5. Sheng Yen’s Pure Land Thought:
5.2. Sheng Yen and the establishment of a Pure Land on Earth
When Sheng Yen founded DDM in 1989, he proposed the maxim: Uplifting the
Character of Humanity and Building a Pure Land on Earth. The idea of Building a Pure Land on Earth was not first conceived by Sheng Yen, but is one central to other Renjian Buddhist groups, and in fact can be traced back to Taixu and Yang Wenhui.301
Although Sheng Yen began to promote the concept of a Pure Land on Earth relatively late in life—he was almost sixty when he founded DDM—he had already been influenced by Taixu and Yinshun when he was much younger.302
300 Chen Jianhuang, “Shengyan fashi「jianshi renjian jingtu」yu「yinian xinjing」zhi yaoyi,” Shenyan yanjiu di’er ji (Taibei: Fagu wenhua, 2011), 214.
301 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 158.
302 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 160.
As early as the 1950s, he began to advocate a more this-worldly Buddhism that
contributes to society. He writes in an article in Humanity in 1957: “To leave the world is the aim of studying the Buddha dharma, but to enhance the world is a measure towards this end […] To beautify the life of humanity is the foundation of the Buddhist Pure Lands, the Buddhist Pure Lands [at the same time] are the manifestation of the beautification of the life of humanity.”303
In another article a month later, he expresses himself in even more specific terms. He recommends Buddhist practice, and particularly upholding Buddhist precepts, as a means to construct a Pure Land on Earth, which again he regards as a step towards achieving the ultimate goal: liberation from the Three Realms.304 Thus, by the late 1950s, Sheng Yen had already linked traditional and modernist notions of Buddhism. In terms of doctrine he already bases his approach on the Vimalakirti sutra. To establish a Pure Land one has to begin with the existing world and start with oneself. Thereby one can influence others who in turn influence others, until finally the Buddhist Pure Land appears.305
But it would take Sheng Yen until 1982 to elaborate on the concept in detail in an article called “Examination of Pure Land Thought” (淨土思想之考察).306 From that time on, the concept would appear regularly in his writings.307
So how did Sheng Yen aim to create a Pure Land on Earth? According to Chen Chien-Huang the answer is reflected in DDM’s maxim of “Uplifting the Character of Humanity
303 Quoted from: Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 163. 離開這個世界是學
佛的目的，建設這個世界才是學佛的 手段 。[…] 美化人生是佛國淨土的基礎，佛
國淨土是美化人生的表現。
304 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 163-164.
305 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 164.
306 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 165.
307 Lin, “Shengyan fashi renjian jingtu sixiang,” 165-168.
and Building a Pure Land on Earth.” DDM aims to establish a Pure Land on Earth by uplifting the character of humanity. It aims to do so by promoting Buddhist practices, such as nianfo, the Buddhist precepts, and Chan meditation, etc. 308 Though many of these practices, especially Chan meditation, were historically reserved for monastics, Sheng Yen now began to popularize them as a means to improve society.309 We can see that in his early writings of the 1950s, Sheng Yen mainly stressed the Buddhist precepts as a way in which the laity could contribute to the betterment of society. In a later phase, Sheng Yen recommends the whole range of Buddhist practices, with especial emphasis on Chan meditation, as means for lay individuals to help improve society. According to Li Yu-Chen, Sheng Yen’s decision to open up monastic Chan halls in Taiwan to the laity reflects his earlier experiences with meditational lay Buddhism in the US.310
In addition to these Buddhist methods, Sheng Yen promotes the establishment of the Pure Land on Earth through more secular methods, first and foremost by promoting
environmentalism,311 but also through the provision of social services by the DDM Social Welfare and Charity Foundation.312 He also communicates Buddhist values in secular language, as discussed in chapter 4, in order to reach a wider, non-Buddhist audience. For Chen Chien-Huang, campaigns like the Four Kinds of Environmentalism (四環) and Four Fields for Cultivating Peace (四安) represent tools that can be utilized to popularize a
308 Guojing, “Shengyan fashi jingtu sixiang zhi yanjiu,” 79.
309 Jiang, Zhanhou taiwan hanchuan fojiao shi, 116.
310 Li, “Chanxiu,” 29.
311 Shengyan, Nianfo sheng jingtu, 69.
312 Shengyan, Nianfo sheng jingtu, 70.
Buddhism for modern life in accordance with Dharma principles and human dispositions (契理契機).313
He traces Sheng Yen’s Pure Land thought back to Yongming Yanshou’s concept of Becoming a Buddha in a Single Thought (一念成佛論)314 and Ouyi Zhixu’s concept of a Single Manifest Thought” (現前一念心).315 By combining their approaches Sheng Yen synthesizes Huayan and Tiantai teachings to create the Establishing the Pure Land on Earth movement.
5.3. Conclusion
As we have seen, Sheng Yen advocates a two-way approach to nianfo. Yü Chün-fang differentiates between two methods within Pure Land, invocation, aiming at gaining rebirth in the Pure Land, and meditation, which in addition to rebirth in the Pure Land, the practitioner seeks to experience a vision of Amitabha in this world.
Sheng Yen’s twofold model, on the other hand, combines these two into a single Pure Land approach, in which they correspond to different levels of attainment, more or less advanced, depending on the skill of the practitioner. Both require a strong faith and determination and emphasize an object outside of oneself (有相). Yet somewhat
diverging from the Chinese tradition, Sheng Yen deemphasizes single-minded recitation
313 Chen, “Shengyan fashi「jianshi renjian jingtu」,” 232.
314 Chen, “Shengyan fashi「jianshi renjian jingtu」,”216-224.
315 Chen, “Shengyan fashi「jianshi renjian jingtu」,” 224-231.
of the Buddha’s name as advocated in the Amitabha sutra, recommending instead the Infinite Life sutra approach of faith in Amitabha’s vows and other power (他力本願).
Sheng Yen’s justification for this is not doctrinal but practical: to ensure a Buddhism that is not characterized by escapism, but that makes a positive contribution to society.
In addition Sheng Yen provides another approach, nianfochan, which does not emphasize an object outside of oneself. In this practice, the practitioner recites Amitabha’s name until he or she becomes completely one with it. Should any sense object appear, even a vision of Amitabha, it is to be ignored. If the nianfo gongan arises one might dwell on it, if not then fine.
The two methods are superficially identical, proceeding as described in chapter 4: the practitioner circumambulates the Chan hall in a serpentine fashion, steadily reciting Amitabha’s name. After a while he sits down on his meditation mat and continues to recite even faster, until in the end, the sound is dropped, and recitation only continues in his or her mind. What differs is the motive behind the practice. In one case, the
practitioner hopes to gain something, rebirth in the Pure Land, merit for a deceased family member, or a vision of Amitabha, while in the other the practitioner must abandon all expectations and just completely absorb themselves in the method. Sheng Yen
recommends the Pure Land approach for beginners, since it requires only faith, and less mastery of the method. Through diligent practice one can then progress to the nianfochan approach. Thus, while incorporating both somewhat conflicting approaches into his system, Sheng Yen still creates a hierarchy between the two: the Pure Land approach can serve as a gateway to a more advanced, Chan understanding. But both are legitimate
Mahayana approaches, just different doorways to the dharma (法門) that match the particular requirements of the practitioner and eventually leading to the same goal.
Regarding the conception of Pure Lands, Sheng Yen suggests a fourfold model. The Pure Lands do not correspond to specific geographical locations, but to different levels of spiritual attainment and purity. The Pure Land on Earth is the starting point, while the inner Pure Land is the goal. The way to reach that goal is foremost to purify oneself through Buddhist practice. When the goal is reached, the practitioner realizes that destination is identical with the starting point and the Pure Lands of all the Buddhas.
Thus, on a doctrinal level, Sheng Yen emphasizes a Mind-Only approach based on the Vimalakirti sutra over an approach based on the three Pure Land sutras which stress literal rebirth in the Pure Land. However, he still promotes the latter as a valid and reliable path, and does not just relegate it to a mere upaya. Sheng Yen in fact stresses faith in the literal existence of the Pure Land and Amitabha, resolving the doctrinal conflict on the level of practice. While the nianfochan method and the Mind-Only Pure Land are advanced, the literal understanding of Pure Land is still an effective and valid means in itself that can, but does not necessarily have to, serve as a gateway to a Chan understanding. With this practical and inclusive approach Sheng Yen adapts to the different needs and understandings of the practitioners.
Both understandings of nianfo are means to purify the mind and thereby contribute to the establishment of a Pure Land on Earth. Neither approach is promoted in isolation, but rather in addition to other practices, such as traditional Buddhist ethics and contemporary environmentalism.
In terms of doctrine, Sheng Yen applies Mind-Only understandings of Pure Land to make them accessible to modernist interpretations. He promotes Buddhist ethics through public campaigns and environmentalism and establishes an inclusive viewpoint regarding cultivation methods. Although Sheng Yen’s main focus is the popularization of Chan, his views incorporate both literal understandings of the Pure Land in the West and nianfo as a method of getting there.
6. Conclusion
The aim of this thesis was to examine different conceptions of Pure Land at DDM and their related practices, to see how they relate to each other and how tension between them is negotiated. Furthermore I wanted to assess how they are related to the modernization of Chinese Buddhism.
There are at least two conceptions of Pure Land present at DDM: First, a literal understanding of the Western Pure Land as an actual place to go to after death. This conception of a Pure Land is based on the three so-called Pure Land sutras. To achieve this goal one has to establish a firm faith in the actual existence and power of Amitabha and set up a regular nianfo practice. Although DDM’s main focus is Chan meditation, nianfo practice plays an important role at the organization. The organizational body responsible for nianfo practice within DDM is the Merit and Wisdom Chanting Society, one of the two big practice societies promoting Buddhist practice at Nung Chan temple, whose existence predate the founding of DDM. Nowadays, all DDM branches in Taiwan hold a weekly nianfo group practice. In addition, DDM Taiwan offers seven-day nianfo retreats usually about twice a year. Although this is a small fraction of the many Chan retreats DDM holds every year, attendance at the nianfo retreats is about ten times higher than at Chan retreats. From this fact we can deduce that, although DDM mainly identifies with Chan Buddhism, on the lay Buddhist level, practicing nianfo to gain merit and achieve rebirth in the western Pure Land seems to be the most popular practice in Chinese/Taiwanese Buddhism.
Related to this approach to Pure Land is the end of life chanting assistance DDM provides to the general public. The End-of-Life Chanting Group offers end of life care, assists in chanting for the deceased to ensure his or her rebirth in the western Pure Land and caters to the needs of the deceased’s family members.
Nianfo practices aimed at gaining rebirth in the Western Pure Land have a long history in China, dating back to the beginnings of Chinese Buddhism and with precursors in Indian Buddhism. Thus I understand these to be a traditional form of Pure Land practice.
The second conception of Pure Land at DDM is the notion of a Pure Land on Earth. It reflects the discourse of Renjian Buddhism, advocated by Taixu, his student Yinshun, and others. At the end of the nineteenth century, many Buddhists perceived their own tradition as in decline; Reformers like Taixu and others thought that over the centuries it had come to be corrupted by elements of Chinese folk religion, and to be overly
concerned with supernatural beings and practices like chanting for the dead. Their response was to promote a Buddhism that focuses on the living and makes a positive contribution to society. They absorbed the popular concept of the Pure Land into the notion of the Pure Land on Earth, a concept that diminishes otherworldly elements of traditional Buddhism in favor of a modernist version of the religion that is more affirmative of worldly matters. Buddhist groups like DDM, but also Foguangshan and Tzu Chi all adopted this modern concept and try to implement it in today’s Taiwan.
DDM promotes the establishment of a Pure on Earth through public outreach campaigns like Spiritual Environmentalism, based on Mind-Only ideas that do not stress the Pure Land as a physical place but relate it to the state of purification of the mind. If one’s mind
is purified than the world will be purified too. This idea is based on a concept from the Vimalakirti sutra: “when the mind is purified, the Buddha lands will be purified”. What is new, or modern, is that Sheng Yen relates this idea not just to a (mostly monastic)
person’s individual practice but also to society as a whole. DDM promotes this idea by applying contemporary language, using terms like environmentalism, etc., to attract a large number of people, Buddhist and non-Buddhist, to Buddhist concepts and practices.
Thus I call this notion a modern or modernist conception of Pure Land.
However, historically speaking, Mind-Only understandings of Pure Land are not new, but are related to a Chan approach to Pure Land that dates back to at least the Song. They were often applied to harmonize doctrinal tensions between Chan and Pure Land. Here the Pure Lands of the Buddhist sutras were identified with the purified mind: If one completely purifies one’s mind through Buddhist practice, one attains the Pure Land.
Mind-Only concepts therefore play an important role at DDM in negotiating the tensions between Chan and literal understandings of Pure Land. However, they do not explain the role of Pure Land at DDM entirely, since they do not take in account the modernist aspects of the organization’s take on Pure Land. In other words, modern notions of Pure Land include Mind-Only understandings, but are not identical with them, since they also incorporate other elements like an explicit world-affirmation, a concern for contemporary society, and references to modern concepts like environmentalism.
Unlike in Japanese Buddhism, there is no strict separation of Pure Land and Chan in Chinese Buddhism. The notion of the Pure Land and the practice of nianfo have always been a general part of Chinese Buddhism and are especially popular with the laity, which
is still the case in today’s Taiwanese Buddhism. In reflection of this fact, Sheng Yen took pains to incorporate Pure Land into the wider context of DDM-style Buddhist doctrine and practice.
As a bridge between Chan and Pure Land practice DDM holds nianfochan retreats in addition to traditional Pure Land nianfo retreats. On the surface they look almost identical: on both types of retreat, retreatants recite Amituofo while sitting and
circumambulating in the Chan hall; yet the motive for each approach to the practice is different. Participants in Pure Land nianfo retreats wish to ensure rebirth in the Pure Land, or in some cases wish to transfer merit to deceased loved-ones or gain merit for themselves. The nianfochan retreat is designed differently: here participants are supposed to use nianfo as a Chan meditation method. However nianfochan retreats have
significantly lower attendance than nianfo retreats. This reflects a gap between the more elite Mind-Only understandings of Pure Land within some circles in DDM, and the more literal Pure Land conceptions of nianfo retreatants that typify popular Taiwanese
Buddhism in general.
As is apparent in Sheng Yen’s writings and in the interview I conducted with Guojing, both prefer a Mind-Only interpretation of Pure Land to a more literal one. Conceptions of the Pure Land as an actual place somewhere in the west are perceived as a valid approach but also understood as inferior in the sense that they only function as an entrance point to a more advanced Chan Mind-Only understanding.
Similarly many people involved with the Dharma Drum Buddhist College that I have encountered indicated in conversations with me that they perceive Mind-Only
understandings as more advanced.
Whenever I, as a European researcher, had a private conversation with these highly educated associates of DDM they always preferred a modernist and a Mind-Only understanding of Pure Land over literal conceptions.
However during my fieldwork at the weekly nianfo group practice at the DDM Anhe branch I noticed that the monastics that lead the activity deemphasized mind-only approaches to nianfo. They did mention them, but described them as being too difficult, instead recommending a strong faith in the literal existence of the Pure Land. This corresponds with other observations I made during my fieldwork, several informal conversations with participants at the nianfo group practice, and especially the
significantly higher attendance at the seven-day nianfo retreats, compared to that of the average Chan retreat and nianfochan retreats. These data suggests that literal
understandings of the Pure Land as a place of rebirth after death are much more common than Mind-Only understandings at DDM especially on the level of the average lay attendee of nianfo practice. It also seems to reflect the situation of Taiwanese Buddhism in general where nianfo as a practice to achieve rebirth in the Western Pure land seems to be one of the most popular approaches to Buddhism. Thus there exists a gap at DDM between elite and popular understandings of Pure Land.
In terms of doctrine Sheng Yen tries to harmonize this gap by introducing a fourfold model of Pure Lands. The four Pure Lands identified by Sheng Yen do not refer to geographical locations, but to different levels of spiritual attainment and purity. The Pure Land on Earth is the starting point, while the inner Pure Land is the goal. The way to reach that goal is foremost to purify oneself through Buddhist practice. When the goal is reached, the practitioner realizes that destination and origin, and the Pure Lands of all the Buddhas, are one and the same. But although Sheng Yen emphasizes such Mind-Only
In terms of doctrine Sheng Yen tries to harmonize this gap by introducing a fourfold model of Pure Lands. The four Pure Lands identified by Sheng Yen do not refer to geographical locations, but to different levels of spiritual attainment and purity. The Pure Land on Earth is the starting point, while the inner Pure Land is the goal. The way to reach that goal is foremost to purify oneself through Buddhist practice. When the goal is reached, the practitioner realizes that destination and origin, and the Pure Lands of all the Buddhas, are one and the same. But although Sheng Yen emphasizes such Mind-Only