One Way, Two Teachings
Scholars called the Buddha's teaching foreign and useless to the state. Whether a monk can answer them from inside their own classics, and what he would have to show to do it, is what this theme asks.
Qisong does not defend Buddhism as a rival. The five precepts, he argues, are the Confucian constants under other names, not killing being humaneness and not stealing righteousness, and the sages, Buddha and Confucius alike, share one mind and leave different traces. The precept against killing, he adds, asks more than abstaining from meat: it forbids harming anything that lives. Against Han Yu, who had cast the Buddha as a barbarian, he answers that the Buddha's homeland was not barbarian and that Han Yu's own writings praise monks.
- buddhism
- confucianism
- religious pluralism
- buddhist ethics
- confucian ethics
- virtue
- virtue ethics
- ethics
- karma
- dao
- interpretation
- skillful means
Enter a dialogue
- Han Yu called the Buddha a barbarian whose way does not belong in China. Why do you answer that the sage-king Shun was himself from the eastern tribes?
- The Book of Changes and the Doctrine of the Mean already teach human nature, an objector says, so China needs no Buddha. What does he miss?
- You wrote thirty pieces against Han Yu, yet note that his own writings praise monks. Is your quarrel with the man, or with how he is read?
- Someone gives up meat and considers the question of killing settled. Why do you say the precept against killing asks far more than that?
- Villagers changed their ways, you argue, once they heard that good brings blessing and evil brings punishment. Is fear of consequences a worthy ground for virtue?