로월의 작품들을 불란서 현대 철학자이자 심리학자인 메를로 뽕띠의 현상학을 통해서 접근, 분석한 로월 시 연구서.
목차
Preface ⅴ
Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1. Life Studies and Contemporary American Literature 1 2. Socio-Cultural Background of Mid-Century American Poetry 10 3. Theoretical Preparation 21 Chapter 2. From the “City of God” to the “City of Man” 35 Chapter 3. The Self Incarcerated in the Family 57 Chapter 4. The Self Remapped in the World 92 Chapter 5. Madness, Tranquilization, and the Self 122 Chapter 6. “Skunk Hour”: Completing Life Studies 152 Bibliography 162
=== 책속에서
Introduction
1. Life Studies and Contemporary American Poetry
Robert Lowell’s Life Studies opens with the poet “On the train from Rome to Paris,” which implies Lowell’s metaphorical journey to locate his self in the world. The opening poem “Beyond the Alps” outlines the direction of that poetic tour: the quest for his suffering self---“the blear-eyed ego.” By putting his private situation into a broad historical and geographical context, Lowell seeks to investigate the perimeters of his life in self-revealed language. Put another way, Lowell explores his inner self by displaying his private experiences on to the external world. Lowell pushes his private past into these poems by unreservedly disclosing his family’s shame and humiliation as well as his own madness and imprisonment. In this confrontation with the demons of his life, Lowell relies exclusively upon his own perceptions, without recourse to any transcendental reality or to the concept of an intangible deity. Most important, such a downright engagement with autobiographical data shows that the poet intends to put his whole life into question, thereby identifying his presence in the world.
Such overt self-expression---placing the self in the center of poetry, as M. L. Rosenthal has suggested---was like a reformation in the history of American poetry. James E. Miller identifies “the two poles of American poetry” in Whitman and Eliot, and remarks that “the Eliot dominance” inaugurated by The Waste Land (1922) began to “wane by the late 1950s and continued to fade in the 1960s.” Indeed, Allen Ginsberg’s Howl and Other Poems (1956) offered American Poetry a new paradigm. In some sense, too, Robert Lowell’s Life Studies (1959) hastened the end of the Pound-Eliot era in terms of its poetic themes and styles. The revolutionary experiment of the mid-century poetry was undeniably against “an orthodoxy” which “derived from the authority of T. S. Eliot and the new critics.” Although many mid-century American poets were schooled under the influence of modernist poetics, later, when they came into their own, some of them fashioned an anti-modernist mode of poetics under which poems like The Waste Land or Cantos were inconceivable. Allen Tate’s comment on Life Studies (“. . . it’s not poetry”), for instance, draws a distinctive borderline between modernist poetry and the poetry since the 1950s.
What, then, was the modernism that contemporary American poets went against? To answer the question, it is necessary to take a brief look at the basic credo of the modernism which dominated literary movements in the first half of this century. Since the appearance of Eliot’s essays “Tradition and the Individual Talent” (1917) and “Hamlet and His Problems” (1919), poetry as escape from personality became one primary element of the modernist poetic fashion. In “Tradition and the Individual Talent,” Eliot sets out an “impersonal theory of poetry” which emphasizes the importance of personality and emotions in the poet and yet argues for an escape from personality as the key prerequisite for poetry. The artist’s escape from personality is to be achieved through a process of transmutation. To explain how the poet’s mind works in the act of creation, Eliot uses a chemical analogy: if oxygen and sulphur dioxide are combined with platinum, they produce sulphurous acid; yet the platinum itself remains intact and the new gas does not contain any traces of platinum. That is, the good poet, through an artistic process, ought to conceal one’s personal voice or purely private impressions behind a poetic persona; likewise, the good critic must seek a certain objectivity by focusing on the work itself rather than on the poet. In his essay on Hamlet, Eliot speaks of the actual transformation of emotion:
The only way of expressing emotion in the form of art is by finding an “objective correlative”; in other words, a set of objects, a situation, a chain of events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion; such that when the external facts, which must terminate in sensory experience, are given, the emotion is immediately evoked.
(original italics)
It is the objective correlative that alters personal emotion into “the form of art.” Thus, elements that can be identified with the artist’s biography get transmuted in the process of creation and emerge only as the personality of the work itself.
Similarly, Ezra Pound talks about the reductions of emotions in art in his formulation of the imagist project: “Emotion, seizing upon some external scene or action, carries it in fact to the mind; that vortex purges it of all save the essential dominant or dramatic qualities and it emerges like the external original.” For Pound, writing poetry is the process in which the poet, denying any kind of personal interpretation of the external object, creates a concrete language to represent the world through a linguistic technique. Take “In a Station of the Metro” for example; this poem purges all emotions from its denotative, succinct language. For modernist poets like Eliot and Pound, molding their personal experiences into objective language was the goal. The Eliot-Pound poetics firmly established the objectification of poetry in their reworking of personal experiences. Since they stressed impersonality and objectivity through a wide knowledge of classical literature and “high intelligence,” poetry tended to be intellectual, allusive and highly indirect. They turned to classical mythology for literary experience and looked to French Symbolist poetry and Metaphysical poetry for their use of irony, wit, and conceit. As a result, what readers of their poetry needed was not biographical knowledge of the poets but a sophisticated knowledge of classical literature and the literary conventions of previous ages.
As Robert Bly observes, modernist poets had “more trust in the objective, outer world than in the inner world.” Indeed, they projected their emotion or inner vision into the outer world by using external objects or events---Eliot’s “objective correlative.” Although to a lesser degree than Pound and Eliot, William Carlos Williams and Wallace Stevens also avoided the direct involvement of their personal experience in their poems. Williams eradicates private experiences by projecting them into external objects, and Stevens fictionalizes himself in the working of the imagnation. Consequently, there remains only a very small amount of the poet’s autobiographical self in the poems.
Just as Pound and Eliot broke from Victorian modes of poetry in the early twentieth century, so poets in the 1950s fashioned a poetics that revolted against their predecessors. Their most conspicuous revolt consists in the direct treatment of their autobiographical facts and the explicit revelation of the self in their poetry. In Cry of the Human, Ralph J. Mills, Jr. observes the tendency toward self-creation in contemporary poetry:
The contemporary poet re-creates himself as a personality, an identifiable self within his poetry, that is, of course, a self who has been selected and heightened in the process, captured in essence, and so is not perhaps a full likeness of the author as a physical, workday person outside the poem yet could not be mistaken for someone else. . . . [w]e recognize a certain maganimous gesture in their acts of creation, a profoundly touching and human gesture through which the poet voluntarily stands exposed as “creation’s very self” before us. (ellipsis mine)
Unlike poets in the 1920s who hid themselves behind language and tradition, many poets since the fifties, preferring personal experiences to tradition, have embraced autobiography as a major theme in their poetry. Instead of relying on classical literature, contemporary poets have sought to build a mythology out of their own experiences in the world. As Marjorie Perloff remarks, Lowell “creates a mythology out of his own life and those of his friends, relatives, or historical counterparts.” Similarly, John Berryman, Anne Sexton and Sylvia Plath come closest to M. L. Rosenthal’s term “Confessional Poets” in that the poets themselves become the speakers in their poems, and their private experiences of madness, failure, and alienation become the subjects of their poetry.
As the mode of poetic themes altered, mid-century American poets adopted a technique different from the poets of the 1920s and 1930s. Unlike their predecessors, the poets in the 1950s tried to grasp the immediacy of daily experiences and transform them into art, a process that demanded a new creative apparatus. James E. B. Breslin, for example, elaborates on the radical change of theories and practices of poetic form the period saw:
During this time, in fact, the Beats, the Confessional poets, the Black Mountain, New York, and Deep Image groups proposed a range of alternatives to the established mode, and they provided the leading sources of the new paradigms for poetry that became visible in the late fifties and early sixties. These clusters of poets differed from each other in fundamental ways and in some instances were mutually antagonistic; but they agreed in their renunciation of the well-made symbolist poem and in their search for poetic forms that could capture temporal immediacy, for the language of a breakthrough back into life. (emphasis mine)
The demands of self-revelation and promptness of personal experience in the new poetry could not be met by the conventional poetic forms which stressed, among other things, precise prosody of rhyme and meter. Mid-century American poets had therefore to reject the complex techniques of modernist poetry in favor of themes and techniques which accommodated the self and private experience. In the formulation of this revolutionary poetics, Lowell’s Life Studies was an influential and pioneering text. Life Studies’ prose and poetry, expressing a variety of modes with the self as the work’s articulating center, was revolting less than revolutionary in the fifties and was hardly able to be written in the modernist poetics of Eliot, Pound, Tate and Ransom. 접기
로월의 『인생연구』는 여러 해에 걸쳐서 발표된 후 한권의 시집으로 묶어진 것이지만, 세계 속에서의 시인의 자아탐색이라는 시집 전권에 흐르는 주제를 기승전결에 가깝게 구조화 시키고 있다. 흥미로운 것은 『인생연구』에 수록된 작품들의 상당수가 개별 작품으로서도 형식과 주제 양면에서 완결을 성취하고 있을 뿐만 아니라, 그것들을 전체적으로 묶어서 조망할 때에도 구성과 주제의 교호성(交互性)이 돋보인다는 사실이다.
로월의 회고에 따르면 종전의 자신의 창작 스타일에 일대 전환점을 주고자 하는 의도에서 쓰여진 것으로 되어 있다. 그러나 분명한 것은 창작 스타일 전체의 변모를 선언했지만, 새로운 스타일을 이용하여 일정한 기획 하에서 특정 주제와 구조로 단일 시집을 출판하겠다고 처음부터 염두에 둔 것은 아니었다는 점이다. 『인생연구』에 수록된 작품의 절반은 1958에서 1959년에 걸쳐 서로 다른 문학잡지들을 통해서 발표되었고, 1959년 4월에 비로소 한 권의 시집으로 나타났다.
『인생연구』는 20세기 문명과 문화에 대한 연구인 동시에 로월 자신의 자아 표현이자 자신에 관한 연구였다는 것을 보여준다. 이 시집의 전 작품들은 시인 자신의 시간으로 판명되는 「스컹크 시간」이라는 한 편을 향해서 일견 관련이 없어 보이는 작품들을 치밀하게 구성·배치되었으며, 그 결과 훌륭한 한 편의 단편소설이 이루어 내는 듯한 구성상의 짜임새와 완결성을 성취하는데 성공하였다고 할 수 있다. 미국 시의 역사에 있어서 성취도가 높고, 획기적인 전기를 제시한 시집이지만 국내에서는 로월의 『인생연구』에 대한 집중적인 저술은 전무한 상태이다. 따라서 본 연구는 국내의 로월 시 연구에 기여할 수 있을 것이라 판단된다. 아울러 이 저술은 로월의 작품들을 불란서 현대 철학자이자 심리학자인 메를로 뽕띠의 현상학을 통해서 접근, 분석하고 있기 때문에 로월 시의 이해와 연구에 새로운 지평을 제시할 수 있다고 사료된다.
one of my mentors in the United States, as he left for a college in Los Angeles, gave me a copy of John Ashbery’s A Wave as a gift. On the inside cover he wrote a note saying that he hoped I would become “a passionate and eloquent teacher of poetry.” About twenty years have passed since I completed my doctoral dissertation on Robert Lowell’s Life Studies, but a question has haunted me for a long time: whether I have taught my students successfully and lived up to my mentor’s wish. The answer is easy and I have come to the conclusion that I fell short of becoming “a passionate and eloquent teacher of poetry.” My fifteen years of teaching have given me a strong sense that I need to better my earlier understanding of Robert Lowell. Teaching American poets, particularly whenever I have encountered Lowell, I found myself attracted to his way of “life studies,” and this has brought me to reflect upon my own “life studies.” One benefit from reading Lowell’s Life Studies was that it helped me to take a deeper look at my own past. I believe that Lowell’s “life studies” were very successful in that he could expand his self to the extent that he was able to reconstruct his relationship with the members of his family. My understanding of Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology has helped me read Lowell’s reconstruction and expansion of his own world. Although my original interpretation of Lowell’s Life Studies through Merleau- Ponty’s phenomenology was written some twenty years ago, this time span has not caused me to alter the initial combination or its interpretation; rather I find that it rings truer and truer as the years go by. This recognition has lessened my hesitation at publishing my dissertation and has led me to revise the chapters one by one. This present volume adopts Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s existential phenomenology and explores the self-investigation found in Robert Lowell’s Life Studies. It particularly seeks to explore the ways in which the poet arrived at a sense of identity through engaging the external forces of life such as family, society and culture. Merleau-Ponty’s ?tre-au-monde, a modification of Husserl’s intentionality, elaborates a theory of human communication which results from a complementary operation between the subject and the object. His thesis illustrates not only the possibility but the inevitability of the subject’s coexistence with others and with the external world. Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology suggests a shared existence between the human subject and the world. In Life Studies, Lowell places himself in the already- experienced world, i.e. the past. To position himself in the past is thus to re-experience and re-express his own self in language and to further question and seek out his identity in the world. I regard Lowell’s Life Studies as the poet’s personal perception of his past and as a journey toward an articulated discovery of his identity within the world of which Merleau-Ponty speaks. This book is a reading of Life Studies and focuses on the ways in which the poet examines the self by engaging himself with the external forces. These are the very forces, according to Merleau-Ponty, that the self must engage dialectically in order to come to a sense of its own subjectivity. The first chapter presents the theoretical background for a reading of Life Studies. In the second chapter, I examine the poet’s declaration of his journey as “down-to-earth,” which suggests his abandonment of his religion and reveals his view of human civilization. The third chapter deals with the fate of the poet’s self by situating his family in the context of American history and culture. Chapter Four addresses the self which grows through interacting with the world. I present the poet’s self in an ongoing dialogue with his family, especially treating the ways in which the poet comes to understand the world and forgives his parents and grandparents, with whom he once was strongly at odds. The fifth chapter seeks to explore how the poet’s self aggrandized itself through a re-experience of his personal afflictions. The final chapter, concentrating on “Skunk Hour,” examines how the poet created a reconciliation between the self and the tormenting world and how the poet’s perception of the world led to the expression and establishment of the self in the world. 접기
Fazang was known for his skill as a translator, knowledge of Sanskrit, and for his efforts to produce a new translation of an extended edition of the Gaṇḍavyūha sūtra. He also composed an original commentary on the Avatamsaka Sutra, called the Huayan jing tanxuan ji (Record of Investigating the Mystery of the Huayan jing).[7][8] He was also known as a popularizer and promoter of Huayan teachings, through his relationship with Empress Wu Zetian and his authorship of several essays on Huayan philosophy, especially Essay on the Golden Lion.[9][8]
Names
Although there remains ambiguity with varying interpretations of biographical sources, most recent scholarship promotes that the well-known name Fazang is not only the monk's dharma-name, but the secular name he used prior to being ordained. His surname was Kang, which originated from his place of birth, Kangjuguo.[10] Furthermore, he had the nickname of Xianshou 賢首 which appears to have been the style-name given to him by his parents, despite prior claims that it was an honorific title from Empress Wu.[8] This is further supported by Fazang's self-reference using the nickname, which strongly suggests it was not an honorific title as previous scholars thought. His title as a teacher and of distinction (biéhào 別號) was Dharma Master Guoyi 國一法師, in which his disciples referred to him post-ordination and in the latter stages of his life.[8]
Life
Early life
Map of the Tang Empire and Central Asian Protectorates (including Sogdiana) circa 660 CE
Little is known about Fazang's early life.[11] Fazang's family were Sogdians and lived in an ethnically Sogdian enclave in the imperial capital of Chang’an.[12] Fazang's father, Kang Mi, held an official title in the Tang court.[10] Not much was known about his mother, although Chinese biographies state that she became pregnant "after dreaming of swallowing rays of sunshine".[8] Accounts of the affluence of Fazang's grandfather hint at his father's ability to attain higher up positions in Tang aristocratic circles, despite being a Sogdian immigrant. However, epigraphic and textual sources show an abundance of ambiguity regarding his family.[8]
In contrast to the uncertainty surrounding his blood relatives, Fazang's dharma family is better recorded in the sources. Zhiyan was his primary teacher, while Fazang's fellow scholars, Daocheng and Baochen, exerted additional influence.[13] Fazang also had a multitude of fellow-disciples, although sources only record four primary names: Huixiao, Huaiji, Huizhao, and most famously, Uisang, who went on to establish Hwaeom Buddhism in Korea. It is argued that he had many other disciples, a nun-disciple Facheng, two Korean disciples in addition to Uisang, and finally a Chinese biographer, Qianli.[8]
Fazang had an early interest in Buddhism. When he turned fifteen, he set his finger on fire in front of a “Ayuwang shelita” (a Famensi pagoda enshrining the finger bone of the Buddha).[13] This was a popular religious practice at the time.[12] Fazang became disappointed in his initial search for a proper teacher in the capital, and so he went to Mount Zhongnan, where he studied Mahayana sutras, like the Avatamsaka sutra and also engaged in Daoist practices of consuming herbal elixirs.[14]
After several years of seclusion and hearing his parents were ill, Fazang returned to Chang’an and eventually met his first teacher Zhiyan, after impressing him with his knowledge of the Avatamsaka.[15] He began his lay discipleship with Zhiyan in roughly 663; however, Fazang did extensive traveling and did not remain with his teacher consistently.[16] Before Zhiyan's passing in 668, he instructed his two vinaya masters, Daocheng and Baochen, to care for Fazang.[16] Daocheng was appointed as one of the three principals of the newly constructed monastery in Chang’an, Taiyuansi.[17] This would be where Fazang would enter Buddhist priesthood for the remainder of his life. Previous biographical sources claim that Fazang was either overqualified for the bodhisattva-precepts or had his ordination situated in a miraculous context, yet both were distorted accounts attempting to validate the lack of evidence Fazang ever had a full ordination.[8]
670–700
After 670 and Fazang's monastic ordination, he spent time travelling between Mount Zhongnan (staying at Wuzhensi and Zhixiangsi) and Taiyuansi in the capital. He often lectured on the Avatamsaka sutra.129 From 680 to 687, Fazang began working with the Indian monk Divākara on translating Indian texts into Chinese.[18]
Between 688 and 689, Fazang was ordered by Empress Wu (at this time acting as regent) to build a high Avatamsaka-seat and bodhimanda of Eight Assemblies in Luoyang.[19] This event provided an opportunity for elucidating and promoting the Avatamsaka sutra, and further established rapport between Fazang and Empress Wu, who would soon after establish her dynasty in 690.[20] At this time, he also began his collaboration with the translator Devendraprajña.[19] During this period, Fazang maintained correspondence with his dharma friend Uisang.[21]
In the founding of Empress Wu's dynasty in 690, Fazang continued his teaching of the Avatamsaka sutra. He also travelled to various regions, visited his family, and debated with Daoist priests.[22] A notable occurrence during this time was that Fazang was exiled to southern China (sometime between 694 and May 695).[23] He returned later in 695 (August).[23] The new translation of the Avatamsaka sutra (i.e. that of the Śikṣānanda translation team) was soon released and celebrated with a ceremony in 695. Fazang soon began lecturing on the sutra. In one instance (c. 700), an earthquake occurred during one of his lectures, and this was celebrated as a great sign.[24]
Fazang also participated in the imperial suppression of the rebellion of the Khitans (c. 697). He performed some Buddhist rituals to aid the Chinese army, and this strengthened the relationship between Empress Wu and Fazang. The victorious war effort only increased enthusiasm for Buddhism at court.[25] According to Chen, it is likely that Fazang used Xuanzang's version of the Dhāraṇī of Avalokiteśvara-ekadaśamukha, an esoteric dharani (incantation) for the purpose of repelling enemies intent on attacking.[26]
The 8th century saw much political change and unrest. From 700 to 705, Fazang continued translation work on the order of Empress Wu. He worked with Śikṣānanda's translation team on a new translation of the Lankavatara Sutra, which was completed in 704.[27]
During this time, Fazang is said to have gone on a quest to Famen Temple to retrieve a sacred relic that supposedly provided therapeutic relief. Various veneration ceremonies were performed with the relic.[28] After Wu's retirement of the position due to political infighting, Li Xian was reinstated as emperor, and Fazang declared his loyalty to him. Fazang also contributed to the quelling of a political rebellion during this time of unrest (by providing crucial information to the emperor). He was accordingly recognized and rewarded with a fifth-rank title from Emperor Zhongzong in 705. A monastery was also restored in his honor (Shengshansi).[29]
In 706, Fazang joined Bodhiruci's translation team to work on the Mahāratnakūṭa sutra (Da Baoji jing). This translation project was the focus of his scholarly activity for some years to come (and it was not completed until 713, just after his death).[30]
From 708 to 709, a drought threatened the capital area, and Fazang was commanded to perform the proper religious rituals to manifest rain. Much to Zhongzong's contentment, on the 7th day, a heavy downpour came about and lasted for ten nights. Fazang's miraculous abilities continued to be efficacious through the imperial shifts in power.[31] Fazang seems to have made use of the esoteric Mahapratisara dharani for the purpose of a rainmaking ritual that is described in the text.[32]
In the last years of his life, Fazang acquired increased imperial support, promoting the construction of new Huayan Buddhist monasteries in the two capitals (Chang’an and Luoyang), and as well as in Wu and Yue (Zhejiang and Jiangsu). According to Fazang's biographer Ch’oe Ch’iwon, the number of Avatamsaka societies (societies attended by laypersons to chant and study the sutra) is said to have "exceeded ten thousand" at this time.[33]
Fazang died on December 16, 712 (at 69 years old) at Great Jianfu temple and was honored accordingly by Emperor Ruizong with a generous posthumous donation.[34] Fazang was buried south of Huayansi, at Shenhe Plain.[34]
Influence
Fazang's greatest influence was upon his dharma friend Uisang (625–702), who was a same disciple of Zhian with Fazang and eventually returned to Korea to establish the Korean Huayan school: Hwaeom. It is well documented that they had a lifelong friendship and frequently corresponded through written letters. you can see how Fazang admired Uisang through the letters. Fazang was also influential on one of his Korean disciples, Simsang (Jp. Shinjō). Simsang is known for transmitting Huayan to Japan, and for being the teacher of Rōben (689–773), known as the founder of the Kegon school (Japanese Huayan).[3]
In terms of propagating Huayan Buddhism in China, one of Fazang's greatest contributions was his translation work on the Avatamsaka sutra. In this, he collaborated with various Indian and Chinese masters. He also composed an important commentary to the sutra. The teachings of the Avatamsaka sutra were propagated through numerous lectures as well as through his close relationship with Empress Wu and other members of the imperial household. This ultimately led to the further establishment of Huayan Buddhist monasteries in around Chang'an as well as in Wu and Yue.[8]
Fazang is also credited for having contributed greatly in improving and promoting the technology of wood block carving (xylography), which he used for the printing of Buddhist texts.[8] Indeed, the earliest dated wood-block printed text was a copy of dharani sutra translated by Fazang in 704. The copy was discovered in Pulguksa, a Korean monastery.[35]
Works
Four Leaves from a Sanskrit Gandavyuha Manuscript
Translation
Along with the Indian master Divākara (Dipoheluo 地 婆訶羅 or Rizhao 日照; 613–688), Fazang also produced a translation of an extended edition of the Gaṇḍavyūha sūtra (Ru fajie pin, 入法界品, Chapter on Entering the Realm of Dharma), which makes up the last section of the Avatamsaka sutra. This new translation was deemed necessary because the previous translator of the Avatamsaka sutra (Buddhabhadra) had produced a significantly shorter translation.[36] The current Chinese edition of the 60 fascicle Avatamsaka Sutra actually includes Divākara and Fazang's translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha chapter. This edition was produced during a revision in the Song dynasty (960–1279).[36] Fazang also worked with Divākara on other translation projects.[36]
Another sutra which Fazang translated together with Divākara was the Ghanavyūha Sūtra (Mahāyāna Secret Adornment Sūtra,Chinese: 大乘密嚴經, Dà chéng mì yán jīng).[37]
Fazang also took part in Śikṣānanda's translation efforts (from 695 to 699) to translate and edit the 80 fascicle Avatamsaka Sutra. This new translation was also missing parts, and so was completed with Fazang's translations.[36]
At a later date (688), Fazang also worked with the pandita Devendraprajña (Tiyunbore 提雲般若) to translate two more chapters of the Avatamsaka sutra (which are not found in either the 60 or the 80 fascicle Avatamsaka sutra). These two independent Avatamsaka translations are:[38]
Da fangguang fo huayanjing xiuci fen 大方廣佛華嚴經修慈分
Da fangguang fo huayan jing busiyi fo jingjie fen 大方廣佛華嚴經不思議佛境界分
Original works
Fazang wrote numerous works on Buddhism, his magnum opus is a commentary on the Avatamsaka (Huayan) sutra, the Huayan jing tanxuan ji (華嚴經探玄記, Record of Investigating the Mystery of the Huayan jing) in 60 fascicles.[7]
Jin shizi zhang 金獅子章 (The Treatise on Golden Lion), an essay that encapsulates the key teaching of Huayan Buddhism
Huayan wujiao zhang 華嚴五教章 (Treatise on the Five Huayan Teachings), which contains the key panjiao (doctrinal classification) system of Huayan. It has an alternate name: Paragraphs on the Doctrine of Difference and Identity of the One Vehicle of Huayan (Huayan yisheng jiaoyi fenqi zhang, 華嚴一乘教分齊章, T. 1866).[40] It has been translated twice into English, once by Francis Cook as Fa-tsang’s Treatise on the Five Doctrines: An Annotated Translation (1970) and the more recent one by BDK, the Treatise on Doctrinal Distinctions of the Huayan One Vehicle.
The Gist of the Huayan Sutra (Hua-yen ching chih kuei)[41]
Outline of the Text and Doctrine of the Huayan Sutra (Hua-yen ching wen i kang mu)[41]
Treatise on the Avataṃsaka Sūtra (Huayanjing zhang 華厳経章, T. 45, #1874) [42]
Dasheng qixin lun yiji 大乘起信論義紀 (Commentary on the Treatise of the Mahayana Awakening of Faith). This work remains one of the most important commentaries on this treatise. An English translation has been published by Dirck Vorenkamp.[43]
Huayan jing wenyi gangmu (Essentials of the Teachings of Huayan Jing, Taisho 35, no. 1734), this text explains the "ten mysteries" doctrine.[2]
Commentary on the Brahmajala sutra (Fanwang jing pusa jieben shu, Taisho 40, no. 1813).[2]
Commentary to the Lankavatara sutra. Fazang considered the Lanka to be one of the definitive sutras.[44][45]
A Record Conveying the Meaning of the Tenets of the Treatise on the Twelve Gates, a commentary to Nagarjuna'sTreatise on the Twelve Gates (十二門論, pinyin: Shiermenlun, T. 1568). A translation of this commentary has been published by Dirck Vorenkamp.[46]
Cultivation of Contemplation of the Inner Meaning of the Huayen: The Ending of Delusion and Return to the Source (Hsiu hua-yen ao chih wang chin huan yuan kuan). This was written in Fazang's old age as a concise summary of the Huayan teaching.[47]
A commentary to the Ghanavyūha Sūtra, called Dasheng miyan jing shu (大乘密嚴經疏, no. X368 in the supplement to the Taisho canon, Xu zang jing 續藏經 vol. 34).[37][48]
A commentary on Saramati's Dasheng fajie wu chabie lun 大乘法界無差別論, Skt. Dharmadhātu-aviśeṣa śāstra; Treatise on the Non-Distinction of the Dharmadhātu of Mahāyana, Taisho no. 1626) titled Dasheng fajie wu chabie lun bingxu (大乘法界無差別論疏 并序, Taisho no. 1838).[49]
The Huayan fajie guanmen 華嚴法界觀門 (Method of Mental Examination on the Realm of Dharma) has been traditionally attributed to Dushun (557–640), but some scholars argue that it is actually by Fazang.[7]
Philosophy
Fazang's thought focuses on a unique interpretation of the classic Buddhist principle of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising) – how all phenomena are conditioned and arise dependent on other phenomena. Fazang (and the Huayan tradition in general) depicts the cosmos as an infinite number of interdependent and interpenetrating phenomena (dharmas), which make up one holistic net, the one universal dharma realm.[50] Fazang draws out the metaphysical implications of this Buddhist doctrine within a Mahayana framework informed by ideas like buddha-nature (which he considers to be the source of all things) and mind-only (cittamatra), often interpreted as a kind of idealism. He did this in a uniquely Chinese prose that also draws on Daoist and classical Chinese influences. Two of Fazang's works, The Rafter Dialogue and On the Golden Lion, outline the basic Huayan doctrine and are among the most celebrated Huayan texts.[9]
In East Asian Buddhism, the Dharmadhatu (法界, fajie, realm of dharma) is the whole of reality, the totality of all things, the absolute. Fazang develops this idea and brings together various Huayan teachings into a holistic view of the entire universe, which Alan Fox calls the Huayan "Metaphysics of Totality".[51] Two key elements of Fazang's understanding of the absolute are "dharmadhatupratītyasamutpāda" (法界緣起, fajie yuanqi, the dependent arising of the whole realm of phenomena), which for Fazang refers to the interrelatedness and interfusion of all phenomena (dharmas); and "nature origination," (xingqi) which refers to how phenomena arise out of an absolute nature, which is buddha-nature, or the "One Mind".[52]
Interpenetration and perfect interfusion
A key element of Fazang's understanding of the totality of things is a unique view of the Buddhist theory of dependent arising, which is informed by Mahayana sources like the Avatamsaka sutra. This unique Huayan view of dependent arising is called "dharmadhatupratītyasamutpāda" (法界緣起, fajie yuanqi, the dependent arising of the whole realm of phenomena).[53][52] According to Wei Daoru, this theory holds that "countless dharmas (all phenomena in the world) are representations of the wisdom of Buddha without exception ('pure mind of the original nature', 'one-mind' or 'dharmadhatu'). They exist in a state of mutual dependence, interfusion and balance without any contradiction or conflict."[53]
The central and unique element of this view of dependent arising is the "interpenetration" (xiangru) of all phenomena (dharmas) and their "perfect interfusion" (yuanrong, 圓融).[53][52][54] It is a holistic theory which holds that any thing or phenomenon (dharma) exists only as part of the whole. That is to say, the existence of any single thing depends on the total network of all other things, which are all equally fused with each other, interdependent with each other and mutually determined (xiangji) by each other.[53][55][54] As Bryan Van Norden describes this theory, "because the identity of any one thing is dependent on the identities of other things, 'one is all,' and because the whole is dependent for its identity on its parts, 'all is one.'"[55] According to Fazang, “one is many, many is one” (yi ji duo, duo ji yi), because the existence and nature of any phenomenon determines and is determined by the sum of all phenomena. Likewise, he also asserts “one in many, many in one” (yi zhong duo, duo zhong yi), because any phenomenon (dharma) penetrates and is penetrated by the existence and nature of the sum of all phenomena.[54]
Alan Fox similarly describes the doctrine of interpenetration as the fact that all possible particular events "overlap and coexist simultaneously and at all times, without conflict or obstruction."[51] Thus, according to this theory, the existence of any object at any moment is a function of its context as part of the whole network of relations in the universe.[51] Furthermore, because of this, all phenomena are so interconnected that they are fused together without any obstructions in a perfectly harmonious whole (which is the entire universe, the Dharmadhatu).[53]
One schema which is used by Fazang in explaining the depth of interpenetration and non-obstruction is “ten profound principles” (shi xuanmen). The basic idea of the ten profound principles is outlined by Antonio S. Cua as follows:
It is a vision of perfect harmony, in which all forms and levels of phenomenal beings, understood as formations of the tathagatagarbha (9), are perceived as existing in perfect accord (1), penetrating (2) and determining (3) each other irrespective of size (5) and temporal distinctions (8). Each phenomenal entity is like each jewel in the net of Indra (4), penetrating and determining all other phenomenal entities as well as being penetrated and determined by them (6), appearing at once as the center of the entire phenomenal realm and as one of its elements (7). Even the most minute phenomenal entity appears as containing the whole universe (5) and as exemplifying the ideal state of total nonobstruction (10).[54]
Fazang was known for the various similes, demonstrations and metaphors he used to explain this idea, including Indra's net, the rafter and the building, and the hall of mirrors.[55][51] Interfusion was also a method of reflection, contemplation and Buddhist practice, a way to observe and understand things, and was not just a philosophy theory.[53]
Fazang's “Rafter Dialogue” explains Huayan metaphysics by using extended metaphor of the relation between a rafter (a part) and the building (a whole). It is part of a longer treatise, Paragraphs on the Doctrine of Difference and Identity of the One Vehicle of Huayan (Taishō no. 1866), which discusses the doctrines of interpenetration, i.e. the absence of obstruction between all phenomena, and emptiness.[53] According to Fazang, a building (standing in for the universe, the entire realm of all phenomena) is nothing more than the sum of its parts, and thus an individual rafter (or any individual phenomenon) is essential to the identity of the building. Likewise, the rafter is also fused with the building, because its identity as a rafter is dependent on it being part of the building.[55][51] Thus, according to Fazang, any individual dharma (phenomenon) is necessarily dependent upon the entirety of all dharmas in the universe (the dharmadhatu), and because of this, dharmas lack any metaphysical independence. However, dharmas are also distinct insofar as they have a unique and particular function in the total web of dependent causes and conditions (and if it did not have this function, the universe would be a different universe). As Fazang says, “each part is identical [in making the whole and in allowing each part to be what it is], and they are identical because they are different”.[40]
In another example, Fazang used ten mirrors arranged into an octagon (with two above and below) with a Buddha image and a torch at the center. According to Alan Fox, "Fazang then ignited a torch in the center, and the room was filled with reflections within reflections of the torch and the Buddha. This effectively demonstrated the Huayan view of reality as a web of causal relations, each “node” or interstices of which lacks any essential identity, and each of which is in some sense contained within everything else even as it contains everything else."[51]
Perfect interfusion of the six characteristics
The Rafter Dialogue provides six characteristics, or six ways of understanding the relation between part and whole (and their interfusion), as well as between part and part. Each characteristic refers to a specific kind of relation between parts and wholes. This schema provides six mereological perspectives on the nature of phenomena.[40] Fazang uses these characteristics as a way of further explaining the doctrine of perfect interfusion and how wholeness and diversity remain balanced in it.[54] This is called the "perfect interfusion of the six characteristics" (liuxiang yuanrong 六相圓融).[56]
Wholeness / universality (zongxiang): each dharma (like a rafter) is characterized by wholeness, because it takes part in creating a whole (like a building), and each dharma is indispensable in creating the whole.
Particularity / distinctness (biexiang): a dharma is characterized by particularity (e.g. any specific rafter) as far as it is a numerically distinct particular that is different than the whole.
Identity / sameness (tongxiang): each dharma is characterized by a certain identity with all other parts of the whole, since they all mutually form the whole without conflict.
Difference (yixiang): each dharma is different, since they have distinct functions and appearance, even while being part of a single whole.
Integration (chengxiang): each dharma is integrated together with other dharmas in forming each other and in forming the whole, and each dharma does not interfere with every other dharma.
Non-integration / disintegration (huaixiang): the fact that each part maintains its unique activity and retains its individuality while making up the whole.
According to Wei Daoru, Fazang's schema is supposed to illustrate how all things are in a state of mutual correspondence and interfusion, and how all phenomena are completely non-dual.[57] Fazang also warns readers of the extremes of “annihilationism” (seeing phenomena as non-existent) and “eternalism” (seeing phenomena as uncaused, independent and eternal). These are both ontological extremes that the Buddha originally rejected in embracing the “Middle Way”.[40] Fazang's schema is therefore also an attempt to provide an ontological middle way.[40]
In his famous Essay on the Golden Lion (Taishō no. 1881), Fazang provides a succinct explanation of a key principle of Huayan thought, that of the ultimate principle or pattern (li 理) and the relative phenomena / events / things (shi 事).[55][40] To do this, he uses the statue of a golden lion as a metaphor. According to Van Norden: “The gold of the statue is a metaphor for the unified, underlying Pattern of relationships, while the appearance of the statue as a lion is a metaphor for our illusory perception of things as independent individuals. We must recognize that the only thing that ultimately exists is the Pattern of relationships among momentary events. (There is really only gold; there is no lion.) However, we must also acknowledge that it is useful and appropriate to continue to speak as if there were independent, persistent individuals. (The gold really does appear to be a lion.)”.[40] In Huayan Buddhism, li, the principle or pattern is the ultimate reality (paramārtha-satya) which is experienced by Buddhas. According to Van Norden, this principle is a "boundless and ceaseless activity that has a patterned coherence to it".[55]
According to Fazang, Li is boundless and ceaseless, while the phenomena (shi) are impermanent, relative and limited.[55] The metaphor is intended to illuminate the relation between the ultimate principle and the myriad phenomena. Because the boundless principle (or, the gold) always remains empty and lacks a permanent nature (zixing), it can be transformed into many relative forms (like the various shapes that make up the lion statue).[58]
The metaphor also explains the relation between objects and their underlying nature, i.e. an object appears as an independent thing, but actually lacks any independent existence apart from the ultimate principle. Even though conventional phenomena are not wholly representative of the ultimate principle or pattern, they can still be pragmatically understood as relative apparent phenomena.[40]
Another important element of this metaphor is that the ultimate principle and the relative phenomena are in some sense interdependent, unified and interfused, that is to say, they are non-dual.[59]
The three natures (sanxing)
Drawing on the Awakening of Faith, Fazang presents a unique interpretation of the Yogacara theory of the Three Natures (Skt. tri-svabhāva; 三性, sanxing): the “discriminate nature” (fenbie xing), “dependent nature” (yita xing), and “true nature” (zhenshi xing).[60][55][54] The Awakening of Faith states that there is one mind (the pure buddha-nature) and two aspects (a samsaric and a nirvanic aspect). Fazang draws on this model and argues that each of the three natures also has two aspects: a fundamental aspect that is unchanging, pure, and also empty, and a derivative aspect that is fully interdependent, conditioned, and relative.[60][55]
Fazang equates the most fundamental of the three natures, the "true nature", with the tathagatagarbha (buddha-nature). The "true nature" has a dual nature: (1) “being immutable” (bubian), referring to the pure aspect of buddha nature, and (2) “responding to conditions” (suiyuan), which refers to the buddha-nature influenced by ignorance.[54] The conditioned aspect of buddha-nature gives rise to the phenomenal world, and thus, to the "dependent nature", which also has two aspects. First, it is “without self-nature” (wuxing), since all dharmas depend on the tathagatagarbha for their existence, and secondly it also has a “semblance of existence” (shiyou), i.e. it appears to exist independently.[54] Ordinary beings who do not understand the true nature of the dependent nature think that phenomena really exist independently, and this mistaken perception gives rise to the “discriminate nature.” The dual aspects of this discriminate nature are: (1) “being inexistent in reality” (liwu), the imagined phenomena seen by ordinary beings are non-existent and (2) “appearing to be existent to the senses” (qingyou).[54]
According to Fazang, each of the three nature's two aspects are also understood as being non-dual with all the others and interconnected / interfused with each other.[54][60][7] Thus, while we can speak of two aspects, Fazang writes that they "completely encompass one another, forming one, not two natures."[54] Likewise, regarding the three natures, none of them conflict or obstruct the other, allowing for a harmony between the unchanging "base" (ben) or “true origin” (zhenyuan) and the phenomenal “derivatives” (mo, or “false derivatives”, wangmo), both of which perfectly interfuse and pervade one another.[54]
Furthermore, Fazang argues that since each of the three natures has their derivative aspects, they also must have their fundamental aspect.[60][7]
Nature origination
According to Fazang's commentary on Mahayana Awakening of Faith, all phenomena (dharmas) arise from a single ultimate source, the "nature" or "One Mind".[55] This is variously described as Suchness, the tathagatagarbha (the womb of tathagatas), buddha-nature, or just "nature". This nature is the ontological source and basis of all things, which is prior to any objects or conscious subjects.[55] This doctrine which states that all dharmas arise from the buddha-nature has been termed "nature-origination" (xingqi), and the term derives from chapter 32 of the Avatamsaka Sutra, titled Nature Origination of the Jewel King Tathagata (Baowang rulai xingqi pin, Skt. Tathâgatotpatti-sambhava-nirdesa-sûtra).[54][61]
As noted by Hamar, for Fazang, nature origination (utpatti-sambhava) means "the appearance of the Absolute in the phenomenal world...this is the appearance of Tathagata in the world as a teacher for benefit of living beings and the appearance of the wisdom of Tathagata in living beings."[61] This pure nature is also not separate from living beings and all the phenomena (dharmas) in the universe. This is because the Buddha only manifests in the world due to the needs of sentient beings and he would not come into the world if there were no impure phenomena.[61] Thus, for Fazang, the ultimate nature is non-dual with all relative phenomena and interconnected with all of them.[55] As such, the source is still empty of self-existence (svabhava) and is not an essential nature that is independent of all things, but rather it is interdependent on the whole of all phenomena.[55][54]
Fazang writes that nature-origination can be understood from two perspectives: from the perspective of the cause and from the perspective of the fruit.[54] From the causal perspective, "nature" refers to the buddha-nature innate in all living beings which (in living beings) remains covered over with defilements. When defilements are all removed, the manifestation of buddha-nature is the "nature-origination".[54] Furthermore, drawing on the Buddha-nature treatise, Fazang writes that there are three kinds of nature and origination: principle, practice and fruit (li xing guo). As Hamar explains these: "Principle-nature is the Buddha-nature inherent in all beings before they begin to practice Buddhism. Practice-nature is the Buddha-nature in those beings who practice Buddhism. Fruit-nature is the Buddha-nature of those practitioners who have attained enlightenment."[61]
From the perspective of the fruit, "nature" refers to the nature that is realized on the attainment of Buddhahood. In this case, nature-origination refers to the functions of the innumerable wonderful buddha qualities and powers.[54]
Fazang, and the Huayan tradition as a whole, venerate a particular understanding of the universe as being the very body of the supreme cosmic Buddha Vairocana (whose name means "The Illuminator"). Vairocana's body is an infinite one that comprises the entire universe. Vairocana's light permeates all phenomena in the cosmos, his life is infinite and there is no place in the universe where Vairocana's teachings and manifestations are not present.[62] Vairocana is also equated with the ultimate principle (li), and as such, Vairocana is "the substance underlying phenomenal reality" according to Francis Cook.[63] Furthermore, this ultimate reality is immutable and yet it changes according to conditions, and emanates everything in the phenomenal world. It is thus both unchanging and also interdependent (and therefore empty) and dynamic.[63] Vairocana's immutability is its transcendental aspect, while its conditioned nature is its immanent aspect.[64] Cook has called this view of an all pervasive cosmic Buddha "pan-Buddhism", since it holds that everything is the Buddha and the Buddha is omnipresent in all things.[65]
Cook is careful to note that Buddha Vairocana is not a monotheistic God, nor has the functions of a God, since he is not a creator of the universe, nor a judge or father who governs the world.[66] However, other scholars have positively compared the Huayan view with theism. Weiyu Lin sees Fazang's conception of Vairocana, which is "omnipresent, omnipotent and identical to the universe itself", as containing elements which resemble some forms of theism.[67] However, Lin also argues that Fazang's metaphysics of emptiness and interdependence prevents any reification of Vairocana as a monotheistic God.[67]
According to Fazang, Vairocana is the author of the Avatamsaka Sutra. The sutra is taught through all of the ten bodies of Vairocana. The "ten bodies" is Fazang's main buddha body theory (which differs from the Mahayana three bodies theory).[68] The ten bodies are: All-Beings Body, Lands Body, Karma Body, Śrāvakas Body, Pratyekabuddha Body, Bodhisattvas Body, Tathāgatas Body, Jñānakāya Body, Dharmakāya Body, and the Space Body.[69] The number ten also has symbolic meaning, since it signifies perfection and infinitude. According to Fazang, the ten bodies also encompass the “three worlds”, and thus, he equates the ten bodies with all phenomena in the universe.[70] For Fazang, the Buddha pervades and is included in all dharmas. This includes all beings as well as all inanimate phenomena.[61]
Furthermore, Fazang says that "whatever body in the Ten Bodies is brought up, all the other nine bodies would also be included." According to Weiyu Lin, "in other words, each body simultaneously includes all the others and is, in turn, included in all of them. Their relationship is “interpenetrating” (xiangru 相入) and “mutually inclusive(xiangshe 相攝)."[71]
Fazang's understanding of the Buddhist path to awakening is informed by his metaphysics of interfusion and interpenetration. According to Fazang, “in practicing the virtues, when one is perfected, all are perfected.” Furthermore, he also writes that: “when one first arouses the thought of enlightenment [bodhicitta] one also becomes perfectly enlightened”.[72] Thus, Fazang's model of practice is one of sudden and non-dual awakening which holds that as soon as bodhicitta arises, full awakening is present within it. Since any phenomenon contains and is interfused with the entire universe, any element of the Buddhist path contains the entire path – even its fruit (buddhahood).[72]
For Fazang, this is true even for temporally distant events (like a sentient being's practice now and their eventual Buddhahood aeons from now). This is because, for Fazang, time is empty, and all moments (past, present, and future) are interfused with each other. Any segment of time is interconnected with all others and depends on all other moments.[72][73] Thus, Fazang writes:
Because an instant has no essence, it penetrates the eternal, and because the lengthy epochs have no essence, they are fully contained in a single instant...therefore, in an instant of thought all elements of the three periods of time – past, present, and future-are fully revealed.[72]
This means that not only does the end depend on the beginning, but the beginning depends on the end. Thus, while buddhahood depends on the first thought aimed at awakening (bodhicitta) and on the initial attainment of faith, the initial stages of practice also depend on the future buddhahood as well.[72][74] Fazang thus seems to be rejecting any linear causation and to be supporting some form of retrocausality.[72] As Fazang writes, "beginning and end Interpenetrate. On each stage, one is thus both a Bodhisattva and a Buddha."[73]
Furthermore, because of emptiness and interpenetration, all stages of the bodhisattva path contain each other.[73] Fazang's understanding of the path to Buddhahood is based on the Avatamsaka sutra's 52 stages (bhumi) model. The 52 begin with the ten stages of faith (shixin 十信), and then follows the ten abodes (shizhu 十住), ten practices (shixing 十行), ten dedications of merit (shihuixiang 十迴向), ten grounds (shidi 十地), virtual enlightenment (dengjue 等覺), and marvellous enlightenment (miaojue 妙覺).[75] However, Fazang does not understand this process in a linear manner, since each of these stages and practices are all said to be interfused with each other and with Buddhahood itself (as with the example of the rafter, which is only a rafter due to its dependence on the whole building).[72] As Fazang says, "If one stage is acquired, all stages are acquired". Fazang calls this the "superior progress", which entails "the acquisition of all stages as well as the stage of Buddhahood" as soon as one has reached the "perfection of faith."[73]
According to Imre Hamar, Fazang was the first to argue that "enlightenment at the stage of faith" (xinman cheng fo 信滿成佛) was "a unique doctrine of the distinct teaching of One Vehicle".[74] According to Fazang, "all practices are born from resolute faith."[74] Thus, for Fazang, at the initial stages of the path (after having given rise to faith and bodhicitta), a bodhisattva already has access to the limitless merit of all the other stages (since all stages are mutually interfused with each other).[74] Thus, for Fazang, the first initial arising of bodhicitta is also the stage of irreversibility, the stage at which one knows one is assured to become a Buddha in the future.[72]
However, this does not mean that the gradual practices of the bodhisattva stages are not necessary. Indeed, Fazang writes that the bodhisattva, after having reached the initial stages of faith, still must transverse the remaining bodhisattva stages. This is because all stages retain their particularity even while being wholly interfused, and because buddha-nature must be nourished by training on the bodhisattva stages.[74][76]
Lin, Weiyu. Exegesis-philosophy interplay : introduction to Fazang's (643-712) commentary on the Huayan jing (60 juans) [Skt. Avataṃsaka Sūtra; Flower garland sūtra] — the Huayan jing tanxuan ji [record of investigating the mystery of the Huayan jing], University of British Columbia, 2021.
Tiwald, Justin; Van Norden, Bryan (2014). Readings in Later Chinese Philosophy: Han to the 20th century. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing. pp. 80–87. ISBN978-1624661907.
Cleary, Thomas (1993). Entry into the Inconceivable: An Introduction to Hua-yen Buddhism, p. 13. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Vorenkamp, Dirck. An English Translation of Fa-Tsang's Commentary on the Awakening of Faith. Lewiston, NY, The Edwin Mellen Press 2004. ISBN 0773463739
Cook, Francis Harold (1977). Hua-yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra, pp. 90–91. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Cook (1977), pp. 93–104.
Cook (1977), p. 105.
Cook (1977), p. 92.
Cook (1977), pp. 91–94.
LIN Weiyu 林威宇 (UBC): Vairocana of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra as Interpreted by Fazang 法藏 (643–712): A Comparative Reflection on "Creator" and "Creation" 法藏(643–712)筆下《華嚴經》中的盧舍那：談佛教中的創世者和創世
Wright, Dale. “The ‘Thought of Enlightenment’ In Fa-tsang's Hua-yen Buddhism.” The Eastern Buddhist (Fall 2001): 97–106.
Cook (1977), pp. 112–113.
Hamar, I. "Faith, Practice and Enlightenment in the Avataṃsaka-sūtra and the Huayan School", in Imre Hamar and Takami Inoue (eds.) Faith in Buddhism. Budapest Monographs in East Asian Studies 6. Budapest: Institute of East Asian Studies, Eötvös Loránd University 2016.
Chen, Jinhua (2005). "Fazang: The holy man". Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies. 28 (1): 11–84. Archived from the original on March 21, 2014.
Cook, Francis Harold (1977). Hua-yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Cleary, Thomas F. (1994). Entry into the Inconceivable: An introduction to Hua-yen Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Fazang (2014). "Essay on The Golden Lion". In Tiwald, Justin; Van Norden, Bryan W. (eds.). Readings in Later Chinese Philosophy. Translated by Van Norden, Bryan W. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing. pp. 86–91.
Fazang (2014). "The Rafter Dialogue". In Tiwald, Justin; Van Norden, Bryan W. (eds.). Readings in Later Chinese Philosophy. Translated by Elstein, David. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing. pp. 80–86.
Fox, Alan (1995). "Fazang". In McGreal, Ian P. (ed.). Great Thinkers of the Eastern World. HarperCollins. pp. 99–103.
Odin, Steve (1982). Process Metaphysics and Hua-yen Buddhism: A critical study of cumulative penetration vs. interpenetration. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Vorenkamp, Dirck (2004). An English Translation of Fazang's Commentary on The Awakening of Faith. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen.
Vorenkamp, Dirck (2004). "Reconsidering the Whiteheadean critique of Huayan temporal symmetry in the light of Fazang's views". Journal of Chinese Philosophy. 32 (2): 197–210. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.2005.00187.x.
Weinstein, Stanley (1987). Buddhism in T'ang China. Cambridge University Press.
Wright, Dale (Fall 2001). "The 'Thought of Enlightenment' In Fa-tsang's Hua-yen Buddhism". The Eastern Buddhist: 97–106.
External links
Rothschild, Norman Harry. "Fazang". Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
중국 화엄종의 제3조로서 화엄학의 대성자이다. 성은 강씨, 휘는 현수, 國一國師, 香象, 康藏이라고 한다[2]. 지엄(智儼)에게 배웠고 가끔 《화엄경》을 여러 선비들에게 가르쳐 측천무후의 신임이 두터웠다.[1]화엄종이 그에 의하여 크게 이루어진 까닭으로 보통 "화엄종의 고조"라고 부른다.[1] 약 30부 100여권의 저술을 남겼다.
강창국에 강덕계의 아들로 태어났다. 지치 (ちごん)에게 화엄경을 배우고 함형 원년( 670년 ) 칙명을 받고 출가 했다. 궁정의 정원 끝에 있던 도금 청동의 사자를 가리키며, 금속은 이치(본질), 사자는 사상이라고 할 수 있지만, 사건은 본질과 불즉 불리하다(그의 강 의록 『금사자장』 참조)라고 설교하여 무칙천 의 비호를 받아 화엄교학을 선양하고 서안교외 법문사에 불사리를 맞아 오하라지에 살았다. 제자의 의정에 준 서한이 현존해 유명. 화엄교학의 실질적인 대성자가 되었다. 화엄종의 제3조, 태당대종황제의 정관 17년에 살았던 당시 진대역의 '화엄경'은 내용이 부족한 곳이 있었기 때문에 우린 나라에 원본을 색하고, 실차난다, 보리제류지 등 거듭해 이것을 번역할 때, 이것에 주는, 나중에 오하라지에 화엄의 종지를 공개해 제의 칭찬 을 받아 경성의 10대 덕으로 수많은, 그 저술중 『구역 화엄경』의 주역인 『탐현기』 20권은 가장 유명하며 『기신론의기』 3권, 『5교장』 3권 모두 널리 불학자들 사이에 연루되는 화엄종의 교학은 실로 담긴다. 현종황제의 선천 원년 11월 14일 입외, 향상대사는 그 경칭이다(불교사림) 즉, 실차난다 의 화엄경 80권의 번역과 의정 의 번역경 등에 관여했다. 제자에는 문초 · 혜원 등이 있다.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg)
.jpg)