화엄불교: 인드라의 보석망 - 프랜시스 쿡 Full text 8

  화엄불교: 인드라의 보석망  - 프랜시스 쿡 Full text 8

Full text of "hua-yen-buddhism-the-jewel-net-of-indra"

Hua-yen Buddhism the Jewel Net of Indra
Francis H. Cook  1977

==
Contents

Preface

1. The Jewel Net of Indra
2. The Hua-yen School
3. The Indian Background of Hua-yen 
4. Identity
5. Intercausality
6. The Part and the Whole
7. Vairocan
8. Living in the Net of Indra

Notes
Glossary

Index

===

Living in the Net of Indra 

It is tame now, in this final chapter, to remind the reader of a point made much 

earlier in this book. Primarily, Buddhism 1s praxis, something that one does. 

Although elements such as having faith, possessing a warm feeling about the 

religion, and adhering to certain credal formulas are not absent from Buddhism, 

it may safely be said that these things are not in themselves enough. Likewise, 

there is a lot of “philosophy” in Buddhism, in the form of logic, cosmology, and 

epistemology, but to be a Buddhist entails much more than having a certain 

philosophy of existence. One must make the philosophy a lived reality, so that 

systems of thought such as Hua-yen must give rise to a particular mode of activity. 

Otherwise, the believer is merely indulging m intellectual fun, and Buddhism 

would claim that the problem of life 1s too pressing to waste in fruitless mind- 

games. 

Faith, attitudes, credal purity, and the like, are not without value, but in 

themselves they are insufficient for spiritual freedom. They may help in some way 

to make the long journey to infinite light, but the journey itself is a series of acts 

of a certain kind, including some glimpse, however partial and imperfect, of the 

light itself. Thus the Bodhisattva who begins to wend his way down the eons 

must do more tlian believe in his religion, and he must do more than gain an 

understanding of the nature of existence through a study of philosophical texts; 

he must act as if the Hua-yen vision were an indubitable reality. Buddhism 

therefore places a great amount of stress on meditation and the ethical life which is 

the outflow of this meditation, for both are at once practical means of realizing 

the Hua-yen dharma-dhatu and an acting out of the reality of that vision. The 

function of Hua-yen thought, as was remarked earlier, 1s to be a lure which 

attracts the aspirant to the practice which will presumably culminate in an 

existential, or experiential, validation of what was before only theory. At the 

same time, it guides the aspirant in actual interrelationships, serving as a kind of 

template by means of which the individual may gauge the extent to which his 

actions conform to the reality of identity and interdependence. 

110 Hua-yen Buddhism 

Needless to say, Hua-yen did not invent Buddhist ethics, nor did it invent the 

overall picture of the Bodhisattva’s path with its many stages of development. 

This marga scheme was already in existence when Hua-yen arose. What it did do 

in its attempt to comprehend the whole of Buddhism within one grand synthesis 

was to supply a more thorough rationale for the Bodhisattva’s path than had been 

achieved before the arising of Hua-yen. In doing this, it laid a basis for ethical 

life and for various important Buddhist concepts which was ambitious in its 

attempt and satisfying in its achievement. 

This chapter concentrates on several key items in the inventory of Buddhist 

thought and practice. First, there is the path of the Bodhisattva, conceived by 

Hua-yen as stretching over fifty-three stages and countless kalpas. What 1s that 

path, and what is the relationship between the various stages? Second, since the 

path is for the purpose of enlightenment, when does this enlightenment occur? 

Is this enlightenment something one achieves in a flash, or does it come to the 

aspirant gradually, over a long period of time? Third, and closely related to the 

previous question, whose enlightenment is 1t when the aspirant is enlightened? 

Is it his alone, or do all share in 1t in some manner? A corollary of this is the 

question of the relationship of any one individual’s ignorance or nonenlighten- 

ment (avidyd) to other beings. Fourth, and finally, a rather extensive question: 

Granted that the picture of existence as portrayed by Hua-yen is a true picture, 

how should I conduct myself in my relationship with the infinity that 1s the other? 

Why should I bother to seek enlightenment at all? Is there any moral imperative, 

even implicit, im Hua-yen which demands that I make this search? Most impor- 

tant, what is the relationship between the goal sought by the aspirant and the 

ethical stance which he takes? This chapter will investigate these, as well as some 

ancillary matters, in the light of the portrait of the dharma-dhatu so painstakingly 

created by Fa-tsang and his tradition. 

The Bodhisattva marga is conceived as being a very long, heroic endeavor, 

covering many lifetimes, marked in each life by the total commitment of the ‘ 

Bodhisattva to emancipate all beings even at the expense of his own life. But in 

order to do this, he must take pains never to actually reach the final stage in his 

career, perfect enlightenment, for were he to finally reach the fifty-third stage he 

would cease forever to be reborn in the destinies of woe, and as a consequence, 

he would not have the opportunity to work for the good of all beings. According 

to Fa-tsang, he prevents this by deliberately retaining some of the moral and 

intellectual faults (klesa) which will bind him to rebirth, thus enabling him to be 

perpetually reborn in the evil paths in order to aid suffering beings.* Since pre- 

sumably there will always be bemgs who need help, the Bodhisattva’s career 1s 

endless, and of course this means that he is forever shut off from the goal which he 

Living in the Net of Indra 111 

could have if he wished. Such is the heroic, compassionate career of the Bod- 

hisattva. However, there 1s a paradox here, and it has been noted in the 

Lankavatara Siitra; m deliberately refusing the final goal of the highest, perfect 

enlightenment, which comes at the fifty-third stage, the Bodhisattva in fact 

acquires the only real enlightenment, which 1s nothing but the renunciation of 

personal desires so complete that even the highest good of nirvana 1s tossed away 

as if it were the merest trifle.? The Saddharmapundarika Sutra tells us that even the 

Buddha himself has not finished his Bodhisattva work, though he has trained for 

incalculable eons.? 

Admittedly this 1s a grand concept, and it 1s obviously one which places almost 

unrealistic demands on the aspirant, who is, after all, a human being, and a human 

being who lives with other beings who probably do not share his exalted view of 

things. For what this commitment means in concrete terms Is that even before he 

1s a perfect Buddha, the Bodhisattva must begin to follow the vocation of a 

Buddha. That is, he must begin his mission of emancipating all beings, even at 

the cost of his own life, at exactly the point in hus career where he presently finds 

himself. According to the Japanese Zen master Dogen, the question which all 

Buddhas ask 1s, ““How can I cause beings to enter the supreme Way and speedily 

perfect Buddha bodies?,”* because a Buddha’s life is nothing but the cosmic task 

of making all beings over into Buddhas. The Bodhisattva must likewise ask the 

same question at all stages of development, even at the very beginning of his 

mission, for he cannot wait until he has acquired the rare and special abilities of a 

perfect Buddha. 

The basis of this idea can be found 1n several places. First, there are the exempla 

of the jatakas, the previous lives of the man who became the founder of Buddhism. 

In these stories we see that even though the beng who was ultimately to become 

a Buddha had not yet become one, these previous lives were all marked by a 

selflessness and compassignate action which were to culminate in perfection. The 

insight and compassion which are the “two wings of Buddhahood” were thus 

abundantly evident in an individual who was still far from perfection. Second, 

there 1s a kind of logic at the root of this activity. That 1s, the perfection of 

Buddhahood, defined as absolute egolessness and compassion, can hardly be 

achieved by someone who selfishly and egotistically strives for his own private 

perfection. This inner contradiction of selfishly seeking selflessness thus leads to a 

new orientation. The Bodhisattva abandons his own ultimate reward and 

dedicates his life, and all future lives, to the emancipation of every last living 

being. But this training 1m insight and compassion to which he commits himself 

is itself the very life-activity of a Buddha. Here too 1s a paradox, for ina Buddhist 

version of “one hand washing another,” as the Bodhisattva strives ceaselessly to 

112, -Hua-yen Buddhism 

benefit others, he is also benefiting himself all the time.® In a spiraling dialectical 

movement which traverses the eons, the Bodhisattva benefits others; this benefit 

increases his own insight and compassion, and this in turn better equips him to 

benefit other beings. Thus to help others 1s really to help oneself; to help oneself is 

to help others. The ultimate good of nirvana 1s not really lost sight of in the eons 

of selfless giving to others, and while practically speaking the Bodhisattva’s 

mission will never end, in theory he will enter final nirvana side by side with the 

last being. In time, say the scriptures, every living thing, even the grass, will 

enter the unspeakable bliss of nirvana. Were it otherwise, it would not be the 

Dharma. 

But logic and scriptural testimony aside, what reason is there for believing 

that Buddha activity is present in all stages of the marga, not excluding the very 

early stage of the beginner? The basis is, of course, the truth of emptiness, Sanyata. 

The fifty-three stages of the Bodhisattva are as empty as any other thing, which 1s 

to say that any stage, including the stage of Buddhahood, possesses only a 

contingent existence. Their identity, that 1s, 1s precisely their interdependent 

being. According to Fa-tsang, 

If one stage is acquired, all stages are acquired, because [each stage] possesses 

the six characteristics [of universality and particularity, etc.], because of the 

infinite interrelationship of primary and secondary, because of mutual 

interpenetration, because of mutual identity, and because of mutual inter- 

fusion. The Avatamsaka Sutra says, “One stage mcludes the qualities of all 

stages throughout.” Therefore, what is meant here is the acquisition of all 

stages as well as the stage of Buddhahood as soon as one has reached that part 

[of the path] which 1s called ‘“‘superior progress,” which 1s the perfection of 

faith. 

He then concludes, 

Because all stages including the stage of Buddhahood are identical, then 

cause and effect are not different, and beginning and end interpenetrate. On 

each stage, one is thus both a Bodhisattva and a Buddha. [My emphasis]® 

Thus, according to Fa-tsang, when one reaches that stage of development which 

is the perfection of the stage of faith, one 1s both a Bodhisattva and a Buddha, and, 

of-course, the same dual role is played at each of the following forty-three stages. 

The causal stage of faith and the resultant stage of perfect Buddhahood inter- 

Living in the Net of Indra 113 

penetrate, are identical, are mutually dependent, and equally empty. For the 

details of this-situation, the reader may recall the arguments in Chapter 6 on the 

analogy of the building. In essence, the situation 1s this: if the stage of faith is 

truly a causal stage, there must, by implication, be a resultant stage, which is 

Buddhahood, because it is the result which makes the cause a cause. The eventual 

attainment of the result in fact proves that the stage of faith was causal in nature. 

In the analogy of the building, we have a parallel case, where the part-rafter can 

only be a rafter when the whole building 1s present, making the rafter a rafter. 

If this seems to be a specious argument, it must be remembered that any part, 

according to Hua-yen, 1s only a part due to the fact that the whole makes 1t a part. 

Therefore, the whole path, including Buddhahood, must be present during the 

first stage of development. 

Now, such a view naturally leads to the corollary view of the Bodhisattva, 

even in the early stage of faith, as already endowed with the powers and majesty 

of full Buddhahood. Fa-tsang praises the Bodhisattva extravagantly : 

From the [point of development of] perfection of faith and the’attainment of 

the stages onward, the activities of the Bodhisattva which have come into 

being fill up the entire dharma-dhatu. According to the [ Avatamsaka] sutra, 

for instance, “With one hand he can cover the immense trichiliocosm. The 

ritual implements which he holds in his hands are as extensive as space and 

the dharma-dhatu. He honors countless Buddhas simultaneously, performs 

all the activities of a Buddha, and his benefit to living beings 1s inexpres- 

sible.’’? 

With forty-three stages left to traverse, the Bodhisattva 1s already performing the 

miracles of a Buddha. 

Here, the question may easily arise as to why the Bodhisattva should bother 

with the remaining forty-three stages, since even as a neophyte the activities of 

Buddhahood are present. Fa-tsang admits that the later stages, posterior to faith, 

are necessary and that indeed the Bodhisattva cannot stop his training after faith 

1s ripe. According to the Treatise, the remaining stages are taught because “they 

are the ‘all’ which are included in the first. These later stages are the same as the 

first [in cluding all].”® This rather cryptic answer need not trouble us if we 

keep firmly in mind the doctrine of interdependent being. While the later stages 

are in some sense present in the first stage, nevertheless, the first stage 1s only a 

first stage relative to the second, third, and so on. If those later stages are not 

patiently perfected also, the first stage was not really a first stage at all. In fact, 

114 Hua-yen Buddhism 

simultaneity and sequence are both realities, just as in the general picture given by 

Hua-yen, all things are stmultaneously particular and universal, individuals but 

also the totality. 

Previous and later being mutually inclusive fi.e., interpenetrating] and 

completely interfused without obstacle, they are different from [the stages 

in] the three vehicles. .. . Still, the stages are not disturbed, and yet they are 

identical; and this identity is not disturbed, but there still remains always 

a sequence. Therefore the two concepts. are mutually inclusive, with no 

contradiction between them.? 

Consequently, while the Bodhisattva must perfect each of the stages in order, on 

each stage all the qualities of the remaining stages, including Buddhahood, are 

present. 

I believe that in this treatment of the stages, there is another issue at stake, 

however muted it may be. This 1s the very important doctrine of ‘“‘Buddha- 

nature.” It will be recalled that in an earlier quotation in this chapter, Fa-tsang 

spoke of a situation m which “‘cause and effect are not different, and begining 

and end interpenetrate.” Now, if the effect or fruit of the Bodhisattva’s causal 

practices 1s Buddhahood, and if cause and effect are identical, Fa-tsang’s comment 

1s tantamount to saying that the causal state must be Buddha-result itself. This is 

a thorough mixing of cause and effect, because what is conventionally considered 

to be the fruit of a long sequence of acts is now said to be that which 1s present 

right from the very beginning and, indeed, that which 1s performing the causal 

acts. But in a universe which 1s claimed to be the body of Vairocana, it should not 

be surprising that Buddha-nature is not only completely pervasive spatially but is 

temporally omnipresent as well. This 1s not, in Chinese Buddhism, an unorthodox 

doctrine, because it simply deals in a different manner with the older, common 

distinction of “‘intrinsic enlightenment” and “acquired enlightenment.” !° 

According to this doctrine, all beings are endowed with intrinsic enlightenment 

from the beginning, and the existentual realization of this true nature occurs when 

the intrinsic enlightenment is “nourished” by acquired enlightenment, the 

training of the stages of the Bodhisattva. A common metaphor for this is that of 

the seed which becomes a sprout when it has been moistened by the rain. This 

indicates a situation in which it is really the intrinsic enlightenment, or fundamen- 

tal Buddha-nature, which 1s acting as an impetus to training, and indeed which 1s 

acting through the individual in a process of self-realization. 

Something else 1s involved also, and that is the well-known and troublesome 

doctrine of “sudden enlightenment.” As we see this concept developed by such 

Living in the Net of Indra 115 

men as Hui-neng, the Japanese Soto Zen master Dogen, and others, it becomes 

evident that the issue over sudden enlightenment as opposed to gradual enlighten- 

ment had little or nothing to do with the question of the speed with which the 

enlightenment event occurred. Allschools of Buddhism agreed that the enlighten- 

ment event was of necessity a sudden one. Rather, the question centered around 

the issue of whether enlightenment had to be preceded by a progressive course of 

moral improvement. The “suddenists” such as Hui-neng denied the necessity 

of prior training, and their basis for this was the conviction that beings are 

already enlightened, albeit ignorant of their enlightenment. That is, they were 

endowed with intrinsic enlightenment. In the writings of Hui-neng and Dogen, 

then, there is a strong denial of meditation and ethics as means to the end which is 

enlightenment; instead, we find that training is that which merely manifests, or 

draws out, that which one already is in theory.1! Therefore, training 1s not at all 

negated by the suddenists, including the Hua-yen masters, who also considered 

themselves to be suddenists. This idea, which is one of the prominent features of 

Sino-Japanese Buddhism, 1s here reflected in the totalistic arguments of Hua-yen, 

where we also see that the Bodhisattva, at the dawn of his career, carries out the 

compassionate, msightful deeds of the Buddha, but must also continue his 

training throughout the fifty-three stages if that Buddha activity 1s to be 

strengthened and deepened. 

When Fa-tsang says that cause and effect are the same, he is perhaps reflecting 

some of the creative intellectual ferment that was taking place during the Su- 

T’ang period, particularly with regard to the question of the relationship between 

the absolute and relative (li and shih), and with regard to the question of whether a 

person had to wait several eons in order to become a Buddha, a question of great 

importance to Chinese Buddhists.!2 The conclusion was that the Buddha seed 

1s present right from the beginning, requirixg only the nourishment of practice 

in order to sprout, flourish, and bloom. It is really this intrinsic Buddha-nature 

which acts to realize itself, not the individual. That is, Buddhahood is its own 

cause. Such an idea, so pregnant with possibilities for the career of the Bodhisattva, 

eventually culminated, in fact, in the perceptive and profoundly religious obser- 

vation of Dogen, who said that “no ordinary beings ever became Buddhas; 

only Buddhas become Buddhas.’’!3 This can only bea world in which the Buddha 

realizes himself in and through beings in an act of cosmic, eternal self-limitation. 

The Bodhisattva cannot, and need not, wait through the eons in order to 

eventually equip himself to perform the compassionate deeds of a Buddha. 

He can and must begin early in his course of training to act as if he were a Buddha. 

While in the beginning his career will be marked by success and failure, continual 

training will result in the development of his abilities. It may seem, as I have 

116  Hua-yen Buddhism 

said, a great burden to lay on the neophyte Bodhisattva, but we must bear in 

mind that the Mahayana conception of the Bodhisattva 1s a truly exalted one. 

The real Bodhisattva (and not the “Bodhisattva in name only”’) 1s that individual 

who has reached a crucial turning point in his career, when he can, in all sincerity 

and with an absolute commitment, make a vow to emancipate all living beings 

before he 1s emancipated himself. The figure of Amida, in Japanese Pure Land 

Buddhism, 1s perhaps the epitome of this ideal, along with his “‘spiritual son,” 

Kannon. If the aspirant cannot make this vow, he 1s not a Bodhisattva.14 

It can be seen, then, that the Hua-yen tradition offers its own kind of reasons 

as to why Buddha activity is present in all phases of Bodhisattva activity. Implicit 

is the understanding that Buddha-nature is a reality even in the “green” Bod- 

hisattva, and that his arduous training will make this nature a reality which will 

illuminate his experience and increasingly give power and direction to his acts. 

As Hua-yen sees the situation, this activity is possible because the universe is one 

of identity and interdependence. 

We might pause here to make a brief summary of the Bodhisattva’s career. 

At the outset of this career, he makes a vow 1n utter seriousness to postpone his 

own enlightenment until the day when all other beings, even the grass, enter 

the supreme bliss of nirvana. At best, this dooms the Bodhisattva to enter the 

blazing heat of samsdra over and over again, throughout countless lifetimes, 

until he can enter the cool peace of nirvana simultaneously with the last poor 

soul. At the worst, he will never reach his ideal goal, for viewed realistically, 

there will always be a considerable pool of unemancipated beings in need of 

ferrying across. These acts, which are of the nature of prajna-insight and com- 

passion (karuna), which are the very essence of Buddhahood, must not wait 

upon the Bodhisattva’s achievement of ultimate enlightenment but must begin 

even at that point in his training when the Bodhisattva makes his great vow. 

Thus, while he unflaggingly pursues the life of the Bodhisattva in life after life, 

in all the destinies, from the purgatories up through the deva realms, at each of 

the fifty-three stages he must do the work of a Buddha. Dogen, five centuries 

after the time of Fa-tsang, comments on this dual role: 

That which we call the ultimate 1s Buddhahood, or bodhi. If the highest, 

perfect enlightenment [anuttara samyak sambodhi| and this first arousal of 

the thought of enlightenment are compared, it is like the world-fire at the 

end of the eon compared with a firefly. And yet, having acknowledged this, 

if one arouses this enlightenment-thought of ferrying across all others to 

the other shore even though oneself has not yet been ferried across, there 1s 

no difference between the two.15 

Living in the Net of Indra - 117 

Not very many Buddhists make this ultrmate commitment, Just as the imitatio 

Christi 1s rather uncommon even among those who believe they are true Chris- 

tians. If we ask why anyone would take upon himself this seemingly impossible 

burden, the answer must be that upon rare occasions, an individual appears who 

possesses such a profoundly religious spirit that he cannot conceive of accepting 

a reward which excludes even one of his suffering fellow beings. For him, it 

must be all or nothing, and if all beings do not enter the gate along with him, 

then, like Dharmakara in the Large Sukhavati-vyiha Sutra, he will never accept 

the prize which 1s rightfully his. There 1s a touching story told in Hindu literature 

of a man who died and went to reap his reward in one of those Hindu heavens 

where the delights are beyond the imagination of men. He was accompanied by 

his beloved and faithful dog. When he reached the entrance of the heaven, he was 

stopped and told that only human beings could enter heaven. He thereupon told 

the gatekeeper that he would not enter heaven alone, for he could never leave 

behind the dog who had been so faithful a companion 1n life. Both man and dog 

were then allowed to enter into the heaven, for it developed that this was just a 

final test to determine whether the man really deserved to enjoy the delights of 

heaven. The question 1s, can we really forget the rest of that life of which we are 

part, turn our backs on the sighs and moans of living creatures, and greedily 

accept a prize, however holy and transcendent, which others cannot also enjoy? 

The Bodhisattva’s answer 1s ‘‘No.” The Bodhisattva might add, using the words 

of Jesus, ‘‘Truly I say to you, I shall be with you, even to the end of time.” 

Hua-yen Buddhism sees such a commitment as a necessary corollary of 2 

universe which 1s a single organic body, one living Buddha body. If the Hua-yen 

vision of being contains any validity at all, then what touches one part of that 

body must touch the whole body. Because the whole web is shaken when one 

strand 1s touched, the whole of existence 1s somelfow affected by the progress 

of the Bodhisattva. For the same reason, mn a way which may elude those of us 

whoare too engrossed in mundane matters of getting and spending, the ignorance, 

hatred, and desire which poison any one man’s life must also poison the whole of 

existence. This bemg the case, any light which illuminates and transforms the 

existence of one person also helps to illuminate and transform the life of an 

Eskimo in northern Alaska, and by the same token, my own ignorance is also 

the ignorance of the nomad in the Kalahari Desert. Am I not the poorer because 

one man decided that six million Jews should be murdered? Likewise, because 

Bodhidharma sat in meditation, facing a cave wall for nine years, am J not the 

better? Who truly knows the outer limits of the radiating karma of any one man? 

Perhaps to pluck a flower is indeed to make a star in Orion tremble to its molten’ 

core. Only a Buddha really knows. 

118  Hua-yen Buddhism 

Not only is the reality of identity and interdependence the basis for Bodhisattva 

activity, but it also acts as a moral imperative, leaving the truly moral being with 

no option but to act in accordance with this reality. For if my own existence is 

unthinkable apart from the existence of this infinite other, and if my Own actions 

touch these beings in some manner, then I must have an obligation to act in such 

a way that all benefit from the acts. I may, of course, choose otherwise, but then 

[am not acting in a fundamentally ethical manner, nor, of course, am I making 

any progress in my own development. But insight teaches me that my chorces do 

indeed touch others, and i a manner unsuspected by Sartre, I choose for all 

when I choose for myself. It even reaches beyond the human, so that if I throw 

away a paper drinking cup, I can almost hear the reverberations of a falling tree 

m Michigan. If I choose the way of common men, I choose that all partake of 

some share of darkness and rage; if, on the contrary, I choose the way of light, 

I choose that all be bathed in light. If, as Hua-yen claims, all things are bound 

inextricably together in community, then what I will, will be the lot of all. 

Consequently, if I have the least shred of concern for my own spiritual progress, 

I must care—really care—for the spiritual growth of even the grass. We rise or 

fall together, like yucca plants and yucca moths. We are one body. 

The Hua-yen tradition has found the answer to the nature of the Bodhisattva’s 

career in the fact of a universe of identity and interdependence. The Bodhisattva 

cannot make a selfish, brash assault on the citadel of nirvana because he knows 

he is not alone and that no one can enter alone. He must, therefore, find his own 

ultimate good in the good of the other. He is a sympathetic being in the same 

way that a strmg on a violin is sympathetic; when the other strings vibrate, it 

vibrates, and when it vibrates, so do the others. This 1s, admittedly, not the warm, 

melting sympathy known in human emotions, but a sympathy which is akin to 

the insight into emptiness itself. This may be said :inequivocally; this sympathy 

is nothing more than the dynamic, social manifestation of prajna, sight in action. 

If we are all one being, the one body of Vairocana, surely I can never consider 

my fate apart from the rest of the body; it must be all, or nothing. When I finally 

approach the point of ultimate perfection, which Hua-yen calls “entering the 

dharma-dhatu,”’ then every being, to the last blade of grass, must enter the door 

together. 

. But where does my obligation end? It will be abundantly clear from preceding 

chapters that the interrelationships described by Hua-yen are not simply those 

among human beings, or even simply among living things. Whether the indivi- 

dual is a human being, a birch tree, or a stone, that individual exists only in 

dependence on all other things. But the human being is faced with a problem not 

shared by a stone; he must adopt an ethical stance toward all things, including 

sc tenminhn rea nnhenntinamt eh setieinaindiainihniananentiteneytanheeetsnnnrneniesas 

otneinnininenenainen nin nininimtiimetiitntnnanmneatenaneioserotnsinen 

Living in the Net of Indra 119 

water, soil, stone, and even human artifacts, which is consonant with this inter- 

dependence. First, whenever it 1s in my power, I must promote their destinies in 

the same way in which they indubitably promote mine. Second, looked at from 

the negative side, I must abstain from actions which interfere in their destinies, 

which detract from their integrity, and which degrade or nullify them. But I 

depend on these things in a number of ways, one of which 1s to use them for my 

own benefit. For I could not exist for a day if I did not use them. Therefore, in 

a world in which I must destroy and consume in order to continue to exist, I must 

use what 1s necessary with gratitude and respect. Part of this 1s a frugality born 

of this respect and gratitude, for to waste, out of greed or carelessness, 1s the 

rankest sort of ingratitude. It nullifies the thing we depend on, murders it, and 

1n so doing, we murder ourselves and others. This attitude of respect and gratitude 

toward all things, which I would consider part of ethics, is extremely important 

in Buddhism, because it is not so much what one does, such as eating a carrot, 

as it is what one’s attitude is toward that thing. No one ever became a Buddha, 

or entered the kingdom of heaven, who went through life with a careless, 

arrogant, hard-hearted attitude. Perhaps respect and gratitude are more important 

than we may think, ranking near the top of those modes of action we call ethics. 

But there is one more point which will perhaps round out this discussion of 

attitudes and actions. That is the attitude of fair-mindedness. I must be prepared 

to accept the fact that I am made for the use of the other no less than it is made 

for my use. If can really grasp this, then even though I may recoil and scream 

as the eager tiger pounces on me, which 1s natural for me to do, perhaps in the 

last moment of consciousness before I am gratefully consumed by the tiger, I 

may have the grace to reflect that this is the tiger’s world as well as mine, and that 

I am for the use of hungry tigers just as much as carrots are for my use. Thus the 

least we can do is to be fair in our estimations as to the propriety of things. 

These attitudes of respect, gratitude, fairness, and compassion, along with 

their embodiment in concrete acts, are reflected in several places in Hua-yen 

literature, and if nothing else, they are implied m the Hua-yen world picture. 

Compassion, mainly, 1s a common, even dominant theme in all Mahayana 

Buddhist literature, and in its recogmition of the centrality of this attitude, 

Hua-~yen takes its place in the development of Mahayana. We can find this 

emphasis on compassion in several places in Hua-yen literature. In the sutra 

literature, for instance, the primacy of compassion in Buddhas and Bodhisattvas 

is dealt with at length. In the chapter of the Avatamsaka Siitra named “The 

Arising of the Tathagata from Essential Nature,” for instance,1® we can read a 

very elaborate discussion of how the Buddha appears in the world of tame and. 

space due to ten conditions. These conditions are, in essence, the needs of suffering 

i 

i 

i 

| 

120 Hua-~yen Buddhism 

beings, and thus this section of the sutra underlines an important fact of Buddhism, 

which is that Buddhas become Buddhas not out of any greed for self-spirituali- 

zation, but because as Buddhas they will have the proper equipment for carrying 

out their real mission, which is to help other beings. In the discussion of the three 

natures, it is clear that the absolute—the perfected nature—appears in the 

phenomenal world due to the condition of ignorance. That condition is, of 

course, the avidya of those who are not Buddhas. It is because beings are in 

darkness and need light that a Buddha, out of a boundless compassion, appears ' 

to bring light. Indeed, if this were not a world of darkness, there would never 

be any need for them to appear bringing light, showing the Way. 

But the Light of the World did appear, and he delivered a message which is, 

in essence, very simple: meditate and be compassionate, and the result will be 

serenity and peace, joy, light, and supreme service to ailing beings. It 1s+the 

meditation which 1s the key, however, for the compassion does not come from 

an act of will, but is rather the outflow of meditation. This ‘‘meditation’’ (the 

term is unsatisfactory, but-it has the virtue of familiarity) 1s traditionally divided 

into two parts, each part contributing to the overall goal. One part 1s Samatha, 

which traditionally had the office of tranquilizing those psychic factors which 

create obstacles to further progress (such as sense-desire and ill will). It has the 

general function of tranquilizing the self-perpetuating inner flow of hallucina- 

tions, daydreams, concepts, symbols, and judgment. According to Fa-tsang, 

Samatha consists of the increasing ability to see things as empty (Sanya).17 The 

other part of the process is vipasyand, defined in older texts such as the Visuddhi- 

magga as insight into the rising and falling of dharmas and their possession of the 

marks (laksana) of impermanence, turmoil (duhkha), nonself, and impurity 

(asubha). Fa-tsang interprets Samatha and vipasyana respectively as leading to 

the insight into the emptiness of dharmas and leading to the knowledge that 

emptiness takes the form of dharmas; that is, there is no emptiness apart from 

form.'® In his “Brief Commentary on the Heart Sutra,’ Fa-tsang correlates 

Samatha with the sutra assertion that form 1s empty (rapam Sunyata) and vipasyana 

with the statement that emptiness itself is form (Sdnyataiva riipam). The impor- 

tance of this dual form of meditation is that while the tranquility exercises produce 

the insight into emptiness, the analytic process leads to the very important 

perception of the fact that there is something of which 1t can be said that it is empty. 

Thus the Bodhisattva dwells in a world of other beings, and since this world of 

beings is one of identity and interdependence, there are obvious implications for 

activity. 

When one practices tranquility and insight together, they are perfect. . 

| 

a wont ein 

tenho anny aanbinncninblinesoadbumeittlentinresainme sn; arewtidnevenennemetnrenintit nmaneiean carta atnnainte tmnt tment 

Living in the Net of Indra 121 

When one sees that form is empty, one achieves great wisdom and no longer 

dwells in samsara. When one sees that emptiness is form, one achieves great 

compassion and does not dwell mn nirvana.'? 

Thus the Bodhisattva is “without an abiding place,” free from attachment to 

both the mundane and the supramundane. 

Meditation, as well as philosophy, 1s never an end in itself, but rather effects 

that transformation in the Bodhisattva which in turn transforms his perception 

of reality, and in so doing equips him for his true mission of emancipating all 

beings. But this mission 1s inextricably bound up with this perception; only in 

the Hua-yen dharma-dhatu as experienced by the individual are the vows of 

Samantabhadra possible. In the ordinary world as experienced by ordinary 

people, only competition and aggression, with their satellite impulses of fear, 

hatred, and suspicion, are possible. 

Compassion, which I am considering to be an ethical matter here, 1s inextri- 

cably bound up with perception. As I remarked earlier, 1t 1s really only the 

dynamic form of prajiid-insight, which 1s itself the insight into emptiness. Why 

compassion develops along with insight will be readily apparent, if it 1s remem- 

bered that in Buddhism, to be compassionate really means to treat the other in 

conformity with what that object is in reality, divorced from illusion, wish- 

fulness, inference, hearsay, convention, and the like. Simply stated, to act compas- 

sionately means to act in accordance with reality. As long as I always react to 

experience in terms of what 1s beneficial or harmful to my self, I can never 

really be of any effective use to others. When I am empty of a self, and when I 

no longer act in terms of selves, or within any conceptual framework, my 

relationship with the other will be that which the bystander would call ““compas- 

sionate.” Thus, as the Vajracchedika Sitra tells us, the Bodhisattv% strives cease- 

lessly, leading all beings to the joy of nirvana, but there never arises 1n him the 

concept of a being. In fact, it is only because no such thoughts arise that he does 

indeed lead all beings to nirvana. Such a compassion 1s obviously not of the com- 

mon variety, which is flawed with sentimentality, strained through erroneous 

concepts, and probably infected with some degree of ego need. We may, perhaps, 

think of it as “metaphysical compassion,” to use Ananda Coomaraswamy’s 

term.2° We might even go so far as to call it love, but certainly no love that we 

know. Not the love of the mother for her child, not the love of Tristan for 

Isolde, and certainly not the love of a Marquis de Sade for his ladies; it 1s not 

like the love of the patriot for his country, or even like the love the worshiper 

feels for his god. Our expericence of love 1s limited and self-interested. If any- 

thing, Buddhist love is something akin to that love of which Dante spoke so 

122 Hua-yen Buddhism 

movingly and beautifully, as “the Love that moves the sun and the other stars.” - 

At first glance this may seem to be an outrageous exaggeration, but this compas- 

sion 1s not the compassion of the common man; it 1s the occurrence in space and 

time of a compassion which pervades ten thousand galaxies and realizes itself 

in them, individual by individual. 

Someone once made the observation that one’s skin is not necessarily a bound- 

ary marking off the self from the not~self but rather that which brings one into 

contact with the other. Like Faraday’s electric charge which must be conceived 

as being everywhere, I am in some sense boundless, my being encompassing 

the farthest limits of the universe, touching and moving every atom in existence. 

The same is true of everything else. The interfusion, the sharing of destiny, 1s 

as infinite in scope as the reflections in the jewels of Indra’s net. When im a rare 

moment I manage painfully to rise above a petty individualism by knowing my 

true nature, I perceive that I dwell in the wondrous net of Indra, and in this 

incredible network of interdependence, the career of the Bodhisattva must 

begin. It 1s not just that “we are all in 1t” together. We all are 1t, rising or falling 

as.one living body.