Mujaku Dochu (1653-1744) and 17th-Century ... - East Asian History

MUJAKU DOCHU
45
ism, frequently using the phrase, "to see the nature and become Buddha".
Mujaku asked, "How can this be the 'see the nature and become Buddha'
of the Zen School?" Li Cho-wu was an independent thinker who had
been a Confucian but became a monk, his thought being labelled "Wild
Ch'an". His works advocated both nienfo (nembutsu) and rebirth in the
Pure Land, and "seeing the nature" of Ch'an-yet Chu-hung disapproved
of Li's ideas.104 Similarly, Mujaku attacked Lin Chao-en *}t 0517-98),
writing that although Lin comprehended the three teachings of Confucianism,
Buddhism and Taoism, "if one looks at his Buddhism it is immature,
and so [his understanding of] the other teachings is also immature, , 105
Therefore, Mujaku concluded one should specialise in Ch'an or Pure Land
and not mix them:
Chu-hung proclaimed that he transmitted Ch'an and also understood
the Vinaya Vehicle, and so he wrote the Revelation of the Secrets of the
Sutra of Brahm a's Net (Fan-wang-ching fa-yin Jitf1¥JtiHIlI), which is frequently
in error. Japanese Vinaya scholars have exposed more than one
error in it.106
When he was asked if it were possible to cease this mixing and return to
ancient ways, Mujaku responded that,
If Confucians only research Confucianism, Buddhists only Buddhism,
Vinayists only Vinaya, and Ch'an only Ch'an, then it is almost possible
to be pure. If one is solely devoted to one's own lineage and still have
some remaining energy, then one can put it to the study of other schools.
Only then can one be called erudite. 10 7
Later Mujaku cited a series of classical works, such as Discourses of the
Warring States (Kuo-yu 'ii-B), Kuo Hsiang's * commentary on the
Chuang tzu, and the Hard-Earned Scholarship and Records of Findings
(K'un-hsueh chi-wen rnticlj) by Wang Ying-lin 3:,,I)'!1Jl 0223-96) to say
that one should master only one topic or theme.108
These comments encapsulate two major streams in Mujaku's criticisms
of Chu-hung, that he was not learned enough and that he mixed Pure
Land and Confucianism into his Ch'an. These made him too close to Mujaku's
rivals in Japan, the Obaku monks. That Chu-hung's scholarship was
limited, despite the prodigious volume of his writing, is one of Mujaku's
constant refrains.109 It was, in fact, so limited that Japanese Vinayists did
not use his commentary on the Sutra of Brahma 's Net (Fan-wang ching Jit
tiI¥J#.ill:). After praising him for being compassionate and intelligent, Mujaku
remarked:
Alas! Chu-hung had not read the Buddhist books extensively, nor entered
deeply into Buddhist principles, yet he dared to write a book like the
Revelations of the Secrets of the Sutra of Brahma 's Net ... . How could he
have obtained pure [comprehension]? Therefore, I say that none of the
famous scholars of the Ming are the equal of Ch'an Master Yung-chueh
104 Araki, Unsei Shuk8 no kenkyU, pp.195-
99
105 Wa n'un reiu, MSS, 258b.
106 Wa n'un reiu, MSS, 258b.
107 Wa n 'un reiu, MSS, 258b--9a. For the source
of the quote, Chu-ch 'uang san-pi, p.253b-d
under "Li Cho-wu". The attack was made
partly because Li stated the origins of all
things lies in yin and yang. Li was a complex
thinker. For his Buddhist and other thought,
see Lin Ch'i-hsien, Ii Cho-wu Ii fo -hsueh
yu shih-hsueh [The Buddhist and Secular
Studies of Li Cho-wu] (Taipei: Wen-chin
ch'u-pan she, 1982).
108 Wan'un reiu, MSS, 259a-60a; the text by
Chu-hung is the Fan-wang ching chieh-shu
fa-yin, which can be found in HTC Vo1.59.
109 Wan'un reiu, MSS, 50a-b, on the Kao Wang
kuan-shih yin ching [Sutra of AvalokiteSvara
(Revealed to) Kao Wang] MSS, 254b; Kinben
shikai, p.96b, for a few examples.