8 - 9 JUNE 2000
LEIDEN, THE NETHERLANDS
Yoga-ca-ra Buddhism in China
On 8-9 June 2000, the symposium on 'Yogacara Buddhism in China' was held at the International Institute for Asian Studies at Leiden University. Convened by Chen-kuo Lin, this symposium gathered together scholars and Buddhologists from Taiwan, Japan, America, Canada, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands to explore the literatures and doctrines of Yogacara Buddhism in China from its inception in the fifth century to its modern revival in the twentieth century.
By CHEN-KUO LIN
The theme of the symposium, not inappropriately, was a triple one, the first one of which was to study the Yogåcåra texts translated and collected in the Chinese Tripitaka. Except for a few texts still extant in Sanskrit, most Yogåcåra literature is preserved in Chinese and Tibetan translations, such as Sam.dhinirmocana S¨tra, Yogåcårabh¨mi, and Asa(check)ga's Mahåyånasam.graha, to name but a few. Despite their availability, Chinese textual sources are often ignored by scholars when Tibetan translations are available for reconstruction and exegesis. Calling attention to the textual value of Chinese sources was one of purposes of this symposium. The second thematic focus was on the development of Yogåcåra Buddhism in China from its earliest stage (Dilun Masters and Shelun Masters), the 'Old' Yogåcåra School founded by Paramårtha (499-569), up to the 'New' Yogåcåra School founded by Xuanzang (602-664) and Kuiji (632-682). The revival of Yogåcåra Studies in the Ming dynasty and early decades of the Republican era should also not be overlooked. The third and most interesting focus of the theme was the interchange between Yogåcåra and other Chinese indigenous Buddhist schools, such as Tian-tai, Hua-yan, Chan, and Pure Land.
Diversity of approaches
Given these guidelines, the topics of papers presented at the symposium reflected a great diversity of problematic and methodological approaches. In 'Three Natures in the Mahåyånasaµgraha', Leslie S. Kawamura pointed out the structural similarity between Asa(check)ga's Mahåyånasaµgraha and Vasubandhu's Triµsikå. Both regard the Three-Nature Theory as the modus operandi by which a student can realize the meaning of vijñapti-måtratå (information only), which is construed by Kawamura as a kind of mentalism. In Kawamura's interpretation, Yogåcåra is concerned with the 'meaningful world', but not with the 'ontological world'. What counts are the mental factors in the processing of information. The ontological question of whether 'external objects do not exist' or 'the world is nothing but an idea' does not bother Yogåcåra. However, as we will see later, the ontological question may not easily be dismissed.
Unhappy about some scholars, 'mainly from the Anglo-Saxon cultural sphere', having challenged the Yogåcåra 'idealist' ontology of 'nothing but cognition' (vijñapti-måtratå), in his paper entitled 'On the Problem of the External world in Ch'eng wei shih lun', Lambert Schmithausen vigorously argued that 'the existence of "extra-mental" material (or other) entities' is rejected not only as objects of cognition but also as such without any qualification. Although he might not have the final word, Schmithausen's paper can be seen as one of the most significant responses to the dispute initiated by Alex Wayman in the 1970s and espoused by many scholars since, including Dan Lusthaus, who strongly challenged a non-idealist interpretation.
Instead of reacting to Schmithausen's criticism, Dan Lusthaus turned to the hermeneutic issue. In 'Notes on the Soteric Hermeneutics of Asa(check)ga: Language, Sam.skåras, and Appropriation', Lusthaus examined Asa(check)ga's Abhidharmasamuccaya and the Mahåyånasaµgraha respectively, attempting to answer questions such as 'What are the cognitive conditions at work in a hermeneutic act?' and 'What happens when one reads or hears Buddhavåcana?' Using textual analysis, Lusthaus pointed out that 'the teachings enter one's own consciousness from outside, through the medium of language'. That is, a practitioner hears the teaching which flows from the Purest Dharma-Dhåtu (i.e., Purest Cognitive Field) correctly. As expected, a sort of anti-idealist stance is clearly demonstrable in Lusthaus' hermeneutics.
In 'Language and Consciousness in the Sam.dhinirmocana S¨tra', Chen-kuo Lin elaborated on a Yogåcåra philosophy of language. The main question for Lin was to clarify the ontological status of the referent (nimitta) by looking into the Consciousness and Three-Nature Theories. Using SNS and the Vinißcayasam.graha(integral)^ of Yogåcårabh¨mi as the textual sources, Lin concluded that nimitta is the perceived object that occurs as the effect of psycho-linguistic sediments.
The problem of language also drew John Keenan's attention. In his lengthy paper, 'Critical and Mystic Yogåcåra Philosophy: Paramårtha on language', Keenan provided a systematic account of Yogåcåra philosophy by tracing two contrasting Yogåcåra agendas: (1) critical phenomenology of consciousness and (2) mystic understanding of consciousness. In drawing on the 'unmediated experience', which is ineffable, Yogåcåra has to face the questions: How is one to engage in the world of language? What is the function of language? For Paramårtha, who was characterized by Keenan as more religious and mystic, language is employed as a skilful but arbitrary means to negate all ideas and all words. In reponse to Keenan's presentation, Tilmann Vetter remarked that the 'unmediated experience', for example, of animals, should be differentiated from the Buddhist mystic 'unmediated experience', which is always mediated dialectically.
Chinese Buddhism
In Chinese Buddhism in general, including Yogåcåra, the most influential yet controversial figure is Paramårtha. Following the interpretive context in modern scholarship, in 'The Yogåcåra Doctrine of Buddha-Nature: Paramårtha vs. Fa-hsiang School', Wing-cheuk Chan provided a new interpretation, and argued that Paramårtha's thought should be separated from the Awakening of Faith and tathågatagarbha thought. On the basis of the Fo-hsing lun, which is regarded as Paramårtha's work, Chan also argued that neither Buddha-nature nor amalavijñana function as the (empirical or transcendental) grounds of the world. Accordingly, Paramårtha is a non-idealist in contrast to the idealistic character displayed by Xuanzang.
When observing the historical development, no one can ignore the early stages of Chinese Yogåcåra thought represented in the Dilun Shi and the Shelun Shi. In 'Zhiyi's (538-597) Reception, Interpretation, and Criticism of Dilun- and Shelun- Thoughts', Hans Kantor used the texts of Huiyuan (523-592) plus Dunhuang manuscripts to reconstruct the history and doctrines of early Chinese Yogåcåra schools. He also stressed the role played by these early Yogåcåra commentators in the shaping of Zhiyi's Tiantai philosophy. The interaction between Yogåcåra and Tiantai was clearly exposed.
Nabuyoshi Yamabe drew our attention to another interaction between Yogåcåra and the indigenous Buddhist Schools, namely Xuanzang's Faxiang School and Northern Chan. In 'Yogåcåra Influence on the Northern School of Chan Buddhism', Yamabe subverted the stereotype of common understanding that Xuanzang's Yogåcåra Buddhism had little influence on the later indigenous Buddhist Schools. By carefully analysing the Yuanming lun and the Zhengzong lun, Yamabe concluded that there is a strong textual and doctrinal link between Yogåcåra and the Northern Chan.
Huimin Bhikkhu shed light on modern Chinese Yogåcåra scholarship. He introduced us to an interpretation of Yogåcåra thought from Yinshun, the most prominent monk-scholar in Taiwan. In Huimin's 'Prat^tya-samutpåda and Prat^tya-samutpanna Dharma-lak(omega)a(omega)a: The Essence of Yogåcåra thought from the viewpoint of Venerable Yinshun', the different positions adopted by Asa(check)ga and Vasubandhu can be explained by looking into their different interpretations of 'causation' and 'the characteristics of causally arisen phenomena'.
Lastly, in 'Yogåcåra and Abhidharma in China', Charles Willemen provided a brief, historical picture of the Sarvåstivåda and the Sautråntika Abhidharmas as precedents to the rise of the Yogåcåra school. He summarized a quite complicated historical context involving many figures and doctrines in India, Central Asia, and China.
Conclusions
After two days of in-depth discussion, most participants agreed that this was a truly pioneering seminar on the study of Yogåcåra Buddhism. In general, this symposium was fruitful and promising. It was fruitful because it contributed scholarship of a high standard to the study of Yogåcåra Buddhism. It was promising because a new land was discovered. However, more effort needs to be made. As Professor Kawamura proposed, a follow-up conference on the same subject will take place at the University of Calgary, Canada, in two years' time. *
Professor Chen-kuo Lin was the European Chair of Chinese Studies until 1 August 2000 at the IIAS, Leiden.
E-mail: cklin@nccu.edu.tw