16 a Comparative Study of Mahāyāna and Theravāda Buddhist Meditation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
《禪與人類文明研究》第 7 期(2020) International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020) A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MAHĀYĀNA AND THERAVĀDA BUDDHIST MEDITATION: READING CHIH-I’S MOHO CHIH-KUAN AND BUDDHAGHOSA’S VISUDDHIMAGGA Tony See Sin Heng (Buddhist College of Singapore (BCS)) ABSTRACT This paper examines the connection between Mahayana and Theravāda Buddhist meditation from the perspective of Chih-i’s Moho chih-kuan 摩訶止観 and considers its differences and similarities from Buddhist meditation and Pure Land Buddhism. Although much scholarship has been devoted to the study of Chih-i’s concept of meditation, relatively few works have been engaged in a comparative study of his theory of mediation and Theravāda understanding of meditation. This paper makes such an attempt in the light of works done by exceptional works by scholars such as Swanson, Groner and Habito. In this paper, we examine why Chih-i used the term “chihi-kuan” 止観 and what practical implications it may have for meditators, what the philosophical background of chih-kuan is, followed by a consideration of the differences and similarities with the concept of meditation in Theravāda Buddhism. KEYWORDS Chih-i, Chih-kuan, Mahāyāna, T’ien-t’ai, Theravāda 16 《禪與人類文明研究》第 7 期(2020) International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020) INTRODUCTION It is generally accepted that Chih-i’s theory of meditation is foundational to the development of the T’ien-t’ai school of Buddhism in China. This school was credited with systematizing almost the entirely of the Buddha’s teachings and maintaining the centrality of the Lotus Sūtra 法華經. In fact, Paul Swanson has also gone to the extent of saying in his T’ien-t’ai Philosophy: The Flowering of the Two Truths Theory in Chinese Buddhism (1989) that all roads towards understanding of Chinese Buddhism eventually lead to T’ien-t’ai Buddhism (Swanson 1989, x). This suggests that any study of meditation in the Chinese Buddhist tradition would be incomplete without considering the teachings of the T’ien-t’ai school of Buddhism. Given the centrality of T’ien-t’ai Buddhism to the study of Chinese Buddhism, it is remarkable why there is a relative lack of scholarship on T’ien-t’ai meditation in contemporary Buddhist studies. The bulk of the work seems to be focused on Zen-related studies and even Pure Land meditative experiences. In this paper, we hope to contribute to the current lacunae by turning our focus on the T’ien-t’ai perspective on meditation as this would help us understand how early Buddhist schools in China conceived of meditation. This would in turn inform our understanding of the varieties of meditative traditions and theories in our times. We begin with an examination of the concept of meditation as expressed by Chih-I in his massive text Mo-ho Chih-kuan 摩訶止観, otherwise known as the Great Calming and Concentration. This will be followed by a study of the idea of mediation in Theravāda Buddhism. This will be followed by an analysis of their similarities and differences. One of the first things that we discover when we turn to the Mo-ho Chih-kuan is that meditation is not a matter of simply following one practice. In other words, early Chinese meditators did not advocate the sole practice of meditation to the exclusion of other practices. Unlike modern day mindfulness and meditative movements, meditation is seen as part of a larger complex of religious practices. We say this because while meditation has become an important area of research by modern scholars, a trend that is gaining prominence especially due to the mindfulness circles, there is also a corresponding rise in the belief that the exclusive practice of meditation is sufficiently “Buddhist.” While the popular image of Buddhist practice is that of a person seated quietly in silent contemplation, this is not always the case in Buddhism. The study of Chih-i’s text on meditation, namely, the Mo-ho chih-kuan, reminds us that Buddhist meditation forms part of a larger body of practices. When we appreciate this point, important similarities with other schools of Buddhism. In Theravada Buddhism, for instance, it is emphasized that while mindfulness is an important factor for enlightenment, it is not the only factor for enlightenment There are a host of other mental factors that that need to be developed, and a host of mental defilements that need to be removed before the practitioner can make further progress. The Satipatthāna-sutta, for instance, teaches us that there are factors such Upekkhā (“equanimity”) and visuddhi (“purity”) that are equally important for the attainment of Buddhahood. These combinations of factors and support for practice should make us step back and think again about Buddhist practice, and question whether modern-day mindfulness movements give us an accurate picture of what Buddhist practice is. This paper seeks first of all to understand how meditation is conceived of by Chih-i, how it may be compared with Theravada meditation, and how these together differ from modern interpretations of mindfulness and what some of these factors are. 17 《禪與人類文明研究》第 7 期(2020) International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020) SAMATHA AND VIPASSANA IN THE MO-HO CHIH-KUAN One of Chih-i’s earliest texts that give instructions on meditation is the Shih ch’an p’o-lo- mi tz’u-ti fa-men 釈禅波羅蜜次第法門 (Treatise on the Gradual Practice of Dhyana-paramita (T 46, no. 1916, 475-548). This is a text which was also commonly known as the Tz’u-ti ch’an- men 次第禅門 (The Gradual Practice of Ch’an). Strictly speaking, this text was not composed by Chih-i personally but a summary of his lectures which was edited by Kuan-ting. This massive text was later summarised into the Hsiao chih-kuan 小止観, a text composed around around 575, while Chih-i was working on Mt. T’ien-t’ai (from the age of 38 to 48). It was when Chih-i returned to the capital of Chin-ling from Mt. T’ien-t’ai in 585 that he composed the massive Mo-ho chih-kuan 摩訶止観( Great Calming and Concentration ) (T 46, no. 1911) (Swanson, 2012: 2-3). Although there is a tendency to focus on his two other texts, which are exegetical his works on the Lotus Sūtra, namely the Fahua wenzhu 法華文句 (Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sūtra) and the Fahua xuanyi 法華玄義 (Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra), it is also important to study his work on meditation in order to see the connection between meditation and the Lotus Sūtra. For instance, Chih-i’s use of the term “chih-kuan” was directly inspired by scriptural passages from the Lotus Sūtra 法華經 (T. 9.8a23–24), where it is stated that “The Buddha himself dwells in the Mahāyāna, and in accordance with his attainments, Is adorned with the power of concentration and wisdom, With which he saves sentient beings (Hsiao chih-kuan, T 46.462b5-11) (Swanson, 2012: 4). One of the immediate things that we should notice as we approach the Mo-ho chih-kuan is that Chih-i uses the term “chih-kuan” 止観 instead of “ch’an” 禪. The term “chih-kuan” consists of two words which means “stopping” or “calming” (śamatha) and “insight” or “contemplation” (vipaśyanā) respectively. Thus, the term chih-kuan is a translation of the term śamatha - vipaśyanā, a term that is, as we shall see, commonly shared by other Buddhist schools to describe the twin processes of meditation. So why did Chih-i use the term chih-kuan 止観 instead of a term that is more familiar with us today such as ch’an? The term ch’an is usually used as a transliteration of the Buddhist term for meditative stability called dhyana. There is evidence that Chih-i used this term at the initial stages of his career to refer “Buddhist practice” itself. According to Swanson, he believes that Chih-i may have switched to using the term chih-kuan because the word ch’an came to be associated with “one-sided” meditative practices that ignored other practices, and it may have even been associated with non-Buddhist practices such as Taoist meditative practices that became prevalent at the time. Thus, Chih-i may have adopted the term chih-kuan in the Mo-ho chih-kuan in order to distinguish it from other Buddhist and non-Buddhist traditions (Swanson, 2012: 7). In my opinion, even though Swanson’s analysis is accurate, it is also possible that Chih-i adopted the term simply because it was a more accurate representation of Buddhist meditation. As mentioned previously, the term chih-kuan is a more accurate transliteration of the Sanskrit pair śamatha– vipaśyanā, which denotes both concentration and penetrating insight and wisdom which is shared by most Buddhist schools. Thus, in other words, he would have adopted this term even if there were no exclusive Buddhist and non-Buddhist adaptations of this term during his time. The Mo-ho chih-kuan describes various types of chih-kuan that are familiar to other traditional schools of Buddhism. According to Chih-i, there are basically two basic types of chih- kuan (T 46. 466c28-29): that of sitting in meditation 坐禪, and that of “responding to objects in accordance with conditions” 歴縁対境. This latter form of meditation refers to that which involves maintaining a calm and insightful mind under various different conditions of life. This can be 18 《禪與人類文明研究》第 7 期(2020) International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020) practiced gradually by first engaging in sitting meditation, eventually leading to the latter type of meditation.