．．．．．．．．Chapter 6 Development of The Hua-Yen school during the Tang Dynasty CONTENTS CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION 1 A. The Origin of Hua-yen sutra. 4 1. The Fundamental Meaning of Dharma-cakra 4 2. The Inquiry as to who Expounds the sutra. 7 3. From the Title of the sutra to its Deciphering. 10 B. The Transmission and Translation of the Hua-yen sutra 13 1. The Process of Transmission and Translation 13 2. The Transmission and Translation of Hua-yen sixty 16 volumes 3. The Transmission and Translation of Hua-yen eighty 17 volumes 4. The Transmission and Translation of Hua-yen forty 19 volumes CHAPTER 2- THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND RELIGIOUS CONDITION OF CHINA IN THE PRE-TANG PERIOD 21 CHAPTER 3- THE FOUNDING OF THE HUA-YEN SCHOOL AND ITS LINEAGE 35 1 1. The Historical and Cultural Context of the Hua-yen Buddhism 35 2. The Process of the Founding of The Hua-yen School 42 3. The Religious Lineage of The Hua-yen School and its Patriarchs 45 A. The First Patriarch Tu-shun 46 B. The Second Patriarch Chih-yen 64 C. The Third Patriarch Hsien-shou (Fa-tsang) 84 D. The Fourth Patriarch Cheng-kuan 104 E. The Fifth Patriarch Kuei-feng (Tsung-mi) 121 CHAPTER 4- PERSECUTION OF BUDDHISM BY EMPEROR WU-TZUNG DURING THE PERIOD OF HUI-CHANG 131 CHAPTER 5- THE PROMINENCE OF THE HUA-YEN SCHOOL 141 2 ．．．．．．．．Chapter 6 The Myriad Practice of Samantabhadra 141 1. The First Great Vow: Pay Homage and Respect to all the 145 Buddhas. 2. The Secondary Vow: Praise the Tathagatas. 146 3. The Third Vow: Pay Abundant Offerings to all the 148 Buddhas. 4. The Fourth Vow: Repent the Evil Karma of Misdeed. 149 5. The Fifth Vow: Admire and Rejoice at the Merits and 150 Virtues of Others. 6. The Sixth Vow: Request all the Buddhas to Keep Turning 151 the Dharma-wheel. 7. The Seventh Vow: Beseech all the Buddhas to Remain in 153 the World. 8. The Eighth Vow: Under the Guidance of the Buddhas 154 Forever. 9. The Ninth Vow: Always Comply with all Living Beings. 155 10. The Tenth Vow: Transfer all Merits and Virtues 157 Universally. CHAPTER 6- CONCLUSIONS 161 3 NOTE 171 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This book is an enquiry into the origin and development of Hua-yen Buddhism in China, especially during the Tang and pre-Tang period. The purpose of this research work is threefold. Firstly, we have made an attempt to clarify the extent and the nature of the contributions made by various patriarchs to the development of this important East Asian tradition of Buddhism. Secondly, by taking the various patriarchs (especially the first five) as examples thereof, we have evaluated critically the process by which Indian Buddhism was transformed into a Chinese religion. Thirdly, by using the sinification of Buddhism itself as an example, we have made an attempt to find answers to the theoretical questions of how and why conceptual change occurs in the development of religious traditions. The Hua-yen sutra (known as the Avatajsaka sutra in Sanskrit) is the basic text of the Hua-yen School. In this chapter, we have dwelt on the date and stratigraphy of this text. An attempt has also been made to place the different portion of this text into historical and chronological context. A significant portion of this chapter also concentrates on the background relating to the events from the time of its discovery to the coming into existence of different manuscripts of the text and the variations that exist between them. Thereafter, we shall critically analyze the efforts made in the collection of the relevant material in this regard as well as its interpretation. The scope and limitations of the work under consideration shall also be dealt within this chapter. The last portion of this chapter deals with an assessment of the available sources of 4 ．．．．．．．．Chapter 6 biographical information about the Hua-yen School of Buddhism. Several traditions of Buddhist thoughts and practices were witnessed by the Sui and early Tang dynasties that had neither the equivalents nor institutional antecedents in the ‘Western Regions.’ In its own way, each of Hua-yen, Tian-tai, Ching-tu, and Chan was a product of a truly novel interpretation and understanding of Buddhism which was first clearly achieved during the decades between the An Lu-shan rebellion of 755 and reunification of the country in 589. There was clearly a sharp and distinguished difference between these traditions and the Chinese Buddhism of pre-Sui period. For instance, the sixth century Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of Lung- men, in their lofty and hieratic serenity, stand in marked contrast to the robust and earthly figures depicted in the preceding century. The earlier Chinese Buddhism which carried the legacy of rapt imitation of Indian forms of Buddhism or of outdated, suffered from various fundamental weaknesses and mostly from incomplete understanding of that foreign religion, These new traditions were at once authentically Chinese yet genuinely Buddhist. There is no doubt that the ascendant phase of the Chinese Buddhism had to wait upon the social, economic, religious, and political changes that followed the mid-Tang period. In any case, the fundamental conceptual changes of the more mature sinification were first devised by those sixth and seventh century thinkers who were to be canonized as ‘patriarchs’ of Chinese Buddhism. Patriarchal lineage and associated concern is one aspect of a sectarian consciousness that did not emerge in Chinese Buddhism till about the beginning of the ninth century. It was only after this that each of the traditions felt the need, in the 1 words of Philip Yampolsky, “to establish a history for itself.” It is the creation of one impressive display of such conceptual instruments, the doctrines of early Hua- yen, that we propose to investigate amongst others in the following pages. The origin and development of Hua-yen Buddhism may best be understood as an instance of conceptual change within a religious tradition. The empirical as well as theoretical issues surrounding the phenomena of conceptual change have drawn the 5 attention of scholars at least since Vico (1668-1744) in the West and Ku Yen-wu (顧 炎武) (1613-82) and Huang Tsung-hsi (黃字義) (1610-95) in the Orient. These three scholars focussed primarily on the historical aspect of the issue. For instance, Huang Tsung-hsi pointed out that scholars “should also be required to study history, so that they may know how circumstances change with the times and thus avoid 2 being dogmatic.” Similarly, Ku Yen-wu laments that Ming Neo-Confucians (新儒 家), “set aside broad knowledge and concentrated upon the search for a single, all 3 inclusive method.” . Though so far a general theory by which phenomena can be understood has not been propounded, the enquiry has been more clearly put forth by contemporary thinkers as to how and under what conditions does a new set of concepts take the place of another set of fundamental concepts which have governed 4 5 a certain tradition for some period of time. It may be pointed out here that this enquiry can be put at rest by focusing primarily on the crucial role played by two religious thinkers, Tu-shun and Chih-yen. While doing so, we have made an effort to identify the roots of these two patriarchs in the earlier traditions of Buddhism and the setting forth of several early Hua-yen teachings as representative examples of the creative use to which these two patriarchs put this heritage. However, even when we have pin pointed some of the issues at hand, it does not necessarily make our task easy. Our topic is still limited by a number of increasingly narrowly focused questions. To what extent were the conceptual innovations of the patriarchs (especially the first two) the response of a Chinese mind to an Indian tradition? Further, to what extent were the response of early Tang Buddhism the prevailing trends in both the popular form and the philosophical level of Buddhism of China? Furthermore, to what extent these trends were the brainchildren of the geniuses of the times? It also needs to be clarified that no justice can be done to the topic without a close scrutiny of the lives and works of the patriarchs (especially first five) of Hua-yen Buddhism. This is not necessarily an easy task, though, as the sources are few and much worse written in the shape of 6 ．．．．．．．．Chapter 6 complicated legends. In other words, it is not an easy task to separate the facts from myths. The style of the writings of most of these patriarchs is also very difficult to understand and thus, so easy to use them for the work that we have at hand. The shortage of commentarial literature is another added woe for such a work. However, on the positive side excellent works such as Discernment of the Dharma-dhatu of the Avatajsaka (Hua-yen fa-chieh-kuan-men) which is treated as a fundamental text of the whole tradition. This brief, but profound meditation is, among other things, a masterful essence of that process of religious conceptual change which was issued in 6 early Hua-yen doctrine. In less than 3,000 characters, this text depicts very clearly the transition from an initial statement of certain fundamental concepts of Indian Buddhism, through an intermediate revaluation and redefinition of them, to a culminating exposition of quite novel Chinese teachings. A. The Origin of Hua-yen sutra. 1. The Fundamental Meaning of Dharma-cakra All the Buddhist schools declare that they have inherited the authentic doctrine of the Wakyamuni.