.


P.415

    Historically, there were three major occasions when China
imported  foreign  culture  and ideology.  The first  was the
importation of Buddhism the focus of this paper.
    The  second  cultural  incursion   was  that  of  western
culture, an event which, for a time, gave rise to debate over
the respective merits of things past and present, Chinese and
foreign.  From a philosophical standpoint.  this event raised
questions  concerning  the relationships  between western and
Chinese philosophy.  Many modern philosophers, whether or not
they  were  aware  of  it,  were  in  actuality  striving  to
reconcile   these  two  vastly  different  cultures.   Before
Liberation, Feng  Yu-lan(a) was perhaps  most  successful  in
reconciling the two.  His "New Rationalism" may be seen as an
attempt   to  use  western  pragmatism   to  resolve  several
traditional Chinese philosophical questions.  That he did not
succeed   in  determining   the   true   course   of  Chinese
philosophical  development  can be seen  in the fact that, in
practice,he failed to solve China's social problems.
    The  third  event, was  the  inportation  of  Marxism,  a
European   ideology   developed   in  response   to  European
historical  conditions.  In order for Marxism to take root in
China,  it  must  also,  in  a  certain   sense,  merge  with
traditional  Chinese culture and thought.  That is to say, it
must  pass  through  a  stage  of  critical   acceptance   of
traditional culture.
    Chia  Yi(b) in his  "Kuo  Ch'in-lun"(c) (Treatise  on the
Failings  of Ch'in) quoted  an old  adage.  "The  unforgotten
events of the past are teachers of the future."  Can we today
learn anything from the contacts between

P.416
imported  Buddhism and traditional  Chinese culture? I think
we can.
    I would like to discuss  three important  elements  which
characterized Buddhism's spread in China.
    First, is the  fact  that  when  Buddhism  first  entered
China, it tended to attach itself to native ideologies.  Only
later did it gradually  develop and begin to influence  those
ideologies.
    When, during the Han dynasty, Buddhism  entered China, it
identified itself with native religious practitioners. During
the Wei-Chin  period, Buddhism  identified  itself  with  the
"Mysterious Learning"(d)then popular.
    During the Han Dynasty, Buddhism was often seen as on par
with  the  Huag-Lao(e) School.  Thus, King  Ying  of Ch'u  is
reported  as having "recited the subtle words of Huang-Lao(e)
and respectfully  performed human sacrifices  to the Buddha",
while Emperor  Huan(f) "set up shrines  to Huang-Lao  and the
Buddha in his palace."
    Buddhist   disciples   of  the  period   even  identified
themselves  as "practitioners  of the techniques of the Way".
The  "Li-huo  lun"(g)(Treatise on  Rectifying  Error) of  the
Mo-tzu(h) states: "There  are ninety six distinct  ways, but,
among  those  worthy  of veneration, none is so great  as the
teachings   of  the   Buddha."   The   Sutra   in   Forty-two
Sections(i)also styles itself "the Way of the Buddha".
    At that time the principal  tenets  preached  by Buddhist
missionaries  were  the  immortality  of the soul  and karmic
retribution;  such Indian concepts  as the "non-existence  of
the self" were simply not understood.  The immortality of the
soul was already present in traditional  Chinese thought, but
only  in the  concept  of spirits.  The  Wen Wang  Ode of the
Shih-ching(j)says  of  the  former  Chou  Kings,  "The  Three
Directors are in Heaven", that is, their souls have ascended.
The "Ching-shen shun" of the Huai-nan tzu(k)asserts that "the
form may be ground  away, but the spirit is not transformed".
As a result of these beliefs, Huan T'an(1)held that "when the
form comes to an end, the spirit  is easily destroyed," while
Wang Ch'ung(m)argued  that "when  men die, they do not become
ghosts (spirits)".
    That  the  immortality  of the  soul  or spirit  depended
on "refining and nurturing" was also a native Chinese concept.

P.417

    As for karmic retribution, while the Buddhist  conception
did not exactly accord with that of China, it was promulgated
during  the Han and was compatible  with  the Chinese  notion
that "good fortune  comes  to those  who are good and evil to
the  dissolute."  Witness  the Wen-yen  gloss  to the  Ch'ien
hexagram of the I-ching(n): "Those who accumulate  good deeds
will certainly  have an excess  of blessings, while those who
accumulate bad deeds will have an excess of calamity."
    During the end of the Han and the beginning  of the Three
Kingdoms period, as Buddhist translations increased, Buddhism
divided  into  two  main  schools.   The  first  was  the  An
Shih-kao(o) lineage   of   Hinayana:  Buddhism,   emphasizing
meditation. The second was the Lokak sema lineage of Mahayana
Buddhism which emphasized prajna.
    An Shih-kao translated a number of sutras among which the
most influential  were  the Anapanasmrti-sutra (T602) and the
Yin-ch'ih  ju  ching (T1694) .The former  emphasizes   breath
control,  a  practice  comparable  to  the  "inhalation   and
exhalation"  (t'u-na)  (p)  methods  of  Chinese  seekers  of
transcendence.   The  latter  explicates  Buddhist  numerical
categories and may be compared to Han exegetical studies.
    With regard to man's place in the cosmos, the theories of
these sutras are based on the concept  of "primal breath" and
state that primal  breath encompasses  the Five Phases  which
they equate  with the five skandas.  It can be seen  that the
Hinayana practices expounded  by the An Shih-kao lineage were
assimilated to the popular religious practices and thought of
the day and which then used them to explicate Buddhism.
    The prajna concept  taught by the Lokaksema  lineage held
as its most important truth  the "return of the spirit to its
original  perfection  and union with the Way." In this we see
already the influence of the philosophy of the Lao-tzu(q) and
the Chuang-tzu(r)
    Chih Ch'ien,(s)the disciple of Lokaksema's  disciple Chih
Liang, retranslated  the Prajnaparamita sutra as  the Ta-ming
tu-wu-chi ching.(t)This title itself betrays the influence of
the  Lao-tzu  and  Chuang-tzu.   His  translation  of  "Grand
luminescence"  for prajna  probably  draws on the phrase, "He
who knows the eternal  nature  of things  appears  luminous,"
from the Lao-tzu.  The translation "cross to the illimitable"
for paramita

P.418

also means  to reach a state  of union  with the Way, that is
the Illimitable Tao.
    Chih Ch'ien's  gloss for the  first  chapter  states: "My
Master (that is Chih Liang(u) ) said: "The   heart   of   the
Bodhisattva treads the Great Way.  Wishing to embody the Way,
his heart  and the  way merge.  For this reason, the formless
is called the 'empty void' ".  This is the same point reached
in Juan  Chi's'  "Biography  of the  Prior-born  Great  Man",
wherein the great man  merges with the way. The latter phrase
recalls as well the Lao-tzu statement,"The constant nature of
the Way is formless".
    Chih Ch'ien and the others believed  that man's heart and
spirit originated  in the Tao, but, because of such flaws of
the latter heavens as desire, man can no longer join with the
Tao.  For the heart and spirit  to escape  these limitations,
one must embody  one's origin, the Tao, and become  a Buddha.
This is undoubtedly  a Buddhism assimilated to the thought of
the Lao-tzu  and Chuang-tzu.
    During  the Wei-Chin  period  the ontology  of Mysterious
Learning, based  on the Lao-tzu  and the Chuang-tzu, was very
popular.  The  central  issues  discussed  in the  Mysterious
Learning  were questions  of fundamental  cause and secondary
effects as well as existence and non-existence.Buddhistprajna
studies  were fairly similiar  to the concerns  of Mysterious
Learning,  so  many  monks   used  it  to  explain   Buddhist
principles.   Tao   An,  (w) for   example,  wrote   in   his
Pi-nai-yeh(x)(Prefaceto the Vinaya):

      Among  the  twelve  sections   of  the  Tripitaka,  the
    vaipulya  section  is the largest  due to the  fact  that
    Lau-tzu  and Chuang-  tzu have spread  teachings  in this
    country   similar   to   the   Fang-   teng   ching   and
    Prajnaparamita  sutra and thus it has been easy to travel
    with the wind.

conditional  nature of Non-being, there was also the tendency
to  glorify  the  Original  substance  while  neglecting  its
expression  as Being.  This was an internal contradiction  in
the thought of Wang Pi.
    From  just  this  element  of Wang  Pi's  thought, we can
extrapolate  the negation  of Being (which was fully realized
in Seng Chao's systerm).
    Wang Pi's emphasis  on Non-being  was further  refined by
Hsiang.

P.419

    Hsiu(ac)and P'ei Ku(ad)and eventually  developed into Kuo
Hsiang's  emphasis  on Being.  According  to Kuo  Hsiang, all
existence  was  comprised  of  individual  concrete  objects.
Beyond these material objects there was no Original substance
(i.e.no creator).The existence of the ten-thousand things was
based  solely  on their "self-nature."  This self-nature  was
self-generated.  He wrote "Non-being  has no reality and thus
cannot  give birth to Being."  This direct  contradiction  of
non-existence  contains  within it the seeds of (Seng-chao's)
negation of existence.
    These two developments  fit exactly  the Prajna  School's
negation of Being and Non-being.  So Seng Chao's doctrine  of
the  Emptiness  of  the  Unreal  contiues  the  philosophical
development  begun  by Wang Pi and Kuo Hsiang.  We may, then,
trace the historical development  of Mysterious Learning from
Wang Pi through  Kuo Hsiang to Seng Chao.  Later, the San-lun
School(ae)(Madhyamika)would develop Seng Chao's doctrine  and
Hui Neng(af)of the Ch'an  School(ag)would further  refine  it
and eventually influence the Neo-Confucianism of the Sung and
Ming dynasties.
    The reason for this development  is that ideologies  have
certain  set principles  of development.  Unless interrupted,
later  developments  always  grow out of earlier  tendencies.
Also, an ideology often has several possible ways in which it
might develop, so that, if an imported  ideology  accords  in
important  respects with one possible line of development, it
can have a very great impact.  The imported ideology may then
become a constituent element of the native ideology and, to a
greater  or lesser extent, influence  the development  of the
native culture.
    Even  the  clerics  of  that  time  recognized  that  the
popularity  of Buddhism was due to the thought of the Lao-tzu
and Chuang-tzu.
    What  is the reason  for  this  situation? As Engels  has
said: "Tradition  is a great  conservative  force."  It seems
that any cultural ideology  has its conservative  aspects and
will  resist  foreign  culture.   Because  of  this,  foreign
ideologies must first adapt themselves to the requirements of
the native ideology, attaching themselves to a native thought
system. Elements of the foreign ideology which are similar or
identical  to the  native  ideology  are easily  transmitted,
while  dissimilar   elements   seep  in  only  gradually   to
eventually change the native ideology.

P.420

    The second element involves the reason why Buddhism, as a
foreign importation, was able to have such a strong impact on
Chinese culture.  In addition to the fact that it met certain
social needs, it often accorded  with the natural development
of Chinese thought.
    The Mysterious  Learning of the Wei-Chin period developed
from Wang  Pi(X)and Ho Yen's(Y)emphasis  on Non-being  as the
source of all existence  through  Kuo Hsiang's(z)emphasis  on
Being ("The ten-thousand  things are born of themselves"), to
Chang  Chan(aa)of the Eastern  Chin, who contended  that  "in
being suddenly born of themselves, the Source of all things
resides  in Non-being".  Finally  there was Seng Chao,(ab)who
held  that  "the  Emptiness  of the  Unreal"  consisted  of a
negation  of both Being and Nonbeing.  Why was the Mysterious
Learning  of the Wei Chin  period  summed  up in Seng  Chao's
prajna  inspired  doctrine? Precisely  because  this  was one
possible outcome to which this philosophical system tended.
    Beginning   with   Ho  Yen  and  particularly   Wang  Pi,
Mysterious  Learning was much engrossed with the relationship
between Being and Non-being, which was explained  in terms of
substance and function.  It was held that "Non-being  may not
be understood  in terms  of Non-being, (so)it draws  its name
from  Being."  Thus  Non-being  was  held  to be the Original
substance, which  expressed  itself  as  Being  so  that  its
substance  and function  were as one.  However, since Wang Pi
emphasized the un-
    Thirdly, the reason that Buddhism was able to work such a
lasting  influence  on Chinese thought and culture, was that,
in  certain  respects, it  was  superior  to  native  Chinese
systems  of thought.  In this  way it was  able  to act  as a
stimulus in the development of Chinese culture.
    The question  of the Indian  Buddhist  prajna  doctrine's
superiority  to native Chinese  modes of thought  is one that
must be examined closely from every angle before a conclusion
can be reached.  This  we are not able to do here, so we will
only  examine   the  prajna   system's   resolution   of  the
contradiction  inherent  in the doctrine  of the negation  of
Being and Nonbeing.  Despite  the fact that, like the thought
of Wang Pi and Kuo Hsiang, this  doctrine  is an instance  of
idealism, it is undoubtedly superior to theirs in that it can
be used to analyze  problems  from  two opposite  directions.
Even though  Seng Chao's  doctrine  of the "Emptiness  of the
Unreal"

P.421

can  be seen  as an extension  of Wang  Pi and Kuo Hsiang, it
goes beyond their systems in that it accords fairly well with
the Indian prajna system.
    In my opinion, after its absorption into Indian Buddhism,
the idea of a creator  or a spiritual  entity which fashioned
heaven and earth never again occupied  an important  position
in China's  idealism.  This  was  replaced  by such  abstract
concepts  as the  Confucian  li(ah)(the"natural  pattern")and
Tao(ai)("theWan"),  which,  as  first  principles,  detemined
human existence  in the universe.  Sometimes "Heart mind"(aj)
was made a first  principle;  it was held that "the heart  is
the natural pattern"  or that "the natural  pattern merges in
the  heart."  This  is a feature  of Sung  and  Ming  dynasty
philosophy. As this sort of idealism developed, it became the
most important form of Chinese traditional philosophy.
    However, even for a relatively  superior foriegn ideology
to  influence   another  culture  it  must,  in  addition  to
satisfying  certain economic  and political  conditions, also
meet the first two requirements we have discussed. If it does
not, then even a superior ideology  will fail to take root in
the  host  country.   For  example,  the  "Treatise  on  (the
Completion  of Ideation Only" (Wei-shih  lun) (ak) brought in
by Hsuan  Tsang(al) and  Hetuvidya  (Yin-ming  hsueh(am) )are
both fairly  lofty constructions, but, despite  Hsuan Tsang's
reputation, they were not influential  in China and failed to
become a constituent of Chinese philosophy.
    I think  that  the above  three  points  are  significant
phenomena attending Buddhism's importation  into China.  With
these in mind,I would like to bring up a question  of current
concern: can Marxism merge with traditional  Chinese  thought
and  culture.   This  is  a  large  and  difficult  question.
Predictions are hard to make, but it can be explored.  In the
abstract, most people respond  that they wish for a merger of
the two, but the question is whether this is possible and how
it could be achieved.
    Here I wish only to discuss a few thoughts drawn from the
second  of the points  above: If Marxism  is to take root  in
China, continuing  lines of development  begun in traditional
Chinese  thought  and  culture, the  chief  issue  is to find
points  of  convergence  between  the  two  so  both  Chinese
philosophy and Marxism will progress.
    Marxism is undoubtedly a superior ideology.  Moreover, it
developed  in the West so that  there  are great  differences
between it and traditional Chinese thought. It is also a vast
system of thought,so that it is difficult  to know just where
to search for points of convergence. Naturally, I

P.422

cannot  here discuss  the problem  in its entirety.  I merely
wish to raise a few examples.
    The dialectical methodology of Marxism centers on the law
of the unity of opposites, and takes actual  practice  as the
only  standard  of determining  truth.  This I believe  to be
correct.  If related  principles  can  be found  among  those
fundamental  to traditional  Chinese  philosophy, then cannot
Marxism  be sinified  and  become  a further  development  of
Chinese philosophy?
    The central problem of traditional  Chinese philosophy as
defined  by  ancient  philosophers   and  historians  is  the
question  of the  relationship  between  man and heaven.  The
traditional  answer to this question, in most cases, has been
that heaven (that is the natural world, or the way of heaven)
and man(society,or the way of man)are one.  From  this  unity
derives the unity of thought and action and,in art, the unity
of subjective feeling and objective expression. (This is what
Wang Fu calls the interface of emotion and scene.)
    These  three  unities  of man and heaven, of thought  and
action, and  the unity  of subjectivity  and objectivity  are
questions  of  "truth",  "goodness"  and  "beauty".   Chinese
philosophy, then, emphasizes  unity, a fact  which  may  have
something  to do with  Chinese  thought  processes  or social
conditions. Confucian thought has always emphasized the Grand
Unity and the Way of the Mean, and opposed excess.
    If we correctly  understand  this unity and do not regard
it  as inflexible, then  it  is easy  to see  it as an active
unification  as in the I-Chuan phrases "giving  birth without
cessation"   and  "Heavens  movements   enduring   while  the
Chun-tzu"(an) never ceases in expanding himself."
    Would    it   be   wrong,   then,   to   see    struggle,
(or"movement") as  the  traditional   technique   of  Chinese
philosophy  by which union was achieved, with the unities  of
heaven  and  man,  knowledge   and  action,  subjective   and
objective  as the goals of this striving? If so, then this is
a point of convergence between traditional Chinese philosophy
and Marxism.  From  one  standpoint, the Marxist  law  of the
reconcilation  of opposites is a superior summation  and more
scientific  continuation  of traditional  Chinese philosophy.
From another,absorbing  Chinese  ideas of unity  would enrich
Marxism.
    Another special characteristic  of Chinese philosophy  is
that it has never separated  its theories  of knowledge  from
questions  of moral cultivation.  Thus questions of knowledge
and action are at once epistomological and moral. To know one
must be able to put something into practice.

P.423

The  unity  of  thought  and  action, then, is  an  important
concept.
    From the point of view of the development  of thought, it
is proper and even necessary to separate epistomoligical  and
moral  questions.  The  failure  to do  so may  have  been  a
shortcoming.  Looked  at  from  another  angle,  however, the
traditional  Chinese  concept of putting moral theories  into
action has a great significance.
    "Practice"   in  Marxism  primarily   denotes  production
struggle, class struggle and scientific  experimentation.  Of
course, such  things  as  the  "struggle  against  Japan", an
example of social practice, also included moral practice. "Is
it not meaningful, then, to emphasize moral practice? "
    I think  that such an emphasis  would  have two important
results: first, it would raise our self-evaluations and cause
us to view ourselves as moral human beings;  second, it would
cause us to pay attention to the results of our actions.
    I  think  that  if  we  can  overcome  the  confusion  of
traditional  Chinese philosophy with respect to practice and,
moreover, refine it through  reference  to Marxist  views, we
can make it more scientific and more correct.
    This  would  serve  both to advance  traditional  Chinese
philosophy  and to sinify Marxism.  The moral emphasis on the
unity of thought  and action  in practice  would  also enrich
Marxism.  If this is so, then  here is yet another  point  of
convergence   between  traditional   Chinese  philosophy  and
Marxism.
    Undoubtedly Marxism must develop, thus it must be an open
system, and not a closed one.  If it is to develop  in China,
then  it  must  resolve  the  question  of  its  merger  with
traditional  Chinese culture.  Naturally, the convergence  of
two such extremely  different  entities is difficult, but the
need to advance Chinese philosophy requires that we strive to
do so.
    The  advancement   of  Chinese  philosophy   depends   on
Marxism's  union with the better elements of that philosophy.
The modern  generation  of philosophers  are faced  with this
responsibility.  I myself am without special abilities. I can
only express  my feelings  through  an old adage.  "Though  I
cannot achieve it, I aspire to do so."

P.424
a 馮友蘭                     r  莊子
b 賈誼                       u  支亮
c 過秦論                     v  阮籍
d 玄學                       w  道安
e 黃老                       x  王弼
f 桓帝                       y  何晏
g 理惑論                     z  郭象
h 墨子                       aa 張湛
i 四十二章經                 ab 僧肇
j 詩經「文王」               ac 向秀
k 淮南子「精神訓」           ad 裴「固」
l 桓譚                       ae 三論宗
m 王充                       af 惠能
n 易經「乾」卦               ag 禪宗
o 安也高                     ah 禮
p 吐納                       ai 道
q 老子                       aj 心
                             ak 唯識論
                             al 玄奘