The following essay is based on a presentation I gave at the Won
Buddhist Temple of Philadelphia during the time prior to my converting to the
Nichiren Shu. This presentation was my attempt to summarize what I had
learned about the Flower Garland Sutra and its teachings. I had been curious
about the Flower Garland because it was the most influential sutra in
mainland Buddhism and in many ways was the basis of the underlying philosophy
of Zen Buddhism, especially in China and Korea. Nichiren Shonin also spoke
very highly of the Flower Garland Sutra in the Kaimoku Sho. While Nichiren Shonin pointed out that it did not teach the One Vehicle or reveal the
Eternal Shakyamuni Buddha, he did praise its many other teachings and pointed
out that no other provisional sutra could compare with it. In order to better
understand why this sutra was so highly praised, I read the Thomas Cleary
translation of it as well as several books about the Hua Yen school which was
based on its teachings. I felt richly rewarded for my efforts. The Flower
Garland Sutra opened up whole new dimensions of the Mahayana worldview to me.
The least I could do was to share what I had learned with those who had
encouraged my practice over the years - Rev. Bokin Kim and the members of her
Friday night meditation/discussion group. In the presentation, I used
illusory and ambiguous figures, a bronze lion, and a small scale model of the
monk Fa-tsang's hall of mirrors complete with a candle and crystal in order
to demonstrate the Hua Yen worldview.
This essay also owes a lot to the teachings of Thomas Berry. When I
gave this presentation I had just graduated from the Institute of Culture and
Creation Spirituality where I had earned my M.A. in Spirituality. One of the
guest speakers there was the ecologist and theologian Father Thomas Berry. He
is sometimes referred to as a eco-theologian or even a geologian. In any
case, I was very impressed by him and by his urgent prophetic call to a
fundamental reevaluation of our civilization and its relationship with the
natural world. In many ways, he enabled me to awaken to the practical meaning
and value of the Hua Yen worldview. In many ways, that presentation was also
my way of expressing my gratitude to Thomas Berry by passing on his words to
others. I hope that those who read this essay will be similarly inspired to
read Thomas Berry for themselves.
Back when I was in San Diego studying the western esoteric tradition, I had
the following exchange with the teacher of the school I had joined:
"Teacher, you've been saying that the whole world and everyone in it is an
illusion. If that's true, then aren't you just my illusion and I'm really
just teaching myself?" I asked.
"That's right." she said.
"Well, in that case, if you are just a figment of my imagination; then what
am I to you?" I inquired.
"A figment of my imagination. Either way you look at it, I'm still teaching
myself," was her response.
That conversation made quite an impression on me, and I recalled it a year
later when I was debating "The Nature of Reality" in Los Angeles with a
couple of friends. I forget the particulars of that debate, except that it
revolved around the relative or absolute nature of Truth. Was Truth an object
one could find through hard work or was it something that forever lay beyond
direct apprehension? Perhaps Truth was merely subjective? My answer was that
Truth was inter-subjective. In other words, the world arises through
relationship and its Truth is discovered in community. As my former teacher
indicated, we are all in a mutual process of creating each other and the
world. Therefore, Truth can not be isolated or individual. As the Lotus Sutra
states, "Only a Buddha together with a Buddha can fathom the True Reality of
all existence." This is also the point of view of the Flower Garland Sutra
and the Hua Yen school of Buddhism.
Before I dive into an explanation of the Hua Yen viewpoint, I would like to
say a word about cosmology and its place in Buddhism. By cosmology, I am
referring to the study of a comprehensive vision of the nature of the
universe and humanity's place within it. The historical Buddha refused to get
entangled with cosmology, comparing it to having a discussion about the
particulars of a poisoned arrow before actually allowing it to be removed
from one's flesh. In Shakyamuni's view, cosmology was a distraction from the
immediate task of recognizing the immediacy of the human predicament for what
it is and extricating oneself from it. Today, however, we are so engrossed in
our "predicament" that we have created what sociologist Christopher Lasch has
called a "culture of narcissism." As a culture, we are so concerned with our
human predicament that therapy, drugs, escapism, and equally escapist
transcendental or fundamentalist religions have blinded us to the fact that
there is more to humanity than just individual humans. The human situation is
different than it was in Shakyamuni's day; our situation has always been
inextricably bound up with the world in which we live, but now we have the
power to change that world in drastic ways. Our technical know-how and
industrial progress have brought us to the point where, as the ecologist and
theologian Thomas Berry has pointed out, "we have actually changed the
chemistry of the planet." This is the danger. The problem of enlightenment is
no longer solely a problem of seeing into the nature of one's own mind. Even
Shakyamuni recognized the need to take care of one's physical body if right
meditation is to be practiced. Now we must take care of our universe-body as
well. Thomas Berry has also pointed out that, "We need the healing Beauty of
the natural world. We need the Beauty for our imagination. To damage the
outer world is to destroy the inner world." As Buddhists, we must acknowledge
that a destruction of the inner world as a consequence of having no
responsibility towards or appreciation for the cosmos and our role in it's
unfolding is not conducive to right meditation or right livelihood. Berry's
earnest recommendation is that we must learn to see that "the universe is a
communion of subjects, not a collection of objects." With all of this said, I
think it can be safely concluded that Buddhism must now come to grips with
cosmology if it is to provide a healthy vision for a humanity that must learn
to relate to the natural world in an entirely new way if it is to survive.
Now it is time to dive into the Hua Yen teachings to see what they might have
to offer us in this respect. To begin with, let me put the Flower Garland
Sutra in context. The sutra is a highly imaginative and profound attempt to
expound the vision of the fully awakened mind of Shakyamuni Buddha at the
time of his enlightenment. This makes it very different from all the other
sutras which are records of Shakyamuni's teachings to others. The Flower
Garland is more concerned with the enlightened state in and of itself, as
opposed to the teachings which lead it. On this basis, the Chinese Buddhists
of the Hua Yen school declared that it alone was the most profound "king of
all sutras," whereas the other sutras were all provisional teachings leading
back to the primordial experience of the Buddha's enlightenment expressed in
the Flower Garland. While the followers of the Lotus Sutra in the T'ien-t'ai
school contested this assertion, the Hua Yen school nevertheless became the
dominant school of Chinese and Korean Buddhism until the Confucianist
persecutions in the 9th and 15th centuries respectively.
The Flower Garland is famous for the identification of the Dharmakaya as the
Buddha Vairocana (The Illuminator) whose body pervades the universe, its use
of the imagery of the Jewel Net of Indra and the Tower of Vairocana, and the
fifty-two stage pilgrim's progress of Sumedha from the initial aspiration to attain
enlightenment all the way to full awakening. Countless principles and
teachings have been derived from all of this, but I would like to focus on
two of the most important phrases that have been contributed to Mahayana
Buddhism by the Hua Yen school: li shih wu ai (the non-obstuction of
principal and phenomena) and shih shih wu ai (the non-obstruction of
phenomena and phenomena). I especially want to show how these two insights
point towards a cosmology of inter-subjectivity.
Let us begin with li shih wu ai, the non-obstruction of principle and
phenomena. In general, "principle" refers to emptiness and "phenomena" refers to the dharmas or experiences which make up the everyday world in which we
live. Emptiness refers to the mutual dependence and relatedness which
characterizes all things. In my understanding, emptiness is the principle of
inter-subjectivity. In other words, things are empty of static
self-existence; rather, they arise through a dynamic relationality. The 7th
century Hua Yen monk Fa-tsang illustrated li shih wu ai through the analogy
of a golden lion. If we think of the gold as the principle and the form of
the lion as phenomena, then we can begin to understand how principle and
phenomena can be simultaneously present and mutually supportive. In the
example, the lion could not be a lion if it were not for the gold. Likewise,
the gold must be presented to us in one form or another, so the form of the
lion is the way in which the gold is presented to us. In the real world, this
means that each of us is an exemplification of inter-subjectivity, and
inter-subjectivitiy is present as the reality of our lives. Thus it is
impossible to think of ourselves as existing apart from some context or
relation to other things. This is our fundamental relationality. We can not
exist in isolation. If we were not empty or inter-subjective, we would be
something other than we are. If we were not as we are, there would be nothing
to call empty. In the famous words of the Heart Sutra: "Form is not other
than emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form."
If li shih wu ai points to the simultaneous presence of inter-subjectivity
and individual phenomena, then shih shih wu ai carried the insight further by
pointing to the presence of all in one and one in all without the loss of
individuality due to the emptiness of all dharmas. Thomas Berry put it
succinctly when he said "Things are distinct, but not seperate." The
"Formation of Worlds" chapter of the Flower Garland states: "Thus does
infinity enter into one, Yet each unit is distinct with no overlap." and "In
each atom are congregations numerous as atoms...Yet with no crowding or
confusion." How can we possibly make sense of this or even imagine it? Once
again, Fa-tsang made recourse to the analogy of the golden lion. Each part of
the lion (tail, teeth, ears, paws, etc...) makes no sense apart from the
whole and each part lends its support to the whole. Without the context of
the lion, the tail would no longer be a tail but simply a squiggle of gold.
Likewise, without the coordination of parts, there would be no whole to
support the individual members. Because of this mutual support of the whole
and its parts, one contains the all and is contained by the all. As Thomas
Berry has pointed out "We are totally implicated in one another."
Perhaps a quick study of ambiguous and illusory images might help to further
illustrate these principles. From the standpoint of li shih wu ai, there are
no individual subjects as such. Rather, there is the mutually supportive
activity of the universe which creates the multitude of sentient beings and
their worlds. As the figure of the illusory circles shows, there are not
really any circles (individuals) at all; what one is seeing is a complex of
lines (the dynamic activity of the universe) which give rise to the illusory
circles and the equally illusory X (the world of the individuals) which
arises from the complex of circles. Thus, illusion gives rise to illusion;
and according to li shih wu ai, even the lines would not be there if there
were no circles for them to create or radiate from.
From the standpoint of shih shih wu ai, the infinite intersubjectivities of the universe mutually support and contain one another. To grasp this we can
look to the following three figures, which are also three different figures.
Or perhaps we could say there are six figures, or none at all. It depends
upon how we choose to view them. If we think about the mutual presence of two
images (subjects) in one, we can perhaps begin to grasp how the dynamic flow
of the world can originate from one or another, both or neither within the
very same total experience. Is reality my own experience of the world or is
it derived from the actions of others, or is it somehow neither or both? As
the picture illustrates, the multiple images (subjectivities) of the world
give rise to each other within the very same figure without impeding their
distinct individuality. It all depends on what is revealed to any one point
of view at any given moment. This is what I call inter-subjectivity. The
"Formation of Worlds" chapter in the Flower Garland states: "Sentient beings are muddled by afflictions, Their conceptions and inclinations are not the same; According to their mental states they perform inconceivably many
acts, Thereby forming the ocean of all lands."
If this view is a reality, and the formation of worlds depends on our
inter-subjectivity, then one can conclude that this also means we are
mutually responsible for the worlds that are formed. Judging from the current
state of the world, it seems that the people of today are dangerously unaware
of this. The continuing degredation of the natural world, the ticking time
bomb of racial tensions in the U.S., the ominous rise of ethnic strife in
Europe, and the continuing disregard of fundamental human rights in Asia
reminds me of a verse from the story of Sumedha's pilgrimage in the final
chapter of the Flower Garland: "Then because of the evil of mutual contempt,
they lost their span of life, physical appearance, strength, and happiness -
all was lost." This is the dark side of inter-subjectivity, mutual contempt
and destruction owing to narrow self-glorification at the expense of all
else. Because of inter-subjectivity, we all rise or fall together. To redeem
this situation we must internalize and act upon the Hua Yen teachings of li
shih wu ai and shih shih wu ai. In the prophetic words of Thomas Berry: "In the 20th century the Glory of the human has become the desolation of the
Earth. The desolation of the Earth has become the fate of the human. All
institutions must be judged according to how they promote or inhibit a
mutually enhancive relationship between the subjects of the Earth."
The situation is dire, but not without hope. Shih shih wu ai may imply mutual
arising or destruction, but it should also be remembered that li shih wu ai
implies a universe wherein the ultimate principle is reflected endlessly in
all phenomena throughout the universe. In this case the principle of
emptiness, or inter-subjectivity, refers to the inherent capacity of
compassion and wisdom in a universe wherein all phenomena mutually arise,
contain and support one another. At some point self-understanding naturally
breaks through into an intimate feeling and compassion for all things which
are, after all, one's very own and to which one belongs. Thus, emptiness is
also the principle of compassion and wisdom inherent in the very nature of an
inter-subjective universe, and in this sense we can understand the assertion
of Vairocana Buddha in the Flower Garland that "The buddha body extends
throughout all the great assemblies; It fills the cosmos without
end. Quiescent, without essence, it can not be grasped; It appears just to
save all beings." Fa-tsang showed this through a series of mirrors reflecting
one another just as all phenomena do in their mutual arising; and in the
midst, a candle like the all pervading light of Vairocana endlessly reflected
within them; and in the center a crystal reflecting all the mirrors just as
Vairocana contains all the worlds within the reality of wisdom and
compassion.
Berry, Thomas, C.P. and Clarke, Thomas, S.J. Befriending the Earth: A Theory
of Reconciliation Between Humans and the Earth. Mystic: Twenty-third
Publications, 1992.