reflected  the ways  of the moral, educational, and political
programs of Confucianism summarized in the Ta-hsueh.(43)
　　 Sot'aesan added what might be called "prudential reasons"
for requiting  the Four  Graces  in terms  of the results  of
gratitude and ingratitude. If requited one would cultivate the
virtues of Heaven and Earth (K. 30); one's offspring would be
filial (K.  33);  there would be peace and prosperity  in the
world (K.  37);  and one would  be protected  by the laws (K.
41).  If one were ungrateful  to them, one's  moral character
would  suffer  from insincerity, partiality, foolishness, and
so on (K.  30);  one's offspring  would be unfilial (K.  34);
fellow humans  would turn out to be mutual enemies  (K.  38);
and laws would become shackles (K. 44).
　　 Is it because of prudential resons or because of indebtedness
to the Four Graces, (i.e.,the contents of Dharmakaya Buddha -
Irwonsang)that  one ought  to follow  the four  sets of moral
injunctions? Prudential  reasons reflect the founding  motive
of  Won  Buddhism, namely, the  deliverance  of all  sentient
beings to a vast paradise, implying a teleological principle.
Buddhist  ethics has been based on a teleological  principle,
(44)namely, that whatever is conducive to the realization  of
nirvana is right.  The aim of Buddha's moral teaching  was to
help all sentient beings realize nirvana.
　　 Confucian   ethics,  on   the   other   hand,  has   been
deontological, namely, that  whatever  is in accordance  with
Tao (the  universal  moral  principle)was right.(45)Confucian
moralists  have believed that there are universal principles,
of which moral rules pertaining to human beings are part, and
therefore  they  ought  to  be  followed  regardless  of  the
consequences.
　　 Sot'aesan's  moral thought was essentially  teleological,
but relied on some deontological  moral rules to realize  its
goals.  The mere fact that the Four Graces  were that without
which  one's life would be impossible  justified  their being
the object of religious  worship.  Here there were answers to
why the graces  ought to be requited.  One was based on prud-
ential reasons.  The Four Graces were living Buddhas  capable
of blessing  or punishing;  hence, one ought to do all things
as [if offering] a Buddhist mass. The other was deontological
in the sense that it was a matter of

P.442

necessary  moral course to return what one owed.  Flial piety
cannot be compromised  [even if heaven  falls!].  Offering  a
Buddhist mass was a religious  activity, requiting  the Grace
of Parents was a moral action. However, Sot'aesan synthesized
the two by suggesting  that  the  way of offering  a Buddhist
mass  lay  in  requiting  grace  (K.9).  It followed  that  a
Buddhist  monk did not have to leave  his family  to offer  a
Buddhist mass to the Buddha statue made of wood or gold.  The
four sources  of grace were all living  Buddhas  who would be
well  served  if one requited  the appropriate  grace  in the
mundane world, for nirvana was different from samsara not
ontologically but epistemologically.(46)

VI.  CONCLUSION

　　 Sot'aesan  did more than merely synthesize  Buddhism  and
Confucianism  into a new religious  moral  system.  His moral
system of Won Buddhism contains solutions to the antithetic
principles  of Buddhism  [Dogen] and Confucianism  [Chu Hsi].
Chu Hsi's criticism  of Buddhism has no force on Won Buddhism
since the latter  is not other-worldly.  The ideal of nirvana
is to be realized  in discharging  one's duties to Heaven and
Earth, Parents, Brethren, and Law, even though it may be very
difficult as Dogen saw it. Sot'aesan's moral system can blunt
Chu  Hsi's   criticism   only   if  Dogen's   or  Nagarjuna's
other-worldly  practice  of Buddha  dharma can be brought  to
where sentient beings suffer in samsara. Sot'ae- san has only
to put into practice Nagarjuna's  ideal to realize nirvana in
samsara.  This  can be done  when  one takes  Sunyata  as the
substance, and jen, i, li.  and chih as the functions  of the