Christopher L. Bennett

                                                                                                            China Prehistory to 9th Century

 

                                          Universal Patterns of Belief Transformation

                                            in the Development of Chinese Buddhism

 

The religions of East and West are often regarded as very different from one another.  In contrast to the centralized, monotheistic, exclusive faiths of the West, Asian belief systems appear more adaptable, personal, inclusive, and either polytheistic or atheistic.  Some even question whether the Western term Areligion@ is an appropriate label for Asian belief structures.[1]  However, the process by which Buddhism came to China and became incorporated into Chinese thought and culture demonstrates compelling similarities to the spread of other religions into new lands.  The dynamism of the process, the adaptations, syncretisms, heterodoxies and tolerance thereof, may seem characteristic of the Alooser@ spirituality of the East, but the same dynamic change and accommodation are found in the spread of more Arigid@ Western faiths, despite the wishes of their central authorities.

Buddhism underwent considerable evolution even before it reached China.  As originally developed by Siddhartha Gautama in the sixth century BCE, it was a monastic discipline for obtaining release from the suffering of life, which was done by overcoming desire through a prescribed path of contemplation and meditation.  It taught that all things were transient, illusory and false, so that yearning for them would only lead to grief.  The ultimate goal was to obtain nirvana or Asnuffing out,@ a state of total release from individual temporal existence.  Although the original Theravada form of Buddhism did not posit the existence of an individual soul, it asserted that the essences that comprise one=s soul in life would continue to be reborn, bearing the weight of past deeds and yearnings, unless the individual could achieve nirvana and thus free one=s soul from this cycle.  Theravada Buddhism was an atheistic religion, since in its conception gods were as transient and unreal as everything else.[2]

Although monastic in focus, the canon of Theravada Buddhism does address lay ethics, encouraging friendliness, compassion, honesty and family love.  It also promotes a pragmatism with which Mozi could identify: Aexpensive ceremonies and domestic rituals are wasteful as well as useless; fairs and festivals lead men to squander precious time and wealth; ...drink and gambling are evil chiefly for the same reasons; to increase the family estates is a meritorious act.@  Though suffering is inevitable to all trapped in the illusion of life, warm, respectful family and social relationships can at least ease the suffering for those not yet ready for nirvana.[3]

By the second century CE, a new strain of Buddhism, Mahayana (AGreater Vehicle@), had emerged.  This form of Buddhism concerned itself with the salvation of all, not merely those who committed to monasticism and the severing of temporal ties.  Seeing Theravada=s concern for individual salvation as selfish, the Mahayanists believed that those who had obtained enlightenment, instead of dispersing promptly into the nothingness of nirvana, should remain as bodhisattvas to lead others to enlightenment.  In fact, Mahayanist philosophers concluded that since all things are illusory, all that really exists is the Void -- and that therefore we are all in nirvana already, but simply don=t know it.  In effect, this made nirvana much more accessible to the masses, so that the average layperson did not need to make as much commitment or effort to qualify as Aenlightened.@[4]

Mahayana was the vehicle in which Buddhism came to China, in the formative era of the doctrine.  The means of its introduction, the further changes in underwent in its new home, and the various Chinese responses to its presence all parallel patterns observable in the spread of other world religions to new cultural regions.

 

The conventional view of the spread of religions, at least in the West, is of a central religious institution actively sending out missionaries to convert unbelievers, persuading them through the force of righteousness (or arms) to abandon their own beliefs wholesale and replace them with the official doctrine of the Atrue@ faith.  Clearly this is not a valid assessment of the spread of Buddhism, which had no central authority, and which was not spread by conquerors.  But it is in fact equally invalid for Western religions.  Usually, the vanguard of religious conversion does not consist of orthodox clergy, and is dominated by popular, devotional and traditional practices.

In the Indo-Islamic world, the propagators of Islam fell into two often-overlapping categories: conquerors known as ghazi, who used the spread of Islam as justification for their conquests, and Sufi mystics.  Sufis practiced a devotional, populist form of Islam frowned upon by the orthodoxy.  The ghazi were often fairly recent converts from indigenous beliefs, whose Islamic practice was heavily influenced by folk religion.[5]  In many respects, the Islam they championed bore only minor differences from the indigenous beliefs of those they converted, making the transition easy.[6]  In the Americas, Christianity was introduced by conquerors rather than clergymen.  AConversion@ was often a superficial ceremony following only the most cursory inculcation of doctrine, and served more as a means of establishing political alliances than an actual show of religious conviction.[7]

The impetus of Buddhism=s spread into China similarly came from the outskirts of Buddhist culture rather than the center.  Indeed, most of the monks who brought this Indian faith to China were not even from India.  The first significant known translator of Buddhist texts into Chinese was a Parthian known as An Shih-kao.  His coworkers included another Parthian, a Scythian, two natives of a land called Sogdiana, and a lone Indian known as Chu Shuo-fo.[8]

The Buddhism propounded by these early monks shows substantial differences from the original form of the religion.  Not least of these is the worshipping of the Buddha as a divine figure.  In the early text Mou-tzu Li-huo-lun, compiled between the second and fifth centuries, the Buddha is defined to Chinese audiences not as a man who has achieved enlightenment and transcended illusory reality to a state of nonexistence, but as Aendowed with supernatural powers, and untouched by fire, weapons or impurities@ -- sounding more like Superman than the Buddha.[9]  The concept of a distinct, eternal soul transmigrating intact from life to life had been added[10], bringing Buddhist teaching more into agreement with conventional Indian beliefs as well as the Chinese concept of the spirit.

The most radical transformation was a change in the fundamental goals of the believer.  The original goal was to achieve enlightenment by letting go of all desire.  But the Sutra of the Pure Land, a scripture translated into Chinese in the third century, tells of a heavenly realm to the West in which the faithful will be reborn.[11]  Although the Pure Land is theoretically just one step along the journey to nirvana, a next life in which the conditions are more amenable for attaining full enlightenment, it came to be seen as an end in itself for many Buddhists, a paradisical reward for a pious life, a goal to be yearned for.  As observed by the ex-Buddhist scholar Hui-lin, a faith conceived to eliminate craving now encouraged it.[12]

Certain variations of doctrine appear to be more sincere than others.  Chapter 25 of the Lotus Sutra, compiled in the 1st-2nd centuries, presents a dialogue explaining how simply invoking the name of the deity AvalokiteÑvara will suffice to bring salvation -- presented not in the traditional Buddhist sense of release from the illusion of existence, but in the more concrete terms of deliverance from physical threats -- fire, swords, chains, banditry, infertility and so forth.  Even a nationwide plague of demons can, according to the text, be defeated simply by one person invoking the deity=s name.  Upon being persuaded of this, the Bodhisattva Infinite Thought expresses his devotion to AvalokiteÑvara -- through the donation of a priceless gold necklace.  This materialistic interpretation of religion, the promise of miraculous quick fixes to temporal woes in exchange for minimal spiritual effort and generous monetary donation, bears striking resemblances to 20th-century American televangelism.

 

The acceptance of a new religion by an indigenous population is not a simple process.  According to a thesis developed by Richard M. Eaton in his studies of Islamic conversion, the conversion proceeds in stages.  Initially, the new ideas are incorporated into the existing belief structure, either by being added onto the canon or by being identified with extant elements of it.  The Aconversion@ is actually a syncretic process, a blending of beliefs.  In later generations, as pilgrims bring back increased knowledge about the original form and central culture of the religion, reform movements arise in an effort to Apurify@ the faith and return to its fundamental tenets.[13]

In China, this process is not hard to recognize.  During its rise in the Han period, Buddhism was closely linked with Taoism in Chinese minds.  As Kenneth Chen points out, there were numerous surface similarities between the two faiths: AIn their public ceremonies both systems practiced worship without sacrifices.  In their private practices both emphasized concentration and meditation, control of respiration, and abstinence from certain kinds of food.@  Buddhist texts chosen for translation during the Han were preferentially those dealing with the points of similarity listed above, neglecting those addressing core Buddhist doctrine.  ATo the Taoists,@ Chen remarks, ABuddhism was a new method of obtaining immortality.@  They saw it not as a contradictory faith, but as an additional tool for their own spiritual repertoire.  To the mass of Chinese, it was simply a variant of familiar Taoist teachings.[14]

Generally, the most successful missionaries are those who recognize this process of gradual adaptation and syncretism, and voluntarily cast their teachings in terms familiar to the locals rather than insisting on strict dogma.  Chen suggests that Aperhaps the foreign monks chose to translate only those texts because they were the ones of interest to the Chinese.@[15]  Other accommodations were sometimes made for reasons of expediency.  According to Embree, Theravada Buddhism Adefinitely discouraged the pretensions of kings to divine or semidivine status.@[16]  Yet in the post-Han Northern Dynasties, whose rulers refused to exempt Buddhist monks from prostrating themselves before them, the monks rationalized obedience to this demand Aby considering the northern rulers living Buddhas, before whom it was natural and fitting that they should prostrate themselves.@[17]

The reform process in Eaton=s thesis, in which movements arise seeking to trim the faith of excess cultural baggage and ritual and return to the fundamentals, is perhaps best represented in China by the rise of Chan Buddhism.  Chan beliefs focus purely on dhyana, the practice of meditation through which enlightenment can be reached. Chen puts it clearly:

The Ch=an masters... state that the main feature of Buddhism is the realization of enlightenment, which is a direct, personal experience.  All the external paraphernalia of the religion, such as the sacred scriptures, the images, and the rituals, are but props and aids to realize this enlightenment; they are not enlightenment itself.  Since the Ch=an masters claim that they can realize this enlightenment by looking directly into one=s own nature, then there is no need for all the accoutrements of the religion.  They claim that they are the genuine Buddhists, since they, like the Buddha, apprehend the ultimate reality without resorting to such externalities as literature and images.[18]

 

Although Chan Buddhism is indigenous to China, it is clearly intended as a return to the fundamentals of the original teaching.  This is the normal pattern of reform in Eaton=s thesis: the impetus for reform comes not from the orthodox center itself, but from local believers who have studied the orthodox or original teachings of the faith and found the paraphernalia of its popular, syncretic form corrupt or superficial.  The Chinese monk Hui-yüan wrote, AI regret very much that since the introduction of the great religion into the East, so little is known of the practices of dhyana that the whole structure is in danger of collapse because of lack of the solid foundation of meditation.@[19]

 

One key difference between the spread of Buddhism in China and the spread of Christianity and Islam elsewhere is the fact that Buddhism remained a minority faith, which often faced resistance, rejection or persecution from proponents of the dominant beliefs.  Although there was initial concord between Buddhism and Taoism, there were also periods of intense competition, evidently arising more from the desire for political prominence and royal support than from scriptural or spiritual concerns.  Confucianists, of the dominant belief structure in China, disliked Buddhism on more doctrinal grounds, and Chinese culture in general was suspicious of an Aalien@ faith.  Government officials, meanwhile, were uncomfortable with monastic exemptions from taxation and tribute, and were easily persuaded to engage in persecution.[20]

To a large extent, these negative impressions of Buddhism pertain to syncretic or altered elements of the doctrine.  For instance, Chinese often criticized Buddhism as being Aunfilial,@ rejecting all bonds of family.  Recall, however, that the lay ethics of Theravada Buddhism celebrated family and social ties among the majority who were not yet ready to assume the monastic life.  A more drastic example is found in the writings of Han Yü (768-824), a noted Confucian scholar and anti-Buddhist activist. As Sommer points out, the ABuddhist@ practice he condemns in one of his strongest tracts, AMemorial on the Bone of Han Yü=s Buddha,@ is merely Aa cultish folk practice that itself bears no resemblance to the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama: the worship of a relic of the Buddha.@[21]  In other words, what was being condemned was not part of Buddhism, but a traditional element grafted onto the foreign faith by local lay believers.

A conventional explanation for why Buddhism failed to dominate as Christianity and Islam did would likely be that it was spread solely by monks and scholars rather than conquerors and armies.  But Eaton=s work dismantles the Aconversion at the point of the sword@ myth by demonstrating that the greatest Islamization actually occurred in those regions where state power was weakest and where the least military pressure would therefore have been felt.  This same point also invalidates the assumption that conversion was due to political or economic advantage.[22]  In fact, Eaton demonstrates that those regions where conversion was most successful were the ones where no literate, scripture-based religion had previously held sway.  Nonliterate faiths are far more flexible and open to innovation than those whose doctrines are printed in black and white.[23]  In China, Confucianism and Taoism both had extensive written traditions predating Buddhism=s arrival by centuries.  Thus, Buddhism had no more chance of displacing them as the dominant Chinese faith than did Christianity or Islam in later centuries.

 

Despite the great differences that exist between Eastern and Western religions, a comparative study reveals that there are great similarities in the processes by which they spread across time and cultures.  It also reveals that no religion is fixed and unchanging.  Doctrine usually takes generations to be formalized, and continues to be adapted and reinterpreted by different populations.  Even fundamentalist reform movements are reinterpretations suiting the particular time and place of their development.

And this is exactly as it should be.  Religion is a personal thing, and no rigid, monolithic structure of belief can serve the personal spiritual needs of all.  The most adaptable belief structures are in many ways the most useful.  A comparative overview of world religion is helpful in revealing this truth.

 

Back


[1]Sommer, Deborah, Chinese Religion: An Anthology of Sources (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. vii.

[2]Embree, Ainslie T., ed., Sources of Indian Tradition, Second Edition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988), pp. 93-97 passim.

[3]Ibid., pp. 114-15.

[4]Ibid., pp. 155-8.

[5]Cemal Kafadar, Between Two Worlds: The Construction of the Ottoman State (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), pp. 49-90 passim.

[6]Sugar, Southeastern Europe, p. 54.

[7]Leon-Portilla, Miguel, ed.,  The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico, Expanded and Updated Edition, tr. Lysander Kemp (Boston: Beacon Press, 1992), pp. 59-60.

[8]Chen, Kenneth K. S., Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), pp. 43-44.

[9]Ibid., p. 39.

[10]Ibid., p. 46.

[11]Sommer, pp. 119-125.

[12]Chen, p. 139.

[13]Eaton, Richard M., "Approaches to the Study of Conversion to Islam in India," in Richard C. Martin, Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies (Tuscon: Univ. of Arizona Press, 1985), p. 111-113.  This thesis is further developed in Eaton, The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760 (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1993).

[14]Chen, pp. 48-50.

[15]Ibid.

[16]Embree, p. 125-6.

[17]Hucker, Charles O., China=s Imperial Past (Stanford University Press, 1975), p. 217.

[18]Chen, p. 363.

[19]Ibid., p. 351.

[20]Hucker, p. 215.

[21]Sommer, p. 169.

[22]Eaton, Rise of Islam, pp. 115-19.

[23]Ibid., pp. 273-75.