Analysis Of Ta-cheng Ta-Ⅰ Chang

Ta-cheng ta-Ⅰchang was arranged according to the questions and answers about Buddhism's argumentation of Lushan Huiyuan and Kumarajiva's. And Kumarajiva whose theory based on Prajna, Mahaprajnaparamitasastra, Madhyamika-sastra, Shatika-Shastra and Dvadashamukha Shastra was the first person that introduced Madhyamaka's theory of Mahayana to China through translating Buddhist scripture and itineration, which was always taken seriously by scholars. Also Huiyuan, a leader of Buddhism after Daoan in East-Jin Dynasty, was much accounted important owing to the significance of his religionary activities and Buddhist thoughts. There are plentiful specific studies about the two Buddhists but only few studies about Ta-cheng ta-Ⅰchang as epistles. This paper aims to analyze the contradiction of the recognition toward Shifa, Dharmata and Dharma-kaya between Huiyuan and Kumarajiva, to conclude the correction of China's Buddhism in Jin and Song Dynasty, and to break through the internal clues of Kumarajiva and his disciples' theory by means of the decipherment to Ta-cheng ta-Ⅰchang and crytic mainline of relationship between the subject and object. The following are the main parts of the paper:The first part: About Shifa. It sets about analyzing Huiyuan's opinion of Shifa, which believes that Shifa is the world primitive and objective reality of Youti and Dingxiang, also the essential of everything. It is deduced that Shifa represents the final quietism of substantial life with reference to the theory "Shifa", which means the final substance as Buddhism says. Consequently, Kumarajiva denies the nature of noumena and thinks that "Shifa" is a kind of concept which contains all substances by the way of spirits. Shifa only exists inside the people's recognition which changes and differs quite often, therefore it is uncertain and untruthful.The second part: About Dharmata. According to the two subjects of Huiyuan's theory that Dharmata is the nature which exceeds "You", "Wu", it can be concluded that Huiyuan attempts to talk about the tendency of final substance from the combination of the subject and the object. While through Dharmata Kumarajiva expresses a true substantial away from noumena therefore he pushes the object into an absolutely untraceable wonderland. Because of the exceeding quality of Dharmata, Kumarajiva also denies that people's language and thoughts can make up for the unbridgeable differences between the subject and the object, so that it leads to the externality and absolute separation between human beings and substantial.The third part: About Dharma-kaya. Huiyuan defines Dharma-kaya as the unity of perpetual substance and manito of personality which combines the four permanent elements with "manito". As a result, the permanent noumena becomes the people's extremal destination. Meantime what people are pursuing exactly are four elements, Dharma-kaya and "manito". Finally nature and "manito" change into Dharma-kaya and free from the object when people return to the state of Nirvana. So the subject and the object have achieved harmonious unity by Dharma-kaya. Kumarajiva opposes Huiyuan's opinion of substantial Dharma-kaya. As for him, so-called people of Nirvana only recognize that the subject—people cannot set free their own thoughts in order to seek the mystery independent substance apart from the world, that is to say people will not have any other mental activities to distinguish the subject and the object. Owing to it Nirvana is a kind of pure recognition. Kumarajiva's theory obviously block the subject's way of looking for externality and lead to the complete separation between the subject and the object.The forth part: From "Prajna" to "Nirvana Buddhata". With China's traditional backgrounds of the two Kumarajiva and Huiyuan's theories, this part has drawn a conclusion of the internal theory clues of Ontology's transformation in Jin and Song Dynasty based on the analysis and comparison of these.