| And now, the thrilling conclusion... The shaving of a monk's head was contrary to the principle of filial piety, in that it disrespects the gift of the body from one's parents. In his well formulated rejoinder, Mou Tzu interpreted Confucius himself as saying, again paraphrasing liberally: "You gotta do what you gotta do, based on the time period," and that Confucius even praised T'ai-po who did so. On the subject of lack of marriage and celibacy among Buddhist monks, Mou Tzu cleverly sympathizes with the concern of the questioner, appreciating the "joys of wife and children." He also, more subtly asserts that women and children get in the way of simple living (Isn't that always the Way?), and again mentions exemplars of Confucian traditions who exhibit this "unfilial conduct". A very significant disparity on practices of these to philosophies is that which defines the link between monks and their secular (non-Buddhist) emperor. According to Hui-y�an's "A Monk Does not Bow Down Before a King," well, I guess the title gives it away. Anyway, this is of great importance because it expressly opposes one of Confucius' Five Moral Relations, specifically the one about the relationship between a king and his subjects. It was acceptable for monks to violate this tradition, however, by decree of Huan Hs�an, because they had, in theory, transcended the earthly wisdom and spirituality. Finally, an overarching disparity, not in beliefs, but the protocol, modus operandi, if you will, of each philosophy: Both Confucianism and Buddhism support the notions of reciprocity and benevolence toward one's fellow man, but the essence of Buddhism in practice is nonaction. It is better to remain isolated from worldly affairs than to deliberately involve oneself, of course the antithesis to generally accepted Confucian thought. It seems that China became very accommodating to Buddhism for several reasons, most of which have already been mentioned. First and foremost, the lack of defense against foreign influence after 220 AD was the main reason. The Chinese of the South had no way to deter the influx of heathen barbarians or their values. Also, many people were discontented with the recent ineptitude of a government with a traditional ideology, and were generally willing to accept new concepts, albeit slowly at first. Finally, the eloquence of such writers as Mou Tzu and certainly orators as well managed to sway a large portion of the general public, by pointing out how many had already been relying on similar faiths as it were, thus conversion was simplified. Now if it would only catch on in America� |
| Again, sorry. Home (better stuff, I promise) |