首 页  |  中国禅学  |  禅学三书  |  慈辉论坛  |  佛学论文  |  最新上传  |  文学频道  |  佛缘论坛  |  留言簿   |

 管理登陆        吴言生 创办              图片中心    关于本网     佛教研究所 主办


  • 晋宋时代的禅经译出与禅法传播[148]

  • 有四样东西,可以带给一个家庭[136]

  • 什么是放下?什么是加持?90%的[122]

  • 常有这种心,自然就会圆满、快[111]

  • 好事坏事,终成往事[108]

  • 佛教如何看待“爱情”与“欲望[150]

  • 在生活中转烦恼为菩提[105]

  • 云门宗在舒州地区传承与发展研[120]

  • 为什么说“ 一失人身,万劫不复[135]

  • 幸福就是,身上无痛苦,心里无[120]

  • 心不要随着境界而动[123]

  • 论唐代的讲经仪轨[731]



  • 本站推荐

    恭迎佛吉祥日·卫塞

    禅理:任何人的苦乐

    一禅一世界,一叶一


       您现在的位置: 佛学研究网 >> E3英文佛教 >> [专题]e3英文佛教 >> 正文


    The Moral Systems of Confucianiam And Buddhism
     
    [ 作者: Bongkil Chung   来自:期刊原文   已阅:10796   时间:2007-1-16   录入:douyuebo


    ·期刊原文
    Won Buddhism: A Synthesis of The Moral Systems of Confucianiam And Buddhism

    Bongkil Chung
    Journal of Chinese Philosophy
    Vol.15 1988
    P.425-448
    Copyright @ 1984 by Dialogue Publishing Company,
    Honolulu, U.S.A.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    .


    P.425

    I  INTRODUCTION

        When two moral  systems  have incompatible  moral  tenets
    such  as  Buddhism  and  Confucianism, and  if a third  moral
    system claims to have integrated  the two conflicating  moral
    teachings;  serious  questions  arise  on on theoretical  and
    practical  grounds.  One  of  the  questions  is whether  the
    integration is syncretism or synthesis. According to Thomas
    F. Hoult, "all religious doctrines  are syncretic.''(1)If the
        Nagarjuna asked: If one, keeping the precepts for laymen,
        can  be born  in the celestial  world, attain  the way of
        Bodhisattva, and realize  nirvana, why does one need  the
        precepts  for monks? He answered: Although both ways lead
        to emancipation, there are differences  of difficulty and
        easiness.  Laymen  have to make a living, which  requires
        various  toilsome  work.  Hence, if one wishes  to devote
        oneself  to the Buddha  dharma, one's family life will be
        ruined.  However, if one devotes  oneself to one's family
        the way of the Buddha dharma  will be neglected.  One can
        neither take nor discard the Way;

    P.426                       

        to follow the Way properly is difficult. However, if  one
        becomes   a  monk,  one  frees   oneself   from   worldly
        responsibility, anger, and disturbance  and finds it easy
        to devote oneself to practicing the Way.(2)

    Sosan(c) (1520-1604), a great Korean patriarch, supplied this
    justification:

        To become  a monk and leave one's family behind  is not a
        trivial matter.  The purpose is not to seek for  physical
        ease, nor is it to eat and to be clad luxuriously, nor is
        it to seek for fame and property.   It is to avoid  birth
        and death, to sever worldly  passions, to succeed  to the
        wisdom of the Buddha, and to deliver all sentient  beings
        by transcending the three worlds.(3)

    The moral issue is whether  the Buddha dharma can be followed
    without  jettisoning  one's  filial  duty  to one's  parents.
    Buddhist  monks  were  subjected  to  harsh  criticism   from
    Neo-Confucian  philosophers.   Thus  Chu  Hsi(d)  (1130-1200)
    wrote:

          The  mere  fact  that  they  discard  the  Three  Bonds
          (between  ruler  and  minister,  father  and  son,  and
          husband  and  wife)  and  the  Five  Constant   Virtues
          (righteousness  on the part of the father, deep love on
          the part of the mother, friendliness on the part of the
          elder  brother, respect  on  the  part  of the  younger
          brother, and filial  piety  on the part  of the son) is
          already a crime of the greatest magnitude. Nothing more
          need be said about the
          rest.(4)

    Wittgenstein  seems to be right: "When two principles  really
    do meet which  cannot  be reconciled  with  one another, then
    each man declares  the other  a fool and heretic."(5) Chu Hsi
    regarded  the  Buddhist  way as harmful  to the  morality  of
    mankind.  He pointed  out that  the Buddhists  "renounce  the
    family to attend to their own virtue in solitude.  This shows
    they  are  different  in substance  from  the way...."(6) His
    advice was that

    P.427

    "a student  should  forthwith  get as far away  from Buddhist
    doctrines as from licentious songs and beautiful women.
    Otherwise they will soon infiltrate him."(7)
        As Chu Hsi's influence  was strongly felt in Korea during
    the Yi dynasty (1392-1910), during that period Buddhist monks
    became  one of the seven despised  low classes  of the social
    structure.   Charles   Weihsun   Fu,  (e)  noting   that  the
    Neo-Confucianists' criticisms were exaggerations and distortions,
    has written:

        Mahayana  Buddhists  should learn a good lesson from the
        challenge of Neo-Confucianism and engage in a necessary
        and urgent inquiry into the moral dimension  of their own
        tradition, by shifting their traditional  emphasis  on
        transcendental  truth to a new emphasis  on worldly truth
        in terms of everyday ethic-social  practice...  It is now
        time for them to develop  a new and modern philosophy  of
        the Middle Way by placing equal emphasis  on morality  as
        well  as on wisdom  (prajna) and meditation  (samadhi)...
        But it remains to be seen whether Mahayana  Buddhism  can
        work out in this modern  age an ethical  system to tackle
        most, if not all, human and secular problelms they
        encounter in everyday life.(8)

    As Fu has pointed out, answers are contained  in the texts of
    Mahayana  Buddhism.(9) In this  paper  I will  show  how  the
    ethico-religious  system  of Won  Buddhism  has attempted  to
    answer this question  by analyzing  its central moral tenets.
    This paper will consider  Sot'aesan's(f) motives  in founding
    Won Buddhism and the points of renovation (II), his synthesis
    of metaphysical tenets (III), his synthesis of the perfection
    of human nature (IV), and his synthesis  of moral duties (V).
    A concluding remark (VI) is added.

    II.     RENOVATION OF BUDDHISM

        At the turn of the century Sot'aesan had " a precognition
        upon the

    P.428   

    great enlightenment" (1916) of the danger the world was about
    to face on account of humanity being enslaved by the power of
    material civilization. He felt that something had to be done
    to save the world from becoming a Frankenstein's  Monste.  In
    the Founding Motive of the new religious order he wrote:

        ...The motive therefore lies in an attempt to deliver all
        sentient  beings  suffering  in the tormenting  seas to a
        vast and limitless paradise.  This goal shall be realized
        by expanding the spiritual  power in order to conquer the
        power of matter and the spiritual  power will be expanded
        by the faith in a truthful religion and training in sound
        morality (K.19).(10)

        When Sot'aesan  needed  a moral system  as a means to his
    goal, neither Buddhism nor Confucianism as then understood by
    Korean society could help.  The Yi dynasty Confucianists were
    divided into several factions involved in academic controversies
    and  endless  factional,  bloody  wranglings.(11)  Sot'aesan,
    accepting  the truthful tenets of the three teachings  of the
    East, intended to integrate them into the new ethico-religious
    sytem that took the Buddha dharma as the core doctrine of a new
    religious order. He explained his intentions to integrate them
    as follows:

        In the past, the founders  of various  religions  came to
        the world  in accordance  with the call of the times  and
        taught  the  ways  man  ought  to follow: yet the central
        doctrines  have been different from one another depending
        on the places and times.  This is like the various  areas
        of specialization in medicine.(12)

            ... Thus the substance of the three teachings are
        different  from one another;  they however agree in their
        goals  of correcting  the world  and benefiting  sentient
        beings.   In  the  past  each  of  the  three   religions
        exclusively   taught   their  own  areas  of  speciality;
        however, in the future, any one of them individually will
        not be sufficient to deliver the world.  Hence, we intend
        to integrate  all these  doctrines  into one system...(K.
        125-6).

    P.429

    As Sot'aesan had taken the Buddha dharma as the central tenet
    of  the  new  religion, there  arose  a question  of  whether
    Sot'aesan's   form  of  Buddhism  could  avoid  the  kind  of
    criticism  which Chu Hsi poured on Buddhism  without  leaving
    the new system in a state of mere syncretism.

        Sot'aesan's   integration  also  poses  the  question  of
    whether the problem Dogen perceived  could also be solved.  A
    brief consideration  of the spirit of Sot'aesan's reformation
    of Buddhism  will help  clarify  the points  of synthesis  in
    question.  Sot'aesan's renovation of Buddhism is reflected in
    the Four Grand Platforms of Won Buddhism, which summarize the
    central tenets of its doctrine.
        In the  first  platform, "Right  Enlightenment  and Right
    Conduct," Sot'aesan  grasps the heart of Buddhism  and throws
    it to the world for realization. The Buddha dharma should not
    hide itself  in a deep  mountain  valley  for a few monks  to
    follow.  Everyone should "be enlightened  by the Mind Seal of
    all  Buddhas  and  patriarchs, symbolized  by  the  truth  of
    Irwon(g) or one circle, and to model  oneself  thereafter  to
    act perfectly without partiality, excessiveness or deficiency
    when  using  the six roots  (eyes,ears,nose,tongue, body, and
    mind)" (K.58).Asanecessaryfirst step toward this goal temples
    and monasteries are to be erected in urban and rural areas.
        The second platform, "Be Aware of Grace and Requite  It",
    requires one to realize one's indebtedness  to what Sot'aesan
    calls  the "Four Graces," namely, Heaven  and Earth, Parents,
    Brethren, and Law;  one is also required  to requite  them by
    modeling oneself on the way of indebtedness  to them.  A life
    of  resentment  can  thus  be  transformed  into  a  life  of
    gratitude even in situations  where one can justifiably  find
    an object of resentment  (K.58).Theidea  of "the requital  of
    grace" is not new with Sot'aesan as it can be found in the
    traditional Buddhist texts.(13)
        This platform  reflects  more of Confucian  filial  piety
    extended initially  to Heaven and Earth, and then to Brethren
    and Law.  In Sot'aesan's enlightened view the Four Graces are
    the incarnation of Dharmakaya Buddha.  Sot'aesan thought that
    the first step in curing the world of illness  is to change a
    life of resentment to one of gratitude. Here Sot'aesan saw no
    theoretical  problem or practical  difficulty  in integrating
    Confucian moral duty into a Buddhist moral system.

    P.430

        In the third platform, "Proper Application  of the Buddha
    Dharma" Sot'aesan gane a new direction to the practice of the
    Buddha dharma, a direction which can be seen as a response to
    the Neo-Confucian  criticism of Buddhism;  he taught that one
    must  make  the  best  use  of  the  Buddha   dhrama  without
    neglecting to take better care of worldly affairs. One should
    not  become  useless  to the  world  by becoming  a Buddhist;
    rather  one, making  the  best  use  of it, should  become  a
    capable  and useful  person rendering  help to oneself, one's
    family, one's  state, and the world  (K.59).  Dogen and Sosan
    would wonder how this is possible.  Again the idea is not new
    with Sot'aesan, as it is found Mahayana  Buddhist  texts.(14)
    The Buddha dharma Sot'aesan advocates, however, was expressed
    in a few tenets simple enough  for anyone  to understand  and
    yet sufficient  enough to allow anyone to realize  Buddhahood
    without leaving the mundane world.
        The fourth platform, "Egoless Service to the Public", set
    a general rule of altruism  that one, forsaking  the egoistic
    mentality  of only caring for oneself  or one's family, ought
    to  exert  oneself  to help  deliver  the  world  by Mahayana
    altruism.  This  platform  reflects  not only the Bodhisattva
    ideal of Mahayana Buddhism  but also, no doubt, the Confucian
    moral  and  political  thought  elaborated  in the Tahsueh(h)
    [Great Learning].(15)
        Sot'aesan's  spirit  of  renovation  and  revival  of the
    Buddha  dharma as expressed  in several  mottos can certainly
    blunt  the  edge  of Chu  Hsi's  criticism  of Buddhism, even
    though they might make Dogen and Sosan wonder.
        The first motto, "Everywhere  is the image of the Buddha,
    hence  do  all  things  as  a  Buddhist  mass", reflects  the
    Hua-yen(i) doctrine that the Buddha Vairocana is manifesting
    himself everywhere.(l6) Sot'aesan  by this motto intended  to
    renovate  the way of worshipping  the Buddha.  In his view it
    was hard to prove whether  the Buddha  statue had any potency
    to bless or punish  tire faithful;  the practice  in question
    was obsolete  and superstitious, unable to keep pace with the
    growth  of  human  intelligence.   In  Sot'aesan's  view  the
    practice  could  do more  harm  than service  to the original
    teachings of the Buddha (K. 131).
        The second  motto, "Practice  ch'an(j) (sort, zen) at all
    times and places". reflects Sot'aesan's intention of bringing
    the heart of the Buddhist

    P.431

    way into the daily  life of all.  If this could  be done, Won
    Buddhism  could solve the problems  of the opposing  parties.
    Sot'aesan described thus the essence of son:

        True   ch'a(j)  lies   in  taking   the  True   Emptiness
        [chen-kung(k)] as  the  substance  of the  mind  and  the
        Marvelous  Existence  [mioo-yu(l)] as the function of the
        mind so that the mind is as immovable as a great mountain
        in trying situations and, when left alone, the purity and
        serenity  of the mind is like the empty  and vast sky, If
        one continues ch'an, all the discriminations  of the mind
        will be based on samadhi such that the functioning of the
        six roots will coincide  with the self-nature  (svabhava)
        of  Silent   Emptiness   [k'ung-chi(m)  ]  and   Numinous
        Awareness [ling-chih(n)] (K. 81).

    Sot'aesan took this as the Mahayanistic  ch'an or zen and the
    integrated   practice  of  the  Triple  Discipline  (samadhi,
    prajna, sila). Ch'an was to be the way of lving in samsara.
        The spirit of reformation  of Buddhism was found in still
    another  motto, "Buddha dharam is worldly  living and worldly
    living  is  Buddha  dharma  itself."  This  motto  challenges
    Dogen's  way of the Buddha dharma, and is not independent  of
    the previous  two.  Sot'aesan  here brought the Buddha dharma
    which had been hiding, if not lost, in remote mountains  into
    the urban  and rural  areas  to deliver  the sentient  beings
    there.
        The question  now becomes whether  this Buddhist  way was
    not the way of the Confucian, or whether  one could sincerely
    carry out the moral duties spelled out by the Confucian moral
    system while one was following the Buddhist way.

    III.   SYNTHESIS OF METAPHYSICAL TENETS

        Once one learns  of the Four Grand  Platforms  and of the
    mottos  for reformatian, one can feel that the Buddha  dharma
    is near at hand;  yet one can feel  it quite  implausible  to
    follow the Buddha dharma as Won

    P.432

    Buddhism  suggests, let alone to graft  the Confucian  way to
    it. Some may even feel that there is a catch in such a claim,
    for  black  and  white  mixed  can  only  produce  gray.  For
    Sot'aesan, however, it was not only possible but necessary to
    so mix.  To a newly  converted  disciple  from  the Confucian
    tradition  who  worried  about  the long  standing  Confucian
    prejudice  against Buddhism for its nihilism and otherworldly
    aspects, Sot'aesan said:

        ...Wu-chi(o)   [Ultimateless]   or   T'ai-chi(p)   [Great
        Ultimate]  in the Chou-i(q) is true essence  of emptiness
        [hsu-wu(r) ']  and  annihilation  [chi-mieh(s) ] with  no
        selfish desires. Tsu-ssu's(t) state of equilibrium cannot
        be the Mean unless it is emptiness and annihilation;  nor
        can the illustrious  virtue of the Ta-hsueh be manifested
        without   emptiness   and  annihilation.   Thus,  various
        religions use different words and names, but the truth is
        identical.  However, if you  end  up with  emptiness  and
        annihilation, you  can never  become  a man  of morality.
        Hence, you must  take emptiness  and annihilation  as the
        substance  of the Way and jen, i, li.  and chih(u) as the
        functions of the way in order to apply the Way to myriads
        of human affairs.  Only then does the Way become  perfect
        (K. 28o-281).

    Sot'aesan  was here disabusing  his disciple  of the mistaken
    Neo-Confucian  conception of the metaphysics  of sunyata.  If
    given a proper interpretation, it could imply the meaning  of
    the  term  hsing(v) or nature  as used  in the  Chung-yung(w)
    [Doctrine  of the Mean]: "What Heaven has conferred on man is
    called  nature."(17) The state of mind before the arousal  of
    feelings  of pleasure, anger, sorrow, or joy, called chung or
    equilibrium, was none other  than emptiness  and annihilation
    of this  or that feelings.  And yet the way of sunyata  could
    only  be a moral  way if it functioned  as the four  cardinal
    virtues  of  Confucianism.  Thus  there  was  no  problem  of
    synthesizing the two conflicting views.
        To  Sot'aesan,  different  religious  doctrines  provided
    different  metaphysical   paradigms,  to  use  Thomas  Kuhn's
    terminology,(18) which would cause  one and the same ultimate
    reality to be viewed differently. Sot'ae-

    P.433

    san used the figure of a perfect  circle  called Irwonsang(x)
    (i-yuan-hsiang) to refer  to that  ultimate  reality  and the
    original nature of all sentient beings.

        What is referred  to by Irwonsang  is called T'ai-chi  or
        Wu-chi  in Confucianism, Tao(y) or nature  in Taoism, and
        pure  Dharmakaya  Buddha  in Buddhism.  However, they are
        different names of one and the same principle;  no matter
        which way you enter, ultimately  you return  to the truth
        of Irwon(g).... (K.320).(19)

    The  correctness  of this  view  is a thorny  question  which
    cannot be settled here.  The same idea, however  goes back to
    the Vedic period.(20)
        With Sot'aesan believing that the best theoretical  basis
    for the synthesis of the Confucian and Buddhism moral systems
    lie in the concept  of Irwonsang, it must be shown  both  how
    Buddhistic  the concept  of Irwonsang  is and how some of the
    central  moral tenets  of Confucianism  are derived  from it.
    Sot'aesan  identified  Irwon  or one circle  with  Dharmakaya
    Buddha  and said  it was  "the  origin  of all beings  of the
    universe, the Mind  Seal  of all  Buddhas  and sages, and the
    original nature of all sentient beings" (K. 9).
        Here Irwon refers to the realm which Kant called noumenon
    and  to li-fa-chieh(z) or  the  realm  of  principle  in  the
    Hua-yen  texts.(21)That  Sot'aesan's  view  of  the  ultimate
    reality of the universe was within the Mahayanistic tradition
    can be seen in his description of what Irwon referred to:

        ...In  this  realm  there  is  no  difference   of  great
        [substance] and small [function], being and nonbeing, nor
        is there  the change  of coming  and going  of birth  and
        death.  Nor is there the karmic  retribution  of good and
        evil.  In this realm words  and names are all annihilated
        in complete voidness (K. 21).

    This description reminds one of Kant's view that the noumenal
    realm   goes  beyond   any  of  the  twelve   categories   of
    understanding, especially that of causality.(22)

    P.434

        Sot'aesan   then  explained  the  relation  between  that
    ineffable  realm and the phenomenal  realm [shi-fa-chieh(aa)]
    in terms found in some Mahayana texts, saying:

        According   to  the  light  of  the  Numinous   Awareness
        [ling-chih(n)] of the Silent  Void  [k'ung-chi(m)] arises
        the  difference  of  Great  and  Small, followed  by  the
        difference  of karmic  retribution  of good and evil, and
        the clear manifestation  of the phenomena  with names and
        forms;  so that the three realms of ten directions appear
        as clearly  as a jewel  on the  palm.  Amongst  this  the
        providence   of  True  Emptiness   [chen-k'ung(k)  ]  and
        Marvelous  Existence  [miao-yu(l)] appears and disappears
        throughout   the  myriads   of  things  of  the  universe
        eternally. This is the truth of Irwonsang (K. 21).

    This  is the  central  metaphysical  tenet  of Won  Buddhism.
    Dharmakaya Buddha or Irwonsang is the object of its religious
    worship.  This metaphysical  tenet reflects Mahayana Buddhist
    idealism in the sense that numinous awareness  plays the role
    of illuminating  the ultimate  reality  into  the  phenomenal
    world.(23) Irwon thus refers to the ultimate  reality  of the
    universe;  and  Irwonsang  to  the  harmony  of  noumena  and
    phenomena arising from numinous awareness.

    IV. SYNTHESIS IN THE PERFECTION OF HUMAN NATURE

        What  is the moral  relevauce  of the truth  of Irwonsang
    which in Sot'-  aesan's view jields the Confucianistic  moral
    norms,  to  the  ideal  of  "Right  Enlightenment  and  Right
    Conduct"? Answering  how one could realize  in everyday  life
    the truth of Irwonsang  as the standard  of moral discipline,
    Sot'aesan said:

        You cultivate your moral character by taking Irwonsang as
        the standard  of moral  perfection  and by modeling  your
        mind after its truth. (I) By getting enlightened [prajna]
        to the truth  of Irwon  you are to know clearly  the real
        nature of all things

    P.435

        in the  universe, birth, old  age, illness, and the death
        of human beings, and the principle of karmic retribution.
        (II) You are to nourish  [samadhi]  the perfect  original
        nature  which, like Irwon, is free from selfishness, love
        and lust, and  attachment.  (III) Or, you  are  to handle
        [sila] all human affairs rightly and perfectly like Irwon
        without  yourself  being  affected  by  pleasure,  anger,
        sorrow, and joy or by favoritism (K. 129).

    Thus the three aspects of one's original  nature referred  to
    by  Irwon  or Dharmakaya, namely, samadhi, prajna, and  sila,
    should  be realized  in daily mundane  affairs.  The language
    here  is unmistakably  that  of Huineng(ab);  but, it is also
    that  of  the  Chung-yung.   Hui-neng  taught  that  the  six
    consciousnesses, when passing  through  the six roots, should
    not  be  colored  by  the  six  dirts  [liu-ch'en(ac) ].  The
    Chung-yung taught that chung or equilibrium  lay in the state
    of mind  before  the feelings  of pleasure, anger, sorrow, or
    joy have arisen;  and yung or harmony  lay in the manifesting
    of these  feelings  in due degree.(24) For Sot'aesan  the two
    teachings were not incompatible. Irwonsang as the standard of
    moral  perfection  was to remind  us of the truth  that one's
    original  nature was perfect like Irwonsang, lacking nothing,
    and utterly unselfish  as the mind of all Buddhas  and sages.
    Hence  moral  discipline  aimed  at manifesting  that  nature
    completely  in  daily  lives,  realizing  the  Buddha  dharma
    without leaving one's family.
        Sot'aesan's  view of moral  discipline  presupposed  that
    human nature in its substance  transcended  good and evil but
    could be either  in its functioning  (K.  292).  This view is
    found in Wang Yang-ming's(ad) (1472-1529) sayings: "1. In the
    original  substance  of mind there is no distinction  between
    good and evil. 2. When the will becomes active, however, such
    a  distinction  exisls."(25) Wang,  however,  also  explained
    Mencius  view that human nature  is good: "The nature endowed
    in us by Heaven  is pure  and perfect.  The fact  that  it is
    intelligent, clear, and  not  beclouded  is evidence  of  the
    emanation  and revelation  of the highest  good."(26) So some
    ask  whether  or a not  Wang's  theory  of human  nature  was
    influenced by the Buddhist view.
        Wang's criticism  of the Buddhist  theory of human nature
    is helpful

    P.436                       

    for our understanding of Sot'aesan's position. Wang taught:

        in nourishing the mind, we Confucians have never departed
        from things and events.  By merely following the natural
        principles of things we accomplish our task. On the other
        hand, the Buddhists  insist on getting  away from things
        and events  completely  and view the mind as an illusion,
        gradually entering into a life of emptiness and silence,
        and seem  to have nothing  to do with  the world  at all.
        This is why they are incapable of governing the World.
        (27)

    Wang's  criticism  was  based  on  his  observations  of  the
    Buddhist  monks of his time;on theoretical  grounds it missed
    the point of Hua-yen and Ch'an Buddhist tenets.(28)
        Wang's criticism had no force on Sot'aesan's way of moral
    perfection since the latter intended for one to make the best
    use of the Buddha dharma  in order to be an active member  of
    society.  Sot'aesan  took as the fundamental  cause  of human
    predicament  the  three  evil  tendencies  of  disturbedness,
    foolishness, and evil arising in trying situations. Hence the
    moral  discipline  was  to let  samadhi, prajna, and sila  of
    one's  original  nature  manifest  in trying  situations  (K.
    59-60). Here Sot'aesan reflected Huineng's view of the triple
    disciplines.(29) Sot'aesan's originality lay in his statement
    of the criteria of moral perfection  with regard to the three
    aspects of the original nature. He set out three criteria for
    each  of the  three  aspects  and  summarized  the  truth  of
    Dharmakaya  or Irwonsang  in terms of these criteria, namely,
    k'ung(ae)[void], yuan(af)[perfect], and cheng(ag)[right]  (K.
    129-130):

        In nourishing  the nature  [yang hsing(ah)]: (l) the void
        lies in one's  intuition  of the realm  which  transcends
        being and non- being;  (2) the mind in which nothing goes
        or comes is perfect;and (3)the mind which does not decline
        to or lean on anything is right.

    In seeing  [awakening  to] the nature  [chien-hsing(ai)]: (1)
    the

    P.437

        void lies in one's knowledge  of the ineffable state with
        no  trace  of  mind's  whereabouts;   (2)  the  limitless
        capacity  of intelligence  of mind  is perfect;  and  (3)
        one's seeing and judging  all things  correctly  owing to
        true  knowledge  of  reality.

        In following  the nature  [shuai-hsing(aj)]: (1) the void
        lies  in  one's   doing   all  things   with  no  thought
        [wu-nien(ak) ] (2) doing  all things  with  no attachment
        [wu-cho(al)] is perfect;  and  (3) doing  all  things  in
        accordance with the Mean [chung-tao(am)] is right.

    In  the   last   paragraph,  the  ideals   of  Buddhism   and
    Confucianism, namely, no thought from the Vajracchedika Sutra
    and the Mean from the Chung- yung, function as integral parts
    of moral perfection in Won Buddhism.  These moral perfections
    are  all  to  be  realized  in  personal, family, social, and
    national affairs as set for in the Ta Hsueh.

    V.   SYNTHESIS OF MORAL DUTIES

        Sat'aesan's  synthesis of moral duties is best understood
    as the grafting of Confucian moral duties to the Dharmakaya
    Buddha  or Irwonsang, the object  of Won  Buddhist  religious
    worship.
        Some  of the central  tenets  of Confucian  morality  are
    embraced  in the "Ethics of Grace" of Won Buddhism.  With his
    fundamental  moral  principle, "Be aware of grace and requite
    it, "  Sot'aesan  intended  to  show  why  a  world  full  of
    resentment  could be changed to one of gratitude.  The former
    aggravates the human predicament;  the latter ameliorates  it
    and leads to a paradise on earth. A life of gratitude lies in
    requiting  the grace one has received  in one's own life from
    various sources. Sot'aesan listed four such sources of life -
    Heaven  and  Earth, parents, Brethren, and  Law  -  which  he
    called  the Four  Graces, a "grace"  being  anything  without
    which one's life would be impossible. He challenged people to
    question  whether they could exist and live without them, and
    said that  even  a man of low intelligence  could  understand
    that life would be

    P.438   

    impossible  without  them.  He argued that nothing could be a
    greater favor or grace than that without  which life would be
    impossible.  As to  why  these  graces  ought  to be requited
    prudential  reasons  were given.  Graces requited  will being
    blessings;  graces unrequited  will bring punishment.  Of the
    four  graces, those  of Heaven  and Earth  and  Parents  were
    central moral tenets of Confucianism.  Sot'aesan attempted to
    synthesize the moral systems of Buddhism and Confucianism  by
    showing  that  the Four  Graces  were  none  other  than  the
    contents or manifestations  of Dharmakaya  Buddha, symbolized
    by Irwonsang(K. 131).
        Sot'aesan  derived  the moral norm to require  the graces
    from  the way  men  are  indebted  to them.  And how are  men
    indebted  to the grace of Heaven  and Earth? Men are indebted
    through the eight virtues of the way of Heaven and Earth: (i)
    extremely  bright,  (ii) extremely  sincere,  (iii) extremely
    fair,  (iv) natural, (v) vast  and  limitedless, (vi) eternal
    and immortal, (vii) without good or evil fortunes, and (viii)
    harboring  no false  ideas (K.27).  Since man is indebted  to
    these virtues, his duty is to cultivate, to model his moral
    character after them.  The representative  moral virtue to be
    cultivated  as a way  of requiting  the grace  of Heaven  and
    Earth is to do good to others without  harboring  in mind the
    idea of having done so.  This specific moral character is, of
    course, a Buddhist  moral ideal.(30)The same virtue is taught
    in the Bible: "But when  you give  alms, do not let your left
    hand know  what your right  hand is doing..."(31)However, the
    idea of imitating the moral virtues of Heaven and Earth comes
    mainly from the Confucian tradition.  Chu Hsi,commenting on a
    Chou Tun-i (1017-1073)quotationfromthe I-ching(ao), says:

        ...Thus  (the sage) establishes  himself  as the ultimate
        standard  for man.  Hence, the character  of the sage  is
        identical with that of Heaven and Earth;his brilliancy is
        identical with that of the sun and the moon; his order is
        identical with that of the seasons; and his good and evil
        fortunes are identical with those of spiritual beings.(32)

    Whether  Heaven  and earth  can be said  to have  such  moral
    character is a philosophical question; however, some of those
    characterizing moral

    P.439

    norms  run  through  the  Confucian   texts.   For  instance,
    "Sincerity is the way of Heaven; the attainment of sincerity,
    or the attempt to be sincere, is the way of Heaven.  To think
    how to be sincere is the way of man. Never has there been one
    possessed of complete sincerity who did not move others."(34)
    Sot'aesan  suggested  that everyone  ought  to model  himself
    after  the  way  of  Heaven,  with  sincerity, as  a  way  of
    requiting  the  Grace  of  Heaven  and  Earth.  For  Chu  Hsi
    impartiality  or fairness, another  of the Heavenly  virtues,
    was a necessary condition for practicing jen:

        ...a man originally possesses jen. It comes with him from
        the very beginning. Simply because he is partial, the jen
        is obstructed  and cannot be expressed.  Therefore, if he
        is impartial, his jen will operate.(35)

    The virtue of "no mind," the representative  virtue of Heaven
    and Earth  for Sot'aesan, can  found  in both  Confucian  and
    Buddhist traditions. The Chin-kang ching(ap) (Diamond Sutra),
    counsels  " [o] ne should develop a mind which does not abide
    in anything,"(36) in  the  same  work  man  is advised  to do
    charitable works without harboring any idea of having done so
    in  mind.  The  Confucian  Ch'eng-i(aq)  (1033-1107)  taught:
    "Heaven  and Earth create  and transform  without  having any
    mind of their  own.  The sage  has a mind of his own but does
    not  take  any (unnatural) action."(37) The moral  virtue  in
    question  can  thus  be  found  in  the  allegedly   opposing
    traditions.
        Another  tenet  of Confucianistic  morality  round in the
    moral system  of Won Buddhism  is filial piety.  Filial piety
    was the weapon used by the Neo-Confucianists to criticize the
    Buddhist monks who had left their parents for the monastery
    life.(38) In the Confucian  tradition, filial  duty  was  the
    fundamental  principle  of  morality.  For  Confucius, filial
    piety  was  the  foundation  of all  virtue  and the root  of
    civilization.(39)  When  Teng  Tzu(ar) asked  what  surpassed
    filial piety as the virtue of a sage, Confucius replied,

        [M] an excels all the beings in Heaven and Earth. Of man's
        acts none is greater than filial piety. In the practice of
        filial


    P.440


    piety, nothing is greater than to reverence one's father.(40)

        For Sot'aesan, filial piety was the requital of the grace
    of Parents  and needed to be expanded.  One had to discipline
    oneself to become a morally respectable  person following the
    great moral way.  One had to faithfully support one's parents
    as much as one could when the parents  lacked the ability  to
    help themselves;one  had to help them have spiritual comfort.
    Further, as part  of the requital  of the  grace, one had, in
    accordance  with  one's  ability,  to  protect  the  helpless
    parents of others even as one's own during and after the life
    of  one's  parents.  This  recalls  one  of Chang  Tsai's(as)
    (1020-1077)  moral  tenets   that  "...even   those  who  are
    tired,infirm, crippled, or sick;  those  who have no brothers
    or children, wives  or husbands, are all my brothers  who are
    in distress  and  have  no  one  to turn  to."(41) Sot'aesan,
    however, left it open so that, as long as the motive  was not
    selfish, one  could  sacrifice  the material  expressions  of
    filial piety so that one could contribute  to a greater cause
    for the public well-being.
        The idea that one is indebted to Brethren, fellow humans,
    animals, and plants, for life itself  needs  no argument.  In
    Sot'aesan's  view humans were capable  of harming or blessing
    others; without the help of others, life would be impossible.
    Even though humans are potential  Buddhas, they can harm each
    other as long as they are moved  by the three evils of greed,
    anger, and  foolishness.  At the  final  analysis, all  human
    sufferings  are based on these three evils.  Sot'aesan  set a
    simple norm which should, be followed in all walks of life in
    order to ameliorate the human predicament.  He suggested as a
    way  of requiting  the  grace  of Brethren, that  man had  to
    conform to "the principle  of fairness and mutual benefit" as
    a moral norm when exchanging goods (K.36).
        When Sot'aesan talked about the grace of Law, he meant by
    the term "law" the religious and moral teachings of all sages
    as well as the penal  and civil  laws  to which  one owed a
    great deal for one's life. The concept of the grace of dharma
    could be found in the traditional  Buddhist (42) By including
    in it the civil and penal laws of the state, Sot'aesan texts.
    prescribed one's duties to the state.  He suggested, as a way
    of requiting  the grace of Law, one ought  to do what the law
    encouraged one to do and

    P.441

    to abstain from doing what the law prohibited (K.40).  This
    reflected  the ways  of the moral, educational, and political
    programs of Confucianism summarized in the Ta-hsueh.(43)
        Sot'aesan added what might be called "prudential reasons"
    for requiting  the Four  Graces  in terms  of the results  of
    gratitude and ingratitude. If requited one would cultivate the
    virtues of Heaven and Earth (K. 30); one's offspring would be
    filial (K.  33);  there would be peace and prosperity  in the
    world (K.  37);  and one would  be protected  by the laws (K.
    41).  If one were ungrateful  to them, one's  moral character
    would  suffer  from insincerity, partiality, foolishness, and
    so on (K.  30);  one's offspring  would be unfilial (K.  34);
    fellow humans  would turn out to be mutual enemies  (K.  38);
    and laws would become shackles (K. 44).
        Is it because of prudential resons or because of indebtedness
    to the Four Graces, (i.e.,the contents of Dharmakaya Buddha -
    Irwonsang)that  one ought  to follow  the four  sets of moral
    injunctions? Prudential  reasons reflect the founding  motive
    of  Won  Buddhism, namely, the  deliverance  of all  sentient
    beings to a vast paradise, implying a teleological principle.
    Buddhist  ethics has been based on a teleological  principle,
    (44)namely, that whatever is conducive to the realization  of
    nirvana is right.  The aim of Buddha's moral teaching  was to
    help all sentient beings realize nirvana.
        Confucian   ethics,  on   the   other   hand,  has   been
    deontological, namely, that  whatever  is in accordance  with
    Tao (the  universal  moral  principle)was right.(45)Confucian
    moralists  have believed that there are universal principles,
    of which moral rules pertaining to human beings are part, and
    therefore  they  ought  to  be  followed  regardless  of  the
    consequences.
        Sot'aesan's  moral thought was essentially  teleological,
    but relied on some deontological  moral rules to realize  its
    goals.  The mere fact that the Four Graces  were that without
    which  one's life would be impossible  justified  their being
    the object of religious  worship.  Here there were answers to
    why the graces  ought to be requited.  One was based on prud-
    ential reasons.  The Four Graces were living Buddhas  capable
    of blessing  or punishing;  hence, one ought to do all things
    as [if offering] a Buddhist mass. The other was deontological
    in the sense that it was a matter of

    P.442

    necessary  moral course to return what one owed.  Flial piety
    cannot be compromised  [even if heaven  falls!].  Offering  a
    Buddhist mass was a religious  activity, requiting  the Grace
    of Parents was a moral action. However, Sot'aesan synthesized
    the two by suggesting  that  the  way of offering  a Buddhist
    mass  lay  in  requiting  grace  (K.9).  It followed  that  a
    Buddhist  monk did not have to leave  his family  to offer  a
    Buddhist mass to the Buddha statue made of wood or gold.  The
    four sources  of grace were all living  Buddhas  who would be
    well  served  if one requited  the appropriate  grace  in the
    mundane world, for nirvana was different from samsara not
    ontologically but epistemologically.(46)

    VI.  CONCLUSION

        Sot'aesan  did more than merely synthesize  Buddhism  and
    Confucianism  into a new religious  moral  system.  His moral
    system of Won Buddhism contains solutions to the antithetic
    principles  of Buddhism  [Dogen] and Confucianism  [Chu Hsi].
    Chu Hsi's criticism  of Buddhism has no force on Won Buddhism
    since the latter  is not other-worldly.  The ideal of nirvana
    is to be realized  in discharging  one's duties to Heaven and
    Earth, Parents, Brethren, and Law, even though it may be very
    difficult as Dogen saw it. Sot'aesan's moral system can blunt
    Chu  Hsi's   criticism   only   if  Dogen's   or  Nagarjuna's
    other-worldly  practice  of Buddha  dharma can be brought  to
    where sentient beings suffer in samsara. Sot'ae- san has only
    to put into practice Nagarjuna's  ideal to realize nirvana in
    samsara.  This  can be done  when  one takes  Sunyata  as the
    substance, and jen, i, li.  and chih as the functions  of the
    Way.  Here is the meaning  of Charles Fu's phrase, "emptiness
    works wonders in everyday life."(47)
        This  analysis  has used  a Western  concept  of morality
    suggested  by Nowell-Smith,(48) trying to identify the ideals
    of their moral system, their  beliefs  about human nature,the
    kind  of moral  rules  adopted  for the realization  of their
    ideals, and their theories of motivation.  Sot'aesan's  moral
    system has remarkably  clear answers to these questions.  The
    ideal is to realize sagehood in the mundane world and to cure
    the world of illness.  Human nature is neither  good nor evil
    in its  substance, but  it can  be either  in its  functions;
    hence moral training must manifest the three

    P.443

    aspects of the Buddha nature.  Moral rules are deontological,
    prescribing the requital of the Four Graces to which one owes
    one's  life.  Yet  the  theory  of the motivation  to do good
    contains  prudential  reasons  that reflect  the teleological
    ground  of  Won  Buddhism.  Thus, the  moral  system  of  Won
    Buddhism  is based on Buddhist teleological  grounds, but the
    specific  moral  rules  as  means  to  that  goal  come  from
    Confucian  deontology.  It is Won Buddhism's  achievement  to
    have  synthesized  these  two  seemingly  incompatible  moral
    tenets into a harmonious whole.

    FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

                   NOTES

        *Wonbulgyo(at), or Won  Buddhism, is  a form  of Mahayana
    Buddhism  founded  by Pak Chung-bin(au), better  known by his
    style  Sot'aesan(f), after  great  enlightenment  in 1916  in
    Korea.  For a general  introduction  to Won Buddhism, see  my
    "What  is Won Buddhism?" Korea  Journal  24, no.5 (May 1984):
    18-32;  my "The Ethics of Won Buddhism: A Conceptual Analysis
    of the Moral System of Won Buddhism"  (Ph.D.  diss., Michigan
    Stale University, 1979).

    1.  Quoted   by   Roland   Robertson   in  The   Sociological
        Introduction  of  Religion  (New  York:  Schocken  Books,
        1970), p.103.  "For example Christianity was historically
        composed of elements from Eastern and Near Eastern religi
        -ons (e.g. virgin birth, baptism, burial services), from
        Greek religions (asceticism, cosmology, escatology), from
        Judaism (monotheism) and from gnostic religious doctrines."
    2.  Terada  Toru(av)  and  Mizuno  Yaoko(aw)  eds.   Dogen(a)
        (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1972), p.307.  The translation is
        mine.  For an English translation of Dogen's Shobo-genzo,
        see Yuho Yokoi, trans., Zen Master Dogen (New York:
        Weatherhill, 1976).
    3.  So Cheha(ax), ed.  Sosan's Son'ga kuigam(ay) [Models from
        Ch'an Traditions] (Seoul: Poyon'gak, 1978), p.143, para.
        #57.
    4.  Wing-tsit  Chan(az), trans.  and  ed., A Source  Book  in
        Chinese Philosophy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
        Press, 1963), p.646, This  work is referred  to hereafter
        in this paper as "Chan, Source Book. "
    5.  Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty, trans. Denis Paul and
        E.E.M. Anschombe and G.H. von Wright (NewYorkand Evanston:
        J & J Harper, 1969), p. 81.


    P.444     


    6.  Chu  Hsi  and  Lu  Tsu-ch'ien,(ba) comp., Reflections  on
        Things  ot  Hand,  trans.,  Wing-tsit  Chan,  (New  York:
        Columbia University Press, 1967), p. 283. Hereafter refer
        -red to as "Chan, Reflections."
    7.  Loc. cit.
    8.  Charles   Wei-hsun   Fu,   "Morality   or   Beyond:   The
        Neo-Confucian  Confrontation  with  Mahayana  Buddhism, "
        Philosophy East And West XXIII, 3: 395. PEW hereafter.
    9.  Ibid.,  p.   390ff.   Fu  shows  how  life-affirming  and
        this-worldly  tenets are strongly suggested  in the texts
        of Hua-yen, T'ien-t'ai (bb) and Ch'an Buddhism.
    10. Wonbulgyo  kyojon(bc) [Canon  of  Won  Buddhism],  comp.
        Wonbulgyo  Chong-  (bd) huasa  (Iri:  Wonbulgyo  kyomubu
        1962), p.  19, This  work  is referred  to as "K" in the
        text of this paper.
    11. Kim  Tuhon(be) "Songni  ui Yon'gu"(bf) ["A  Study  of the
        Principles  of  Human  Nature"], in Pak  Kilchin(bg) ed.,
        Kinyom  unch'ong(bh) [A Collection  of Articles  for  the
        Commemoration  of the Half  Cenrenniol  of Won Buddhism],
        (Iri: Wonbulgyo Ch'ulp'ansa, 1971), pp.344-361.
    12. Sot'aesan's    view   of   the   central   teachings   of
        Confucianism, Buddhism  and  Taoism  is: "Thus  Buddhism,
        taking as the substance  of the doctrine the unreality of
        all phenomena  of the world, has elucidated  the way  for
        turning  the deluded to the enlightened  by teaching  the
        truth of no-origination and noannihilation. Confucianism,
        taking  as the substance  of its doctrine  the phenomenal
        reality  of all  beings  of the  universe, has elucidated
        mainly   the   way  of  individual   moral   cultivation,
        regulating  one's family, ruling a state, and putting the
        world  at peace, by teaching  the  morality  of the Three
        Bonds and the Five Human Relation and the four virtues of
        jen, i, li, and chi  [humanity, righteousness, propriety,
        and  wisdom].  Taoism, taking  as the  substance  of  its
        doctrine   the  way  of  the  nature   of  the  universe,
        elucidated the way of purity, serenity, and non-action by
        teaching the method of nourishing  one's original nature"
        (K. 125-6).
    13. Sosan, Son'ga  kuigam,p.77, mentions  the four graces  of
        parents, state, teacher, and alms giver.
    14. For  an  incisive  presentation  of this  point, see  Fu,
        "Morality or Beyond" p. 391.
    15. James  Legge,  trans, Confucius: Confucion  Analects, The
        Great Learning, & The Doctrine of the Mean (Oxford: Clare
        -ndon  Press,  1893) ,  pp.356-360.   Hereafter   "Legge,
        Confucius."
    16. Taisho   shinshu   daizokyo(bi)  (Tokyo:  Taisho  shinshu
        daizokyo kanko kai, 1976 reprint) 45: 513c.  This edition
        is referred to by the abbeviation TSD hereafter.
    17. Legge, Confucius,p.383.
    18. Sot'aesan might have said, using Wittgenstein's expression
        (On Certainty,


    P.445


        P.  15) ,  that  different  religious  doctrines  provide
        different  Weltbild  through  which  the faithful of each
        religion  view  one and the same thing  differently;  and
        using  Thomas  Kuhn's  terminology  [  The  Structure  Of
        Scientific Revolution, Chicago: The University of Chicago
        Press, 2nd ed., 1970).  p.  35],that different  religions
        provide different religious "paradigms" through which the
        faithful  see only  certain  things, and do not see other
        things which other people see.
    19. This  view  is found  in  Kim  Unhak,(bj) ed., Chin-k'ang
        ching  wu-chiao  hai(bk) [Interpretations  Of The Diamond
        Sutra By Five Masters]  (Seoul: Hyonam  sa, 1980): p.  4,
        "Yeh-fu's(bl)  'Eulogy   to  the  Circle'...of   all  the
        dharmas, pure  or impure, in the four  dharma  realms  of
        three worlds, not a single dharma arises outside  of this
        Circle.  In Ch'an  it is  called  the  first  phrase;  in
        Chiao(bm) [textual teaching] it is called the pure dharma
        realm. Among the Confucianists is it called T'ai-chi, the
        one  pervading  substance;  in Taoism, the mother  of all
        things  under heaven  In truth, all these names refer  to
        this.  So someone  in the past said of this: 'Before  the
        birth of past Buddhas existed one circle;  even Sakyamuni
        could not meet with it, how could Kasyapa transmit it?' "
    20. S. Radhakrishnan and C. Moore eds, A Sourcebook in Indian
        Philosophy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University  Press,
        1957). p.21. "What was that One who in the unborn's image
        hath  stablished   and  fixed  firm  these  world's   six
        religions [regions?]! They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna,
        Angi, ]and he is heavently nobly-winged Garutman."
    21. Immanuel  Kant, Critique  of Pure  Reason, trans., Norman
        Kemp Smith (New York: St Martin's  Press, 1929, 1968), p.
        269: TSD, 45: 672c.
    22. Kant,Critique of Pure Reoson. p.296.
    23. TSD, 30: 1b; 45: 91b; 48: 1007a, b, "... This is the mind
        which  is empty  and silent  [k'ung-chi(m)], and  is your
        original  face.  This is also the dharma seal transmitted
        from Buddha  to Buddha, from patriarch  to patriarch, and
        all  those  learned  under  heaven."  "...However, in the
        voidness  of all dharmas  is the  empty  (sic! )awareness
        (hsu-chin(n)]. [The Korean edition includes the character
        Line  missing,  see  text  hsu,  emptiness[;   51:  458c,
        "...True  void  [chen-k'ung(k) ]  is  the  substance  and
        marvelous existence  [miao-yu(l)] is  the  function."  It
        must  be noticed that the central  metaphysical  ideas of
        the truth of irwonsang have been expressed in these terms.
    24. Legge,Confucius.p.384 [The Mean.Ch.l,sect.4].
    25. Wang Yang-ming, Instructions for Practical Living, trans,
        Wing-tsit  Chan, (New  York: Columbia  University  Press,
        1963), p.243.
    26. Chan,Source Book, p.661.
    27. Wing-tsit  Chan, "How Buddhistic  is Wang Yang-ming?" PEW
        XII, 3: 214.
    28. See Fu, "Morality or Beyond," pp.391-392, for the point in
        question.
    29. TSD,48:342b.


    P.446     


    30. TSD,8:750c.
    31. The Bible, Matthew: 6,3.
    32. Chan,Reflections, p.6.
    33. Legge, Confucius, p.413.
    34. James  Legge, trans., The Works  Of Mencius, The  Chinese
        Classics. Vol. 2 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895), p. 303.
    35. Chan,Reflections, p.62.
    36. TSD,8:749c.
    37. Chan,Source Book, p.646.
    38. Ibid,p.l9.
    39. Mary 'Lelia  Marka, trans, The Hsiao  Ching(bn) (NewYork:
        St.John's Univer- sity Press, 1961), p. 3.
    40. Ibid.p.l9.
    41. Chan,Source Book, p. 497.
    42. Sosan, Son'ga kuigam, p.  79; In Shin-chi-kwan-ching(bo),
        the four graces include  the graces  of parents, sentient
        beings,  the  king, and  the  triple  treasures  (Buddha,
        sangha, and dharma](Oda tokuno, (bp) Bukkyo daijiten(bq)).
    43. Legge, Confucius, p. 357.
    44. Luiz  O.  Gomez, "Emptiness  and  Moral  Perfection," PEW
        XXIII, 3:370.
    45. Christian Jochim, "Ethical Analysis of an Ancient Debate:
        Moists versus Confucians, " Journal of Religious Erhirs 8,
        no.l (1980): 137.
    46. TSD, 30: 36a: Kenneth K. Inada. trans., Nagarjuna (Tokyo:
        Hokuseido Press, 1970), p.158.
    47. Fu."Morality and Beyond,"p.391.
    48. Patrick  H.  Nowell-Smith, "Religion  and Morality," Paul
        Edward, ed., The Encyclopedia  of Philosophy  (New  York:
        Macmillan Co., 1967), 8: 150

    P.447

     【关闭窗口
    相关文章:
  • 佛教如何看待“爱情”与“欲望”?[150]

  • 寻心记:你从何方来?[148]

  • 药王孙思邈是如何通过佛教来养生的?[168]

  • 漫谈社会上误解佛教的人们[95]

  • 佛教的四大魅力[134]

  • 佛教与青年[109]

  • 佛教生命力的最终意义在何处[208]

  • 佛教和其他宗教之不同[183]

  • 当佛教遇到娱乐时应该怎么办?[260]

  • 佛教 的“变”与画[297]

  • “我”在佛教里的不同含义[273]

  • 相由心生,送你九种佛教美容方法![406]

  • 佛教是如何看待疾病的[359]

  • 佛教到底是什么?是哲学?是科学?是迷信?还是……[480]

  • 佛法东流:正仓院珍宝与佛教在日本的传播[314]

  • 武则天为何对佛教如此狂热,并结下不解之缘?[348]

  • 佛教与心理健康的关系你知道吗?[273]

  • 当景德镇陶瓷遇上佛教,会碰撞出怎样的火花[335]

  • 佛教:出家的本质是什么?真懂的人不多[289]

  • 寺为何叫寺,庙为何叫庙?寺的诞生与佛教无关,寺庙不能混为一谈[307]

  •  
    设为首页 | 加入收藏 | 联系站长 | 友情链接 | 版权申明 | 管理登录 | 
    版权所有 Copyright© 2005 佛学研究        站长:wuys
    Powered by:Great Tang Hua Wei & XaWebs.com 2.0(2006)