Summary

　　The religio-philosophical system presented by the Hua-yen Buddhist school of China was characteristically “Chinese” in the sense that it was not merely extensions of Indian Buddhist ideas but the reinterpretations and restatements of Buddhist thought within distinctively Chinese modes of thought and expression.  Hua-yen, in this sense, was a “sinicized” Buddhism.

　　This paper examines the philosophical background of this “sinicization process.”  The paper argues that the Taoist philosophy was one, possibly the most important, influence on this process.  The paper tries to prove this by exploring specifically four major Hua-yen concepts derived from the Taoist tradition: hsuan (mystery), “returning to the source,” t’i-yung (essence and function), and li-shih (noumenon and phenomenon).

Key words:1. Hua-yen Buddhism  2. Taoist Philosophy  3. Dharmadhaatu  4. Sinicization

I. Introduction

　　Buddhism, which was first introduced into China around the first century C.E., developed through various stages of interaction with traditional Chinese culture before it finally emerged as an integral part of the Chinese religious tradition.  After the periods of preparation (ca. 65~317 C.E.) and of domestication (ca. 317~589), Buddhism came to the stage of “independent growth” in the Sui-T’ang period (589~900).[1]　In this period there flourished such schools as the T’ien-t’ai (Lotus or Saddharmapu.n.darika), the Hua-yen (Flower Garland or Avata^msaka), the Fa-hsiang (Dharma-Character or Dharmalak.sana), the Ching-t’u (Pure Land or Sukhavatii), and the Ch’an (Meditation or Dhyaana).[2]　The systems of thought of most of these schools were characteristically “Chinese” in the sense that they were not mere extensions of Indian ideas but the reinterpretations and restatements of Buddhist doctrines within distinctively Chinese modes of thought and expression to meet the intellectual and spiritual needs of the particular times and space.[3]　Among these schools, however, the Hua-yen is generally considered not only as the apex of Buddhism,[4]　but also as “the greatest adaptation of Mahaayaana Buddhism among the various philosophical systems organized by the Chinese.”[5]

　　The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to examine some of the salient features of Hua-yen Buddhism as an example of the Sinicization of Buddhism in sixth and seventh century China. Needless to say, there must have been various religious, intellectual, and socio-political elements which conduced to the Sinicization process of Hua-yen Buddhist philosophy.[6]　In this paper, however, attention will be focused exclusively on Taoist philosophy as a possible indigenous spiritual influence on the formation of Hua-yen thought.[7]

　　II. The Basic Doctrine of Hua-yen

　　To have a general background for the discussion of the Taoist influence on Hua-yen, it would seem appropriate to give a brief sketch of Hua-yen philosophy.[8]　The central teaching of the Hua-yen school is the dharmadhaatu (fa-chieh) doctrine, or more specifically, the dharmadhaatu-pratiityasamutpaada (fa-chieh yuan-ch’i).  The Sanskrit term dharmadhaatu, which is a compound consisting of dharma and dhaatu, has been variously translated as “the Element of the Elements,” “The Realm of All Elements,” “the Dharma-Element,” the “Reality or Essence of Dharmas,” “the Noumenal Ground of Phenomena,” “the Essence of Reality,” “the Ultimate Reality,” “Supreme Reality,” “Totality,” and so on.[9]　It is, in short, a designation of the “Ground of all Being.”  The term pratiityasamutpaada means “dependent co-origination.”

　　This idea of dharmadhaatu-pratiityasamutpaada which was originally found in the Avata^msaka-suutra or Hua-yen ching,[10]　was fully developed by the Hua-yen school into a systematic doctrine palatable to the Chinese intellectual taste. The dharmadhaatu doctrine[11]　can be said to have been, by and large, set forth by Tu-shun (557~640 C.E.), formulated by Chih-yen (602~668), systematized by Fa-tsang (643~712), and elucidated by Ch’eng-kuan (ca. 737~838) and Tsung-mi (780~841).

　　The foundation of the dharmadhaatu doctrine was definitely laid in a short treatise, Fa-chieh-kuan-men (The Gate of Insight into the Dharmadhaatu),[12]　which has been ascribed to Tu-shun, the first patriarch of the school.[13]　In this “fundamental text” it is recommended to have “threefold insight” into the dharmadhaatu, i.e.,the insight into 1) the “true Emptiness,” 2) the “non-obstruction of li and shih” or noumenon and phenomena, and 3) “all-pervading and all-embracing [nature of phenomena]. This means that in our meditative insight we have to intuit not only the two aspects of dharmadhaatu, form (ruupa) and emptiness (`suunyataa), in their non-obstructive interrelationship but we have also to see the dharmadhaatu in terms of li and shih or the noumenal and the phenomenal in their “interfusion and dissolution, coexistence and annihilation, adversity and harmony”[14]　and their mutual identification.  Even further, we are advised to realize ultimately that “shih, being identified with li, are interfusing, interpervading, mutually including, and interpermeating without obstruction.”[15]　It is said here that all the phenomenal things, having been endowed with the quality of the noumenal, are now complete in themselves, and thus they are now interrelating with each other. In this relationship, it is further said, the universal and the particular, the broad and the narrow, and the like, have no impeding boundaries but are freely interpenetrating each other without obstruction or hindrance whatsoever.

　　This last insight into the universal and inexhaustible interrelatedness of all the dharmas in the dharmadhaatu was formulated as the “ten mysteries”[16]　by the second patriarch Chih-yen in his Hua-yen I-ch’eng shih-hsuan-men (The Ten Mysteries of the One Vehicle of the Hua-yen).[17]　These ten mysteries or principles, according to Chih-yen, point to the Hua-yen truth that the myriad things in the universe freely interrelate with each other without losing their own identities. Each and every manifested object of the dharmadhaatu includes simultaneously all the qualities of the other objects within itself.  Consequently all the qualities such as hidden and manifest, pure and mixed, one and many, subtle and minute, cause and effect, big and small, time and eternity, and the rest are all simultaneously and completely compatible in any given dharma.

　　Fa-tsang, the third patriarch and greatest systematizer of the school, having inherited this basic teaching of Chih-yen, organized it within his finely refined theoretical system.[18]　Whereas Chih-yen’s “ten mysteries” had been simply set forth without elaboration, Fa-tsang incorporated the truth of the ten mysteries in the web of his grand system. It is now no longer an isolated set of meditational items, but becomes part of an organic structure substantiated in terms of “emptiness and existence,” “having power and lacking power,” and so on. It is also by him that the cardinal twin principle of Hua-yen philosophy “mutual identification” and “interpenetration” is first clearly systematized in connection with ideas of “essence and function” (t’i-yung).

　　It was the fourth patriarch of the school, Ch’eng-kuan, who built up the so-called theory of “four-fold dharmadhaatu” upon the basis of the teachings handed down by his predecessors, which subsequently became known as the standard formula of the Hua-yen dharmadhaatu doctrine. In his Fa-chieh-hsuan-ching (The Mirror of the Mystery of Dharmadhaatu), the commentary on Tu-shun’s Fa-chieh-kuan-men, Ch’eng-kuan suggests that the dharmadhaatu can be seen either as 1) shih dharmadhaatu, 2) li dharmadhaatu, 3) dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction of li and shih, or 4) dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction of shih and shih.[19]　According to his explanation, the first one is the dharmadhaatu particularized or phenomenalized into innumerable concrete things. The second one, li dharmadhaatu, is the “essential” aspect of the dharmadhaatu which is the foundation of all the manifested phenomena. The third one is the aspect of the dharmadhaatu in which phenomena and noumenon interfuse each other. The fourth dimension of the dharmadhaatu, according to Ch’eng-kuan, points to the truth of the “ten mysteries,” which teaches basically the twin principle of interrelationship of all phenomena: mutual identification and interpenetration. The dharmadhaatu doctrine of Tsung-mi is more or less similar to that of Ch’eng-kuan.

　　These patriarchs have emphasized throughout their writings that everything in the universe is related to each other.  Apart from this relatedness, or what is technically called pratiityasamutpaada, nothing has an existence of its own. Everything should be viewed with regard to all possible relationships with all possible things.  Every possible level and every available dimension should be applied to a certain thing. In other words, any given object in the world is subject to infinitely numerous and different frames of reference.  Nothing can have a fixed, intrinsic, or static value nor be judged by a determined standard. Everything in the phenomenal order is fluid, flexible, and relative.

　　The same step is too high for a child and at the same time too low for an adult. The same step is also too wide for a child and too narrow for an adult.  The same step has, therefore, according to Hua-yen, the qualities of being high and low, wide and narrow, and so on, all simultaneously.  The truth of the “ten mysteries” lies in its pointing out these relativistic or relationalistic qualities of all dharmas. All dharmas are free from being either narrow or broad; they are both narrow and broad, and many more without obstruction. This is the so-called mystery of “the sovereignty and non-obstruction of the broad and the narrow.”  The truth of “the perfect and brilliant compatibility of the qualities of being both the primary and the secondary” conclusively affirms this relativistic outlook of Hua-yen philosophy.

　　In such a transcendental insight, there can be no room for dogmatic assertions concerning any particular thing. A theoretical polarity of good and bad, right and wrong, happy and unhappy, profane and sacred, and the like is completely removed.[20]　Static views (d.r.s.ti) or dogmas have no place in such a flexible and comprehensive attitude toward dharmas.

　　Those things which have been seen by common-sense knowledge as essentially distinctive, categorically different, and spatiotemporally separate from each other are, here in this Hua-yen meditative intuition of a higher level, completely dissolved into the totalistic harmony of the dharmadhaatu of non-obstruction and non-hindrance. There is only “the one unique reality” in which every fixed distinction, discrimination or particularization has no room.

　　Hua-yen philosophy is in this sense a philosophy of liberation which sets a person free from all rigid and stubborn dogmatism, prejudice, and preconception. The restraint and bondage of localization, categorization, artificial restriction, conceptual construction, sentimental bias, provincialism, intolerant self-centeredness, and worldly attachment, are all broken down and there remains only absolute spiritual freedom which keeps one from partial judgement but leads to a perfect and round perspective of things.