Статья 'Буддизм и имперские государства в средневековом Китае ' - журнал 'Genesis: исторические исследования' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > The editors and editorial board > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Article Processing Charge > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Genesis: Historical research
Reference:

Buddhism and Imperial States in Medieval China

Markhanova Tatiana Fridrikhovna

PhD in History

Interpreter, LLC “Standart”

670013, Russia, Ulan-Ude, Klyuchevskaya str., 64-69

tatiya6a@mail.ru
Other publications by this author
 

 

DOI:

10.25136/2409-868X.2023.1.39618

EDN:

BOGXXU

Received:

13-01-2023


Published:

20-01-2023


Abstract: The subject of the study is Buddhism in the context of the state system of medieval Chinese society. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the place of Buddhism in the traditional Chinese concept of government, as well as in the context of studying the general parameters of the functioning and interaction of religious and secular institutions of government. Special attention is paid to the relationship between the state and Buddhism in medieval China on the example of the analysis of Hui Yuan's polemical treatise "Shamen Bujing wangzhe lun" 沙門 不敬 王者 論 ( A treatise on monks who do not honor the ruler) As a unique monument in the history of ideological thought in China, the main conclusions of the study are that Buddhism was actively used in the politics of the medieval states of China, but it never managed to subdue the state, but on the contrary, it itself turned into an auxiliary means of government. The analysis of Hui Yuan's treatise "Shamen bujing wangzhe lun" was made for the first time" 沙門 不敬 王者 論 ( A treatise on monks who do not honor the ruler). Hui Yuan tried to prove to the Chinese authorities the Sangha's right to autonomy. The treatise provides a theoretical justification for the autonomy of the Buddhist community, Hui Yuan even managed to convince opponents to preserve the monastic sangha's right to independent governance, but Buddhist monasticism in subsequent eras could not maintain its position in imperial China.


Keywords:

medieval China, Buddhism, Huiyuan, monastic community, state system, Huangxuan, esteem for Emperor, monks, anti-Buddhist diatribe, sacredness

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

The main condition for the long-term existence of Buddhism, the oldest of the world's religions, was its compliance with a particular social structure. Various directions of Buddhism were formed in the process of close ties with specific societies at one time or another. Buddhism, which came from outside to China and brought new ideals, had to carry the preaching of Buddhist teachings into society and spread the commandments, at the same time morally self-supporting in order to preserve religious purity.

Buddhism penetrated into the state, adapting to it socially and politically, and after that it received the conditions for creating its own religious structure, the main elements of which were temples, monasteries and monasticism. The success of this depended both on the receptivity of Buddhist ideals by society, and on the ability of the imperial power, whose structure was formed long before the penetration of this religion into China, and its ruling stratum locally to perceive Buddhist ideals, as well as on how much Buddhist preaching correlated with real life.

One of the most important factors that influenced the fate of Buddhism in China was the sacralization of the state system. The state in China, regardless of the change of dynasties, was held on a kind of symbolic basis, which was projected onto the actual power. Due to this factor, not becoming a state religion, but adapting to the supreme power, Buddhism has taken a certain position in Chinese society. Explaining the thesis of sacralization, first of all in the aspect of power, A. S. Martynov wrote that "instead of converting the population to a new faith and eradicating former religious cults, there was a process of slow infiltration of the new world religion into various spheres of public life. But the difference was not limited to this. The state, which had its own traditional sacred foundation, treated local and religious alien systems as something more private and inferior compared to its own sacredness, and therefore placed them in a subordinate position. The sacral dominant resulted in the complete and unlimited domination of the state over religious organizations in political, administrative, legal and ideological relations" [1, p. 15-16].

Because of this, as Buddhism spread in Chinese society, namely the emergence of temples and monasteries, the expansion of their economic activities and the deepening of their impact on society, a special relationship of the state with this religion developed, in which there was no unifying hierarchical structure as its religious synonym and at the same time an intermediary between it and the imperial power.

The appearance of temples and monasteries dictated the need to form the first elements of the sangha management system. For example, in the Jiangnan region during the Jin Dynasty (265-420), the number of temples and monasteries and their size rapidly increased. The Jin emperor Xiao Wu-di was the first of the Chinese emperors to declare his affiliation to Buddhism in 381. In 470-476, the emperor of the Northern Wei dynasty, Xiao Wen-di, issued a number of state decrees that helped strengthen the economic positions of the monasteries. The rulers of the Qi (479-502), Liang (502-557), Chen (557-589), Northern Qi (550-577) dynasties patronized Buddhism. The Liang dynasty Emperor Wu Di (502-547) even recognized Buddhism as an official religion.

The focus of the article is on some points of tension created by seemingly irreconcilable worldviews and divergent institutional goals that opposed the autocratic Chinese state(s) to the growing monastic order. On the one hand, the monastic order sought to establish a sense of autonomy, obtain economic and social benefits and provide legal prerogatives. At the same time, the royal empire asserted absolute power, accompanied by his persistent efforts to preserve his ability to make various kinds of demands on all his subjects.

These issues were central to the crucial periods of the formation of Buddhism in China, and over time they also influenced the transmission of Buddhism from China to the rest of East Asia. In general, the Sangha's efforts to preserve the appearance of independence and prevent the encroachments of the totalitarian state were largely unsuccessful. Nevertheless, during a long historical process that included complex socio-political negotiations and a change in religious orientation, the Buddhist clergy were able to achieve important exceptions to the requirements of the Chinese rulers, primarily exemption from taxation, conscription and forced labor. This, in turn, helped to strengthen the economic foundations of monastic life and consolidate the prominent place of Buddhism in medieval Chinese society.

Next, consider some key debates in which prominent Buddhist monks, such as Huiyuan (334-416), confronted key segments of the Chinese socio-political elite, many of whom were influenced by Confucian ideology, which was often hostile to Buddhist monastic ideals and institutions.

One of the most famous debates about granting or denying certain privileges to monks took place in 402, during the formation of Buddhism in China. The discussion focused on a seemingly innocuous question: should monks render ritual worship to the ruler, as in all imperial instructions? The main person who formed the reason against the proposal to deny privileges was Hui Yuan, considered one of the most influential monks during the first centuries of the growth of Buddhism in China [9, 15, p. 240]. Hui Yuan joined the debate, which initially took place in the imperial capital, then at his monastic retreat in Lushan ??, located in the southern part of the empire.

According to his biographical entry in Gao Sengzhuan (Biographies of Outstanding Monks), compiled in 519 by Huijiao (497-554), in his youth Hui Yuan received a classical education, having studied Confucian classics, as well as important Taoist texts Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu [10]. While still a young man, he decided to leave the mundane life and become a Buddhist monk. His teacher was Daoan (312-385), perhaps the most prominent and influential Buddhist leader of that time. Despite the fact that he was originally a northerner, Hui Yuan later moved to the south and settled in Lushan, in the famous picturesque mountains in Jiangxi Province. There he became the leader of a thriving monastic community centered in the Donglin Monastery, which he founded in the 380s. Although Hui Yuan remained in his mountain monastery until his death (416), his fame spread far beyond Jiangxi and he came to the debate to be perceived as one of the leading clerics in China.

Hui Yuan was a man of diverse talents and broad interests. Inside and outside the Buddhist community, he was known for his irresistible personality and respected as a charismatic leader who embodied cherished monastic ideals. The monastic regime of doctrinal research, contemplative practice, ritual work and the observance of ethical standards that he established in his monastery in Lushan became a model for monastic institutions in other parts of China. It is especially associated with the development of the tradition of "Pure Land" (shk. Jingtu ???) in East Asia. This is largely due to his creation of a society of practitioners, including monks and laypeople, who devoted themselves to religious and contemplative practices aimed at achieving rebirth in Sukwavati, the Pure Land of Buddha Amitabha.

Hui Yuan's main opponent in the discussion was the warlord Huang Xuan. He was a soldier during the Jin Dynasty (265-420) and the son of Huang Wen ?? (312-373), the grand marshal of the Jin Empire and one of the greatest generals of the fourth century in China. Huang Xuan briefly usurped the throne, and in 403 created a new dynasty called Chu. However, his reign was short-lived, as he was assassinated in 404. Shortly after the occupation of the Jin capital in 402 and the seizure of dictatorial power, Huang Xuan began to initiate a policy aimed at curbing the influence of Buddhism and reducing the number of monastic orders. There was a requirement where monks had to render ritual worship to the ruler [15, p. 155, 8, p. 76], which revealed the famous answer of Hui Yuan, discussed below. It is interesting to note that it was Huang Xuan who invited Hui Yuan to join the debate, apparently because of Hui Yuan's impeccable reputation and high status.

The main line of Hui Yuan's reasoning and his arguments against the anti-Buddhist Huang Xuan and his restrictive policy are preserved in the form of a polemical treatise called "Shamen bujing wangzhe Lun" (A Treatise on monks who do not honor the ruler) [6]. The treatise is based on a letter that Hui Yuan sent to Huang Xuan in response to the dictator's request that Hui Yuan present his views on the pro- and anti-Buddhist controversy that raged in the capital. The entire treatise is preserved in the fifth edition of Hong ming ji (Collection of [Writings], the light of [truth] spreading), compiled by Seng Yu (445-518) [5].

The treatise "Shamen Bujing wangzhe lun" is a unique monument in the history of ideological thought in China. Hui Yuan offered a way to transform human nature for the better, which was the work of a spiritual mentor, not a secular ruler, and therefore a monk has a very special role in the world. This text (in fourteen issues) contains a lot of information about various anti-Buddhist discourses and polemics that unfolded in the period from the fourth to the beginning of the sixth century. It also contains a number of Buddhist responses to criticisms, as well as records indicating a determined attempt by prominent monks and their supporters to support the teachings and practices of Buddhism. An abridged version of the treatise (or, rather, a brief outline) is also included in the biography of Hui Yuan in Gao Seng Zhuang [10]. In addition, its contents were reproduced, summarized or discussed in later texts, such as Ji sha men bu ying bai su deng shi ????????? Monks should not worship the emperor and other customs (issue two) [7], which contains the entire text, and Fozzu tong ji ?? ? ? A comprehensive Biographical Directory of Buddhist Patriarchs (issue twenty-six), which has only a brief outline.

Hui Yuan's arguments.

At first glance, the debate about whether monks should observe the rite of reverence for the emperor is associated with a significant symbolic aspect. However, much was at stake, as the ritual act of worshipping the emperor symbolized key power relations and social hierarchies and reflected broader philosophical and political issues. This was not an entirely new topic of discussion, since a similar debate was held in 340 during the Eastern Jin Dynasty (317-420). During the reign of Cheng-di (325-342), Yu Bing (296-344), a powerful aristocrat, proposed that the Buddhist clergy show their subordination to the court by bowing to the ruler. At this time, a Buddhist opposition arose, led by Hae Chong (292-346), a Buddhist layman and a high-ranking official in the central government, who vehemently disagreed with the anti-Buddhist proposal. After official discussions in the imperial court, the advantage was for pro-Buddhist arguments [9, pp. 106-110].

The discussion was about the relationship between the monastic order and the imperial state, personified by the emperor, as well as the degree of superiority and control that the government had over religion. The political power and authority of the emperor (and the government) were not really questioned, since they were accepted as a norm by all parties. The main question that had to be considered was whether monks, as a separate group or category in medieval society, were different from other imperial subjects, whether they could deviate from the established norms of ritually appropriate behavior. In a broader sense, it was about granting the monastic order a special status, perhaps even a semblance of autonomy, within an autocratic state.

Hui Yuan's treatise is divided into five sections. The first two detail the different aspirations and lifestyles of laypeople and monks. The third section describes monks who seek the ultimate truth and are freed from the bonds of samsara, the cycle of birth and death. The fourth section is a response to the counterargument: an imaginary opponent claims that there is no higher truth than that revealed in the past by the great sages of China. The last section contains a somewhat abstract and partly doctrinal, not very complex argument about the Buddha as an immortal spirit, permeating the everyday world of phenomenal phenomena, but still separate from it. The following is a brief description of some of the main parts of the treatise, accompanied by translations of several relevant passages that are taken from the abridged version included in the Biography of Hui Yuan from Gao Seng Zhuan [11].

Hui Yuan begins his treatise with a discussion of Buddhist laypeople and their role in society. He cautiously points out that they are no different from other imperial subjects. They follow all secular laws and worldly customs and in no way shirk their duties to the ruler, including performing appropriate rituals and showing maximum respect. Basically, Buddhist laypeople do not pose any danger to the socio-political structure of the state and they do not challenge the authority of the ruler and his empire.

?????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????

Firstly, there are laypeople. As householders, they follow the laws of [the state] and [decent] subjects who obey [the ruler]. Without deviating from customs and established norms, they act in accordance with existing rules. Therefore, they have a [natural] love [that should be shown] to their relatives and observe

rituals that show respect for the ruler. On the basis of reverence and ritual, they become civilized individuals [10, 15, p. 251].

In the second section, Hui Yuan continues to describe the path of religious and basic monastic differences. Unlike the laity, he argues, the monks have left society and do not follow the usual pattern of behavior, including the outward manifestation of filial piety and ritualized respect for the ruler. However, they do it for a lofty purpose:

discard the depths of reality and overcome the everyday sphere of suffering and imperfections. Although their religious lifestyle excludes their participation in worldly activities, awareness of the goals of monks of the Buddhist path brings real benefits to society. Moreover, in a deeper sense, the genuine pursuit of their vocation does not actually contradict the basic (Confucian) principle of filial piety and reverence for the ruler.

?????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????… ?????????? ?????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????

Secondly, there are monks [those who have left home/family]. Monks can leave the [mundane] world to pursue their [spiritual] aspirations. They don't follow social conventions so that they can realize the Path. Having abandoned social conventions, their clothes do not comply with the rules of decency prescribed in secular classics. Leaving the world [secular], they are obliged to act nobly. Monks of great virtue are able to save the sinking world from being drawn into the flow of [samsara, or the cycle of birth and death], as well as to pull out the mysterious root of [accumulated bad karma] of recurring epochs. ... Even if only one monk achieved perfect virtue, then the [true] Path would extend to six close relationships (father, mother, elder brother, younger brother, wife and son) and this benefit would spread throughout the world. Although he does not accept a position of power, such a person undoubtedly benefits the empire by helping ordinary people. Therefore, although inwardly [monks] turn their backs on the natural feeling of [emotional attachment] to their relatives, they do not betray [the virtue of] filial piety. Outwardly, although they do not show the [generally accepted] form of respect for the monarch, they do not violate the [dignity] of respect [10, 15, p. 251].

In the next section, under the heading "Those who seek the ultimate meaning do not follow the path of the world ("?????"), Hui Yuan builds on his argument about monastic difference, complementing the high ideals of monks and confirming the great importance of their spiritual aspirations for the transcendence of Nirvana. Given that monks seek to transcend the limitations of the mundane realm, they cannot be burdened with mundane feelings or mundane aspirations. Therefore, because of the intrinsic significance of their aspirations, monks deserve high respect and a special status in society.

? ?? ? ? ? ??, ?? ??. ? ? ??, ? ? ? ? ? ?.

Therefore, although the monks [?ramana] behave towards the emperor as if he were their equal, their behavior is virtuous. Although they are not given noble titles such as princes or princes, they are still recipients of [imperial] patronage [10, 15, p. 252].

In the last two sections, the longest in the treatise, Hui Yuan departs a little from the topic to address larger issues related to Buddhist doctrine and its relationship with the Chinese tradition. This is especially true of the last section, where the central topic of discussion is the immortality of the soul. Here we will not consider this section, but only mention that in the fourth section Hui Yuan presents a set of arguments about the essential compatibility of Buddhism and Confucianism. Despite the noticeable differences in the doctrines of the two traditions, he argues that their goals are basically the same and they have the same intention [11, pp. 103-114].

Apparently, Hui Yuan's arguments proved convincing, since Huang Xuan abandoned his original plan to get rid of the monastic order and force its members to pay homage to the emperor. Hui Yuan managed to convince Huang Xuan to retain the monastic sangha's right to independent governance, but disputes broke out with renewed vigor under the next emperors. For example, in 606, Emperor Yang di ? ? (604-618) of the Sui dynasty, during a period of great prosperity of Buddhism, ordered the same benefits to be reviewed as part of a more extensive attempt to strengthen control over the monastic order [13, pp. 167-168]. Similarly, in 662, Emperor Gao Zong (649-683), the third emperor of the Tang Dynasty, issued a decree ordering monks to render ritual worship to both their parents and the emperor [12, pp. 32-33]. The anti-Buddhist measure proposed by Gao Zong followed a decree published five years earlier in which he forbade monks to disrespect their parents. After a debate in the capital, which was attended by numerous court officials, aristocrats and prominent monks such as Daoshan, the emperor decided to find a compromise solution: the exemption from rendering ritual worship to the emperor was confirmed. After an unexpected clash with the opposition, the emperor also decided to cancel this decree [12, p. 34]. Thus, during the Tang dynasty, the monks finally lost their independence from state power, and in the code of the Tang dynasty – "Tang lui", chapters appeared prescribing the monks norms of social behavior and charging them with respect for the emperor [2, p. 49].

Buddhism presented the strongest challenge to the existing order, since its basic doctrines and practices did not necessarily conform to local norms and entrenched values. This generated various tensions and disagreements, which had to be resolved through ongoing negotiations and adjustments [14, p. 92]. The formative growth of Buddhism in China was facilitated by relatively open views that prevailed during centuries of political disagreements, which created peculiar historical circumstances that favored the establishment of a new faith that came from foreign lands.

In general, over the centuries, the centralized state (states) made some adjustments that allowed Buddhism to be included in the socio-political structures of China. This, in turn, allowed religion to take root firmly on Chinese soil and become an important factor in the social and cultural spheres. Nevertheless, the State has never abandoned the basic ideological principles, largely based on Confucian texts and traditions, which were the basis for its exercise of total control and absolute power. Although the general political climate and specific state policy varied somewhat from one dynastic period to another, in general, various rulers and their imperial bureaucracy pursued policies aimed at controlling and exploiting Buddhism and other religions in ways that ultimately benefited the state and strengthened its power [14, p. 3-4]. In this sense, Buddhist monks and other believers have never been able to enjoy free religious beliefs and practices. In a broader sense, the relationship between the state and the Buddhist Sangha has never been equal, since the state ultimately had all the political power and could control all aspects of Chinese life, including religion.

 

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The following lines of R. Kipling are widely known: "Oh, the West is the West, the East is the East, and they will not leave their places Until Heaven and Earth appear at the Terrible judgment of the Lord." And yet, Europeans have long been interested in the East, its culture, lifestyle, nutrition, and religious affiliation. Among those fundamental worldview themes that determined and determine the development of the East, one can safely name Buddhism, the first of the world's religions, which originated in India, but then penetrated into other regions. China, as one of the largest regions of the world and, at the same time, India's neighbor, could not but become an area of penetration of Buddhism, but the history of Chinese Buddhism, which had certain specifics, is relatively little known in our country. These circumstances determine the relevance of the article submitted for review, the subject of which is Buddhism in medieval Chinese society. The author sets out to "analyze some points of tension created by seemingly irreconcilable worldviews and divergent institutional goals that opposed the autocratic Chinese state(s) to the growing monastic order." The work is based on the principles of analysis and synthesis, reliability, objectivity, the methodological basis of the research is a systematic approach, which is based on the consideration of the object as an integral complex of interrelated elements. The scientific novelty of the article lies in the very formulation of the topic: the author seeks to characterize the relationship between Buddhism and medieval Chinese states. Considering the bibliographic list of the article, its scale and versatility should be noted as a positive point: in total, the list of references includes 16 different sources and studies. The undoubted advantage of the reviewed article is the attraction of foreign literature, including in English and Chinese. From the sources attracted by the author, we will point to the works of Chinese authors and various biographies. From the studies used, we will point to the works of A.S. Martynov and T.G. Komissarova, whose focus is on the state and religion in the Far East. Note that the bibliography is important both from a scientific and educational point of view: after reading the text, readers can turn to other materials on its topic. In general, in our opinion, the integrated use of various sources and research contributed to the solution of the tasks facing the author. The style of writing the article can be attributed to a scientific one, at the same time understandable not only to specialists, but also to a wide readership, to anyone interested in both the history of Buddhism in general and Chinese Buddhism in particular. The appeal to the opponents is presented at the level of the collected information received by the author during the work on the topic of the article. The structure of the work is characterized by a certain logic and consistency, it can be distinguished by an introduction, the main part, and conclusion. At the beginning, the author defines the relevance of the topic, shows that "Buddhism, which came from outside to China, brought new ideals, it was necessary to carry the preaching of Buddhist teachings into society and spread the commandments, at the same time morally adapting itself in order to preserve religious purity." The paper shows that "Buddhism posed the strongest challenge to the existing order, since its basic doctrines and practices did not necessarily conform to local norms and entrenched values." Using various examples, the author shows that "although the general political climate and specific state policies varied somewhat from one dynastic period to another, in general, various rulers and their imperial bureaucracy pursued policies aimed at controlling and exploiting Buddhism and other religions in ways that ultimately benefited the state and strengthened its power." The main conclusion of the article is that "the relationship between the state and the Buddhist Sangha has never been equal, since the state ultimately possessed all political power and could control all aspects of Chinese life, including religion." The article submitted for review is devoted to an urgent topic, will arouse readers' interest, and its materials can be used both in lecture courses on the history of Asia and Africa, and in various special courses. In general, in our opinion, the article can be recommended for publication in the journal Genesis: Historical Research.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.