• 沒有找到結果。

A Re-examination of the Relationship between the Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought, Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "A Re-examination of the Relationship between the Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought, Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan"

Copied!
39
0
0

加載中.... (立即查看全文)

全文

(1)

A Re-examination of the Relationship between

the Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought,

Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan

pp. 183–215

in:

Chen-kuo Lin / Michael Radich (eds.)

A Distant Mirror

Articulating Indic Ideas in Sixth and Seventh

Century Chinese Buddhism

Hamburg Buddhist Studies, 3

(2)

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (German National Library).

The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche

Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the internet at

http://dnb.d-nb.de.

The online version is available online for free on the website of Hamburg University Press (open access). The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek stores this online publication on its Archive Server. The Archive Server is part of the deposit system for long-term availability of digital publications.

Available open access in the Internet at:

Hamburg University Press – http://hup.sub.uni-hamburg.de

Persistent URL: http://hup.sub.uni-hamburg.de/purl/HamburgUP_HBS03_LinRadich URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:gbv:18-3-1467

Archive Server of the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek – http://dnb.d-nb.de ISBN 978-3-943423-19-8 (print)

ISSN 2190-6769 (print)

© 2014 Hamburg University Press, Publishing house of the Hamburg State and University Library Carl von Ossietzky, Germany

Printing house: Elbe-Werkstätten GmbH, Hamburg, Germany http://www.elbe-werkstaetten.de/

(3)

Foreword

9

Michael Zimmermann

Acknowledgements

13

Introduction

15

Michael Radich and Chen-kuo Lin

Chinese Translations of Pratyakṣa

33

Funayama Toru

Epistemology and Cultivation in Jingying

63

Huiyuan’s Essay on the Three Means of Valid Cognition

Chen-kuo Lin

The Theory of Apoha in Kuiji’s Cheng weishi lun Shuji 101

Shoryu Katsura

A Comparison between the Indian and Chinese

121

Interpretations of the Antinomic Reason

(Viruddhāvyabhicārin)

(4)

Chinese Buddhist Logic

Jakub Zamorski

A Re-examination of the Relationship between the 183

Awakening of Faith and Dilun School Thought,

Focusing on the Works of Huiyuan

Ching Keng

A Pivotal Text for the Definition of the Two

217

Hindrances in East Asia: Huiyuan’s “Erzhang yi”

Chapter

A. Charles Muller

On the Notion of Kaidaoyi (*Avakāśadānāśraya) as

271

Discussed in Xuanzang’s Cheng weishi lun

Junjie Chu

Yogācāra Critiques of the Two Truths

313

Zhihua Yao

Philosophical Aspects of Sixth-Century Chinese

337

Buddhist Debates on “Mind and Consciousness”

Hans-Rudolf Kantor

The Way of Nonacquisition: Jizang’s Philosophy of 397

Ontic Indeterminacy

(5)

Indian Interpretations of the Parable of the Raft in

the Vajracchedikā

Yoke Meei Choong

Ideas about “Consciousness” in Fifth and Sixth

471

Century Chinese Buddhist Debates on the Survival

of Death by the Spirit, and the Chinese

Background to *Amalavijñāna

Michael Radich

The Process of Awakening in Early Texts on

513

Buddha-Nature in India

Michael Zimmermann

About the Authors

529

(6)

in memoriam

John R. McRae (1947-2011)

(7)

A Re-examination of the Relationship between the Awakening

of Faith and Dilun School Thought, Focusing on the Works of

Huiyuan

1

Ching Keng

Introduction

The Awakening of Faith (Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論, T1666) is widely recognized to have been a seminal text for the development of East Asian Buddhism from the Tang dynasty onwards. In at least one sense, the

Awakening of Faith initiated a completely new direction in Buddhist

thought, namely, the idea that defiled phenomena are modes of the Truth or Thusness (tathatā). In my 2009 PhD dissertation, I argued that it is unlikely that the Awakening of Faith originated with Paramârtha (Zhen-di 真諦, 499-569) and his group, and that the (Zhen-distinctive doctrinal (Zhen- differ-ence between Paramârtha and the Awakening of Faith lies in the question of whether a strict distinction is made between unconditioned

(asaṃskṛ-ta) and conditioned (saṃskṛ(asaṃskṛ-ta) dharmas. Paramârtha makes a strict

dis-tinction between the Dharma-body (dharmakāya) and the Enjoyment-bo-dy (saṃbhogakāya), and between innate Buddha-nature

(prakṛtistha[-bud-dha]-gotra) and cultivated Buddha-nature (samudānīta[-buddha]-gotra);

---

1 Note: I am very grateful to Professor Lin Chen-kuo for doing me the honour of allowing

me to contribute to his project “Indian Buddhist Thought in 6th-7th Century China”. I am

indebted to Dr. Elizabeth Kenney and Dr. Michael Radich for their generous help with correcting and polishing my English. I also want to acknowledge the very useful correc-tions and suggescorrec-tions made by the anonymous reviewer, especially in drawing my at-tention to the Dunhuang fragment Taishō No. 2770.

(8)

whereas the Awakening of Faith does not maintain these distinctions (Keng, 2009: 129ff. and 307ff.).

For example, the Awakening of Faith claims that defiled dharmas arise because ignorance permeates Thusness. As the text says:

(Quotation 1)

How is it that the permeation [of ignorance] gives rise to defiled

dhar-mas without interruption? This means that because it is based upon

the dharma of Thusness, ignorance exists. Because ignorance exists as the cause of defiled dharmas, it [ignorance] then permeates Thusness. Due to [this] permeation, deluded mind exists. Because deluded mind exists, it [deluded mind] then permeates ignorance. Because [the deluded mind] does not understand the dharma of Thusness, unen-lightened thoughts arise and make manifest objects of delusion. 云何熏習起染法不斷?所謂以依真如法故,有於無明;以有無明染 法因故,即熏習真如;以熏習故,則有妄心;以有妄心,即熏習無 明;不了真如法故,不覺念起,現妄境界 (T32:1666.578a21-25).2 Here, the Awakening of Faith claims that ignorance can permeate Thus-ness; but the problem is that Thusness cannot be permeated, because it is unconditioned. This Awakening of Faith notion that Thusness can be permeated is a clear deviation from Indian Abhidharma-Yogâcāra Bud-dhist schools, all of which subscribe to the basic distinction between un-conditioned (asaṃskṛta) and un-conditioned (saṃskṛta) dharmas.

Now, if the Awakening of Faith was not in fact translated or transmitted by Paramârtha, then what was the origin of its most distinctive doc-trines? Scholars such as Mochizuki Shinkō (望月信亨),3 Takemura

Ma-kio (竹村牧男) (Takemura, 1990), and Lü Cheng (呂澂)4 – all strong

---

2 For variant English and French translations, see Hakeda, 1967: 56-57 and Girard, 2004:

65.

3 For a brief review of Mochizuki’s points, see Kashiwagi’s summary, in particular point

(10) (Kashiwagi, 1981: 152-153).

4 Lü Cheng emphasizes the close connection between the Awakening of Faith and

Bodhi-ruci’s translation of the Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra. Although Lü did not talk about the connec-tion between the Awakening of Faith and the Dilun School, based on the fact that Bodhi-ruci was regarded as the founder of the Dilun School, we can fairly assume that Lü

(9)

supporters of the Chinese provenance of the Awakening of Faith – trace the Awakening of Faith back to the Dilun School (地論宗).5 According to

them, the Awakening of Faith was composed under the influence of Dilun School doctrines, which were greatly influenced by the Chinese trans-lation of the Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra.

However, even if we agree with these scholars, we still need to answer the question of why the Awakening of Faith could hold this view that Thusness, an unconditioned dharma, is itself the basis of conditioned and defiled phenomena. This view is an apparent deviation from the basic distinction between conditioned and unconditioned dharmas. Now, if it is true that the Awakening of Faith was based on the Dilun School reading of the Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra, then unless we could somehow show that the Di-lun School misinterpreted this sūtra, we would be forced to adopt the in-terpretation that the Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra itself, an authentic Indian Bud-dhist text, also blurs the distinction between conditioned and uncondi-tioned dharmas. On the other hand, if we hesitate to accept such an inter-pretation of the Laṅkâvatāra-sutra, then we should probably also consider the possibility that this interpretation is actually a result of reading the

Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra through the lens of the Awakening of Faith.6

This paper argues that Huiyuan (慧遠, 523-592 CE) has a very differ-ent understanding of the origin of defiled phenomena from that de-scribed in the Awakening of Faith. In short, according to the Awakening of

Faith, defiled phenomena are modes of Thusness; but for Huiyuan, they

are constructed by false discrimination (wangqing 妄情), with Thusness as the basis. Only to the extent that Thusness serves as the ultimate basis ---

would agree that the Awakening of Faith originated from the Dilun School (Lü, 1978: 301-307).

5 Here the term “school” is used loosely as a “translation” of the Chinese term zong (宗). I

do not mean to refer to an established institutional body of scholars. Thanks to the ano-nymous reviewer for suggesting I should make this clarification.

6 For an excellent and up-to-date collection of essays reflecting the current state of the

field in the study of the Dilun School, see Geumgang Center for Buddhist Studies, 2010. Especially relevant to my paper here is the article by Seok Gil-am (石吉岩), in which he argues that it is very unlikely that the Awakening of Faith was composed by anyone in the lineage of the Dilun School, including Bodhiruci (菩提流支を含む地論宗系統) (Seok, 2010: 262).

(10)

for false discrimination can Thusness be said to be related to defiled phe-nomena. This doctrinal difference between the Awakening of Faith and Huiyuan as the best-known master of the Dilun School entitles us to con-clude that the Awakening of Faith is not a direct outgrowth of Dilun School thought.

The difficult issue at hand is to clarify how, according to Huiyuan, Thusness as an unconditioned dharma could serve as the ultimate basis for defiled phenomena, without itself being relegated to the status of a conditioned state. In what follows, I shall first show that, like Para-mârtha, Huiyuan also draws a strict distinction between conditioned and unconditioned dharmas, as reflected in his distinction between two as-pects of Thusness: the aspect of “natural purity” (xingjing 性淨) and the aspect of “expedient means” (fangbian 方便). Second, regarding the for-mer aspect, Huiyuan employs the term “true consciousness” (zhenshi 真 識) to refer to the perfect wisdom of the Buddha or the “cognition” of Thusness; and in this connection, Huiyuan cites the scriptures to insist that the true consciousness is unconditioned and unchanging. Third, I shall give an interpretation of Huiyuan’s notion of the true conscious-ness “adjusting to falsity” (suiwang 隨妄), and, based on this, an inter-pretation of how the true consciousness serves as the substance (ti 體), i.e., the basis, of defiled phenomena. Fourth, at the end of this paper, I shall draw a few possible larger ramifications from my thesis.

Methodological remarks

Through an examination of Huiyuan’s works, this paper aims to investi-gate whether the key doctrinal feature of the Awakening of Faith discussed above is already present in the Dilun School. A major difficulty is that we do not know much about the precise dates of Huiyuan’s works, nor when he became familiar with the Awakening of Faith. Some of the works traditionally attributed to him apparently cite the Awakening of Faith, using the title Qixin lun (起信論, “The Awakening of Faith”), Maming lun

(11)

(馬鳴論, “The Treatise of Aśvaghoṣa”), or simply the name Maming (馬 鳴, Aśvaghoṣa), as shown in the Table below:7

Table 1: The Occurrence of Citations of the Awakening of Faith in Works Attributed to Huiyuan M am ing lun (“T he Trea tise of A śvag ho ṣa” ) Mam ing (“A śvag ho ṣa” ) but not M ami ng lun Da she ng qix in lun (“T he Aw ak eni ng of F ai th in t he Mahāyān a”) Qi xin lun (“T he Aw ak eni ng of F ai th ”) but not Da she ng qix in lun T1745 0 0 0 0 T1749 0 0 0 0 T1764 1 3 0 0 T1776 0 0 0 1 T1793 0 0 0 0 T1843 0 3 2 1 T1851 ex “Bashi” 5 11 0 8 “Bashi yi” 4 6 2 17 X351 2 6 0 0 ---

7 In a recent article, Okamoto Ippei (岡本一平) tries to establish a chronology of

Hui-yuan’s works (Okamoto, 2010). Interestingly, he observes that when he refers to the

Awakening of Faith, Huiyuan uses the title Maming lun in his earlier works, but the title Qixin lun in his later works. On this basis, Okamoto further suggests that among the

chapters of the Dasheng yi zhang, those using Maming lun were composed before those using Qixin lun. The co-existence of both titles in three chapters (i.e., “Bashi yi” 八識義, “Wu zhudi yi” 五住地義, and “Niepan yi” 涅槃義) shows that these chapters under-went revision afterwards (Ibid., 176ff.).

(12)

X704 0 0 0 0

X753 0 1 0 0

Legend: texts

T1745: Wuliangshou jing yishu 無量壽經義疏 T1749: Guan Wuliangshou jing yishu 觀無量壽經義疏 T1764: Da banniepan jing yiji 大般涅槃經義記 T1776: Weimo yiji 維摩義記

T1793: Wenshi jing yiji 溫室經義記

T1843: Dasheng qixin lun yishu 大乘起信論義疏

T1851 ex “Bashi”: Dasheng yi zhang 大乘義章, excluding “Bashi yi” 八識義 “Bashi yi”: 八識義 in Dasheng yi zhang 大乘義章 T1851

X351 Shengman jing yiji 勝鬘經義記 X704 Dichi lun yiji 地持論義記 X753 Shidi jing lun yiji 十地經論義記

Despite the evidence of these citations, we also have a few good reasons to believe that Huiyuan composed some of his texts before he learned about the Awakening of Faith. (1) Some of his works do not cite the

Awak-ening of Faith. (2) Despite the troubling statement in the Xu gaoseng zhuan

(續高僧傳, T2060) that Tanqian (曇遷, 542-607) had studied the

Awak-ening of Faith before he fled to the South, all other historical evidence

points to the likelihood that the Awakening of Faith came to light in the North only after Tanqian came back to Chang’an (長安) in 587.8 Given

this date, and given that Huiyuan died in 592, it is virtually certain that some of Huiyuan’s works must have been composed before he knew a-bout the Awakening of Faith. (3) Some of Huiyuan’s works, notably his en-cyclopedic Dasheng yi zhang (大乘義章, T1851) and his commentary on the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra (Da banniepan jing yiji 大般涅槃經義記, T1764), appear to have undergone ongoing revision, either by Huiyuan himself or by his disciples.9 So despite the fact that the Dasheng yi zhang

quotes quite a few times from the Awakening of Faith, this does not mean that this whole large work (20 fascicles in total) was written under the influence of the Awakening of Faith.

---

8 For the early circulation of the Awakening of Faith, see Kashiwagi, 1981: 183ff.

9 See, for example, the report in the Xu gaoseng zhuan that a disciple named Shanzhou 善

(d.u.) began revising Huiyuan’s commentary on the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra even be-fore Huiyuan died; T50:2060.519b11-20.

(13)

In light of this difficulty, my working hypothesis is that if I find in Huiyuan’s works any passages that show no doctrinal similarity with the

Awakening of Faith, then I have good reason to believe that these passages

could have been written before Huiyuan learned about the Awakening of

Faith, and hence could be authentic samples of Dilun School thought

be-fore the appearance of the Awakening of Faith. In other words, the fact that there are elements in Huiyuan’s works that go against the funda-mental tenet of the Awakening of Faith should be strong evidence for my thesis that the Awakening of Faith was not a direct outgrowth from the Di-lun School.

On the basis of this hypothesis, I shall avoid citing any passages from works by Huiyuan in which the influence of the Awakening of Faith is most obvious. These include: the “Chapter on the Eight Consciousnesses” (“Ba-shi yi” 八識義) in Fascicle Three of the Dasheng yi zhang, and An Exegesis

of the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith (Dasheng qixin lun yishu 大乘起信

論義疏, T1843). In addition, I shall also avoid citing passages where di-rect or indidi-rect reference to the Awakening of Faith appears in neighbor-ing passages.

A brief review of recent scholarship

Under my working hypothesis mentioned above, most recent scholar-ship turns out not to be so illuminating, because it proceeds on the as-sumption that it is legitimate to read Huiyuan in light of the Awakening of

Faith. Here I briefly review the work of three scholars who have studied

Huiyuan extensively: Yoshizu Yoshihide (吉津宜英), Aoki Takashi (青木 隆), and Ibuki Atsushi (伊吹敦).

Yoshizu (1975) investigates Huiyuan’s notion of “dependent origin-ation [based on] Buddha-nature” (foxing yuanqi 佛性緣起). Yoshizu re-mains completely silent about the tension between Buddha-nature as an unconditioned dharma and Buddha-nature as the basis of dependent ori-gination. He explains that the reason Huiyuan came up with the notion of “dependent origination [based on] Buddha-nature” was because Hui-yuan was influenced by the Yogâcāra doctrine that identifies

(14)

Buddha-na-ture or tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang 如來藏; literally, “Tathāgata-contain-ing [sentient be“Tathāgata-contain-ings]”10) with the storehouse consciousness (ālayavijñāna),

and hence regards Buddha-nature as the substance (ti 體) of dependent origination (Yoshizu, 1975: 175).

The best explanation I can think of for Yoshizu’s silence about the tension mentioned above is that he uncritically thinks that it is legiti-mate to interpret Huiyuan in terms of the doctrine of the Awakening of

Faith. The identification between Buddha-nature and the storehouse

con-sciousness referred to by Yoshizu can be fairly regarded as a distinctive doctrine of the Awakening of Faith.

Yoshizu’s uncritical attitude is also reflected in the fact that he fre-quently cites from the “Chapter on the Eight Consciousnesses” while dis-cussing the notion of “dependent origination [based on] Buddha-nature”. For example, when Yoshizu discusses Huiyuan’s interpretation of a pas-sage from the Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanāda-sūtra, viz. the paspas-sage stating that “both birth and death are tathāgatagarbha” (T12:353.222b8-9), he links Huiyuan’s interpretation to the “Chapter on the Eight Consciousnesses”. According to Yoshizu, Huiyuan coins the notion of “the mixture of Truth and falsity” (zhenwang hehe 真妄和合), and uses it to establish that, oc-casioned by causes and conditions, Buddha-nature (i.e., the Truth) is transformed into the storehouse consciousness (i.e., falsity), which pro-jects the illusion of birth and death (Yoshizu, 1975: 180-181).

As mentioned above, Huiyuan’s “Chapter on the Eight Consciousness-es” – whether it was written by Huiyuan himself or not – is heavily influ-enced by the Awakening of Faith, and hence must not be taken as repre-sentative of Huiyuan’s earlier thought, nor of Dilun School thought in general. Yoshizu’s frequent or even exclusive reliance on the “Chapter on the Eight Consciousnesses” betrays his unawareness of the danger of

---

10 I agree with Michael Zimmermann (Zimmermann, 2002: 39-46) that tathāgatagarbha

does not mean a womb or a matrix from which a Tathāgata develops. The term -garbha at the end of the compound should be interpreted as a marker of a bahuvrīhi com-pound, meaning “to contain”.

(15)

reading Huiyuan exclusively from the perspective of the Awakening of

Faith.11

Similarly, Ibuki (1998) overtly claims that Huiyuan introduces into his system the doctrines of the Awakening of Faith (Ibuki, 1998: 87). Moreover, Ibuki also relies almost exclusively on the “Chapter on the Eight Con-sciousnesses” in his interpretation of Huiyuan (Ibid.: 88ff.).

In a somewhat different manner, Aoki Takashi is careful to limit him-self to Dilun School sources when interpreting Huiyuan. Aoki (1997) claims that there are three kinds of dependent origination according to Huiyuan: youwei yuanqi (有為緣起); wuwei yuanqi (無為緣起) and ziti

yuanqi (自體緣起). The last, according to Aoki, contains both of the

oth-ers, and is identified with “dependent origination based on

tathāgatagar-bha” (Rulaizang yuanqi 如來藏緣起) (Aoki, 1997: 9). When it functions

wrongly, the third type of dependent origination becomes the first, i.e., “birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra]”; but when it functions correctly, the third becomes the second, i.e., nirvāṇa (Ibid.).

Thus, Aoki concludes by claiming that, for Huiyuan, “Tathāgatagarbha is the basis of all dharmas, and all kinds of defilements and false discri-mination are born from Thusness, tathāgatagarbha. But at the same time, the storehouse consciousness is born together [with defilements and false discrimination] and becomes the foundation (konpon 根本) of all defilements, namely, becomes the basis that holds [others] (eji 依持)” (Ibid.: 10).

Aoki is cautious not to link the Awakening of Faith too quickly with Dilun School thought. Nevertheless, his interpretation is still not far from the idea of “dependent origination [based on] Buddha-nature” as characterized by Yoshizu. He also fails to pay sufficient attention to the question of how defilements could be born from Thusness. More impor-tantly, he fails to doubt whether our current reading of Dilun School thought has been heavily biased by later doctrinal schemes such as that of the Awakening of Faith.

---

11 In Yoshizu 1974a and Yoshizu 1974b, he also exclusively relies upon the “Chapter on

the Eight Consciousnesses” while discussing Huiyuan’s notions of “true consciousness” (zhenshi 真識) and “false consciousness” (wangshi 妄識).

(16)

To conclude, recent scholarship on Huiyuan has not taken seriously enough the issue of how unconditioned Buddha-nature or

tathāgatagar-bha could serve as the basis for dependent origination, which by

defini-tion is condidefini-tioned. Scholars have also not worked hard enough to disso-ciate Huiyuan from later doctrinal schemes such as that of the Awakening

of Faith. In what follows, I shall venture to provide a fresh interpretation

of Huiyuan’s notion of “dependent origination [based on]

tathāgatagar-bha”.

The distinction between the aspect of “natural purity” (xingjing 性

) and the aspect of “expedient means” (fangbian 方便)

That Huiyuan subscribes to a dualistic scheme, instead of a monistic scheme like that seen in the Awakening of Faith, is evident from his re-peated employment of the contrast between the aspect of “natural pur-ity” and the aspect of “expedient means”. For example, when discussing

bodhi (“wisdom”) in Fascicle 18 of his Dasheng yi zhang, Huiyuan

distin-guishes these two aspects [of bodhi]: (Quotation 2)

Next, the third aspect, under which two [further] aspects are differ-entiated, i.e., the aspect of natural purity (xingjing 性淨) and the as-pect of expedient means (fangbian 方便)…Regarding bodhi from the aspect of expedient means, its arising is initiated by conditions, and its realization is made out of its substance (ti 體) [i.e., Buddha-nature]. If we apprehend the merits [of bodhi] from [the aspect of] conditions, then [all its merits] are born from conditions, just as an ornament is made by a craftsman; if we apprehend the merits [of bodhi] from [the aspect of] its substance, then [all the merits] are made out of Buddha-nature (foxing 佛性), the True Mind (zhenxin 真心), just as the orna-ment is made of gold. Conditions can indeed make [merits], but such making must base itself on the substance; the substance can indeed make [merits], but such making must be accomplished through condi-tions.

(17)

Regarding bodhi from the aspect of natural purity, the nature [of

bodhi] proceeds from the remote past, but it only becomes manifest

through conditions.12

次第三門,性淨、方便二門分別…方便菩提,集從緣發、成由體起。

攝德從緣,皆從緣生,如莊嚴具工匠所為;攝德從體,皆是佛性真 心所作,如莊嚴具真金所作。緣雖能作,作必依體;體雖能為,為 必藉緣…性淨菩提,性出自古,從緣始現13 (T44:1851.830a1-18). Following this, Huiyuan further divides his discussion of “bodhi [from the aspect of] natural purity” into two dimensions: (1) investigation of reali-ty with reference to conditions (yue yuan lun shi 約緣論實); and (2) [in-vestigation] in terms of reality [alone] without reference to conditions (ju shi wang yuan 據實亡緣). Under (1), Huiyuan repeats what he has al-ready pointed out above: the manifestation of this bodhi must be based on the substance, and conversely, its manifestation must also be accom-plished with the help of conditions. In this latter aspect, bodhi is likened to seven jewels lined up in a dark room, which cannot become manifest without a light (T44:1851.830a18-24). Under (2) Huiyuan says something even more illuminating:

(Quotation 3)

[Secondly,] if we [investigate] in terms of reality [alone] without re-ference to conditions, then [bodhi from the aspect of natural purity] is neither hidden nor disclosed. Under this head, two senses can be dif-ferentiated. First, if we set aside the [perspective of] person and simp-ly investigate dharmas, then the nature of dharmas is originalsimp-ly calm and without conditions from beginningless time, namely, there are no conditions outside reality. With reference to what then should it be known that we talk about [its being] “hidden or disclosed”, [or about] “cause and effect”? This is bodhi [that exists due to] the nature of

dharmas (*dharmatā), which should be included under the aspect of

---

12 All English translations of Chinese passages are mine.

13 The Taishō shinshū daizōkyō has “從緣始起” instead. Here I follow the variant edition

marked by 【甲】, which, according to T44:1851.465, n. 1, refers to 延寶二年刊,村 上專精氏藏, which means “published in the second year of Enbō (1674), included in the collection of Murakami Senshō (1851-1929)”.

(18)

principle (limen 理門) and has nothing to do with the merits of prac-tice (xingde 行德). Second, if we apprehend dharmas from the [per-spective of the] person, then the nature of dharmas mentioned above is realized when one attains Buddhahood. When one has realized it [i.e., the nature of dharmas], one looks back and realizes that, from be-ginningless time, there never were any conditions [for its being hid-den or for its being disclosed]. Since there were no conditions from the very beginning, the state in original time without beginning was not defiled, and [the state of Buddhahood] at this time is not newly purified, and is the same nature of dharmas as before. [This state is] neither hidden nor disclosed; neither cause nor effect.

據實亡緣無隱顯中,義別亦二。一、廢人論法,法性本寂,從來無 緣,實外無緣。知復約何說隱說顯、說因說果?此則是其法性菩提, 理門可收,不關行德。二、攝法從人,則前法性至佛乃證,證已返 望從來無緣。本無緣故,本則非染,今非新淨,同前法性,非隱非 顯,非因非果 (T44:1851.830b3-9, my emphasis).

Here, Huiyuan emphasizes again and again that bodhi from the aspect of natural purity is not changed even if it is hidden or covered by defile-ments.14 This is because bodhi that exists due to the nature of dharmas is

unconditioned. On the side of expedient means, in contrast, bodhi that exists through cultivation is subject to conditions and hence is condi-tioned.15 In other words, to investigate a certain dharma from the side of

natural purity means to focus on its aspect of being unconditioned; and to investigate it from the side of expedient means boils down to focusing on its aspect wherein it somehow gets involved in a chain of conditioned causality. The crucial point here is that underlying Huiyuan’s differ-entiation into the two aspects of natural purity and expedient means is ---

14 Cf. also T44:1851.476b24-28.

15 This means that according to Huiyuan, for example, wisdom in a specific verbal or

conceptual form (e.g. calculus in the Newtonian formulation instead of the Leibnizian formulation) results from specific conditions (e.g. different teachers, different me-thods, etc.). It would be interesting to explore whether these two aspects of bodhi cor-respond to the two kinds of wisdom prominent in several Yogâcāra texts, namely the non-discriminating wisdom (nirvikalpa-jñāna) vs. the subsequently-acquired wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna).

(19)

his subscription to the strict distinction between unconditioned and conditioned realms.

Furthermore, we can also detect that Huiyuan makes a clear dis-tinction between the conditioned and unconditioned realms through the contrast he makes between the Enjoyment-body (saṃbhoga-kāya) and the Dharma-body (dharma-kāya). We can easily tell that the former is con-ditioned for Huiyuan from his claim that the Enjoyment-body is the fruit of bodhi from the aspect of expedient means.

(Quotation 4)

Some people say that bodhi [from the aspect of] expedient means exists even when one is still a worldling [i.e., has not attained buddha-hood]. This interpretation is not correct…Moreover, the fruit of bodhi [from the aspect of] expedient means is the Enjoyment[-body of the] Buddha. It is termed “enjoyment” (bao 報) because it is a reward fol-lowing upon certain causes. If [bodhi from the aspect of expedient means] existed eternally from beginningless time, then there would be no cause prior to its existence. Of what, then, could enjoyment be the reward?

有人說言:方便菩提凡時亦有。是義不然…又復、方便菩提之果即

是報佛。酬因名報,本來恒有,有前無因,酬誰名報? (T44:1851.832 a28-b22).16

Along the same lines, Huiyuan also differentiates between two kinds of

nirvāṇa: nirvāṇa [from the aspect of] natural purity and nirvāṇa [from the

aspect of] expedient means. Under this distinction, again, we find that Huiyuan maps the Dharma-body onto the former, in contrast with the Enjoyment-body, which maps onto the latter:

(Quotation 5)

Third, if we discuss reality in general terms, then [we claim that] the aspect of natural purity and the aspect of expedient means are

equal--- 16 Cf. also T44:1851.832a16-20.

(20)

ly shared by three things.17 What does this mean? [It means] the Dhar

ma-body18 has these two aspects: first, the dharmatā-body (faxing shen

法性身; svābhāvika-kāya?), which was originally hidden but now becomes disclosed…second, the Real-enjoyment-body (shibao shen 實 報身), which is born from cultivation as an expedient means. Here, the dharmatā-body is included under [nirvāṇa from the aspect of] natural purity and the Real-enjoyment-body is subsumed under

[nir-vāṇa from the aspect of] expedient means.

三、就實通論,性淨、方便齊具三事。是義云何?法身有二:一、

法性身,本隱今顯…二、實報身,方便修生。其法性身性淨所收;

實報身者方便所攝 (T44:1851.822b24-29).

Huiyuan’s view in these two passages may be summarized as follows:

Table 2: The contrast between the aspect of natural purity and the aspect of expedient means

Worldlings After attaining Buddhahood The aspect of natural

purity (i.e., aspect of being unconditioned)

bodhi from the aspect

of natural purity =

bodhi that exists due to

the nature of dharmas

nirvāṇa from the

aspect of natural purity = the

dharmatā-body

The aspect of expedi-ent means (i.e., aspect involved in condi-tioned causal chain)

bodhi from the aspect

of expedient means =

bodhi that exists

through cultivation

nirvāṇa from the

aspect of expedient means = the Real-enjoyment-body

As mentioned earlier, the fundamental difference between Paramârtha’s thought and the Awakening of Faith lies in whether a strict distinction is maintained between conditioned and unconditioned dharmas (see my Introduction above). To the extent that both Paramârtha and Huiyuan ---

17 See T44:1851.822b24-c18. “Three things” refers to the dharma-body, bodhi and

libera-tion (jietuo 解脫). These three things are discussed here in Quotalibera-tion 5, and below in Quotations 6-7.

18 Apparently, the term “Dharma-body” here is used in its broader sense, including both

its aspect of natural purity (i.e., the dharmatā-body) and its aspect of expedient means (i.e., the Real-enjoyment-body).

(21)

maintain this distinction, it is likely that, doctrinally speaking, Huiyuan is actually closer to Paramârtha than to the Awakening of Faith!

An objection may be voiced here that Huiyuan’s contrast between the aspect of natural purity and the aspect of expedient means corresponds quite nicely to the contrast between the “aspect of Thusness” (zhenru

men 真如門) and the “aspect of birth and death” (shengmie men 生滅門)

in the Awakening of Faith. This can be refuted by pointing out that Hui-yuan never suggests that the aspect of expedient means derives directly from the aspect of natural purity. This point will become even clearer in the following sections.

The notion of the “true consciousness” (zhenshi 真識)

Now let us concentrate on how Huiyuan characterizes an investigation from the side of natural purity, or from the side of the investigated

dhar-ma, wherein it is unconditioned. Immediately following the above

Quota-tion (5), Huiyuan goes on to discuss how wisdom (Ch. banruo 般若; Skt.

prajñā) can also be differentiated into two types based on the contrast

between the aspect of natural purity and that of expedient means. Under “the aspect of natural purity”, further, he introduces the intriguing no-tion of the “true consciousness” (zhenshi 真識). Also glossed by Huiyuan as tathāgatagarbha19 or the “nature that cognizes [Reality]” (nengzhi [zhi]

xing 能知[之]性)20, the “true consciousness” refers to the inherently

pure mind whose nature is to shed light on the Dharma-realm

(dharma-dhātu). He says:

(Quotation 6)

Wisdom also has these two [aspects, i.e., the aspect of natural purity and the aspect of expedient means]. The first is the wisdom that illu-minates by its own nature (xingzhao banruo 性照般若), also termed ---

19 Cf. also T37:1764.691b7-9; T37:1764.692c7-11; X19:351.885c15-18.

20 Cf. also T37:1764.828b29-c3; T37:1764.884c5-12; T44:1851.472c12-22. Note that the term

“nature”, as I employ it in my English translation, is intended simply to reflect the Chinese term “xing 性” but does not suggest in any way substantiation or reification of the function in question.

(22)

the “realized wisdom”. What does this mean? [It means] that the mind, viz. the true consciousness, is pure by its own nature, but it looks as if it is impure in appearance (xiangsi 相似) because it is co-vered and veiled by false defilements (wangran 妄染). Only after false defilements cease is this mind disclosed for the first time. The now disclosed true mind, corresponding to its own nature, inwardly sheds light on the Dharma-realm (dharmadhātu), and is [therefore] named “the wisdom that illuminates due to its own nature”. It is [also] named “realized wisdom” because this [illumination] matches its own nature. The second [type of wisdom is] the wisdom that illuminates by means of contemplation (guanzhao banruo 觀照般若)…The wisdom that illuminates due to its own nature is included under [the aspect of] natural purity; the wisdom of illuminating by means of contemplation is subsumed under [the aspect of] expedient means.

般若亦二。一、性照般若,亦名「證智」。是義云何?真識之心本 性清淨,而為妄染之所覆蔽,相似不淨。後息妄染,彼心始顯。始

顯真心,如其本性,內明法界,說之以為「性照般若」。由稱本性,

故名「證智」。二、觀照般若…性照般若,性淨所收;觀照般若,方

便所攝 (T44:1851.822b29-c10).

Note that Huiyuan does not claim here that the true consciousness itself becomes impure. Rather, he says that the true consciousness only looks as

if it is impure in appearance, and the reason is that it is covered and veiled

by false defilements. Again, we confirm that there is a clear difference between Huiyuan and the Awakening of Faith.

Following the above Quotation (6), Huiyuan goes on to emphasize that the true consciousness is covered but not defiled, and hence “does not only now first begin to be pure” (jin fei shi jing 今非始淨) when one be-comes liberated, i.e., when defilements are removed:

(Quotation 7)

Liberation also has these two [aspects, i.e., the aspect of natural purity and the aspect of expedient means]: First, liberation [from the aspect of] its own nature, which can also be termed “liberation [from the as-pect of] natural purity”. The mind – in its literal sense (zhishuo 直說) – is pure by its own nature, but because it is hidden by falsity it is also said to be in bondage (xifu 繫縛). Later, when it eliminates the false

(23)

defilements, its nature emerges from [beneath] the layers [of defile-ments]. This is what is termed “liberation [from the aspect of] its own nature”. Moreover, when it has attained liberation, it looks back [and realizes that] the afflictions and impurities never existed from be-ginningless time, and it did not only now first begin to be pure (jin fei

shi jing 今非始淨). For this reason, it is termed also as “liberation

[from the aspect of] its own nature”. Second, liberation [from the as-pect of] expedient means…Liberation [from the asas-pect of] its own na-ture is included under [the aspect of] natural purity; and liberation [from the aspect of] expedient means is subsumed under [the aspect of] expedient means.

解脫亦二。一、自性解脫,亦得名為「性淨解脫」。直說之心,本 性雖淨而妄隱21,說為繫縛。後除妄染,彼性出累,名「性解脫」。 又得脫已,返望惑染,從來不有,今非始淨,故亦名為「自性解脫」。 二、方便解脫…自性解脫,性淨所收;方便解脫,方便所攝 (T44:1851. ‌ 822c10-17).22

Again, what is emphasized here is that the mind, the true consciousness, is never defiled nor impure. It is simply covered or hidden by defile-ments. With respect to the disclosure of the true consciousness, there is a beginning.23 But with respect to its original natural purity, there is no

beginning, nor is there an end. This is very different from the Awakening

of Faith, which argues that it is the pure mind itself that is agitated by

ignorance and projects deluded phenomena.

My point here is that, unlike Thusness as it is understood in the

Awak-ening of Faith, the true consciousness as Huiyuan understands it never

shares in the nature of conditioned dharmas. If Huiyuan had ever sub-scribed to the conceptual scheme of the Awakening of Faith, he would not have put so much emphasis on the idea that, even if a sentient being in

saṃsāra is tainted by defilements, the true consciousness does not

be-come tainted and, when that sentient being bebe-comes liberated, the true ---

21 A character seems to be missing here. The variant edition marked by 【甲】reads: 而

為妄隱, see T44:1851.822, n. 8. For 【甲】, see above, n. 13.

22 Cf. also T37:1764.816b18-20.

(24)

consciousness does not only then begin to be pure. According to the

Awakening of Faith, by contrast, Thusness can be agitated by ignorance,

and then it becomes defiled; and when the defilements are eliminated, Thusness does begin to become pure again.

Various formulations of the dubious idea of “adjusting to falsity”

(suiwang 隨妄)

So far, I have shown that Huiyuan carefully distinguishes two aspects, and that the true consciousness as he understands it is unmistakably un-conditioned. Now I must tackle the further issue of whether the true consciousness can be modified by ignorance, in the same way as Thus-ness can be agitated by ignorance according to the Awakening of Faith.

In order to investigate this issue, let me first note that in Huiyuan’s works, there are at least five notions that seem to point to the involve-ment of the true consciousness in the conditioned realm: (1) [the notion that the true consciousness] adjusts to falsity (suiwang 隨妄); (2) [the no-tion that the true consciousness] adjusts to condino-tions (suiyuan 隨緣 or

yuanqi 緣起); (3) the notion of “dependent origination [based on the]

substance of tathāgatagarbha” (Rulaizang ti yuanqi 如來藏體緣起); (4) the notion that defiled consciousness is based on (yi 依) the true con-sciousness; and (5) the function (yong 用) of the true consciousness. For each notion, I will cite one passage from Huiyuan.

1 [That the true consciousness] adjusts to defilements:

(Quotation 8)

With regard to their ultimate nature, the twelve links of dependent origination arise from the true mind, just as that [illusion] which oc-curs in a dream arises from the mind [that is conditioned by] karmic payback (baoxin 報心). Therefore, the Daśabhūmika-sūtra24 says that

the twelve links of dependent origination are all made by the true ---

24 Huiyuan seems to be alluding to the following passage: 經曰:是菩薩作是念:三界虛

(25)

mind. [This] true mind itself is the nature, i.e., tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性) which is clear at all times, pure and un-changeable. How could there be arising and function [of it] due to causes and conditions? Hence it is not existent. [But on the other hand,] it evolves by adjusting to defilements, and hence birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra] arise. For this reason it is said to be not non-ex-istent. It is neither existent nor non-existent, and therefore, we speak of [it as] the “middle path”.

十二因緣,窮其本性,真心所起,如夢所作皆報心起。故《地經》 說:十二因緣皆真心作。真心即是如來藏性,古今常湛,清淨不變, 何有因緣起作可得?所以非有。隨妄流轉,集起生死,說為非無。 非有非無,故名中道 (T37:1764.825b11-16, my emphasis).

2 [That the true consciousness] adjusts to causes and conditions:

(Quotation 9)

Despite the fact that [things] such as wisdom and ignorance are distinguished and different, their real nature (shixing 實性) is not different. [This is because:] the same substance of the true mind (yi

zhenxin ti 一真心體) is transformed into various dharmas by adjusting

to conditions…First, the same substance of the true consciousness (yi

zhenshi ti 一真識體) is transformed into wisdom and ignorance by

adjusting to conditions, and hence there is no other [i.e., different] nature [in the true consciousness]. In just the same manner, water of the same nature can become clear or turbid by adjusting to conditions, and yet there is no other [i.e., different] nature of the water.

明、無明等雖復別異,實性不二。一真心體隨緣轉變為諸法故…一

真識體隨緣轉變為明、無明,故性無二。如一水性,隨緣清濁,水 性無二 (T37:1764.702c2-19, my emphasis).25

--- 25 Cf. also T38:1776.497a7-9.

(26)

3 The notion of “dependent origination [based on the] substance of

tathāga-tagarbha”: (Quotation 10)

Now if we explain these two [i.e., the conventional and the ultimate truth] by recourse to dependent origination, then [we note that] it is the dependent origination [based on] the substance of the pure Dhar-ma-realm, i.e., the tathāgatagarbha, that constructs “birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra]” and nirvāṇa. [Here] the substance of the true nature itself (zhenxing ziti 真性自體) is said to be the ultimate truth; its func-tion, i.e., dependent originafunc-tion, is said to be the conventional truth. 若就緣起以明二者:清淨法界如來藏體,緣起造作生死涅槃。真性 自體說為真諦;緣起之用判為世諦 (T44:1851.483c19-21, my em-phasis).26

4 That the defiled consciousness is based on (yi 依) the true consciousness

(Quotation 11)

Fourth, the permanent gives birth to the impermanent. This means that based on the true consciousness, false consciousness is produced, and that based on the permanent body [i.e., the Dharma-body], birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra] are tranformed [by false consciousness]. 四、常生無常,謂依真識,發生妄識,依於常身,起化生滅 (T44:1851. 480c24-25, my emphasis).

--- 26 Cf. also T44:1851.486b19-24.

(27)

5 The function of the true consciousness:

(Quotation 12)27

Regarding the aforementioned dependent origination [based on] the true consciousness, we can differentiate two senses: first, dependent origination [which is] the function of the true [consciousness]

(zhen-yong yinyuan 真用因緣). [This means that] the nature, i.e., tathāgata-garbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), becomes defiled even while

[re-maining all the while] undefiled (bu ran er ran 不染而染), and [to-gether with it] arise the twelve links of dependent origination. There-fore the Scripture [i.e., the Laṅkâvatārasūtra28] says, “The nature, i.e.,

tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), is the cause of all good and

bad. It can pervasively create [re]births in all destinies, just as an ac-tor (ji’er 伎兒) can manifest himself in [the forms of] various desti-nies.” And another Scripture [Foshuo wushangyi jing?29] also says, “Just

these five destinies [arising from] spinning through the Dharma---

27 I am very grateful to the anonymous reviewer, who pointed out to me that the

Dun-huang fragment Taishō No. 2770 in Volume 85 (Aurel Stein Collection No. 2688, hence-forth abbreviated as T2770) could be a variant edition of the same text by Huiyuan. In the following, I correct T1776 by consulting T2770.

28 For the Chinese translation of the passage from the Laṅkâvatārasūtra, see T16:670.510

b4-5. The Sanskrit text reads, tathāgatagarbho mahāmate kuśalākuśalahetukaḥ sarvajan-magatikartā | pravartate naṭavad gatisaṃkaṭa ātmātmīyavarjitas tadanavabodhāt trisaṅgati-pratyayakriyāyogaḥ pravartate (Nanjio, 1923: 220). Note that instead of the term tathāga-tagarbha in the Sanskrit text and Rulai zhi zang 如來之藏 in Guṇabhadra’s translation,

Huiyuan has Rulai zang xing 如來藏性.

29 Note that Huiyuan also quotes the same passage at least twice in his Dasheng yi zhang

“Chapter on the Eight Consciousnesses”. See T44:1851.527a6, T44:1851.530a28-29. The source behind this quote is not clear. Thus far, the closest I have found is the following passage from the Foshuo wushangyi jing (佛說無上依經, T669), translated by

Paramâr-tha, which reads, 阿難!是如來界無量無邊,諸煩惱㲉之所隱蔽,隨生死流漂沒六

道,無始輪轉,我說名眾生界 (T669:16.469c17-19). In addition, the Foxing lun (佛性論, T1610) attributed to Paramârtha also cites the same passage from the Foshuo wushangyi

jing: 故《無上依經》說:阿難!是如來法界,無量無邊諸煩惱㲉之所隱蔽,隨生 死流。漂沒六道,無始輪轉,我說名眾生界 (T1610:31.806b2-5). If Huiyuan here is indeed citing from Paramârtha’s Foshuo wushangyi jing, then this would imply that Huiyuan was quite familiar with the works of Paramârtha, an issue which requires further exploration.

(28)

realm are termed ‘sentient beings’.” [The above two passages, etc.] all refer to dependent origination [which is] the function of the true [consciousness]. [Second, regarding] dependent origination [which is] the substance of the true [consciousness, I claim], the nature, i.e.,

ta-thāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), is the substance of

depen-dent origination. This is why [tathāgatagarbha] is named “dependepen-dent origination”. But in this substance the marks (xiang 相) of dependent origination are absent. Just because this real nature of tathāgatagarbha (zhenshi Rulaizang xing 真實如來藏性) is the substance of dependent origination, the Scripture (i.e., the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra30) proclaims,

“The twelve links of dependent origination are regarded as the Bud-dha-nature,” and hence seeing the twelve links of dependent origina-tion is termed seeing the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. 於前真識因緣之中,義別亦二。一、真用因緣。如來藏性不染而染, 起十二緣。故經說言:「如來藏性是其一切善、不善因,能遍興造 一切趣生,猶如伎兒31變現眾趣。」又經亦言:「即此法界輪轉五道, 名曰眾生。」此等皆是真用因緣。[二、]真體因緣。如來藏性是因 緣體,名曰因緣。而此體中,無因緣相。32良以真實如來藏性是緣 體故,經中宣說:「十二因緣以為佛性」,見十二因緣名為見佛、見 法、見僧。 (T38:1776.429c17-26, my emphasis).33

Despite slight differences in formulation, what is common to all of the above passages is the idea that the inherently pure true consciousness or the nature, i.e., tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性) can somehow follow dependent origination or adjust to conditions, and that from this adjustment, false phenomena arise. In what follows, I shall try to show that, despite its seeming similarity with the Awakening of Faith, this idea of “adjusting to falsity” actually says quite the opposite.

--- 30 T12:374.524a1-3.

31 I follow ji’er伎兒 in T1776 instead of bijian彼見in T2770.

32 Here I follow T2770 instead of T1776, which reads: 如來藏性是因緣體,名因緣,而此

因緣相 (T38:1776.429c23). I agree with the anonymous reviewer that T2770 makes much better sense.

(29)

A clear separation of Huiyuan from the Awakening of Faith?

Now the issue is: How could we reconcile the idea that the true con-sciousness is unchanging with the idea that it could also become related to dependent origination, which always implies change? From the above passages, it might appear that Huiyuan does side with the Awakening of

Faith, and tries to downplay the strict distinction between the true

con-sciousness, which is unconditioned, and false phenomena, which are conditioned. I argue that we must firmly reject this interpretation, be-cause I believe that Huiyuan has come up with a subtle way to deal with this difficulty without compromising the strict distinction between con-ditioned and unconcon-ditioned dharmas. But before I show how Huiyuan deals with this problem, I should note that this is not a new challenge faced by Huiyuan alone. This difficulty had already been posed in a fa-mous passage from the Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanāda-sūtra:

(Quotation 13)

O World Honored One! Tathāgatagarbha is “that which contains the Dharma-realm”, “that which contains the Dharma-body”, “that which contains the supreme supramundane [dharmas]”, and “that which contains inherent purity”. [That] this tathāgatagarbha, whose nature is pure, is nonetheless affected by adventitious defilements and tainted by defilements, is something inconceivable, that can be known only by the Tathāgata. Why? The mind [associated with] good mental

dhar-mas is momentary, [and is therefore] not tainted by defilements; [so

too,] the mind [associated with] bad mental dharmas is momentary, [and] is also not tainted by defilements. Defilements do not touch the mind, nor does the mind touch defilements. How could a dharma that it does not touch be able to defile the mind? O World Honored One! Nonetheless, there are [indeed] defilements, and there is indeed a mind tainted by defilements. [That] the mind is inherently pure and there are nonetheless taints is [something] very difficult to under-stand; only the Buddha, the World Honored One – who has the eye of truth and true wisdom, who is the foundation of all dharmas, who

(30)

knows perfectly the dharmas, who is the basis of all correct dharmas – knows and sees this as it really is.34

世尊!如來藏者,是法界藏、法身藏、出世間上上藏、自性清淨藏。 此性清淨如來藏而客塵煩惱上,煩惱所染,不思議如來境界。何以 故?剎那善心非煩惱所染;剎那不善心亦非煩惱所染。煩惱不觸心, 心不觸煩惱。云何不觸法而能得染心?世尊!然有煩惱、有煩惱染 心。自性清淨心而有染者,難可了知。唯佛世尊,實眼實智、為法 根本、為通達法、為正法依、如實知見 (T353:12.222b22-c1, my emphasis).

Given this total heterogeneity between pure mind, i.e., the true con-sciousness, and defilements, how then might Huiyuan try to resolve the problem of how these two could be combined without compromising their heterogeneity?

The key here is the notion of “false discrimination” (wangqing 妄情), as stated in the following passages:

(Quotation 14)

Question: Dependent origination is a false dharma.35 How could it

[then] serve as the cause of bodhi? [Answer:] Those twelve links of de-pendent origination [within the realm of] birth-and-death [= saṃsāra] arise due to false discrimination and are established in dependence upon Thusness. Therefore the Scripture36 says, “All the twelve links

---

34 Part of the first underlined portion is quoted in the Ratnagotravibhāga, which reads: yo ’yaṃ bhagavaṃs tathāgatagarbho lokottaragarbhaḥ prakṛtipariśuddhagarbha iti

(John-ston, 1950: 72.16-73.1). The second underlined portion is also attested in the

Ratnago-travibhāga, which reads: kṣaṇikaṁ bhagavan kuśalaṁ cittam | na kleśaiḥ saṁkliśyate | kṣaṇi-kam akuśalaṁ cittam | na saṁkliṣṭam eva tac cittaṁ kleśaiḥ | na bhagavan kleśās tac cittaṁ spṛśanti | katham atra bhagavann asparśanadharmi cittaṁ tamaḥkliṣṭaṁ bhavati | asti ca bha-gavann upakleśaḥ | asty upakliṣṭaṁ cittam | atha ca punar bhagavan prakṛtipariśuddhasya cit-tasyôpakleśārtho duṣprativedhyaḥ || (Johnston, 1950: 15.3-7). For Takasaki’s English

trans-lation, see Takasaki, 1966: 174-175.

35 I think that Huiyuan does not mean here that dependent origination is false, but that

dependent origination as it is understood by ordinary sentient beings – e.g., in terms of the twelve links of dependent origination – is not ultimately true. This is because each of the twelve links is not ultimately real.

(31)

of dependent origination are based on true mind, i.e., mind at the level of the ultimate truth.” If we speak about their false aspect [i.e., of the twelve links of dependent origination], it is true that they are unreal constructions. But if we speak about their true aspect, then because they are governed by conditions, none of them is unreal. If one exhaustively explores conditions and comes to know reality, then he will attain great awakening; for this reason, it is possible for de-pendent origination to be the cause of buddhahood.

問曰:因緣是虛妄法,云何能與菩提作因?然彼生死十二因緣,起 由妄情,託真如立。故經說言:「十二因緣皆依真實第一義心。」 就妄論之,雖是虛搆,據真緣攝,斯無不實。窮緣悟實,便成大覺, 是故因緣能為佛因 (T44:1851.473c6-11, my emphasis).

(Quotation 15)

If we analyze reality according to the “Mahāyāna teaching of the disclosure of Reality” (dasheng xianshi jiao 大乘顯實教), then there are two [kinds of reality]: one, empty [reality]; the other, existent [reality]. To further distinguish each of these two, [in each] we can briefly differentiate [the following] two aspects [i.e., of the basis and of dependent origination]. First, the aspect of the basis (yichi men 依 持門): Suffering, the arising of suffering, the cessation of suffering, and the path leading to the cessation of suffering, which are grasped by false imagination (wangxiang 妄想), and hence appear to be exis-tent for [those with false] discrimination, but are non-exisexis-tent for [those who know] the Principle (li 理), are what is called “empty real-ity”. The nature, i.e., tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), that is taken as the basis of false discrimination, which, although its mark (xiang 相) cannot be seen, nevertheless exists in reality, is what is called “existent reality”. Therefore the Scripture37 calls this

“non-empty [tathāgata-]garbha” (bukong zang 不空藏). Second, the aspect of ---

37 Cf. the Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanāda-sūtra: 世尊!有二種如來藏空智。世尊!空如來藏,若

離、若脫、若異一切煩惱藏。世尊!不空如來藏,過於恒沙不離不脫不異不思議佛 法 (T12:353.221c16-18). The Sanskrit as quoted in the Ratnagotravibhāga reads, śūnyas

tathāgatagarbho vinirbhāgair muktajñaiḥ sarvakleśakośaiḥ | aśūnyo gaṅgānadīvālikāvyati-vṛttair avinirbhāgair amuktajñair acintyair buddhadharmair (Johnston, 1950: 76, 7-9).

(32)

dependent origination (yuanqi men 緣起門): The nature, i.e.,

tathā-gatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), whose substance (ti 體) is

Thusness (ru 如) and hence is uniform in flavor, is what is called “empty reality”. The functioning (yong 用) of dependent origination [in terms of] suffering, the arising of suffering, the cessation of suffer-ing, and the path leading to the cessation of suffersuffer-ing, is what is called the “existent reality”. Hence the Scripture says, “Natural purity is de-filed even while [remaining all the while] undede-filed;” “The twelve links of dependent origination are all made of the one mind;” “The two dharmas – birth and death – are spinning through the realm, i.e., tathāgatagarbha, and are [respectively] called the Dharma-body and sentient beings.” These and other similar passages refer to suffering and the arising of suffering [due to] dependent origination [based on] true reality [i.e., tathāgatagarbha]. The disclosure of the na-ture, i.e., tathāgatagarbha (Rulaizang xing 如來藏性), to become the Dharma-body, bodhi, nirvāṇa, and the merits of practice through the stages (bhūmi), is the cessation of suffering and the path leading to the cessation of suffering [due to] dependent origination [based on] true reality [i.e., tathāgatagarbha].

若就大乘顯實教中辨實亦二:一、空;二、有。於中分別,略有二 門。一、依持門。妄想所取苦、集、滅、道,於情為有,於理實無, 名為「空實」。妄情所依如來藏性,相雖叵見,而實是有,名為「有 實」。故經說為「不空藏」矣。二、緣起門。如來藏性,體如一味, 名為「空實」。緣起苦、集、滅、道之用,名為「有實」。如經中說: 「自性清淨,不染而染」、「十二因緣,皆一心作」、「生死二法是如 來藏法界輪轉,名曰法身、眾生。」如是等言,是其真實緣起苦、 集。如來藏性顯成法身、菩提、涅槃、諸地行德,即是真實緣起滅、 道 (T1851:44.512a5-16).38

What is impressive about Huiyuan’s resolution of this difficult issue is that false discrimination works in exactly the same sense as “adventi-tious defilements” (āgantuka-kleśa): discrimination covers the true con-sciousness and out of the “combination” of the two all defiled pheno-mena – birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra] – arise.

---

(33)

To explain further, I construe what Huiyuan says as follows: the ulti-mate substance (ti 體) is Thusness or tathāgatagarbha, which refers to nothing other than Reality as governed by the principle of dependent origination. Originally, we are endowed with the correct “cognition” of Thusness, namely, the true consciousness. But due to ignorance, false discrimination is superimposed upon the true consciousness, and hence Reality is falsely grasped and designated in terms of concepts (such as “a pot”). But even when false concepts are applied to Reality, it merely

ap-pears to be defiled, but in fact is not changed whatsoever, inasmuch as it

arises and ceases according to dependent origination. In the same way, even when false discrimination is superimposed upon the true con-sciousness, the true consciousness itself is never tainted. It is simply hid-den or covered. That is to say, there is no real mixture between the true consciousness and false discrimination, because when these two come together, the latter does not change the nature of the former at all. In fact, Huiyuan follows the Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanāda-sūtra to claim that these two do not touch each other even while being combined with one another:

(Quotation 16)

The sentence, “Defilements do not touch the mind; the mind does not touch defilements”39 is meant to explain what was mentioned earlier,

[namely, the idea of “the mind being] untainted”. Defilements origi-nate from false discrimination, and do not impinge upon the true con-sciousness, and hence they do not touch the mind. Since [the mind] stays in its truth without falsity, it does not touch any defilements. This is as when a worldling mistakenly sees a rope and takes it for a snake. The [cognition of the] snake arises from false discrimination, and hence it does not touch the rope; the substance of the rope is for-ever pure, and also does not touch the snake.

---

(34)

「惚40不觸41心,心不觸惚」,釋前不染。惚出妄情, 不及真識,故

不觸心。據真无妄,故不觸惚。其猶世人見繩為虵42,虵出妄情,

故不觸繩。繩躰常淨,亦不觸虵 (X19:351.894b2-5).

The idea that false discrimination does not taint the true consciousness is strong evidence that for Huiyuan, false discrimination is not a mode of the true consciousness. False discrimination is of a totally different na-ture from the true consciousness, and hence cannot taint it. False discri-mination remains nothing more than adventitious defilements. Con-versely, the true consciousness does not touch false discrimination, ei-ther. This does not imply anything like the idea that the true conscious-ness is somehow agitated or transformed into false consciousconscious-ness, as suggested by the Awakening of Faith. Rather, Huiyuan simply means that false discrimination is superimposed upon the true consciousness, and hence Reality is falsely conceptualized and reified. In this sense, Huiyuan can make the claim that the true consciousness adjusts to falsity without subscribing to the doctrinal scheme of the Awakening of Faith.

We should certainly investigate further the problem of whether Hui-yuan successfully resolves this difficulty, or whether he should be sub-ject to a further request to provide an explanation of how and why false discrimination comes into existence in the first place, if it is not a direct derivative of the true consciousness.43 But my point here is that Huiyuan

does not come anywhere near to suggesting that false discrimination is a ---

40 Given that there are 49 occurrences of 煩惚 in this text, which I assume would

cor-respond to the more common term fannao (煩惱), we can conclude that 惚 in X351 is an ancient variant character for nao (惱). According to the Zokuzōkyō, this manuscript was rediscovered in Dunhuang, and is catalogued as Pelliot Chinois No. 3308.

41 Due to shortcomings in my computer font, I can only show the modern character here.

In the manuscript, according to CBETA, this same word is written [舉-與+角], meaning that we should remove 與 from 舉, and then put 角 to the right.

42 This is an ancient variant character for 蛇 (snake).

43 Huiyuan faces potential difficulties here. For example: What precisely does it mean to

say that false discrimination can be superimposed upon true consciousness, without compromising the unconditioned status of true consciousness? Perhaps we might an-swer by saying that this is similar to the case of putting on a blindfold: when one puts on a blindfold, one cannot see anything at all, but one’s natural capacity to see is not therefore harmed.

(35)

mode or an aspect of the true consciousness, which is the idea that cha-racterizes the Awakening of Faith. Instead, Huiyuan emphasizes that the true consciousness remains untainted despite the superimposition of false discrimination upon it.

The simile of snake and rope: The indispensability of the substance

Another reason for arguing that, according to Huiyuan, false discrimina-tion is not a mode or an aspect of the true consciousness is that Huiyuan also claims that defiled phenomena never really exist. Their seeming ex-istence is in reality exex-istence; their seeming cessation is also non-cessation. Huiyuan puts it thus:

(Quotation 17)

The substance of [all] dharmas, which [alone] is true, remains the same and is named “Thusness”. As Thusness adjusts to false discrimi-nation, birth and death [i.e., saṃsāra] arise. That defilements arise by [Thusness] adjusting to falsity is named “birth”, and that purity [i.e., of Thusness] is hidden is named “death”. Further, that purity mani-fests by adjusting to the antidotes is named “birth”, and that defile-ments stop is named “death”. Birth [in accordance with] dependent origination is [in reality] a non-birth [falsely taken as] birth, but [in reality] this [falsely taken] birth is a non-birth. Death [in accordance with] dependent origination is [in reality] a non-death [falsely taken as] death, but [in reality] this [falsely taken] death is a non-death. It is just as someone in the dark of night might see a rope and think it a snake. The arising of the [false idea of a] snake is named “birth” [of the snake], but [in reality] this [falsely taken] birth is a non-birth; when the dawn comes, the [false idea of a] snake dies, but [in reality] this [falsely taken] death is a non-death.

真法體同,名之為如。如隨妄情,集起生滅。隨妄起染,名之為生, 淨隱稱滅。又隨對治,淨起名生,染息云滅。緣起之生,非生為生, 生則無生;緣起之滅,非滅為滅,滅則無滅。如人夜闇見繩為蛇。 蛇起名生,生則無生;至明蛇滅,滅則無滅 (T38:1776.462a1-6).

數據

Table 1:    The Occurrence of Citations of the Awakening of Faith in Works  Attributed to Huiyuan  M am ing  lun  (“T he  Trea tiseof Aśvaghoṣa”)  Maming (“Aśvaghoṣa”) but not Maming lun Dasheng qixin lun (“The Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna”) Qixin lu

參考文獻

相關文件

• To enhance teachers’ understanding of the major updates of the English Language Education Key Learning Area under the ongoing renewal of the school curriculum;.. • To

 Literacy Development  Using Storytelling to Develop Students' Interest in Reading - A Resource Package for English Teachers 2015  Teaching Phonics at Primary Level 2017

• e‐Learning Series: Effective Use of Multimodal Materials in Language Arts to Enhance the Learning and Teaching of English at the Junior Secondary Level. Language across

help students develop the reading skills and strategies necessary for understanding and analysing language use in English texts (e.g. text structures and

• e‐Learning Series: Effective Use of Multimodal Materials in Language Arts to Enhance the Learning and Teaching of English at the Junior Secondary Level. Language across

volume suppressed mass: (TeV) 2 /M P ∼ 10 −4 eV → mm range can be experimentally tested for any number of extra dimensions - Light U(1) gauge bosons: no derivative couplings. =>

Courtesy: Ned Wright’s Cosmology Page Burles, Nolette & Turner, 1999?. Total Mass Density

incapable to extract any quantities from QCD, nor to tackle the most interesting physics, namely, the spontaneously chiral symmetry breaking and the color confinement.. 