魏晉南北朝佛教; 格義佛教; 佛教與道教=佛教與老莊=Buddhism and Taoism; 自然=spontaneity; 因果=causality; 義兼雙域=twofold purview; 中國佛教史=Chinese Buddhist History; 東晉玄學=Xuanxue in Eastern Jin
In the Eastern Jin period, the inter-relationship of the three teachings of Confucianism, Buddhism and Daoism first became a philosophical issue. While most intellectual elite? paid attention to the controversies between Confucianism and Daoism, or between Laozi and Zhuangzi, the foreign, uniquely Buddhist concepts of karma and samsara gradually became topics of discussion in Pure Conversation (Qingtan). Traditional literati and Buddhist monks alike had been interpreting these foreign concepts by way of geyi (matching concepts) in reference to Chinese thought. Early Chinese Buddhist schools, finding difficulties in using this technique to interpret their newly imported concepts of reincarnation and karmic retribution, along with associated problems of soul and spirit, self and non-self, came under the influence of the Wei-Jin Xuanxue (metaphysical) movement, and followed the fundamental paradigms of being and non-being in Wang Bi's and Guo Xiang's philosophies. The uses of these paradigmatic concepts became the main theoretical means both to interpret and to resist Buddhism. By Sui and Tang times, Daoism had assimilated from Buddhism profound religious teachings about causality. Through a complex relation called "poaching from Buddhist causality," it responded with doctrines focusing on the causal treatment of problems in the formulation "the Dao patterns itself on spontaneity, but spontaneity does not pattern itself on the Dao." As for Buddhism, causal concepts underwent various changes and interpretations as it criticized and assimilated the idea of spontaneity; these were expressed in Buddhist translations in their portrayals of true dharma nature and the Pure Land paradise. This essay expounds on the concepts of spontaneity and causality. It explores how the mainstream of late Xuanxue metaphysical thought evolved from Daoist spontaneity into Buddhist causality. The author finds that, regardless of the affiliation with either Daoist spontaneity or Buddhist causality, both traditions can be understood from their reliance on a twofold purview, i.e., that substance (ti) and appearance (yong) are two aspects of the ultimate reality. By exploring the ideas of "Daoist causality" and "Buddhist spontaneity,'' we show how Daoism and Buddhism both have this double structure. The principles of spontaneity and causality are ontologically different, and their referents varied. Their uses in Xuanxue and Buddhism in the processes of matching concepts produced many struggles leading to later developments, which had many different stages of opposition, congruence, and assimilation. From the concepts of spontaneity and causality, we can reasonably explain the later developments of Daoist causality and Buddhist spontaneity in the Tang dynasty. This paper offers explanations of why the main theme of Eastern-Jin Xuanxue was dominated by Buddhist causality rather than Daoist spontaneity; and why Buddhism, after the Sui and Tang, could not avoid its baptism by ideas of spontaneity. In the final analysis, both Daoist spontaneity and Buddhist causality can be understood from a twofold purview, i.e., that substance (ti) and appearance (yong) are t
