Advertisement

The Metaphysics of Identity in Fazang’s Huayan Wujiao Zhang: The Inexhaustible Freedom of Dependent Origination

  • Nicholaos JonesEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy book series (DCCP, volume 9)

Abstract

Fazang’s arguments in his Treatise on the Five Teachings of Huayan provide a philosophical foundation for the Avatamsaka Sutra’s rich and suggestive imagery. This chapter focuses on one of Fazang’s central arguments in that treatise, namely, his argument that mutually reliant dharmas are mutually identical. The chapter presents the background context for Fazang’s argument, reconstructs the argument’s logical structure, interprets the central concepts appearing therein, and explains why Fazang might have found plausible his argument’s premises. Specific discussion points include: the non-duality of existence and emptiness; relations between causes and their conditions; the meaning of creation and identity; connections with the ti-yong paradigm; Fazang’s analogy of the ten coins. The chapter concludes by considering the implications of Fazang’s metaphysics for contemporary discussions of substance and ontological foundations.

Keywords

Causation Fazang Huayan Mutual identity (xiangjiti-yong 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I thank Youru Wang and Ryan Jordan for helpful comments on prior versions of this chapter.

References

  1. Chan, Wing-tsit, ed. and trans. 1963. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Chang, Garma C.C. 1971. The Buddhist Teaching of Totality: The Philosophy of Hwa Yen Buddhism. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Chen, Jinhua. 2007. Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (643–712). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  4. Cleary, Thomas. 1983. Entry Into the Inconceivable: An Introduction to Hua-yen Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cleary, Thomas. trans. 1993. The Flower Ornament Scripture: A Translation of The Avatamsaka Sutra. Boston: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  6. Cho, Sungtaek. 2002. “The Rationalist Tendency in Modern Buddhist Scholarship: A Revaluation.” Philosophy East and West 52.4: 426–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cook, Francis. 1970. Fa-tsang’s Treatise on the Five Doctrines: An Annotated Translation. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  8. Cook, Francis. 1977. Hua-yen Buddhism: The Jewel Net of Indra. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cook, Francis. 1979. “Causation in the Chinese Hua-yen Tradition,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 6.4: 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fahy, Gregory M. 2012. “Huayan Buddhism and Dewey: Emptiness, Compassion, and the Philosophical Fallacy.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 39.2: 260–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fazang 法藏. Huayan Jing Tanxuan Ji 華嚴經探玄記 (Account of Investigating the Mysteries of the Avatamsaka Sutra). T 35, 1733.Google Scholar
  12. ———. Dasheng Qixin Lun Yiji 大乘起信論義記 (Commentary on the Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith). T 44, 1846.Google Scholar
  13. ———. Huayan Wujiao Zhang 華嚴五教章 (Treatise on the Five Teachings of Huayan). T 45, 1866.Google Scholar
  14. ———. Jin Shizi Zhang 金獅子章 (Treatise on the Golden Lion). T 45, 1881.Google Scholar
  15. Fung, Yu-lan. 1983. A History of Chinese Philosophy. Vol. II. Trans. by Derk Bodde. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Garfield, Jay L. 1994. “Dependent Arising and the Emptiness of Emptiness: Why Did Nagarjuna Start With Causation?” Philosophy East and West 44.2: 219–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Heil, John. 2012. The Universe as We Find It. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hershock, Peter. 2013. “Diversity Matters: Buddhist Reflections on the Meaning of Difference.” In Steven M. Emmanuel, ed. A Companion to Buddhist Philosophy. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 675–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jiang, Tao. 2001. “The Problematic of Whole-Part and the Horizon of Enlightenment in Huayan Buddhism.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 28.4: 457–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones, Nicholaos. 2009. “Fazang’s Total Power Mereology: An Interpretive Analytic Reconstruction.” Asian Philosophy 19.2: 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones, Nicholaos. 2010a. “Mereological Heuristics for Huayan Buddhism.” Philosophy East and West 60.3: 355–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jones, Nicholaos. 2010b. “Nyāya-Vaiśesika Inherence, Buddhist Reduction, and Huayan Total Power.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 37.2: 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kalupahana, David J. 1986. Causality: The Central Philosophy of Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  24. King, Winston L. 1979. “Hua-yen Mutually Interpenetrative Identity and Whiteheadean Organic Relation.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 6.4: 387–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. King, Sallie B. 1997. “The Doctrine of Buddha-Nature Is Impeccably Buddhist.” In Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm Over Critical Buddhism, ed., by Jamie Hubbard. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 174–192.Google Scholar
  26. Kong, Roberta Lion. 1979. “Metaphysics and East-West Philosophy: Applying the Chinese T’i-Yung Paradigm.” Philosophy East and West 29.1: 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Koseki, Aaron K. 1982. “‘Later Mādhyamika’ in China: Some Current Perspectives on the History of Prajnāpāramitā Thought.” The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 5.2: 53–62.Google Scholar
  28. Liu, Jeeloo. 2006. An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy: From Ancient Philosophy to Chinese Buddhism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Liu, Ming-wood. 1979. The Teaching of Fa-Tsang: An Examination of Buddhist Metaphysics. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  30. Liu, Ming-wood. 1982. “The Harmonious Universe of Fa-tsang and Leibniz: A Comparative Study.” Philosophy East and West 32.1: 61–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu, Ming-wood. 1994. Madhyamaka Thought in China. New York: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  32. Lowe, E.J. 1994. “Primitive Substances.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54.3: 531–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Muller, A. Charles. 1996. “The Composition of Self-Transformation Thought in Classical East Asian Philosophy and Religion,” Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University 4: 141–156.Google Scholar
  34. Muller, A. Charles. 1999. “Essence-Function and Interpenetration: Early Chinese Origins and Manifestations.” Bulletin of Toyo Gakuen University 7: 93–106.Google Scholar
  35. Odin, Steve. 1982. Process Metaphysics and Hua-yen Buddhism: A Critical Study of Cumulative Penetration vs Interpenetration. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  36. Oh, Kang Nam. 1976. A Study of Chinese Hua-yen Buddhism With Special Reference to the Dharmadhātu (Fa-Chieh) Doctrine. Ph.D. Dissertation. McMaster University.Google Scholar
  37. Park, Jin Y. 2008. Buddhism and Postmodernity: Zen, Huayan, and the Possibility of Buddhist Postmodern Ethics. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  38. Park, Sung-bae. 1993. Buddhist Faith and Sudden Enlightenment. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  39. Priest, Graham. 2009. “The Structure of Emptiness.” Philosophy East and West 59.4: 467–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rea, Michael. 2013. “Analytic Theology: Précis.” Journal of the American Academy of Religions 81.3: 573–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ronkin, Noa. 2005. Early Buddhist Metaphysics: The Making of a Philosophical Tradition. New York: RoutledgeCurzon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schaffer, Jonathan. 2010. “Monism: The Priority of the Whole.” Philosophical Review 119: 31–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shih, Chang-Qing. 2004. The Two Truths in Chinese Buddhism. Delhi: Motilal Bonarsidass.Google Scholar
  44. Suh, Jung-hyung. 1997. Taoist Impact on Hua-yen Buddhism: A Study of the Formation of the Hua-yen World View. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  45. Vorenkamp, Dirck. 2004. “Evil, the Bodhisattva Doctrine, and Faith in Chinese Buddhism: Examining Fa Zang’s Three Tests.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 31.2: 253–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wang, Youru. 2003. Linguistic Strategies in Daoist Zhuangzi and Chan Buddhism: The Other Way of Speaking. New York: RoutledgeCurzon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wright, Dale S. 1982. “The Significance of Paradoxical Language in Hua-yen Buddhism,” Philosophy East and West 32.3: 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang, Dainian. 2002. Key Concepts in Chinese Philosophy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Zimmerman, Michael. 2002. A Buddha Within: The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra: The Earliest Exposition of the Buddha-Nature Teaching in India. Tokyo: International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology.Google Scholar
  50. Ziporyn, Brook. 2003. “Li (Principle, Coherence) in Chinese Buddhism.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 30.3–4: 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Alabama in HuntsvilleHuntsvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations