English
” As the character of Mahayana unfolded, another Buddha type, Amitabha (Chinese: O-mi-t‘o Fu, hy iff bé #) came to occupy the chief place in worship as well as in thought. His image very soon acquired one of ‘the principal positions in the temples, being placed either as the central figure, or being set up on the side of honor (left side) of Sakyamuni Buddha. It is very difficult to trace out the sources from which the conception of Amitabha arose. A large number of guesses and conjectures on this question are given by the Chinese. Hinayana Buddhism does not [38] KK > 1( S , KR <0 Eines SS > 33 | I re eae ESSE Ey NN EVE Le amma ntunesnanan aia RMAHINGNERONRATANNARNO CNN CN CEN Se UNIS ESNNENENENC NC EEE ES app y}— RSRRO ON TAOS eee SAKYAMUNI INNER DEVELOPMENT once mention the name, and in the Indian Veda literature there is not a hint of it. Some assert that he is the ninth son of the Buddha of Wisdom. The larger number hold to the explanation that he is the son of one of the prehistoric Buddhas named the “Freely Existing King.” After having gone through all the steps to Buddhahood, and taking his famous forty-eight vows, he was born for the last time into the land of bliss, the “Western Paradise”’ (Hi 77 Hi $8 Uk 3), as the Chinese call it (Sukhavati). Here he was united with the two others in the Tathagata group Kuan-yin (#1 #%) and Ta-shih-chih (XK 4 =). From that moment, he could not become incarnate again, and for this reason he works through his two powerful assistants above mentioned. These two, as bodhisattvas, can <fén shén” (4 4), divide their bodies, and thus come to the help of the created world. This is especially the case with Kuan-yin or Kuan-shih-yin (#i it BH) (Avalokitesvara), “‘The one who hears the cry.” It is also very common to depict Amitabha as the great heavenly Buddha, who stands three generations removed in age from Sakyamuni Buddha. Some assert further that Sakyamuni Buddha was merely one of Amitabha’s last incarnations. Still others maintain that Amitabha is a collective expression which takes in all Buddhas and all the Absolute. Therefore when one prays the commonly used short prayer ‘‘Nan-mo O-mi-t‘o Fu (m4 46 ft if BE Gh) (“I honour thee and resort to thee, Amitabha’’), one has prayed to and called upon all the Buddhas. Others say that the syllables in the name stand for the most important [39] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM virtues which are necessary for attaining the honour of Buddhahood: O=goodness, mi=moral conduct, t‘o= contemplation, fu=knowledge. (Cf. the famous book “Hstian Fu Pu,” 3 th #, “Suggestions for the Attainment of the Dignity of Buddhahood.”’) There is assuredly no other name in the whole Buddhist terminology in China which so strongly holds the interest of those given to meditation and speculation, and provides so fruitful a field for religious mysticism and profound reflection. According to the Chinese Buddhists, the “historical” foundation for the understanding of Amitabha is to be found in the classics strictly adopted by the “Pure Land’’ School. Here in the great and small *Sukhavati Vyuha Sutra” (“ Wu-liang-shou Ching,” 4 & 3 &, and “Q-mi-t‘o Ching,” Pf] i BE #), Gotama Buddha introduces the merciful All-Father Amitabha. We are told that, before becoming a Buddha, Amitabha was a pious and good monk by the name Dharmakara, who subsequently became a powerful bodhisattva. As a bodhisattva he made forty-eight great vows to rescue all living beings in all the different spheres of life. Having in this way stored up boundless merit and saving power for “innumerable lost souls,’’ he became the “Buddha of boundless age and light” (Wu-liang shou, Wu-liang kuang, 4 it 3%, 406 4% 56). On one point all, even the greatest rationalists among the monks(and there are a remarkable number), seem to agree, and that is that, when one follows the Amitabha idea to its uttermost limit, one ends finally with one’s own heart. For it is there that Amitabha [40] INNER DEVELOPMENT ultimately reveals himself —and that not as something from without, but at the very centre of one’s own human existence, as one’s real and best ego. Thus one meets expressions among the deepest thinkers within the Buddhist world in China which, in holy exaltation, reach their climax in the confession: “‘Amitabha is myself!’ I have heard it personally in a few great moments when I have been with monks in their cells and had a chance to talk things out with them, and it has struck me that this confession was always accompanied by a certain gesture. The hand was laid on the heart. The striking likenessto the mys- tics among the Persian Sufists, the spiritual branch of Mohammedans, will here instantly impress itself on all who are at all acquainted with the history of religion. As we shall see later, the name “ Amitabha”’ has in time taken on a more monotheistic tone. This was especially true during the period when Nestorianism_ made itself most felt. What has been said here of Amitabha will be suf- ficient to give an impression of the tremendous signifi- cance his name acquired in China, and will show how all the threads in the web of Mahayana lead back to him. We shall postpone the further treatment of his nature and functions to the point when we can con- centrate on the purer and more refined form of Mahayana, that which is comprised in the “Ching- t‘u”’ (2 -L), or “Pure Land” School. We must at this point proceed to look at the more historical aspects of Mahayana’s inner development in China. [41] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM It has already been mentioned that China became more and more the stage for the great breaking up of forces within the Buddhist society. This is due to the fact that the centre of gravity for the life of Buddhism had been transferred to China. The reaction against Buddhism grew stronger in its native land, India, and finally it was actually pushed out of its cradle. The split between Hinayana and Mahayana also grew steadily deeper, until the former found a sure resting- place for itself in Ceylon, Burma, and Siam. — While this withdrawal was in progress, however, a new factor had already begun to make itself felt, a factor which served more especially to increase the confusion in China also, namely the practice of pilgrimages. Lokaraksha and Anshikao (Arsaces), the zealous missionaries of Mahayana in China, had, with great success, proclaimed the principal doctrines of the ‘‘Great Vehicle,” and, in that way, had led the rather colourless form of Buddhism, which first had entrance into China, into more definite lines. Later, a great many other Buddhist monks of various schools and sects came over from India into China. Little by little, it became quite common also for the Chinese Buddhist monks to travel westward on pilgrimages, and many and varied were the sacred writings and relics which they brought back with them to China. Some of these pilgrims travelled all the way down to South India, even to Ceylon, and quite naturally they received strong impressions of Hinayana Buddhism also. So the confusion increased with every new [42] INNER DEVELOPMENT pilgrimage that was undertaken. Here without doubt we find the chief cause of the tangled and overweighted condition which stamps the Chinese Mahayana down to the present day. This situation is all the more strange as it is con- stantly said in the books of travel of that period that “now that this pilgrimage has been brought to a happy conclusion, we have finally succeeded in completing that which was lacking in the scriptures and securing the desired clearness in the formerly contradictory systems.” China was positively flooded with scrip- tures, and it is with apparent impatience that the patrons of Buddhism among the emperors appointed one “commission” after another to give Mahayana’s Tripitaka, on Chinese soil its final form. The great internal contradictions between Mahayana and Hina- yana scriptures which continually emerged filled the air with excitement, and the most amazing theories were propounded by which to explain the whole. We shall go into this matter in greater detail in the treat- ment of the Chinese Tripitaka and Buddhist literature as a whole. Among the famous pilgrims, we must mention Fa- hsien (j $4), A.D. 399; Sung-yiin (# ZH), 518; I-ch‘ing (38 77), 634-713; and Hsiian-chuang (% 4), 629-645.1 Of these men, the first and the last are especially worthy of attention. Professor Legge’s translation, ‘‘Wa-Hsien’s Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms,” gives 10ur sources for an understanding of these pilgrims are, besides their own records of their travels which are still partially preserved, the two books: Memoirs of Famous Monks” (from 519) and “Memoirs of Remarkable Monks” (from 1415), [43] TRUTH AND TRADITION IN BUDDHISM a good view of that remarkable pilgrim’s life and thought. Through his books of travel, we can follow him across Gobi’s dangerous desert sands, where ‘only the bleached bones along the way showed the path.” We can see how the tribes on the borders of the Chinese Empire were already influenced by the “law,” or, in other words, the “way of salvation” as Buddhism had outlined it. It is also interesting to notice that it was Mahayana that was especially cultivated. Among the many remarkable experiences which the monk had in northern India, we may mention espe- cially the sight of the immense “Maitreya statue,” eighty ells high and eight ells at the base from knee to knee. (Here the position of meditation is clearly indi- cated.) It was in the “kingdom of To-lieh”’ that Fa- hsien saw this imposing image.