Chapter 2 Xiong’s Two-level Ti-yong System between 1920 and 1923

This chapter examines Xiong Shili’s understanding of Reality and Function in the early 1920s. Although Xiong had yet to establish his systematic ti-yong phi- losophy by this stage, his scattered views on Reality and Function can still be found in his 1923 Weishixue gailun, which reflects his philosophical thought during this time. This chapter deals principally with Xiong’s ideas in this work. Although the Weishixue gailun was published in 1923,1 Xiong claimed that he began to compose it as early as 1921,2 while he was studying Yogācāra at the Institute of Inner Learning. It is natural and under- standable that this work on Yogācāra is intertwined with what he was learning at the Institute. At a later time, Xiong revealed what he learnt there and what this work is about:

余初叩佛學即專攻唯識論，追尋玄奘、窺基宣揚之業，從護法諸師 以上索無著、世親，悉其淵源、通其脈絡、綜其體系、控其綱要，遂 成《唯識學概論》一書，壬戌講授北庠（北京大學。）即此書節本。 3

When I first inquired into Buddhist learning, I specialised in Yogācāra theories. I pursued what and Kuiji propagated by tracing var- ious masters such as Dharmapāla (Hufa 護法; sixth century)4 back to Asaṅga and – knowing clearly their sources, compre- hending thoroughly the threads of their thought, summing up their systems, and making notes of their outlines. Based on this, I composed the manuscript titled Weishixue gailun 唯識學概論 (A General Account

1 This work is generally considered to have been published in 1923. Yet it should be noted that the contemporary Confucian philosopher Cai Renhou 蔡仁厚 (1930–2019) records its publication year as 1922. See Cai, Xiong Shili xiansheng xuexing nianbiao, p. 18. However, Cai describes the exact time of publication as “the twelfth month of the lunar year in the winter” (dongla 冬臘), which was actually from January 17th to February 15th in 1923, according to the solar calendar. 2 Xiong, Xin weishi lun (wenyanwen ben, 1932), p. 9. 3 Xiong, Xin weishi lun (shanding ben, 1953) 新唯識論 (刪定本, 一九五三年) (New Treatise on the Uniqueness of Consciousness [Expurgated and Finalised Version, Published in 1953]), in Xiong Shili quanji, vol. 6, p. 5. 4 Dharmapāla was an influential figure in the Indian Yogācāra school. He developed Vasubandhu’s thought by commenting on his works.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004431584_004 72 Chapter 2

of Yogācāra Learning). [The teaching material on which I] lectured in Beixiang () in 1922 is precisely the abridged version of this manuscript.

Undoubtedly, Xiong’s “first inquiry into Buddhist learning” refers to his expe- rience at the China Institute of Inner Learning. As described in the above statement, his study at that time centred on the “Asaṅga-Vasubandhu- Dharmapāla-Xuanzang-Kuiji lineage” of the Yogācāra school.5 Based on his research, Xiong drafted a manuscript entitled Weishixue gailun, the abridged version of which – namely, Xiong’s teaching material on which he lectured at Peking University in 1922 – is precisely what he published in 1923 under the same title.6 Although Xiong’s 1923 Weishixue gailun is a monograph that concentrates on explicating Yogācāra (with a focus on the Asaṅga-Vasubandhu- Dharmapāla-Xuanzang-Kuiji lineage), his opinions on Reality and Function in this work emerge precisely from his explanations of certain Yogācāra theories. For this reason, this chapter pays considerable attention to how Xiong inter- preted those Yogācāra theories. In his 1923 work, Xiong on the whole provided a faithful interpretation of Yogācāra learning, but he still offered independent judgements about Yogācāra theories, infused with his own opinions. He did this primarily through three approaches: his decision as to which Yogācāra theories should be included in (or excluded from) this work;7 his choice between the opinions of different

5 Xiong divided the Yogācāra learning in China into two traditions: the “old” (guxue 古學) and the “new” ( jinxue 今學). As John Makeham notes, Xiong identified Paramārtha as a rep- resentative figure in the “old” tradition of Yogācāra as transmitted in China in contrast to the “new” tradition which he associated with Xuanzang and Kuiji but which has roots in the teachings of Dharmapāla and Vasubandhu. See Makeham, “The Significance of Xiong Shili’s Interpretation of Dignāga’s Ālambana-parīkṣā (Investigation of the Object)”, p. 225, note 54. As for Xiong’s own expression of this differentiation of the two traditions in his 1923 work, see Xiong, Weishixue gailun (1923) 唯識學概論 (一九二三年) (A General Account of Yogācāra Learning [Published in 1923]), in Xiong Shili quanji, vol. 1, pp. 51–52. 6 For the relationship between Xiong’s teaching material for his lectures at Peking University in 1922 and his 1923 publication of Weishixue gailun, see, for example, Cai, Xiong Shili xian- sheng xuexing nianbiao, p. 18. 7 Wang Shouchang 王守常 also mentions that Xiong made his own choice concerning what content should be included in his 1923 Weishixue gailun. As Wang points out, this choice reflects Xiong’s understanding of Yogācāra learning. Wang Shouchang 王守常, “Ershi shiji ru fo zhi zheng: Xiong Shili yu Liu Dingquan zhenglun” 二十世紀儒佛之爭——熊十 力與劉定權的爭論 (The Battles between and Buddhism in the Twentieth Century: The Debate between Xiong Shili and Liu Dingquan), in Xiong Shili quanji, supple- mentary volume A, p. 567.