Buddha-dharma
teaches us not to hate and not to be destructive with our
thoughts, words
or actions. Buddhism teaches us to establish a sublime
and virtuous ideal,
to be firm with ourselves, and to practice
self-improvement. It teaches us
to do good deeds for the benefit of
others and to have patience. It also encourages
us to be sympathetic
towards the wicked. Do not despise those in error but
endeavour to
assist their sublimation of that error. Gradually exert your
benign
influence upon them so that the salutary inclination towards virtuous
fulfilment may grow in their minds.
Appreciating
the verity and sheer beauty of this ideal enables us to
understand why the
Buddha wanted us "not to slight the unlearned" and
"not to
slight those who offend us." Everybody can attain Buddhahood.
Those who
are ignorant and confused may learn and gradually become more
and more learned
and virtuous. Those who commit offences against the
precepts and rules may
confess and gradually accomplish more skilful
moral behaviour. With such ideas
in mind we can have sincere
friendships with other people, and not just take
advantage of them. We
should sow true kindness containing no seed of war.
Consider yourselves
to be equal to others. Never consider yourself superior.
With
dedication towards these ideas we can increase our compassion for
others and
strengthen our determination to save all. We can cultivate
our wisdom towards
non-self (viz. "anatta" the Buddha's teaching
concerning the unreality
of ego) and help Buddhahood ripen within us by
practicing the perfections
of the Bodhisattva. If we can extend this
ideal and practice it well we will
enter a period of mutual
understanding, mutual trust, mutual help and enjoyment
of great peace
and happiness together.
Bodhisattva
Sadaparibhuta used to say, "I would never slight you, you
shall all be
Buddhas." This is a saying of everlasting and perfect
truth. With this
saying I began and with this saying I shall end. This
is a special offering
to all of you today.
Translated
by Chai Gao Mao, edited by Mick Kiddle, proofread by Neng
Rong.(20-6-1995)
The Position of the Chinese Tripitaka in World Buddhism
The
main objective of the World Buddhist Fellowship is to link the
various schools
of Buddhism, coming as they do from all over the world.
This communion can
be accomplished by harmonious co-operation on the
basis of spiritual sharing.
As a global community we can then actualize
the inspiring ideals of world
enlightenment and salvation through the
encouragement of our common Buddhist
culture.
We
must first acknowledge that the various schools of thought in
Buddhism are
indeed facets of the Triple Gem that is Buddhism. There is
no room for superficial
and dogmatic claims that one school is true
whereas others are not. For instance
the Mahayana schools should not be
lightly dismissed as illegitimate, nor
should the Sravakavana school
conversely be despised as moribund. Only when
the study and practice of
Buddhism is carried out in a friendly and accommodating
atmosphere,
with mutual trust and understanding, will co-ordination and
co-operation be possible. With this attitude, the trash and trimmings
now
enshrouding Buddhism can be removed to reveal the essential
splendor of the
Triple Gem. Thus Buddhism, which is well-adapted to
this modern world, can
be redeemed and developed for the purpose of the
enlightenment and salvation
of the world in its dire present need.
Buddhism
stems from one point of origin and is highly adaptable under
many circumstances.
For different races, time and environments it seems
to develop into entirely
different shapes and forms. But a close study
of its trends and modes of development,
its adaptations to new
environments whilst preserving the integral identity
of its core,
brings one to the realisation that the different forms of Buddhism
are
interrelated and that cooperation amongst them is entirely feasible.
Generally, each school has its own characteristics and shortcomings.
Buddhists
should honestly survey these various schools, exchanging the
shortcomings
in each for the strengths in others on the basis of
equality, and for the
sake of pursuing truth. In so doing, the ultimate
truth as experienced by
the Buddha may be realized and his original
intention, as embodied in his
teaching, may be fully understood.
When
we trace the different schools of Buddhism in the world today from
their origins
in India we can see that the profile sprouting of
sectarian Buddhism seems
to have taken place as follows:
(1)
The sacred texts embodying the Buddha-dharma developed over time.
The sutras
and Vinaya Pitaka were the earliest to be compiled and
circulated. Round about
the beginning of the first century A.D., the
researchers of the Agama Sutra
and those dedicated to Sravaka practice
had compiled the Abhidharma, emphasising
the existential aspect of
Dependent Origination. On the other hand, the Mahayana
scriptures had
been compiled by those who stressed the virtues of the Buddha
and the
practice of the Bodhisattva, emphasizing the aspect of emptiness as
central to the attainment of real understanding of Dependent
Origination.
By
the third century A.D., Nagarjuna had composed his famous Sastras on
the Madhyamika
doctrine interpreting the Agama and Abhidharma on the
basis of the Mahayana
sutras of the Sunyata school. At about the same
time, Mahayana scriptures
tending towards 'eternal-reality' idealism,
such as the Srimaladeve-Simhanada
Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra,
had begun to be found, followed by sutras
such as the Lankavatara
Sutra. Along with this development, the Asters and
Yogacaryas of the
Sravastivada school accepted the "mind-only" aspect
of the Mahayana
school. They compiled a number of Sastras of the Yogacara
Vijnanavada
and eventually flourished as a great Mahayana school in their
own
right.
Then,
at about the fifth century there was a further development of
esoteric Yoga
from the school of eternal-reality idealism. If one tried
to follow the course
of development of Buddhism as outlined above, one
would have no difficulty
tracing the evolution of the vast diversity of
scriptures and doctrines held
sacred by the many schools.
(2)
Doctrinally, Buddhism was just Buddhism at first and there was no
sectarian
difference. It did not divide into the Sravakayana and
Bodhisattvayana until
about the beginning of the Christian era. Then in
the scriptures of the Bodhisattvayana
we begin to see the division of
Hinayana and Mahayana.
In
the second and third centuries scriptures of eternal-reality
idealism started
to appear in the Bodhisattvayana. In such Sutras were
first seen the terms
"noumenon, Sunya and Madhya"; and "Hina-, Maha-
and Eka-yana."
These scriptures of later date laid special emphasis on
the achievement of
Buddhahood, and were thus also classified as
Buddhayana.
At
the beginning of the fifth century, another 'yana', the Dharaniyana,
sprung
into existence from the noumenal school of Buddhism. This school
classified
all Buddha Dharma into the Tripitaka, the Paramita Pitaka
(including everything
of the exoteric schools), and the Dharani Pitaka.
It also categorised the
Dharma according to practice as:
Catvri-satyani, Paramita, and greed-ingrained.
These
classification are indicative of the diversification and
development of Buddhism
and are consistent with the schematic three
periods of historical development
proposed by the late Venerable Tai
Hsu. The latter were as follows:
First
500 years after Buddha's demise - Hinayana in vogue with Mahayana
in the background.
The Pali Tripitaka are representative of the
Buddhism of this period.
Second
500 years - Mahayana to the fore with Hinayana attendant. The
Chinese Tripitaka
reflects the development of Buddhism in this period.
Third
500 years - Tantric Buddhism took the lead, leaving the exoteric
school in
its wake. The Tibetan Tripitaka is the fruit of this period.
Chinese
Buddhism - from which Japanese Buddhism derives is
representative of the Buddhism
of the second 500 years, i.e. it is
founded mainly on Bodhisattvayana, which
links the earlier Sravakayana
and the later Buddhayana. It therefore effectively
ties Buddhist
history together.
As
it plays such a pivotal role in the historical development of the
Buddha-dharma,
the Chinese Tripitaka deserves the special attention of
all those concerned
with the present development of world Buddhism. It
is my humble opinion that
only in the study of the Chinese Tripitaka
can the contents of Buddhism be
fully and totally understood. The
Chinese Tripitaka offers the following:
(a)
Agamas: All four Agamas belong to the Bhava division. The
Madhyamagama and
Samyuktagama were translated from the texts of the
Sravastivada school while
the Dirghagama and Ekottaragama were
translated from those of the Mahasamghika
or Vibbajyavada schools.
Though admittedly it does not contain a complete
set of the sutras of
any single school, (the Pali Tripitaka does present a
more complete
set), a textual conglomeration of many schools does have its
merits
(The Tibetan Tripitaka contains no Agama at all).
(b)
Vinayas: The Tibetan Tripitaka contains only the new rules of the
Tamrasatiya
sect, while the Chinese Vinaya contains all the following:
(i) The Mahasamghika Vinaya of the Mahasamghika school.
(ii)
The five divisions of the Mahisasaka Vinaya, the four divisions of
the Dharmagupta
Vinaya, the pratimoksa of Mahadasyapiyah, and the
Sudarsana Vinaya of Tamrasatiya.
All these are rules of the
Vibbajyavada school.
(iii)
The old Sravastivada Vinaya and the new Mulasarvasti vadanikaya
Vinaya, both
of the Sarvastivada school.
(iv)
The Twenty-Two-Points-Of-Elucidation Sastras of the Sammatiya sect
of the
Vatsiputriyas school.
This
rich collection of materials from different sources greatly
facilitates comparative
studies of sectarian Buddhism.
(c)
Abhidharmas: This body of scripture is common to the three main
schools of
Theravada Buddhism, namely, the Vibhajyavadins, the
Sarvastivadins, and the
Vatsiputriyas. In the Tibetan Tripitaka there
are only the Prajnapti of the
Jnanaaprasthanasatpadabhidharma and the
later Abhidarmakosa.
The
Pali Tripitaka contains seven Sastras. While the Chinese Tripitaka
has an
especially large collection of the work of the Sarvastivada
school, it also
possesses the Abhidharma work of practically all sects.
The Chinese Tripitaka
contains:
i)
The Samgitiparyaya, the Dharmskandha, the Prajnapti, the
Vijnanakaya, the
Dhatukaya, the Prakaranapada, the Jnanaprasthana, the
Mahavibhasa, the Abhidharma-hrdaya
-vyakhya, the
Abhiraharmananyanyanusara and the Abhidharmasamayapradipika
Sastras of
the Sarvastivada school.
ii)
Of the works of Vibhajyavadins, it includes the Abhidharma Sastra
of Sariputa,
which is the only important work that links up the
Southern and Northern Abhidharmas.
iii)
It also contains the Vimmuttimagga which is a different version of
the Pali
Visuddhimagga.
iv)
It further contains the Sammitiya Sastra of the Vatsiputriya
School.
v)
The renowned Abhidharmakosa of the third to fourth century which
combines
the best teachings of the Sarvastivada and Sautrantika
schools, and the Satyasiddi
Sastra of Harivarman which greatly
influenced Chinese Buddhism.
All
these treasures of the Abhidharma may be found in the Chinese
Tripitaka. It
can thus be seen that although the works of earlier dates
in the Tripitaka
were not given the full respect due to them by the
majority of Chinese Buddhists,
the wealth of information they contain
will be of great reference value to
anyone interested in tracing the
divisions of the Sravaka schools and the
development of the Bodhisattva
ideal from the Sravakayana. If these scriptures
are ignored, I will say
that it would definitely not be possible for anyone
to fulfil the
responsibility of co-ordinating and linking the many branches
of world
Buddhism.
(d) Mahayana scriptures of the Sunyavada
(e)
Mahayana scriptures of the noumenon school, or the school of
eternal-reality,
are very complete in the Chinese Tripitaka. These
scriptures are very similar
to those found in the Tibetan Tripitaka.
The four great Sutras, the Prajnaparamita,
the Avatamsaka, the
Mahasamghata, and the Mahaparinirvana (to which may be
added the
Maharatnakuta Sutra, making five great sutras), are all tremendously
voluminous works. Here it may be pointed out that the Chinese
scriptures are
particularly notable for the following characteristics:
(i)
The different translations of the same Sutra have been safely
preserved in
the Chinese Tripitaka in their respective original
versions without their
being constantly revised according to later
translations, as was the case
with Tibetan scriptures. From a study of
the Chinese translations we can thus
trace the changes in content which
the majority of scriptures have undergone
over time and reflect upon
the changes in the original Indian texts at different
points in time.
Thus we have the benefit of more than one version for reference,
recording the evolution of the scriptures.
(ii)
The Chinese Mahayana scriptures that were translated before the
Tsin Dynasties
(beginning 265 A.D.) are particularly related to the
Buddhism of Chinese Turkestan
with its center in the mountain areas of
Kashmir. These scriptures form a
strong nucleus of Chinese Buddhist
thinking. The translations of the Dasabhumika
Sastra and Lankavatara
Sutra all possess very special characteristics.
(f)
Madhyamika: The Madhyamika texts of the Chinese Tripitaka are
considerably
different from the Tibetan renditions of the same system
of thought. The Chinese
collection consists mostly of earlier works,
particularly those of Nagarjuna,
such as the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra
and the Dasabhumikavibhasa Sastra, which
not only present Madhyamika
philosophy of a very high order but also illustrate
extensively the
acts of a Bodhisattva.
Of
the late Madhyamika works, i.e. works produced by the disciples of
Nagarjuna
after the rise of the Yogacara system, only the Prajnapradipa
Sastra of Bhavaviveka
has been rendered into Chinese. The Chinese
Tripitaka dose not contain works
or as many schools of this system as
the Tibetan Tripitaka. The Mahayanavataraka
Sastra of Saramati and the
Madhyayata Sastra of Asanga clearly indicate the
change of thinking
from the Madhyamika to the Yogacara system.
(g)
Yogacara-Vijnanavada: The Chinese Tripitaka contains a very
complete collection
of this system of thought. It includes important
scriptures such as the Dasabhumika,
Mahayanasamparigraha Sastra, and
Vijnaptimatrasiddhi Sastra. While the Tibetan
system was mainly founded
on the teachings of Sthiramati which are more akin
to the
Mahayanasamparigraha school of Chinese work, the Chinese students of
orthodox Vijnanavada follow the teachings of Dharmapala.
The
Vinaptimatrasiddhi Sastra, which represents the consummation of the
Dignaga-Dharmapala-Silabhadra
school of thought, is a gem of the
Chinese Tripitaka. The Hetuvidya which
is closely connected with
Vijnanavada, is not fully translated in the Chinese
Tripitaka and
cannot compare favourably with the works of Dignaga and Dharmakirti
collected in the Tibetan Tripitaka.
This
seems to indicate that the Chinese people were not logically
inclined, and
gives no weight to engagements in verbal gymnastics and
debates. In times
past this had relegated the position of Sastra
masters in China to one of
relative unimportance.
(h)
The esoteric Yoga: The Chinese Tripitaka includes Chinese
translations of
both the Vairocana Sutra of the practical division, and
the Diamond Crown
Sutra of the Yoga division of the Tantric school of
Buddhism. The only esoteric
scriptures that are missing are those of
the Supreme Yoga division which,
as they arrived in China at a time of
national chaos, did not have much chance
to circulate widely. Its very
nature of achieving enlightenment through carnal
expressions also made
Tantrism unacceptable to the Chinese intellectuals.
However, the texts
of esoteric Yoga are abundant in the Tibetan Tripitaka
From
the above it can be seen that the Chinese Tripitaka is composed
mainly of
Mahayana scriptures of the second 500 years, yet translations
were not restricted
to scriptures of this middle period. The Chinese
Tripitaka also possesses
a wealth of works of early Buddhism as a good
portion of the later productions.
Thus,
if one could have a sufficient knowledge of the Chinese
Tripitaka, and could
extend his knowledge from there to include the
Pali Tripitaka of the Sravakayana,
and the Madhyamika and Supreme Yoga
of the Tibetan system, then he would have
little difficulty in gaining
an accurate, complete and comprehensive panorama
of the 1,700 years of
development of Indian Buddhism, the record of which
has been preserved
in the three great extant schools of Buddhist thought.
The
late Venerable Tai Hsu once said, "To mold a new, critical and
comprehensive
system, based on the Chinese Tripitaka, the Theravada
teaching of Ceylon,
and selected components of the Tibetan canon,
should be the objective of the
writing of a history of Indian
Buddhism." Even more so, it should be
the objective of co-ordinating
and connecting the many tributaries of world
Buddhism. It is our
responsibility to discard the trimmings and to retain
the very essence
of the great Tripitakas, adapting Buddhism to the modern
world so that
it may fulfil its mission of leading the way, taking under its
wings
the miserable beings of the present era.