The Early Development of the Buddha-nature Doctrine in China* Ming-Wood Liu 

Journal of Chinese Philosophy 

Vol.16,1989 

PP.1-36 

Copyright @1989 by Dialogue Publishing Company,Honolulu,Hawili,U.S.A 

P.1 

Among the many concepts current among Chinese Buddhists, "Buddha-nature" is undoubtedly the most central and the most widely debated. As is well-known, the idea "Buddha-nature" first became popular in China with the translation of the Mahayana Maahapanrin irvaanasuutra (hence-forth referred to as MNS) in the early fifth century; since then, a variety of theses have been proposed on several aspects of the subject. These are worth examining not only because of the important role they play in the history of development of Chinese Buddhist thought, but also because they reflect more fundamental doctrinal differences. Once these differences have been clarified, a more a comprehensive picture ofthe various dominant philosophical trends in the field of Chinese Buddhism will appear. This paper will unravel the diverse streams of thought which came to be associated with the Buddha-nature concept during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, i.e., in the first two centuries Of the propagation of the Buddha-nature doctrine in China. 

In my article "The Doctrine of the Buddha-nature in the Mahayana MNS",(1) I have attempted to analyse the view of the MNS on the problem of Buddha-nature around three basic questions:  
 

i. What is Buddha-nature? 

ii.What is the meaning of sentient beings "having" Buddha-nature?  

 iii.Do all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature? 

         The following answers are arrived at the course of that discussion : 

i."Buddha-nature" means the nature of the Buddha. 

P.2 

ii.With respect to sentient beings, "to have Buddha-nature" signifie "

      to be able to attain the nature of the   Buddha in the future."  

iii.All sentient beings without exception possess Buddha-nature,(2)  

Since the MNS was commonly accepted in China as the final  

authority on the subject of Buddha-nature, all parties during the period under review regarded these replies as final, All agreed that one of the central significances of the term "Buddha-nature" was "the nature of being a Buddha." They also agreed that every being with life would attain Buddhahood some day. Controversies arose only when they started to inquire into the ontological basis of this peculiar assurance of the Tathaagata, as everywhere reported in the MNS, that no sentient being however corrupt would fail to share his enlightened state sooner or later In the terminology of the MNS, they did not dispute the question of the Buddha-nature proper (i.e., what constitutes a Buddha), but the problem of "the direct cause of Buddha-nature', (cheng-yin fo-hsing(a)) 

1.The Direct Cause of Buddha-Nature as Understood in the MNS 

The term "direct cause" first appears in the MNS in connection with the relation of the Buddha-nature with sentient beings, The MNS taught that all sentient beings would eventually attain the nature of the Buddha. When considered from the general theoretical frame-work of the MNS, especially its scepticism towards ontological speculation, it is apparent that this belief is not the consequence of abstract 

philosophical reasoning, but is rather a soteriological thesis derived from the all-embracing compassion of the Tathagata, who vowed never to enter the final nivrana until each and every sentient being has been saved.Further, it is propounded as encouragement to all followers and would-be followers of the Buddhist way, assuring them that so long as they are willing to tread the Path laid down by the Bhagavat, no obstacle - however serious - can separate them from the supreme enlightenment forever.3 But if it is neither the interest nor to the general policy of the MNS to probe into the metaphysical ground of this peculiar potency of the sentient to achieve ultimate deli- 

P.3 

verance, the common run of mankind, governed in their thinking by the categories of cause and effect, will view the matter otherwise. They will think that since all sentient beings are bound for enlightenment, there must be present in their ontological constitution some particular features 01 "causes" which account for this fact, and they will remain dissatisfied until these features or "causes" are completely traced out and clearly specified. 

When confronted by such a demand for an explanation, the strategy of the MNS is to resort to similes. Thus, a parallel is drawn several times between cream obtained from milk and the Buddha-nature to be attained by sentient beings: just as milk will turn into cream when properly processed, sentient beings will achieve Buddhahood by leading the correct religious life However, the MNS rejects out of hand any further attempt (perfectly legitimate from the commonsense point of view) to infer from the tendency of milk to be transformed into cream to the pre-existence in milk of the nature of cream. Pursuing this same line of reasoning, the MNS also judges that the future assumption of the Buddha-nature by all sentient beings does not entail the preexistence in them at present of a definite essence to appropriate the characteristics of the Tathagata: 
 

Good sons! Only the ignorant will speak as you have argued:  

that if milk does not have the nature of cream, it cannot  

produce cream,just as if banyan seeds do not have the nature  

of being five chang from the ground,(4) it cannot produce  

concrete [trees] five chang tall. The wise will never speak  

that way. Why? For [they understand that things] do not have  

[definite] nature. 

Good sons! If milk already has the nature of cream, it would  

not need the support of various conditions [to produce  

cream]. 

Good sons! Milk will never turn into cream when mixed with  

water even if we allow it to stand for one month, but if  

we add (b) tree to it,(5) cream will one drop of the juice  

of the p'o-chiu be formed right away. If milk already has  

[the nature of] cream, why is it dependent on [such]  

conditions [as the juice 

P.4  

of the p'o-chiu tree to produce cream]? The same is true  

of the "Buddha-nature with respect to sentient beings"  

(chungsheng hsing(c)).c).The Buddha-nature is apprehended  

[by sentient beings] at the fulfilment of various 

conditions... Since [sentient beings] attain the Buddha- 

nature dependent on various conditions, they do not have any  

[definite] nature; and since [sentient beings] do not have  

any [definite] nature, they can attain the most perfect  

enlightenment.(6) 

A similar argument is offered a few pages later, where the term "direct cause" is introduced: 

The Buddha explained, "I have never maintained that there  

is [the nature of] cream in milk. When people say that there  

is [the nature of] cream [in milk],it is because [they see  

that] cream is produced from milk."  

[The Bodhisattva Simhanaada asked,]"World-honored one!  

Everything produced surely must have its occasions." 

[The Buddha replied,] "Good sons! When there is milk, there  

is no cream, and there is also no curd, butter  

and ghee.... If there is [cream in milk] ,why don't we give  

milk the double name [milk-cream], just as we call a person  

skillful in [making] both [articles of gold and iron] gold-  

and blacksmith? ... Good sons! There are two types of  

cause: first, direct cause and second, auxiliary cause.  

Direct cause is like milk which produces cream, and  

auxiliary cause is such as warmth and yeast [which are added  

to milk to form cream]. Since [cream] is formed from milk,  

we say that there is the nature of cream in milk." 

The Bodhisattva Simhanaada asked, "World-honored one! If  

there is not the nature of cream in milk, there is also not  

the nature of cream in horns. Why isn't cream formed from  

horns ? " 

[The Buddha replied,] "Good sons! Cream is also formed  

from horns. Why? 1 have mentioned two auxiliary causes of 

P.5 

cream: first, yeast, and secondly, warmth. Since horns  

are warm in nature, it can produce cream."  

[The Bodhisattva] Simhanaada asked, "World-honored one!  

If horns can produce cream, why do people who want cream  
look for milk and not horns?"  

The Buddha replied, "Good sons! That is why I teach that there are [two types of cause:] direct cause and auxiliary cause.(7)

In this revealing dialogue, the Bodhisattva Simhanaada represents the position of the ordinary man, who sees the need of postulating "occasions" to account for the production of cream from milk. Thus, he asks that if there is nothing in the composition of milk which is especially conductive to the formation of cream, why do people who want cream look for milk, and not some other things such as horns? The Buddha, on the other hand, consistently refuses to view the matter this way. In his opinion, the everyday assertion that there is cream in milk should not be taken literally as indicating the presence of the nature of cream in milk, but rather as a loose way of referring to the fact that cream is always formed from milk. As for the query why people look for milk instead of horns when they need cream, the Buddha answers by classifying causes into two categories: direct and auxiliary. Milk is the first thing to come to our mind in case we "need cream because it is the direct cause. Furthermore,horns, being warm in nature, can serve as the auxiliary cause of cream. So it is not totally wrongheaded if a person wanting cream asks for horns, since warmth, as the auxiliary cause, is as necessary to the formation of cream as milk. 

Whether the argument outlined above is convincing or not is not our present concern. What is important for our immediate purpose is that in referring to milk as the "direct cause" and warmth or yeast as an "auxiliary cause," the MNS is obviously drawing a distinction between Principal and secondary conditions for the production of cream. No less significant is the fact that this classification of causes into the two categories comes in the wake of a strong denouncement of the everyday man's interest in constitutive principles in his investigation of things. This makes it abundantly clear that the division is advanced not out of an 

P.6  

ontological consideration but rather by way of reply to the query forwarded by the Bodhisattva Simhanada. These observations of ours are further confirmed when the Sutra continues to apply the concepts "direct cause" and "auxiliary cause" to "Buddha-nature with respect to sentient beings" 
 

[The Bodhisattva Simhanaada asked,] "World-honored one! As you have said, there are two types of causes: direct cause  

and auxiliary cause. To what category does 'Buddha-nature  

with respect to sentient beings' belong? 

[The Buddha replied,] "Good son! As for 'Buddha-nature  

with respect to sentient beings,' there are also two types  

of cause:first, direct cause; and second, auxiliary cause.  

Direct cause refers to sentient beings. Auxiliary cause  

refers to the six paaramitas.(8) 

With respect to the fulfilment of the Buddha-nature by sentient beings, sentient beings are the "direct causes," for only animate creatures can assume the excellences of the Tathaagata. However,, enmeshed in defilements in the realm of samsaara, sentient beings will not be able to reach the state of Buddhahood without first practising religious disciplines Among the most basic of these disciplines are the six paaramitaas of charity, virtuous conduct, forbearance, zeal, meditation and wisdom. So the six paaramitaas are designated as the "auxiliary causes." But if it appears quite natural to us (as it did to the Bodhisattva Simhanada) that there must be some peculiarities in the physical and mental make-up of sentient beings which account for their state of being the "direct causes" of Buddha-nature, the MIVS apparently thinks otherwise. For when we contrive our reading of the text, we find in it no primordial explanation whatever for calling sentient beings "direct causes" and the six paaramitaas "auxiliary causes." On the contrary,we find the Sutra citing the examples of the knife and the images it reflects,the pregnant woman and the child she bears,bunyan seeds and the bunyan trees they give rise to, etc., all serving to demonstrate that this kind of reductive reasoning is illegitimate .(9)  

To summarize, we can say that by "direct cause of Buddha-nature," the MNS means the principal condition of the fulfilment of the nature of 

P.7 

the Buddha. "Sentient beings" are the "direct cause of Buddha-nature," for only beings with life can practise the Buddhist way and there by reach the Buddhist goal. The constant refusal of the MNS to posit any ontological ground for the above is an instance of that anti-metaphysical attitude which we observed at the opening of this section. It further corroborates our earlier remark that in the MNS, the idea of the enlightenment of all sentient beings in the future is essentially a soteriological concept, which is arrived at independently of any theoretical speculation on the nature of Reality. 

2.Some General Interpretations of the "Direct Cause of  Buddha-Nature'' 

        The import of the MNS into China in the early fifth century ushered in a torrent of discussion on the subject of  Buddha-nature. The Ta-ch'eng hsuan-lun(d) (henceforth referred to as TH) and the Nieh-p'an-ching yu-i(e) of Chi-tsang(f) (549-623),(10) the Nieh-p'an tsung-yao(g) of Wonhyo(h) (617-686)(11) and the Ta-ch'eng ssu-lun hsuan-i(i) (henceforth referred to as TSH) of Hui-chun(j) (text completed in 657),(12) all speak of the existence in the fifth and sixth centuries of a wide variety of these on the problem. Since most propounders of the theses have not passed down to us independent writings of their own, the aforementioned four works constitute the principal sources of information for our present study. Also important in this respect is the Ta-pan nieh-p'an-ching

chi-chueh(k)(henceforth referred to as TNC), a collection of commentaries on the MNS compiled during the reign Of Emperor Wu(l) (464-547) of the Liang Dynasty(m). This text preserves many pronouncements by leading contemporary scholars of the MNS on the question of the Buddha-nature, pronouncements which would otherwise be lost. 

        Judging from the records of Chi-tsang, Wonhyo and Hui-chun, debates On the Buddha-nature doctrine in the period centered around the question of what constitutes its "direct cause." Based on presently available information, many of the early interpreters of the Buddhanature concept adopted the non-committal attitude of the MNS. That is, 

P.8  

like the MNS, they considered sentient beings in general to be the direct cause of Buddha-nature, for only animate creatures can assume the essence of the Buddha. Otherwise they remained totally indefinite as to the ontological ground of this belief. 

Theory One: Sentient Beings as the Direct Cause of Buddha-Nature (Advocated by Tao-lang,(n) Seng-min,(O) and Hui-yen(P)). 
 

Heading the list of the eleven interpretations of the  

"direct cause of Buddha-nature" as given in the TH is one  

which adopts literally the definition of the term in the  

MNS, and maintains that sentient beings are the direct  

cause of Buddha-nature. 

The first thesis regards sentient beings as the direct  

cause of Buddha-nature. So the Sutra (MNS) says,'Direct  

cause refers to sentient beings. Auxiliary cause refers to  

the six paaramitaas.' Since it is stated that direct cause  

refers to sentient beings, we know that sentient beings are  

the direct cause of Buddhanature. Again [,the MNS]  

says,'All sentient beings have the Buddha-nature' [T,  

vo1.12, p.524b, 1.20.]. Thus, we know that sentient  

beings are the direct cause [of Buddha-nature] .(13) 

The Nieh-p'an tsung-yao cites Seng-min (467-527)14 and the TSH further cites Tao-lang(15) and the elder Pal-yen of the Chao-t'i Temple(r/6) as proponents of this thesis. They give almost identical accounts of their position. 
 

The second master maintains that sentient beings here and  

now are the substance of [the direct cause of] Buddha- 

nature. Why? For the function of sentient beings is to  

preside over mental dharmas, and the essence of sentient  

beings is to be reborn in myriad realms. Since as masters  

of mental [dharmas, sentient beings] they will definitely  

achieve the perfect enlightenment,it is asserted that  

sentient beings are the substance of the direct cause [of  

Buddha-nature] .(17) 
 

P.9 

From the above quotations we can see that the reason given by the advocates of this thesis for calling sentient beings the direct cause of Buddhanature agrees perfectly with that of the MNS: Sentient beings are the direct cause of Buddha-nature, for as "masters of mental dharmas," they "will definitely achieve the perfect enlightment" if they follow the way of the Buddha. 

Theory Two: Future Fruit as the Direct Cause of Buddha-Nature (Advocated by Chu Tao-sheng(s) and T'an-ai(t)). 

A more sophisticated and rather misleading way of expressing this same truth of sentient beings being the direct cause of Buddha-nature is the thesis that "the future fruit is the direct cause of Buddha-nature," This theory is listed in the TH as the eighth interpretation. The use of the term "future fruit" in discourses on the Buddha-nature began with Chu Tao-sheng (d. 434),'s the famous philosopher monk who is best remembered by posterity for preaching in China the idea of the possession of Buddha-nature by all sentient beings even before the appearance of the full translation of the MNS." So far as can be gathered from presently accessible sources, Tao-sheng followed closely the footsteps of the MNS, and interpreted "Buddha-nature" as meaning "the nature of being a Buddha." It is obviously this sense of the term "Buddha-nature" Tao-sheng has in mind when he speaks of the Buddha-nature as the apprehension of the TrUth,20 as "the paragon of excellence apprehended only when all virtues are fulfilled,"(21) and as "not formed from causes, and also not something made."(22) Tao-sheng sometimes refers to this sense of "Buddha-nature" more specifically as "the Substance of Buddha-nature" as when he calls the supreme form of emptiness, which can be comprehended by Buddhas alone, "the subStance of Buddha-nature."23 With this understanding of the term "Buddha-nature," it is not surprising that Tao-sheng would come to designate it as "future possession" (tang-,yu(u))(24) and "future fruit'' (tangkuo(v)), because from the perspecrive of sentient beings, assuming the character, of a Buddha remains a matter of the far distant future. TaoSheng's idea of Buddha-nature as "future fruit" is recounted in the TSH as follows: 

P.10  
 

The Dharma-master Tao-sheng maintains that what will be  

possessed [by all sentient beings] in the future is the  

substance of Buddha-nature. In the opinion of the  

Dharma-master, even though all sentient beings do not have  

the Buddha-nature [at present], they will definitely  

attain the pure awakening in the future. When they are  

awakened, they will transcend the four terms (of being,  

non-being, both being and non-being, and neither being nor  

non-being) and the hundred negations, and will not be  

circumscribed by the three periods (of past, present and  

future). But to sentient beings not yet awakened, this  

[transcednence of the] four terms and the hundred negations  

appears as "future fruit" [yet to be realized].(25) 

As for Tao-sheng's conception of the "direct cause of 

Buddha-nature," this cannot be determined from the scant materials at hand. Nevertheless, the term "future fruit," which Tao-sheng coined to indicate the Buddhanature proper, was adopted in later discussions to denote the "direct cause of Buddha-nature," In fact, the thesis of the "future fruit" as the direct cause of Buddha-nature seemed to have enjoyed considerable popularity in the early decades of the propagation of the Buddha-nature doctrine in China.(26) The TSH gives the following record of the teaching of a certain Master Ai(W) of the Pai-ma Temple,(X) who subscribed to this idea.(27) 
 

First, the Master Ai of the pal-ma Temple sticks to the idea  

of Tao-sheng and declares that the future fruit is the  

direct cause [of Buddha-nature]. [His intent is] to  

distinguish [sentient beings from] wood and stones, which  

do not have the propensity of [attainingl the future fruit.  

[According to the Master,l except for things devoid of even  

the initial thought of ignorance, whatever is endowed with  

a mind has the nature of [attaining] the future fruit [of  

Buddhahood] . Thus, if they practise myriads of  

[meritorious] deeds, they will gain the fruit. So [it is  

said] that the future fruit is the substance of the direct  

cause of Buddha-nature,(28) 

P.11 

The reference to wood and stones in the above quotation calls to mind a passage in the MNS,which throws much light on how the concept "Buddha-nature" is understood in the MNS in connection with sentient beings. 
 

I speak of 'nirvaana' due to [the existence of conditions]  

contrary to nirvana. I speak of the Tathaagata' due to  

[the existence of conditions] contrary to the Tathaagata.  

I speak of the 'Buddha-nature' due to [the existence of  

things] contrary to the Buddha-nature. ... As for [things]  

contrary to the Budd~aa-nature, they include walls, tiles,  

stones and all nonsentient objects. Apart from such  

non-sentient objects, we [can] apply the name 'Buddha- 

nature' [to the rest] .(29) 
 

When the MNS applies the term "Buddha-nature" to sentient beings and speaks of them as having the Buddha-nature, its primary purpose is to highlight the fact that sentient beings are unlike non-sentient objects such as walls, tiles and stones. Sentient beings can appropriate the nature of a Buddha by proper religious cultivation. The same consideration seems to be at work in Master Ai's affirmation that the "future fruit" is the "direct cause of Buddha-nature." In designating the direct cause of Buddha-nature as "future fruit," the Master - Ai is trying to bring out that 'whatever (unlike wood and stones) is endowed with a mind has the nature of attaining the future fruit of Buddhahood." In other words, the concept "direct cause of Buddha-nature" is employed by the Master Ai not literally to refer to the future fruit proper (i.e., the Buddha-nature proper), but loosely to allude to the whole realm of animate beings, all Of which can win the future fruit of enlightenment by pursuing the "myraids of meritorious deeds." 

If the above analysis of the theory of "the future fruit as the direct cause of the Buddha-nature" is correct, the thesis amounts to just another way of expressing the MNS idea that "sentient beings are the direct cause Of Buddha-nature," since only beings with life can attain the nature of a Buddha (i.e., the future fruit). As for why only the sentient (and not Ihe "On-sentient) can reach this future end of. Buddhahood, the master Ai 

P.12  

and the other proponents of the thesis have left us no clear clue from which to derive an answer, It may be that their expositions of this matter have been lost, but it is also very likely that they followed the precedent of the MNS, and did not see the need of speculating on the philosophical ground of a basically soteriological judgement. 

3.In Search of Underlying Principles in Speculations on the  

Direct Cause of Buddha-Nature, 

As the MNS is not concerned with uncovering the underlying principle which makes sentient beings the "direct cause of Buddha-nature," and theories One and Two are true to this attitude by remaining entirely non-specific on the subject, this is not the case with most other interpreters. As interest in the problem of Buddha-nature spread, there gradually emerged tenets which attempted to single out some special elements in sentient beings to account for their capacity to attain Buddhahood in the future; the appellation, "direct cause of Buddha-nature," was used to designate these elements in particular, instead of being used to refer to sentient beings in general. 

Theory Three: The Six Dharmas or the Mind as the Direct Cause of Buddha-Narure (advocated by Seng-jou(Y) and Chih-tsang(z)). 

Representing the inital stage of the development In this direction are attempts to define the direct cause of Buddha-nature by some features generally recognized to be peculiar to sentient beings. The exact link between these features and the eventual achievement of Buddhahood by sentient beings was still largely left unexplained. For example, since in Buddhism sentient beings are commonly taught to be made up of the five skandhas [e.g., matter, sensation, perception, predisposition and consciousness (unlike non-sentient objects which are made up of matter alone)l , there avose the thesis that the six dharmas, [i.e., the five skandhas and the overall phenomenal being they constitute] are the direct cause of Buddha-nature, 

P.13 
 

The second master regards the six dharmas as the direct  

cause of Buddha-nature. So the Suutra (MNS) says,'[The  

Buddhanature] is neither identical with nor different from  

the six dharmas'. (T, vol.12, p.556b, 11.27-28) What the  

'six dharmas' refer to are the five skandhas and the  

phenomenal person [they constitute] . Thus, we know that  

the six dharmas are the direct cause of Buddha-nature." 
 

Furthermore, since the ability to think is by general consensus the single most important mark which differentiates the animate from the non-animate, there also appeared the thesis that the mind is the direct cause of Buddha-nature. 
 

The third master regards the mind as the direct cause of  

Buddha-nature. So the Suutra (MNS) says,'Every-one endowed  

with a mind will definitely attain the most perfect  

enlightenment". (T, vo1.12, p.524c, 11.8-9) Since  

[whatever is endowed with] a mind [or] consciousness is  

different from nonsentient objects such as wood and stones,  

and can definitely realize Buddhahood by cultivating [the  

Buddhist Way], we know that the mind is the direct cause  

of Buddha-nature.31 

In the TH, the ideas of the six dharmas and of the mind being the direct cause of Buddha-nature are listed as two distinct tenets. In the TSH, however, both are attributed to Seng-jou (431-494)(32) and Chih-tsang (458-522),(33) and the mind theory is presented as a more precise representation of the import of the dharma theory. 
 

The eighth is the thesis of the Dharma-master [Seng-] jou  

of the Ting-lin [Temple](aa), and is [also] adopted by the  

Master Chih-tsang of the K'ai-shan [Temple].(al) To speak  

in general, both the phenomenal [being] and the real  

[skandhas which constitute it] are tile direct cause [of  

Buddha-nature] . So the chapter, "The Bodhisattva  

Kaasyapa', in the MNS says,'[The Buddha-nature] is  

neither identical with nor different from 
 

P.14  
 

the sixdhamzas'. To be more precise, the mind [or]  

consciousness is the substance of the direct cause [or  
Buddha-nature]. So the chapter, The Bodhisattva Simhanada', of MNS says, 'Everyone endowed with a mind will attain the 
most perfect enlightenment'. So the Dharma-Master  

[Seng-jou] says, 'Even the icchantikas, the most evil  

[among sentient beings], have the occasion of returning to  

the origin (i.e., to attain enlightenment). Non-sentient  

objects such as grass and trees, [on the other hand,] are  

condemned [to spiritual darkness] from the very moment they  

come into existence, and will never come to possess [the  

nature of a Buddha]. Since sentient beings endowed with a  

mind [or consciousness] will continue to pass from one life  

to another until full sainthood is reached, in contrast  

with those not endowed with [a mind or] consciousness, it  

is asserted that sentient beings have the Buddha nature'. 
 

(34) 

The above exposition shows that Seng-jou's and Chih-tsang's interpretation shares the general framework of Theories One and Two in that it also takes as the staring-point the notion that,"the sentient,unlike the non-sentient,will eventually assume the nature of the Buddha."It is also worth noting that Theories One and Two have already alluded to the qualities of a sentient being as the "master of the mental dharmas" and being "endowed with a mind" as reasons for believing in their prospective enlightenment. The only significant change introduced here is the following: while in Theories One and Two the mind and its ability to deliberate are forwarded as justifications for calling sentient beings and the future fruit the direct cause, they are advanced in the present instance as the direct cause of Buddha-nature itself. 

Theory Four: The Principle qf' Attaining Buddhahood as the Direct Cause of Buddha-Narure (Advocated by Fa-yao(ac) and Huiling(ad)). 

characteristic of being sentient, a counterargument may yet be presented: the minds of sentient beings, as they presently exist, are as prompt to think of ill as 

P.15 

to think of good. Therefare it is not the mind in general but only its ability to think of good in particular that should be regarded as the direct cause. This way of thinking is represented by a thesis which cites "the principle of attaining Buddhahood" as the direct cause of Buddha-nature. In the TSH, this thesis is attributed to the monk administrator Hui-ling of the Ling-kan Temple(ae),(35) who is said to have taken over the view from Fa-yao (d. 473-476 at the age of 76).(36) According to the Nieh-p'an-ching yu-i,(e) Fa-yao give the existence of the "principle of attaining Buddhahood" in sentient beings as the reason for calling them the direct cause of Buddha-nature. 
 

Next, there is the Master Yao of [the] Hsin-an(af)  

[District],(37) who maintains: Sentient beings have the  

principle of attaining Buddhahood. Since this principle  

is permanent [in character], it is asserted that sentient  

beings are the direct cause of Buddha-nature. Since this  

principle pertains to sentient beings, it is said that  

sentient beings originally possess [the Buddha nature]. 

(38) 

In the TNC, we further find Fa-yao identifying the direct cause of Buddhanature with the "principle of the origination of goodness." 

The Buddha-nature is the principle of origination of  

goodness. If there is no [such] principle, how can good  

[deeds] ever come to arise? Thus, the Buddha-nature is the  

root of good deeds. [So it is said in the MNS that] the  

Buddha-nature is the direct cause, whereas good deeds are  

the auxiliary cause. 

The position of Hui-ling is registered in the TSH as follows: 

Second, The Monk Administrator [Hui-] ling of the Ling- 

kan Temple sticks to the idea of the Master [Fa-]  

yao,(40)and declares that all sentient beings originally  

possess the principle of attaining Buddhahood, which is  

the substance of the direct cause [of Buddha- nature]. 

That is to say,there is the principle 

P.16  

of attaining Buddhahood in the cause, and this principle  

is permanent [in character] .(41) 

The TSH further asserts that Hui-ling's thesis of the "principle of attaining Buddhahood" as the direct cause of Buddha-nature, like T'an-ai's thesis of the "future fruit" being the direct cause, is propounded with the purpose of distinguishing sentient beings from wood and stones. The only difference is that Hui-ling's thesis views the matter from the perspective of cause, whereas T'an-ai's thesis considers the case from the perspective of effect.(42) 

It should be noted that even though Hui-ling, in his attempt to differentiate the sentient from the non-sentient, went beyond Theory Three in specifying a certain principle as the direct cause of Buddha-nature. he left us no indication of what he considered the essence of this principle except that it is permanent in character. Fa-yao appears a little more definite on this score. What he speaks of in this connection carries distinct mental connotations. For example,he once alludes to this principle as the virtues of "compassion and mercy."(43) On another occasion, he refers to "Buddha-nature with respect to sentient beings" as the "perfectly luminous trueself."(44) 

Theory, Five: The Intrinsically Pure Mind and Its Aversion for Buffering and A spirarion? for Bliss as the Direct Cause Of Buddha-Nature:(advocated by Pao-liang(ag) and Fa-yun(ah)). 

Representing yet a more advanced stage in the search for an underlying principle which explains the eventual enlightenment of all sentient beings is the attempt to ally the direct cause of Buddha-nature with the concept of the intrinsically pure mind. This "pure mind" is distinguished by its aversion for the samsaaric realm of suffering and its aspiration for the nirvaanic realm of eternal bliss. 

The view that the mind of sentient beings is originally luminous but is defiled by taints coming from without can be traced back to the Anguttara-nikaaya,(45) and was also advocated by a number of old Hiinayaana sects, notably the Mahasangikas(46) and the Vibhajyavadins.(47) With the advent of Mahaayaana Buddhism, there gradually emerged suutras and 'saastras 

P.17 

which took the idea of the intrinscially pure mind as their main theme.(48) The earliest among this group of scriptures to be introduced into China was the Tathaatagarbhasuutra (around 290-310), followed by the 'Sriimaalaa-suutra (early fifth century) and the Ratnago travibhaaga-mahaayaano ttaratan tra'saastra (early sixth century). These works give the name "tathaagatagarbha" to the pure mind, which they describe as permanent, tranquil, eternal, and the property of all sentient beings. To stress that the tathaagatagarbha remains unspoiled even amidst defilements, they often compare it to the hidden treasure of a poor family, the seed inside a mango, and the gold statue enclosed in a cast. 

Since the "tathagatagarbha" and the "Buddha-nature"were generally regarded as synonymous by Buddhists,(49) it is not surprising that as the notion of the "intrinsically pure mind" became increasingly popular in China, people began to apply it to the interpretation of the doctrine of Buddha-nature. In the TH, we find listed as the eighth interpretation the thesis that the "true spirit"(chen-shen(ai)) is the direct cause of Buddha-nature.(50) A more detailed exposition of this view, found in the Nieh-p'an-ching yu-i, shows clearly that by the "true spirit", the propounders of this thesis are thinhing of the "pure mind'' as taught in the Tathaagatagarbha-suutra. 

P.18  

According to T'ang Yung-t'ung,(al) the Master Kao-kao is none other than the monk Pao-liang, (444-509) an expert of the Sriimaalaa-suutra and the MNS,(52) and the alleged compiler of the TNC. Even though Pao-liang's contribution to the formation of the TNC has been questioned by recent scholars," the TNC does include many of his observations on the MNS, demonstrating beyond doubt that he frequently applies the idea of the intrinscially pure mind to the explanation of the Buddha-nature concept. For example, commenting on the analysis of the Buddha-nature into four types in the MNS, Pao-liang writes: 
 

There are four types of Buddha-nature, i.e., direct cause,  

auxiliary cause, effect, and effect vis-a-vis effect.  

There is no significance [attached to the concept Buddha 

-nature] which is not comprehended by these four terms. 

Both the 'direct' and the 'auxiliary' causes refer  

to the ways of intelligence [of sentient being]. [The  

feature of] being averse to suffering and aspiring for  

bliss is common to both the dull and the wise, but to inquire  

into its essential functions,we divide it into the two  

aspects [of the direct and the auxiliary]. We call the  

'direct cause' the function of remaining permanent through  

time and undergoing no rise end fall. There is not a single  

moment in which [sentient beings] are deprived of this  

function of discernment, which, [however,] only becomes  

firmly established when Buddhahood is reached. Thus, we  

know that the function of discernment [of sentient beings],  

which is the aversion for suffering and aspiration for  

bliss, is not the product of good or bad causes (i.e., the  

product of karma). That is why the Srimala-sutra calls it  

the intrinsically pure mind .(54) 

In the above passage, Pao-liang considers the direct cause of Buddha-nature to be equivalent to the intrinsically pure mind as taught in the Sriimaalaasuutra. After the fashion of the Sriimaalaa-suutra, Pao-liang sees this mind as essentially an aptitude for the good, which is demonstrated in its aversion for the pains of the conditioned world and its aspiration for the joy of 

P.19 

enlightenment. Furthermore, this aptitude is not understood as a mere abstract possibility, but is conceived as an immanent and immutable feature of all living beings, suffering "no rise and fall" and being "not the product of good or bad causes." For its immutable nature, the direct cause of Buddha-nature is sometimes referred to as the real aspect of the 'spirit' (shen-ming(am)) by Pao-liang. 
 

[When the MNS asserts] that the Buddha-nature resides in  

the skandhas, dhaatus and aayatanas without being  

circumsribed by them (T, vo1.12, p.414a, 11.26-27), (55)  

[it means to tell us that] the real and the mundane truths  

together constitute the one dharma which is the spirit.  

The mundane aspect [of the spirit] is always [associated  

with] the skandhas, aayatanas and dhaatus, whose real  

substance is always unconditioned. Since the real  

substance [of the spirit] is unconditioned, it is not  

circumscribed by the skandhas even while residing in them.  

It is in essence immutable, and it remains unimpaired [even  

while] in activity. Since it remains unimpaired [even  

while] in activity, it is taken as the direct cause of  

Buddha-nature.(56) 
 

The immutable character of the real aspect of the spirit gives to it the role of acting as the underlying continuum which makes possible the phenmenon of retribution. 

[By describing the twelvefold chain of dependent  

origination] in extremely profound terms, [the MNS] means  

As the false aspect of the spirit is itself under the governance of the three signs of birth, old age and death, it cannot serve as the enduring factor which assures that the fruits of deeds are never lost. To this effect, we need the postulating of "an underlying nature which is in essence everlastingly real and immutable." This nature is mentioned in the above quotation as the "real aspect" of the spirit, which, as we have seen from the second quotation of Pao-Wang is the other name for the direct cause of Buddha-nature or the pure mind. 

In the first quotation above, Pao-liang speaks of the intrinsically pure mind of sentient beings as the aversion for the sufferings of samsara and the aspiration for the bliss of nirvana. This feature is considered to be so central to the pure mind that it is sometimes referred to straightway as the direct cause of Buddha-nature. For example, Pao-liang once notes that "the aversion for suffering and aspiration for bliss [pertaining to] all sentient beings are the direct cause of Buddha-nature.''(59)An almost identical statement appears in Pao-liang's comments on the relation between the twlvefold chain of dependent origination and the Buddhanature: 
 

We take the wisdom [arising from] the perception of the  

[truth of] dependent origination and call it the auxiliary  

cause [of Buddha-] nature . As f0or its substance, which  

is the in- 

　 

P.21 

telligence which is averse to suffering and aspires for  

bliss, we call it the direct cause [of Buddha-nature] .(60) 

Given this background, it is not surprising that Fa-yun (467-529),(61) a follower of Pao-liang, would come to advocate the thesis that "the aversion for suffering and aspiration for bliss" are the direct cause of Buddha(62) This thesis is related as the fifth interpretation in the TH: nature. 
 

The fifth master regards "aversion for suffering and  

aspiration for bliss" as the direct cause of Buddha-nature.  

All sentient beings without exception possess the nature  

of being averse to suffering and aspiring for bliss. Since  

[all sentient beings] truly possess this nature of being  

averse to suffering and aspiring for bliss, we consider  

this function [of theirs] to be the direct cause [of  

Buddha-nature] .(63) 

The accounts of the thesis in the Nieh-p'an tsung-yao(64) and the TSH(65) contain hardly anything new. The only difference is found in that they mention Fa-yun as the protagonist of the theory. The latter further adds that Fa-yun sometimes also shares the opinion of his teacher Pao-liang, and maintains that "the nature of the tathataa of the mind" (i.e., the true nature of the mind) is the substance of the direct cause of Buddhanature.(66) This allusion to the true nature of the mind demonstrates that Fa-yun, like his preceptor Pao-liang, resorts to the idea of the intrinsically pure mind in his explication of the direct cause of Buddha-nature. In affirming the "aversion for suffering and aspiration for bliss" to be the direct cause of Buddha-nature, he has in mind not our physical or psychological dislike of pain and longing for pleasure, but rather our innate capacity to follow the path of virtue and to eschew the way of vice. 

4. The Early Chinese Yogaacaara Interpretation of the Direct Cause of Buddha-Nature . 

Theory Six:The Aalaaya-or-Amala-Consciousness as the Direct Cause of 

P.22  

Buddha-Nature (advocated by the Ti-lun(an) and She-lun(ao) masters). 

In conceiving the direct cause of Buddha-nature as the intrinsically pure mind, and further, in considering it as the permanent substratum which makes possible the functioning of retribution, Theory Five has given to the idea of Buddha-nature a definite ontological significance. This ontotogical sense is not found in the MNS, and is but faintly suggested in the other theories of the direct cause of Buddha-nature recounted in Sections 2 and 3 above. This trend received additional impetus with the introduction of Yogaacaara thought into China at the beginning of the sixth century. 

It is well-known that the central teaching of Yogaacaara Buddhism is the existence in every sentient being of a basic consciousness, i.e., the aalaya-consciousness, which is the subject of transmigration and the "storehouse" of karmic effects generated by deeds of the past. As the subject of transmigration, the aalaya-consciousness is pictured in Yogaacaara Buddhism as being associated from the beginningless past with all forms of impurities and so as essentially a consciousness to be transformed by proper religious practice. As the bearer of karmic effects, the aalayaconsciousness is presented in Yogaacaara Buddhism as the metaphysical ground of the physical and mental make-up of each sentient being" as well as the source of the entire phenomenal world which it experiences.(68) 

This concept of a basic consciousness or aalaya-consciousness found a considerable number of abherents in China as Yogaacaara philosophy gradually because known. This occurred in the early decades of the sixth century through the translation of a number of central Yogaacaara texts, notably the Mahaayaanasamgraha-'saastra (She-lun) of Asanga and the Da'sabhuumikasuutra-saastra (Ti-lun) of Vasubandha. However, important modifications were introduced in the course of transmission, so much so that the basic consciousness (e.g., the aalaya-consciousness) as understood by the early Chinese Yogaacaarins differed significantly from its original Indian model. While the Chinese Yogaacaarins adopted from the Indian Yogaacaarins the cardinal thesis of a fundamental consciousness acting as the metaphysical basis of the existence of each sentient being and the universe he encounters, they departed from them with respect to its moral attribute, 

P.23 

which they made out as originally pure instead of as impure. Some of them continued to call this originally pure consciousness the aalayaconsciousness, but they proceeded to detach it from its former impure roles as the subject of rebirth and the receptacle of karmic effects,which they relegated to the subordinate consciousnesses.(69)Others kept intact the initial conception of the alaya-consciousness as defiled but went on to postulate a more fundamental immaculate 

consciousness.To this they gave other names, such as the amala-consciousness and the ninth consciousness. The former was the position of the so called Ti-lun masters(ap),(70) while the latter was the position of the so called She-lun masters(ap). (71) These two groups together represented in the main the early Chinese response to Yogaacaara teaching.(72) 

If the notion of an intrinsically pure mind acting as the underlying continuum of the ever changing river of life (as envisaged in Theory Five carries distinct ontological implications, it is even more so with this idea of the originally pure consciousness of the early Chinese Yogaacaarins. This consciousness constitutes not only the substratum of the life-stream of each individual, but is also the fountainhead of the entire phenomenal world which he experiences. As might be expected, this concept of the pure consciousness of the early Chinese Yogaacaarins soon found its way Into discussions of the direct cause of Buddha-nature. In the TH, we find listed as the seventh interpretation the theory that "the aalaya-consciousness, which is the intrinsically pure mind, is the direct cause of Buddha"nature,"(73) which is obviously the view of the Ti-lun masters. The NiehP'an tsung-yao quotes instead the theory that "the amala-consciousness, which is the nature of intelligence of the tathataa, is the substance of the Buddha-nature," a view appearently pertaining to the She-lun masters.(74) Both theories appear in the account of the TSH, the former being given as the ninth and the latter as the tenth thesis. While noting some minor disagreements between these two traditions on the scope of the application of the term "direct cause," the TSH observes that they are on the whole in accord with regard to the question of Buddha-nature. Both maintain that "sentient beings, from the common folk up to the Buddha, 

Buddha-nature."(75) 

P.24 

5.The Buddha-Nature and the Immortal Spriit 

Theory Seven: The Immortal Spirit as the Direct Cause of BuddhaNature (advocated by Emperor Wu of the Liang Dynasty). 

The foregoing account shows, among other things, that there  

existed in the early period of investigation into the  

problem of Buddha-nature in China a general tendency to identify the direct cause of Buddha-nature with the "mind." Very often, owing to the different notions interpreters had of the concept 'mind,' different theories of the direct cause of Buddha-nature arose. Thus, Theory Three saw the "direct cause of Buddha-nature" as denoting the mind in the ordinary sense of the term. Theories Five and Six, on the other hand, equated the "direct cause of Buddha-nature" with the "intrinsically pure mind" or consciousness. Each of them in turn had its own specific historical background as well as its own opinion as to what functions this pure mind or consciousness performs. We will conclude our discussion with an exposition of yet another attempt to relate the direct cause of Buddha-nature and the mind. This time, the mind is understood as the immortal spirit which is neither definitely pure nor definitely impure (different from Theories Five and Six), and which is the permanent entity which undergoes transmigration (different from Theory Six). 

It is common knowledge that Buddhism teaches the doctrine of anattaa,or "no-self." Thus, in Early Buddhism, it was maintained that each sentient being is merely an amalgamation of the five evanescent elements (matter, sensation, perception, predisposition and consciousness). There was no permanently and independently existing entity called the self to be found. While later Buddhists might give more elaborate analyses of these elements and even introduce into their systems concepts which carry ostensive substantive connotations (the idea of the aalaya of the Yogaacaarins is a good example), they unanimously adhered to this tenet of no-self as a canonical truth. 

The fate of the doctrine of no-self took an unexpected turn in China.While most Chinese Buddhists from the T'ang Dynasty 

(ar) (seventh century) onwards were aware that the Buddha had preached the idea of no-self, this was not the case in the beginning years of the propagation of the religion in the country. Strongly attracted by the Buddhist doctrine 

P.25 

of transmigration, many early Chinese Buddhists speculated that there must exist in each sentient being an eternal "spirit" (shen(as)), which does not disappear at death, but continues to pass from one life to another, taking up a new form at each rebirth. Thus, in the third century, Moutzu(at),one of the first Chinese intellectuals converted to Buddhism, defended the Buddhist concept of rebirth by comparing the body of the individual to leaves and roots and the individual's spirit to seeds. Mou-tzu argued that even though the leaves and roots of a plant may wither and perish, its seeds will continue to live forever. Throughout the next three centuries, there was the strange phenomenon of Buddhists advocating the existence of an indestructible soul, while non-Buddhists tried to prove to them that such a belief was false.(76)Among the most well-known of these Buddhists was Emperor Wu of the Liang Dynasty. 

Emperor Wu is best remembered by posterity for his lavish patronage of the Buddhist religion.(77)With respect to the problem of the immortal spirit, he had solicited from nobles and officials refutations against Fan Chen's(au) (450-ca.507) widely acclaimed essay "On the Destructibility of the Spirit" (shen-mieh lun(av)).(78) Emperor Wu was also the author of a short treatise entitled Shen-ming ch'eng-fo i-chi,(aw) which contains some of the standard Chinese Buddhist arguments for the existence Of the eternal soul. Besides, he was a fervent student of the MNS,(79) having commissioned Pao-liang and Fa-lang(ax) of the Chien-yuan Temple(ay) (died ca.502-520) to compile commentaries for it.(80) Emperor Wu himself also wrote a preface for the TNC in which he cited the concept of "Buddha-nature" as among the Suutra's central themes.(81) Given his interest in both the questions of the indestructible spirit and the Buddhanature, it is hardly surprising that he would come to apply his opinion of the former to his interpretation of the latter. 

In the Nieh-p'an tsung-yao, we find attributed to Emperor Wu the thesis that "the mind-spirit (hsin-shen(az)) is the substance of the direct cause [of Buddha-nature] " 
 

The fourth master maintains that the mind has the nature  

Of being spiritual and immutable. Whoever possesses in  

his body this mind-spirit is different from such non- 

sentient ob- 

P.26  

jects as wood and stones, and can achieve the fruit of full  

enlightenment as a result. That is why it is said that the 

mindspirit is the substance of the direct cause [of  

Buddha-nature] .(82) 

A similar account is found in the TSH. 

The fourth is the tenet of Emperor Wu, surnamed Hsiao(ba)  

of the Liang Dynasty. [According to the Emperor,] the mind  

has the nature of being immutable, [and is] the true spirit  

which is the substance of the direct cause [of Buddha- 

nature] . [Whoever has this true spirit] in his body is  

different from such non-spiritual objects as wood and  

stones; [such a one can attain the full enlightenment.]  

What this thesis means is that since there is the nature  

of the true spirit in the cause (i.e., the mind), [all  

sentient beings] can attain the true fruit of Buddhahood. 

(83) 

The TSH goes on to observe that Emperor Wu's thesis resembles in general that of Pao-liang.(84) The fact that both Paoliang and Emperor Wu considered the mind to be immutable and to be the direct cause of Buddhanature, demonstrates that they were on common ground. But it should be noted that Pao-liang's idea of the mind was based upon the tathaagatagarbha doctrine as found in the Tathaagatagarbha-suutra and 'Sriimaalaa-suutra, so that the mind as he understood it was originally pure in nature. Emperor Wu, on the other hand, conceived of the mind on the model of the concept of the indestructible spirit postulated by Chinese Buddhists to explain the functioning of karma; and instead of being originally pure, the mind as he apprehended it was liable to good as well as bad influences, and was in itself neither perfectly defiled nor perfectly non-defiled. This was clearly revealed in his demonstration of the need of assuming the existence of an immortal spirit in the Shen-ming ch'eng-po i-chi. 
 

The spirit is in nature immutable. How do we know this? For  

example, the earlier mind engages in deadly sins entailing  

rebirth in Avici Hell, and the later consciousness 

practices  

P.27 

profound virtues leading to rebirth in Avrha Heaven.(85)  

The principles of sin and virtue are very unlike, and the  

earlier [mind] and the later [consciousness] are far apart.  

If these [opposing] functions do not have [behind them] a  

[unfying] fundamental [entity] how can they follow each  

other this way? So we understand that the earlier sins  

disappear without the defiled consciousness being removed,  

and the later virtues arise without the deluded mind being  

changed. So the sutra says [of the mind], 'When it is  

accompanied with various bonds of defilements, it is said  

to be ignorant. When it is accompanied with all virtuous  

dharmas, it is said to be enlightened.' Does this not imply  

that the mind or consciousness is in essence one, but  

[its attributes] vary with [changing] conditions?  

Thus, we know that while production and annihilation alter  

in response to past causes, and virtues and sins succeed  

each other in consequence of existing environment, there  

is a mind which is their foundation and which does not  

change. Since this foundation of [all] functions never  

goes out of existence, how Buddhahood can be attained  

becomes clear; since [functions] come and go  

following changing environment, how [the cycles of] birth  

and death can be brought to an end becomes comprehensible. 

(86) 

In this passage, the mind is of indeterminate moral character, 
 

being 'ignorant'when accompanied with bonds of defilement and being 'enlightened' when accompanied with all virtuous dharmas. Despite its "not being definitely 'enlightened.'(87) it nevertheless acts as the "fundamental entity" which binds together the ever evolving 'functions' which constitute the individual's psychic stream; as such it ensures that the psychic stream will continue to pass from one state to another, and from one life to another, until full Buddhahood is reached. In other words, it is the ontological basis of the common belief that the same person who is sinful and deficient at present can become holy and perfect in the future by pursuing proper religious discipline. For this reason, it was judged by Emperor Wu to the direct cause of Buddha-nature. 

P.28  

Finally, the TH mentions the thesis that "the nature of passing [from one life to another] and being immortal" of the spirit is the direct cause of Buddha-nature,(88) and attributes it to Fa-an(bb) (454-498).(89) This thesis is reported in the TSH as follows: 

The above account of the spirit may apply equally well to the pure mind, pure consciousness and immortal soul as taught in Theories Five, Six, and Seven. Still, given the fact that at Fa-an's time, the idea of the intrinsically pure mind (Theory Five) had not yet come into vogue and the Yogaacaara teaching (Theory Six) was still unknown in China, it was most probable that by the term 'spirit' Fa-an had the last of the three in consideration. If our surmise is correct, Fa-an's thesis amounts largely to a variant formulation of the theory of Emperor Wu, only that it takes the immortal nature of the soul in particular instead of the immortal soul as a whole to be the direct cause. 

University of Hong Kong 

ABBREVIATIONS: 

HKSC Hsu kao-seng-chuan(bd) by Tao-hsuan(be)  

Z Zoku zookyo(bf) (Hong Kong: 1967) 

P. 29 

KSC Kao-seng chuan(bg) by Hui-chiao  

MNS Mahaaparinirvaana-suutra 

T Taishoo shinshuu daizookyoo(bi)Tokyo: 1924--1932)  

TH Ta-ch'eng hsuan-lun(d) by Chi-tsang  

TNC Ta-pnn nieh-p'an-ching chi-chueh(k) edited by Pao-liang  

TSH Ta-ch'engssu-lun hsuan-i(i) by Hui-chun(j) 

NOTES 

* I would like to thank the University of Hong Kong for a research grant which has made this study possible. 

1. See the Journal of the International Associotion of 

Buddhist Studies 5,2 (1982), pp.63 -94. 

2.The reply of the MNS to this question is actually equivocal.  

While it repeatedly asserts that all sentient beings are  

endowed with the Buddha-nature and are destined for  

Buddhahood, it also speaks of the existence of icchantikas,  

i.e., beings who are so deprived of the roots of virtue that  

they are condemned to spiritual darkness forever. Detailed  

discussion of the problem can be found in Tokiwa Diajoo(bj)  

Busshoo no kenkyuu(bk)(Tokyo: 1944), pp.36-66 and Mizutani 

Kooshoo(bl) "lchisendai koo,(bm) Bukkyoo daigakuu kenkyuu  

kiyoo(bn) ( 40) (1961), pp.63 -107. Also consult my article,  

"Do All Sentient Beings Possess the Buddha-nature?-The  

Problem of the Icchantika in the Mahaayaana 

Mahaparinirvaana-suutra ,'' the Journal of the International  

Association of Buddhist Studies 7:1 (1984), pp.57-81 . 

3.For a more detailed disucssion of this highly complicated  

subject, see my article "The Doctrine of the Buddha-nature  

in the Mahayana Mahaapaarinirvaanasuutra", op.cit., sec.  

III. 

4.'Chang' is a Chinese unit of length equivalent to 3-1/3  

metres.  

5.I cannot find the Sanskrit original of the name of this  

tree. 

6. Takakusu Junjiroo(bo) & Watanabe Kaikyoku(bp) eds., Taishoo  

shinshuu daizookyoo,(bi) 85 vols. (Tokyo: 1924-1934)  

(henceforth referred to as T), vo1.12, p.519b, 1.22-c, 1.3. 

7. Ibid., p.530b, 1 .20 -c, 1 .6. 
8. lbid., p. 5309, 11.14-17. 

9. See ibid.,p. 530c-531a. 

10. See T, vo1.45, pp.35b -37a & vo1.38, pp.237c-238a.  

11. See T, vo1.38, p.249a-b. 

12. See Zoku zookyoo vo1.74 (Hong Kong: Ying yin Hsu tsang- 

ching wei-yuan-hui(bq), 

P.30  

1967), (henceforth referred to as Z), pp.46c-48c. 

13. T, vo1.45, p.35b, 11 .22 -26 . 

14. seng-min, together with Chih-tsang(br) and Fa-yun,(bs)  

were the three foremost authorities on the Satya-siddhi- 

saastra in the Liang Dynasty. See the biography of Seng-min  

in Tao-hsuan(be).Hsu kao-seng-chuan (bd)(henceforth  

referred to as HKSC), T, vo1.50, pp.461c-463c. 

15. Tao-lang assisted Dharmaraksa (385-433) in the translation  

of the MNS, which was completed in 421. See Huichiao, (bh)  

Kao-seng-chuang(bh)(henceforth referred to as KSC), T,  

vo1.50, p.336a. 

16. The biography of Seng-ch'ien(bt) (495-580) in the HKSC  

mentions a monk,Hui-yen of the Chao-t'i Temple, with whom  

Seng-ch'ien debated the question of meditation. The elder  

pai-yen was most probably this Hui-yen. See T, vo1.50,  

p .4 76a. 

17. T, vo1.38, p.249a, 11.16-19. 

18. The biography of Chu Tao-sheng is in KSC, T, vo1.50, p.366b  

-367a.  

Princeton University Press, 1964), pp.l 14 -116. 19. Refer to Kenneth K.S. Ch'en, Buddhism in China (Princeton:  

20.TNC, T, vo1.37, p549a, 1.29-b, 1.1. 

21.Ibid., p.543b, 1.27.  

22.Ibid., p. 548b, 11.2-3.  

23.Ibid., p.544c, 1.15. 

24.The KSC mentions among the works of Chu Tao-sheng one with  

the title of The Buddha-nature as Future Possession (Fohsing  

tang-yu lun(bu), which is no longer extant. See T,vol.5O,  

p.366c, 11.18-19.  

25. Z, vo1.74, p.46b, 1 1 .8 -1 1 . 

26. The TH notes that 'masters of the past frequently adopted  

this thesis." (T,vo1.45 , p.36c, 11.9-10.)  

27.These are in the TNC comments on the MNS by a certain T'a-nai,  

who was most likely the same person as this Master Ai of the  

Pal-ma Temple. See Fuse Koogaku,(bv)Nehanshuu no kenkyuu: 

(bw)vo1.2 (Tokyo: 1973), pp.245-246 and pp.293 -294 . 

28.Z, vo1.74, p.46b, 11.14-16. An almost identical account  

is found in the Nieh-p'an tsung-yao, T, vo1.38, p.249a,  

11.8 -16. 29.T, vol.l'L, p.581a, 1 1.17 -23.  

30.TH, T, vo1.45, p.35b,11.26 -29.  

31.Ibid., p.35b, 1.29 -c, 1.3. 

32.Biography of Seng-jou in KSC, T, vo1.50, pp.378c -379a. 

33.Biography of Chih-tsang in HKSC, T,vol5O, ppd65c-467b. See  

n.14 above.  

34.Z,vo1.74, pp.46 d,1.16-47a, 1.4. 

35.The HKSC mentions a Monk Administrator Hui-ling who had a  

debate with the monk Pao-ch'iung(bx) (504-584) during the  

reign of the Emperor Wu of 

P.31 

the Liang Dynasty.See T, vo1.50, pp.478c-479a. Also see Fuse  

Koogaku, op. cit., p.250. 

36.Biography of Fa-yao in KSC, T, vo1.50, p.374b-c. 

37.The original text reads "Chang-an", (by) which, according  

to T'ang Yung-t'ung, should be changed to "Hsinan." See Han  

Wei Liang-Chin Nan-pei ch'ao Fochiao-shih(bz) (Peking:  

1963), p.686.  

38.T, vo1.38, p.23 7c, 1 1 .9 -11 .  

39.T, vo1.37, p.447c, 1 1.4-6. 

40. The original text reads "wang".(ca) which is the miswritten  

form of "yao."(cb) See Tang Yung-t'ung, op. cit., p.686. 

41.Z, vo1.74, p.46c, 11.1-3.  

42.Ibid., p 46c, 11.8-10. 

43.TNC, T, vo1.3 7, p.448c, 11.3-4.  

44.Ibid., p.451a, 1 2. 

45.Angutrtrra-nikaaya 1.5 & 1.6 (F.L. Woodward, trans., The  

Book of Gradual Sayings, vol.l [London: Pall Text Society,  

1951]. p.8)  

46.Refer to Vasumitra, Samayabhedavyuuhacakra, T, vol. 49,  

p.15c, 11.27-28.  

47.Refer to Abhidharmamahaavibhaasaa-'saastra,T, vo1.27,  

p.140b, 11.25-26.  

48.For more information on the history of the concept of the  

"intrinsically pure mind"and the emergence of the  

tathaagatagarbha doctrine, consult Andre Bareau, Les  

Sectes Bouddhiques du Petit Vehicule (Saigon: Ecole  

Francaise d'Extreme-Orient, 1955), pp.67-68 & 175; Etienne  

Lamotte, trans., L'Enseignement de Vimalakiirti(Louvain:  

Bibiiotheque du Museon, 1962), pp.51-56; D.S. Ruegg, La  

Theorie du Tathaagatagarbha et du Gotra (Paris: Ecole  

Francaise d'Extreme-Orient:1969), pp.l-6 & 411-418; and  

Alex Wayman & Hideko Wayman, trans., The Lion 's Roar of  

Queen 'Sriimaalaa (New York & London: Columbia University  

Press, 1974), pp.4 2-44.  

49.See Takasaki Jikidoo,(cd) Nyoraizoo shisoo no keisei(cd)  

(Tokyo:1974),pa.1,chap.2 and Shinoda Masashige(ce), 

"Busshoo to sono gengo"(cf) Indogaku bukkyoogaku  

kenkyuu(cg) 11,1 (1963), pp.223-226. 

50.T, vo1.45, p.35c, 11.11-12.  

51.T, vo1.38, p.237c, 1 1 .4 -9 . 

52.Op.cit., pp.680 & 693. The biography of Pao-liang is in  

KSC, T, vo1.50. PP.381b-382a. There, it is recorded that  

Pao-liang lectured on the MNS eighty-two times and the  

Sriinmaalaa-suutra forty-two times.  

53.For example, see Fuse Koogaku, op.cit., pp.4 9 -5 3 .  

54.T, vo1.37, p.447c, 1 1.1 2 -18. Also see p.545a, 1.22 -b,  

1.7.  

55.The five 'skandhas' are matter, sensation, perception,  

predisposition and con-sciousness, as mentined earlier. The  

twelve 'aayatanas' are the six organs (eyes, ears, nose,  

tongue, body and mind) and their corresponding objects  

(color, sound, smell, taste, touch and ideas). The eighteen  

'dhaatus' include the six 

P.32  

sense organs and six sense object mentioned above, and  

their corresponding consciousnesses (i.e., eye- 

consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness,  

tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, and mind- 

consciousness).The skandhas, aayatanas and dhaatus are  

considered to be the most basic components of the realm of  

samsaara in Buddhism.  

56.TNC, T, vo1.37, p.465a, 11.10 -14. 

57.The three signs of impermanency are birth, old age and  

death.  

58.TNC, T, vo1.3 7, p.548c, 11.6 -17.  

59.Ibid., p.545a, 1.25.  

60.Ibid., p.547b, 11.10 -11. 

61.Biography of Fa-yun in HKSC, T, vo1.50, pp.463c-465a. See  

n.14 above.(Ch) who was senior to both Pao-liang and Fa- 

yun, had already put  

62.Seng-liang forward this idea. See n.70 below.  

63.T, vo1.45, p.35c, 11.5-8.  

64.T, vo1.38, p249a, 11.21-26.  

65.Z, vo1.74, p.46d,11.5-10 

66.In the TH, Pao-liang is mentioned together with a certain  

Master Ho as the protagonists of the thesis that the tathataa  

is the direct cause of Buddha-nature. (T, vo1.45, p.36c,  

The description of the tathataa in the above quotation  

coincides perfectly with that given of the "real aspect of  

the spirit" by Pao-liang in the TNC. Thus, the thesis that  

the tathataa is the direct cause of Buddha-nature is  

actually not a separate tenet, but is a variant expression  

of the tenet that the true mind is the direct cause of  

Buddha-nature. 

P.33 

Pao-liang was often referred to by posterity as the Junior 

Liang, in distinction to Seng-liang, who was known  

as the Senior Liang. The TNC includes quite a number of  

consciousnesses, as well as the mindconsciousness and the  

manas. 

68. For some elementary discussions of the concept of the  

69.Such as the mind-consciousness and the manas. 

70. They are so called because they based their teaching on the  

Da'sabhuumikasSuutra-'saastra of Vasubandhu.Strictly speaking, what we give here is the position of the Southern  

Branch of the Ti-lun school, while the Northern Branch  

still adhered to the idea of the impure aalaya. The Northern  

Branch soon faded away with the rise of the Shelun School  

(see n.72 below); it was the Southern Branch with its  

teaching of the originally pure aalaya that continued to  

influence the subsequent development of Yogaacaara thought  

in China. 

71. They are so called because they based their teaching on  

Paramartha's (449-569) interpretation of the 

Mahaayaanasamgraha-'saastra. 

72. For more information on these early Chinese Yogaacaara  

schools, see D.S. Ruegg, op.cit., pp.439 -442; Alfonso  

Verdu, Dialectical Aspects in Buddhist Thought (Kansas:  

Center for East Asian Studies, University of Kansas, 1974),  

PP.29-39;and Diana Y.Paul, Philosophy of Mind in Sixth- 

Century China(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1984),  

chap. 2.  

73.T, vo1.45, p.35c, 11.13-14.  

74. T, vo1.38, p.249b, 1.8.  

75.T.,vol.74, p.47a, 11.8-9.Among the few works written by the  

P.34  

this problem. See T, vo1.44, pp.472a-477c. 

76.On the subject of the immortal spirit in Chinese Buddhism,  

see Kenneth K.S. Ch'en, op.cit., pp.39 & 138-142 and W.  

Pachow,''The Controversy over the Immortality of the Soul  

in Chinese Buddhism", Journal of Oriental Studies 

XV1(1979),pp.21-38. 

77.On Emperor Wu's patronage of Buddhism, see Kenneth K.S.  

Ch'en, op.cit.,pp.124-128. 

78.See Sengyuc(cn) ed., Hung-ming chi,co T,vo1.52, p.60b. 

80.See KSC, T,vo1.50,p.381c, 11.21 22 & HKSC,T,vo1.50, 

p.426c,1.11 respectively. 

81.T, vo1.3 7, p.3 77a, 11.26 -28 .  

82.T, vo1.38, p.249a,11.26-29.  

83.Z,vo1.74,p.46c,11.15-18.  

84.Ibid., p.46d, 1.2. 

85.The Aviici Hell is the last of the eight hot hells, and 

sentient beings are born there for the five deadly sins of  

parricide, matricide, killing an arhat, shedding the blood  

of a Buddha, and instigating schism in the sangha. The Avrha  

Heaven is the thirteenth Brahmaloka, attained through  

practising the fourth meditation. 

86 .T, vo1.52, p.54c, 11 .6 -19. 

87.Considering its constant assocation with defiled functions,  

the Emperor even refers to this mind as the "ignorant  

spirit." (Ibid., p.54b, 1.24)  

88.T, vo1.45, p.35c, 11.3-5 . 

89. See the biography of Fa-an in KSC, T, vo1.50, p.380a. Fa-an  

wrote a commentary on the MNS as well as discussed the  

problem of the Buddhanature with his contemporaries.  

90.Z, vo1.74, p.46 d, 11.2-4. 

a 正因佛性 w 愛 

b 頗求 x 白馬寺 

c 眾生佛性 y 僧柔 

d 大乘玄論 z 智藏 

o 涅架經遊意 aa 定林寺 

f 吉藏 ab 開善寺 

g 涅藥宗要 ac 法瑤 

h 元曉 ad 慧令 

i 大乘四論文義 ae 靈根寺 

j 慧均 af 新安 

k 大般涅架經集解 ag 寶亮 

l 武帝 ah 法雲 

m 梁朝 ai 真神 

n 道朗 aj 高高 

o 僧支 ak 靈味 

p 慧琰 al 湯用彤 

q 白琰 am 神明 

r 招提寺 an 地論 

s 竺道生 ao 攝論 

t 曇愛 ap 地論師 

u 當有 aq 攝論師 

v 當果 ar 唐朝 

P.36 

as神 br 智藏 

at牟子 bs 法雲 

au范縝 bt 僧遷 

av神滅論 bu 佛性當有論 

aw神明成佛義記 by 布施浩岳 

ax法朗 bw 槃宗研究 

ay建元寺 bx 寶瓊 

az心神 by 障安 

ba蕭 bz 漢魏兩晉南北朝佛教史 

bb法安 ca 望 

bc中寺 cb 瑤 

bd續高僧傳 cc 高崎直道 

be道宣 ed 如來藏思想 形成 

bf續藏經 ce 田正成 

bg高僧傳 cf 佛性 原語 

bh慧皎 cg 印度學佛教學研究 

bi大正新脩大藏經 ch 僧亮 

bj常盤大定 ci 真諦 

bk佛性 研究 cj 真如 

bl水谷幸正 ck 道亮 

bm一闡提改 cl 大乘義章 

bn佛教大學研究紀要 cm 慧遠 

bo高楠順次郎 cn 僧祐 

bp渡迭海旭 co弘明集 

bq影印續藏經委員會