Download THE IMPACT OF THE BUDDHIST DOCTRINE OF KARMA ON THE

THE IMPACT OF THE BUDDHIST DOCTRINE OF
KARMA ON THE CHINESE WAY OF LIFE
Pataraporn Sirikanchana
I. Introduction
In Buddhism, the Law of Karma is the supreme law of causation
which , without any divine intervention, determines the result of one’s
action. Here, god is not the initiator nor the goal of one’s meritorious
deed. When Buddhism entered China, the concept of Karma was
somewhat differently taken by the Chinese because of the interaction
of the Chinese culture and the Indian Buddhism. This research paper is
intended to examine the meaning and the role of Karma in Chinese
context, to assert the influence of Buddhism on Chinese society by
showing the Chinese situation before and after the introduction of
Buddhism and to demonstrate how Buddhism can be well accepted
among Chinese people despite their own traditional beliefs.
II. The Doctrine of Karma in Mahāyāna Buddhism and in
Theravāda Buddhism and Its Impact on Chinese Scholars.
The definitions of karma in Mahāyāna Buddhism and in
Theravāda Buddhism are generally the same. The Mahāyānists define
karma as action, work, deed, performance, service and duty.1 The
Theravadins define kamma as a volitional action, action, deed and
good & bad volition.2 Because kamma has both general meaning and
specific meaning, its definitions are debated among scholars.
Christmas Humphreys indicates that, in C.E. 1945, the Buddhist
Society in London needed a brief summary of Buddhism. Thus, the
leading Buddhists from China, Japan, Burma, Ceylon, Thailand and
Tibet had considered and approved the Twelves principles of
1
The Chinese Buddhist Order of Sangha in Thailand. A Dictionary of Buddhism (Bangkok:
Chan Patana Printing, 1976), p.605.
2
Phra Rājvaramunī, A Dictionary of Buddhism (Bangkok: Religious Printing, 1977), p. 291.
88
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
Buddhism of which karma was explained in the fourth Principle as
follows:
The universe is the expression of law. All
effects have causes, and man’s soul or character is the
sum total of his previous thoughts and acts. Karma,
meaning action-reaction, governs all existence, and
man is the sole creator of his circumstances and his
reaction to them, his future condition, and his final
destiny. By right thought and action, he can gradually
purify his inner nature, and so, by self-realization,
attain in time liberation from rebirth. The process
covers great periods of time, involving life after life on
earth, but ultimately every form of life will reach
enlightenment.3
Karma, here is emphasized as the law of causation created by
the doers. This law implies the endless birth-and-death cycle of human
life and it will be broken by enlightenment. By this definition, karma is
differentiated from the state of Nirvāṇa, i.e. in Nirvāṇa, there is no
karma and those who perform karma have not yet attained Nirvāṇa.
Humphreys further explains that whereas Theravada Buddhism asserts
the theory of anattā, Mahāyāna Buddhism tends to support the theory
of reincarnation:
The body dies at death, but the individual’s
karma, the resultant of all the causes generated by him
in the past, lives on. This complex “soul,” the product
of ten thousand lives, is clothed, as we have seen, with
divers attributes or qualities, called skandhas. This it is
which, in the intervening and subjective worlds, digests
the lessons of the previous life until such causes as can
take effect subjectively have been transmuted into
faculty and innate tendency. That which remains to
3
Christmas Humphreys, Buddhism (Great Britain: Cox & Wyman Ltd., 1979), p.74.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
89
incarnate afresh may be regarded as an individual, as in
the Northern School of Buddhism, or as a nameless
complex residuum of karma, as in the southern School.
The danger of the former viewpoint lies in the tendency
to look upon this individual as a “separated soul”
eternally distinct from other forms of life. The
Southern viewpoint, on the other hand, anxious to
enforce the doctrine of anattā in its literal sense, keeps
to the letter rather than to the spirit of the Buddha’s
metaphors.4
The tendency of Mahāyanā Buddhism to support the theory of
reincarnation may be observed in the conception of the Triple Form in
which the Buddha is an Earthly Body, a Nirmāṇā-kāya, and an
incarnation of the Universal Buddha. Thus, when Buddhism entered
China, the doctrine of karma and rebirth was taken by the masses as
the theory of reincarnation.
Nevertheless, when the doctrine of karma and
rebirth was preached to the masses, calling their
attention to the woes of human life, it could not help
becoming objectivized and vulgarized. The majority of
the Chinese took from Buddhism first and foremost the
strange, yet easily understood, objectivized doctrine of
reincarnation in the six states of existence - as denizens
of hell, hungry demons, beasts, spirits, human beings,
or gods. The Indian doctrine of reincarnation was
accepted by the Chinese masses as the most
representative doctrine of Buddhism and spread rapidly
among them. It became identified with the family
4
Ibid., p. 106-7.
90
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
system, the very basis of Confucian society, and with
the obligations of filial piety5.
Because the Chinese people already believed in deities and
ancestor worship, it was easy for them to take some aspects of
Buddhist doctrine as a support of the theory of eternal soul and
reincarnation. These beliefs are quite the same among people in
Theravāda countries. Buddhist scholars, on the other hand, do not
commonly agree with this public opinion.
Apart from being the law of causation, karma in Buddhism can
be defined as volitional actions. By this definition, intention is the
criterion of what is called karma. Kenneth Ch’en, a Mahāyāna scholar,
explains its meaning as follows:
“Karma” to the Indians means the deed
performed and the results that arise from it. To this
conception of karma the Buddha made a significant
addition. He taught that karma involved not just the
deed and the reward but also the intention behind the
deed. For karma to be generated there must be
intention, and he considered this intention to be much
important than the deed. If the deed is unintentional, he
said, no karma is generated, but if intention is present,
then karma is produced even though the deed itself is
not actually performed.6
U. Thittila, a Theravāda scholar, also agrees with this
definition. He affirms that :
Kamma (karma in Sanskrit) is a Pāli word
meaning action. In its general sense, kamma means all
good and bad actions. Kamma refers to all kinds of
5
Zenryu tsukamoto, “Buddhism in China and Korea,” trans. by Leon Hurvitz in Kenneth W.
Morgan (ed.), The Path of the Buddha (N.Y. : The Ronald Press Company, 1956), p. 230-1.
6
Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China (N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964), p.4-5.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
91
intentional actions whether mental, verbal, or physical,
that is, all thoughts, words, and deeds. In its ultimate
sense kamma means all moral and immoral volition.
The Buddha says, “Mental volition, O Bhikkhus, is
what I call action (kamma). Having volition, one acts
by body, speech, and thought (Aṅguttara Nikāya III.
415). 7
Nevertheless, the meaning of karma is not quite a consensus
among Buddhist scholar. Hajime Nakamura, a Mahāyāna scholar,
thinks that karma does not necessarily include intention within itself
and it always yields some results:
All acts, whether mental or physical, tend to
produce like acts in a continuing series. Good acts
increase in a man a tendency to similar good actions,
and bad acts create a tendency toward continuing evil
acts of a similar nature. The karma committed with or
without previous intention will come to fruition. Some
karmas bear fruit in the same life in which they are
committed, others in the immediately succeeding one,
and others in future lives more remote8.
These different interpretations of karma may be due to some
explanation in Visuddhimagga which was a commentary on the
Tripiṭaka compiled by Buddhaghosa in early fifth century C.E. In
Visuddhimagga, Buddhaghosa had classified all meanings of karma
into three categories, according to the time or ripening or taking effect,
function and the order of ripening. In the last category, there is a kind
of karma called katattākamma or katattāvāpanakamma which means
reserve karma or casual act. This kind of karma is performed with no
7
U. Thittila, “The Fundamental Principles of Theravāda Buddhism,” in Kenneth W. Morgan
(ed.), op.cit, p.85.
8
Hajime Nakamura, “Unity and Diversity in Buddhism,” in Ibid., p.378.
92
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
specific intention or with no intention, e.g. a doctor tries to help a
patient but accidentally becomes the cause of his death. Katattākamma
has the weakest power in yielding its effect.9
The exact date of the arrival of Buddhism in China is still
debated. Tsukamoto believes that it may be some time around the first
century C.E.:
It is no longer possible to determine with
precision the time of the Introduction of Buddhism into
China, but one may be reasonably certain in view of
the political situation which existed in China and the
circumstances of the Buddhist community in India, that
the event took place at a time at least not much this or
that side of the beginning of the first century C.E. 10
The problem of the exact date may be due to several causes,
There was a tale of the Emperor Ming of the Latter Han Dynasty (5875 C.E.) who dreamt about a golden man who was supposed to be the
Buddha. He then sent an envoy to India to bring the Buddhist teachings
to China. The envoy came back with two Indian monks, images of the
Buddha and the Buddhist scriptures in 67 C.E. Thus, it was believed
that Buddhism was known in China by that time.
Many scholars, however, believe that this tale was originated in
200 C.E. in order to spread Buddhism in China while Confucianism
and Taoism were very powerful.11 Besides, the arrival of Buddhism in
China may be dated in 200 B.C.E. when the Chinese empire adopted a
political and commercial policy which brought about the opening of
the “silk routes” that could link India to China. These “silk routes”
were over the Sinkiang desert, north of Tibet. It was along these routes
that Buddhist teachings were expanded over central Asia by pilgrims
9
Phra Rājvaramunī, op. cit., p.216.
10
11
Zenryu Tsukamoto, op.cit., p.185.
Ibid., p. 184, also in Kenneth Ch’en op.cit., p.30.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
93
and merchants. There was also a supposition that Buddhism might
enter China in 200 C.E. when Buddhist scriptures were widely
translated into Chinese and made known to the people.12 Of all the
three assumptions, the one which indicates that Buddhism probably
came to China in 200 B.C.E. sounds most sensible. All forms of
civilizations, as we can observe, are usually transmitted from one place
to another through routes of communication. When the “silk routes”
were opened to bridge China and India, though for commercial and
political policy, probably, religion, arts, literature and so on in both
countries could certainly find their ways in mutual exchange. Thus, the
Indian Buddhism, a form of Indian civilization could enter China
through pilgrims, merchants and so on after the opening of these
routes. By this way, the Chinese in the frontier, not the townspeople
nor the rulers, were the first who could witness the teachings of the
new religion. Buddhism in China by this time was therefore
understood and interpreted by the illiterate folks and was different
from the version of the learned. The explanation that Buddhism was
made known in China in 67 C.E. emphasized only the official
acceptance of Buddhism by a Chinese ruler as a state religion. The
latest possible period which was 200 C.E. concerned only with the
translation of Buddhist scriptures into Chinese version which signified
the scholarly studying of Buddhist teachings but did not prove that,
without textual translation, Buddhism could not be made known
among people.
In the beginning, Buddhism was introduced to China both in
Mahāyāna and Theravāda traditions. The difference of opinions in both
doctrines caused much difficulties in translation and compilation of the
Buddhist texts. For example, Chu Tao-sheng (365-434) and his
contemporaries were troubled by some conflicting doctrines of
salvation offered in the Theravāda and Mahāyāna texts that had by
then translated. The Theravāda texts affirmed a long period of ardous
accumulation of positive karma leading to Nirvāṇa. The Mahāyāna
12
Ibid., p.185-7
94
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
texts, on the other hand, suggested salvation by faith of the believers
and the mercy of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who could provide the
way towards Nirvāṇa. Chinese Buddhists thus saw the two paths
towards truth and liberation in Buddhism.13 According to the
Theravāda texts, karma is one’s own responsibility. It is what one
created. If one performs a good deed, one will have a good return and
if one performs evil, then one will surely get an evil result. No person
or thing can interfere with this truth. On the contrary, Mahāyāna
Buddhism proposes the role of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as saviors of
human beings. Thus, karma in Mahāyāna Buddhism is universal rather
than individual, i.e. man can depend on other beings, instead of on
himself alone for salvation.
According to Buddhism, both Mahāyāna and Theravāda, there
are five states of existence: deity, man, animal, hungry ghost, and
denizen of hell. Only deity and man are the products of good karma.
According to the Pāli Canon, existence is caused by the unceasing
accumulation of karma. It involves all sorts of sufferings. Salvation
can be attained only by means of putting an end to the sufferings or by
the cessation of karma. The cessation of karma is possible when a
person has right understanding of life and is free from desires and
attachments. Salvation in Theravāda context, however, is different
from that the Mahāyāna. Fung Yu-Lan has pointed out the distinctions
of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna (Theravāda) interpretations of salvation
and has indicated the reason why Mahāyāna Buddhism is more
acceptable than Hīnayāna Buddhism in China:
In Hīnayāna Buddhism salvation is a personal
matter; the individual concerned must work out his
own salvation and can do little to help others to
achieve theirs. In Mahāyāna Buddhism, on the
contrary, the concept of the Bodhisattva is prominent.
This is the being who seeks Buddhahood but seeks it
13
Arthur F. Wright, Buddhism in Chinese history (U.S.A. : Stanford University Press, 1959),
p.47-8.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
95
altruistically; he wants enlightenment, but wants it to
enlighten others; he willingly sacrifices himself for
these others, and therefore, even after enlightenment,
voluntarily remains within the wheel of life and death.
Because of this distinction, Nirvāṇa, for the
Mahāyānists, loses its original meaning of extinction
and simply designates the state of the enlightened
being. Such a being continues to live in this world,
where he works for the salvation of sentient beings but,
because of his enlightenment, he has no attachments
and therefore no karma. He is in the wheel of life and
death, yet is immune to its effects. These distinctions
between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna doctrine perhaps in
part reflect the differences between the “thisworldliness” of Chinese thought and “otherworldliness” of that of India.14
During the so-called Period of Disunity in China (221-589),
there were many, especially the Confucianists and the Taoists, who
strongly opposed the Buddhist theories. Buddhism, however, continued
to influence many Chinese during the Han Dynasty and, in this period,
the Chinese began to have a systematic understanding of the Buddhist
doctrine. At the same time, the Chinese and scholars faced some
difficulties in the interpretation and translation of the Buddhist texts.
There was no consensus in their understanding of Buddhist concepts.
Seng-chao (384-414), one of Kumārajīva’s disciples, who was
impressed by Vimalakirti Sūtra, a major sūtra in Mahāyāna Buddhism,
has compiled a collection entitled Book of Chao (Chao Lun) which was
a combination of Buddhism and Neo Taoism. In his book, Seng-Chao
insisted that the Law of Karma was eternal.
14
Fung Yu-Lan, A history of Chinese Philosophy trans. by Derk Bodde (U.S.A.: Princeton
University Press, 1967), Vol. II, p. 238.
96
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
That is why the good karma of the Tathāgata
(the Buddha) eternally remains even after the course of
ten thousand generations, and his teaching becomes
increasingly firm after passing through a hundred
aeons. The reason is that karma can never decay. It
never decays, and therefore, though lying in the past,
does not undergo change. It does not undergo change,
and therefore is immutable.15
Another scholar who also believed that the Law of Karma was
universal was Hui-yüan (334-416). Hui-yüan was a brilliant disciple of
Tao-an (312-385) and was knowledgeable in the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.
In 404 C.E., he had a contact with Kumārajīva to whom he posed the
question of momentariness. Hui-yüan believed in the immortality of
the soul. This immortal soul was the reaper of good and bad results of
all deeds on earth. The belief in immortality of the soul was probably
due to the preachings of some Buddhist monks in China at that time
and the belief in immortal spirits in Confuncianism and Taoism which
was predominant in China before the arrival of Buddhism.
During the Han period the main tenets of
Buddhism were the indestructibility of the soul and the
cycle of rebirth and karma. This idea of the Buddhists
that a soul lives forever in accordance with karma fitted
in with prevalent later Han Taoist beliefs, namely, that
a man upon death becomes a spirit with knowledge and
feeling, and can assume human shape to harm people.
Followers of the Confucian tradition also share in this
belief of a spirit’s surviving after death, as indicated by
their practice of mounting the roof top and calling the
15
Seng-chao, Book of Chao, p. 54. Quoted in Ibid., p. 262.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
97
name of a person who had just died. Such a practice
was known as Recall of the Departed Spirit.16
Hui-yüan did not think that transmigration was in the form of
evolution of the seed of life which was determined and cherished by
the owner’s karma. He firmly believed that the entire soul could
infinitely pass from one body to another unless one entered Nirvāṇa
Fan Chen (ca. 450-515), a Confucianist who attacked
Buddhism, did not agree with Hui-yüan. He thought that Buddhism
was wrong in teaching that souls lived through endless transmigration.
He was the author of a famous Essay on the Extinction of the Soul
which was intended to attack Hui-yüan’s treatise,
On the
Indestructibility of the Soul (Shen-pu-mieh-lun). In his essay, Fan
Chen explained that:
Man’s substance is substance which possesses
consciousness. That of the tree is substance which
lacks consciousness. Thus mans’ substance is not the
substance of the tree, nor is the tree’s substance the
substance of the man. For how, in the case of a
substance like that of a tree, could there be a
consciousness which differentiates it from that tree.17
Thus, what differentiated man from other natural beings was
consciousness not soul. Fan Chen also believed that, after death, man
no longer had consciousness. Fan Chen also thought that the
vicissitude of human lives were accidental. Lives were not subject to
kamma.
Human lives are like flowers blossoming forth
from the same tree. They are blown by the wind and
fall from the tree. Some brush against screens and
16
Kenneth Ch’en, op.cit., pp.46-7.
17
Fan Chen, Essay on the Extinction of the Soul (Hung-ming Chi) quoted in Kenneth Ch’en,
op.cit., 290.
98
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
curtains and fall on rugs and mats, some are stopped by
fence and wall and fall on the manure pile. Those that
fall on rugs and mats become Your Highness. Those
that fall on the manure pile become my humble self.
The high and low follow different paths; where does
the operation of karma come in?18
Though Fan Chen, as a Confucianist, denied the immortality of
the soul, the practice of filial piety to the bygone ancestors implied that
traditional Chinese thought also acknowledged the immortality of the
soul and results of former deeds.
III. The Doctrine of Karma and the Belief in the Immortality
of the Soul
A. Karma and Salvation by Faith
Fung Yu-Lan, one of the eminent Chinese scholars in
Mahāyāna Buddhism, explains that karma in Mahāyāna Buddhism is
not considered entirely personal as in Hīnayāna (Theravāda)
Buddhism:
Hīnayāna Buddhism conceived of karma as
being entirely personal and individual; only the doer
himself could shape his future destiny through his
karma. Therefore the early teachings of Buddha
were all directed toward self-reliance and selfemancipation, “Be ye lamps unto yourselves, be ye a
refuge unto yourselves,” runs a passage in the Pāli
canon. Yet in this Pure Land Sūtra emphasis is
placed not on one’s own effort but on the power of
Amitābha to effect salvation; the shift was from
18
Ibid., p.141.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
99
jiriki, self-power, to tariki, other-power, as the
Japanese put it.19
By this explanation, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas who take the
role of divine saviors can interfere in the process of karma of the
believers, while in Theravāda Buddhism, karma is a personal
commitment which causes its own law without external interference.
Salvation by Faith is a new concept in Mahāyāna Buddhism of the
Pure Land School. The interference of the divine savior in a person’s
salvation is clearly expressed in the Pure Land Sutra:
Beings are not born in that Buddha country
of the Tathāgata Amitāyus as a reward and result of
good works performed in this present life. No,
whatever son or daughter of a family shall hear the
name of the Blessed Amitāyus, the Tathāgata, and
having heard it, shall keep it in mind, and with
thoughts undisturbed shall keep it in mind, after their
death, they will be reborn in the world Sukhāvatī, in
the Buddha country of the same Amitāyus, the
Tathāgata.20
According to the Pure Land Sutra, faith in divine saviors who
are external beings is more important for salvation than one’s own
karma. Nevertheless, Nakamura, another Mahāyāna scholar, does not
think that the divine saviors can entirely help the followers to salvation
without depending on their own karma:
Neither the spiritual inspiration and power
of the Buddha and Bodhisattvas nor transcendental
influence of the Supreme Truth can deliver us from
natural calamities; they can only help indirectly by
19
Fung Yu-Lan, “The Spirit of Chinese Philosophy” in Allie M. Frazier (ed.), Chinese and
Japanese Religions (U.S.A. : The Westminster Press, 1969), p.339.
20
Loc.cit.
100
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
accumulating our merits or by bringing our merits to
maturity so that the good karmic effects of those
merits may give us whatever protection we need.21
Humphreys also agrees with this explanation. He
asserts that:
For though each has reached the end of his
own immediate journey and attained his own
Release, yet he may not “interfere” with another’s
Karma, nor would it help him if he could. From the
beginning to the end of the journey man must travel
alone, but he travels guarded, guided and in some
way protected from his folly, and it is the aim of the
noblest of mankind to add to that Guardian Wall.22
The problem concerning the role of divine saviors and the
individual’s karma in Pure Land Buddhism is still under discussion. If
the divine saviors can help people to salvation regardless of their own
karma, there will be nor real authority of karma as the universal law of
causation. Human deeds cannot be evaluated as good or evil because
man has no responsibility in his own decision and has to rely on
another power. But if there is no divine savior, the path to Nirvāṇa may
seem too difficult for mankind to pursue.
The doctrine of the Pure land school did not originate in
China. The longer Sukhāvatīvyuha which was translated into Chinese
before 186 C.E. indicated that the sūtra existed in Sanskrit some time
previously.23 It was once taught in India with the basic Indian texts.
Wing-Tsit Chan has commented that the Pure Land doctrine is truly
21
Hajime Nakamura, op.cit., p.397.
22
Christmas Humphreys, Karma and Rebirth (Great Britain: Lewis Reprints limited, 1972),
p. 109.
23
Sir Charles Eliot, Hinduism and Buddhism (N.Y. : Barnes & Noble Inc., 1968), Vol. III,
p.313.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
101
Chinese in spirit and character and it exists nowhere else but in China
and Japan. Nevertheless, in India, rebirth in Pure land meant a
complete break with earthly life, which was considered a life of
suffering. In the Chinese Pure land School, rebirth in the Pure Land
means an extension of earthly living. Human relations are continued in
the Pure Land. Thus, a person can transfer his merits to his ancestors
and continue his filial duty.24
Generally speaking, Chinese philosophy emphasizes life on
earth while the Indian philosophy portrays a pleasant life in another
world, e.g. in heaven. Taking all into consideration, we can say that the
desire for rebirth in the Pure Land is only an extension of the Chinese
search for everlasting life on earth.
B. Karma and Ancestor Worship
In Chinese Buddhism, ancestor worship and karma are
related to each other. If we believe that karma is limited to the deeds of
an individual, it will be problematic as to how one can share one’s
meritorious deeds with one’s ancestor. Ancestor worship was
commonly practiced before the time of Confucius. When Confucius
appeared on the scene in the fifth century B.C.E., he emphasized the
ethical and social significance of filial piety. He taught that one should
show respect to one’s parents not only while they are alive but also
after they had passed away by preparing a proper burial for them and
appropriately making sacrificial offerings. Though Confucius had a
skeptical attitude towards spirits and supernatural beings, he did not
object to offerings made to departed ancestors. This practice reinforced
the belief in a soul after death and paved the way for Buddhism to play
a significant part in the religious service to the dead.25 Chinese
24
Wing-Tsit Chan, “Transformation of Buddhism in China,” Philosophy East and West
(U.S.A. : The University Press of Hawaii), Vol. VII, no. 3-4, p.109.
25
W.Pashow, “The Controversy over the Immortality of the Soul in Chinese Buddhism,
“The Journal of Oriental Studies” (Hong Kong: Libra Press Limited, 1978), Vol. XVI, no. 1-2,
pp.28-9.
102
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
Buddhism admits the concept of life in another world and the
transference of merits. For example, if one does something good, one
may have good in return and can also share this good result with
others. In a family, the meritorious karma of a son can effect both
himself and his parents. Thus, if the parents do something bad and go
to hell after their death, the meritorious karma of the son in performing
his filial piety can eliminate or mitigate the sufferings of the parents. In
the Collection of Pien Wen from Tun-huang26, there is a story
concerning filial piety of Mahā Maudgalyāyana, a chief disciple of the
Buddha, who rescued his mother from the Avici purgatory. This is
interesting because it implies that karma of ancestors can be negotiated
with the karma of their descendants. Besides, it is worth noting that
belief in Heaven and Hell was unknown in Chinese history until
Buddhism introduced it into China.
If Theravada Buddhism is somewhat
ambiguous concerning the existence and behavior of
superhuman beings, Confucianism is much less
ambiguous. Although the latter does not explicitly
deny the existence of such beings, it certainly
ignores their role in human affairs. It is more than
interesting to note, therefore, that when Mahāyāna
Buddhism was introduced into China, it was
precisely its gods (including the Bodhisattvas),
demons, heavens, and hells that, according to many
scholars, accounted for its dramatic conquest of
China.27
26
Ibid., p. 29.
27
Melford E. Spiro, “Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation,” in Michael Banton
(ed.), Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion (Edinburgh: T.&A. Constable
Ltd., 1966), p. 94.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
103
IV.
The Doctrine of Karma in Buddhism and the Concept of
Retribution in Chinese Philosophy
Karma is translated in Chinese as Yeh and both mean action
or deed. In fact, karma is not restricted only to outward action.
Buddhism classifies karma into three categories: karma by action, by
speech and by thought. In Chinese Buddhism, there are two terms
which deal with the concepts of reward and punishment, good and bad,
meritorious and evil and so on. These two terms are karma and
retribution. Some scholar give the same explanation to these two terms.
But some may define them differently, e.g. karma is the cause and
retribution is its effect. Fung Yu-Lan explains that:
Whenever he acts, speaks, or even thinks,
his mind is doing something, and that something
must produce its results, no matter how far in the
future. This result is the retribution of Karma. The
Karma is the cause and its retribution is the effect.
The being of an individual is made up of a chain of
causes and effects.28
The concept of karma can be indicated as an import from
Indian culture while the concept of retribution is the Chinese property.
Buddhism, introduces the idea of karmic causation which was limited
to individuals. The concept of retribution in China, on the other hand,
asserts that the results of one’s deed can fall upon one’s family.
Besides, the doer is not the only author of his own retribution. Some
other external forces such as Heaven and so on can determine
punishment or reward for the doer. Human institutions were believed
by the early Chinese to be controlled by a T’ien and a Ti or Heaven and
Earth. The Shu Ching or Book of History which is a collection of
religious and philosophical thought of the period prior to, and
28
Fung Yu-Lan, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy (N.Y. : The Macmillan Company,
1960), p. 243.
104
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
including the time of, Confucius and was compiled about 1000 B.C. or
earlier, in its section on “The Counsel of Kao Yao,” says:
Let him not have his various officers
cumberers of their places. Men must act for the work
of Heaven! From Heaven come the relationships with
their several duties; we are charged with those five
duties, and lo! We have the five courses of honorable
conduct! From Heaven come several ceremonies;
from us come the observances of these five
ceremonies, and lo! They appear in regular
practice!....Heaven confers its decree on the virtuous,
and there are the five habiliments and five
decorations! Heaven punishes the guilty, and there are
the five punishments to be severally used for that
purpose!29
The five duties referred here are the duties of five
relationships: duties to one’s parents, relatives, rulers teachers, and
friends. The ideas of karma in Buddhism had assimilated in the idea of
retribution in Chinese philosophy and became a new idea, since the
sung Dynasty (beginning 960 C.E.), that divine retribution worked on a
family basis and through a chain of lives.30 In Neo-Confucianism, thus,
reward and punishment were believed to be caused by both one’s own
karma and divine work.
Generally, Chinese people were illiterate and mostly were
farmers and fishermen. They worshipped idols, deities and natural
objects which they believed to have some supernatural powers. When
Buddhism first entered China, the Buddha was also worshipped as a
deity. The ignorant people were fatalistic. They believed in Fate which
was the Mandate of Heaven. They went to deities primarily to seek
blessings, wealth and long life while the scholars and the enlightened
29
30
Shu Ching, pp. 55-6 quoted in Fung Yu-Lan, A History of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. I, p.33.
Arthur F. Wright, op. cit., p.105.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
105
people worshipped deities not to seek favors but only to pay respect.
The idea of Heavenly Mandate was not originated by Confucius but it
was prevalent at his time. By the time of the arrival of Buddhism in
China, there were some arguments and discussions between Buddhist
scholars and the scholars of other religious schools in the topic of
terminological interpretation. When the Taoists argued that man was
justified in leading any sort of life so long as it was in accordance with
his nature, Chi Tun (314-366) who came from a Buddhist family and
was influenced by the Prajñāpāramitā texts felt that they opposed the
Buddhist moral law and thus attempted to refute them. He affirmed
that, according to the doctrine of karma, man could improve his
destiny by his own efforts. Later, His Ch’ao (336-377), a disciple of
Chih Tun, who came from a Taoist family and then turned to
Buddhism wrote a treatise entitled Feng-fa-yao or Essentials of the
Dharma. In this treatise, Ch’ao discussed the concept of karma:
If the father performs some evil deed, the son
does not suffer the consequences for him; if the son
performs some evil deed, the father does not suffer
the consequences for him. A good deed naturally
brings about its own blessings, an evil deed its own
calamity.31
In the Confucian concept, human deeds are collective
responsibility; and in the Taoist concept, they are the transmission of
burden which means that good or evil performed by ancestors would
influence the destiny of the descendants. His Ch’ao could well
differentiate the doctrine of karma from the concept of retribution in
the Chinese traditions. Besides, he indicated that mind or will took an
important role in the way of karma.
It is said in the scriptures, the mind makes
one a deity, the mind makes one a human being or an
inhabitant of hell or a domestic animal, even the state
31
Hsi Ch’ao, Feng-fa-yao (Essentials of the Dharma) quoted in Kenneth Ch’en, op.cit., p. 70.
106
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
of one who has gained the way in the result of the
mind…. Each and every thought that springs from the
mind is subject to retribution; even if the fact or act
has not been realized, the hidden response of karma
has been built up in the dark.32
Hui-yüan, a Chinese Buddhist monk scholar, used the doctrine
of karma and the concept of retribution in order to form an
appropriate way of Chinese life. He argued strongly that a subject who
became a monk had cut his ties with the world of material gain and
personal reward and thus should not be obliged to pay homage to the
rulers. But the lay-people who still led their lives at home and enjoyed
the world profits should submit themselves to the rulers. He explained
that:
The retribution of evil karma is regard as
punishment; it makes people fearful and thus
circumspect. The halls of heaven are regarded as a
reward; this makes them think of the pleasures of
heaven and act accordingly. Therefore they who
rejoice in the way of Sākya invariably first serve their
parents and respect their lords.33
Further, in is San-pao-lun (“Treatise on the Three Rewards”),
Hui-yüan had explained that karma could produce its results not only
in this present life but also in the next and in late lives. Though some
people who had committed evil deeds still seemed fortunate in this
existence, it could not be taken that bad karma had “good” results.
Those people would surely be subject to their own karma in their
future lives.
32
Loc.cit.
33
Hui-yüan, “Hung-ming chi 5,” in Taisho, LII, p. 30. Quoted in Arthur F. Wright, op.cit.,
p.50.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
107
“An auspicious omen meets with misfortune,
and ill omen encounters blessings.” The reason why
such views arise lies in the fact that the literature of
the world considers one existence as the limit, and
does not understand what is outside that one
existence. Thus those who seek the truth confine
themselves to what can be seen or heard.34
There is another similarity between Buddhism and Taoism on
the idea of “fruitless” karma. In Taoism, there are ideas of wu-wei and
wu-hsin. Wu-wei literally means non-action which signifies action that
takes place without effort. When one acts spontaneously without any
deliberation, one is practicing non-action. Wu-hsin literally means no
mind. Hui-yüan declares these ides in his treatise, “On the Explanation
of Retribution,” that when one practice wu-wei in that manner, one is
also practicing wu-hsin. This Taoist idea is quite similar to the idea of
fruitless karma in Buddhism which affirms that effect or retribution of
one’s karma is due to one’s craving and attachment and that one’s
karma “with no mind” (without intention or desire) will not entail any
retribution. In Chinese Buddhism, especially in the Ch’an school, there
is a belief that the best method of spiritual cultivation is to do one’s
tasks without deliberate effort or purposed mind. When all one’s
actions entail no effect, then after the effects or previously
accumulated karma have exhausted themselves, one will gain
emancipation from the Wheel of Birth and Death and attain Nirvāṇa.35
V. The Doctrine of Karma and Chinese Religious Practices
In Chinese social practices and religious practices, the
Buddhist doctrine of karma introduces a ceremony in the services for
the dead which is led by a state of reaping the results of their former
34
Hui-yüan, San-pao-lun (“Treatise on the Three Rewards”) quoted in the Kenneth Ch’en,
op.cit., p.111.
35
Fung Yu-Lan, A Short History of Chinese Philosophy, p. 249.
108
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
deeds. Their relatives, therefore, try their best to help them out of their
sufferings (for fear that they had done something bad while they were
alive). Besides, the concept of karma also leads to the vegetarian feast
in which the taking of only lifeless nutriment is the affirmation of notkilling and the avoidance of harming one’s own ancestors who may
take the forms of those preys of carnivorous beings. In politics, the
idea of kingly behavior or Cakravartin-rāja is encouraged by the
doctrine of karma. Before the introduction of Buddhism in China, there
had already been a service for the dead suggested by Confucianism but
it was mostly performed by people who were the relatives of the dead.
Buddhism came to make the ceremony more sacred through the
performance of the monks and to assure the relatives that their
offerings would reach the dead. As to the vegetarian feast and the idea
of Cakravartin-rāja, however, it is worth nothing that there were no
such beliefs among the Chinese before the expansion of Buddhism in
China.
A. Services for the Dead
In Confucianism, the concept of filial piety and ancestor
worship are widely stated. The descendants are obliged to be grateful
to their ancestors. After the death of one’s parents, the son has to give
them a sacrifice. Confucius said that “Sacrifice to spirits which are not
those of one’s own deed is a flattery.36 Thus, sacrificial offerings
should be confined to the kinship group. Mahāyāna Buddhism, which
considers karma collective and universal rather than personal and
restrictedly individual as did Theravāda Buddhism, supports these
traditional practices of the Chinese people. The Chinese are more
convinced that with their sacrificial offerings to their ancestors, though
the latter had accumulated bad karma while they were alive, the
descendants’ meritorious deeds can give them a chance to relieve their
own sufferings if, by that time, they repent and appreciate the virtue of
merits. When Taoism became Taoist religion, the funeral rites were
36
Confucius, Analects I, 24.1, quoted in Lawrence G. Thompson, Chinese Religion: An
Introduction (U.S.A. :Dickenson Publishing Company, 1975), p.44.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
109
participated by the Buddhist and the Taoist priests. Following death,
there services continue for seven weeks, which was a Buddhist
innovation, with the presence of the priests who performed on certain
instruments, chanted sutras, and prayed for quick passage of the soul
through purgatory to enjoy the offerings.
B. The Kingly Behavior
In India, Buddhism had taken an important role in encouraging
a virtuous ruler by its ethical precepts. King Asoka was portrayed as a
Dharma-rāja or a king who ruled by Dharma. In China, Buddhism
also offered a new model for kingly behavior or Cakravartin-rāja
which inherited in Indian Dharma-rāja. Cakravartin-rāja was the king
who rules well and successful through Buddhist doctrine. Besides, he
was the great Buddhist supporter or the Mahā-dānapatī which made
him a living bodhisattva. By the end of the period of disunion,
Buddhism was the important instrument for combining the cultures of
the Sui Dynasty and the T’ang Dynasty with its concept of
Cakravartin-rāja. the Sui founder presented himself as a mahādānapatī
in his Edict of 581 C.E.:
With the armed might of a Cakravartin king,
We spread the ideals of the ultimately enlightened
one. With a hundred victories in a hundred battles,
We promote the practice of the ten Buddhist virtues.
Therefore We regard the weapons of war as having
become like the offerings of incense and flowers
presented to Buddha, and the fields of this world as
becoming forever identical with the Buddha-land.37
By the Edict, the duty of the king is considered justifiable even
by means of war. The fulfillment of this kingly duty is a meritorious
karma which is believed by the performer to yield a good result, e.g. a
more fortunate life, a promise of being born in the heaven and so on.
37
Li-tai san-pao chi, ch.12, Taisho, XLIX, 107c. quoted in Arthur F. Wright, op.cit., p. 67.
110
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
C. The Vegetarian Feast
The Buddhist doctrine of karma also encouraged the idea of
Vegetarian Feast among Chinese people. The Chinese word for
vegetarian feast is chai. It denotes the fasting periods after high noon
when monks were not supposed to eat. During the Sui Dynasty (581618) and the T’ang dynasty (618-907), the fasting days assumed
national importance, for during the three long fasting months (the first
fifteen days of January, May, and September) and the six fasting days
(the eight, fourteenth, fifteenth, twenty-third, twenty-ninth, and
thirtieth of each month), killing of living animals and execution of
criminals were prohibited. The exact date of fasting is not specified. It
may be on the Buddha’s birthday, the birthday of the emperor and so
on. Kenneth Ch’en explains that:
Sometimes such vegetarian feast would be
arranged as an example of gratitude for hospitality
rendered, benefits received, recovery from illness,
completing of some meritorious project, deliverance
from some calamity, or as a welcome or farewell
party for visiting monks.38
Formerly, Buddhism forbade killing living beings but not
eating them. When it entered China, it encountered the idea of unity in
Chinese philosophy and thus the Chinese Buddhism also considered
the abstinence from eating meat.
There are the Five precepts in Buddhism, and
not to kill is the first. Man exists for only a few scores
of years and should not become an enemy of animals.
The main thing is of course universal salvation. There
are, I am afraid, cases where a person is not free (to
abstain) and because of his vegetarianism his
cultivation of the Way is sometimes hampered.
Therefore while the disciple is there, its application
38
Kenneth Ch’en, op.cit., p.283-4.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
111
must be flexible. Nevertheless, people who are
cultivation the Way must hold compassion as
fundamental. An insect or a bird shares with us the
same heavenly nature it is only because they differed
in merits and demerits in their previous lives that they
have changed in this. If we kill and eat them, we are
obstructing the principle of Heaven.39
Hence, eating meat implies the encouragement of killing
which is forbidden in the Buddhist doctrine and the principle of
Heaven in Chinese philosophy. Besides, vegetarianism or the
Vegetarian Feast also arises from the belief in the effect of karma.
Chinese Buddhism admits the concept of the cycle of life and rebirth
while Confucianism supports the idea of filial piety and ancestor
worship. The combination of the two traditions then encourages
vegetarianism. When life is not ended in this existence, those ancestors
may be reborn in the form of animals or other living creatures. When
we eat meat, we may accidentally destroy our ancestors’ lives which
abide in animal forms and thus violate our filial duty. Vegetarianism is
therefore a new phenomenon in Chinese Buddhism that strongly
affirms the Law of Karma.
VI. Conclusion
The Buddhist doctrine of karma has been compatible with the
Chinese way of life in general. According to the doctrine of Confucius,
the Chinese should respect their ancestors. The principle of filial piety
and gratitude is expressed by respectful service to the parents when
they are alive and sacrificial offerings after their death. Buddhism has
strengthened this belief by showing that human life is subject to the
Law of Karma. It is difficult to detect all karmas of ancestors.
Nevertheless, sacrificial offerings to the dead and meritorious deeds of
the descendants can be an expression of gratitude in relieving their
ancestors’ sufferings and in consoling their lives. Buddhism therefore
39
Wing-Tsit Chan, “Religions of China,” p.224.
112
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
does not reject Confucian doctrine of filial piety. Furthermore, the
Chinese are familiar with the teachings of Lao-Tze on the Law of
Nature or the Way of Tao and are accustomed to the concept of the
Mandate of Heaven in Confucianism. These doctrines emphasize the
concept of retribution, i.e. reward and punishment by an Authoritative
Agent. Buddhism also preaches the Law of Karma that rules human
life. The Law of Karma is our own product, not a gift from others.
Thus, the doctrine of karma does not contradict the “Law of Nature.” If
even encourages more responsibility and self-confidence in humanbeings. Apart from this, Confucianism and Taoism have no concept of
salvation. Though Taoism teaches the ideal life which is the harmony
with Tao, it does not clearly explain the method of practice. Buddhism
introduces the idea of salvation by faith and the means to this end
which can be taken as a consolation for sufferings in the present life
and hope for better life in the future. The impact of the Buddhist
doctrine of karma on the Chinese way of life, therefore, is constructive
to the whole Chinese community. And because Buddhist doctrine does
not oppose other religions and the belief in traditional doctrines, it can
be well accepted in China and has finally become a part of Chinese
culture.
WBU Journal Vol. 10 No.2
113