critical thought?
The Kalama Sutta, which sets forth the principles that should be followed by a seeker of truth, and which contains a standard things are judged by, belongs to a framework of the Dhamma; the four solaces taught in the sutta point out the extent to which the Buddha permits suspense of judgment in matters beyond normal cognition. The solaces show that the reason for a virtuous life does not necessarily depend on belief in rebirth or retribution, but on mental well-being acquired through the overcoming of greed, hate, and delusion.
More than fifty years ago, Moncure D. Conway, the author of "My Pilgrimage to the Wise Men of the East," visited Colombo. He was a friend of Ponnambalam Ramanathan (then Solicitor General of Ceylon), and together with him Conway went to the Vidyodaya Pirivena to learn something of the Buddha's teaching from Hikkaduve Siri Sumangala Nayaka Thera, the founder of the institution. The Nayaka Thera explained to them the principles contained in the Kalama Sutta and at the end of the conversation Ramanathan whispered to Conway: "Is it not strange that you and I, who come from far different religions and regions, should together listen to a sermon from the Buddha in favor of that free thought, that independence of traditional and fashionable doctrines, which is still the vital principle of human development?" — Conway: "Yes, and we with the (Kalama) princes pronounce his doctrines good."
Supplementary Texts
"Friend Savittha, apart from faith, apart from liking, apart from what has been acquired by repeated hearing, apart from specious reasoning, and from a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over, I know this, I see this: 'Decay and death are due to birth.'"
Samyuttanikaya, Nidanavagga, Mahavagga, Sutta No. 8
"Here a bhikkhu, having seen an object with the eye, knows when greed, hate, and delusion are within, 'Greed, hate, and delusion are in me'; he knows when greed, hate, and delusion are not within, 'Greed, hate, and delusion are not in me.' Bhikkhus, have these things to be experienced through faith, liking, what has been acquired by repeated hearing, specious reasoning, or a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over?" — "No, venerable sir." — "Bhikkhus, this even is the way by which a bhikkhu, apart from faith, liking, what has been acquired by repeated hearing, specious reasoning, or a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over, declares realization of knowledge thus: I know that birth has been exhausted, the celibate life has been lived, what must be done has been done and there is no more of this to come."

Samyuttanikaya, Salyatanavagga, Navapuranavagga, Sutta No. 8
The Instruction to the Kalamas
Anguttara Nikaya, Tika Nipata, Mahavagga, Sutta No. 65

The Kalamas of Kesaputta go to see the Buddha

1. I heard thus. Once the Blessed One, while wandering in the Kosala country with a large community of bhikkhus, entered a town of the Kalama people called Kesaputta. The Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta: "Reverend Gotama, the monk, the son of the Sakyans, has, while wandering in the Kosala country, entered Kesaputta. The good repute of the Reverend Gotama has been spread in this way: Indeed, the Blessed One is thus consummate, fully enlightened, endowed with knowledge and practice, sublime, knower of the worlds, peerless, guide of tamable men, teacher of divine and human beings, which he by himself has through direct knowledge understood clearly. He set forth the Dhamma, good in the beginning, good in the middle, good in the end, possessed of meaning and the letter, and complete in everything; and he proclaims the holy life that is perfectly pure. Seeing such consummate ones is good indeed."
2. Then the Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta went to where the Blessed One was. On arriving there some paid homage to him and sat down on one side; some exchanged greetings with him and after the ending of cordial memorable talk, sat down on one side; some saluted him raising their joined palms and sat down on one side; some announced their name and family and sat down on one side; some without speaking, sat down on one side.
The Kalamas of Kesaputta ask for guidance from the Buddha
3. The Kalamas who were inhabitants of Kesaputta sitting on one side said to the Blessed One: "There are some monks and brahmans, venerable sir, who visit Kesaputta. They expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Some other monks and brahmans too, venerable sir, come to Kesaputta. They also expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Venerable sir, there is doubt, there is uncertainty in us concerning them. Which of these reverend monks and brahmans spoke the truth and which falsehood?"
The criterion for rejection
4. "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
Greed, hate, and delusion
5. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to greed, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by greed, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
6. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to hate, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by hate, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
7. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his harm, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being given to delusion, and being overwhelmed and vanquished mentally by delusion, this man takes life, steals, commits adultery, and tells lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his harm and ill?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
8. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Bad, venerable sir" — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Censured, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to harm and ill, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill. Thus it strikes us here."
9. "Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill," abandon them.'
The criterion for acceptance
10. "Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them.
Absence of greed, hate, and delusion
11. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of greed appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to greed, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by greed, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" — "Yes, venerable sir."
12. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of hate appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to hate, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by hate, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" _ "Yes, venerable sir."
13. "What do you think, Kalamas? Does absence of delusion appear in a man for his benefit or harm?" — "For his benefit, venerable sir." — "Kalamas, being not given to delusion, and being not overwhelmed and not vanquished mentally by delusion, this man does not take life, does not steal, does not commit adultery, and does not tell lies; he prompts another too, to do likewise. Will that be long for his benefit and happiness?" _ "Yes, venerable sir."
14. "What do you think, Kalamas? Are these things good or bad?" — "Good, venerable sir." — "Blamable or not blamable?" — "Not blamable, venerable sir." — "Censured or praised by the wise?" — "Praised, venerable sir." — "Undertaken and observed, do these things lead to benefit and happiness, or not? Or how does it strike you?" — "Undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness. Thus it strikes us here."
15. "Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

The Four Exalted Dwellings

16. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who in this way is devoid of coveting, devoid of ill will, undeluded, clearly comprehending and mindful, dwells, having pervaded, with the thought of amity, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of amity that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of compassion, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of compassion that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of gladness, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of gladness that is free of hate or malice.
"He lives, having pervaded, with the thought of equanimity, one quarter; likewise the second; likewise the third; likewise the fourth; so above, below, and across; he dwells, having pervaded because of the existence in it of all living beings, everywhere, the entire world, with the great, exalted, boundless thought of equanimity that is free of hate or malice.

The Four Solaces

17. "The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom four solaces are found here and now.
"'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him.
"'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him.
"The disciple of the Noble Ones, Kalamas, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found."
"So it is, Blessed One. So it is, Sublime one. The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, four solaces are found.
"'Suppose there is a hereafter and there is a fruit, result, of deeds done well or ill. Then it is possible that at the dissolution of the body after death, I shall arise in the heavenly world, which is possessed of the state of bliss.' This is the first solace found by him.
"'Suppose there is no hereafter and there is no fruit, no result, of deeds done well or ill. Yet in this world, here and now, free from hatred, free from malice, safe and sound, and happy, I keep myself.' This is the second solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) befall an evil-doer. I, however, think of doing evil to no one. Then, how can ill (results) affect me who do no evil deed?' This is the third solace found by him.
"'Suppose evil (results) do not befall an evil-doer. Then I see myself purified in any case.' This is the fourth solace found by him.
"The disciple of the Noble Ones, venerable sir, who has such a hate-free mind, such a malice-free mind, such an undefiled mind, and such a purified mind, is one by whom, here and now, these four solaces are found.
"Marvelous, venerable sir! Marvelous, venerable sir! As if, venerable sir, a person were to turn face upwards what is upside down, or to uncover the concealed, or to point the way to one who is lost or to carry a lamp in the darkness, thinking, 'Those who have eyes will see visible objects,' so has the Dhamma been set forth in many ways by the Blessed One. We, venerable sir, go to the Blessed One for refuge, to the Dhamma for refuge, and to the Community of Bhikkhus for refuge. Venerable sir, may the Blessed One regard us as lay followers who have gone for refuge for life, from today."

The Buddhist Publication Society is an approved charity dedicated to making known the Teaching of the Buddha, which has a vital message for people of all creeds.
Founded in 1958, the BPS has published a wide variety of books and booklets covering a great range of topics. Its publications include accurate annotated translations of the Buddha's discourses, standard reference works, as well as original contemporary expositions of Buddhist thought and practice. These works present Buddhism as it truly is — a dynamic force which has influenced receptive minds for the past 2500 years and is still as relevant today as it was when it first arose.
BUDDHIST PUBLICATION SOCIETY
P.O. Box 6154,
Sangharaja MawathaKandy
Sri Lanka» http://www.bps.lk -->

The Apology of Socrates by Plato

2007-12-08T15:06:00.000-08:00

Plato
APOLOGY
translated by Benjamin Jowett

{Socrates’ Defense}
How you have felt, O men of Athens, at hearing the speeches of my accusers, I cannot tell ; but I know that their persuasive words almost made me forget who I was — such was the effect of them ; and yet they have hardly spoken a word of truth. But many as their falsehoods were, there was one of them which quite amazed me ; — I mean when they told you to be upon your guard, and not to let yourselves be deceived by the force of my eloquence. They ought to have been ashamed of saying this, because they were sure to be detected as soon as I opened my lips and displayed my deficiency ; they certainly did appear to be most shameless in saying this, unless by the force of eloquence they mean the force of truth ; for then I do indeed admit that I am eloquent. But in how different a way from theirs ! Well, as I was saying, they have hardly uttered a word, or not more than a word, of truth ; but you shall hear from me the whole truth : not, however, delivered after their manner, in a set oration duly ornamented with words and phrases. No indeed ! but I shall use the words and arguments which occur to me at the moment ; for I am certain that this is right, and that at my time of life I ought not to be appearing before you, O men of Athens, in the character of a juvenile orator — let no one expect this of me. And I must beg of you to grant me one favor, which is this — If you hear me using the same words in my defence which I have been in the habit of using, and which most of you may have heard in the agora, and at the tables of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you not to be surprised at this, and not to interrupt me. For I am more than seventy years of age, and this is the first time that I have ever appeared in a court of law, and I am quite a stranger to the ways of the place ; and therefore I would have you regard me as if I were really a stranger, whom you would excuse if he spoke in his native tongue, and after the fashion of his country ; — that I think is not an unfair request. Never mind the manner, which may or may not be good ; but think only of the justice of my cause, and give heed to that : let the judge decide justly and the speaker speak truly.
And first, I have to reply to the older charges and to my first accusers, and then I will go to the later ones. For I have had many accusers, who accused me of old, and their false charges have continued during many years ; and I am more afraid of them than of Anytus and his associates, who are dangerous, too, in their own way. But far more dangerous are these, who began when you were children, and took possession of your minds with their falsehoods, telling of one Socrates, a wise man, who speculated about the heaven above, and searched into the earth beneath, and made the worse appear the better cause. These are the accusers whom I dread ; for they are the circulators of this rumor, and their hearers are too apt to fancy that speculators of this sort do not believe in the gods. And they are many, and their charges against me are of ancient date, and they made them in days when you were impressible — in childhood, or perhaps in youth — and the cause when heard went by default, for there was none to answer. And, hardest of all, their names I do not know and cannot tell ; unless in the chance of a comic poet. But the main body of these slanderers who from envy and malice have wrought upon you — and there are some of them who are convinced themselves, and impart their convictions to others — all these, I say, are most difficult to deal with ; for I cannot have them up here, and examine them, and therefore I must simply fight with shadows in my own defence, and examine when there is no one who answers. I will ask you then to assume with me, as I was saying, that my opponents are of two kinds — one recent, the other ancient ; and I hope that you will see the propriety of my answering the latter first, for these accusations you heard long before the others, and much oftener.
Well, then, I will make my defence, and I will endeavor in the short time which is allowed to do away with this evil opinion of me which you have held for such a long time ; and I hope I may succeed, if this be well for you and me, and that my words may find favor with you. But I know that to accomplish this is not easy — I quite see the nature of the task. Let the event be as God wills : in obedience to the law I make my defence.
I will begin at the beginning, and ask what the accusation is which has given rise to this slander of me, and which has encouraged Meletus to proceed against me. What do the slanderers say ? They shall be my prosecutors, and I will sum up their words in an affidavit. “Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause ; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others.” That is the nature of the accusation, and that is what you have seen yourselves in the comedy of Aristophanes ; who has introduced a man whom he calls Socrates, going about and saying that he can walk in the air, and talking a deal of nonsense concerning matters of which I do not pretend to know either much or little — not that I mean to say anything disparaging of anyone who is a student of natural philosophy. I should be very sorry if Meletus could lay that to my charge. But the simple truth is, O Athenians, that I have nothing to do with these studies. Very many of those here present are witnesses to the truth of this, and to them I appeal. Speak then, you who have heard me, and tell your neighbors whether any of you have ever known me hold forth in few words or in many upon matters of this sort. (...) You hear their answer. And from what they say of this you will be able to judge of the truth of the rest.
As little foundation is there for the report that I am a teacher, and take money ; that is no more true than the other. Although, if a man is able to teach, I honor him for being paid. There is Gorgias of Leontium, and Prodicus of Ceos, and Hippias of Elis, who go the round of the cities, and are able to persuade the young men to leave their own citizens, by whom they might be taught for nothing, and come to them, whom they not only pay, but are thankful if they may be allowed to pay them. There is actually a Parian philosopher residing in Athens, of whom I have heard ; and I came to hear of him in this way : — I met a man who has spent a world of money on the Sophists, Callias the son of Hipponicus, and knowing that he had sons, I asked him : “Callias,” I said, “if your two sons were foals or calves, there would be no difficulty in finding someone to put over them ; we should hire a trainer of horses or a farmer probably who would improve and perfect them in their own proper virtue and excellence ; but as they are human beings, whom are you thinking of placing over them ? Is there anyone who understands human and political virtue ? You must have thought about this as you have sons ; is there anyone ?” “There is,” he said. “Who is he ?” said I, “and of what country ? and what does he charge ?” “Evenus the Parian,” he replied ; “he is the man, and his charge is five minae.” Happy is Evenus, I said to myself, if he really has this wisdom, and teaches at such a modest charge. Had I the same, I should have been very proud and conceited ; but the truth is that I have no knowledge of the kind.
I dare say, Athenians, that someone among you will reply, “Why is this, Socrates, and what is the origin of these accusations of you : for there must have been something strange which you have been doing ? All this great fame and talk about you would never have arisen if you had been like other men : tell us, then, why this is, as we should be sorry to judge hastily of you.” Now I regard this as a fair challenge, and I will endeavor to explain to you the origin of this name of “wise,” and of this evil fame. Please to attend then. And although some of you may think I am joking, I declare that I will tell you the entire truth. Men of Athens, this reputation of mine has come of a certain sort of wisdom which I possess. If you ask me what kind of wisdom, I reply, such wisdom as is attainable by man, for to that extent I am inclined to believe that I am wise ; whereas the persons of whom I was speaking have a superhuman wisdom, which I may fail to describe, because I have it not myself ; and he who says that I have, speaks falsely, and is taking away my character. And here, O men of Athens, I must beg you not to interrupt me, even if I seem to say something extravagant. For the word which I will speak is not mine. I will refer you to a witness who is worthy of credit, and will tell you about my wisdom — whether I have any, and of what sort — and that witness shall be the god of Delphi. You must have known Chaerephon ; he was early a friend of mine, and also a friend of yours, for he shared in the exile of the people, and returned with you. Well, Chaerephon, as you know, was very impetuous in all his doings, and he went to Delphi and boldly asked the oracle to tell him whether — as I was saying, I must beg you not to interrupt — he asked the oracle to tell him whether there was anyone wiser than I was, and the Pythian prophetess answered that there was no man wiser. Chaerephon is dead himself, but his brother, who is in court, will confirm the truth of this story.
Why do I mention this ? Because I am going to explain to you why I have such an evil name. When I heard the answer, I said to myself, What can the god mean ? and what is the interpretation of this riddle ? for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great. What can he mean when he says that I am the wisest of men ? And yet he is a god and cannot lie ; that would be against his nature. After a long consideration, I at last thought of a method of trying the question. I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a refutation in my hand. I should say to him, “Here is a man who is wiser than I am ; but you said that I was the wisest.” Accordingly I went to one who had the reputation of wisdom, and observed to him — his name I need not mention ; he was a politician whom I selected for examination — and the result was as follows : When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and wiser still by himself ; and I went and tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise ; and the consequence was that he hated me, and his enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me. So I left him, saying to myself, as I went away : Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is — for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows. I neither know nor think that I know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the advantage of him. Then I went to another, who had still higher philosophical pretensions, and my conclusion was exactly the same. I made another enemy of him, and of many others besides him.
After this I went to one man after another, being not unconscious of the enmity which I provoked, and I lamented and feared this : but necessity was laid upon me — the word of God, I thought, ought to be considered first. And I said to myself, Go I must to all who appear to know, and find out the meaning of the oracle. And I swear to you, Athenians, by the dog I swear ! — for I must tell you the truth — the result of my mission was just this : I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish ; and that some inferior men were really wiser and better. I will tell you the tale of my wanderings and of the “Herculean” labors, as I may call them, which I endured only to find at last the oracle irrefutable. When I left the politicians, I went to the poets ; tragic, dithyrambic, and all sorts. And there, I said to myself, you will be detected ; now you will find out that you are more ignorant than they are. Accordingly, I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings, and asked what was the meaning of them — thinking that they would teach me something. Will you believe me ? I am almost ashamed to speak of this, but still I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves. That showed me in an instant that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration ; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them. And the poets appeared to me to be much in the same case ; and I further observed that upon the strength of their poetry they believed themselves to be the wisest of men in other things in which they were not wise. So I departed, conceiving myself to be superior to them for the same reason that I was superior to the politicians.
At last I went to the artisans, for I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things ; and in this I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets ; because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom — therefore I asked myself on behalf of the oracle, whether I would like to be as I was, neither having their knowledge nor their ignorance, or like them in both ; and I made answer to myself and the oracle that I was better off as I was.
This investigation has led to my having many enemies of the worst and most dangerous kind, and has given occasion also to many calumnies, and I am called wise, for my hearers always imagine that I myself possess the wisdom which I find wanting in others : but the truth is, O men of Athens, that God only is wise ; and in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing ; he is not speaking of Socrates, he is only using my name as an illustration, as if he said, He, O men, is the wisest, who, like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing. And so I go my way, obedient to the god, and make inquisition into the wisdom of anyone, whether citizen or stranger, who appears to be wise ; and if he is not wise, then in vindication of the oracle I show him that he is not wise ; and this occupation quite absorbs me, and I have no time to give either to any public matter of interest or to any concern of my own, but I am in utter poverty by reason of my devotion to the god.
There is another thing : — young men of the richer classes, who have not much to do, come about me of their own accord ; they like to hear the pretenders examined, and they often imitate me, and examine others themselves ; there are plenty of persons, as they soon enough discover, who think that they know something, but really know little or nothing : and then those who are examined by them instead of being angry with themselves are angry with me : This confounded Socrates, they say ; this villainous misleader of youth ! — and then if somebody asks them, Why, what evil does he practise or teach ? they do not know, and cannot tell ; but in order that they may not appear to be at a loss, they repeat the ready-made charges which are used against all philosophers about teaching things up in the clouds and under the earth, and having no gods, and making the worse appear the better cause ; for they do not like to confess that their pretence of knowledge has been detected — which is the truth : and as they are numerous and ambitious and energetic, and are all in battle array and have persuasive tongues, they have filled your ears with their loud and inveterate calumnies. And this is the reason why my three accusers, Meletus and Anytus and Lycon, have set upon me ; Meletus, who has a quarrel with me on behalf of the poets ; Anytus, on behalf of the craftsmen ; Lycon, on behalf of the rhetoricians : and as I said at the beginning, I cannot expect to get rid of this mass of calumny all in a moment. And this, O men of Athens, is the truth and the whole truth ; I have concealed nothing, I have dissembled nothing. And yet I know that this plainness of speech makes them hate me, and what is their hatred but a proof that I am speaking the truth ? — this is the occasion and reason of their slander of me, as you will find out either in this or in any future inquiry.
I have said enough in my defence against the first class of my accusers ; I turn to the second class, who are headed by Meletus, that good and patriotic man, as he calls himself. And now I will try to defend myself against them : these new accusers must also have their affidavit read. What do they say ? Something of this sort : — That Socrates is a doer of evil, and corrupter of the youth, and he does not believe in the gods of the state, and has other new divinities of his own. That is the sort of charge ; and now let us examine the particular counts. He says that I am a doer of evil, who corrupt the youth ; but I say, O men of Athens, that Meletus is a doer of evil, and the evil is that he makes a joke of a serious matter, and is too ready at bringing other men to trial from a pretended zeal and interest about matters in which he really never had the smallest interest. And the truth of this I will endeavor to prove.
Come hither, Meletus, and let me ask a question of you. You think a great deal about the improvement of youth ?
Yes, I do.
Tell the judges, then, who is their improver ; for you must know, as you have taken the pains to discover their corrupter, and are citing and accusing me before them. Speak, then, and tell the judges who their improver is. Observe, Meletus, that you are silent, and have nothing to say. But is not this rather disgraceful, and a very considerable proof of what I was saying, that you have no interest in the matter ? Speak up, friend, and tell us who their improver is.
The laws.
But that, my good sir, is not my meaning. I want to know who the person is, who, in the first place, knows the laws.
The judges, Socrates, who are present in court.
What do you mean to say, Meletus, that they are able to instruct and improve youth ?
Certainly they are.
What, all of them, or some only and not others ?
All of them.
By the goddess Here, that is good news ! There are plenty of improvers, then. And what do you say of the audience, — do they improve them ?
Yes, they do.
And the senators ?
Yes, the senators improve them.
But perhaps the members of the citizen assembly corrupt them ? — or do they too improve them ?
They improve them.
Then every Athenian improves and elevates them ; all with the exception of myself ; and I alone am their corrupter ? Is that what you affirm ?
That is what I stoutly affirm.
I am very unfortunate if that is true. But suppose I ask you a question : Would you say that this also holds true in the case of horses ? Does one man do them harm and all the world good ? Is not the exact opposite of this true ? One man is able to do them good, or at least not many ; — the trainer of horses, that is to say, does them good, and others who have to do with them rather injure them ? Is not that true, Meletus, of horses, or any other animals ? Yes, certainly. Whether you and Anytus say yes or no, that is no matter. Happy indeed would be the condition of youth if they had one corrupter only, and all the rest of the world were their improvers. And you, Meletus, have sufficiently shown that you never had a thought about the young : your carelessness is seen in your not caring about matters spoken of in this very indictment.
And now, Meletus, I must ask you another question : Which is better, to live among bad citizens, or among good ones ? Answer, friend, I say ; for that is a question which may be easily answered. Do not the good do their neighbors good, and the bad do them evil ?
Certainly.
And is there anyone who would rather be injured than benefited by those who live with him ? Answer, my good friend ; the law requires you to answer — does anyone like to be injured ?
Certainly not.
And when you accuse me of corrupting and deteriorating the youth, do you allege that I corrupt them intentionally or unintentionally ?
Intentionally, I say.
But you have just admitted that the good do their neighbors good, and the evil do them evil. Now is that a truth which your superior wisdom has recognized thus early in life, and am I, at my age, in such darkness and ignorance as not to know that if a man with whom I have to live is corrupted by me, I am very likely to be harmed by him, and yet I corrupt him, and intentionally, too ; — that is what you are saying, and of that you will never persuade me or any other human being. But either I do not corrupt them, or I corrupt them unintentionally, so that on either view of the case you lie. If my offence is unintentional, the law has no cognizance of unintentional offences : you ought to have taken me privately, and warned and admonished me ; for if I had been better advised, I should have left off doing what I only did unintentionally — no doubt I should ; whereas you hated to converse with me or teach me, but you indicted me in this court, which is a place not of instruction, but of punishment.
I have shown, Athenians, as I was saying, that Meletus has no care at all, great or small, about the matter. But still I should like to know, Meletus, in what I am affirmed to corrupt the young. I suppose you mean, as I infer from your indictment, that I teach them not to acknowledge the gods which the state acknowledges, but some other new divinities or spiritual agencies in their stead. These are the lessons which corrupt the youth, as you say.
Yes, that I say emphatically.
Then, by the gods, Meletus, of whom we are speaking, tell me and the court, in somewhat plainer terms, what you mean ! for I do not as yet understand whether you affirm that I teach others to acknowledge some gods, and therefore do believe in gods and am not an entire atheist — this you do not lay to my charge ; but only that they are not the same gods which the city recognizes — the charge is that they are different gods. Or, do you mean to say that I am an atheist simply, and a teacher of atheism ?
I mean the latter — that you are a complete atheist.
That is an extraordinary statement, Meletus. Why do you say that ? Do you mean that I do not believe in the godhead of the sun or moon, which is the common creed of all men ?
I assure you, judges, that he does not believe in them ; for he says that the sun is stone, and the moon earth.
Friend Meletus, you think that you are accusing Anaxagoras ; and you have but a bad opinion of the judges, if you fancy them ignorant to such a degree as not to know that those doctrines are found in the books of Anaxagoras the Clazomenian, who is full of them. And these are the doctrines which the youth are said to learn of Socrates, when there are not unfrequently exhibitions of them at the theatre (price of admission one drachma at the most) ; and they might cheaply purchase them, and laugh at Socrates if he pretends to father such eccentricities. And so, Meletus, you really think that I do not believe in any god ?
I swear by Zeus that you believe absolutely in none at all.
You are a liar, Meletus, not believed even by yourself. For I cannot help thinking, O men of Athens, that Meletus is reckless and impudent, and that he has written this indictment in a spirit of mere wantonness and youthful bravado. Has he not compounded a riddle, thinking to try me ? He said to himself : — I shall see whether this wise Socrates will discover my ingenious contradiction, or whether I shall be able to deceive him and the rest of them. For he certainly does appear to me to contradict himself in the indictment as much as if he said that Socrates is guilty of not believing in the gods, and yet of believing in them — but this surely is a piece of fun.
I should like you, O men of Athens, to join me in examining what I conceive to be his inconsistency ; and do you, Meletus, answer. And I must remind you that you are not to interrupt me if I speak in my accustomed manner.
Did ever man, Meletus, believe in the existence of human things, and not of human beings ? ... I wish, men of Athens, that he would answer, and not be always trying to get up an interruption. Did ever any man believe in horsemanship, and not in horses ? or in flute-playing, and not in flute-players ? No, my friend ; I will answer to you and to the court, as you refuse to answer for yourself. There is no man who ever did. But now please to answer the next question : Can a man believe in spiritual and divine agencies, and not in spirits or demigods ?
He cannot.
I am glad that I have extracted that answer, by the assistance of the court ; nevertheless you swear in the indictment that I teach and believe in divine or spiritual agencies (new or old, no matter for that) ; at any rate, I believe in spiritual agencies, as you say and swear in the affidavit ; but if I believe in divine beings, I must believe in spirits or demigods ; — is not that true ? Yes, that is true, for I may assume that your silence gives assent to that. Now what are spirits or demigods ? are they not either gods or the sons of gods ? Is that true ?
Yes, that is true.
But this is just the ingenious riddle of which I was speaking : the demigods or spirits are gods, and you say first that I don’t believe in gods, and then again that I do believe in gods ; that is, if I believe in demigods. For if the demigods are the illegitimate sons of gods, whether by the Nymphs or by any other mothers, as is thought, that, as all men will allow, necessarily implies the existence of their parents. You might as well affirm the existence of mules, and deny that of horses and asses. Such nonsense, Meletus, could only have been intended by you as a trial of me. You have put this into the indictment because you had nothing real of which to accuse me. But no one who has a particle of understanding will ever be convinced by you that the same man can believe in divine and superhuman things, and yet not believe that there are gods and demigods and heroes.
I have said enough in answer to the charge of Meletus : any elaborate defence is unnecessary ; but as I was saying before, I certainly have many enemies, and this is what will be my destruction if I am destroyed ; of that I am certain ; — not Meletus, nor yet Anytus, but the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more ; there is no danger of my being the last of them.
Someone will say : And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end ? To him I may fairly answer : There you are mistaken : a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying ; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong — acting the part of a good man or of a bad. Whereas, according to your view, the heroes who fell at Troy were not good for much, and the son of Thetis above all, who altogether despised danger in comparison with disgrace ; and when his goddess mother said to him, in his eagerness to slay Hector, that if he avenged his companion Patroclus, and slew Hector, he would die himself — “Fate,” as she said, “waits upon you next after Hector” ; he, hearing this, utterly despised danger and death, and instead of fearing them, feared rather to live in dishonor, and not to avenge his friend. “Let me die next,” he replies, “and be avenged of my enemy, rather than abide here by the beaked ships, a scorn and a burden of the earth.” Had Achilles any thought of death and danger ? For wherever a man’s place is, whether the place which he has chosen or that in which he has been placed by a commander, there he ought to remain in the hour of danger ; he should not think of death or of anything, but of disgrace. And this, O men of Athens, is a true saying.
Strange, indeed, would be my conduct, O men of Athens, if I who, when I was ordered by the generals whom you chose to command me at Potidaea and Amphipolis and Delium, remained where they placed me, like any other man, facing death ; if, I say, now, when, as I conceive and imagine, God orders me to fulfil the philosopher’s mission of searching into myself and other men, I were to desert my post through fear of death, or any other fear ; that would indeed be strange, and I might justly be arraigned in court for denying the existence of the gods, if I disobeyed the oracle because I was afraid of death : then I should be fancying that I was wise when I was not wise. For this fear of death is indeed the pretence of wisdom, and not real wisdom, being the appearance of knowing the unknown ; since no one knows whether death, which they in their fear apprehend to be the greatest evil, may not be the greatest good. Is there not here conceit of knowledge, which is a disgraceful sort of ignorance ? And this is the point in which, as I think, I am superior to men in general, and in which I might perhaps fancy myself wiser than other men, — that whereas I know but little of the world below, I do not suppose that I know : but I do know that injustice and disobedience to a better, whether God or man, is evil and dishonorable, and I will never fear or avoid a possible good rather than a certain evil. And therefore if you let me go now, and reject the counsels of Anytus, who said that if I were not put to death I ought not to have been prosecuted, and that if I escape now, your sons will all be utterly ruined by listening to my words — if you say to me, Socrates, this time we will not mind Anytus, and will let you off, but upon one condition, that are to inquire and speculate in this way any more, and that if you are caught doing this again you shall die ; — if this was the condition on which you let me go, I should reply : Men of Athens, I honor and love you ; but I shall obey God rather than you, and while I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy, exhorting anyone whom I meet after my manner, and convincing him, saying : O my friend, why do you who are a citizen of the great and mighty and wise city of Athens, care so much about laying up the greatest amount of money and honor and reputation, and so little about wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul, which you never regard or heed at all ? Are you not ashamed of this ? And if the person with whom I am arguing says : Yes, but I do care ; I do not depart or let him go at once ; I interrogate and examine and cross-examine him, and if I think that he has no virtue, but only says that he has, I reproach him with undervaluing the greater, and overvaluing the less. And this I should say to everyone whom I meet, young and old, citizen and alien, but especially to the citizens, inasmuch as they are my brethren. For this is the command of God, as I would have you know ; and I believe that to this day no greater good has ever happened in the state than my service to the God. For I do nothing but go about persuading you all, old and young alike, not to take thought for your persons and your properties, but first and chiefly to care about the greatest improvement of the soul. I tell you that virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue come money and every other good of man, public as well as private. This is my teaching, and if this is the doctrine which corrupts the youth, my influence is ruinous indeed. But if anyone says that this is not my teaching, he is speaking an untruth. Wherefore, O men of Athens, I say to you, do as Anytus bids or not as Anytus bids, and either acquit me or not ; but whatever you do, know that I shall never alter my ways, not even if I have to die many times.
Men of Athens, do not interrupt, but hear me ; there was an agreement between us that you should hear me out. And I think that what I am going to say will do you good : for I have something more to say, at which you may be inclined to cry out ; but I beg that you will not do this. I would have you know that, if you kill such a one as I am, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me. Meletus and Anytus will not injure me : they cannot ; for it is not in the nature of things that a bad man should injure a better than himself. I do not deny that he may, perhaps, kill him, or drive him into exile, or deprive him of civil rights ; and he may imagine, and others may imagine, that he is doing him a great injury : but in that I do not agree with him ; for the evil of doing as Anytus is doing — of unjustly taking away another man’s life — is greater far. And now, Athenians, I am not going to argue for my own sake, as you may think, but for yours, that you may not sin against the God, or lightly reject his boon by condemning me. For if you kill me you will not easily find another like me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by the God ; and the state is like a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has given the state and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. And as you will not easily find another like me, I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel irritated at being suddenly awakened when you are caught napping ; and you may think that if you were to strike me dead, as Anytus advises, which you easily might, then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you gives you another gadfly. And that I am given to you by God is proved by this : — that if I had been like other men, I should not have neglected all my own concerns, or patiently seen the neglect of them during all these years, and have been doing yours, coming to you individually, like a father or elder brother, exhorting you to regard virtue ; this I say, would not be like human nature. And had I gained anything, or if my exhortations had been paid, there would have been some sense in that : but now, as you will perceive, not even the impudence of my accusers dares to say that I have ever exacted or sought pay of anyone ; they have no witness of that. And I have a witness of the truth of what I say ; my poverty is a sufficient witness.
Someone may wonder why I go about in private, giving advice and busying myself with the concerns of others, but do not venture to come forward in public and advise the state. I will tell you the reason of this. You have often heard me speak of an oracle or sign which comes to me, and is the divinity which Meletus ridicules in the indictment. This sign I have had ever since I was a child. The sign is a voice which comes to me and always forbids me to do something which I am going to do, but never commands me to do anything, and this is what stands in the way of my being a politician. And rightly, as I think. For I am certain, O men of Athens, that if I had engaged in politics, I should have perished long ago and done no good either to you or to myself. And don’t be offended at my telling you the truth : for the truth is that no man who goes to war with you or any other multitude, honestly struggling against the commission of unrighteousness and wrong in the state, will save his life ; he who will really fight for the right, if he would live even for a little while, must have a private station and not a public one.
I can give you as proofs of this, not words only, but deeds, which you value more than words. Let me tell you a passage of my own life, which will prove to you that I should never have yielded to injustice from any fear of death, and that if I had not yielded I should have died at once. I will tell you a story — tasteless, perhaps, and commonplace, but nevertheless true. The only office of state which I ever held, O men of Athens, was that of senator ; the tribe Antiochis, which is my tribe, had the presidency at the trial of the generals who had not taken up the bodies of the slain after the battle of Arginusae ; and you proposed to try them all together, which was illegal, as you all thought afterwards ; but at the time I was the only one of the Prytanes who was opposed to the illegality, and I gave my vote against you ; and when the orators threatened to impeach and arrest me, and have me taken away, and you called and shouted, I made up my mind that I would run the risk, having law and justice with me, rather than take part in your injustice because I feared imprisonment and death. This happened in the days of the democracy. But when the oligarchy of the Thirty was in power, they sent for me and four others into the rotunda, and bade us bring Leon the Salaminian from Salamis, as they wanted to execute him. This was a specimen of the sort of commands which they were always giving with the view of implicating as many as possible in their crimes ; and then I showed, not in words only, but in deed, that, if I may be allowed to use such an expression, I cared not a straw for death, and that my only fear was the fear of doing an unrighteous or unholy thing. For the strong arm of that oppressive power did not frighten me into doing wrong ; and when we came out of the rotunda the other four went to Salamis and fetched Leon, but I went quietly home. For which I might have lost my life, had not the power of the Thirty shortly afterwards come to an end. And to this many will witness.
Now do you really imagine that I could have survived all these years, if I had led a public life, supposing that like a good man I had always supported the right and had made justice, as I ought, the first thing ? No, indeed, men of Athens, neither I nor any other. But I have been always the same in all my actions, public as well as private, and never have I yielded any base compliance to those who are slanderously termed my disciples or to any other. For the truth is that I have no regular disciples : but if anyone likes to come and hear me while I am pursuing my mission, whether he be young or old, he may freely come. Nor do I converse with those who pay only, and not with those who do not pay ; but anyone, whether he be rich or poor, may ask and answer me and listen to my words ; and whether he turns out to be a bad man or a good one, that cannot be justly laid to my charge, as I never taught him anything. And if anyone says that he has ever learned or heard anything from me in private which all the world has not heard, I should like you to know that he is speaking an untruth.
But I shall be asked, Why do people delight in continually conversing with you ? I have told you already, Athenians, the whole truth about this : they like to hear the cross-examination of the pretenders to wisdom ; there is amusement in this. And this is a duty which the God has imposed upon me, as I am assured by oracles, visions, and in every sort of way in which the will of divine power was ever signified to anyone. This is true, O Athenians ; or, if not true, would be soon refuted. For if I am really corrupting the youth, and have corrupted some of them already, those of them who have grown up and have become sensible that I gave them bad advice in the days of their youth should come forward as accusers and take their revenge ; and if they do not like to come themselves, some of their relatives, fathers, brothers, or other kinsmen, should say what evil their families suffered at my hands. Now is their time. Many of them I see in the court. There is Crito, who is of the same age and of the same deme with myself ; and there is Critobulus his son, whom I also see. Then again there is Lysanias of Sphettus, who is the father of Aeschines — he is present ; and also there is Antiphon of Cephisus, who is the father of Epignes ; and there are the brothers of several who have associated with me. There is Nicostratus the son of Theosdotides, and the brother of Theodotus (now Theodotus himself is dead, and therefore he, at any rate, will not seek to stop him) ; and there is Paralus the son of Demodocus, who had a brother Theages ; and Adeimantus the son of Ariston, whose brother Plato is present ; and Aeantodorus, who is the brother of Apollodorus, whom I also see. I might mention a great many others, any of whom Meletus should have produced as witnesses in the course of his speech ; and let him still produce them, if he has forgotten — I will make way for him. And let him say, if he has any testimony of the sort which he can produce. Nay, Athenians, the very opposite is the truth. For all these are ready to witness on behalf of the corrupter, of the destroyer of their kindred, as Meletus and Anytus call me ; not the corrupted youth only — there might have been a motive for that — but their uncorrupted elder relatives. Why should they too support me with their testimony ? Why, indeed, except for the sake of truth and justice, and because they know that I am speaking the truth, and that Meletus is lying.
Well, Athenians, this and the like of this is nearly all the defence which I have to offer. Yet a word more. Perhaps there may be someone who is offended at me, when he calls to mind how he himself, on a similar or even a less serious occasion, had recourse to prayers and supplications with many tears, and how he produced his children in court, which was a moving spectacle, together with a posse of his relations and friends ; whereas I, who am probably in danger of my life, will do none of these things. Perhaps this may come into his mind, and he may be set against me, and vote in anger because he is displeased at this. Now if there be such a person among you, which I am far from affirming, I may fairly reply to him : My friend, I am a man, and like other men, a creature of flesh and blood, and not of wood or stone, as Homer says ; and I have a family, yes, and sons. O Athenians, three in number, one of whom is growing up, and the two others are still young ; and yet I will not bring any of them hither in order to petition you for an acquittal. And why not ? Not from any self-will or disregard of you. Whether I am or am not afraid of death is another question, of which I will not now speak. But my reason simply is that I feel such conduct to be discreditable to myself, and you, and the whole state. One who has reached my years, and who has a name for wisdom, whether deserved or not, ought not to debase himself. At any rate, the world has decided that Socrates is in some way superior to other men. And if those among you who are said to be superior in wisdom and courage, and any other virtue, demean themselves in this way, how shameful is their conduct ! I have seen men of reputation, when they have been condemned, behaving in the strangest manner : they seemed to fancy that they were going to suffer something dreadful if they died, and that they could be immortal if you only allowed them to live ; and I think that they were a dishonor to the state, and that any stranger coming in would say of them that the most eminent men of Athens, to whom the Athenians themselves give honor and command, are no better than women. And I say that these things ought not to be done by those of us who are of reputation ; and if they are done, you ought not to permit them ; you ought rather to show that you are more inclined to condemn, not the man who is quiet, but the man who gets up a doleful scene, and makes the city ridiculous.
But, setting aside the question of dishonor, there seems to be something wrong in petitioning a judge, and thus procuring an acquittal instead of informing and convincing him. For his duty is, not to make a present of justice, but to give judgment ; and he has sworn that he will judge according to the laws, and not according to his own good pleasure ; and neither he nor we should get into the habit of perjuring ourselves — there can be no piety in that. Do not then require me to do what I consider dishonorable and impious and wrong, especially now, when I am being tried for impiety on the indictment of Meletus. For if, O men of Athens, by force of persuasion and entreaty, I could overpower your oaths, then I should be teaching you to believe that there are no gods, and convict myself, in my own defence, of not believing in them. But that is not the case ; for I do believe that there are gods, and in a far higher sense than that in which any of my accusers believe in them. And to you and to God I commit my cause, to be determined by you as is best for you and me.
[The jury finds Socrates guilty.]
{Socrates’ Proposal for his Sentence}
There are many reasons why I am not grieved, O men of Athens, at the vote of condemnation. I expected it, and am only surprised that the votes are so nearly equal ; for I had thought that the majority against me would have been far larger ; but now, had thirty votes gone over to the other side, I should have been acquitted. And I may say that I have escaped Meletus. And I may say more ; for without the assistance of Anytus and Lycon, he would not have had a fifth part of the votes, as the law requires, in which case he would have incurred a fine of a thousand drachmae, as is evident.
And so he proposes death as the penalty. And what shall I propose on my part, O men of Athens ? Clearly that which is my due. And what is that which I ought to pay or to receive ? What shall be done to the man who has never had the wit to be idle during his whole life ; but has been careless of what the many care about — wealth, and family interests, and military offices, and speaking in the assembly, and magistracies, and plots, and parties. Reflecting that I was really too honest a man to follow in this way and live, I did not go where I could do no good to you or to myself ; but where I could do the greatest good privately to everyone of you, thither I went, and sought to persuade every man among you that he must look to himself, and seek virtue and wisdom before he looks to his private interests, and look to the state before he looks to the interests of the state ; and that this should be the order which he observes in all his actions. What shall be done to such a one ? Doubtless some good thing, O men of Athens, if he has his reward ; and the good should be of a kind suitable to him. What would be a reward suitable to a poor man who is your benefactor, who desires leisure that he may instruct you ? There can be no more fitting reward than maintenance in the Prytaneum, O men of Athens, a reward which he deserves far more than the citizen who has won the prize at Olympia in the horse or chariot race, whether the chariots were drawn by two horses or by many. For I am in want, and he has enough ; and he only gives you the appearance of happiness, and I give you the reality. And if I am to estimate the penalty justly, I say that maintenance in the Prytaneum is the just return. Perhaps you may think that I am braving you in saying this, as in what I said before about the tears and prayers. But that is not the case. I speak rather because I am convinced that I never intentionally wronged anyone, although I cannot convince you of that — for we have had a short conversation only ; but if there were a law at Athens, such as there is in other cities, that a capital cause should not be decided in one day, then I believe that I should have convinced you ; but now the time is too short. I cannot in a moment refute great slanders ; and, as I am convinced that I never wronged another, I will assuredly not wrong myself. I will not say of myself that I deserve any evil, or propose any penalty. Why should I ? Because I am afraid of the penalty of death which Meletus proposes ? When I do not know whether death is a good or an evil, why should I propose a penalty which would certainly be an evil ? Shall I say imprisonment ? And why should I live in prison, and be the slave of the magistrates of the year — of the Eleven ? Or shall the penalty be a fine, and imprisonment until the fine is paid ? There is the same objection. I should have to lie in prison, for money I have none, and I cannot pay. And if I say exile (and this may possibly be the penalty which you will affix), I must indeed be blinded by the love of life if I were to consider that when you, who are my own citizens, cannot endure my discourses and words, and have found them so grievous and odious that you would fain have done with them, others are likely to endure me. No, indeed, men of Athens, that is not very likely. And what a life should I lead, at my age, wandering from city to city, living in ever-changing exile, and always being driven out ! For I am quite sure that into whatever place I go, as here so also there, the young men will come to me ; and if I drive them away, their elders will drive me out at their desire : and if I let them come, their fathers and friends will drive me out for their sakes.
Someone will say : Yes, Socrates, but cannot you hold your tongue, and then you may go into a foreign city, and no one will interfere with you ? Now I have great difficulty in making you understand my answer to this. For if I tell you that this would be a disobedience to a divine command, and therefore that I cannot hold my tongue, you will not believe that I am serious ; and if I say again that the greatest good of man is daily to converse about virtue, and all that concerning which you hear me examining myself and others, and that the life which is unexamined is not worth living — that you are still less likely to believe. And yet what I say is true, although a thing of which it is hard for me to persuade you. Moreover, I am not accustomed to think that I deserve any punishment. Had I money I might have proposed to give you what I had, and have been none the worse. But you see that I have none, and can only ask you to proportion the fine to my means. However, I think that I could afford a minae, and therefore I propose that penalty ; Plato, Crito, Critobulus, and Apollodorus, my friends here, bid me say thirty minae, and they will be the sureties. Well then, say thirty minae, let that be the penalty ; for that they will be ample security to you.
[The jury condemns Socrates to death.]
{Socrates’ Comments on his Sentence}
Not much time will be gained, O Athenians, in return for the evil name which you will get from the detractors of the city, who will say that you killed Socrates, a wise man ; for they will call me wise even although I am not wise when they want to reproach you. If you had waited a little while, your desire would have been fulfilled in the course of nature. For I am far advanced in years, as you may perceive, and not far from death. I am speaking now only to those of you who have condemned me to death. And I have another thing to say to them : You think that I was convicted through deficiency of words — I mean, that if I had thought fit to leave nothing undone, nothing unsaid, I might have gained an acquittal. Not so ; the deficiency which led to my conviction was not of words — certainly not. But I had not the boldness or impudence or inclination to address you as you would have liked me to address you, weeping and wailing and lamenting, and saying and doing many things which you have been accustomed to hear from others, and which, as I say, are unworthy of me. But I thought that I ought not to do anything common or mean in the hour of danger : nor do I now repent of the manner of my defence, and I would rather die having spoken after my manner, than speak in your manner and live. For neither in war nor yet at law ought any man to use every way of escaping death. For often in battle there is no doubt that if a man will throw away his arms, and fall on his knees before his pursuers, he may escape death ; and in other dangers there are other ways of escaping death, if a man is willing to say and do anything. The difficulty, my friends, is not in avoiding death, but in avoiding unrighteousness ; for that runs faster than death. I am old and move slowly, and the slower runner has overtaken me, and my accusers are keen and quick, and the faster runner, who is unrighteousness, has overtaken them. And now I depart hence condemned by you to suffer the penalty of death, and they, too, go their ways condemned by the truth to suffer the penalty of villainy and wrong ; and I must abide by my award — let them abide by theirs. I suppose that these things may be regarded as fated, — and I think that they are well.
And now, O men who have condemned me, I would fain prophesy to you ; for I am about to die, and that is the hour in which men are gifted with prophetic power. And I prophesy to you who are my murderers, that immediately after my death punishment far heavier than you have inflicted on me will surely await you. Me you have killed because you wanted to escape the accuser, and not to give an account of your lives. But that will not be as you suppose : far otherwise. For I say that there will be more accusers of you than there are now ; accusers whom hitherto I have restrained : and as they are younger they will be more severe with you, and you will be more offended at them. For if you think that by killing men you can avoid the accuser censuring your lives, you are mistaken ; that is not a way of escape which is either possible or honorable ; the easiest and noblest way is not to be crushing others, but to be improving yourselves. This is the prophecy which I utter before my departure, to the judges who have condemned me.
Friends, who would have acquitted me, I would like also to talk with you about this thing which has happened, while the magistrates are busy, and before I go to the place at which I must die. Stay then awhile, for we may as well talk with one another while there is time. You are my friends, and I should like to show you the meaning of this event which has happened to me. O my judges — for you I may truly call judges — I should like to tell you of a wonderful circumstance. Hitherto the familiar oracle within me has constantly been in the habit of opposing me even about trifles, if I was going to make a slip or error about anything ; and now as you see there has come upon me that which may be thought, and is generally believed to be, the last and worst evil. But the oracle made no sign of opposition, either as I was leaving my house and going out in the morning, or when I was going up into this court, or while I was speaking, at anything which I was going to say ; and yet I have often been stopped in the middle of a speech ; but now in nothing I either said or did touching this matter has the oracle opposed me. What do I take to be the explanation of this ? I will tell you. I regard this as a proof that what has happened to me is a good, and that those of us who think that death is an evil are in error. This is a great proof to me of what I am saying, for the customary sign would surely have opposed me had I been going to evil and not to good.
Let us reflect in another way, and we shall see that there is great reason to hope that death is a good, for one of two things : — either death is a state of nothingness and utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a change and migration of the soul from this world to another. Now if you suppose that there is no consciousness, but a sleep like the sleep of him who is undisturbed even by the sight of dreams, death will be an unspeakable gain. For if a person were to select the night in which his sleep was undisturbed even by dreams, and were to compare with this the other days and nights of his life, and then were to tell us how many days and nights he had passed in the course of his life better and more pleasantly than this one, I think that any man, I will not say a private man, but even the great king, will not find many such days or nights, when compared with the others. Now if death is like this, I say that to die is gain ; for eternity is then only a single night. But if death is the journey to another place, and there, as men say, all the dead are, what good, O my friends and judges, can be greater than this ? If indeed when the pilgrim arrives in the world below, he is delivered from the professors of justice in this world, and finds the true judges who are said to give judgment there, Minos and Rhadamanthus and Aeacus and Triptolemus, and other sons of God who were righteous in their own life, that pilgrimage will be worth making. What would not a man give if he might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus and Hesiod and Homer ? Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again. I, too, shall have a wonderful interest in a place where I can converse with Palamedes, and Ajax the son of Telamon, and other heroes of old, who have suffered death through an unjust judgment ; and there will be no small pleasure, as I think, in comparing my own sufferings with theirs. Above all, I shall be able to continue my search into true and false knowledge ; as in this world, so also in that ; I shall find out who is wise, and who pretends to be wise, and is not. What would not a man give, O judges, to be able to examine the leader of the great Trojan expedition ; or Odysseus or Sisyphus, or numberless others, men and women too ! What infinite delight would there be in conversing with them and asking them questions ! For in that world they do not put a man to death for this ; certainly not. For besides being happier in that world than in this, they will be immortal, if what is said is true.
Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know this of a truth — that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death. He and his are not neglected by the gods ; nor has my own approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that to die and be released was better for me ; and therefore the oracle gave no sign. For which reason also, I am not angry with my accusers, or my condemners ; they have done me no harm, although neither of them meant to do me any good ; and for this I may gently blame them.
Still I have a favor to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I would ask you, O my friends, to punish them ; and I would have you trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about riches, or anything, more than about virtue ; or if they pretend to be something when they are really nothing, — then reprove them, as I have reproved you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care, and thinking that they are something when they are really nothing. And if you do this, I and my sons will have received justice at your hands.
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways — I to die, and you to live. Which is better God only knows.

Shingon-shu Buddhism Services

2007-12-08T14:34:00.000-08:00

Shingon Buddhism Services
A listing of the different prayers and mantras
Veneration

Bodhicitta - Awakening mind

Samaya

Prelude

Sutra Recitation "Hannya Shin Gyo"

The Heart Sutra of Perfect Wisdom

Lotus Sutra Chapter XXV

Golden Chain

Aspiration
Veneration
Om sarva-tathagata-pada-vandanam karomi. (Skt.)
(Three times)
(Om I bow down at the feet of all the Tathagatas.)Back to services list
Repentance
LEADER: All my past deeds
GROUP: originating from greed, hatred, and ignorance are products of my own physical, verbal and mental misdeeds. I repent all wrongdoings committed by my body, mouth and mind. Back to services list
Three Jewels
LEADER: We put our faith in Buddha.
GROUP: May we all together realize Buddhahood to attain awakening.
LEADER: We put our faith in Dharma.
GROUP: May we all together dwell in Buddhas Teachings and attain the infinite wisdom.
LEADER: We put our faith in Sangha.
GROUP: May we all together be of One in accord and harmony and live the life of Universal Brotherhood. Back to services list
Three Refuges
LEADER: I take refuge in the Three Jewels.
GROUP:
Buddham saranam gacchami. (I take refuge in the Buddha.)
Dharmam saranam gacchami. (I take refuge in the Dharma.)
Sangham saranam gacchami. (I take refuge in the Sangha.)
(Repeat the Sanskrit statements three times.) Back to services list
Ten Precepts
LEADER: From this day forward
GROUP: I will do my best to observe Ten Precepts.
1. I will not harm life.2. I will not steal.3. I will not commit adultery.4. I will not tell a lie.5. I will not exaggerate.6. I will not speak abusively.7. I will not equivocate.8. I will not be greedy.9. I will not be hateful.10. I will not lose sight of the Truth. Back to services list
Bodhicitta
LEADER: In pure faith
GROUP:
I awaken the mind of Enlightenment. I aspire, together with others, to cross over the sea of birth and death, and quickly reach the shore of liberation.
On boji shitta boda hadayami. (Jpn.)
Om bodhi-cittam utpadayami. (Skt.)
(Om I aspire to evolve the Awakened mind.)
Back to services list
Bodhicitta - Awakening mind Samaya
LEADER: I, a child of the Mahavairocana Buddha,
GROUP:
will abide in the Buddhas great compassion and wisdom. As the embodiment of the Buddhas Wisdom, I will make a wholehearted effort to help others.
On sanmaya satoban. (Jpn.)
Om samaya sattvam. (Om I am united in the vow.) (Skt.)
Om samayas tvam. (Om you are united in the vow.)
Back to services list
Prelude
LEADER: The unsurpassed, profoundest, and most exquisite Truth is
GROUP: difficult to encounter, even in one billion kalpas.* Now we are about to see, listen to, and hold the sutra containing the Truth. May we understand the true meaning of the Buddha's message.
LEADER: Hannya Shin Gyo, the Heart Sutra is
GROUP: the essence of Buddhism and Esoteric Buddhism in particular. If I uphold, recite and expound this sutra and offer it to others, I can be freed from suffering and can attain Buddhahood. If I practice the teaching given herein and contemplate its meaning, I can find the Path to Awakening. This sutra is the lamp of the world that sheds light upon darkness. It is the raft that carries all sentient beings safely across the sea of birth and death. May I enter deeply into the meaning of the sutra and recite it earnestly.
Footnote: *Kalpa - A fabulous unit of time. For example, the time required for a celestial woman to wear away a ten cubic mile stone if she touched it with her garments once every hundred years. Back to services list
Sutra Recitation
Hannya Shin Gyo
LEADER: Bussetsu Maka Hannya Haramita Shin Gyo
GROUP: Kanjizai bosa, gyo jin-hannya-haramita ji, shoken goun kai ku, do issai kuyaku. Sharishi, shiki fu i ku, ku fu i shiki, shiki soku ze ku, ku soku ze shiki, ju-so-gyo-shiki yakubu nyoze. Sharishi, ze shoho kuso fusho fumetsu, fuku fujo, fuzo fugen. Zeko ku chu mu shiki mu ju-so-gyo-shiki; mu gen-ni-bi-zet-shin-ni; mu shiki-sho-ko-mi-soku-ho; mu genkai naishi mu ishikikai; mu mumyo, yaku mu mumyo jin naishi mu roshi, yaku mu roshi jin, mu ku-ju-metsu-do; mu chi yaku mu toku, imu shotokko. Bodaisatta e hannya-haramita ko, shin mu kege; mu kege ko, mu u kufu; onri issai tendo muso kugyo nehan. Sanze shobutsu e hannya-haramita ko, toku anokutara-sammyaku-sambodai. Kochi hannya-haramita, ze daijinshu, ze daimyoshu, ze mujoshu, ze mutodoshu, nojo issai ku, shinjitsu fu ko; ko setsu hannya-haramitashu, soku sesshu watsu: Gyate, gyate, hara-gyate, hara-sogyate, boji sowaka. Hannya-shin-gyo.Back to services list
The Heart Sutra of Perfect Wisdom
(Prajna-paramita-hrdaya-sutram)
When the Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara was practicing prajna-paramita (a profound form of contemplation), he clearly saw that the Five Skandha* are Sunya* and thereby became free from all suffering. O Sariputra,* form is sunyata, sunyata is form; form is none other than sunyata, sunyata is none other than form. The same can be said of sensation, conception, predisposition and consciousness. O Sariputra, all dharmas * are characterized by dependence upon causation; they are neither born nor do they perish; they are neither tainted nor immaculate; they neither increase nor decrease. Therefore, in sunyata there is no form, no sensation, no conception, no predisposition, no consciousness; no eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body or mind; no form, sound, odor, taste, tangibleness or objects of thought; no realm of the eyes,... no realm of consciousness.* There is no ignorance, no extinction of old age and death. There is no suffering, no origination of suffering, no extinction, no path. There is no wisdom and no attainment because there is no object to be attained. The Bodhisattva, because of his reliance on Perfect Wisdom, has no obstacle in mind; because he has no obstacle, he has no fear. Being free from all delusions he reaches ultimate Nirvana. All the Buddhas of the past, present, and future, relying on Perfect Wisdom, attain perfect Awakening. One should, therefore, know that the prajna-paramita is the great mantra, the mantra of great wisdom, the highest mantra, the incomparable mantra, which is capable of relieving all suffering; it is true and not false.
Thus, the prajna-paramita mantra is:
Gate gate paragate parasamgate bodhisvaha. (Gone, gone gone beyond, gone together, perfectly beyond, O Awakening, hail!)
Footnotes
1. Five Skanda* - form, sensation, conception, predisposition and consciousness.2. Sunya or Sunyata* - state of interdependent causation.3. Sariputra* - One of the ten great disciple of Sakyamuni Buddha.4. Dharmas* - Law, truth, things and non things, Buddhas teaching, the whole universe as the object of thoughts. 5. no realm of eyes, ... no realm of consciousness*The Eighteen Realms of sensory means, objects and consciousness.
Sensory means
eyes
ears
nose
tongue
body
mind
Objects
form
sound
fragrance
taste
tangibleness
/touch
objects of
thoughts
Consciousness
visual
auditory
olfactory
gustatory
tactile
nonsensuous
The Heart Sutra of Perfect Wisdom is Buddha's words to Sariputra.Back to services list
Thirteen Mantras
This sutra is Buddhas words to Sariputra.
1. LEADER: Fudo Myo-o (Acala Vidyaraja)
GROUP:
Nomaku sammanda bazaradan senda makaroshada sowataya un tarata kamman. (Jpn.)
Namah samanta-vajranam chanda maharosana sphotaya hum trat ham mam. (Skt.)
(Homage to the all-pervading Vajras! O Violent One of great wrath! Destroy! Hum trat ham mam.)
2. LEADER: Shaka Nyorai (Sakyamuni Tathagata)
GROUP:
Nomaku Sammanda bodanan baku. (Jpn.)
Namah samanta-buddhanam bhah. (Skt.)
(Homage to all the Buddhas! Bhah.)
3. LEADER: Monju Bosatsu (Manjusri Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On a rahashano . (Jpn.)
Om ara pa ca na. (Skt.)
(Om a ra pa ca na.)
4. LEADER: Fugen Bosatsu (Samantabhadra Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On sammaya satoban. (Jpn.)
Om sammaya sattvam. (Om samayas tvam.) (Skt.)
(Om I am (you are) an embodiment of the pledge.)
5. LEADER: Jizo Bosatsu (Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On kakaka bisammaei sowaka. (Jpn.)
Om ha-ha-ha vismaye svaha. (Skt.)
(Om Oh Wondrous One svaha.)
6. LEADER: Miroku Bosatsu (Maitreya Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On maitareiya sowaka. (Jpn.)
Om maitreya svaha. (Skt.)
(Om Compassionate One svaha.)
7. LEADER: Yakushi Nyorai (Bhaisajyaguru Tathagata)
GROUP:
On koro koro sendari matogi sowaka. (Jpn.)
Om huru huru candali matangi svaha. (Skt.)
(Om heal, heal; Candali Matangi svaha.)
8. LEADER: Kannon Bosatsu (Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On arorikya sowaka. (Jpn.)
Om arolik svaha. (Skt.)
(Om Unstained One svaha.)
9. LEADER: Seishi Bosatsu (Mahasthamaprapta Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
On san zan zan saku sowaka. (Jpn.)
Om sam jam jam sah svaha. (Skt.)
(Om may defilements be removed svaha.)
10. LEADER: Amida Nyorai (Amitabha Tathagata, Amitayus Tathagata)
GROUP:
On amirita teizei kara un. (Jpn.)
Om amrta-teje hara hum. (Skt.)
(Om save us in the glory of the Deathless One hum!.)
11. LEADER: Ashuku Nyorai (Aksobhya Tathagata)
GROUP:
On akishubiya un. (Jpn.)
Om aksobhya hum. (Skt.)
(Om Immovable One hum.)
12. LEADER: Dainichi Nyorai (Mahavairocana Tathagata)
GROUP:
On abiraunken; bazaradato ban. (Jpn.)
Om a-vi-ra-hum-kham; vajra dhatu vam. (Skt.)
(Om All Pervading One; Imperishable One.)
13. LEADER: Kokuzo Bosatsu (Akasagarbha Bodhisattva)
GROUP:
Nobo akyasha kyarabaya on arikya mari bori sowaka. (Jpn.)
Namo akasagarbhaya om arya kamari mauli svaha. (Skt.)
(Homage to the great Space-bearer who holds a flower and wears a garland and a jeweled crown svaha.)
Back to services list
Light Mantra
LEADER: The Light mantra contains,
GROUP:
In its syllables, the entire power of the omnipresent Mahavairocana Buddha. When we recite the mantra earnestly; the Light of the Buddha will embrace us. Illusions will disappear spontaneously, as the moon becomes free from mist.
On abokya beirosha no maka bodara mani handoma jimbara harabaritaya un. (Jpn.)
Om amogha-vairocana mahamudra mani-padma-jvala pravarttaya hum. (Skt.)
(Om Unfailing Vairocana, the great mudra (symbol), mani (jewel), padma (lotus), and jvala (light), evolve! Hum.)
Back to services list
Gohogo
LEADER: Let us take refuge in our Great Master, Kobo Daishi,
GROUP: Namu Daishi Henjo Kongo. (Jpn.)
( I take refuge in the Great Guru, the Vajra of all-pervading spiritual radiance.) Back to services list
Prayer
LEADER: We reverently pray
GROUP: for eternal harmony in the universe. May we attain Buddhahood in this very life in this esoteric realm of Mahavairocana. May the weather be seasonable, may the harvest be fruitful, may countries exist in harmony, and may all people enjoy happiness. May we share these benefitsequally. Back to services list
Universal Prayer
LEADER: May the merits we have accumulated
GROUP:
be extended universally to all sentient beings so that they, together with us, may equally realize the Awakening.
Back to services list
LOTUS SUTRA
Myo-ho rengekyo kanzeon bosatsu fumon bon dai nijugo ge Niji mujinni bosa igen mon natsu Se son myo so gu Ga kon ju mon pi Busshi ga in nen Myo i kan ze on Gu soku myo so son Ge to mu jin ni Nyo cho kan non gyo Zen no sho ho jo Gu zei jin nyo kai Ryakko fu shi gi Ji ta sen noku butsu Hotsu dai sho jo gan Ga i nyo ryaku setsu Mon myo gyu ken shin Shin nen fu ku ka No metsu sho u ku Ke shi kou gai i Sui raku dai ka kyo Nen pi kan non riki Ka kyo hen jo chi Waku hyo ryu ko kai Ryu gyo sho ki nan Nen pi kan non riki Ha ro fu no motsu Waku zai shu mi bu I nin sho sui da Nen pi kan non riki Nyo nichi ko ku ju Waku hi aku nin chiku Da raku kon go sen Nen pi kan non riki Fu no son ichi mo Waku chi on zoku nyo Kaku shu to ka gai Nen pi kan non riki Gen soku ki ji shin Waku so o nan ku Rin gyo yoku ju ju Nen pi kan non riki To jin dan dan ne Waku shu kin ka sa Shu soku hi chu kai Nen pi kan non riki Shaku nen toku ge datsu Shu so sho doku yaku Sho yoku gai shin ja Nen pi kan non riki Gen jaku o hon nin Waku gu aku ra setsu Doku ryu sho ki to Nen pi kan non riki Ji shippu kan gai Nyaku aku ju i nyo Ri ge so ka fu Nen pi kan non riki
Shisso mu hen bo Gwan ja gyu fukkatsu Ke doku en ka nen Nen pi kan non riki Jin jo ji e ko Un rai ku sei den Go baku ju dai u Nen pi kan non riki O ji toku sho san Shu jo hi kon nyaku Mu ryo ku hisshin Kan non myo chi riki No gu se ken ku Gu soku jin tsu riki Ko shu chi ho ben Jippo sho kokudo Mu seppu gen shin Shu ju sho aku shu Ji gokki chiku sho Sho ro byo shi ku I zen shitsu ryo metsu Shin kan sho jo kan Ko dai chi e kan Hi kan gyu ji kan Jo gan jo sen go Mu ku sho jo ko E nichi ha sho an No buku sai fu ka Fu myo sho se ken Hi tai kai rai shin Ji i myo dai un Ju kan ro ho u Metsu jo bon no en Jo sho kyo kan jo Fu i gun jin chu Nen pi kan non riki Shu on shiÕtai san Myo on kan ze on Bon non kai cho on Sho hi se ken non Ze ko shu jo nen Nen nen mossho gi Kan ze on jo sho Okku no shi yaku No i sa e ko Gu issai ku doku Ji gen ji shu jo Fuku ju kai mu ryo Ze ko o cho rai
Ni ji ji ji bo sah soku ju za ki zen byaku butsu gon se son nyaku uh shu jo mon ze kan ze on bo sa hon ji zai shi go fu mon ji gen jin zu riki sha to chi ze nin ku doku fu sho bussetsu ze fu mon bon ji shuju hachi man shi sen shujo kai hotsu mu toh do anoku tara san myaku san bodai shin. Back to services list
The Lotus Sutra Chapter XXV
The Gateway to Every Direction
(Gatha)
Thereupon, the Bodhisattva Aksayamati asked a question in verse, saying:"O Bhagavat, endowed with excellent marks! I now wish to ask you about him once again: For what reason is the heir of the Buddha Named Avalokitesvara?" The Bhagavat, endowed with excellent marks, answered Aksayamati in verse: "Listen to the practices of Avalokitesvara, which have their application to all! His vow is deep like the ocean and his kalpa is of inconceivable length. After having attended many thousands of kotis of Buddhas, he made a great, pure vow. I will now explain it to you in brief: If you hear his name and see his body, and contemplate him in thought, your life will not be in vain; and you will extinguish all sufferings. If anyone wants to hurt you and pushes you into a great fire-pit, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, the fire-pit will change into a pond. If you drift upon the great ocean and meet danger from dragons, fish and demons, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, you will not be swallowed by the waves. If you are on the peak of Sumeru and are pushed by somebody, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, you will stay suspended in the air like the sun. If any evil one chases you and pushes you from Mount Diamond, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, not even a single hair will be hurt. If evil robbers sorround you each with a sword and the intent to harm, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, the tought of mercy will awaken in them. If you suffer under the punishment of a king and you life is to be ended by execution, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, the sword will be immediately broken into pieces. If you are imprisoned with a neck chain, your hands and feet fettered, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, they will disappear and you will be released. If anyone wants to hurt your body with a curse or poison, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, these ills will return and afflict their authors. If you meet evil raksasas, poisonous dragons or demons, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, they will not dare to hurt you. If you are surrounded by evil beasts whose teeth and claws are fearfully sharp, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, they will run away swiftly and to an immeasurable distance. If there are lizards, snakes, vipers or scorpions, whose breath is poisonous like a flaming smoke, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, they will turn away swiftly at the sound of your voice. If thunder resounds, lightning flashes, hail falls and great rain pours out of the clouds, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, it will disappear immediately. If santient beings are in great adversity, and immeasurable pain afflicts them, the wonderful power of the wisdom of Avalokitesvara can relieve the sufferings of the world. Endowed with transcendent powers and having fully mastered wisdom and skillful means, in all the worlds in the ten directions, there is no place where he will not manifest himself. The sufferings of those in the troubled states of being: Hell-dwellers, ever-hungry spirits, and beasts; and the sufferings of birth, old age, illness and death will gradually be extinguished. He who perceives the world with truth, purity, and vast knowledge, and with benevolence and compassion, should be ever longed for and looked up to. He is a spotless, pure ray of light, a sun of wisdom which destroys the darkness, a flame which withstands the wind of calamities. He brilliantly illuminates the entire world. His will, the essence of which is compassion, shakes like thunder; and the mind of mercy is like a beautiful overspreading cloud, which pours the Dharma-rain of immortality and extinguishes the flame of desires. In a dispute before judges, or fearful in the midst of battle, if you contemplate the power of Avalokitesvara, all enemies will flee away. He has a wondrous voice, the voice of one who perceives the world, a voice like Brahma, a voice like the rolling tide, a voice unsurpassed in this world; for this reason you should always contemplate him. You should have no doubt, even for a moment, the pure seer Avalokitesvara will be a refuge when suffering distress or the misery of death. He is endowed with every quality, sees the sentient beings with his benevolent eyes, and his ocean of merit is immeasurable; for this reason you should pay him homage." At that time the Bodhisattva Dharanimdhara arose from his seat, went before the Buddha and said to him: "O Bhagavati! If there are any sentient beings who hear of this chapter The Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara, and these effortless deeds, the manifestation of the gateway to all directions, and the transcendent powers, know that their merit will not be little!" When the Buddha taught the chapter, "The Gateway to Every Direction," the thought of the highest and incomparable complete enlightenment awoke in eighty-four thousand sentient beings in the assembly.
Back to services list
Golden Chain
I am a link in Lord Buddhas golden chain of love that streches around the world. I must keep my link bright and strong. I will try to be kind and gentle to every living thing, and protect all who are weaker than myself. I will try to think pure and beautiful thoughts, to say pure and beautiful words, and to do pure and beautiful deeds, knowing that on what I do now depends my happiness and misery.
May every link in Lord Buddhas golden chain of love become bright and strong and may we all attain perfect peace.Back to services list
Aspiration
I
O, Thou who holdest the Seal of the Power Spiritual, raise Thy Diamond Hand, and bring to naught all evil. O, Thou who purifies, purify all who are in bondage of the life corporeal. O, Thou who are Perfectly Enlightened, enlighten all men and end all suffering. O, Thou who are Perfect in Wisdom and Compassion, redeem all men and bring them to the realm Divine. Adoration to the Buddha of Perfect Wisdom and Compassion, Thou who hast accomplished, is accomplishing, and will accomplish all these Words, True and Mystical.
II
We are the result of what we have thought. If a man speaks or acts with an evil thoughts, sorrow follows him even as the wheel follows the foot of the drawer. The scent of flowers does not travel against the wind, but the fragrance of good people travels even against the wind. As a mother, at the risk of her life, watches over her only child, so let every one cultivate a boundless love towards all beings.
III
We surround all men and all forms of life with infinite love and compassion. Particulary do we send our loving thoughts to those in suffering and sorrow, and to all those in doubt and ignorance, to all who are groping for the Truth, and those whose feet are standing close beside the gate of death, we send forth oceans of Wisdom, Mercy and Love.
IV
Reverently we come before the holy place of our Lord Buddha, the Holy One, and the Perfect One. With the deepest gratitude we have brought our offerings of universal wishes and devotion to honour Him. We earnestly resolve to strive to know and understand His Universal Dharma, and to walk everyday in His Holy Path, so that like Himself, we may attain the Perfect Peace of Nirvana.
V
Be to yourselves your own Light. Be to yourselves your own refuge. Thou shalt not go looking about for any other light or refuge, whoever follows, when I am gone, shall be to themselves their own light, their own refuge - whoever shall take the Truth I have taught as their light and their refuge - that they now and always will be my true disciples, will be walking in the Universal path. They will see and know the Supreme Bliss.
VI
In my love, in my spiritual power, and in the Holy Name Henjo Kongo, I shall save all beings accompanied by Miroku Bodhisattva. Being come from the Universal power of Maha Vairocana, the Illuminated One, and return to Him with a pure, wealthy, universal, and charitable heart. They shall know Him and see happiness and peace in their land.
VII
The Holy Saviour addressed us, on His last day, At first, I thought I should live till I was a hundred years old to save all the people in the bank of suffering, but now that you are all grown up and accomplishing my holy mission, there is no need for my life to be prolonged, and I shall not grieve, agonize and disappoint. I will leave for the eternal Samadhi on the 21st day of next March. For I will still live and save all the people accompanied by the Holy maitreya Bodhisattva as long as you cease your suffering on the earth.
VIII
He who dwells in Dharma, delights in the Dharma, meditates on the Dharma, recollects the Dharma; that man will never fall away from the true Dharma.
IX
He who longs for life, knows that immortality is hidden in transciency. He who wishes for happiness, without the sting of regrets, receives treasures that are eternal. Truth is wealth, and a life of truth is happiness. The Dharma knows neither birth nor death; it has no beginning and no end. It is the immortal source of mind.
Copyright © 1998-2006 Northern California Koyasan Temple

An Introduction to Zen: Religious Practice for Everyday Life

2007-12-08T11:42:00.000-08:00

An Introduction to Zen: Religious Practice for Everyday Life

Reverend Master Jiyu-Kennett

It is with great pleasure that we offer here a second selection from Roar of the Tigress, the first book of Reverend Master Jiyu-Kennett’s oral teachings which has been published recently by Shasta Abbey Press. Taken from a body of more than a thousand of her lecture tapes, the book represents a three-year effort on the part of monastic and lay followers alike.

Zen Is a Religion.
I am sure you’ve noticed by now that I’ve been talking about Zen as a religion, and yet some of you may have heard that all of Buddhism, and especially Zen, is atheistic. It is not. You’ve heard this due to the fact that the Christian missionaries who brought back the Scriptures from the Far East either did not know of, or deliberately steered clear of, one particular Scripture spoken by the Buddha. In the Udana Scripture He says very clearly, “O monks, there is an Unborn, Undying, Unchanging, Uncreated.”1 This is what He found in meditation and which gave Him His enlightenment. In other words, He found That Which Is. What the Christians call “God” and Mohammedans call “Allah”, the Buddhists call variably: That Which Is, the Lord of the House, the Cosmic Buddha, the Eternal, Amida Buddha, the Immaculacy of Emptiness, Vairocana Buddha, the Unborn, etc.2
The terms we use for It don’t really matter: they’re just labels, just concepts. Don’t waste time thinking about what God is like. Whatever you imagine that It is, I assure you, is not what you’ll—how can I say this?—I was going to say, “is not what you’ll know”, when you get self out of the way. That’s not strictly true; what it comes down to is this: we always place upon ourselves our own personal concept of God or the Eternal—something that is much better than us. But we usually stop short at Something that just is there, and is such perfect love It can tolerate everybody in the world. I don’t know if you ever saw that really great old comedy, “The Night They Raided Minsky’s”. There was a lovely line in there where the old Jewish vaudevillian is speaking to the dour Amish father of one of his girls, and they both decide to pray together because, as one of them points out, “Only a God that could tolerate me could possibly tolerate you,” (laughter) Now you have to keep this in mind. How can you imagine Something that doesn’t just love, It is unquestioning Love? It makes the rain of compassion to fall on the evil and the good. What is evil; what is good? They are concepts in our minds. It is all right for us to have these concepts as long as we don’t try to put them on the Eternal. You cannot be judgmental: the most important thing for a Buddhist is not to judge other people. In other words, love God, do your own training; love the Cosmic Buddha, do your own training; love Allah, do your own training. Don’t worry about other people.
And do not suffer from the notion that Zen training will make you anything other than a human being. Accepting our own humanity is one of the hardest tests of all-acceptance. There is a great difference, you know, between thinking you are God and knowing that what is in you is of God. “I am not God, and there is nothing in me that is not of God,” is the way in which one has to think about it. The reason for Zen practice is to find the Eternal. On finding the Eternal, we call it “enlightenment”. To know the Eternal (and you really do know It once you have had this experience) is to know how infinitesimal you are in the scheme of things: to know that you are “no-thing”: even a grain of sand is miles too big. When you forsake self in this way, then you are the universe, and, if you’ve done it right, you might behave like it. In The Light of Asia3 by Sir Edwin Arnold are the words, “Forsaking self, the Universe grows ‘I’.” What a lot of people do not know, by the way, is that in Hong Kong there is a huge temple with probably the most famous secondary school in all of the Chinese area. That temple is dedicated to Sir Edwin Arnold, and his portrait is the Buddha upon the altar. When he went back to England and wished to publish The Light of Asia, they would only do it on the condition that he would pay lip service to Christian doctrine first, because there was this funny little bit in the law in England that since the King or Queen is the Head of the Church of England, if you don’t believe in that, then automatically you have committed treason. It is one of the rather more peculiar little bits of British law that isn’t talked about much nowadays; in those days it was. And so the copy of the book has this introduction wherein he implies that he doesn’t really believe in Buddhism. But he was actually a Buddhist; he is regarded as a Buddha in the Far East. His temple is magnificent, and he was a pioneer in girls’ education, and it is still the finest school in English-speaking areas in the Far East. So, “forsaking self, the universe grows ‘I’.” Do you get the difference between that and the notion that “I” become “God”?
Perhaps it will help if I explain a bit about another foundation of our religion: all things change, the doctrine of anicca in Buddhism. Everything changes. There is a famous story of Winston Churchill who, although he had an excellent wit and got half of his response right, didn’t make it fully so. A lady came up to him, when he appeared at a meeting somewhat tipsy, and said, “Sir, you are drunk; you are very drunk; you are very, very drunk.” And he replied to her, “Madam, you are ugly; you are very ugly; you are very, very ugly. And I shall be sober in the morning.” (laughter) He understood change, but he hadn’t seen that, however ugly she was, there was the spark of the Eternal in her, the Buddha Nature, and that is the important point. It sounds funny; it is funny; but he should have been able to see the next bit on. If you would really study religion and understand the meaning of perfect faith, that’s how you’ve got to look at people. He may be, or she may be, what you would call a “louse” right now, and tomorrow there could be an incredible change, there could be a total conversion. There could be a finding of the Eternal. Are you still going to carry around the fact that, once, he or she was a louse?
Not only do you look at other people with the awareness of continual change, you look at everything in this light. Everything is always changing; nothing stays the same. At first this is rather scary, because if you think deeply about it, it means that there is no constant, separate thing you can call “me”: there is only an ever-changing flow of space-time-being. But soon it becomes enjoyable because it means that you are not alone in the universe, and that is a great relief. Do not think that anything whatsoever is separate from the Eternal: do not think, for example, that there was a time when the Eternal was Kanzeon (the Bodhisattva of Compassion) and another time when It was Buddha; indeed, there is a time when the Eternal is Kanzeon and a time when It is Buddha, but there was never a time or place when the Eternal was not present as the whole of the Eternal. If you think of Kanzeon as separate, of the Buddha as separate, of the mountain as separate, of the river as separate, and of yourself as separate—if you think in that way, you cannot understand the Eternal. If you know that you are the whole of the Eternal, and that Kanzeon and the Buddha are the whole of the Eternal, and that the whole of the past is present now, and the whole of the future is present now, that there is no other time than (and there will never be any other time than) now, in the real sense of the term, then you understand the eternal now, you understand the Eternal. Otherwise, you become a separate being in a body that is not the Buddha’s body, in a body that is not Kanzeon’s body, and the Eternal becomes a separate Being that is not your body. So you can see how the Eternal is thought of as flowing; It is the eternal flow; It is not static, nor can we truly say It is changing. The whole world must be seen as the Eternal, and not only must it be seen, it must be known to be the Eternal; the Eternal must be able to be felt, seen, smelt, tasted, touched in everyone and in everything. It is not a thing of yesterday; It is not a thing of today; It is not a thing of tomorrow. The Eternal is the eternal flowing, the non-static eternal, the “universe growing ‘I’”.
So this is what the Buddha found, and He explained It by what in religion is called the via negativa: He explained It by what It is not. It isn’t born, because It has always been there; It doesn’t change, because It is Eternal; It is not created; there is nothing greater than It. The Buddha goes on in this Scripture to say if this were not so, then there would be no hope whatsoever for humankind. Now, it’s just as good to say, to explain, what you know to be true by saying what you know the thing isn’t, as it is to say what you know to be true by saying what you believe that it is. You can know what it is not; you believe what it is.
This approach is rather similar to the one taken by what I believe is known as Moravian Christianity. In Moravian Christianity, there is no God and no Christ until you know them; there is merely a Christian way to follow. Now, that is pure Buddhism: there is no Cosmic Buddha until you know the Cosmic Buddha, the Lord of the House. Because so few people take the trouble to get to know Him/Her/It, Buddhism has often become an atheistic or a non-God religion: just a way of life. But in the East they look at you: “Oh, you haven’t met the Lord Buddha yet? Good heavens, you’re an undutiful being! You’re merely following the Buddhist way?!?” They look down on you, you know, almost withdrawing the hem of their garment from you, because you have not got to know That Which Is. Buddhism in its real setting is an incredibly uh ... “theistic” is dangerous, because the word “God” is wrong ... uh, “Supreme Being”-oriented religion, let’s put it that way. And once you know the Lord of the House, then you can speak of It. So, Buddhism has a Supreme Being. Except that It’s not a Supreme Being in the normal sense: It is That Which... Is. It’s not a big daddy God who spanks you when you do something wrong. And “Being” isn’t quite the right word either.
Now, since about the 1500s there has been an attempt on the part of the Shin, or Pure Land, School of Buddhists to say, “Let’s not do it by the way of meditation because so few people ever bother to get any further than the ‘way of life’ attitude of mind.” They decided to start a school of Buddhism called “Shin”, which means the True Heart of Buddhism, which placed faith in and worshipped the Amida Buddha, the Amida Buddha being the equivalent of God or the Cosmic Buddha. Now, this has always confused and confounded Christians and others who say, “Half the Buddhists are worshipping and half aren’t; what on earth is going on?” It was merely that one bunch said, “It’s useless to try and go on with people not really trying to get to know the Lord of the House, because Buddhism has just turned into a way of life, so why don’t we start saying that It really does exist and letting them worship It from that point of view?” And the other bunch said, “This is completely wrong, because they will enter into belief and worship rather than recognizing they have to find the Lord of the House within themselves.” And these two factions have warred for about four hundred years, and in 1924 in China the two of them came together and, since then, all the Buddhists in China became one big school: the Zenists openly admitting, “Yes, we place faith in the Amida Buddha” and the Shinists openly saying, “All right, we go by meditation.” Now, since I was ordained and did some of my training in Chinese Buddhism, you see the background from which I come to this.
This brings us to the importance of understanding the difference between perfect faith and absolute belief. In these little booklets we have for you there is an article on perfect faith which I want you to read over carefully because it is one of the best ways I ever put it, and I don’t want to detract from that.4 Perfect faith is a very different thing from absolute belief. Absolute belief insists that it’s right, and sometimes burns people at the stake and does other things to prove it, as we know from the Middle Ages. Perfect faith, because it is perfect, does not have to insist upon itself. Real truth does not have to insist upon itself; real trust does not have to insist upon itself: there is an incredibly beautiful interplay. It’s like a kaleidoscope: the faith is always there, the trust is always there, the certainty is always there, but you don’t have to beat each other up or damage other people to make them believe as you do. In order to have the courage to leap beyond the opposites, to let go of everything we have, want, and know, perfect faith is necessary in Buddhism—perfect faith in the fact that there is an Unborn, Unchanging, Undying, Uncreated: That which I call the Eternal, and what unfortunately has been very badly translated in the main scripture of Zen Buddhism, The Scripture of Great Wisdom, as “emptiness”.
It is not Nietzsche’s kind of emptiness. In recent years, we have seen the translation and publication of many of the original works of those who took Buddhism to China, and these are making it very clear that the “emptiness” they are talking about is something that is so full it cannot be described. In that sense it’s very like the Jewish concept of God: That which you can’t put a hand on, you can’t feel, you can’t grasp. It’s beyond everything; It is Unborn, Undying, Uncreated, Unchanging. You know It’s there, but when somebody says, “Show It to me”, you can’t show It to them. Again, I am afraid it’s our Christian missionary friends who decided to first have It translated as “emptiness”, which turned Buddhism for many, many people into something that was very little more than a way of life, instead of a very, very great religion based on perfect faith, and you need to know this.
The fact that there is an Unborn and there is a role for faith in Zen upsets many Westerners, because they think that it means that they are required to have the same blind belief which they feel was required of them in their own religion. I can remember a British professor in Japan getting madder and madder by the minute because he felt that Zen training was deliberately putting him into a double bind so as to get him beyond the opposites, which he believed to be impossible. And I recall Koho Zenji looking at him and saying, “My good man, don’t you realize that there is Something that is beyond the opposites?” “Oh no, I’m not going to believe in a God!” “You are not required to” was the answer, “but there is a third position.” You are not required to believe in an “entity”, but there is That which is unborn, unchanging, undying. And in that Place one can take genuine rest and, there, one can get beyond the opposites. People try to flee from God, they try to escape from the “golden body of the Buddha”, but it is only because we do not know what the golden body of the Buddha really is, only because our minds have been raped by theories, that we are afraid of It. When we know what It is not, we can then be free of concepts of what It is, and we do not have to escape. And, even when we are trying to escape, we are still in the flow of the Eternal.
I can remember being infuriated about the same thing when I was first in Japan, in Sojiji. I had gone over like every other Briton I’d ever met, “Oh how wonderful, I will be completely free; I will be supreme, you know; and there’s no God that’s going to be over me, nothing of this sort!” And the first thing I was told was, “Well, of course, Shin Buddhism and Zen Buddhism are exactly the same; they’re the two opposite ends of a tunnel.” The point is, which is the “right” end of a tunnel? If you go all the way through, then does it matter which is the entrance and which is the exit? And I remember almost jumping up and down like a baboon with fury at that one, because, I mean, I’d gone fifteen thousand miles to avoid that sort of “Supreme Being idiocy”! And then I had a kensho5 and I saw they were right, and between joy and annoyance at having been proved wrong, I spent a very interesting week. (laughter) I was really annoyed at having been proved wrong, and that is one of the reasons you hear about people who have had kensho laughing and crying and getting furious and throwing things, because yes, there they were, sitting in the Buddha’s hand all along and He was grinning at them. You can call it “God’s hand” if you like. It doesn’t matter what you call it, but in the end it’s rather enjoyable just to be there.
Unfortunately, our concepts and beliefs have taught us that we, and time and existence, are somehow apart from the Truth, and thus we think that the golden body of the Buddha is not our body. And so we spend our lives trying to free ourselves from this very fact of being the golden body of the Buddha. We try to run away from the Eternal because we think of It as the golden body of the Buddha, with which we have nothing whatsoever to do and from which we must get free. But that is wrong: if you know of the Place of the Eternal—which is beyond all opposites of right and wrong, past and present, etc.—if you know of That, then there is no need whatsoever to try to escape. One of the tragedies of so many Zen books is that they talk about getting beyond the opposites, but they do not explain that this is the Place of the Eternal, the “third position” beyond the two opposites.
Now, if you would study Soto Zen, or for that matter any form of Buddhism, you need three things. You need perfect faith in That Which Is, the Eternal. You need to know, to have the faith in and the willingness to go hunting for, that which will tell you about the Eternal. And you need to know that when you can’t get the answers, there are people whom you can trust to help you. In other words, when you yell, “Help! I’m stuck”, there are people who are willing and able to help. These three things are what we in Buddhism call the Three Refuges: “I take refuge in the Buddha; I take refuge in the Dharma; I take refuge in the Sangha.” These three things are absolutely essential: perfect faith, the willingness to study, and to trust someone who says, “Well, let’s talk; maybe I can help; maybe we can help each other; maybe I have a bunch of experience which I am willing to put at your disposal and see if it’s any use.” Those are the three things you’ll need if you are to study Soto Zen or any other form of Buddhism.
All the rest are beliefs which you have to prove true for yourself. The Buddha said very clearly, “Do not believe anything because I tell you. Only believe it when you have made it true for yourself.”6 Therefore, enlightenment is the making true for oneself of the reality of the existence, and the experience of the existence, of the Unborn. Again, remember that the word “enlightenment” has got muddled as a result of not understanding the importance of the Udana Scripture. When that scripture was first translated, incidentally, a number of people tried to pull it down saying, “Oh, it couldn’t possibly be that the Buddha had found the Eternal!” You read a bit more, and if you do, you discover that this is the only interpretation that makes sense in Buddhism. He definitely did, and it makes it into a real religion and not just a way of life.
Faith, study, and trust: if you think of the word “refuge”, what does it actually mean? To take refuge in something that you can neither see nor grasp nor feel, you have to have faith in it. When you start, perhaps you believe it, but you have to go on beyond belief: belief does not go nearly far enough. So often in religion people get stuck with belief. They think that is enough: it’s not. It has to go on to the certainty of faith, which is an absolute certainty but one which leads not to absolute belief and the hard-fisted type of certainty; it leads to perfect faith, which can allow everybody else to have their beliefs and not interfere with them, and know that when those people find perfect faith, whatever they happen to call the Eternal will be all right.
Notes
1. Translated by F. L. Woodward, “Udana: Verses of Uplift” from the Minor Anthologies of the Pali Canon, Part II, Chapt. VII, sec. iii (London: Oxford University Press, 1935) pp. 97 & 98.
2. At various times in her career, Rev. Master Jiyu used many of these terms to describe the ultimate aspect of our religion. For a discussion of her apparent identification of these terms here with the concepts of God and eternalism, please read on, and also refer to the Introduction.
3. Sir Edwin Arnold, The Light of Asia, (Los Angeles, California: The Theosophy Company, 1977).
4. See Rev. Master Jiyu-Kennett, M.O.B.C., “Perfect Faith” An Introduction to the Tradition of Serene Reflection Meditation, 5th ed. revised (Mt. Shasta, California: Shasta Abbey Press, 1997), pp. 37–40.
5. Kensho (Japanese): to see into one’s own true nature. The experience of touching enlightenment; satori.
6. See F. L. Woodward, trans., The Book of the Gradual Sayings (Anguttara-Nikaya). Vol. I, (London: Pali Text Society, 1979), pp. 171 ff.

http://www.obcon.org/journal/jobc7.html

Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind

2007-12-07T05:33:00.000-08:00

Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind

This talk comes from the Hua-yen World website. It is an interesting site with a few articles in English.

Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind Xinyao Famen by Tony Prince

Today I would like to talk to you about the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind", a short essay by Cheng Guan (738-840). This may well be the first time this text has been expounded in Taiwan, and I hope that it will help everybody to gain a clearer understanding of some key points of the Buddhadharma.Emperor Shun Zung (reigned 805-806) of the Tang Dynasty once asked Ven. Cheng Guan, "The Buddhadharma is so vast, so comprehensive in its scope that if one wants to grasp the basic teachings, it's difficult to know where to start. What's the most effective way to study in order to get the greatest benefit with the least effort?" In reply Cheng Guan gave the Emperor the teaching that we now know as the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind", its full title being "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind Given by the State Preceptor Cheng Guan in reply to Emperor Shun Zung". I will be explaining the contents of this text throughout the year, but first of all I would like to say something about what is meant by the "mind".Some people live more in their mouths than in their minds. They love to run around debating and showing off their extraordinary karmic prowess everywhere. Sometimes they come to Dharma centres uncertain where their commitment really lies and stirring up controversy. They seem to feel that this is the only way they can achieve some kind of status, but unless they change their behaviour they are all too likely to end up having their tongue pulled out in one of the hells. Or they may say, "Let me tell you about these secret teachings that I got at the other Dharma centre...." Such people have only grasped the essential nature of the tongue, not that of the mind. They will have no hope of putting this Dharma instruction on the essential nature of the mind into practice unless they can find a way to overcome their own karma. This is an extreme example and perhaps it's not really appropriate to mention it here, but such cases can provide sincere practitioners with guidance in overcoming their own faults, and certainly unless those concerned are able to change their own state of mind, they will have no chance of understanding the Dharma.Those who have come here to listen to me should be willing to do more than just listen. Listening alone is of no use. This teaching on the essential nature of the mind requires that you transform your own mind. To accomplish this, the mind must first be made correct. But how is that to be done? As we proceed with our study of the Buddhadharma, we need to complete the construction of our mind, or in more traditional terms, to adjust our thinking; for only when our thinking is correct will our conduct be correct, but if our thinking is incorrect, our conduct will be incorrect as well.So the way a person behaves is ultimately an expression of the way they think, and when you go around airing your opinion about all sorts of things, it shows very clearly what your habitual thought patterns are like. So if you persist in talking about certain things even when you have been warned that this kind of behaviour is not correct, can you not see that this is the result of your clinging to incorrect thinking?When I spoke earlier about "correct" and "incorrect", I said that we should not indulge in such dualistic thinking, because thinking in terms of opposed concepts like this is a very serious obstacle to our practice. Perhaps you feel that I am right and decide that you will make sure to avoid dualistic notions from now on, but then you are just setting up another opposition, this time between 'dualistic' and 'nondualistic'. So this is an aspect of our mind that crops up as long as we continue to operate on a purely verbal level, and if we are not aware of it, it will keep us sunk in an abyss of misery that we will be unable to extricate ourselves from. This is a crucial point. Once a fellow practitioner came to me and said that his wife was always getting sick. When I asked him what kind of sickness she suffered from, he said that it wasn't a real illness, it was just that she couldn't get along with one of their children, and whenever this child provoked her, she would fly into a fury and start beating or screaming at the child. Then she would have what seemed to be a fit of hysterics and end up being taken off to hospital in an ambulance for a couple of days. A few days later the same thing would happen and she would be off to the hospital again. This had been going on for several years now and was making the poor gentleman desperately unhappy. He had been to many doctors in search of a cure, but when I asked his wife, "Is this causing you a lot of suffering?", she just smiled and said, "It's nothing really".So if the person herself doesn't feel that she is suffering, do you think it will be possible to cure her illness? Of course not! If she can't even see that there is a problem, how could there be a solution? In the same way, if you are not clearly aware of your own faults, will you be able to find a remedy for them? Of course not! If you fail to notice, for example, that you have a serious ego-problem, you are never likely to change. So we must be careful not to assume that we know ourselves very well when in fact we don't know ourselves at all. The Buddhadharma wants us to be fully aware of this.The inability to see ourselves clearly is what Buddhism calls delusion or misperception. Our eyes are always on other people and we are not in the habit of looking at ourselves, so we are good at judging others but lack the capacity to judge ourselves. The reasons for other people's failures and mistakes are quite obvious to us, but what is the reason when we ourselves fail to achieve something or make a mistake? It can only be because somebody else has done something wrong -- it can't be our fault! Why are we stuck in this kind of situation? The real problem is that we have never seen our own true face. But this "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" insists that we must examine ourselves and not judge other people.In all Buddhist literature it would be difficult to find a text as flawless as this "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind". Not only is it remarkably authoritative in both content and presentation, it is also written in a beautifully polished literary style. It seeks not only to shatter our delusions as the Heart Sutra does, but also to establish the truth, and it is this comprehensiveness that is its most outstanding quality. I hope you will all reflect deeply on this dual aspect of the text and take its lack of one-sidedness to heart.When we talk about "the essential nature of the mind", we are referring to mind at its most fundamental level and regarding it as the very centre of our being. In other words, we are treating the mind as the key to our Dharma practice. So what is the mind? The mind is not the brain, nor is it the "mind" or "sovereign mind" that is spoken of in the Consciousness-only (Vijnanavada) school of Buddhism. The latter is a fairly abstract concept, but the mind we are talking about here should not be confused either with this abstract mind or with the physical brain. Rather than relying on earlier Buddhist theories about the nature of consciousness, we should define our terms as clearly as possible in more modern language.Simply put, then, the "mind" whose "essential nature" we are concerned with here is what our Dharma practice should be based on. Consider for example a person who is said to be "brainy", meaning that they are very smart or clever. Secular education requires that we remember a lot of things, and the more we can remember the more pleased with ourselves we become. If you tell people that this ability is just the result of previous karma, many of them will disagree, but it's possible for over development of this kind of 'brainy' intelligence to distort the way you perceive things, and then you may run the risk of developing dementia in your old age.What sort of people use their brains a lot? People who are inclined to depression or melancholy. When someone has been mistreated and can find no outlet for their resentment, they will keep turning things over and over in their mind and soon they will start to age prematurely. Surely you must have noticed this phenomenon? This is not what happens with people who are busy working diligently. University teachers, for example, also use their brains a lot, but you seldom hear of them suffering from schizophrenia or having a nervous breakdown. Who experiences this kind of problem? People whose careers are not going well, or wives that are being bullied by their husband or their mother-in-law. A wife in this kind of situation can very easily experience a nervous collapse because she is under a great deal of pressure with no means of relief. You see her sitting there very quietly but in fact her mind is working rapidly and she is being swept by waves of emotion because she can find no way out of her dilemma. Excessive use of the rational mind like this will cause her to grow old before her time.Buddhism tells us that if we want to become enlightened we must not use our minds in this way. Ordinary people just go on thinking in their heads and have no idea how to use their minds properly at all -- which is why they remain unenlightened. Nowadays we hear a lot about the brain as the gray matter inside the skull, but I can assure you that the brain, or rational intelligence, that you use to think with is not some kind of material object in your head. It is in fact the place where the self lodges as a parasite, and when this parasite, the self or ego, sets up house in the brain, what is the poor brain to do? The ego is determined to express itself, so the brain has no choice but to pander to it. The ego will demand to know what the rational intelligence plans to do, and the latter will obediently reply that it would really like to be president or chairman of the board.… So even though somebody may only have a couple of thousand dollars, he will try to start a small business company just so that he can tell everyone he meets that he is chairman of the board. People like this are suffering from a swollen head.What do I mean by a swollen head? I mean that their heads are full of the vanity of the self. The self wants to become somebody important, so their brain starts to work along those lines. This may sound simple, but in fact it's not so simple at all because the scope of their ambition is quite wide. There are many people who are capable, intelligent and diligent but have not met with any success in the world because they don't have the right kind of karma. So they turn for a while to Buddhism, and this gives their self a new arena in which to display its talents. Success in society only comes at a certain cost, but to make their mark in Buddhist circles doesn't really cost them anything, so if they attach themselves to some temple or monastery, they will then have a chance to show what they can do as a president, chairman or secretary. This is why we find so many disputes and controversies in Buddhist organizations -- it all comes from the activity of the self.If we Buddhists carry on with this kind of attitude, we'll never manage to accomplish anything. A great many people like to try several different ways of practising Dharma. They'll cultivate one method for a while but then they'll get stuck and won't be able to break through whatever is blocking their progress, so they'll try something else. For example they might repeat the name of the Buddha Amita until they've reached a certain level, but then they'll suddenly be asssailed with doubts: "Does this practice really work? Will it really get me to the Pure Land? Maybe I'd be better off reciting the scriptures." Once they embark on their recitation practice, they're delighted to discover how meaningful it can be and they're filled with pious enthusiasm. But before they're halfway through they find themselves daydreaming all the way from "Thus have I heard..." to "… and so the teaching was faithfully received". Then they feel compelled to start all over again, so they try meditation, but before long they decide that that's not right either and they switch to chanting mantras. After several years of this they've almost acquired enough knowledge for a Ph.D. and have become real Buddhist experts. It's no use trying to tell them that there's still something they can't do because they already know how to do everything! But in fact all they know about is how to talk and they're not capable of anything else at all. Why does this happen? It's because they only practise to a certain level and then they stop. That is how the rational intelligence works.That is why I urge you to go deeply into whatever method you're practising. If you get stuck in some kind of bottleneck, just step back, gather your strength, and then throw yourself into the practice again. If you follow this procedure you'll be sure to break through, but otherwise you'll only keep starting all over again. You have to understand that this is a defect in the way our rational intelligence operates. This is not how we should use our mind. The proper use of our mind in this kind of situation requires that we do as I suggested: step back and take a bit of a break. Give yourself a few days off, go for a trip somewhere perhaps, but don't do any formal Dharma practice at all. Then, when you feel up to it, commit yourself to circumscribed practice for 53 days. If you do this, you'll find that the obstacle to your spiritual progress will suddenly shatter and a whole new realm will open up before you. At this point you will realize just how powerful circumscribed practice can be.This is how Dharma practice should be done, but unfortunately people rely on their intelligence rather than on their mind, so they are always inclined to go in the wrong direction. It's important therefore to be very clear about the difference between the intelligence and the mind. You should be aware that the intelligence always seems very reasonable, but this is in fact one of its most harmful characteristics. Your intelligence may never tell you anything unreasonable but your mind doesn't work in this way at all. The mind functions in a very healthy and natural manner by immersing you in the current of life like a drop of water that becomes part of the stream, not like a boat that only floats on the surface. In other words our task is to train our own minds in such a way that we will be able to plunge into the current of life and become one with its flow; then all our hesitations and uncertainties will vanish. This is what training the mind really means.Just because we are using modern language to discuss these matters, you mustn't make the mistake of supposing that what we are saying has nothing to do with the Buddhadharma. The Vows of Samantabhadra tell us that we must "always accord with sentient beings". But we will find that we can only achieve this kind of perfect accord when water mingles with water. If you are still only a fallen leaf you will just be swept along by the current, and leaves sometimes get washed up onto the shore. That is not being "always in accord"; but if you become the water you have only to flow along with the current and eventually you will reach the ocean.But that is not all, for when water flows with the current many things can happen. If the self perceives some unknown realm of experience ahead of it, the intelligence starts to feel afraid. But what does the mind do? It lets us go wherever the current may take us. Should the self encounter a desert it will be filled with fear, for a river that flows into the desert will disappear, but to the mind it doesn't matter if we vanish. The self can't tolerate the thought of disappearing in this way, so it resists the possibility. In our own lives this 'desert' is death, and death is something that the self will always reject, so it starts to struggle, but the more it struggles the more likely it is to fall into the lower realms of rebirth. But if your life resides in the essential nature of your mind and not in the exercise of your rational intelligence, when you flow into the desert and vanish you will also be transcending the three worlds of desire, form and formlessness.Where is the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" in all this? It is right here in these simple facts but we are unable to see it. As a result, when we encounter something new our intelligence reacts immediately by becoming fearful. But those who use their mind can accept whatever happens. If something comes, let it come! But suppose you end up with your head broken and bleeding -- would you be able to accept that?Let me give you an example. When Zung Mi, the Fifth Patriarch of the Huayen School, was arrested for protecting the Prime Minister Li Jifu and taken to the palace for sentencing in the Ministry of Justice, he said to the emperor, "When he came to me I knew I was likely to lose my life but I couldn't refuse to save him. How could I have handed him over to you to be killed? If you think that I have committed a capital offence, please execute me now!" When the emperor saw Zung Mi so calm in the face of death, he realized that he could hardly expect a monk who had renounced the world to be so lacking in compassion as to have a man bound and delivered up to be killed, and so he pardoned the great master.Are you capable of this kind of courage and wisdom? This is how it is when your life becomes one with the flow of the mind: whatever you encounter, you have no fear at all. Do you understand what sort of mental state Zung Mi was in at that time? He had developed his mind to the point where he realized that even if his body perished his life would be unaffected, for it was already one with the life of heaven and earth. So death holds no terror for a real practitioner. To an ordinary person however death remains a fearful prospect, for it appears to the rational mind as something completely alien. After all, the self is dependent on the body, so if the body is destroyed what will become of the self?But our real life is to be found in the working of our mind -- it doesn't depend on our physical form. Our purpose in studying the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" is to become aware of our mind's 'original face' or true nature. This is not something you can resolve by intellectual analysis. If you try to understand this teaching by using your old habits of thought, you are going about it in quite the wrong way. The essential point of the teaching is something that transcends your rational intelligence and it can never be grasped at a purely intellectual level. The Buddhadharma wants us to understand that we should not live through our intelligence but through our mind. Our mind is our life; it guides us in our daily lives and shapes all our experiences. It's extremely important that we feel the truth of this.For long ages and many lifetimes we have been playing games with our intelligence, but now we are practising Dharma and want to get free of our attachments, to achieve a breakthrough. This is a very serious undertaking, and it's not the sort of thing that can be fully elucidated by providing an outline of the Buddhist teachings or by telling a few simple stories. Of course we can read through Cheng Guan's essay and explain what he says in more modern language; that would only take an hour or so. But to bring out the deeper significance of the text in a way that everybody will be able to understand is a different matter altogether. This is the first point that we need to consider.The next thing I would like to draw your attention to is that when the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" speaks of the mind, it is referring to the mind of what we call the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality, whereas the intellect or rational intelligence is the mind of what is called the Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising. I think that if we explain the difference between the two types of mind in these theoretical terms it may be easier to understand.I mentioned the Arising of Reality and Conditioned Arising when I spoke to you earlier about Huayen philosophy. There are two kinds of conditioned arising or interdependent origination, the impure and the pure, and together they make up the whole Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising. Within this realm we are subject to delusions and misperceptions, and as a result we create karma and experience all kinds of suffering. This comes about through the working of the intellect or rational mind. At this level everything takes place within the Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising. The mind of which the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" speaks, however, operates within the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality. Thus the difference between these two minds is very great. Within the Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising it is as the "Kshitigarbha Sutra" says: "Once the mind arises and starts producing thoughts, everything is karma, everything is wrong." Within the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality on the other hand our minds are truly focused on the Buddha and we can say that "once the mind arises and starts producing thoughts, every gesture of the hands and every movement of the feet exemplifies the sublime conduct of Samantabhadra".When we speak in terms of the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality and in terms of the Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising, we are not using words in the same way. If you are not aware of this difference in usage, you will find many contradictory statements in the Buddhist teachings. For example we might say that "everyone is fully endowed with the Buddha-nature" or that "our karmic obscurations are very deep", that "all things are devoid of reality" or that "a billion buddharealms west of this world there is the pure land of Sukhavati". So are we really endowed with the Buddha-nature or are we hopelessly weighed down by our karmic burdens? Is Sukhavati unreal or does such a place really exist? I can assure you that if it's unreal your going there won't be in vain, but if it has solid reality you'll never be able to get in, and then what will you do? We only get caught up in these contradictions because we have failed to understand the teachings properly and so we are unable to see what the real truth of the matter is.So first of all we have to distinguish these two levels of meaning. In other words we have to ask ourselves, are we in the Dharmarealm of Conditioned Arising or the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality? If the first, we have a mind that is prone to competitiveness and exhibitionism; then all our thoughts will be wrong and will just create more karma. This is the sort of person I spoke of earlier, one who is always arguing and stirring up controversies. But if you are in the Dharmarealm of the Arising of Reality, your mind will be free from the taint of craving, from the desire for fame and wealth. Then you won't be concerned about right and wrong, success and failure, profit and loss, and so of course you're not going to get caught up in any disputes. Whatever you might have to say will be directly related to the immediate situation and will give practical guidance to other sentient beings.Now I would like to tell you about something that you can apply quite widely, namely, the distinction between social age and spiritual age. In sociology and biology one often speaks of social age and biological age. When we ask someone how old they are or how big their children have grown, we are talking about biological age. But there are some children who still retain a certain childishness no matter how big and strong they may have grown. So you could say that they are quite grown up in terms of their biological age but are still psychologically immature. It is this degree of psychological maturity or immaturity that we are referring to when we speak of social age. On the other hand some people are just the opposite: although they are quite young they are very competent in fulfilling their social responsibilities, so we can say that they are already mature in terms of their social age. We can find extreme cases of the former type who even in their forties or fifties are going about their daily business in a slipshod, short-sighted manner like a five- or six-year-old child. This shows that they are still socially immature.Then again in Buddhist circles today it's possible to encounter people who are competent and quite mature in terms of their social age but are still spiritually childish. Because they are so mature and efficient in social matters, everyone assumes that they must be equally accomplished in the Buddhadharma, but I can assure you that people of this type are in fact extremely stupid. Their social skills are undeniable, but their social maturity is in no way matched by their spiritual development. They themselves often believe that their social achievements entitle them to push their way into Buddhist groups and take charge of those too, but that is why I say they are stupid.Let me give you an example. We frequently see men who achieve a degree of social prominence or business success and then think about getting married, but before long his poor wife can be found crouched in a corner of the house like a frightened kitten. A husband like this might score 100% on the scale of social maturity but only zero on the spiritual scale because he has no idea how to treat his wife with respect. I think we all know of such cases. For people of this type social and business success often ends in divorce.Now let's take a contrary example from the Buddhist scriptures. There was a disciple of the Buddha called Kshudrapanthaka who was very advanced in terms of his spiritual age but was socially quite immature. Because of this social immaturity people regarded him as dim-witted. If you gave him a dustpan he'd forget the broom, and if you gave him the broom he'd forget the dustpan. And yet he subsequently became an arhat. So after he had achieved Enlightenment as an arhat, was he able to remember that the dustpan and broom should be kept together? Not necessarily. If somebody were to become an arhat now, it doesn't necessarily follow that they'd immediately know how to swim or drive a car. Swimming and driving cars are things that have to do with your social age, but whether or not you become an arhat depends on your spiritual age. The two don't always go together. Dharma practice is meant to increase your spiritual age, to make you a bit more mature and less childish. If you really become spiritually mature, you'll never feel that your life is empty or that you are powerless to change anything; you won't be left wondering what the point of your existence is. Now can you see what it is that the "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" wants you to study? Perhaps you might be tempted to exclaim "The mind! We just have to pay proper attention to the mind, to train the mind." But how exactly are you proposing to train it? If your spiritual age is as low as that, any training you do is only likely to be a waste of time, so you might as well leave your mind as it is.When we say that everybody has the buddha-nature, we mean that everybody is capable of achieving spiritual maturity. But this spiritual maturity has nothing to do with your social age. Regardless of whether you stand at 100% or 0% on the social-age scale, you can still become an arhat. In either case your spiritual age can continue to increase until it has reached 100%. Your rational intelligence can help you to develop your social age, but if you don't know how to use your mind properly, your spiritual age will never increase.When we are studying the Buddhadharma we need to understand very clearly just what it is that we are studying, because we can't afford to make any mistakes. But most people go astray at this point and end up not really knowing what they are doing. In distinguishing between different aspects of "the essential nature of the mind", I'm trying to use present-day language but I'm not sure if I'm making myself sufficiently clear or not. Perhaps you have previously studied Buddhism from an intellectual point of view, but none of that is really relevant here. What you are being asked to do now is to develop your "mind" in the sense of the "mind-ground" or the "essential nature of the mind". In order to develop our mind in this way, we need to rely on a teaching or "Dharma instruction" that will show us how to do it. Teachings like this will give us a starting-point from which we can learn to cultivate the Dharma and eventually achieve Buddhahood. In the present case our starting-point is precisely this "mind-ground" and the key to successful practice is the ability to grasp its true nature.The word "instruction" in "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" refers to two things. One is the essential nature of the mind itself as the starting-point for our practice and the other is the method that has to be followed if we truly want to grasp the essential nature of the mind. In fact grasping the real nature of one's mind is not so easily accomplished. Let's think about it for a moment. Here I am talking to you today and you're all sitting there listening. But don't you sometimes feel that even while you are sitting there your mind is actually somewhere else, off thinking about family matters perhaps? You mustn't suppose that the mind is easy to grasp, but the need to do so and to base our Dharma practice in the real nature of the mind is the first thing that this text has to teach us.So if we intend to practise Buddhism in this way, there are two basic things that we must do. In the first place we need to grasp the real nature of our mind, for if we can't do that we will have no way of putting these teachings on the essential nature of the mind into practice at all. But once we have done that, we then need to work out how we should proceed with the practice using the mind as our starting-point. Until they are five or six years old almost everybody lives within the realm of the mind, but then they start to change. Why? Because their mind has already become polluted. By degrees the original purity and integrity of the mind is lost as we start to develop our intellect and live according to conventional ideas of social maturity. One sometimes sees children who are very bright. They never have to be taught anything more than once and they can get top marks in their exams without needing to study. Their delighted parents will then reward them with sweets or money and the children start to think that they can always get a reward just by doing well in an examination. In this way the original purity and integrity of the child's mind is gradually obliterated by the parents themselves.Every individual starts out as something precious, as a normal, healthy human being. But now we are no longer either normal or healthy, and Shakyamuni Buddha describes our abnormal patterns of behaviour as "aberrations" (viparyasa). If we want to practise Buddhism we have to learn how to shun these aberrations and become sane and healthy again. The purpose of Buddhism is to become enlightened, but an enlightened human being is really just someone who is functioning normally. Enlightenment doesn't mean growing a halo and walking around three inches above the ground.The Buddha's achievement was a human achievement: he transformed himself from an abnormal human being into a normal one, from someone living an abnormal life into someone living normally. So we also study and practise Buddhism for the same reason: to turn our abnormal way of life into something normal. But what exactly do we mean by normal? Can you tell? Suppose you see somebody in monastic robes walking along the street. What are they dressed like that for? But if you ask them, they're quite likely to reply that they're very busy; then they go on dashing from one temple to the next. This is just learning how to move faster all the time, not how to live normally. So even for Buddhists it's by no means easy to keep the purpose of studying the Dharma clearly in mind! You mustn't think that a short phrase like "Dharma Instruction on the Essential Nature of the Mind" is something that any primary-school student can understand. The main thing is not to get stuck on the literal meaning of the words but to feel the truth of them in your actual life. Whatever truth you experience in this way belongs entirely to you. If you can experience ten percent of it, you get ten percent of the benefit. If you experience twenty percent, you get twenty percent of the benefit. And if you don't experience anything at all, well that's up to you too.I've been going into some detail about all this, but I'll give you an overview of the theoretical framework later on. If we were to plunge into the theory right from the beginning, I'm afraid it might make the text sound too difficult. Listening to this kind of teaching requires patience. You should continue to reflect over the coming months on what you've heard, for otherwise you're likely to think next time that I'm just repeating the same old stuff all over again. But in fact you still wouldn't get the point even if I did repeat it all again, as long as all you're listening to is the words. My hope is that through the words you will be able to arrive at their real purpose, which is the transformation of your own mind.This teaching has to do with the very centre of our being, so it can't be too difficult. It's discussing something that we have always been endowed with. Since everybody has the buddha-nature, you shouldn't underestimate yourself, but at the same time you must understand that a rigidly intellectual approach is not going to work. If that's your attitude you'd be better off not listening to these talks at all, because an overdeveloped intellect and excessive reliance on your rational intelligence will only cause you to feel unhappy and think you're being scolded all the time. I hope you will be able to curb this tendency a bit, for only then will you be able to grasp the real import of these teachings

http://211.72.15.72/huayen/public/preview.php?id=881&main=013&sub=44

The Meaning of Vairocana in Hua-yen Buddhism

2007-12-07T04:53:00.000-08:00

The Meaning of Vairocana in Hua-yen Buddhism

By Francis H. Cook

Philosophy East & West Vol. 22, No. 4 (October 1972)pp. 403-415
Copyright 1972 by University of Hawaii PressHawaii, USA

p. 403
As the Buddha who occupies the center of the ma.n.dala in esoteric Buddhism, Vairocana is well known to students of Tibetan Buddhism and Japanese Shingon. He also shares with such Buddhas as `Saakyamuni, Amitaabha, and others a wide circle of devotees among the exoteric forms of Buddhism in Japan and China. In Sino-Japanese Buddhism outside Shingon, he is most often associated with the Hua-yen (in Japanese, Kegon) school. This article is limited to the Hua-yen concept of Vairocana, and I do not presume to imply that my conclusions apply to his esoteric form.
Vairocana is, of course, the cosmic Buddha of Great Illumination, whose body is infinitely large and whose life is infinitely long. A pamphlet given to the visitor at Toodai-ji, the headquarters of Japanese Hua-yen, in Nara, tells us, "... Vairocana Buddha exists everywhere and every time in the universe, and the universe itself is his body. At the same time, the songs of birds, the colors of flowers, the currents of streams, the figures of clouds -- all these are the sermons of Buddha." [1] We are also told that this great Buddha is preaching constantly and eternally for the salvation of all beings.
The past practices of the Buddha VairocanaCause oceans of Buddha-lands to be purified.Immeasurable, incalculable, infinite,He freely pervades all places.The Dharma-body of the Tathaagata is inconceivable;It is formless, markless, and beyond comparison.He manifests a form and marks for the sake of living beingsAnd there is no place he is not manifested.In all the atoms of all the Buddha-lands,Vairocana displays his sovereign might.He vows with the earth-shaking sounds of oceans of BuddhasTo tame every kind of living being. [2]
These passages, and others which will be quoted later, seem to be clear enough. Vairocana is, in some sense, the universe. But in what sense are we to understand such passages? Do they mean literally that the universe is in the shape of a huge man, like the cosmic puru.sa of some of the older non-Buddhist Indian texts? Do they rather mean that Vairocana is a spirit who inhabits the forms of men, stones, grass, stars, and so on? We seem to be confronted here, in short, in the figure of Vairocana and the Hua-yen view of existence, with some form of that dread pantheism which is so abhorred by spokesmen for the great monotheistic religions. Certainly the language leads to that conclusion. These passages, as well as numerous others in Hua-yen literature, lead us to
1. "Toodai-ji" (Nara: Toodai-ji, n.d.).
2. Hua-yen wu chiao shih kuan, attributed to Tu-shun. Number 1867, page 513c, in Taishoo shinshuu daizookyoo. Hereafter, all references to the latter will be indicated by the letter T, followed by the number of the text, page, and register.

p. 404
believe that Vairocana is a substance which is immanent in phenomenal things. A corollary of this, that the phenomenal world itself is an emanation of some prior existing world stuff, grows out of the language of Hua-yen texts.
Let us dispose first of the matter of pan-theism, because it is no real issue here. Buddhism is not, of course, a theistic religion, and so, strictly speaking, we are certainly not confronted with pantheism. Whatever Vairocana ultimately is, he has very few of the functions of deity. He is not the creator of the universe, though the language of Hua-yen texts do give that impression. He is not the stern judge of good and bad, though he is law itself. One cannot pray to Vairocana, petition him for favors, make deals with him, or love or fear him. Vairocana is not that kind of being. In short, he is not a god. However, he is a Buddha, and therefore we can raise the question of whether Hua-yen teaches pan-Buddhism. It is clear that Hua-yen does claim that in some sense everything is Vairocana, and so, flatly stated, without qualification, Hua-yen is a species of pan-Buddhism. However, having said that, the real question remains: In what sense is the universe identical with Vairocana? The question is, simply put, what, or who, is Vairocana?
We are led astray at the very beginning with the language used in the systematic texts of such writers as Fa-tsang (643-712), the third patriarch and de facto founder of the Hua-yen system. His treatises are the beginning and end of any study of Hua-yen, and his terminology easily leads us to some wrong conclusions. [3] One of the best examples of this can be found in his Hua-yen i ch'eng chiao i fen-ch'i chang [a] (hereafter translated as "Treatise on the Five Doctrines," [4]) which is, in its overall intent, devoted to demonstrating two things: (1) the essential identity of all phenomena, and (2) the interpenetration, or interdependence, of these same phenomena. His success in showing the former depends on his ability to demonstrate first that all the apparently diverse and distinct things which comprise the phenomenal universe are at heart identical because of essential emptiness (`suunyataa). He accomplishes this through a highly unusual treatment of the well-known theory of the three natures (tri-svabhaava). [5] The three natures of any one thing are parikalpita-svabhaava, which is the imagined, false nature of a thing; paratantra-
3. Among these are the long commentary on the Avata^msaka Suutra, the T'an hsüan chi, T, no. 1733, and the Hua-yen i ch'eng chiao i fen-ch'i chang, T, no. 1866, which is his most systematic and detailed treatise on the structure of Hua-yen. I have also used his commentary on the "Heart Sutra," Pan-lo-po-lo-mi-to hsin ching lio shu, T, no. 1712, as well as the work mentioned in the note just preceding.
4. The shorter title, commonly used by Japanese Buddhologists, is Wu chiao chang. [b]
5. Discussions of the three natures can be found in the following works: La Somme du Grand Véhicule (Mahaayaanasa^mgraha), trans. Étienne Lamotte (Louvain: Museon, 1938), 2:107-152; Le Siddhi de Hiuan-tsang (Vij~naptimaatrataa-siddhi), trans. Louis de La Vallée Poussin (Paris: Libraire Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1928), p. 561; "Le petit traite de Vasubandhu-Naagaarjuna sur les trois natures" (Trisvabhaava nirde`sa), trans. Louis de La Vallée Poussin, Melanges Chinois et Bouddhiques (1932-1933), 2:147-161.

p. 405
svabhaava, which is the thing in its nature of being dependent on other conditions for its existence; and parini.spanna-svabhaava, the perfected or absolute nature of the same thing. A common treatment of the three natures in Buddhist literature consists of interpreting the first as impure, the third as pure, and the middle as a mixture of impure and pure. [6] What this means, of course, is that the dependent nature, which is phenomenal existence resulting from conditions, itself is a compound of the impure and pure, because if the imagined, false aspect of that dependent nature is removed through meditational practices, the purified dependent nature will be revealed as the perfected, absolute nature. This is possible because Buddhist practice involves primarily a change in one's way of viewing existence. What is unusual in Fa-tsang's treatment is that he shows that each of the three natures is itself composed of two parts, which may be called the absolute and relative, and that because of this mixture, although things may be different in function, appearance, and so on, they are all identical in being ultimately and essentially absolute. Since the first nature, parikalpita, is not really germane to this discussion, I will restrict myself to an analysis of the other two natures. For this discussion it is important to remember that although two (or three) natures are being discussed, they occur in any one object.
In discussing the perfected nature of the object at hand, Fa-tsang says that this nature has two aspects. First, it is immutable, or nonchanging. [7] This is, of course, to be expected of the absolute. It never changes under any conditions, and is by definition eternal, unmoving, unchanging, and, in general, always exactly what it is. This is a common description of the Dharma kaaya in all schools of Buddhism. However, next, Fa-tsang says something which is not only uncommon in Buddhism, but which seems to be a logical contradiction of his first statement. He says that this perfected nature "obeys conditions"; that is, it is conditioned by things outside itself, and, under the sway of these conditions, changes and manifests itself as the phenomenal world of discrete objects. [8] While the immutability and the devolution into phenomenal forms seem to contradict each other, the reason this is not really a self-contradiction will be clear when we have settled the precise meaning of the two terms.
Next, Fa-tsang turns to the dependent nature, and here, too, he finds a dual aspect. First, it has the aspect of quasi-existence. [9] By this he means that it appears to the senses to be absolutely existent, but because it is a result of conditions, it has no ultimacy. It is evident from his discussion that this
6. Mahaayaanasa^mgraha, T, no. 1593, p. 193. See also, La Somme du Grand Véhicule, trans. Étienne Lamotte (Louvain: Museon, 1938), II:125.
7. pu pien. [c] The following discussion is based on pages 499a-503a of Fa-tsang's "Treatise on the Five Doctrines," T, no. 1866.
8. sui yüan. [d] I have sometimes translated this simply as "conditionedness."
9. ssü yu. [e] He says that it can also be called "phenomenal existence," chia yu. [f]

p. 406
conditioned, quasi-existent phenomenon is nothing other than the conditioned aspect of the perfected nature. Now, he says, if we scrutinize this apparently really existent thing, we will discover that it is completely lacking in any nature of its own. [10] In Buddhist terminology, it lacks a svabhaava, which can be translated as "own-being," "self-nature," and "nature of its own." It is therefore empty and has only a contingent existence. Thus, though it appears before us as a really existing thing, it does not have an ultimate existence at all, since, according to Buddhist axiom, only something with a svabhaava is really real. The two aspects of each nature will be clearer if they are shown ii a simple chart.
One object¢w¢w
¢z¢x ¢x¢x¢
perfected nature¢w¢w¢w(absolute)
¢z ¢x¢
immutable
obeys conditions
dependent nature¢w¢w(phenomenal existence)
¢z¢x¢
quasi existent
without a nature of its own [11]
The purpose of this sort of treatment of the two natures, as was remarked above, is to show that when we examine all sides of the world of things that confront us, we find that these things have a mixed nature. Fa-tsang now says that the naturelessness of phenomena is identical with the immutable aspect of the absolute, and the quasi-existent aspect of things is identical with the conditioned aspect of the absolute. Whether we examine the absolute or the phenomenal, we arrive at the same two aspects, the absolute and the phenomenal. Things are thus a mixture of these two, and this is a common treatment of the dependent nature; that is, the universe of conditioned things. It is not my intention to dwell on Fa-tsang's reason for doing this sort of thing or the consequences for Hua-yen philosophy. What concerns me more here is to try to determine what Fa-tsang means by "immutable," "obedience to conditions," and so on.
At this point, several remarks are in order for the sake of clarity. The peculiar method of subdivision used by Fa-tsang may seem to show that in the discussion of the perfected nature, for instance, the two aspects of immutability and obedience to conditions are distinguishable aspects of an underlying ground. But, the subdivision is merely meant to show that, on the one hand, the absolute remains the absolute, which is what "immutable" means
10. wu hsing. [g] "Without nature" means "without self-nature." It has no svabhaava because it exists only in its parabhaava.
11. The third nature, parikalpita (imagined), is said to have the two aspects of "existing to the senses" ch'ing yu [h] and "nonexisting in reality" li wu. [i]

p. 407
there, and, on the other hand, that it also obeys conditions which cause it to manifest itself as the world of phenomenal objects. Then, when we turn to the dependent nature, we are, in fact, not really leaving the conditioned, manifested aspect of the perfected nature; the "obedience to conditions" of the perfected nature and the "quasi-existence" of the dependent nature are the same thing. The aspect of self-naturelessness in this quasi-existence is simply the way in which this quasi-existent phenomenality really exists. A simpler diagram would show the situation to be like this:
Perfected nature (immutable, absolute) ¡õ Obeys conditions, becomes phenomenal world = quasi-existence ¡õ Without self-nature (`suunya) = immutable, absolute
From this, we rightly conclude that if the emptiness of phenomenal reality is identical with the immutable absolute, the real reality of phenomena must be its noumenous, perfect nature.
At this point, some of the problems involved in determining what Buddhists really mean by 'Vairocana' must already be apparent. This is repeated in almost identical language in other works by Fa-tsang as well as in the writings of other Hua-yen masters. The same picture is to be found also in the "Awakening of Faith in the Mahaayaana," where it is said that "As a result of the winds of ignorance, Mind, which is intrinsically pure, becomes agitated and becomes impure mind." [12] This is not mere coincidence, as can be seen in the many times in Fa-tsang's "Treatise" when he quotes the "Awakening of Faith." It is evident that Fa-tsang has used the elaborate and round-about method of manipulating the three-nature theory to establish on his own grounds a picture of existence which is identical with that of the "Awakening of Faith." [13] Both Fa-tsang's description of the structure of existence and that of the "Awakening of Faith" have been referred to as species of tathaagata garbha thought, which they are, and the problem of language is a major obstacle in trying to figure out what this kind of system is getting at.
The problem with Fa-tsang's description of existence begins with his insistence in speaking of the absolute in terms of immutability. "Immutability" has the strong connotation of stasis, and when we are told that this immutable absolute forms the real essence of phenomenal reality, our natural tendency is
12. Quoted in the "Treatise on the Five Doctrines," p. 500b.
13. One reason for the elaborate device of the three natures is that during Fa-tsang's life, the new and influential Fa-hsiang school of Hsuan-tsang and his disciples was gaining strength in China, and Fa-tsang probably felt that he had to account for it. The three natures are usually associated with the Fa-hsiang school.

p. 408
to conceive of it as a static entity lying immanent in things. We therefore conceive of it as a substance of some sort, which constitutes the eternal and unchanging core beneath the constant flux of external features. Fa-tsang is emphatic about the point that although the absolute obeys the force of conditions and becomes the phenomenal world, it never loses its aspect of immutability. However, at the same time, to speak of the absolute as becoming conditioned and forming phenomenal reality gives the strong impression that the absolute must have existed prior in time to the things it later became, and along with the impression of the absolute as substance we get the corollary impression that we are dealing here with a theory of emanation, similar to that found, for instance, in the Lao-tzu.
Another passage from another of Fa-tsang's commentaries shows the same language, with the same connotations. In speaking of the two aspects of the absolute, he uses the analogy of gold:
Gold has the two aspects of immutability and obedience to conditions. It has the meaning of immutability because it does not lose its weight [i.e., it is not diminished]. It has the meaning of obedience to conditions because it easily becomes finger rings [and other things]. Also, the ring has the two aspects of emptiness and manifestation. It has no essence apart from the gold, so it is empty. It appears before us because the ring looks like a ring. Because the emptiness of the ring is dependent on the immutability of the gold, even though the ring may lose its form of a ring, the gold is not diminished. Consequently, living beings are the Dharma-body [of the Buddha]. Also, because the manifestation of the ring is dependent on the gold's obedience to conditions, the gold's whole essence manifests as a ring. Therefore, the Dharma-body is beings. [14]
What does this sort of language mean?
Fortunately, in the above description of the structure of existence, Fa-tsang makes another series of equations which will help us determine more accurately what he means by "immutability" and "obedience to conditions." Shortly after discussing the two aspects of each of the three natures and having asserted an essential identity of phenomenal existence, Fa-tsang makes the following series of equations:
Tathataa [i.e., the perfected nature] means existence, because it is the basis of error and enlightenment. Also, it means non-empty because it is indestructible... Also, tathataa means emptiness, because it is divorced from characteristics, because it obeys conditions, and because it is opposed to impurity... Also tathataa both exists and does not exist, [i.e., is empty] because it is endowed with [both] qualities [of existence and emptiness]...The nature which is dependent on the other (paratantra-svabhaava) means existence, because it is formed by conditions, since it lacks a nature of its own .... Also, [it] means non-existence, because that which is created from conditions has no nature of its own...
14. Ta-ch'eng fa chiai wu ch'a pieh lun shu, [j] T, no. 1838.

p. 409
[It] also both exists and does not exist, because it is formed from conditions and has no nature of its own... [15]
Keeping in mind that Fa-tsang frequently substitutes the term "nonexistence" for "emptiness," his equations will look like this:
Perfected nature
¢z¢x¢
Immutability =existence
Obeys conditions = nonexistence (empty)
Dependent nature
¢z¢x¢
Quasi-existence = existence
Without its own nature == nonexistence (empty)
Whatever Fa-tsang means by "immutability" and "obedience to conditions," they are equated with existence and emptiness respectively. The same equation is made with reference to the aspects of the dependent nature, and since, as we noticed earlier, the naturelessness of the dependent nature is identical with the immutability of the perfected nature, and the quasi-existence of the dependent nature is also identical with the conditionedness of the perfected nature, Fa-tsang is also saying that existence and emptiness are identical, a sound `suunyavaadin statement. Now, if we can learn how Fa-tsang understands "existence" and "emptiness," we should be able to discover what he means by "immutability," and so on.
The solution to this problem can be found in a number of Fa-tsang's writings, but one of the best sources is his commentary on the famous and vastly important "Heart Sutra," where he is not ostensibly concerned with demonstrating the truth of Hua-yen. [16] As is well known to students of Buddhism, this brief suutra is remarkable because it presents in the space of about one printed page the gist, or "heart," of the vast praj~naapaaramitaa teaching on emptiness. Concerned as it is, therefore, with the relationship between form (Fa-tsang's "existence") and emptiness, Fa-tsang's commentary on it should give us a good index of his understanding of these two terms. In commenting on the lines of the sutra which say, "Oh, `Saariputra, form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not different from form. Form is identical with emptiness and emptiness is identical with form. The same is true concerning feelings, ideas, volition, and consciousness," Fa-tsang says this with regard to form and emptiness:
These doubts [by the small vehicle] are as follows: [the adherent to the small vehicle says,] 'Our small vehicle sees that while the psycho-physical being still persists, the constituents of personality [skandhas] are without a self. What is the difference between this and the emptiness of dharmas?' Now we explain this by saying that your belief is that the absence of a self among the
15. "Treatise on the Five Doctrines," p. 501b-c.
16. Pan-lo-po-to-mi-to hsin ching lio shu ("Brief commentary on the Praj~naapaaramitaah.rdaya Suutra"), T, no. 1712.

p. 410
constituents of personality is called 'emptiness of the person.' It is not that [each of] the skandhas themselves are empty. Here, the skandhas are different from emptiness. Now we show that the skandhas themselves are empty of own-being (svabhaava), which is different from what you hold. Therefore, the suutra says, 'Form is not different from emptiness, etc.'Also, they doubt thus: 'In our small vehicle, when one enters the state (nirvaa.na) in which there is no psycho-physical being, body and mind [lit. 'knowledge'] are both terminated. What is the difference between this and "emptiness is without form"?' The explanation is this: in your tenet, form is not [in itself] empty, but only when form is destroyed is there then emptiness. This is not, however, so. Form is identical with emptiness; it is not an emptiness which results from the destruction of form. Therefore, this is not the same [as what you teach]. [17]
Further on, the same explanation is given to the Mahaayaana Bodhisattva, and a third point is added:
The third doubt [entertained by the Bodhisattva] is that he believes that emptiness is a thing, [k] and he seizes on emptiness as an entity. Now, [the sutra] shows that emptiness is identical with form. One should not seize emptiness with [the concept of] emptiness. [18]
Several conclusions can be drawn from these comments. First, Fa-tsang knew that emptiness does not refer merely to the absence of a self considered to be an underlying personal unity in the five skandhas, as understood by Hiinayaanists, but that it means that each of the five skandhas itself has no nature of its own. Thus, for instance, there is no form essence, or "formness," in form. While the Hiinayaanists denied the existence of a real self as the core reality of the psycho-physical being, they felt that the building blocks of the being, the five skandhas, were realities. Now, in line with the "Heart Sutra," Fa-tsang says that each of the skandhas is also lacking in a nature of its own. Second, Fa-tsang knew that emptiness was not merely the absence of a thing in a locus. Emptiness is not something which occurs when matter and mind are absent, but is something said of existing things. Emptiness, therefore, is completely inseparable from form. Finally, Fa-tsang knew that emptiness was not a thing. The aspirant was not to reify emptiness and in this way try to grasp emptiness with the concept "emptiness." In this respect, Fa-tsang had inherited the work done by such predecessors as Seng-chao, who demonstrated that emptiness was not simply a more spiritual thing among a lot of other things. [19] He obviously knew that emptiness was not just another order of reality, albeit a more spiritual one, existing along side the phenomenal order, but that it was inseparable from form, or existence, itself.
Later, Fa-tsang discusses existence and emptiness in such a way that we
17. Ibid., p. 553a.
18. Ibid., p. 553a.
19. Chao-lun, "Emptiness of the Non-Absolute," in Richard Robinson, Early Maadhyamika in India and China (Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967), p. 140.

p. 411
can clearly see that emptiness is not something apart from form itself. He says that form and emptiness are related to each other in three ways.
First, they are opposed to each other. A passage a little further on says, 'In emptiness there is no form,' etc., because emptiness injures form. In accordance with this, it can be said that 'in form there is no emptiness,' because form opposes emptiness. The reason for this is that if they preserve each other, they also necessarily destroy each other. Second, they are not mutually opposing. This means that since form is illusory, form does not necessarily obstruct emptiness. Because emptiness is true emptiness, it does not necessarily obstruct illusory form. If emptiness obstructed form, then this would be a destructive emptiness, and not real emptiness. If [form] obstructed emptiness, then it would be real form, not illusory form. Third, they are mutually creative. [l] That is, if this illusory form were to show an essence, then it would not be empty and would not become illusory form. The Pa~ncavi^m`satisaahasrikaa praj~naapaaramitaa suutra says, 'If all dharmas were not empty, there would be no religious practices, no religious result,' etc. The Maadhyamikakaarikaas [of Naagaarjuna] say, 'Because there is the principle of emptiness, therefore all dharmas are able to be perfected.' [20]
Fa-tsang's comments show the following points. (1) To say that dharmas are empty is to negate the absolute reality of form. (2) In negating form, emptiness does not literally destroy form. The object that possesses a material existence and appears before my very eyes is empty. To say that my pocket is empty does not mean that there is no pocket. The pocket is empty. By the same token, form does not cancel out the emptiness of that form. (3) Form and emptiness are mutually creative. There is form because there is emptiness, and there is, concomitantly, emptiness because there is form. Notice here that while it is true that form can only be form because there is emptiness, it is equally true that if there were no form, there would be no emptiness. Emptiness, therefore, is not something existing independently of form itself. Fa-tsang concludes this passage by saying that "... even though this true emptiness is the same as form and so forth, still, form arises from conditions. True emptiness does not produce form. In accordance with conditions, it [form] perishes. True emptiness does not extinguish [form]." [21] (Italics mine.) Here again, Fa-tsang takes pains to deny that although form and emptiness are identical, emptiness either creates form or destroys it. Form results from conditions.
In his essay called "Tranquility and Insight According to the Five Doctrines," Fa-tsang discusses the early doctrine of emptiness as taught by Naagaarjuna and his contemporaries, and makes these remarks:
All dharmas have the mark of emptiness, without exception... First, they are contemplated as being birthless. Second, they are contemplated as markless. 'Contemplated as being birthless' means that dharmas have no nature
20. Pan-lo-po-lo-mi-to hsin ching lio shu, p. 553a-b.
21. Ibid., p. 553c.

p. 412
of their own [svabhaava]. They are mutually causative [m] and therefore are born. In their birth, they do not exist in reality, and so they are empty. They are as empty and non-existent as anything can be. Therefore, they are said to be birthless. A suutra says, 'They are conditioned and therefore exist; they are without a nature of their own and are therefore empty.' This means that being natureless is identical with being conditioned. Being conditioned is identical with being natureless. [22]
This is a particularly revealing commentary. It adds to the former denial of substantialism the positive assertions with regard to existence and emptiness that (1) the existence of dharmas consists of their being formed by conditions or mutual causation. As the previous passages also noted, phenomenal reality comes into being as a result of conditions. (2) The conditionedness of phenomenal existence is precisely its emptiness, and Fa-tsang says explicitly that "Conditionedness is naturelessness"; that is, things are without nature, or empty because they are conditioned. This is in complete keeping with Naagaarjuna's dictum: "It is declared that dependent origination is emptiness..." (Maadhyamikakaarikaas, 24:18). It is clear from this passage, as well as others in the same treatise, that Fa-tsang realized quite well that not only was emptiness not a substance in existent things but that existence and emptiness are not two different things. Emptiness is merely the mutually conditioned manner in which phenomenal existence exists. Therefore, it can be said that if there were no form, or existence, there would be no emptiness, since there would be nothing of which it could be said that it is empty.
With these considerations in mind, we can now return to the original question. What is Vairocana? It can be seen now that when Fa-tsang says that the emptiness of things is identical with the immutable absolute, he is not in any sense conceiving of this emptiness as a substance in phenomenal objects. If emptiness is simply the interdependent nature of phenomenal existence, then "immutability," must refer to the empty, interdependent nature of things which constitutes what may be called their transcendental aspect. In other words, it is the transcendental "ever-thus" quality of interdependence, which is never found apart from interdependent thing themselves, which is called "immutable." Moreover, the Buddhist axiom that emptiness does not occur apart from phenomena means that this immutability cannot be static but must be dynamic, since phenomena are dynamic. It is just this "thusness" of things which is the religious goal of Buddhism to reveal to the practitioner. On the other hand, the obedience to conditions by the absolute indicates not an emanation of things out of a preexistent spiritual Being, but rather the
22. Hua-yen wu chiao shih kuan, T, no. 1867, p. 511a. This is assigned to Tu-shun, the first patriarch of Chinese Hua-yen, but his authorship is doubted by various Japanese scholars, who tend to believe it is by Fa-tsang. Stylistically, it looks like Fa-tsang's writing. See, for instance, Kamata Shigeo, Chuugoku Kegon Shisoo Shi no Kenkyuu (Tookyoo: Zaidan Hoojin Tookyoo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1965), pp. 69, 135, 561.

p. 413
immanence in phenomenal existence of this transcendental aspect. This will be clear if it is remembered that according to Buddhism, the problem for human beings begins with the habit of superimposing (aaropa) constructs of a purely subjective nature on the immediacy of concrete experience, thus investing experience with meanings it does not really possess. Conversely, liberation is achieved through the expunging of this superimposition from the immediate apprehension of existence. This is, in fact, the whole point of the emptiness doctrine. It would seem therefore that the absolute obeys conditions and appears as form, or existence, in the sense that it is our inveterate ignorance (avidyaa) which conditions the absolute and makes it appear as "form," and so on. In Buddhist terms my ignorance results in tathataa (= emptiness) being subjected to false imagining (vikalpa), and this is the way in which the absolute is conditioned. The world is born of ignorance and desire. However, the true nature of things, their emptiness, is not a thing apart from the things I falsely imagine; emptiness is immanent in the world of form, and seeing it involves only a changed perspective on my experience, that is, seeing it as interdependent.
Thus, we may speak of the absolute as existent from the point of view of the absolute itself. It is, as Fa-tsang says, the ground of error and wisdom, and therefore exists. Seen, on the other hand, as mere "things," or as form, we may speak of it as empty, for while it may seem to have an ultimate reality and existence, it has no essence which truly makes it so, and its real existence is only its dependent existence. Because form is empty, the Vimalakiirtinirde`sa can say that "Beings are identical with nirvaa.na, and do not have to enter nirvaa.na again," [23] and because emptiness is form, the "Suutra on Neither Increase Nor Decrease" can say that "The Dharma-body [of the Buddha] transmigrating in the five paths [of sentient existence] is called 'sentient beings.'" [24] Seen falsely, as possessing svabhaavas, things are only things and are the source of du.hkha; seen correctly, as empty and interdependent, things are nirvaa.na and the body of Vairocana.
We can directly answer the question of who Vairocana is by giving an equation such as Fa-tsang is so fond of: emptiness = interdependence = Vairocana. "Vairocana," in short, is a mere name for the interdependent way in which things really exist. The Avata^msaka Suutra, which is the scriptural basis for the Hua-yen school, says,
Clearly know that all dharmasAre without any existence in their own being.
23. T, vol. 14, p. 542. Quoted by Fa-tsang in the "Treatise on the Five Doctrines."
24. T, vol. 16, p. 467. Quoted by Fa-tsang in his treatise. The "five paths" are those of the being in purgatories, pretas, animals, human beings, and devas.

p. 414
To understand the nature of dharmas in this wayIs to see Vairocana. [25]
It is the special mission of the Hua-yen school of Buddhism to teach a view of the universe which is called, in Sanskrit, dharmadhaatupratiityasamutpaada, which may be translated as "the dependent origination of the universe." According to this view, the universe is an eternally existing organism of interdependent parts. Fa-tsang's elaborate manipulation of the three natures, in the tenth chapter of his "Treatise on the Five Doctrines," is done in order to first demonstrate the identity of things on the basis of their common emptiness. Following this, he proceeds to discuss their dynamic interdependence. In this way, he arrives at the distinctive philosophy of Hua-yen, dharmadhaatupratiityasamutpaada, or shih shih wu ai, [n] the completely free interrelationship of all phenomena. This means that any single object in the infinite dharmadhaatu which we may choose to examine will be seen to exert sole and complete responsibility for creating and supporting all the other infinite number of objects in the universe. Since all things are simultaneously related in the same manner, we have a view of existence as mutually dependent and mutually creating. However, identity and interdependence are one and the same thing. Identity is their static relationship, and mutual support, or interpenetration, is their dynamic relationship. [26] They both mean that things are empty of a svabhaava and exist only through interdependence. It is this view of existence which Hua-yen calls "Vairocana."
Hua-yen is thus a form of pan-Buddhism if by that term we understand that "Buddha" is not a substance in things, nor the material and sufficient cause of a material universe which emanated from him. Everything is the Buddha because there is nothing which is not empty, as Naagaarjuna said centuries before Fa-tsang's time. There is not, I believe, any form of Sino-Japanese Buddhism which interprets the Buddha in a substantialistic manner, and if we think there is such a form, it is doubtless our own shortcomings in understanding which makes us think so. For 2,500 years, Buddhism has rested, in all its forms, on the bedrock teaching that it is the erroneous belief in a svabhaava which lies at the bottom of human turmoil. This applies not only to belief in a personal self, but to any form of self, including a divine one. Fa-tsang gives every sign in his writings of having understood this basic Buddhist teaching. Despite his penchant for the terms I have discussed earlier, his view of the universe as one of strict interdependence is pure, classic Buddhism. This view of existence may be called "Vairocana," "God," or
25. T, no. 279, translated during the T'ang dynasty by `Sik.saananda. The passage occurs in the chapter called "Peak of Sumeru." Fa-tsang usually used the older translation by Buddhabhadra which is no. 278 in the T.
26. Identity is hsiang chi, [o] interdependence or interpenetration is hsiang ju. [p]

p. 415
anything else, since words cannot be taken seriously in Buddhism. Therefore, "Vairocana" is as good a word as any for that kind of existence which led the Sung poet, Su Tung-p'o, to write
The sounds of the valley streams are his long, broad tongue;The forms of the mountains are his pure body.At night, I hear the myriad hymns of praise;How can I explain what they say?

The Taoist Influence on Hua-Yen Buddhism

2007-12-07T00:34:00.000-08:00

The Taoist Influence on Hua-yen Buddhism: A Case of the Sinicization of Buddhism in China
Kang-nam Oh

Professor of Religious Studies,
University of Regina
Chung-Haw Buddhist Journal
No.13.2 (May 2000)
pp.277-297
Copyright 2000 The Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

　

p.277

　

Summary

　　The religio-philosophical system presented by the Hua-yen Buddhist school of China was characteristically “Chinese” in the sense that it was not merely extensions of Indian Buddhist ideas but the reinterpretations and restatements of Buddhist thought within distinctively Chinese modes of thought and expression. Hua-yen, in this sense, was a “sinicized” Buddhism.

　　This paper examines the philosophical background of this “sinicization process.” The paper argues that the Taoist philosophy was one, possibly the most important, influence on this process. The paper tries to prove this by exploring specifically four major Hua-yen concepts derived from the Taoist tradition: hsuan (mystery), “returning to the source,” t’i-yung (essence and function), and li-shih (noumenon and phenomenon).

　

　

　

Key words: 1. Hua-yen Buddhism 2. Taoist Philosophy 3. Dharmadhaatu 4. Sinicization

　

　

　

　

p.278

I. Introduction

　　Buddhism, which was first introduced into China around the first century C.E., developed through various stages of interaction with traditional Chinese culture before it finally emerged as an integral part of the Chinese religious tradition. After the periods of preparation (ca. 65~317 C.E.) and of domestication (ca. 317~589), Buddhism came to the stage of “independent growth” in the Sui-T’ang period (589~900).[1]　In this period there flourished such schools as the T’ien-t’ai (Lotus or Saddharmapu.n.darika), the Hua-yen (Flower Garland or Avata^msaka), the Fa-hsiang (Dharma-Character or Dharmalak.sana), the Ching-t’u (Pure Land or Sukhavatii), and the Ch’an (Meditation or Dhyaana).[2]　The systems of thought of most of these schools were characteristically “Chinese” in the sense that they were not mere extensions of Indian ideas but the reinterpretations and restatements of Buddhist doctrines within distinctively Chinese modes of thought and expression to meet the intellectual and spiritual needs of the particular times and space.[3]　Among these schools, however, the Hua-yen is generally considered not only as the apex of Buddhism,[4]　but also as “the greatest

　

　

p.279

adaptation of Mahaayaana Buddhism among the various philosophical systems organized by the Chinese.”[5]

　　The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to examine some of the salient features of Hua-yen Buddhism as an example of the Sinicization of Buddhism in sixth and seventh century China. Needless to say, there must have been various religious, intellectual, and socio-political elements which conduced to the Sinicization process of Hua-yen Buddhist philosophy.[6]　In this paper, however, attention will be focused exclusively on Taoist philosophy as a possible indigenous spiritual influence on the formation of Hua-yen thought.[7]

　

　

p.280

II. The Basic Doctrine of Hua-yen

　　To have a general background for the discussion of the Taoist influence on Hua-yen, it would seem appropriate to give a brief sketch of Hua-yen philosophy.[8]　The central teaching of the Hua-yen school is the dharmadhaatu (fa-chieh) doctrine, or more specifically, the dharmadhaatu-pratiityasamutpaada (fa-chieh yuan-ch’i). The Sanskrit term dharmadhaatu, which is a compound consisting of dharma and dhaatu, has been variously translated as “the Element of the Elements,” “The Realm of All Elements,” “the Dharma-Element,” the “Reality or Essence of Dharmas,” “the Noumenal Ground of Phenomena,” “the Essence of Reality,” “the Ultimate Reality,” “Supreme Reality,” “Totality,” and so on.[9]　It is, in short, a designation of the “Ground of all Being.” The term pratiityasamutpaada means “dependent co-origination.”

　　This idea of dharmadhaatu-pratiityasamutpaada which was

　

　

p.281

originally found in the Avata^msaka-suutra or Hua-yen ching,[10]　was fully developed by the Hua-yen school into a systematic doctrine palatable to the Chinese intellectual taste. The dharmadhaatu doctrine[11]　can be said to have been, by and large, set forth by Tu-shun (557~640 C.E.), formulated by Chih-yen (602~668), systematized by Fa-tsang (643~712), and elucidated by Ch’eng-kuan (ca. 737~838) and Tsung-mi (780~841).

　　The foundation of the dharmadhaatu doctrine was definitely laid in a short treatise, Fa-chieh-kuan-men (The Gate of Insight into the Dharmadhaatu),[12]　which has been ascribed to Tu-shun, the first patriarch of the school.[13]　In this “fundamental text” it is recommended to have “threefold insight” into the dharmadhaatu, i.e.,

　

　

p.282

the insight into 1) the “true Emptiness,” 2) the “non-obstruction of li and shih” or noumenon and phenomena, and 3) “all-pervading and all-embracing [nature of phenomena]. This means that in our meditative insight we have to intuit not only the two aspects of dharmadhaatu, form (ruupa) and emptiness (`suunyataa), in their non-obstructive interrelationship but we have also to see the dharmadhaatu in terms of li and shih or the noumenal and the phenomenal in their “interfusion and dissolution, coexistence and annihilation, adversity and harmony”[14]　and their mutual identification. Even further, we are advised to realize ultimately that “shih, being identified with li, are interfusing, interpervading, mutually including, and interpermeating without obstruction.”[15]　It is said here that all the phenomenal things, having been endowed with the quality of the noumenal, are now complete in themselves, and thus they are now interrelating with each other. In this relationship, it is further said, the universal and the particular, the broad and the narrow, and the like, have no impeding boundaries but are freely interpenetrating each other without obstruction or hindrance whatsoever.

　　This last insight into the universal and inexhaustible interrelatedness of all the dharmas in the dharmadhaatu was formulated as the “ten mysteries”[16]　by the second patriarch Chih-yen in his Hua-yen I-ch’eng shih-hsuan-men (The Ten Mysteries of the One Vehicle of the Hua-yen).[17]　These ten mysteries or principles, according to Chih-yen, point to the Hua-yen truth that the myriad things in the universe freely interrelate with each other without losing their own identities. Each and every manifested object of the dharmadhaatu includes simultaneously all the qualities of the other objects within itself. Consequently all the qualities

　

　

p.283

such as hidden and manifest, pure and mixed, one and many, subtle and minute, cause and effect, big and small, time and eternity, and the rest are all simultaneously and completely compatible in any given dharma.

　　Fa-tsang, the third patriarch and greatest systematizer of the school, having inherited this basic teaching of Chih-yen, organized it within his finely refined theoretical system.[18]　Whereas Chih-yen’s “ten mysteries” had been simply set forth without elaboration, Fa-tsang incorporated the truth of the ten mysteries in the web of his grand system. It is now no longer an isolated set of meditational items, but becomes part of an organic structure substantiated in terms of “emptiness and existence,” “having power and lacking power,” and so on. It is also by him that the cardinal twin principle of Hua-yen philosophy “mutual identification” and “interpenetration” is first clearly systematized in connection with ideas of “essence and function” (t’i-yung).

　　It was the fourth patriarch of the school, Ch’eng-kuan, who built up the so-called theory of “four-fold dharmadhaatu” upon the basis of the teachings handed down by his predecessors, which subsequently became known as the standard formula of the Hua-yen dharmadhaatu doctrine. In his Fa-chieh-hsuan-ching (The Mirror of the Mystery of Dharmadhaatu), the commentary on Tu-shun’s Fa-chieh-kuan-men, Ch’eng-kuan suggests that the dharmadhaatu can be seen either as 1) shih dharmadhaatu, 2) li dharmadhaatu, 3)

　

　

p.284

dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction of li and shih, or 4) dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction of shih and shih.[19]　According to his explanation, the first one is the dharmadhaatu particularized or phenomenalized into innumerable concrete things. The second one, li dharmadhaatu, is the “essential” aspect of the dharmadhaatu which is the foundation of all the manifested phenomena. The third one is the aspect of the dharmadhaatu in which phenomena and noumenon interfuse each other. The fourth dimension of the dharmadhaatu, according to Ch’eng-kuan, points to the truth of the “ten mysteries,” which teaches basically the twin principle of interrelationship of all phenomena: mutual identification and interpenetration. The dharmadhaatu doctrine of Tsung-mi is more or less similar to that of Ch’eng-kuan.

　　These patriarchs have emphasized throughout their writings that everything in the universe is related to each other. Apart from this relatedness, or what is technically called pratiityasamutpaada, nothing has an existence of its own. Everything should be viewed with regard to all possible relationships with all possible things. Every possible level and every available dimension should be applied to a certain thing. In other words, any given object in the world is subject to infinitely numerous and different frames of reference. Nothing can have a fixed, intrinsic, or static value nor be judged by a determined standard. Everything in the phenomenal order is fluid, flexible, and relative.

　　The same step is too high for a child and at the same time too low for an adult. The same step is also too wide for a child and too narrow for an adult. The same step has, therefore, according to Hua-yen, the qualities of being high and low, wide and narrow, and so on, all simultaneously. The truth of the “ten mysteries” lies in its pointing out these relativistic or relationalistic qualities of all dharmas. All dharmas are free from being either narrow or broad;

　

　

p.285

they are both narrow and broad, and many more without obstruction. This is the so-called mystery of “the sovereignty and non-obstruction of the broad and the narrow.” The truth of “the perfect and brilliant compatibility of the qualities of being both the primary and the secondary” conclusively affirms this relativistic outlook of Hua-yen philosophy.

　　In such a transcendental insight, there can be no room for dogmatic assertions concerning any particular thing. A theoretical polarity of good and bad, right and wrong, happy and unhappy, profane and sacred, and the like is completely removed.[20]　Static views (d.r.s.ti) or dogmas have no place in such a flexible and comprehensive attitude toward dharmas.

　　Those things which have been seen by common-sense knowledge as essentially distinctive, categorically different, and spatiotemporally separate from each other are, here in this Hua-yen meditative intuition of a higher level, completely dissolved into the totalistic harmony of the dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction and non-hindrance. There is only “the one unique reality” in which every fixed distinction, discrimination or particularization has no room.

　　Hua-yen philosophy is in this sense a philosophy of liberation which sets a person free from all rigid and stubborn dogmatism, prejudice, and preconception. The restraint and bondage of localization, categorization, artificial restriction, conceptual construction, sentimental bias, provincialism, intolerant self-centeredness, and worldly attachment, are all broken down and there remains only absolute spiritual freedom which keeps one from partial judgement but leads to a perfect and round perspective of things.

　

　

p.286

III. Some of the Taoist Influence on Hua-yen

　　It is a well-known fact that since its introduction into China, Buddhism has had a close relationship with Taoism, more specifically with Neo-Taoism. As a result of this there developed the method of “matching the concepts” of Buddhism and Taoism, which was known as ko-i.[21]　By this method of analogy Buddhists adopted many Taoist terms and ideas to explain their concepts. Although this somewhat superficial and arbitrary method of matching was discarded as useless and misleading after the great translator and scholar Kumaarajiiva arrived in 401 C.E., Taoist influence on Buddhism in general was not, and could not be, totally eliminated.

　　As a good example of the influence of Taoism on Buddhism during its early stage in China, one may take the development of the so-called “Six Houses and Seven Schools.” Even though they were dealing with the Buddhist concept of Emptiness (`suunyataa), most of their vocabularies were based on Neo-Taoist terms. Just as the fundamental problem of the Neo-Taoists was the question of being and non-being, these schools, attuned to this line of thought, called themselves “School of Original Non-being,” “Variant School of Original Non-being,” “School of Non-being of Mind,” and so on.[22]　Consequently they were aptly known as the “Buddho-Taoists.”

　　However, this is not the place to trace such examples of Taoist influence throughout Buddhist history. For, although the close

　

　

p.287

contact between the Taoist and Buddhist, which had an important impact on the development of Chinese Buddhist thought in general, can be an interesting topic to investigate,[23]　our task here is only to see the concrete and most discernible Taoist influence specifically on the Hua-yen thought in order to clarify a particular case of Sinicization of Buddhism.

　

A) The Idea of Hsuan

　　The first Taoist element that can easily be pointed to in the Hua-yen system is the idea of hsuan. For Hua-yen the hsuan or mystery, profundity, deep truth, darkness, subtleness and the like, is the key word used to represent the whole truth of the dharmadhaatu. Chih-yen uses the word hsuan in the title of his magnum opus, Hua-yen ching Sou-hsuan-chi (The Record of Probing the Hsuan of the Avata^msaka-suutra).[24]　This implies that the aim of his probing into the Avata^msaka-suutra was to get into the hsuan mystery. Fa-tsang’s monumental commentary on the Avata^msaka also has the title T’an-hsuan-chi. And Ch’eng-kuan also calls his commentary on the Fa-chieh-kuan-men “Fa-chieh-hsuan-ching.” Above all, the cardinal doctrine in connection with the dharmadhaatu has been throughout these patriarchs of the Hua-yen school, the “ten mysteries” or ten hsuans.

　　As is well-known, the idea of hsuan is found in the first chapter of Lao Tzu’s Tao-te-ching in connection with Tao and its two aspects of being and non-being.　At the end of the chapter it is said:

They both may be called the mystery [hsüan];
It is the mystery of mysteries,

　

　

p.288

The door of all the wonderful subtleties.[25]

　　The phrase “mystery of mysteries,” sometimes rephrased as the “manifold mystery,” was especially cherished as the central term characterizing the inexpressible Tao.[26]　This phrase was so important that around the fifth century C.E. there existed a school named “manifold mystery” in the Lao-Chuang branch of Taoism.[27]　Moreover, the Neo-Taoist philosophy itself was called the “Learning of Mystery” (hsuan-hsuah) in classical times.[28]

　　This important idea was adopted to designate the Buddhist truth of the Ultimate by many Buddhists, such as Seng-chao (C.E. 384~414), Chih-tsang (549~623), Yuan-hsiao (617~686) and Li T’ung-hsuan (635~730).[29]　In view of these facts, it is unlikely that the Hua-yen philosophers could have escaped such a prevailing influence.

　　The most illuminating example of the relation of Hua-yen to Lao-Chuang philosophy in this respect can be found in Ch’eng-kuan.　At the beginning of his encyclopaedic commentary on the Avata^msaka-suutra, he explains the dharmadhaatu in Taoist terms,

　

　

p.289

“wonderful subtleties”:

Going and coming have no limit; moving and stillness are from one source. It contains all the wonderful subtleties and still more, and is beyond words and thoughts and transcends them. Such is nothing but the dharmadhaatu![30]

　　A few passages later he again adopts the Taoist phrase “manifold mystery” or “mystery of mysteries.” As to the source of these phrases, Ch’eng-kuan admits that they are from Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, and in his own sub-commentary he quotes the whole of the first chapter of the Tao-te-ching to show the original meaning of the phrases.

　　One very interesting thing to note here is that Ch’eng-kuan, while acknowledging his debt to Taoist philosophy,[31]　still argues that it is only in terminology, not in meaning as such. He says, “Although we borrow their terms, we do not accept their meanings.”[32]　As an example, he takes the concept of mystery or hsuan-miao.[33]　In Taoism, he argues, it refers to “vacuity and naturalness” while in Hua-yen it means “the one true dharmadhaatu.”

　

B) The Idea of “Returning”

　　As a second element of Taoist influence on Hua-yen we can consider the idea of “returning to the source.”　Throughout the Hua-yen writings it is found that the dharmadhaatu or the Ultimate is designated as the “source,” “origin,” “original source,” “true

　

　

p.290

source,” “unique source” and the like.[34]　As the proper relationship to this source, the Hua-yen thinkers suggest “returning.” Therefore, very frequently we come across terms such as “returning to the dharmadhaatu,” “returning to the one true dharmadhaatu,” “returning to the origin and returning to the source,” “giving up the derivative and returning to the original,” and so on.[35]　In the case of Fa-tsang, one of his essays is titled “The Insight into the Returning to the Source by Exhausting the False.”[36]　Returning to the source is likewise a spiritual goal and in itself enlightenment for Hua-yen Buddhists.

　　It is of course true that the idea of “source” is traceable even to Indian Buddhism. The reality expressed in such terms as alaayavij~naana or tathagataagarbha, for example, could be understood as the “source” in the sense that from it all phenomenal things come into existence. But the idea that the myriad things “return” to the source is hardly found in Indian Buddhism, and particularly the fact that the spiritual goal is spoken of in terms of “returning to the source” has no direct counterpart in India. In Indian Buddhism, the way of enlightenment is primarily purifying or getting rid of discriminative mental fabrications superimposed upon Reality, rather than returning to it.[37]

　

　

p.291

　　On the other hand, the idea of returning or reversion (fan, huan, kuei, or fu) to the source or root is the most important leitmotiv of Taoist philosophy, especially in Lao Tzu.[38]　“All things flourish,” it is said in the Tao-te-ching, “but each one returns to its root. This returning to its root means tranquillity.”[39]　It might not be too much, therefore, to say that this line of thinking in Hua-yen is, at least in inspiration, largely Taoist, and further that when Hua-yen was talking about “returning to the source” or to the dharmadhaatu as its spiritual ideal, it was actually speaking of a Buddhist message within an indigenous Taoist pattern of thinking.

　

C) T’i -yung or Essence and Function

　　A third, and probably the most fundamental element of Taoist influence on the Hua-yen system can be found in their use of the traditional Taoist dichotomy of t’i (essence) and yung (function). The idea of t’i-yung occurs repeatedly in the writings of the Hua-yen patriarchs, especially those of Fa-tsang and his followers, as one of the basic categories in elaborating their theories.[40]　This dichotomy of t’i and yung, according to W. Liebenthal, is the pattern which is “fundamental in all Chinese thinking.”[41]　Strictly speaking, however, this t’i-yung is originally derived from Taoist philosophy.

　

　

p.292

It was the Neo-Taoist Wang Pi (C.E. 226~249) who used the term in the metaphysical sense for the first time in the history of Chinese thought.[42]　Ever since he interpreted the thirty-eighth chapter of the Tao-te-ching in terms of t’i-yung, this has become the basic principle for explaining the relation between reality and its manifestations. On this point, Wing-tsit Chan aptly says:

The concept of substance [t’i] and function [yung] first mentioned here, were to play a very great role in Neo-Taoism, Buddhism, and Neo-Confucianism.... In fact, the Chinese have conceived everything to be in the relationship of substance (the nature of a thing), and function (its various applications).[43]

Needless to say, the Hua-yen usage of t’i-yung is not identical with that of Taoists. For examples, whereas for Wang Pi, t’i-yung was used basically to refer to “non-being,”[44]　for Fa-tsang t’i-yung was adopted not only to show the dual aspect of essence and its various functions or manifestations, but primarily to explain the cardinal Hua-yen idea of mutual identification and interpenetration.[45]

　　But regardless of whether the content might be different from the traditional Chinese understanding, the fact is that the “pattern of t’i-yung,” which Liebenthal describes as “dynamic,” became an integral part of the Hua-yen philosophy. This becomes especially evident when it is taken into consideration that the general Buddhist pattern in this respect is the famous triad of t’i-hsiang-

　

　

p.293

yung or essence-characteristic-function. Although this is mentioned from time to time,[46]　the t’i-yung pattern is predominant. It should, however, be remembered that in Hua-yen philosophy the dynamic aspect of t’i-yung was so intensified that not only the relationship between essence and its manifestations but also those between one manifestation and the other manifestation were equally, if not more, emphasized.

　

D) Li-shih or Noumenon and Phenomenon

　　In addition to the idea of t’i-yung, the question of li-shih should be mentioned in this connection. As was stated previously, li-shih was one of the key terms in the Hua-yen system. The interrelationship of the li and shih aspects of the dharmadhaatu was the whole point of Hua-yen philosophy from the beginning to the end. Even with a first glance, it is easily discernible that the attempt to grasp the dharmadhaatu in terms of li and shih is an unmistakable reminder of the thought pattern of the Tao-te-ching which tries to see the Tao in terms of the two aspects of non-being (wu) and being (yu).[47]　And if one traces this concept in the history of Chinese thought, one can see even more clearly that it is essentially Taoist in origin and inspiration.

　　As a matter of fact, the concept of li-shih, especially the concept of li, has been one of the most important ideas in Chinese thought in general.[48]　The term li in the sense of principle or noumenon does not occur in the ancient Confucian classics. According to Wing-tsit Chan, li was used in the sense of principle for the first time in the Mo-tzu (c. 4th c. B.C.).[49]　But because the Moist

　

　

p.294

movement soon declined in the fourth century B.C., there was no significant advance in the Moist philosophy. The early development of the concept, therefore, was mostly due to Taoist philosophy.

　　In the Tao-te-ching, the term li itself does not appear, but in the Chuang-tzu it appears thirty-eight times. Here in the Chuang-tzu, for the first time in Chinese history li was connected with the Tao. Moreover, the Principle of Heaven is contrasted with human affairs which is “anticipating the sharp contrast of principle [li] and facts in Chinese Buddhism.”[50]

　　Although there were some developments in Hsun-tzu (c. 313~238 B.C.), a Confucian who is said to have lived immediately after Chuang-tzu, and in some others,[51]　the idea of li as the universal principle was most fully discussed by the Neo-Taoists Wang Pi and Kuo Hsiang (d. 312). Both of them interpreted the Tao in terms of li, and for them li was “universal principle,” “necessary principle,” “principle by which things are as they are,” “ultimate principle” etc.[52]　However, while Kuo Hsiang advocated the immanent and plural li, Wang Pi upheld the transcendental, absolute li, and it was through Wang Pi that the development of the concept of li took place in Buddhism during the next several centuries.

　　Such a Taoist understanding of li and shih was introduced into Chinese Buddhist philosophy by Chih-tun (314~366) and developed by Hui-yuan (334~416), Seng-chao (384~414) and Tao-sheng (c. 360~434).[53]　It is apparent, therefore, that the Hua-yen concept of li and shih stems basically from this line of tradition.

　

　

p.295

IV. Conclusion

　　Although we may, of course, continue to enumerate more parallels between Hua-yen and Taoist philosophy,[54]　we have discussed only some of the most concrete and discernible Taoist elements which might have been a source from which the Hua-yen school could derive the directions and patterns for its reshaping process of Indian Buddhist ideas in China. In conclusion, it may be appropriate to make some observations.

　　First, when we say, “A was influenced by B,” this does not necessarily mean that “similarities” between A and B are the only issue. Naturally, such similarities may come about in the process of interaction and influence, but they are not the whole point. The more relevant point here is to see how one stream of thought can serve as a “stimulus” in the development of the other stream of thought. Stimulating is far from imprinting or reproducing the likeness of another thing. Although stimulated or influenced by something or somebody, the development may still be carried out within one’s own intrinsic logic and structure. This seems to be the

　

　

p.296

case with the interaction of Hua-yen Buddhism and Taoist philosophy. Hua-yen was influenced by Taoist philosophy, but obviously Hua-yen is not identical with Taoism in every respect.

　　Second, in Ch’eng-kuan’s statement that although he borrowed Taoist terms, he did not accept their meanings, we actually find the basic attitude of the Hua-yen school toward the indigenous Chinese religio-philosophical traditions. We do not know to what extent his statement corresponds to actual fact, but it is clearly seen here how they understood their position in the history of Chinese thought. This is to say that the two-fold effort of preserving the peculiarity of Buddhist Hua-yen thought and yet at the same time adopting a Chinese way of expression was inevitable if they were to gain a footing on Chinese soil.

　　Finally, when one deals with the history of a certain idea, it is often impossible to know the exact source of it, because an idea enriched by various systems of thought cannot be traced to one single source. One may, therefore, rather ask for one of several possible stimuli which could have given birth to such an idea. With such a qualification, it may be safe to say that the Taoist philosophy was one, and possibly the most significant, stimulus which helped Hua-yen, during the Sui-T’ang period, to develop into a Buddhist school which was characteristically Chinese.

　

　

　

　

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

道家對華嚴宗的影響
──中國佛教漢化的一例
吳剛男
麗佳娜大學宗教學系教授
　

　

p.297

　

提要

　　中國華嚴宗的宗教哲學具有非常「中國化」的特性，因為它不僅是印度佛教的延伸，它還以中國獨特的思惟與表達模式加以重新詮釋與論述。華嚴，因此是「漢化」了的佛教。

　　本文檢視此一「漢化過程」的哲學背景。作者認為道家哲學也許是其中最重要的影響關鍵。為了證明此點，文中探討了四項可能受道家影響的華嚴思想，包括：玄、還源、體用與理事等。

　

　

　

關鍵詞：1. 華嚴宗　2. 道家　3. 法界　4. 漢化

　

　

　

　

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] See Arthur F. Wright, Buddhism in Chinese History (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1959). A similar division of Chinese Buddhist history is found in Daijo Tokiwa, Shina Bukkyo no Kenkyu (A Study of Chinese Buddhism) (Tokyo: Shunjusha, 1942), vol. III. For an extensive study on the early stage of Chinese Buddhist history, see E. Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China (Leiden: E.J. Brill, rev. ed., 1972).

[2] For a brief survey of these Chinese Buddhist schools, see Kenneth K. Ch’en, Buddhism in China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), pp.297-364; J. Takakusu, The Essentials of Buddhist Philosophy (Honolulu: University of Hawaii, 3rd ed., 1956), pp.57-191.

[3] Cf. Wright, op. cit., p.77.

[4] See, for example, D. T.Suzuki, The Essence of Buddhism (Kyoto: Hozokan, 1968), p.54, where he says that Hua-yen is “the climax of Buddhist thought which has been developing in the Far East for the last two thousand years.” His somewhat exaggerated statement is found in Studies in Zen, ed. Christmas Humphreys (New York: Dell Publishing Co., Inc., 1955), p.139, where he says, “Fa-tsang’s systematization of [Hua-yen] ideas . . . is one of the wonderful achievements performed by the Chinese mind and is of the highest importance to the history of world thought.” Cf. also Garma C. C. Chang, The Buddhist Teaching of Totality (University Park: the Pennsylvania State University, 1971), p.ix, in which he says that “of all Buddhist Schools──Hinayana, Mahayana and Tantra alike” the one which “truly holds the highest teaching of Buddhism” is the Hua-yen school of China.

[5] H. Nakamura, Ways of Thinking of Eastern Peoples (Honolulu: East-West Center, 1964), p.245.

[6] Concerning the new situations of this time which might have helped the reshaping process of Buddhism in general, see Reimon Yuki, “Zuito jidai ni okeru Chugoku-teki Bukkyo Seiritsu no Jijo ni tsuite no Kosatsu” (Consideration of the Historical Situations for the Rise of Chinese Buddhism in the Sui-T’ang Period), Nihon Bukkyogakkai Nempo, XIX (1954), pp.79-96. See also my A Study of Chinese Hua-yen Buddhism (unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, McMaster University, 1976), pp.53-69.

[7] The question of the Buddhist influence on Chinese culture in general is dealt with in such studies as Hu Shih, “The Indianization of China: A Case Study of Cultural Borrowing,” in Independence, Convergence and Borrowing in Institutions, Thought and Art, Harvard Tercenteniary Publications (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1937), pp.219-246; P.C. Bagchi, India and China: A Thousand Years of Cultural Relations, the second revised and enlarged edition (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1971) and his “Indian Influence on Chinese Thought” in Raddhakrishnan ed., History of Philosophy, Eastern and Western, vol. 1, pp.573-589; A. F. Wright, Buddhism in Chinese History, op. cit., especially chapter six “The Legacy Buddhism in China,” and his article “Buddhism and Chinese Culture: Phases of Interaction,” Journal of Asian Studies, XVII (19S7), pp.22 ff.; and E. Zurcher, Buddhist Conquest of China, op. cit. For the question of the Hua-yen influence on the history of Chinese thought, see my thesis, pp.239-260 and references therein.

[8] For a good study of Hua-yen see Francis H. Cook, Fa-Tsang’s Treatise on the Five Doctrine──An Annotated Translation (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Wisconsin, 1970). See also his Hua-yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra (University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1977). Steve Odin, Process Metaphysics and Hua-yen Buddhism: A Critical Study of Cumulative Penetration vs. Interpenetration (Albany: SUNY Press, 1982). Garma C.C. Chang’s above-cited book is also on Hua-yen. See also my article “Dharmadhaatu: An Introduction of Hua-yen Buddhism,” The Eastern Buddhist, New Series vol. XII, no.2 (October 1979). For a study of the development of Hua-yen thought, see my thesis.

[9] For these and some other English translations of the term dharmadhaatu see Takakusu, op.cit., p.39 et passim; E. Conze, Buddhist Thought in India (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1967), p.95; T.R. V. Murti, The Central Philosophy of Buddhism (London: George Allen Unwin Ltd., 2nd ed., 1960), p.345; Th. Stcherbatsky, The Conception of Buddhist Nirvana (rep. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1965), p.33, etc.

[10] There are three Chinese translations in the name of Ta-fang-kuang-fo hua-yen-ching. 1) T.9, no. 278, tr. by Buddhabhadra in sixty fascicles during 418-420; 2) T.10, no. 279 , by `Siksaananda in eighty fascicles during 695-699; and 3) T.10, no. 293, by Praj~naa in forty fascicles during 795-798. The last one is basically equivalent to the last chapter of the previous versions, i.e., the Chapter on Entering into Dharmadhaatu. This chapter is available in Sanskrit as an independent sutra called Ga.ndavyuha-suutra, one ed. by D. T.Suzuki and H. Idzumi (Kyoto: The Sanskrit Buddhist Texts Publishing Society, 1934-36), and the other ed. by P. L. Vaidya, Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, no. 5 (Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute of Post Graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1960).

[11] To be exact, it should be called the “dharmadhaatu-pratiityasamutpaada” doctrine. But for the sake of convenience, it will be referred to as dharmadhaatu doctrine hereafter.

[12] The text is not found separately in the Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo. (hereafter referred to as T.) but contained in the commentaries of Ch’eng-kuan and Tsung-mi (T. 45, pp.672a-684b; 684b-692b), and it also constitutes a part of Fa-tsang’s work Hua-yen Fa-p’u-ti-hsin-chang (T. 45, pp.652a-654a).

[13] For the discussion on the controversial question of the authorship, see K. Kimura, “Who was the Author of the Fa-chieh-kuan-men” (in Japanese), Shukyo Kenkyu, 41-195 (1968), pp.47-74, R. Yuki, “Kegon no Shoso Tojin to Hokkai Kanmon no Chosha tono Mondai” (The Question of the Founder of the Hua-yen school, Tu-shun and the Author of the Fa-chieh-kuan-men), Indogaku Bukkyogaku Kenkyu, XVIII, 2 (1969), pp.32-38, and references therein.

[14] T. 45, p.652c, line 28.

[15] Ibid., p.653c, lines 16f.

[16] Cf. T.45, p.683a, ll. 11f., and T.45, p.692b, 1. 4. See also T.35, p.515a.

[17] T. 45, no. 1868, pp.514a-518b.

[18] The most important and well-known works of Fa-tsang are T’an-hsuan-chi (T. 35, no. 1733), Wu-chiao-chang (T. 45, no. 1866). (English translation is found in F.H. Cook, op.cit.), and Essay of the Golden Lion (T. 45, no. 1780). For English translations of this essay, see Fung, A History of Chinese Philosophy, tr. Derk Bodde (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1953), vol. II., pp.341-359; de Bary et al. ed., Source of Chinese Tradition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1960), pp.329-333; Wing-tsit Chan, A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy (Princeton: Princeton University Press,1963), pp.409-414; and Garma C.C. Chang, op. cit., pp.222-230.

[19] T.45, p.672c.

[20] This is not to assert an advocating of a-morality or immorality on the level of everyday life. It is simply to indicate that Hua-yen insight is beyond the common-sense moral value. It is, as it were, supra-moral but not contra-moral.

[21] For this interesting topic, see T’ang, Yung-t’ung, “On ‘Ko-I’,” in Inge, et al., ed., Radhakrishnan, Comparative Studies in Philosophy (London: Allen and Unwin, 1951), pp.276-286, K. Ch’en, op.cit., pp.68 f.

[22] For these schools, see Fung, A History of Chinese Philosophy, vol. II, tr. by Derk Bodde, op. cit., pp.243-258, Wing-tsit Chan, op. cit., pp.336-342, W. Liebenthal, Chao Lun (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1968), pp.133-l50, K. Ch’en, “Neo-Taoism and the Praj~naa School during the Wei and Chin Dynasties,” Chinese Culture, 1, no. 2 (1957), pp.33-46, Arthur E. Link, “The Taoist Antecedents of Tao-an’s Praj~naa Ontology,” History of Religions, vol.9, nos. 2-3 (1969-70), pp.181-215.

[23] As a standard study on this topic, see Daijo Tokiwa, Shina ni okeru Bukkyo to Jukyo Dokyo (Buddhism in China in its Relation to Confucianism and Taoism) (Tokyo: Toyo Bunko, 1930, 1966).

[24] The term “sou-hsuan” appears in Seng-chao’s work. Cf. T.45, p.159b, 1. 12.

[25] Tao-te-ching, ch. 1. The phrase “the mystery of mysteries” found in Fung, op. cit., vol. I, p.178, seems to fit to our context. Cf. Wing-tsit Chan, The Way of Lao Tzu (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., 1963), p.97. Chan translated the phrase as “deeper and more profound.” He intentionally avoided the word “mystery” because he believed that the word is associated with “irrationality.” See op. cit., p.9. But “mystery” in the true sense of the word is not something irrational or occult, but “non-rational” or “supra-rational” and beyond logical or empirical conceptualization. Cf. Rudolf Otto, Mysticism, East and West (New York, 1932, 1962), p.159 and W. James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (London, 1912) pp.379ff.

[26] For the same idea of hsuan, see also Tao-te-ching, chs. 6, 10, 15 et passim.

[27] Shigeo Kamata, Chugoku Kegon Shiso Shi no Kenkyu (Tokyo: The University of Tokyo Press, 1965), p.276.

[28] Fung, op. cit., vol. II, pp.168 ff.

[29] Cf. T.45, p.153a-c; T.38, p.856b; T.44, p.202a; T.36, p.742a, respectively.

[30] T.35, p.503a.

[31] For examples of Ch’eng-kuan’s quotations from Lao-tzu and Chuang-tzu, see Kamata, op. cit., p.287f.

[32] T.36 p.2b.

[33] Hsuan and miao are similar in meaning. Both of these have the meaning of being profound, subtle, deep, dark, wonderful, etc. Therefore, these two characters here may denote one single concept of mystery.

[34] Cf. for example, T.45, p.499a, p.594a, p.631a, p.637c, p.632a, p.710c. T.35, p.503a.

[35] Cf. T.35, p.503c, 1. 21. T.45, p.710c et passim.

[36] The text is found in T.45, pp.637a-641a.

[37] For similar arguments on this point,. see Arthur E. Link, op. cit., p.206, Cook, Fa-tsang’s Treatise, op. cit., pp.48ff., Kamata, Chugoku Bukkyo Shisoshi Kenkyu (Tokyo: Shunjusha, 1968), pp.220f., etc. Cf. E. Conze’s statement: “The Madhyamikas believe that salvation is attained when everything has been dropped, and absolute Emptiness alone remains. For the Yogacarins salvation means to have ‘an act of cognition which no longer apprehends an object,’ an act of thought which is ‘Thought only,’ pure consciousness, and altogether transcends the division between object and subject.” Thirty Years of Buddhist Studies (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer Ltd., 1967), pp.78f. A similar idea of “returning” is found in a highly controversial work, Ta-chih-tu-lun (Mahaapraj~naa paaramitaa-saastra), T.25, p.298bc. See also K. Venkata Ramanan, op. cit., p.264.

[38] For example, see the Tao-te-ching, chs. 14, 16, 25, 28, 30, 40, 52, 65 et passim and the Chuang-tzu, ch. 6, in Herbert A. Giles, tr. Chuang Tzu: Mystic, Moralist, and Social Reformer (Shanghai: Kelly and Walsh, 2nd ed., 1926), pp.75, 82, Burton Watson, tr. The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu (New York: Columbia University Press, 1968), pp.77, 81, 235 et passim, and Victor H. Mair, Wandering on the Way (New York: Bantam Books, 1994), pp.51ff. et passim. Cf. also Fung, op. cit., vol. I, pp.182f. and 225f. and vol.II, p.288.

[39] Chapter 16, Chan’s trans., p.128.

[40] For example, Chih-yen: T.35, p.15b, 1. 5, p.15c, 1. 15, p.46a, 1. 13, p.48a, ll. 26, 28, etc. Fa-tsang: T.45, p.502b, p.635a, 1. 3, p.637ab, etc. Ch’eng-kuan: T.45, p.672b, 1. 16, etc. Tsung-mi: T.45, p.684c, 1. 16, etc.

[41] W. Liebenthal, Chao Lun (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1968), p.17.

[42] For the historical development of the t’i-yung idea, see Kenji Shimada, ‘Taiyo no rekishi ni yosete” (A Contribution to the History of the Concept of T’i-yung) in Essays on the History of Buddhism presented to Professor Zenryu Tsukamoto (Kyoto: Naigai Printing Co., 1961), pp.416-430. Here he mentions Hsun Tzu as the first user of the term itself. Liebenthal and Chan, however, agree that Wang Pi is the first who used the term in a metaphysical sense.

[43] The Way of Lao Tzu, op. cit., p.168.

[44] Cf. ibid.

[45] Cf. T.45, p.503b, 635a, et passim.

[46] Cf. T.45, p.672a, 1. 26, b, 1. 9, p.684b, 1. 21, etc.

[47] Cf. Cook, Fa-tsang’s Treatise, op. cit., p.50.

[48] For an extensive study on this topic, use Ch’un-i T’ang, Chung-kuo che-hsueh yuan-lun. vol. I, on Yuan-hsing (Taiwan: 1968).

[49] Neo-Confucianism etc.: Essays by Wing-tsit Chan (Hanover, N.H.: the Oriental Society, 1969), p.48.

[50] Ibid., p.49. Chan further says, “the book mentions more than once the great li (ta-li) and that li is common to all things (t’ung li). Thus li is not only a principle but a universal one. It ‘cannot be seen,’ ‘cannot be named,’ and ‘infinite and without limit.’ In other words, it is absolute.”

[51] For example, see Han Fei Tzu (d. 233 B.C.) in Fung, op. cit., vol.I, p.177.

[52] Cf. ibid., pp.57ff. and Fung, op. cit., pp.179ff. and 205ff.

[53] For more detail, see my thesis, pp.117ff.

[54] See, for example, Chuang Tzu’s idea of “the equality of things and opinions” (chi-wu-lun), i.e., the transcendence of all the duality and distinctions, which has a strikingly similar counterpart in Hua-yen. See also such parallels as Chuang Tzu’s description of Tao in terms of chou, pien, and han or hsien and Tu-shun’s approach to dharmadhaatu in terms of chou, pien, han and yung; Chuang Tzu’s understanding of “change” and Hua-yen emphasis on “function” or “process”; Lao Tzu’s invitation to the experience of the Non-being or the Unnameable and Hua-yen stress on the insight into the dharmadhaatu; Taoist attitude that “there is nothing in the world which is not good” and Hua-yen understanding of the phenomenal world as one through which the deeper dimension of spiritual insight in the Real can be attained; and the like. Cf. Fung, op. cit., pp.223, 230ff., and 236; Chan, A Source Book, op. cit., pp.179ff.; Burton Watson, tr., op. cit., pp.240ff., Mair, tr. P.217, etc. Although these are surprisingly similar to each other, there is no way, to my present knowledge, to verify whether or not, or to what extent, these are the results of the Taoist influence on Hua-yen thought.

http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ001/93608.htm

Zen Talks On The Sandokai

2007-12-05T13:41:00.000-08:00

Zen Talks On The Sandokai
by Shunryu Suzuki Roshi

THE SANDOKAI: The Harmony of Difference and Equality

The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east. While human faculties are sharp or dull, the way has no Northern or Southern Ancestors. The spiritual source shines clear in the light; the branching streams flow on in the dark. Grasping at things is surely delusion; according with sameness is still not enlightenment. All the objects of the senses interact and yet do not. Interacting brings involvement. Otherwise, each keeps its place. Sights vary in quality and form, sounds differ as pleasing or harsh. Refined and common speech come together in the dark, clear and murky phrases are distinguished in the light. The four elements return to their natures just as a child turns to its mother. Fire heats, wind moves, water wets, earth is solid. Eye and sight, ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste. Thus for each and every thing, depending on these roots, the leaves spread forth.Trunk and branches share the essence; revered and common, each has its speech. In the light there is darkness. but don't take it as darkness; In the dark there is light, but don't see it as light. Light and dark oppose one another like front and back foot in walking. Each of the myriad things has its merit, expressed according to function and place. Phenomena exist, like box and lid joining; principle accords, like arrow points meeting. Hearing the words, understand the meaning; don't set up standards of your own.If you don't understand the way right before you, how will you know the path as you walk? Practice is not a matter of far or near, but if you are confused, mountains and rivers block your way. I respectfully urge you who study the mystery, don't pass your days and nights in vain.
(Translation by Soto-Shu Liturgy Conference, Green Gulch Farm, 1997, with minor revisions.)

FIRST TALK: Things-As-It-Is

The mind of the great sage of India is intimately transmitted from west to east.
I am very grateful for this opportunity to talk about the Sandokai, one of our most important teachings. Its mode of expression is so smooth that you may not feel its deep meaning when you read it. The author of this poem, Sekito Kisen (or Sekito Musai Daishin, his posthumous name), is the dharma grandson of the Sixth Chinese Ancestor, Daikan Eno (in Chinese, Dajian Huineng), and the direct descendent of Seigen Gyoshi (Ch. Qingyuan Xingsi), who is considered the Seventh Ancestor. Among the Sixth Ancestor's many disciples, the most prominent were Seigen Gyoshi and Nangaku Ejo. Later, Master Tozan Ryokai continued Seigen's lineage as the Soto school, and Master Rinzai Gigen (Ch. Linji Yixuan) continued Nangaku's lineage as the Rinzai school. Soto and Rinzai eventually became the dominant schools of Zen.The way of Seigen and Sekito has a more gentle quality than Nangaku's way. In Japan we call this the elder brother's way. Nangaku is more like the second or third son, who is often rather naughty. The elder brother may not be so able or so bright, but he is very gentle. This is our understanding when we talk about Soto and Rinzai. Sometimes Soto Zen is called memmitsu no kafu—"a very careful and considerate style." Seigen's way is to find everything within himself. It is to realize the great mind that includes everything and to practice accordingly.Our effort in Zen is to observe everything as-it-is. Yet even though we say so, we are not necessarily observing everything as-it-is. We say, "Here is my friend, over there is the mountain, and way up there is the moon." But your friend is not only your friend, the mountain is not only the mountain, and the moon is not only the moon. If we think, "I am here and the mountain is over there," that is a dualistic way of observing things. To go to San Francisco, we have to cross over the Tassajara mountains. That is our usual understanding. But that is not the Buddhist way of observing things. We find the mountain or the moon or our friend or San Francisco within ourselves. Right here. That is big mind within which everything exists.Now, let's look at the title, Sandokai. San literally means "three," but here it means "things." Do is sameness. To identify one thing with another is do. It also refers to "oneness" or "one's whole being," which here means "great mind" or "big mind." So our understanding is that there is one whole being that includes everything, and that the many things are found in one whole being. Although we say "many beings," they are actually the many parts of one whole being that includes everything. If you say "many" it is many, and if you say "one" it is one. "Many" and "one" are different ways of describing one whole being. To completely understand the relationship between one great whole being and the many facets of that one great whole being is kai. Kai means to shake hands. You have a feeling of friendship. You feel that the two of you are one. In the same way, this one great whole being and the many things are good friends, or more than good friends because they are originally one. Therefore like shaking hands we say kai. "Hi, how are you?" This is the meaning of the poem's title. What is many? What is one? And what is the oneness of one and many?Originally, Sandokai was the title of a Daoist book. Sekito used the same title for his poem, which describes Buddha's teaching. What is the difference between Daoist teachings and Buddhist teachings? There are many similarities. When a Buddhist reads it, it is a Buddhist text, and when a Daoist reads it, it is a Daoist text. Yet it is actually the same thing. When a Buddhist eats a vegetable it is Buddhist food, and when a vegetarian eats it, it is vegetarian food. Still it is just food.As Buddhists, we do not eat a particular vegetable just because it has some special nourishing quality, or choose it because it is yin or yang, acid or alkaline. Simply to eat food is our practice. We don't eat just to support ourselves. As we say in our meal chant, "To practice our way, we eat this food." This is how big mind is included in our practice. To think "this is just a vegetable" is not our understanding. We must treat things as part of ourselves, within our practice and within big mind. Small mind is the mind that is under the limitation of desires or some particular emotional covering or the discrimination of good and bad. So, for the most part, even though we think we are observing things-as-it-is, actually we are not. Why? Because of our discrimination, or our desires. The Buddhist way is to try hard to let go of this kind of emotional discrimination of good and bad, to let go of our prejudices, and to see things-as-it-is.When I say to see things-as-it-is, what I mean is to practice hard with our desires—not to get rid of desires, but to take them into account. If you have a computer, you must enter all the data: this much desire, this much nourishment, this kind of color, this much weight. We must include our desires as one of the many factors in order to see things-as-it-is. We don't always reflect on our desires. Without stopping to reflect on our selfish judgment we say "He is good" or "He is bad." But someone who is bad to me is not necessarily always bad. To someone else, he may be a good person. Reflecting in this way we can see things-as-it-is. This is buddha mind.The poem begins Chikudo daisen no shin, which means "the mind of the great sage of India." That is Buddha's big mind that includes everything. The mind we have when we practice zazen is the great mind: We don't try to see anything; we stop conceptual thinking; we stop emotional activity; we just sit. Whatever happens to us, we are not bothered. We just sit. It is like something happening in the great sky. Whatever kind of bird flies through it, the sky doesn't care. That is the mind transmitted from Buddha to us.Many things happen as you sit. You may hear the sound of the stream. You may think of something, but your mind doesn't care. Your great mind is just there sitting. Even when you are not aware of seeing, hearing, or thinking, something is going on in big mind. We observe things. Without saying "good" or "bad," we just sit. We enjoy things but have no special attachment to them. We have full appreciation of them at this time, that's all. After zazen we say, "Oh, good morning!" In that way, one after another, things will happen to us and we can fully appreciate them. That is the mind transmitted from Buddha. And that is the way we practice zazen.If you practice zazen in this way, you are less likely to have trouble when you are enjoying some event. Do you understand? You may have a special experience and think, "This is it. This is how it should be." If someone opposes you, you will be angry. "No, it should be like this, not like that. Zen Center should be like this." Maybe so. But it is not always so. If times change and we lose Tassajara and move to another mountain, the way we have here cannot be the same way we will have there. So, without sticking to some particular way, we open our minds to observe things-as-it-is and to accept things-as-it-is. Without this basis, when you say "this is the mountain," or "this is my friend," or "this is the moon," the mountain will not be the mountain, my friend will not be my friend, and the moon will not be the moon itself. That is the difference between sticking to something and Buddha's way.Buddha's way is the study and teaching of human nature, including how foolish we are, what kinds of desires we have, our preferences and tendencies. Without sticking to something, I try to remember to use the expression "liable to." We are liable to, or we have a tendency to do something. This is my motto.When I was preparing this lecture someone asked me, "What is self-respect, and how can we obtain it?" Self-respect is not something that you can feel you have. When you feel "I have self-respect," that is not self-respect anymore. When you are just you, without thinking or trying to say something special, just saying what is on your mind and how you feel, then there is naturally self-respect. When I am closely related to all of you and to everything, then I am a part of one big whole being. When I feel something, I'm almost a part of it, but not quite. When you do something without any feeling of having done something, then that is you, yourself. You're completely with everyone and you don't feel self-conscious. That is self-respect.When you feel that you are somebody, you have to practice zazen harder. As you know, it is difficult to sit without thinking or feeling. When you don't think or feel, you usually fall asleep. But without sleeping and without thinking, just to be yourself is our practice. When you can do that, you will be able to speak without thinking too much, and without having any special purpose. When you speak or act it will be just to express yourself. That is complete self-respect. To practice zazen is to attain this kind of self-respect. You must be strict with yourself and especially with your tendencies. We each have our own unique personal tendencies. But if you try to get rid of them, or if you try not to think or not to hear the sound of the stream during zazen, it is not possible. Let your ears hear without trying to hear. Let the mind think without trying to think and without trying to stop it. That is practice.More and more, you will have this rhythm or strength as the power of practice. If you practice hard you will be like a child. While we were talking about self-respect a bird was singing outside. Peep-peep-peep. That's self-respect. Peep-peeppeep. It doesn't mean anything. Maybe he was just singing. Maybe without trying to think he was just singing, peep-peeppeep. When we heard it we couldn't stop smiling. We cannot say that it is just a bird. It controls the whole mountain, the whole world. That is self-respect.In order to have this everyday practice, we study hard. When we reach this place, there is no need to say "one whole being" or "bird" or "many things which include one whole being." It could be just a bird or a mountain or the Sandokai. If you understand this, there will be no need to recite the Sandokai. Although we recite it in this Japanese-Chinese form, it is not a matter of Japanese or Chinese. It is just a poem, or a bird, and this is just my talk. It does not mean much. We say that Zen is not something to talk about. It is what you experience in a true sense. It is difficult. But anyway this is a difficult world, so don't worry. Wherever you go you have problems. You should confront your problems. It may be much better to have these problems of practice rather than some other mixed-up kinds of problems.

Discussion:

Student: The other day when I was beating the mokugyo, a small spider crawled across the top of it. There was nothing I could do to avoid the spider. I veered a little off to the side to avoid him, but he went right into the striker. It was too powerful for him to escape.

Suzuki Roshi: You didn't kill him.

Student: Something did! [Laughter.]

Suzuki Roshi: By mistake. It happened in that way.

Student: Yeah, but I couldn't stop.

Suzuki Roshi: Yeah. You know, it can't be helped. Buddha killed him! [Laughter.] He may be very happy.To live in this world is not so easy. When you see children playing by a stream or on a bridge, you may be really worried. "The cars are going zoom, zoom, zoom on the highway nearby. What if there is an accident?" If something happens, that's all. If you stop and think, you will be terrified. Did you hear about the 165-year-old man who has more than two hundred children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren? If he thought about each one of them, he would be scared of losing one.Our practice can be a very strict practice. You should be ready to kill something even if you are a Buddhist. Whether it is good or bad, you should do that sometime. It is impossible to survive without killing anything. We cannot live depending just on our feelings. Our practice must be deeper than that. That is the strict side of our practice. On the other hand, if it is absolutely necessary, you should stop hitting the mokugyo even though it throws everything into confusion. Not so easy.

Student: Would you explain more what you mean by "strict practice"?

Suzuki Roshi: Strict practice? Things are already going in a very strict way. There is no exception. Wherever there is something, there is some rule or truth behind it that is always strictly controlling it, without any exception. We think we care for freedom, but the other side of freedom is strict rule. Within the strict rule there is complete freedom. Freedom and strict rule are not two separate things. Originally we are supported by strict rules or truths. That is the other side of absolute freedom.

Student: Could you give us more examples that apply to our individual lives?

Suzuki Roshi: When you get up you should just get up. When everyone sleeps you should sleep. That is my example.

Student: My responsibility is such that it's very easy for me to follow the strict way, because it goes with my position. Other people have somewhat different responsibilities. Sometimes, because my inclination is to follow strictly, we have some differences, and sometimes I think it's okay for them to do things differently than I do. Is that right?

Suzuki Roshi: Yeah. Sometimes you should shut your eyes.[Laughing.] Sometimes it may be unfortunate to see something. If you see it, you have to say something, so it may help you to practice without looking around. That is the best way, actually. If you look around, then, if you see the people on this side of the zendo, the people on the other side will sleep. So it's better not to see anything! [Laughter.] They won't know what you are doing. "He may not be sleeping, so all of us will stay awake." If you see something, that's all. The rest will be ignored. If you don't see anything, you cannot ignore anything. That is the big mind that includes everything. If someone moves, you will notice. Even though you don't try to hear it, if some sound comes you will catch it. If you focus on one person, the rest of the people will be very happy! [Laughter.] If you don't catch anyone, no one can move.

"And it makes me wonder..."

2007-12-05T03:46:00.000-08:00

Universal Recommendation of Zazen by Eihei Dogen

2007-12-04T11:56:00.000-08:00

FUKANZAZENGI

Universal Recommendation of Zazen by Eihei Dogen

The Way is basically perfect and all-pervading. How could it be contingent upon practice and realization? The Dharma-vehicle is free and untrammelled. What need is there for concentrated effort? Indeed, the whole body is far beyond the world's dust. Who could believe in a means to brush it clean? It is never apart from one, right where one is. What is the use of going off here and there to practice?

And yet, if there is the slightest discrepancy, the Way is as distant as heaven from earth. If the least like or dislike arises, the Mind is lost in confusion. Suppose one gains pride of understanding and inflates one's own enlightenment, glimpsing the wisdom that runs through all things, attaining the Way and clarifying the Mind, raising an aspiration to escalade the very sky. One is making the initial, partial excursions about the frontiers but is still somewhat deficient in the vital Way of total emancipation.

Need I mention the Buddha, who was possessed of inborn knowledge? The influence of his six years of upright sitting is noticeable still. Or Bodhidharma's transmission of the mind-seal?--the fame of his nine years of wall-sitting is celebrated to this day. Since this was the case with the saints of old, how can we today dispense with negotiation of the Way?

You should therefore cease from practice based on intellectual understanding, pursuing words and following after speech, and learn the backward step that turns your light inwardly to illuminate your self. Body and mind of themselves will drop away, and your original face will be manifest. If you want to attain suchness, you should practice suchness without delay.

For sanzen (zazen), a quiet room is suitable. Eat and drink moderately. Cast aside all involvements and cease all affairs. Do not think good or bad. Do not administer pros and cons. Cease all the movements of the conscious mind, the gauging of all thoughts and views. Have no designs on becoming a Buddha. Sanzen has nothing whatever to do with sitting or lying down.

At the site of your regular sitting, spread out thick matting and place a cushion above it. Sit either in the full-lotus or half-lotus position. In the full-lotus position, you first place your right foot on your left thigh and your left foot on your right thigh. In the half-lotus, you simply press your left foot against your right thigh. You should have your robes and belt loosely bound and arranged in order. Then place your right hand on your left leg and your left palm (facing upwards) on your right palm, thumb-tips touching. Thus sit upright in correct bodily posture, neither inclining to the left nor to the right, neither leaning forward nor backward. Be sure your ears are on a plane with your shoulders and your nose in line with your navel. Place your tongue against the front roof of your mouth, with teeth and lips both shut. Your eyes should always remain open, and you should breathe gently through your nose.
Once you have adjusted your posture, take a deep breath, inhale and exhale, rock your body right and left and settle into a steady, immobile sitting position. Think not-thinking. How do you think not-thinking? Non-thinking. This in itself is the essential art of zazen.

The zazen I speak of is not learning meditation. It is simply the Dharma gate of repose and bliss, the practice-realization of totally culminated enlightenment. It is the manifestation of ultimate reality. Traps and snares can never reach it. Once its heart is grasped, you are like the dragon when he gains the water, like the tiger when she enters the mountain. For you must know that just there (in zazen) the right Dharma is manifesting itself and that, from the first, dullness and distraction are struck aside.

When you arise from sitting, move slowly and quietly, calmly and deliberately. Do not rise suddenly or abruptly. In surveying the past, we find that transcendence of both unenlightenment and enlightenment, and dying while either sitting or standing, have all depended entirely on the strength (of zazen).

In addition, the bringing about of enlightenment by the opportunity provided by a finger, a banner, a needle, or a mallet, and the effecting of realization with the aid of a hossu, a fist, a staff, or a shout, cannot be fully understood by discriminative thinking. Indeed, it cannot be fully known by the practicing or realizing of supernatural powers, either. It must be deportment beyond hearing and seeing--is it not a principle that is prior to knowledge and perceptions?

This being the case, intelligence or lack of it does not matter: between the dull and the sharp-witted there is no distinction. If you concentrate your effort single-mindedly, that in itself is negotiating the Way. Practice-realization is naturally undefiled. Going forward (in practice) is a matter of everydayness.

In general, this world, and other worlds as well, both in India and China, equally hold the Buddha-seal, and over all prevails the character of this school, which is simply devotion to sitting, total engagement in immobile sitting. Although it is said that there are as many minds as there are persons, still they all negotiate the way solely in zazen. Why leave behind the seat that exists in your home and go aimlessly off to the dusty realms of other lands? If you make one misstep, you go astray from the Way directly before you.

You have gained the pivotal opportunity of human form. Do not use your time in vain. You are maintaining the essential working of the Buddha-Way. Who would take wasteful delight in the spark from the flintstone? Besides, form and substance are like the dew on the grass, destiny like the dart of lightning--emptied in an instant, vanished in a flash.

Please, honored followers of Zen, long accustomed to groping for the elephant, do not be suspicious of the true dragon. Devote your energies to a way that directly indicates the absolute. Revere the person of complete attainment who is beyond all human agency. Gain accord with the enlightenment of the buddhas; succeed to the legitimate lineage of the ancestors' samadhi. Constantly perform in such a manner and you are assured of being a person such as they. Your treasure-store will open of itself, and you will use it at will.