Buddhism entered China from India in the early years of the Christian era. It was already a mature and complex religion and was to have a strong and enduring influence on both Chinese philosophy and indigenous religious belief. Within a few centuries, Buddhism had taken its place as one of the Three Teachings. The other two were Confucianism and Taoism.
Basic to Buddhist belief are the Four Noble Truths: (1) all life is sorrowful, (2) sorrow is due to desire, (3) sorrow can be ended only by termination of desire, and (4) desire can be conquered only by discipline and a high level of moral conduct. The world is not only sorrowful but also transient and soulless. There is no salvation without understanding of these truths. Out of his appetites, man will suffer and cause others to suffer.
All things in the universe are a constantly changing composite of form and matter, sensations, perceptions, psychic dispositions and conscious thought. Each act or word of the individual interacts with the five constituents in an endless process that extends into rebirth (a destiny which seemingly contradicts Buddhism's rejection of a soul). Rebirth is brought to an end only by achieving Nirvana, in which the individual personality ceases to exist. These were doctrines of the Hinayana school.
But beginning in the first century A.D., the Mahayana school emerged to offer salvation to all. Mahayana is the so-called Greater Vehicle school, while Hinayana is the Lesser Vehicle (in terms of the numbers afforded hope of salvation). Mahayana was represented as the completed essence of Buddhism that had been revealed only to the Buddha's spiritually advanced followers. Siddhartha Gautama became a divinity accompanied by a pantheon of buddhas and bodhisattvas in the Mahayana system. The bodhisattva ("Beings of Wisdom") were first conceived as previous incarnations of the Buddha. A later belief was that other Buddhas would follow.
Buddhism teaches that there are three types of perfect beings. These are Buddhas, who perceive the truth and teach it to others; pratyekabuddhas, private Buddhas who perceive the truth but do not share it; and arhats, "worthies" who learned the truth from others and achieved Nirvana. Gradually the idealism of Buddhism was transferred from the arhats to the bodhisattvas, who unselfishly rejected Nirvana to stay in a world of suffering in order to help others. This is the overriding distinction between the Mahayana and the older Hinayana.
Buddha himself was not acting selfishly in passing into Nirvana. Gautama was not human; he was the manifestation of a spiritual being with bodies of Essence, Bliss and Magic Transformation. Only the last came to earth. The body of Essence was identified with Nirvana and became a kind of World Soul. The body of Bliss was an emanation that dwelt forever in Heaven as a sort of supreme deity. It was from northwestern India that Mahayana or Mahayana-style Buddhism was imported into China.
As Buddhism spread from India, it carried Indian culture with it: writing, literature and philosophy as well as religion. But not to China, which already had all of these in a highly developed stage. Furthermore, Buddhism had to compete with mature Chinese systems of religion and philosophy and was often resisted.
At first Buddha was accepted as a demi-god on the order of the Yellow Emperor and Lao Tzu, the philosopher who was believed to have attained immortality. At the time, the Chinese were interested in elixirs conferring immortality and in levitation and other magic experiences. They wanted to know of any contribution that might be made by Buddhism and soon found that the imported religion had a powerful appeal to the intuitive faculties. Early Buddhist missionaries found that the portions of the Buddhist scriptures with prescriptions for magic were of primary interest to the Chinese and translated them.
Subsequently there was a tendency toward metaphysical speculation. Buddhism made good material. Buddhism was reinterpreted in neo-Taoist terms and for a time its Indian origins were all but forgotten. The basic problem in the early days was to make Buddhism palatable to the Chinese and to explain away inconsistencies with extant Chinese practice and belief. One work, The Disposition of Error, attributed to Mou Tzu, is an answer to the polemical writings that were attacking Buddhism in the fifth and sixth centuries. The author took the position that there is no conflict between being a good Chinese and a good Buddhist and claimed that the great truths of Confucianism and Taoism were also those of Buddhism. These are excerpts:
Why is Buddhism not mentioned in the Chinese classics? - "The questioner said: If the way of the Buddha is the greatest and most venerable of ways, why did Yao, Shun, the Duke of Chou and Confucius not practice it? In the seven Classics, one sees no mention of it. You, sir, are fond of the Book of Odes and the Book of History, and you take pleasure in rites and music. Why, then, do you love the way of the Buddha and rejoice in outlandish arts? Can they exceed the Classics and commentaries and beautify the accomplishments of the sages? Permit the liberty, sir, of advising you to reject them.
"Mou Tzu said: All written works need not necessarily be the words of Confucius, and all medicine does not necessarily consist of the formulae of P'ien-ch'ueh (the famous physician). What accords with principle is to be followed, what heals the sick is good. The gentleman-scholar draws widely on all forms of good and thereby benefits his character. Tzu-kung (a disciple of Confucius) said, 'Did the Master have a permanent teacher?' Yao served Yin Shou, Shun served Wu-Ch'eng, the Duke of Chou learned from Lu Wang and Confucius learned from Lao Tzu. And none of these teachers is mentioned in the seven Classics. Although these four teachers were sages, to compare them to the Buddha would be like comparing a white deer to a unicorn, or a swallow to a phoenix. Yao, Shun, the Duke of Chou and Confucius learned even from such teachers as these. How much less, then, may one reject the Buddha, whose distinguishing marks are extraordinary and whose superhuman powers know no bounds! How may one reject him and refuse to learn from him? The records and teachings of the Five Classics do not contain everything. Even if the Buddha is not mentioned in them, what occasion is there for suspicion?"
Why do Buddhist monks do injury to their bodies? (The shaving of the head was distasteful to the Chinese, who followed Confucianist belief that the body is the gift of one's parents and to disfigure it is to be unfilial.) - "The questioner said: The Classic of Filial Piety says, 'Our torso, limbs, hair and skin we receive from our fathers and mothers. We dare not do them injury.' When Tseng Tzu was about to die, he bared his hands and feet. But now the monks shave their heads. How this violates the sayings of the sages and is out of keeping with the way of the filially pious!
"Mou Tzu said: Confucius has said, 'He with whom one may follow a course is not necessarily he with whom one may weigh its merits.' That is what is meant by doing what is best at the time. Furthermore, the Classic of Filial Piety says, 'The kings of yore possessed the ultimate virtue and the essential Way.' T'ai-po cut his hair short and tattooed his body, thus following of his own accord the customs of Wu and Yueh and going against the spirit of the torso, limbs, hair and skin. And yet Confucius praised him, saying that his might well be called the ultimate virtue."
Why do monks not marry? - "The questioner said: Now of felicities, there is none greater than the continuation of one's line, of unfilial conduct there is none worse than childlessness. The monks forsake wife and children, reject property and wealth. Some do not marry all their lives. How opposed this conduct is to felicity and filial piety!
"Mou Tzu said: Wives, children and property are the luxuries of the world, but simple living and inaction are the wonders of the Way. Lao Tzu has said, 'Of reputation and life, which is dearer? Of life and property, which is worth more?' Hsu Yu and Ch'ao-fu dwelt in a tree. Po-i and Shu-ch'i starved in Shou-yang, but Confucius praised their worth, saying, 'They sought to act in accordance with humanity and they succeeded in acting so.' One does not hear of their being ill-spoken of because they were childless and propertyless. The monk practices the Way and substitutes that for the pleasures of disporting himself in the world. He accumulates goodness and wisdom in exchange for the joys of wife and children."
Death and rebirth. (Chinese ancestor worship held that the souls of the deceased had to be offered food and drink. Confucianism accepted the ritual but tended to doubt the existence of spirits and of the soul. Buddhists denied the soul but accepted transmigration. The Chinese thereupon modified Buddhism to project belief in an individual soul that passed from one body to another until the attainment of enlightenment.) "The questioner said: The Buddhists say that after a man dies he will be reborn. I do not believe in the truth of these words.
"Mou Tzu said: The spirit never perishes. Only the body decays. The body is like the roots and leaves of the five grains, the spirit is like the seeds and kernels of the five grains. When the roots and leaves come forth, they inevitably die. But do the seeds and kernels perish? Only the body of one who bas achieved the Way perishes.
"Someone said: If one follows the Way one dies. If one does not follow the Way one dies. What difference is there?
"Mou Tzu said: You are the sort of person who, having not a single day of goodness, yet seeks a lifetime of fame. If one has the Way, even if one dies one's soul goes to an abode of happiness. If one does not have the Way, when one is dead one's soul suffers misfortune."
Why should a Chinese allow himself to be influenced by Indian ways? "The questioner said: Confucius said, 'The barbarians with a ruler are not so good as the Chinese without one.' Mencius criticized Ch'en Hsiang for rejecting his own education to adopt the ways of Hsu Hsing (a foreign teacher), saying, 'I have heard of using what is Chinese to change what is barbarian, but I have never heard of using what is barbarian to change what is Chinese.' You sir, at the age of 20 learned the Way of Yao, Shun, Confucius and the Duke of Chou. But now you have rejected them and instead have taken up the arts of the barbarians. Is this not a great error?
"Mou Tzu said: What Confucius said was meant to rectify the way of the world, and what Mencius said was meant to deplore one-sidedness. Of old, when Confucius was thinking of taking residence among the nine barbarian nations, he said, 'If a gentleman-scholar dwells in their midst, what baseness can there be among them?' The Commentary says, 'The north polar star is in the center of heaven and to the north of man.' From this one can see that the land of China is not necessarily situated under the center of heaven. According to the Buddhist scriptures, above, below and all around, all beings containing blood belong to the Buddha-clan. Therefore I revere and study these scriptures. Why should I reject the Way of Yao, Shun, Confucius and the Duke of Chou? Gold and jade do not harm each other. You say that another is in error when it is you yourself who err."
Why must a monk renounce worldly pleasures. - "The questioner said: Of those who live in the world, there is none who does not love wealth and position and hate poverty and baseness, none who does not enjoy pleasure and idleness and shrink from labor and fatigue. But now the monks wear red cloth, they eat one meal a day, they bottle up the six emotions and thus they live out their lives. What value is there in such an existence?
"Mou Tzu said: Wealth and rank are what man desires but if he cannot obtain them in a moral way, he should not enjoy them. Poverty and meanness are what man hates, but if he can only avoid them by departing from the Way, he should not avoid them. Lao Tzu has said, 'The five colors make men's eyes blind, the five sounds make men's ears deaf, the five flavors dull the palate, chasing about and hunting make men's minds mad, possessions difficult to acquire bring men's conduct to an impasse. The sage acts for his belly, not for his eyes.' Can these words possibly be vain? Liuhsia-Hui would not exchange his way of life for the rank of the three highest princes of the realm. Tuankan Mu would not exchange his for the wealth of Prince Wen of Wei. All of them followed their ideas and cared for nothing more. Is there no value in such an existence?"
Why does Mou Tzu support his contentions for secular rather than Buddhist literature? - "The questioner said: You, sir, say that the scriptures are like the rivers and the sea, their phrases like brocade and embroidery. Why, then, do you not draw on the Buddhist scriptures to answer my questions? Why instead do you refer to the book of Odes and History, joining together things that are different to make them appear the same?
"Mou Tzu said: I have quoted those things, sir, which I knew you would understand. Had I preached the words of the Buddhist scriptures or discussed the essence of non-action, it would have been like speaking to a blind man of the five colors or playing the five sounds to a deaf man."
Why does Buddhism have no doctrine of immortality. - "The questioner said: The Taoists say that Yao, Shun, the Duke of Chou and Confucius and his 72 disciples did not die but became immortals. The Buddhists say that men must all die and that none can escape. What does this mean?
"Mou Tzu said: Talk of immortality is superstitious and unfounded; it is not the word of the sages. Lao Tzu says, 'Even Heaven and earth cannot be eternal. How much the less can man!' Confucius says, 'The wise man leaves the world but humanity and filial piety last forever.' I have observed the six arts and examined the commentaries and records. According to them, Yao died, Shun had his death place at Mt. Ts'ang-wu, Yu has his tomb on K'uai-chi, Po-i and Shu-ch'i have their grave in Shou-yang. King Wen died before he could chastise Chou, King Wu died without waiting for King Ch'eng to grow up. We read of the Duke of Chou that he was reburied, and Confucius dreamed of two pillars shortly before his death. As for the disciples of Confucius, Po-yu died before his father; of Tzu Lu it is said that the flesh was chopped up and pickled. Of the fatal illness of Po-niu, the Master said, 'It must be fate,' while of Tseng Shen we read that he bared his feet before death. And of Yen Yuan the Master said, 'Unfortunately, he was short-lived and likened him to a bud that never bloomed'. All of these things are clearly recorded in the Classics; they are the absolute words of the sages. I make the Classics and the commentaries my authority and find my proof in the world of men. To speak of immortality, is this not a great error?"
Buddhist monks knelt at religious ceremonies but not to kings and emperors. At first this was of little consequence. Only a few monks were likely to meet the emperor and they might be excused from prostrating themselves because they were foreigners with other customs. But as Chinese took over as Buddhist clerics, the disinclination to bow down to temporal authority became serious. Huan Hsuan (369-404), who had temporarily usurped the throne, referred the problem to Hui-yuan, one of the outstanding monks of the time, for a decision. Hui-yuan replied that while Buddhist laymen were obliged to acknowledge their loyalty and respect for the sovereign in the usual ways, the Buddhist clergy had removed itself from the life and the goals of ordinary men and therefore should not be required to make the usual obeisance. Huan Hsuan accepted the argument and decreed that monks did not need to bow to the emperor. Hui-yuan then composed a treatise on the subject. These are excerpts:
Buddhism in the household. - "If one examines the broad essentials of what the teachings of Buddha preach, one will see that they distinguish between those who leave the household life and those who remain in it. Those who remain within the household life and those who leave it are, in all, of four kinds. In propagating the doctrine and reaching the beings, their achievement is equal to that of emperors and kings, their transfiguring effect greater than that of the way of government. When it comes to affecting members and enlightening the times, there is no age that is without them. But, as chance has it, they sometimes function and sometimes conceal themselves, retiring or making their appearance as the faith diminishes or prospers.
"Those who revere the Buddhist laws but remain in their homes are subjects who are obedient to the transforming powers (of temporal rulers). Their feelings have not changed from the customary, and their course of conduct conforms to the secular world. Therefore, this way of life includes the affection of natural kinship and the proprieties of obedience to authority. Decorum and reverence have their basis herein, and thus they form the basis of the doctrine. That on which they are based has its merit in the past. Thus, on the basis of intimacy it teaches love, and causes the people to appreciate natural kindness; on the basis of austerity it teaches veneration, and causes the people to understand natural respect. The achievement of these two effects derives from an invisible cause. Since the cause is not in the present, one must trace it to its source. Therefore the doctrine makes a punishment of sinful karma, causing one to be fearful and thus circumspect; it makes a reward of the heavenly palaces, causing one to be joyous and then to act. These are the retributions that follow like shadows and echoes, and that are clearly stated in the doctrine. Thus obedience is made the common rule and the natural way is not changed.
"Hence one may not benefit by the ruler's virtue and neglect propriety, bask in his kindness and cast aside due respect. Therefore they who rejoice in the ways of Shakya invariably first serve their parents and respect their lords. They who change their way of life and throw away their hair ornaments must always await their parents' command, then act accordingly. If their lords and parents have doubts, then they retire, inquire of their wishes and wait until the lords and parents are enlightened. This, then, is how the teaching of Buddha honors life-giving and assists transformation in the way of government."
Buddhism outside the household. - "He who has left the household life is a lodger beyond the earthly world, and his ways are cut off from those of other beings. The doctrine by which he lives enables him to understand that woes and impediments come from having a body, and that by not maintaining the body one terminate the woe.
"If the termination of woe does not depend on the maintenance of the body, then he does not treasure the benefits that foster life. This is something in which the principle runs counter to physical form and the Way is opposed to common practice. Such men as these commence the fulfillment of their vows with the putting away of ornaments of the head (shaving the head) and realize the achievements of their ideal with the changing of their garb. Since they have changed their way of life, their garb and distinguishing marks cannot conform to the secular pattern. Afar they reach to the ford of the Three Vehicles (postponing enlightenment to help others move toward salvation, attaining enlightenment through personal effort in an age in which there is no Buddha and attaining enlightenment by listening to the preaching of the Buddha), broadly they open up the Way of Heaven and man. If one of them be allowed to fulfill his virtue, then the Way spreads to the six relations and beneficence flows out to the whole world. Although they do not occupy the positions of kings and princes, yet, fully in harmony with the imperial ultimate, they let the people be. Therefore, though inwardly they may run counter to the gravity of natural relationships, yet they do not violate filial piety, though outwardly they lack respect in serving the sovereign, yet they do not lose hold of reverence."
He who seeks the first principle is not obedient to change. -"Question: If we examine Lao Tzu's meaning, we see that for him Heaven and earth are great because of their attainment of the One; kings and princes are honored because they embody obedience. Heaven and earth have attained the one; therefore they have the power of moving others to obey. Thus the clarification of the First Principle must of necessity reside in the embodiment of the Ultimate, and the embodiment of the Ultimate must of necessity depend upon obedience to change. Therefore, the wise men of yore made this the subject of noble discourses, and from this the opinion of the multitude may not differ. If one differs with the opinion of the multitude, one's principles have nothing worth accepting. And yet you speak of not obeying change. Why?
"Answer: In general, those who reside within the limits of ordinary existence receive life from the Great Change. Although the numerous varieties of things have a myriad of differences and subtle and gross are of different lineage, if one reduces them to their ultimate, there are only the soulful and the soulless. The soulful have a feeling toward change. The soulless have no feeling toward change. If there is no feeling toward change, when change ends, life is finished. Their life does not depend upon feeling. Therefore the form decays and change ceases. If there is feeling toward change, the feeling person reacts to things and moves. Motion must depend upon feeling; therefore life does not cease. If life does not cease, the change is ever more far-reaching and the physical forms pile up more and more. The feelings are more of a handicap and encumbrances more weighty. The woes are indescribable. Therefore the scriptures say that Nirvana is changeless, making the cessation of change its home, while the three worlds are in flux, making sin and pain their place. When change is exhausted, then causes and conditions cease forever; when there if flux, then suffering of pain has no limit. How can we prove that this is so? Life is fettered by physical form and life depends upon change. When there is change and feelings react, then the spirit is barred from its source and the intellect is blinded through its own illumination. If one is thus shut up as in a hard shell, then what is preserved is only the self, and what is traversed is only the state of flux. Thereupon the bridle of the spirit loses its driver and the road to rebirth is reopened daily. One pursues lust in the long stream of time; is one affected thus only once? Therefore he who returns to the source and seeks the First Principle does not encumber his spirit with life. He who breaks out of the grimy shell does not encumber his life with feelings. If one does not encumber one's spirit with life, then one's spirit can be made subtle. The subtle spirit transcending sense-objects - that is what is meant by Nirvana. The name Nirvana, can it possibly be an empty appellation? I beg leave to extend this argument and so prove its truth. Heaven and earth, though they are great because they give life to living beings, cannot cause a living being not to die. Kings and princes, though they have the power of preserving existence, cannot cause a preserved creature to be without woe. Therefore in our previous discussion we have said, 'He who has left the household life understands that woes and impediments come from having a body, and that by not maintaining the body one terminates woe. He knows that continued life comes from undergoing change, and by not obeying this change he seeks the First Principle.' Herein lay our meaning. This is why the monk refuses homage to the emperor and keeps his own works sublime, why he is not ranked with kings or princes and yet basks in their kindness."
When the physical form is exhausted, the spirit does not perish. (As already indicated, early Buddhism denied the soul. But the Chinese did not accept this. Their own religious beliefs were to the contrary. Besides, Buddhism preaches reincarnation, and to the pragmatic Chinese this was not possible without a soul. Some Chinese took an opposite view, however, including Confucian rationalists and naturalistic Taoists.) "Question: The receipt of spirit is limited to one life. When the life is "exhausted, the breath evaporates and it is the same as nothing. The spirit, though it is more subtle than matter, is still a transformed manifestation of the yin and yang. When they have been transformed there is life; when they are transformed again there is death. When they come together there is a beginning; when they disperse there is an end. If one reasons from this, one must know that the spirit and the body are transformed together and that originally they are the same line. The subtle and the gross are one breath, and from beginning to end, they have the same abode. While the abode is whole, the breath comes together and there is a spirit; when the abode crumbles, the breath disperses and the light goes out. When it disperses, it returns what it has received to the Great Origin. When it has perished, it returns to a state of nothingness. Return and termination are natural destinies. Who could create them? Also, the spirit resides in the body as fire is in the wood. While the body lives the spirit exists, but when the body crumbles the spirit must perish. When the body departs the soul disperses and has no dwelling. When the tree rots the fire dies out and has nothing to attach to. That is the principle. Even if the matter of sameness and difference were obscure and difficult to clarify, the doctrine of being and nonbeing must rest in coming together and dispersion. Coming together and dispersion is the general term for the change of the breath; it is the birth and death of the myriad changes.
"Answer: What is the spirit? It is subtlety that has reached the extreme and become immaterial. The extreme of subtlety cannot be charted by the trigrams and explanations (of the Book of Changes). Therefore, the sage calls it 'more subtle than matter' and so names it.
"The spirit is in perfect accord and has no creator; it is subtle to the extreme and has no name. In response to beings it moves, borrowing an individual lot (the life of an individual person) it acts. It responds to things but it is not a thing; therefore, though the things may change, it does not perish. It borrows a lot in life but it is not itself that lot; therefore, though the lot be run out, it does not end. Having feelings, it can respond to things; having intelligence, it can be found in allotted destinies. There are subtle and gross destinies and therefore the nature of each is different. There are bright and dull intellects and therefore their understand is not always the same. If one reasons from this, then one knows that change is felt by the feelings, and that the spirit is transmitted through change. Feelings are the mother of change, and the spirit is the root of the feelings. The feelings have a way of uniting with physical things, and the spirit has the power of moving imperceptibly. But a person of penetrating perception returns to the Source, while one who is lost in the principle merely runs after physical things (meaning that the enlightened attain Nirvana and the non-enlightened endure endless reincarnation).
"Feelings and things possessing a destined lot and the changes they occasion have no bounds. Causes and conditions closely interlock and imperceptibly transmit and transfer. Were it not for those of penetrating vision, who would know of their transformations and who would know of their coming together? I beg leave to prove it for your sake, my worthy opponent, by recourse to fact. The passage of fire to firewood is like the passage of the soul to the body. The passage of fire to different firewood is like the passage of the soul to a new body. If the former firewood is not the latter firewood, then we know that the way in which the finger exhausts its duty is past comprehension. (This is reference to the statement in Chuang Tzu that: 'If the finger fulfills its duty in adding firewood, then the transmission of the fire knows no exhaustion.' This is interpreted to mean that the soul is like the fire, moving from one body to another.) If the former body is not the latter body, then one understands that the interaction of the feelings and the individual destiny is profound. The person in error, seeing the body wither in one life, thinks that the spirit and the feelings perish with it. It is as if one were to see the fire die out in one piece of wood and say that all fire had been exhausted for all time."