Lecture 20: Buddhism entering China Tasks: conquest, transformation Before Buddhism arrived, there was a history of Indian reflection on Buddhist teaching and philosophy. - the Chinese did not receive translations in historical order - they had to think through an inherited tradition as outsiders We can roughly, and not entirely accurately, divide the reception into conquest and transformation: - initial Indianization, adapting Indian ideas into Chinese context (conquest) - subsequent Sinicization, extending ideas in new directions (transformation) Conquest This stages stretches from roughly 68CE to 452CE - 68 = founding of White Horse Temple - 452 CE = end of First Disaster of Wu The White Horse Temple establishes a physical center for Buddhist practice and study. - the Han Dynasty invests money to improve trade and protection along Silk Road around 114 - translators tend to understand Buddhism by analogies with Daoism - Buddha as a foreign person who achieved religious Daoism's ideal of nondeath - Buddhist mindfulness as an extension of Daoist breathing exercises When the Han Dynasty collapses in 220 CE, reigning Confucian ideology weakens. - this leaves room for revival of Daoism during Jin Dynasty - Madhyamaka doctrine of emptiness associated with Daoist teaching of nonbeing (wu) - Mahayana idea of nirvana in this life associated w/ Daoist ideal of free and easy wandering (wu-wei) As a result of invading "Wu Hu" tribes in 316, Jin Dynasty relocates its capitol from west to east. - Fotudeng, who had built a religious community in 310, gains political influence and popularity - he is able to hold invaders at bay, because they are Buddhist too Fotudeng's success leads to uneasy relationship between Buddhism and government. - in northern China, Daowu (r.386-409) endorses the idea that ruling kings are destined for enlightenment, and declares himself leader of the Buddhist community - in southern China, Huiyuan writes On Why Monks Do Not Bow Down Before Kings (404 CE) - Huiyuan studies Abhidharma and revives view that dharmas have causal power of their own - posthumously named founder of Pure Land school Around 401 CE, Kumarajiva arrives and translates Lotus Sutra and some commentaries by Nagarjuna. - he is trained in Madhyamaka - one of his students, Sengzhao, masters Chinese Madhyamaka - criticizes earlier Chinese for believing in being or non-being rather than emptiness - this corrects some earlier misunderstandings, and deflates Huiyuan's teachings Under Kumarajiva's influence, the Lotus Sutra rises to special prominence. - never gets much attention in India or Tibet - introduces idea that all other Buddhist teachings are upaya – provisional truths geared to certain audiences' capacities and predelictions – but Lotus Sutra is ultimate truth

-

-

this sets the stage for "levels of truth" obsession - conventional and ultimate truth (form and emptiness) come to be seen as distinct levels of truth - a kind of dualism of truths this gives rise to a quest for a still "higher" level of non-dual truth to unite them the entire tradition is based upon confusing an epistemological distinction (two ways of looking at the world) for an ontological one (two sides/levels/aspects of a single reality)

While Chinese Madhyamaka is rising to prominence, in India the brothers Asanga and Vasubandhu found Yogacara school as response to Madhyamaka - accept doctrine that everything is empty - add that everything is empty because all is known only through representation - everything is "consciousness only" – a form of idealism - what ultimately exists is "storehouse consciousness" = alayavijnana - this teaching enters China in early 500s - Chinese reject it as too subjective – seems to reject cognized objects in favor of only cognition itself Thus ends, roughly, the stage of conquest: Madhyamaka is the dominant school, and the Lotus Sutra provides a heuristic for organizing scriptures and competing teachings. But the entire edifice crumbles during the First Disaster of Wu in 452, when Emperor Taiwu (r.423-452) of Northern Wei, a devout Daoist, slaughters Buddhists, and bans Buddhist practice on penalty of death, after finding enemy weapons stored in Buddhist temples. Transformation The shift from conquest to transformation is not clean, because Dharkaksena arrives in China around 421 and translates the Nirvana Sutra - introduces tathagatagarbha / Buddha-nature as Buddha's final teaching - all beings have Buddha-nature, positive attributes that give capacity for nirvana - there is a penchant to confuse Buddha-nature with Daoist concept of immortal soul - ultimate reality is both empty of self-nature and non-empty of Buddha-nature - supports teleological development of Buddhist teaching: 1. Abhidharma teaching of Four Noble Truths and impermanence/non-self 2. Mahayana teaching of universal emptiness 3. Lotus Sutra teaching of One Vehicle and upaya 4. Nirvana Sutra teaching of permanence (of Buddha-nature) While the idea of buddha-nature takes hold in China in a way it never does in India, the idea's time has not yet come, because of the First Disaster of Wu. But that persecution ends with Taiwu's rule. Buddhism's fortunes revive during the Southern Liang dynasty, as does interest in the merits of Buddhism and Daoism. In the early 500s, Emperor Wu presides over a court debate about whether there is an immortal soul. In response, he writes an essay that anticipates Awakening of Faith in Mahayana - a pure enlightened core trapped in darkness and ignorance - later: one mind with two aspects (suchness/thusness and samsara/birth-and-death) - spirit destined for enlightenment, ignorance mires a person in birth and death

While Buddhism grows in the south, its fortune is short-lived in the north. - Emperor Wu (of the Northern Zhou Dynasty) persecutes Buddhism and Daoism in northern China – once in 574, again in 577 – from concern that communities are too wealthy and powerful. - Buddhists ordered to return to civilian life, join military and contribute to economy - this is the Second Disaster of Wu - northern Buddhists flee south, giving rise to Sinitic Mahayana schools When the Sui emperor Wen (r.581-604) reunites northern and southern China, Jizang rises to fame. - revives Chinese Madhyamaka, founds Sanlun (Three-Treatise) school - honors Sengzhao as posthumous "founder" - privileges Lotus Sutra over Nirvana Sutra, reversing Dharmaksena's teaching - Lotus unites the different teachings; fits with trend of political unification Zhiyi, third patriarch of Tiantai Buddhism, also finds favor in Sui Dynasty. - school named after Mount Tiantai, Zhiyi's residence - introduces an innovative reading of Lotus Sutra - a "trace" aspect, by which One Vehicle absorbs Three Vehicles - a "root" aspect, by which Buddha-nature is present in all things - introduces "harmony of the three in one" and the "three truths" - not a dyadic pair (like yin and yang) but a triadic round (yuan, "circle"), all equal - like Christian trinity, but no one is "alpha" and none become others - the triad is: reality/existence (positive), emptiness (negative), neither real nor empty - these are three perspectives on the form of the real (dharmata) Jizang and Zhiyi fall into disfavor when Sui dynasty collapses. The Tang Dynasty revives Daoism. But they have an interest in Buddhism, too. - when the pilgrim Xuanzang returns from India in 645, he is honored by Emperor Taizong - Xuanzang receives support for translation project - brings back "new Yogacara" philosophy of "consciousness only" - learns at Nalanda University, which developed "old Yogacara" - the "new" teaching is that "storehouse consciousness" is tainted - this entails that some persons lack Buddha-nature - he takes on, as a student and translator, Fazang Fazang is a native of Sogdia (ancient Iranian civilization, parts of modern Uzbekistan and Tajikistan) - Sogdia dominated Silk Road trade from 100-900 CE; main religion Zoroastrianism - Sasanian Dynasty (224-651) falls after Arab/Muslim conquest of Persia (633-651) Fazang rejects "new Yogacara" for its denial of universal Buddha-nature. - favors, instead, understanding of mind found in Awakening of Faith - everything is ultimately "suchness" and therefore pure - results in "consciousness only" and Tiantai falling out of favor - both postulate an ultimate reality that fundamentally contains evil - Fazang treats mind as suchness – and whatever is generated by this mind is also pure - like Confucian debate on human nature's goodness, the side that favors goodness wins! Fazang rises to prominence during rule of Empress Wu, and he established Huayan School.

-

traces influences to Dushun and Zhiyan – posthumous "patriarchs" Zongmi later incorporates Huayan theory into Chan (Zen) practice

This is the height of Buddhism's fortunes in China. - during Third Disaster of Wu, Emperor Wuzong (r. 840-846) orders Buddhist temples destroyed, property confiscated - ditto with Nestorian Christianity and Zoroastrianism After this third persecution, Buddhism is a country-side religion, displaced by "neo-Confucianism."



Asian Philosophy – Handout Lecture 20 – Buddhism Entering China 68 CE:

White Horse Temple founded in China (during Han Dynasty) 150-250 CE: Nagarjuna

220-280 CE:

Three Kingdoms / Period of Disunity

225-651 CE: Sasanian Dynasty in Persia 232-348: Fotudeng (from India)

265-420 CE: 310: 316: 386-534 CE: 386-409:

Jin Dynasty Fotudeng arrives in China from Central Asia "Wu Hu" tribes invade, force Jin Dynasty to relocate Northern Wei Dynasty Emperor Daowu of Northern Wei

344-413:

Kumarajiva (from India)

344-416: 374-414:

Huiyuan (posthumous "founder" of Pure Land School) Sengzhao (posthumous "founder" of Sanlun School)

385-433: Dharmaksena (from India) (quai-political assassination) 400-ish: Asanga and Vasubandhu develop Yogacara

401: 404: 421: 423-452: 446-452: 499-569:

Kumarajiva arrives in China, translates Lotus Sutra Huiyuan, On Why Monks Do Not Bow Down Before Kings Dharmaksena arrives in China, translates Nirvana Sutra Emperor Taiwu of Northern Wei First Disaster of Wu Paramartha (from India)

502-557 CE: 502-549: 538-597: 546: 549-623: 553: 557-581 CE: 557-640: 560-578:

Southern Liang Dynasty Emperor Wu of Southern Liang Zhiyi (founder of Tiantai School) Paramartha arrives in China Jizang (third patriarch of Sanlun School) Paramartha translates/composes Awakening of Faith in Mahayana Northern Zhou Dynasty Dushun (posthumous "founder" of Huayan School) Emperor Wu of Northern Zhou

574-577: 581-618 CE: 581-604: 602-664: 602-668: 618-907 CE: 627-650: 629-645:

Second Disaster of Wu Sui Dynasty Emperor Wen of Sui Xuanzang Zhiyan (second patriarch of Huayan School) Tang Dynasty Emperor Taizong of Tang Xuanzang's pilgrimage through India

570-632: Muhammad

633-651: Arab/Muslim conquest of Persia

637: 643-712: 684-705: 780-841: 840-846: 845-846:

Xuanzang arrives at Nalanda University, learns Yogacara Fazang (of Sogdiana) (third patriarch of Huayan School) Empress Wu Zetian of Tang Zongmi (fifth patriarch of Huayan, seventh patriarch of Heze Chan) Emperor Wuzong of Tang Third Disaster of Wu

Lecture 21: Reality of True Suchness Tasks: background, Mahayana, one heart/mind and two gates, three greats, Vehicle Readings: SRA Selection from Awakening of Faith, FPBP Chapter 6 Background We don't know who wrote the Awakening of Faith. - some think it was written by an Indian, perhaps Avaghosa or Paramartha - others think it was written by a Chinese, with an Indian name attached for prestige - in either case, it is a work on Buddhist doctrine and philosophy - so authorship doesn't affect our study or the text's import for Chinese Buddhism Our selection comes from fairly close to the beginning of a much longer work. - the selection sets out the basic ideas - these ideas are fundamental to Huayan - in some ways, this sutra is more fundamental to Huayan than its namesake Avatamsaka Sutra Mahayana The selection begins by talking about Mahayana. - Mahayana is one of three major traditions of Buddhism, spread through China, Japan, and Korea - there's also Theravada, which spread south and east and has Abhidharma as its most famous school - and there's Pala, which was popular at Nalanda University (India) and spread to Tibet "Mahayana" was characterized in China as "Great Vehicle," in opposition to Hinayana, "Lesser Vehicle" - Theravada tradition was called Hinayana in China, as a kind of insult - this characterization is why the second paragraph talks about greatness so much - why greater? Because of emphasis on Bodhisattva Vow – seen as more community-oriented The selection offers two "explanations" of Mahayana. - in terms of reality (fa) -- this basically refers to dharmas - in terms of attributes (yi) -- this basically refers to things or objects Reality (fa), or dharma, is a tricky concept. It has many meanings, some of which include: - the truth of Buddhism, or the doctrine of Buddhism (which is true) - the true state of affairs that makes Buddhism true - that which exists (often used as a plural term) - not the same as "things," insofar as some things do not exist (e.g., atman) - the fundamental dharma are bhava - bhava are beings that have causal power - whence svabhava = own-being (causal power of its own) - possible non-fundamental dharma: chariots, persons (think about Abhidharma reduction) The text claims that the reality of Mahayana is the heart/mind (xin) of sentient beings. This is odd. - makes no sense, if "Mahayana" refers to a school or tradition or set of doctrines - better: "Mahayana" here refers to the truth contained in the Mahayana doctrines - this fits with Indian Buddhist use of "dharma," as doctrine or as truth conveyed by doctrine 1. Mahayana doctrine contains truth.

2. This truth is about reality (fa). 3. The reality to which Mahayana refers is the heart/mind (xin) of each sentient being. All of this is to assert that Mahayana doctrine makes true claims about our heart/mind. One Heart/Mind (xin) and Two Gates The text never quite says what heart/mind (xin) is. But the term is familiar from Mencius: - xin is heart/mind - humans' heart/mind feels compassion (cf. Bodhisattva Vow), shame/reverence, respect/deference, approving or condemning - the seeds of our heart/mind make us human - these seeds are fundamentally good - moral failure results from failure to develop heart/mind The text makes several assertions about heart/mind: 1. -

Each sentient being's heart/mind "encompasses all dharmas mundane and supramundane." supramundane concerns the escape from samsara and achievement of nirvana mundane concerns samsara and experience of duhkha the text doesn't say what "encompassing" means - realist interpretation: the heart/mind has a capacity to be aware of all dharmas - constructivist interpretation: the heart/mind categorizes/labels all dharmas - idealist interpretation: the heart/mind contains within itself all dharmas

2. -

This heart/mind, in encompassing all dharmas, "manifests" the attributes of Mahayana. "attributes of Mahayana" refers to the nature of reality in other words: our heart/minds manifest reality the text doesn't say what "manifest" means - realist option: makes representation of - constructivist option: invests with meaning/significance - idealist option: projects into existence

3. Heart/minds manifests reality under two "characterizations" – also called "gates" - characterized as True Suchness (bhuta tathata), manifests essence (ti) of reality - characterized as conditioned in samsara (shemgmie), manifests own-being, characteristics, and activities of reality - the text doesn't say what "characterize" means - but remember the ti-yong paradigm here: ti is fundamental, and has a derivative yong " Suchness" (tathata) is a common term for reality just as it is. - an alternative translation is "thusness" or "everything as it is" - a synonym is dharmata - in early Buddhist texts, suchness is described as an aspect of nirvana - for Mahayana, to experience suchness is to experience the world as empty - example in use: you are ill, and you say "Such is the way of the body" - "true" marks a contrast with appearance - in Madhyamaka, true suchness is emptiness, in contrast to appearance of svabhava

Three Greats The text proceeds to the second way of explaining Mahayana. - not in terms of what "Mahayana" refers to, namely, reality - but in terms of "Mahayana" meaning "great vehicle" The text asserts that Mahayana (reality) is great in three ways: 1. Essence of reality is great, because it is universal. - all dharmas are somehow the same in True Suchness - same in what sense? at least as empty, devoid of svabhava and causal power of their own - why no increase/decrease? nothing that lacks causal power of its own can gain or lose causal power of its own - perhaps also "same" in the sense of the daoist method of equalizing (equalized by being empty) - and a new idea: as having Buddha-nature ("positive" twist to emptiness, and solves problem of why all sentient beings capable of enlightenment in this lifetime) 2. Characteristics of reality are great, because Tathagatagarbha has limitless nature and virtues. - Tathagata = Buddha - garbha = womb or embryo - the idea here is that all sentient beings are "pregnant with the Buddha" - Buddha is Buddha by virtue of his enlightenment, so being pregnant with Buddha is being pregnant with enlightenment - that is: all sentient beings have buddha-nature - this explains why nirvana is possible in this lifetime: samsara is undeveloped nirvana - note again the resemblance to Mencius' ideas about seeds of heart/mind! - the virtues are the Buddha's personal qualities: compassion, patience, courage, etc. - we manifest these virtues insofar as we have comparable qualities There's an interesting corollary here: to think of the Buddha's compassion is to think of True Suchness – that is, of reality just as it is (because characteristics are manifestations of essence). - the fundamental nature of reality is compassion 3. Activities of reality are great, because activities produce all good causes and effects. - this implies that reality is active, with causal powers - danger here: if there is no other to True Suchness, this activity apparently would involve causal power of its own and apparently violate Madhyamaka prohibition against svabhava - traditionally, Buddhists characterize nirvana as uncreated and uncreating – permanent, stable, free of duhkha, and therefore not responsible for or implicated in the bad or "evil" aspects of our experience - avoids problem of evil, from Christian theology (because God creates the world) - possible way to avoid danger: production of good causes and effects is teleological rather than efficient causation – by being a dimension of our being, like a perfume of reality, True Suchness draws us toward it – we feel as though it exerts a force on us - possible analogies: gravity in 20th century physics (as path-like structures of space-time); perfume on a person Vehicle The last sentence of the second paragraph asserts that Buddhist practitioners ride True Suchness in order to reach Buddhahood. - again, productive activities of reality are like gravity or perfume – no efficient causation - similar to the stream analogy from Zhuangzi, and idea of free and easy wandering

Asian Philosophy – Handout Lecture 21 – Reality of True Suchness

Reality = fa, referring to dharma - the truth of Buddhism, or the doctrine of Buddhism (which is true) - the true state of affairs that makes Buddhism true - that which exists (often used as a plural term, dharmas)

One Xin (heart/mind) - "encompasses all dharmas mundane and supramundane" - "manifests" the attributes of Mahayana

Two Gates - True Suchness (bhuta tathata), manifesting essence (ti) of reality - aka dharmata, thusness, everything just as it is - conditioned in samsara (shemgmie), manifesting own-being, characteristics, and activities of reality

Three Greats - of essence/own-being, because universal - of character, because limitless nature and virtues of Tathagatagarbha - Tathagata = Buddha - garbha = womb or embryo - virtues are Buddha's personal qualities: compassion, patience, courage, etc - of activities, because produces all good causes and effects

Lecture 22: Attributes of True Suchness Tasks:one heart/mind, two aspects, dharmadhatu, deluded thought Readings: SRA Selection from Awakening of Faith One Heart/Mind The third paragraph asserts that two aspects exist in the "one heart/mind." This is ambiguous. - this could mean that both aspects exist in each particular heart/mind - traditionally it is taken to mean a single heart/mind that is somehow the mind of all sentient beings - all minds participate, somehow, in this one heart/mind The Chinese term for this is yixin. In Sanskrit, it is ekacitta - eka = one, citta = mind - this term does not appear in other Sanskrit literature of Indian Buddhism - it is possible that it is a Chinese misunderstanding of Indian Buddhist doctrine - in any case, the Chinese is ambiguous Tradition says: All dharmas, and all heart/minds, are the same as this one universal heart/mind. - "same" in the sense of "not different" and "not separate" - standard analogy: a "reborn" person is "the same as" the person in the previous life - not numerically identical, because there are differences - but not absolutely distinct either, because there are relations between - this sense of "same" is quite open to interpretation, beyond this Two Aspects One aspect of this one universal heart/mind is True Suchness. - the heart/mind as empty, devoid of own-being Another aspect of this one universal heart/mind is Samsara. - shengmie in Chinese = "arising and perishing" - the heart/mind as involved in life after life, death after death, experiencing duhkha, etc Each aspect "encompasses" all dharmas. - the text does not define "encompass" Each aspect is "not separate" from the other. - the text does not define "separate" - minimally: whenever there is one, then there is the other Dharmadhatu Dhatu means "elements." There is an early Indian Buddhist classification of 18 such dhatu: -

the six faculties: five physical senses and mind the six objects of which we are conscious, corresponding to each faculty the six kind of consciousness

The dharmadhatu, accordingly, is the totality of what we can perceive. - perception is mutual reliance of faculty-object-consciousness, like a tripod

Alternatively, if dharma refers to true doctrine rather than phenomena, dharmadhatu is the root/basis of that doctrine - namely, the universe as a whole The fourth paragraph asserts that the heart/mind as True Suchness is the dharmadhatu. - the universal heart/mind is all that there is - this entails that the universal heart/mind is unarisen and imperishable = unchanging - all that there is does not go into or come out of existence - what arises and perishes are particulars, not the whole itself The "great universal characteristic" likely refers to samanyalakshana - this means arising, enduring, changing, passing away - to say this is unchanging means that everything there is (particulars) arise and perish Here's a proof: 1. The nature of the mind is empty – it has no nature. 2. This emptiness is permanent. 3. Hence, the nature of the mind is unchanging. - it is not now empty, now not-empty This entails that the nature of the mind is nirvana. - the universal heart/mind is buddha-nature! - because that which is unchanging is nirvana Deluded Thought The fifth paragraph asserts that the "deluded thought" discriminates dharmas. - to discriminate is to carve up into "this" and "that", x and non-x - to base this in delusion is to imply that the carving up is not fundamentally real The text does not give a reason. But Nagarjuna's doctrine of emptiness provides one: 1. If x were fundamentally distinct from others, x would have a nature of its own. 2. But nothing has a nature of its own – everything is fundamentally empty. 3. So there is no fundamental distinctness in reality. The universal heart/mind, then, is that which is apart from deluded thought. - a single, unchanging whole = dharmadhatu - this is nirvana - to experience the world in this way is to experience nirvana The paragraph goes on to assert that individual dharmas are only the one universal heart/mind. - that which thought imposes delusion upon is dharmadhatu - think about ti-yong: fundamentally dharmadhatu, manifesting as separate dharmas True Suchness is inexpressible, the "culmination of explanation." - because concepts refer to individual entities with natures - the best we can do is give a pseudo-concept, "True Suchness", that merely indicates presence

Lecture 23: Aspects of True Suchness Tasks: one aspect, another aspect, alayavijnana Readings: SRA Selection from Awakening of Faith One Aspect – Empty True Suchness has two aspects – it appears to us in two ways. -

as empty as non-empty

That True Suchness is empty is not a surprise. 1. 2. 3. 4.

True Suchness "can ultimately manifest reality." So it is not fundamentally different from everything else. So it is related to everything else – it depends in some way upon others. Hence, it is empty.

The text goes on to characterize this aspect as free from delusion. - i.e., as nirvana Another Aspect – Non-Empty That True Suchness is non-empty is a bit of a surprise. 1. True Suchness has its own essence, with uncontaminated nature and virtues. - because it is unchanging, and so on - because it is nirvana – that's a positive description if ever there were one 2. So it is non-empty. This is impossible, if there's exactly one correct way to describe ultimate reality. But the text denies this: there are zero correct ways, because ultimate reality is inexpressible. - the best we can get is useful descriptions - and there are many of these Alayavijnana The final paragraph asserts that the heart/mind as samsara is Alaya consciousness. - the "storehouse" consciousness - contains all seeds/potentialities for experiences of sentient beings - transmits predispositions and impressions from past experiences - a sort of mass of accumulated karma, keeping beings trapped in samsara In the Lankavatarasutra, tathagatagarbha is a synonym for alayavijnana - fundamentally pure, but appearing as impure because of deluded thoughts - nirvana is the uprooting of alaya – getting rid of the "bad" seeds

Lecture 24: Existence, Origination, and Emptiness Tasks: panchiao, lesser vehicle, elementary teaching of the greater vehicle, Indian shortcomings Readings: EII 45-56, FPBP Chapter 8 Panchiao This is Dushun's attempt at panchiao. - systematically classifying different Buddhist teachings - all are "useful" - none are "correct," because ultimate reality is inexpressible - all are "ranked" with respect to proximity to ultimate truth - how much deluded thought does it manage to remove, if properly understood? Each teaching is referred to as a "gate." Lesser Vehicle First is the teaching of the "Lesser Vehicle." - this is Abhidharma - teaches non-reality of wholes (self, chariot) - distinguishes ultimate and conventional truth This teaching reduces everything to 18 fundamental elements: - the six faculties: five physical senses and mind - the six objects of which we are conscious, corresponding to each faculty - the six kind of consciousness And it provides the following therapy against clinging: 1. If one is clinging to x, analyze x into its fundamental elements. 2. Presumably, one is not clinging to any of the fundamental elements. 3. So hopefully analysis stops clinging to x – x is not ultimately real. This teaching is incomplete, because it is not clear about the nature of fundamental reality. - it treats the fundamental elements as ultimately real - so it allows for clinging to fundamental elements Distinctive features: - breaks down attachment to self - analyzes everything into fundamental elements Elementary Teaching of the Greater Vehicle There seem to be two schools of thought included under this label. - gate of origination, presumably Indian Yogacara - gate of nonorigination, presumably Madhyamaka Indian Yogacara (Vasubandhu & Asanga) introduce into the analysis of elements alayavijnana. - this is in addition to the 18 fundamental elements

Dushun begins this section with Yogacara insights and the gate of origination. 1. Take an object of experience, e.g., a headrest. 2. Distinguish between the object and the label for the object. - the label does not pick out the particular object - that is, the label does not capture what we experience (in its particularity) 3. Abhidharma doctrine: what we experience is mutual interaction of the object, faculty, consciousness 4. Yogacara doctrine: we impose a label upon what we experience using cognitive consciousness - we access past experience for similarities, and apply the same label 5. Since the past experiences are not in the experience of the present object, they must exist elsewhere. - as seeds in alayavijnana Dushun makes the point that what we experience is often classified objects rather than things just as they are. - we experience things as particular kinds of things - this is what deluded thought is - because the classifications are not there in the things experienced - they come from the seeds in our minds So the gate of origination is about how deluded thought shapes our experience. - it is a teaching about how samsaric experiences originate - it leads us to experience in terms of categories and classifications that aren't fundamentally real - this identifies, and overcomes, one problem with the Abhidharma analysis of dharmas - they are not ultimately real, because they are classified as separate - but the separateness is in our minds, not in the dharmas Dushun shows that we can reach the same conclusion with Madhyamaka insights and the gate of nonorigination. 1. Everything is empty. 2. So even the fundamental dharmas are empty. 3. So even the fundamental dharmas are not ultimately real. - this is the contemplation of nonorigination - because emptiness neither arises nor perishes There's also the gate of signlessness. - this interprets Madhyamaka teaching to say that ultimate truth is inexpressible. - so concepts do not allow us to say anything that's ultimately true Indian Shortcomings Yogacara and Madhyamaka each, in their own way, avoid possibility of attachment to fundamental elements. But neither is complete, in Dushun's view. - Madhyamaka stops at saying that everything is empty – without any positive characterization - Yogacara stops at identifying mental contribution, without getting to what's beyond mind (if anything) - hence, neither adequately explains the nature of nirvana

Lecture 25: Nonduality and Ineffability Tasks: final teaching, immediate teaching Readings: EII 56-61 Final Teaching of the Greater Vehicle Third is the "final" Mahayana teaching. - improves upon Yogacara and Madhyamaka from India - meant to include most competing schools of Chinese Buddhism - all of these accept the basic ideas in Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana - heart/mind encompasses all dharmas - heart/mind manifests all dharmas through two "gates" - as True Suchness - as conditioned by Samsara - essence of heart/mind is buddha-nature Dushun introduces a series of fundamental contrasts, presumably based upon Awakening of Faith or a similar text. Gate of True Thusness noumenon (? tathagatagarbha ?) emptiness reality cessation (as identical to existence) compassion (as guiding wisdom) nirvana water

Gate of Birth-and-Death phenomena (? dharmas ?) existence falsehood (? appearance of svabhava ?) contemplation (as identical to emptiness) wisdom (as guiding compassion) birth-and-death (samsara) waves

Dushun claims that these contrasts are non-dual. 1. Emptiness is not nihilistic emptiness (voidness), but instead absence of inherent (or hypostasized) existence. 2. Existence is not hypostatized existence (presence of svabhava), but instead presence of Buddhanature = True Suchness – and True Suchness lacks svabhava. 3. Hence, emptiness does not entail non-existence and existence does not entail non-emptiness. 4. Therefore, emptiness and existence are jointly compatible – in some sense, "identical." 5. Corollary: nirvana is "identical to" samsara – they aren't distinct realities. He is making a subtle critique of the Lesser Teaching and Elementary Teaching of Mahayana here, to the effect that both are incomplete. 1- Abhidharma emphasizes existence at the expense of emptiness, since dharmas are taken to have svabhava (causal power of their own, hence not empty) – this is Nagarjuna's critique. 2- If one emphasizes existence at the expense of emptiness, one's teaching is incomplete. - although wholes are empty, failure to realize emptiness of simples 3- Nagarjuna emphasizes emptiness at the expense of existence, since he does not recognize the existence of True Suchness (which is, in some sense, not empty).

-

this makes sense, if we conflate Nagarjuna's sense of "conventional" with the Adhidharma sense 4- If one emphasizes emptiness at the expense of existence, one's teaching is incomplete. - although dharmas are empty, they are also True Suchness To illustrate, Dushun invokes the very famous water-wave metaphor: 1. Water is to True Suchness as wave is to dharmas (birth-and-death). 2. Just as waves are distinct and changing (high/low), dharmas are too. 3. Just as water is water whenever and however it appears, True Suchness is too. - all dharmas have essence of True Suchness, and all waves have essence of water 4. Just as waves are not distinct from water, dharmas are not distinct from True Suchness. 5. Just as there is no water apart from waves (all water has some height), there is no True Suchness apart from dharmas – hence True Suchness is empty! Immediate Teaching of the Greater Vehicle Recall that, according to the Awakening of Faith, True Suchness is inexpressible, the "culmination of explanation." So, whereas the Final Teaching identifies True Suchness as reality and attempts to discuss it despite its inexpressibility, the Immediate Teaching takes seriously the nature of True Suchness and abstains from discussion – the Immediate Teaching occurs through non-conceptual, immediate experience of True Suchness. Nonetheless, although True Suchness is inexpressible, Dushun provides an explanation for why it is inexpressible – and so why the Final Teaching runs into trouble in attempting to express it. 1. Emptiness and existence contain each other, because they are non-dual (from Final Teaching). 2. Hence, whatever exists also does not exist (because it is empty) and whatever is empty also is not empty (because it exists). -

dharmas exist, because they are True Suchness; they are empty because dependent on True Suchness ditto with True Suchness being existent and empty

3. Since existence and emptiness are non-dual, all dharmas as True Suchness are thus the same – they are equalized by virtue of their emptiness and their Buddha-nature. 4. Realizing this involves occupying the pinnacle of the method of equalizing – akin to wu-wei in Daoism. 5. Hence, realizing the non-duality of emptiness and existence produces complete freedom – akin to wandering free and unfettered in Daoism. - any speech at all is limiting in some way; hence, as unlimited/limitless, no speech. 6. Since the realization is limitless, speech cannot comprehend it – it is inexpressible, and can only be experienced.

Asian Philosophy – Handout Lecture 26 – Flower Ornament Meditation and the Net of Indra

non-reality atman Brahman

Jones' Interpretation of Huayan Ontology Buddhism reality Mahayana "illusory"/apparent/provisional Abhidharma conventional "ultimate" wholes

non-reality ---

dharmas with svabhava

ultimate

bhuta tathata (True Suchness) with tathagatagarbha (buddha-nature)

Jones' Interpretation of Net of Indra Analogy --reality --"illusory"/apparent/provisional --conventional "ultimate"

ultimate

net of Indra groups of jewels in net of Indra

individual jewels in net of Indra

Dushun's Master Argument (from Huayan Fajieguan) (from B. Ziporyn, Evil And/Or/As Good (Harvard UP: 2000), pp.172-173)

1. Ontology asks "what is X?' = "what characteristics really belong to X, in all circumstances, from all perspectives, at all times, intrinsically and inalienably?" 2. For all X of whatever kind, the only correct answer to "what is X?" is the characteristic of having no characteristics that really belong to X, except for this very characteristic = the characteristic of "having no intrinsic characteristic" (being empty) = Emptiness = Principle 3. Corollary 1: For any X, all of X's other characteristics are apparent characteristics. 4. Corollary 2: For any X, X is able to "take on" characteristics (appear as though it has intrinsic characteristics). 5. Hence, Emptiness is the only ultimate reality of each and every X. 6. Corollary 3: Emptiness manifests all apparent reality. 7. Since Emptiness is indivisible, every X is entirely Emptiness = every X is "identical to" Emptiness. 8. Corollary 4: Each X is all others (because Emptiness is what everything is). 9. Corollary 5: Each X manifests everything else (because Corollary 3). 10. But since there exist X, Y such that XY, every X is also "distinct from" Emptiness.

Lecture 27 Dependent Origination and Mutual Reliance Excerpts from Fazang, Treatise on the Five Doctrines (trans. Cook 1970, pp.444-467). Chapter 10 – Part 2 – The Six Meanings of Dependent Origination in the Causal Aspect In explaining these six meanings, I will divide them into six topics: 1. Explanation of the characteristics; 2. theory; 3. enumeration of the alternatives; 4. analysis and synthesis; 5. mutual inclusion; 6. [the six meanings] with reference to the five doctrines. There are two parts to the first topic: first, I enumerate the names; next, I explain the characteristics. First, the names: all causes have six meanings. 1. [Cause] is empty, has power, does not require conditions. 2. Is empty, has power, [requires] conditions. 3. Is empty, lacks power, requires conditions. 4. Exists, has power, does not require conditions. 5. Exists, has power, requires conditions. 6. Exists, has no power, requires conditions. Two, explanation of the characteristics: the first means instantaneous extinction. Why is this? Because of instantaneous extinction, [cause] is shown to be without self-nature. This is emptiness. Because of this extinction, the production of the result is possible. This means having power. However, because this extinction does not result from the power of conditions, it is said that there is no need of conditions. The second means [that the cause] exists together [with the result]. Why is this? Because they exist together, [cause] exists at that time. That means [that the cause] is non-existent. This means empty. Because it exists together [with the result], it can form existence. This is the possession of power. Because it exists together [with the result], it is not alone, so it requires conditions. The third means it requires all conditions. Why is this? Because [cause] is without a nature of its own, it is empty. Because the cause does not produce [result] and the conditions do, it has no power. For this reason, it requires conditions. The fourth means [the nature of the cause is] fixed. Why is this? It has the meaning of existence because its own species does not change. Because it has the power to produce the result of itself, without altering, it has power. However, this non-alteration is not the result of the power of conditions, and this means that it does not require conditions. The fifth means [the cause] attracts its own result. Why is this? It exists because it attracts and manifests its own result. Even though it requires conditions when it produces a result, it does not produce a result which has the nature of the conditions. This means it has power. Therefore, it requires conditions. The sixth means [the cause] continuously evolves in dependence [on other conditions]. Why is this? Because of dependence on something other, it would not be non-existent. Because it cannot diverge from conditions, it has no power. For this reason, it requires conditions. Thus, in order to show these six meanings, the Mahayanasamgraha gives this verse: "Instantaneous cessation, existing together [with the result], continuously evolving in dependence, you should know, and fix [nature], requiring many conditions, and attracting only its own result [are the six meanings of cause]."

Two, the theory. Question: Why are just six meanings taught, and not increased to seven or decreased to five? Answer: if you combine the direct cause with the conditions, there are only three possibilities. 1. The cause has power and does not require conditions, because it produces [the result] completely from its own essence, and does not combine with the power of conditions. 2. The cause has power and requires conditions, because it gives rise [to a result] through mutual assistance [of conditions]. 3. Cause has no power and requires conditions, because it is completely non-efficient and is absorbed into the conditions. Also, with regard to these three meanings, in each cause there are two meanings; that is to say, emptiness and existence are each combined with the three above meanings. Because this makes six, there is no increase or decrease. Question: Why isn't the fourth meaning— without power, not requiring conditions—proposed? Answer: It is not proposed because it doesn't have the meaning of cause. There is no need to go into details. [omission of several Q&A sections] Three, the enumeration of alternatives: there are two kinds. The first has to do with essence [ti]; the second concerns function [yong]. First, in connection with the existence or non-existence of the essence [of cause], there are four alternatives. 1. It exists; i.e., this means that its nature is fixed. 2. It does not exist; this means instantaneous cessation. 3. It both exists and does not exists; this is a unity of the combination of [the meanings of] attracting its own result and existing simultaneously [with the result]. 4. It neither exists nor does not exist; this is the unity of the combination of [the meanings of] constantly evolving in dependence and requiring conditions. The four alternatives in connection with function are: 1. [The function is] not born of itself, because of the unity of the combination [of the meanings] of constantly evolving in dependence and requiring conditions. 2. It is not born from something other than itself, because of the unity of the combination of instantaneous cessation and fixed [nature]. 3. It is not both of both [itself and another], because of the unity of the combination of existing together [with the result] and attracting its own result. 4. It is not born without a cause, because of [emptiness and existence] possessing the three alternatives and uniting to make the six meanings and becoming a cause. Consequently, as a result of the six meanings, cause and conditions are wholly absorbed [into each other], and show the marvelous qualities of dependent origination. Therefore, the Treatise on the Dasabhumika says, "[Result] is not produced from the cause because it is produced from conditions. It is not produced from conditions because it is produced from its own cause. It is not produced from both because there is no connection between them because at the time of activity, [cause] does not remain. It is not born without a cause because [the result] exists in dependence on conditions." Also, the Abhidharmasamuccaya-vyakhya says, "Because [a result] has its own seed, it does not arise out of another. Because it requires conditions, it does not arise out of itself. Because [the cause] lacks power, [the result] is not produced from both [itself and another]. Because [the cause] has power, [the result] is not produced without a cause." [omission of a Q&A session] Four, analysis and synthesis. 1. [Concerning] essence, there is only one, because cause does not have two essences. 2. [Concerning] meaning, this is two-fold; i.e., it is empty and existent, because it is without a nature of its own, and because things appear as a result of conditions production. 3. With regard to function, it is divided into three: one, it has power and does not require conditions; two, it has power and requires conditions; three, it is without power and requires conditions. In one, there is total power; in three, there is no power at all; and in the middle one, there is both power and no power. A

fourth alternative, no power and not requiring conditions, is not discussed because it is not a cause. Therefore, there are only these three alternatives. [omission of some further categorizations and of "Five, fusion"] Six, as far as the [five] doctrines are concerned, in the small vehicle, the characteristics of cause [must be considered from the standpoint] of attachment to dharmas [as having only the meaning of existence]. The names and significance of the six meanings do not exist. In the three vehicles, in the alaya-vijnanai and the tathagata-garbha as cause for the [belief in] emptiness of dharmas, the name and meaning of the six meanings exist, but still there is no possession of the interrelationship of primary [substance/ti] and secondary [function/yong]. In the perfect causation of the one vehicle, [symbolized by the realm] of Samantabhadra, [the teaching of causation] reaches perfection in the infinitely repeated possession of the secondary by the primary and the infinity of [the activity of] dependent origination. Because of the concepts of emptiness and existence, there is mutual identity; because of the concepts of having and not having power, there is mutual pervasion; because of the concepts of requiring conditions and not requiring them, there is the category of identical essence and difference essence. Because these concepts exist, oceans of Buddhalands can be put in the follicle of a hair. This is evident if you think about it. from Francis Cook, Fa-Tsang's Treatise on the Five Doctrines: An Annotated Translation. Ph.D. Dissertation. Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1970.

Lecture 28 Mutual Identity through Different Essence – Reconstruction Excerpts from Fazang, Treatise on the Five Doctrines (trans. Cook 1970, pp.468-). Chapter 10 – Part 3 – The Dharma Teaching on the Freedom of the Ten-Fold Profound Dependent Origination The concept of the Dharma teaching on the freedom of the ten-fold profound dependent origination: the dependent origination of the dharma-dhatu is free and infinite. Now, I shall make a rough division of two parts through the use of essential topics. First I show the result, final enlightenment, which is to say, the ten Buddhas' own realm. Second, I discuss doctrine in connection with cause, the compliance with conditions [consisting of the needs of living beings]; i.e., the realm of Samantabhadra. With regard to the first part, [dharmas] being perfectly free in their interrelationship, one is identical with all, and all are identical with the one, but the form [of this realm] cannot be discussed. What this is, is the mutual inclusion of the final result of the ocean of realms and the self-essence of the ten Buddhas, etc., in the [Avatamsaka] sutra. The non-discussion of [the realm of] Indra, or of the miniscule [including large things within it] concerns this inexpressibility. Why is this? Because it is not related to teaching. The treatise on the Dasabhumika says, "Cause is expressible; the result is beyond words." This is what is meant here. [omission of Q&A] The second concept has two parts: the first is shown briefly through the use of comparison. The second is extensively discussed in connection with the Dharma [i.e., the application of the figure of speech]. First, the comparison: it is like the method of counting ten coins. The reason for speaking of ten is that it satisfies the requirements for a perfect number for purposes of showing inexhaustibility [or infinity]. In this section, there are also two parts. One is different essence, two is common essence. The reason there are these two divisions is that there are two meanings in all [dharmas] of dependent origination. The first is the meaning of not being mutually reliant; i.e., because [a dharma] of itself possesses [countless] qualities, such as not requiring conditions, in the cause. The second is the meaning of mutual reliance, such as the need for conditions [by the cause], etc. The first is common essence, and the second is different essence. In connection with different essence, there are two parts: 1. Mutual identity; 2. Mutual inclusion. The reason there are two parts is that all dharmas which arise from conditions have two meanings. [These are] 1. Empty and existent; this is from the point of view of self-essence. 2. Having power and having no power; this is from the point of view of efficiency. Because of the first meaning, mutual identity is possible. Because of the last meaning, mutual inclusion is possible. With regard to the first [ meaning], because when "A" exists, the others necessarily do not exist, the others are identical with "A." Why is this? Because as a result of the others being without a self-nature, the "A" creates [the result]. Second, because at the time "A" is empty, the others necessarily exist of themselves, "A" is identical with the others. Why is this? Because as a result of "A" being without selfessence, the others create [the result]. Because each of the two existences and two emptinesses are not simultaneous, ["A" and the other] are identical with each other. They are always identical with each other because of the identity of the non-existence of the existing and the existence of the non-existing. If this were not so, dependent origination would not occur and there would be the error of self-essence, etc. This is clear upon consideration. [omission of rest]