The "Latter Days of the Law" Ideology among Chinese Pure Land Buddhist Proponents: The Case of Tao-ch'o and Ching-ying Hui-yüan

(1)

Chinese Pure Land Buddhist Proponents:

The Case of Tao-ch’o and Ching-ying Hui-yiian

K

enneth k

. T

anaka

M

theODERN arrivalscholars of the have long“latter days pointed of the out the close connection betweenLaw” (Ch. mo-fci, Jp. mappd andthe emergenceof Pure Land Buddhism in Chinaas well as in Japan. For

example, Jan Nattier, in her work, Once Upon a Future Time: Studies in a

Buddhist ProphecyofDecline, speaks of“dispensationalism,” wherein the conditionsare believed no longer possible to carry out earlier practices, thus

calling for an entirely newform ofpractice. Shethen goes onto citeTao-ch’o 1W (562-645) of China, along with Honen (1133-1212) of Japan as

prime examplesof those who based their formulations of new religious ideas

andpractices on thearrival of mo-fa.1

1 Nattier 1991, p. 138.

2 For a detailed treatment in English on Tao-ch’o, see Chappell 1996.

3 For a detailed treatment in English on Hui-yiian’s Pure Land thought, see Tanaka 1991. In this essay, I wish to concentrate ontwo sixth-century Chinese figures

who contributed to theemergence and growth ofPure Land thoughtandprac

tice in China: Tao-ch’o,2 3 alluded to above, and Ching-ying Hui-yiian

S (523-592)? Hui-yiian was older,and they sharedtwenty-seven years dur ing the second half ofthe sixth century. At that time,interestinmo-fa ideol ogy was perhaps at its highest,coinciding with thepublication of Hui-ssu’s ttlg(515-577)essay on mo-fa in558,theNan-yiieh Ssu tach ’an-shih li

(2)

shih-yuan wen Hui-ssu’s text contained the first detailed discussion of the threeperiods of “truedharma” (cheng-fa lEfe),“semblance of the truedharma” (hisang-fa and“latter daysofthe dharma.”

Given the above background, I shall seek inthis shortessayto: 1) Examine the nature of Tao-ch’o’s argument forregarding the

Pure Land path as the most appropriatepath in the mo-fa period.

2) DescribeHui-yiian’s understandingregarding themo-fa doctrine

and related attitudes.

3)Suggestreevaluatingthe dominant modern understandingof the role of mo-fa in the development of Chinese Pure Land Bud dhism.

Tao-ch ’o and his An-lochi

Tao-ch’o’s arguments in his An-lo chi (ACollection of Passageson [Rebirthin the Realmof] Peace and Bliss) are found under the third of the Great Questions,where there are five topics, the third ofwhich is concerned

with thecondition ofsentient beings that transmigrateendlessly throughthe Three Realms andFive Destinies. And there are five furthertopics in refer

encetothis point,and in regard tothe fifth of thefive topics a questioner asks

the following:

Fifthly, a questioner asks, “All sentient beings possess

Buddha-nature, and they should have met up with many Buddhas since immemorial past. Why is it that they have notbeen ableto exit on

their ownfrom the burning house of the cycle of birth and death.” I shall answer asfollows. “According to thesacredteachings of Mahayana, there are two kinds of superior teachings to exit the

cycleofbirth and death.Without themonecannot exit thisburning house. What are the two? They are theteachings of (1) the sagely

path and (2) the birthin the PureLand. Of the two, it isdifficult in

thisageto attain enlightenment through the sagely path. This is due

to the fact that (1) the GreatSage (Sakyamuni) is long gone, and (2) the teachings aretoo deep for peopletounderstand fully. Con sequently, the Ta-chih yiieh-tsangching (Sutra on the

Great Collection of the MoonStorehouse)states:

(3)

Inour Last Period of the Dharma(mo-_/h), millions of people gen eratepractice and cultivate the path, yetnone has attained enlight enment. Thisperiodis, indeed, theLast Period of the Dharma, and

theworld of theFiveCorruptions.However, there isthe Pure Land gate, which is the only road for entering enlightenment. Hence, it

statesin the LargerPure Land Sutra (Ta-ching dkg):5

5 There are five extant Chinese versions of this sutra; the one that is most often referred to is the Wu-liang-shou ching Taisho no. 360.

6 Taisho no. 1958, p. 13c.

If a beingwho has committed evil all through one’s liferecites my name at leasttentimes at the endof his life and does not attain birth (inthe Pure Land),thenI shallnot become enlightened.6

What I have just cited from Tao-ch’o’s An-lo chi contains a number of extremely interesting points related to our topic. In reiterating them, theycan be summarizedas follows:

1) The questioner inquires about a dilemma, where beings have

Buddha-nature and have met up with Buddhas, yet they are still not enlightened.

2) Tao-ch’o acknowledges two paths, the sagely andthePure Land

paths.

3) Thesagely path is difficult on twogrounds. Buddha Sakyamuni

is no longer in the world and the teachings are too difficult for peopleto fully comprehend.

4) Millions practice, yet none has attained enlightenment on ac

countof being in the Last Periodof the Dharma, mo-fa andinthe

world ofFive Corruptions.

5)ThePure Landpath is theonlyone for enlightenment.

6) Evena transgressor can be reborn in the Pure Land by reciting the nameat leastten times.

These are all extremely interesting points in understanding the factors in

volved in the development of the Pure Land tradition, but giventhe aim of

this essay, I would like tofocuson the last point,which then, in effect, would indirectlythrow light upon someof the other points.

In discussing the last point, allow me to re-readthe relevant passage from

(4)

Ifabeing who has committed evil allthroughone’s life recites my name at least ten times at theendof his life anddoesnotattain birth (inthe Pure Land), thenI shall not become enlightened.

Now,modemscholarshipis inbasic agreement that the popularization of Pure

Land teachings and practice was, in greatmeasure,broughtabout by the sim plificationof practice in the form oforal recitation ofthe name,nien-fotadA, which was pronounced, “Na-wuO-mi-t’oFo” S Tao-ch’o,in par ticular, advocatedoralrecitation, attimes resorting to the use ofsmallbeans

to count thenumberof recitations. From his temple,Hsiian-chung ssu

this form of Pure Land Buddhism spread widely,particularly in theNorthern provinces ofShansi lLiBand Shensi

In order for recitation to be an effectivesoteriological means, the seeker

mustaccess the Other PowerofAmitabha. Inotherwords, simplificationof practice on the seeker’s part requires the working of an efficient cause that

lies beyond the seeker. In the Pure Landteachings, this is expressedas the

guarantee of Amitabha’s vowtosave all who meet the conditions.

However, prior to Tao-ch’o, no one sutra taught both of these points to

gether, i.e.,Amitabha’s vow and oral recitation. TheLargerPure LandSutra

includes the vows thatpromise to lead seekersto the Pure Land and to eventual enlightenment, but nothingon oral recitation. On the other hand, theKuan wu-liang-shou ching (henceforth Visualization Sutra)* offers oral

recitation as means for birth in the Pure Landfor those without any other recourse,but thereis noextensive mention of the vows.

Thus, herein lies the significance of Tao-ch’o’s sutra citation, for it con stitutes an amalgamation of these twoideas expressed inthe 18th vow ofthe

Larger Pure Land Sutraand in the section onthe lowest ofthe lowcategory

of beings bom inthePure Land found inthe VisualizationSutra. There is no passage in theLarger Sutrathatcontains both of these doctrinal points as Tao-ch’o claims.

Hence, it appears that in lightof the dire spiritual circumstances brought

on by the arrivalof mo-fa,Tao-ch’o engaged in a “creative juxtaposition”of two separate teachings from twodisparate sutras in order toauthenticate the

practice of oralrecitation.

This wouldhavea significant influence on the development ofatleastone

stream ofPure Land thought andpractice in China. Several decades laterin

7 Chappell 1996, pp. 152-9. 8 Taisho no. 365.

(5)

the mid-sixth century, one ofTao-cho’s disciples, Shan-tao (613-681), emerged as a highly respected and successful propagator of Pure Land

Buddhism in thecapitalofCh’ang-an Shan-tao clearly interpreted

nien-fo as “voicingorrecitingthe name,”thus breaking with the original meaning

of “contemplation” or “recollection.” This can allbe seen asan outcome of Tao-ch’o’s earlier success in offering and legitimizing a simplifiedformof

practicein keeping withthetimes.

Ching-ying Hui-yiian

In turning to the other figure in this essay, Ching-ying Hui-yiian,we need, first ofall, to notethatthis Hui-yiian differs from Lu-shan Hui-yiian fitiJLitt S (334-416), who livedsome 150years earlierandis traditionally known as one of theearliestpractitioners of the Pure Land way. His prominence is asso ciatedwith his founding of what later came to be named the “White Lotus

Association,” a coterie of 123 lay and clerical discipleswho madea collec tive vow to be reborn in the PureLand together.9

9 Taisho no. 2059, p. 358c. 10 Taisho no. 1749.

Our Hui-yiianof Ching-ying Monastery was an exegete, a lecturer of the highest caliber, andan ecclesiastic leaderof distinguished prominencewithin the Buddhist communityfromthe latterpartof the Northern Ch’i period (550-577)to his death in 592 in theearly years of theSui period (581-618). Hui-yiian’sgreatest contribution toPure LandBuddhismlies in the com pilation ofa commentary to the Visualization Sutra, Kuan wu-liang-shou

ching i-shu KlttSwSi(Commentary on the Sutra of Visualization on the Buddha of Immeasurable Life, henceforth, Commentary).10 TheCommentary is the oldest extant commentary ofthis sutra, which played asignificant role in the doctrinal development of PureLand Buddhism in China. Throughhis commentary, he successfully transformed this sutraintoa legitimate object

of study among the scholastics of the late sixth century and earlyT’ang W period. Although most scholars havecredited this achievement to Shan-tao, it is Hui-yiianwho was responsible for “authenticating” the Pure Landteach ings within thebroaderBuddhistcommunity. Hui-yiian accomplishedthisby constructingan acceptable doctrinal framework thatplaced theteachings of the Visualization Sutra within a broader Mahayana doctrinal context. The

Commentary exerted asubstantial and enduring influence onmany of thelater

(6)

also on those attributed to such eminentfigures as T’ien-tai Chih-i

(538-597) and Chi-tsang (549-623).11 12

11 See Tanaka 1991, pp. 45, 108-10.

12 He noted, “Here, this Visualization Sutra [which is being commented upon] received its title on the basis of the ‘person’ and of the Dharma.” Taisho no. 1749, p. 4a.

13 Taisho no. 1749, pp. 182c-3b. 14 Taisho no. 2103, p. 153c.

Tao-ch’o’s An-lo chi was also meant to be a commentary on the

Visualization Sutra,n which means Ta-ch’o and Hui-ytian wrote commen

taries on the same sutra. As we saw earlier in his An-lo chi, Tao-ch’o’s pro motionof the oral recitation of the name of Amitabha signaled for him the

recognition of the arrival ofmo-fa. The question that now begs askingis, how

wasthis regarded by Hui-yiian?

In stating the conclusion ofmy findings atthe outset,I have not foundany senseof alarmoverthe arrival ofmo-fa. In fact, there is noevidence that mo-

fa played any role in Hui-yiian’s understanding of the Pure Land sutras. With regard to practice,contrary to general understanding among modem scholars,

it turns out thatHui-yiian had recognized oral recitation among aformal list

ofpractices forrebirthin the PureLand called the “Four Causes.” The four are 1) the cultivationofvisualization (hsiu-kuan tfg), 2) the cultivation of acts (hsiu-yehliflt), 3) the cultivation of mind(hsiu-hsin{(E>L')> and4)devo

tion (h/ez-Tzszang !ffi(nj). The oral recitation is found listed under the fourth cause, which includes contemplation (men ^), worship (Zz |L), praise fan

andrecitation ofhis(Amitabha’s) name (c/z ’eng-ch ’i-mingST'M^S).13

As isevident here, Hui-yiian, unlike Tao-ch’o, did not accordoral recita

tion a privilegedstatus as the onlylegitimate practice. ForHui-ytian, recita tion wasonlyonepath among many for realizing rebirth.

This finding in the doctrinal arena can be corroborated by Hui-yiian’s

actionsand attitudes in his personal life, for thereis noevidenceof any spe cialdispensation or acquiescence to lowered expectationsin light ofmo-fa. I

believethis was apparent in theway heconductedhimselfduring the Buddhist persecution atthe hands of EmperorWu of Northern Chou.

In the second year of Ch’en-kuang (577),Empeor Wu invaded Northern Ch’iand instigated a severepersecution ofBuddhists in the newly-conquered

territory. Accordingto the Kuan hung-mingchi thedevastatingCh’i

repression effected the confiscation of40,000 temples by the imperial and aristocratic families, the laicizationofthree million monks andtheconscrip

tion of many others into military service. Buddhist images were burned, and

(7)

At the outset of this persecution in Northern Ch’i, Emperor Wu ordered

over 500 ofthesanghaelders to gather. EmperorWu himself thenascended the throne toproclaim his newpolicytowardreligion. He gave three reasons

forabolishing Buddhism. First, Buddhists had built monasteries and stupas

in flagrant violation ofBuddhism’s own claim that true Buddhas wereform

less. Second, building temples was wasteful, for it unnecessarily burdened people who, out of ignorance, contributed to theendeavor. Third, the renun ciation by Buddhist monks of the ordinaryhouseholder’s wayof life con

flicted with the practiceof filial piety.15

15 Ibid., p. 153a. 16 Ibid., p. 153b.

17 Hsil kao-seng chuan ifSiSle'E, Taisho no. 2060, p. 490c. 18 Ibid.

The proclamation stunned the monks, includingthe Buddhist ecclesiastic head, but they were unable torefute the Emperor’s accusations and instead turnedpale and wept in silence. At this point, Hui-yiian became convinced thatsilence would only confirmthe truth of Emperor Wu’s contention, and he decided to refute the Emperor. His outspoken defense of Buddhism’s legitimacy and right toexist in China was so effective that the Emperor was silenced on several occasions. Hui-yiian retained the offensive throughout most of the debate andatone point even threatened the Emperor with rebirth in hell.16

Thisinfuriated the NorthernChou soldiers in the hall so greatly that they threatened to crush and boil Hui-yiian’s bones. In contrast, his fellow

Buddhist monks, whohad remained silent throughthe debate, came over to

Hui-yiian to express their gratitude for standing up to Emperor Wu.17 Hui-yiian responded that the truthneededto be defended even at the sac

rifice of his own life. Hui-yiian then offeredthat thepersecution wasa sign ofthe times but that the Dharma would not perish; andhe admonishedthem not tomourn thestateof affairs. Hisown wordswere asfollows:

Truthmustbe expressed. How can I be concerned aboutmy own

life! . . . Such is thefate of the time! But even the Sage(Emperor) cannotbanishthe [Dharma].The fact that we cannot presently serve the [Dharma] is a great regret. The Dharma, however, is truly indestructible. Oh Venerables, please understandthis, andIask that

(8)

Fromhis words, wedo not get any sense of resignation or compromise on Hui-yiian’s part;instead, he seems emboldenedby the challenges that theper secution presented him.

One can, perhaps, make the argument that Hui-yiian was not a Pure Land

proponent in the strict sense, for his writings spanned a wide range of doctri

nal traditions that included the works from the Ti-lun lineage to the

NirvanaSutra and to the well-knowntreatise, Ta-ch ’eng chi ’i-hsin lun SBm(Awakening of theMahayana Faith). While there may besome basis

forthat argument, ithas nevertheless been noted thathis influence on thePure Land commentarial traditionwas enormous.

Other PureLand Writings

Similar lack of referenceto mo-fa ideology can be seenin other PureLand

writings in the mid-seventh century, written within sixty years after

Hui-yiian’s death and during the periodin whichthe Pure Land doctrine gained ascendancy. A case in point is the Ching-t’u lun (Pure Land Treatise)

by Chia-ts’ai (ca.seventh century), in which he defends Pure Landteach

ings against the proponents of the Maitreya cult and its belief in Tushita Heaven. Chia-ts’ai’s argumentsfor the superiority of the PureLand include thefollowing:

1) The Sukhavati Pure Land is superior to Maitreya’s Tushita Heaven because itisbeyondthe present world, the Saha Realm.

2) Whereas a life span in the Sukhavati is limitless like that of the Buddhas and transcends samsara, a lifespanin Tushita lasts only 4,000 years,at theend of which one is forcedback intothestream

of samsara.

3) The SukhavatiPureLand is a realmof non-retrogression,with

assurances of attainmentof Buddhahood and noretrogression to the lower levels on the cultivationalMarga path, butthe same is not true inTushita Heaven.19

Chia-ts’ai,thus, makes no mentionof mo-fa in arguing the appropriateness of the Pure Land teaching.Instead, his arguments rested primarily on thetran scendent quality of the Pure Land in relation to our Saha Realm. This was

seen to be a clearadvantage over Maitreya’s Tushita Heaven, which Chia-ts’airegarded asbeing too proximateto and too muchlike the Saha Realm.

(9)

The Ching-t’ulunalsoincludes one ofthe earliestsurviving setsof “birth

legends” (wang-sheng chuan which are recordingsof people gaining

birth in the PureLand at the moment of their death. The descriptions found in these legends normallyfit arather standardized pattern. They include the person’s name, his or herbackground, aspiration, and encounter with avir tuous friend or teacher whoshowed theway; adescription of thepractice; and a description of the last momentsas the person gainedbirth in thePure Land. The Ching-t’u lun contains twenty such legends,fourteen ofwhich are of five

monks, one nun, three laymen and five laywomen from thepost-Sui period

from areas in whichTao-ch’o was active.20Given this close connectionwith

Tao-ch’o, one would expect some reference to their concern with mo-fa, but

there is no such reference that I was able to find in theserecordings. This fur therstrengthens the suggestion that the mo-fa doctrine or outlookmay not

haveplayed as greata role as normally thoughteven among the Pure Land

practitioners associatedwith Tao-ch’o.

20 For more details of this genre of literature in Chinese Buddhism, see Lai 1996.

Reassessment

This absence of argumentsbased on mo-fa appliesto other Pure Land writ ings through the T’angperiod, forcingus, in my view, to reassess the com monly held notionthat the arrival of mo-fa was theprimary factor for the

emergenceof Pure LandBuddhism inChina.

Ishould qualify that statementby notingthatI would not deny theimpor

tance of mo-fa whenconsideringTao-ch’o and Shan-tao, aswe have seen.

However, it wasjust one strand, albeit an important one, within a much broader PureLand development in China.It wasthe Tao-ch’o andShan-tao line of Pure Land proponents whowere elevated to patriarchal status within

Japanese PureLand schools of the Kamakura period initiated by Honen and his disciples suchas Shinran, for whom mo-fa ormappoplayed a far more critical role.

Ifyourecall, at the beginning of this paper,Jan Nattier in her work treated

Tao-ch’o and Honen togetheras examples ofPure Land Buddhistproponents

who werespurred on by the mo-fa doctrine. In treating them together as is

often done, there isa tendency,Ibelieve, to give a greaterrole tothe mo-fa

doctrine than itdeserves in therise of PureLand Buddhism in China. I believe it is correct to say that the mo-fa or mappo doctrine played anundeniably

(10)

significantrole in theKamakuraPureLand movement in Japan, but thesame cannotbe easilysaid in regard to China.

Whilenot denyingthe importance of the mo-fa argumentfor a particular

lineage of Pure Land Buddhism representedby Tao-ch’o and Shan-tao, we must be muchmore careful inapplying thatassessment to a much broader

stream of Pure LandBuddhism in Chinaas evidenced bythe commentarial tradition represented by Hui-yiian as well as the apologetic writings of the early T’ang periodrepresented by Chia-ts’ai’s Ching-t’u lun, in which the

mo-faargumentwasabsent.

REFERENCES

Chappell, David W. 1996. “The Formation of the Pure Land Movement in China: Tao-ch’o and Shan-tao.” In The Pure Land Tradition: History and Development. Edited by James Foard, Michael Solomon, and Richard Payne. Berkeley: Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series. Lai, Whalen. 1996. “Legends of Births and the Pure Land Tradition in China,” In The Pure

Land Tradition: History and Development. Edited by James Foard et al.

Nattier, Jan. 1991. Once Upon a Future Time: Studies in a Buddhist Prophecy of Decline. Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press.

Tanaka, Kenneth K. 1991. The Dawn of Chinese Pure Land Doctrine: Ching-ying Hui-yiian's Commentary to the Pure Land Visualization Sutra. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New