Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm

《》學報 ‧ 藝文│第二十期外文論文

Charles B. Jones Associate Professor, School of Theology and Religious Studies, The Catholic University of America

1. Introduction One could translate the Chinese term commonly rendered “Humanistic Buddhism” more literally as “Buddhism in the Human Realm” (renjian fojiao 人間佛教). The term “human realm” (renjian 人間) has both an everyday meaning in modern Chinese and a more expansive technical Buddhist meaning. In everyday parlance, it means “the human world,” “humanity,” or “social rela- tions,” and within a modern scientific world view, humanity exists in only one place—the planet Earth. Hence, English-language texts sometimes render the term “Humanistic Buddhism” as “Earthly Buddhism.” In traditional Chinese Buddhist texts, however, the term has a more specialized, technical meaning arising from premodern Buddhist cosmology. In this context, it indicates one in a list of five or six possible paths of rebirth. To be reborn in the human realm means that one’s past karma has led to rebirth as a human being, and in Buddhist cosmology, the Earth is not the only place where humans reside. The fact that the term renjian has different definitions in these two contexts has led to some confusion when scholars confront the terms “Humanistic Buddhism” and “The Pure Land in the Human Realm” (renjian jingtu 人間淨土 ). Variations in the way Buddhists and scholars understand the meaning and purpose of Humanistic Buddhism only compound the confusion. This confusion is on full display in the work of the Venerable Taixu ( 太

204 Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm

虛 , 1890-1947), widely recognized as the founding architect of Humanistic Bud- dhism. If one understands him primarily as a modernizer who responded to criti- cisms that Buddhism was antimodern, escapist, and parasitic on the economy, then one will most likely see his idea of the “Pure Land in the Human Realm” as a call for social welfare work and social justice reform. Such efforts would affect only human beings living on planet Earth. On the other hand, if one reads his writings with an eye attuned to his use of traditional Buddhist concepts and aims, then one might find that the human realm can exist in other parts of the cosmos as well. If that is indeed his view, then we should not translate his terms renjian/ rensheng fojiao and renjian jingtu as “Earthly Buddhism” and “the Earthly Pure Land” re- spectively, nor should we understand his purpose as advocating only social reform here and now to the exclusion of other, more traditional practices and goals. In the remarks that follow, I will examine Taixu’s writings on the Pure Land in the Human Realm to see the extent to which he utilizes modern cosmo- logical ideas to call for social reforms on Earth, and to what extent he retains traditional notions of humanity as a path of rebirth capable of manifesting in many different places throughout the cosmos. Within the latter, we will see how much of older Buddhist ideas he retains about reality, the mind, practice, and mechanisms of rebirth.

2. Taixu’s Text Taixu opens by saying that human beings seek security in their lives and possessions (p. 356).1 One place where they can secure these temporarily is in the mythical northern continent of Uttarakuru, but they may secure eternal life and bliss only in the Pure Land of Amitābha (Ibid). He illustrates the point by citing the entire second chapter of the Sutra on the Fundamental Causes for the Arising of Worlds (Foshuo qishi yinben jing 佛說起世因本經 , T.24) called “On the Continent of Uttarakuru” ( 鬱單越洲品第二 ). The citation runs from page 357 to page 371, occupying almost 18% of the entire essay.2 Taixu’s notes, scat-

1. All page numbers refer to the 1956 edition of Taixu’s Complete Works as noted in the “Works Cited” section. 2. In the Taishō, the passage is T.24, p. 1:314a11-317a16. Taixu misattributes the quotation to a different translation of the same text (T.25).

205 《》學報 ‧ 藝文│第二十期

tered throughout this passage, show that he believed humans could eventually obtain the security and pleasure of Uttarakuru here on Earth through technolog- ical innovation. Later he states that it is a real place within the solar system, and that people may attain rebirth there through the practice of the Ten Virtues. It is part of the “human realm,” since human beings inhabit it (p. 371-372).3 At no point does he try to demythologize tales of Uttarakuru or dissuade readers from seeking rebirth there. Next, Taixu notes that even life in Uttarakuru is limited to 1000 years and its pleasures are partial and temporary. Therefore, Amitāyus provides the pure land Sukhāvatī so that living beings may find ultimate happiness and immortality there (p. 372). Following this declaration, Taixu provides another very long sutra citation, this time a detailed description of the Pure Land from the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha-sūtra.4 This citation runs from page 372 to 382, and while it is not as long as the previous quotation, it still occupies 12.5% of the overall text. He prefaces it with the unqualified statement that rebirth in the Pure Land provides complete satisfaction of peoples’ needs for bliss and immortality. After the quotation he says that only rebirth in Sukhāvatī can remedy all the problems of natural disaster, personal turmoil, and social unrest. All this taken together leaves the strong impression that he regards future rebirth in the Pure Land as a viable aspiration for ordinary people. Immediately after this, Taixu provides another very long citation from the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha-sūtra, this time consisting of the Buddha Śākyamuni’s discourse to Maitreya concerning human suffering.5 Unlike the previous two citations, this one does not describe a paradisiacal land such as Uttarakuru or Sukhāvatī, but diagnoses the evils that human beings practice in the present world and the social and familial results to which they lead. To this extent, we

3. 上言鬱單越洲，並非天上，亦非他方淨土，乃確為此太陽系中之一人間。 “The above words on Uttarakuru indicate that it is not above the heavens nor is it a Pure Land lying in some other place, but is actually an abode for human beings within this solar system.” See p. 371. 4. This long quotation from the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha-sūtra runs from T.360, p. 12:270a7- 272c10. 5. This quotation from the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha-sūtra runs from T.360, p. 12:275c17 to 277c25. However, Taixu skips over many passages, often breaking in the middle of sentences.

206 Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm

begin to see Taixu’s concern with the problems of society. In the conclusion of this passage, the Buddha tells Maitreya how he comes into the world to teach and reform human beings in order to stop their evil and improve conditions. However, the final goal is not social improvement for its own sake, but to lead people to the practice of virtue so that they may “pass beyond the world, sur- mount the heavens, and gain the way of nirvana” (p. 384-391). At seven pages, this passage occupies another nine percent of the text. The next section presents a quotation from the Liezi6 列子 which Taixu uses in order to bring up the concept of humanity for examination. The passage describes ancient sages such as Paoxi 庖犧 , Nüwa 女媧 , Shen- nong 神農, and Xiahou 夏后 who exemplified humanity even though they had serpentine bodies. In contrast, some of the most infamous tyrants in Chinese his- tory had fully human bodies, but exhibited the behavior and nature Stone relief of Fuxi and Nuwa 伏羲女媧圖 of savages and animals. Follow- (mythological figures depicted with human- ing this, Taixu asks the reader to like bodies and serpentine tails), carved onto consider what beings really consti- the wall of the Left Chamber at the Wu Family 武氏祠 tute the “human realm” (renjian 人 Shrines (the funerary complex of the Wu clan from the Eastern Han Dynasty). 間 ), and he provides a large chart correlating various kinds of nonhuman beings from Buddhist cosmology with various kinds of humans (p. 392-393). Taixu reminds readers that living beings slip in and out of the human realm through the process of rebirth, but then he correlates all the paths of rebirth in traditional Buddhist thought to human beings in various conditions:

Those who extend their strength to monopolize power to their own benefit and the detriment of others—these are the barbarians and

6. Taixu misidentifies the passage as a quotation from theLaozi 老子 .

207 《》學報 ‧ 藝文│第二十期

asuras! Those who amass capital for their own enrichment, eating the substance of others to fatten themselves—these are the animals and beasts! Those who form the majority, whose capital is coerced, who labor without sufficient food or clothing—are they not the hungry ghosts? Those multitudes who live under repression and pressure and cannot speak or act freely—are they not the denizens of hell (p. 394)?

Taixu calls upon the reader to contemplate the inhumane treatment to which human beings subject one another and to consider how to bring them back into the human path. Here, at last, he brings up the topic of the Pure Land in the Human Realm. After reviewing ideas from the past and from many cul- tures about the creation of a utopian society (p. 396), he states that at present only Buddhists think about building a human pure land. The pure lands of the ten directions all have a buddha, the dharma, and a sangha present, so with that as his template, he says we need to construct the human pure land here with a “rationalized” (lixing 理性 ) buddha, dharma, and sangha. This means taking the rational human mind as the buddha, taking the rational mind’s interactions with the environment and other people as the dharma, and taking all levels of human social organization as the sangha (p. 397). While this sounds very modern, Taixu immediately says that it is only within the human realm that one finds these qualities; they do not obtain in other traditional Buddhist realms of rebirth. Therefore, we must take hold of the opportunity that a human rebirth has handed us to build the pure land in the human realm (Ibid). Once again, Taixu is not disputing longstanding Buddhist views on the cosmos and rebirth, and he is not attempting to demythologize Buddhism to facilitate a more modern and progressive social program. Like many Buddhist texts before him, he is simply saying that rebirth in the human domain is most conducive to the work of liberation and for ending suffering. Put another way, he is not saying that we need to build “the Pure Land in the Human Realm” simply because older forms of practice are outmoded and escapist. Rather, he is saying that the human realm is the best place to build a pure land because of the advantages that come with rebirth as a human being.

208 Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm

When he turns to concrete methods of building the human pure land, he notes that it requires the safeguarding of life and property, and says there are two types of “radical” ways (zhiben zhi fa 治本之法 ) of doing this. The first is to aim for rebirth in Uttarakuru by practicing the Ten Virtues, and the second is through social reform work in the present world. There are also two “superficial” ways (zhibiao zhi fa 治標之法 ). The first is to found an international Buddhist Union that could spread the dharma and do rescue and reform work, and the second is to employ esoteric rituals and repentance ceremonies to enlist the powers of devas and non-duality (p. 398). He concludes, “If we could practice these methods for addressing both root and surface using both exoteric and esoteric means, then the causes and conditions would harmonize and there would be no one who would not be able to maintain security” (p. 399). Modern scholars have made note of the next section, in which Taixu lays out a specific plan for a utopian Buddhist community to be built on land do- nated by the government (see, for example, Pittman 2001, p. 226-230). Justin Ritzinger (2017) has already demonstrated Taixu’s lifelong propensity for de- vising unworkable utopian schemes, but the detail to note here is that the center of this community would be a Buddhist monastery housing monks of all eight traditional schools of Chinese Buddhism, the most important of which would be the Esoteric School. The monks of this hall would carry out the esoteric rituals needed to secure the nation and the world (p. 400). It would also house monks devoted to Pure Land practice, and one of the two nuns’ halls would likewise be engaged in the quest for rebirth in Sukhāvatī. When describing the villages sur- rounding the monastic cloisters, Taixu specifies that all of them should similarly have Pure Land halls (p. 402). The next section may surprise modern scholars the most. After spending many pages describing in detail the way to establish the Pure Land in the Hu- man Realm (i.e., the utopian mountaintop community), Taixu points out that human life still comes to an end and one must consider one’s next rebirth (p. 405). This leads to a discussion of ways to gain rebirth either with Maitreya in the Tuṣita Heaven or with Amitābha in his Pure Land. Taixu illustrates the first option with an extended quotation from the Sutra on the Bodhisattva Maitreya’s Ascent to the Tuṣita Heaven (Fo shuo Mile pusa shang sheng Doushuai tian jing

209 《》學報 ‧ 藝文│第二十期

佛說觀彌勒菩薩上生兜率天經 , T.452).7 The passage stands alone; Taixu adds no comment of his own. The next section provides another long quotation from the Shorter Sukhāvatī-vyūha- sūtra (Fo shuo Amituo jing 佛說阿彌陀經, T.366).8 This passage describes the features of Amitābha’s land of Sukhāvatī, and afterward the Buddha counsels all who hear of this land to make vows to be reborn there. Taixu does not comment on this passage, either (p. 141-415). The next section, called “The Pure Land of the Ocean of Awakening” (juehai jingtu 覺海淨土 ), is very interesting because of Taixu’s use of Buddhist philosophy. All the lands that Taixu has described so far (the Impure Lands of the Five Destinies, the Pure Land in the Hu- man Realm, the Pure Land of [Maitreya’s] In- ner Court, and the Pure Land of Utmost Bliss) Maitreya’s Pure Land Thangka are contained within the land of the Buddha’s supreme wisdom, called the Tathatādharmatā Pure Land (zhenru faxing jingtu 真如法性淨土 ). Using language reminiscent of The Awakening of Faith (Qixin lun 起信論, T.1666), Taixu explains that living beings make false distinctions born of their past karma, but remain nev- ertheless within the “ocean of awakening.” If beings persist in ignorant and evil actions, then the Impure Lands of the Five Destinies will continue to elaborate, but if beings can quell and diminish ignorance and afflicted actions and states of mind, then the Pure Land in the Human Realm manifests. One might do this by “relying upon the pure vows of Maitreya and Amitābha as contributory conditions” and attaining rebirth in their pure realms. All the distinctions that mark out one’s progress or regress on the path reside within the purity of the Buddha’s

7. The passage goes from T.452, p. 14:418c10 to 419c1. 8. T.366, p. 12:346c10- 347b8.

210 Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm

mind (p. 415-416). In the next section, “One’s Own Vows of Compassion and Acts of Charity as the Starting Point” (You benren fa dabei yuan shishe wei shi 由本人發大悲願施捨為始), Taixu again advises making compassionate action the root of subsequent practices for reducing the suffering of both human evil and natural disaster. To do so, he says, emulates the attitude out of which Amitābha made his original vows and established his Pure Land. To illustrate, Taixu quotes the entire section of the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha-sūtra containing the 48 vows (p. 417-423; See T.360, p. 12:267c17-269b6). Taixu notes briefly that Amitābha’s march toward the fulfillment of his vows and attainment of buddhahood began with making offerings, so modern devotees should also make donations to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha. “By generating the mind to make such offerings for all humanity, to relieve them of all their suffering and help them attain bliss, to serve the Three Jewels and humanity, the myriad good practices will all be fulfilled” (p. 423). To demonstrate this, he cites the same sutra again, this time quoting the section that assures the reader that the Buddha fulfilled all his vows, created the Land of Bliss, and went to work teaching and caring for all sentient beings.9 Af- ter briefly exhorting the reader to emulate the Buddha Amitābha in making offerings and setting forth compassionate vows, Taixu concludes the main portion of his essay (p. 423-323; see T.360, p. 12:269c4-270a2). The remainder of his essay consists of a transcript of a 1930 talk entitled, “Creating the Pure Land in the Human Realm” (Chuangzao renjian jingtu 創 [sic] 造人間淨土 , p. 425-430). This section is more clearly organized and suc- cinct than the foregoing, and in it one does not find the long sutra citations and digressions found above. Instead, Taixu begins with a simple acknowledgement that Buddhist cosmology contains buddha-lands as ways to help people understand the unsatisfactory nature of the present defiled world. He also reaffirms the basic Buddhist doctrine that all circumstances and events have their root in the mind. Therefore, cultivation of mind is the key to resolving humanity’s troubles. Once the mind is set aright and people cultivate morals, then they will take specific steps to address human suffering and meet human needs. Industrial

9. The sutra passage is found at T.360, p. 12:269c4-270a2.

211 《》學報 ‧ 藝文│第二十期

development will alleviate shortages. Next, education will extend human capa- bilities and ensure social progress. After that, the arts will elevate the products of technology into things that people can enjoy, and the practice of the arts will fortify both mind and body. Finally, morals will provide guidance and keep human progress on track. This last section makes the clearest call for human effort to improve life in the present and to direct people away from escapist goals such as rebirth in a pure buddha-land. With an attitude that is neither optimistic nor pessimistic but merely realistic, with sustained effort over a long period of time, and with the right motivation and training, this world can become the Pure Land in the Hu- man Realm.

3. Analysis The above summary is very long, but this was inevitable. If we are to get the full scope and range of Taixu’s thoughts on the establishment of the Pure Land in the Human Realm, we need to see a full summary that presents all the topics that Taixu addresses. We are now in a position to critique the oversimpli- fied version of Taixu’s thought prevalent in western scholarship today. Let us start with the question posed at the beginning of this paper: Where exactly is the “Pure Land in the Human Realm”? In Taixu’s essay, we have seen the following propositions affirmed: (1) The “human realm” encompasses places other than our present planet Earth. As he says more than once, the continent of Uttarakuru is part of it as well. (2) The “human realm” is not a permanent part of any living being’s identity. It is simply the part of the Buddhist world occu- pied by beings who for now enjoy a human rebirth. (3) Finally, as he shows with his citation from the Liezi, to be human is not just to be biologically a human organism. Ancient sages with serpentine bodies exhibited humanity, and ancient tyrants who were biologically human showed by their deeds that they were not. Both the location of the human realm and the beings who occupy it turn out to be fungible and transient categories. As he says, the “Pure Land in the Human Realm” is as much a very traditional affirmation that a human rebirth is most conducive to Buddhist practice and attainment, and thus a likely place for beings to bring it into being through meritorious practice. Compassionate work here and now is part of it, but so are

212 Remarks on Current Research on Taixu and the Pure Land in the Human Realm offerings, meditations, and vows to seek rebirth in the Pure Land or the Tuṣita Heaven. Far from discouraging people from practices aimed at rebirth in these postmortem destinations, he affirms that they are indeed worthy goals. Compas- sionate social work is a means toward their attainment, not a modernist substi- tute for them. Scholars have lately come to realize that Taixu had an active liturgical and devotional life focused on the buddha-to-be Maitreya and cherished the personal goal of attaining rebirth in the Inner Court of the Tuṣita Heaven (see especially Ritzinger 2017). That is certainly an advance over the image of him as a qua- si-secularist reformer that dominated prior scholarship, but we must note that in this essay he devotes far more space to setting forth and encouraging main- stream Pure Land practices focused on the Buddha Amitābha and the goal of rebirth in Sukhāvatī. In other essays, he also attempted to present balanced rec- ommendations to Buddhists about seeking rebirth in these two destinations. It should be very clear now that Taixu is not trying to persuade people to pursue social and charitable work to the exclusion of “other-worldly” and “escapist” practices, nor is he a modernizer in the sense that he wants to replace Buddhist mythology and cosmology with a scientific world view. He seems to accept the existence of Uttarakuru, Sukhāvatī, and the Tuṣita Heaven as real places. He resorts to very long sutra citations to convey their attractions and to tell his readers what practices will lead to rebirth in them. Nowhere does he dis- count them as fantasies or unworthy goals. In fact, even while recommending activities to purify the present world, he still acknowledges that people die and need to give some thought to their next rebirth. All this makes him an ambigu- ous and partial modernizer. Perhaps our failure to see Taixu in his own terms stems from “modernizer” and then emphasize his advocacy of science and social welfare work because that is what modernization entails in the west. I would ask scholars with more expertise in Taixu’s thought than me whether and how often a term such as xian- daihua 現代化 appears in his works. We should also be careful not to equate “reform” with “modernization” and “modernization” with “westernization.” Taixu was responding as a committed Buddhist to his own cultural, historical, and religious moment, and the solutions he proposed were addressed specifical- ly to his own time and place.

213