Filial Piety and the Sigalovaada Sutta in China

In preparation for my upcoming trip to China I'm boning up on Chinese Buddhism - an area where I am woefully ignorant.

As we know, Buddhism has changed to accommodate the particular cultures it has encountered through time. I am currently reading "The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism" by Kenneth Ch'en. In his chapter on Ethics he states that one of the greatest challenges Buddhism hit in China was the cultural propensity toward filial piety, Hsiao.

At first the Buddhists in China simply countered each claim that they were anti-hsiao, pointing to Chinese history to support the righteousness of their practices, such as shaving the head. Eventually though, a more 'positive' stance was taken, meaning that the Buddhists began reaching into their own scriptures and emphasizing those that supported filial piety. Chief among these is the Sigalovaada Sutta, which was translated numerous times by Chinese Buddhists (see p.19).

Several other texts were found as well, including Jataka tails, the lives of Saama (Pali, Shan-tzu in Chinese and Shyaama in Sanskrit) and Moggallaana (Pali, Mu-lien in Chinese and Maudgalyaayana in Sanskrit).

Only at page 50 do we move past the discussion of filial piety and on to Ancestor Worship, a closely related topic. Here we find the following:

1. There are no known notices of (Buddhist?) clerical participation in memorial services prior to the T'ang Dynasty (618-907 C.E.).
2. The first likely occurred in 628 CE.
3. The Chinese Buddhists subscribed to the same post-mortem description as the Tibetans; (the Sarvastivadin, I believe) wherein the 'soul' enteres an intermediate state where it may remain for seven days or seven times seven / 49 days. Buddhists in China turned the Confucian idea of memorials to celebrate gratitude for the departed into necessary merit-generating events to get the 'soul' of the dead to a good location.

Page 55 begins the discussion of the 5 precepts and the Chinese Buddhist attempt to harmonise these with the 5 Norms of Confucian thought:

1. human-heartedness
2. righteousness
3. propriety
4. knowledge
5. trust

Usually the 5 precepts were paired directly with these, but in some cases the 2nd precept (not to steal) is paired with the fourth Norm (knowledge), the 3rd (not to commit adultry) is paired with the 2nd Norm (righteousness), and the 4th precept (not to lie) is paired with the 3rd Norm.

The chapter concludes that Buddhism's wide acceptance in China is demonstrably due to its flexibility and creative assimilation of the existing norms (quite literally).

The next chapter is on Politics... ohh, ahh. More on that hopefully before I fly...

Is all Indian philosophy "ethics"?

An excellent book review that sets up this question, which has been answered in various ways over the years, is here (ND reviews).

The issue usually rests on the meaning of Dharma - as it is accepted that all (Classical/pre-Classical) Indian philosophies are "Dharmic" in nature; that is, they have Dharma as an explicit Ultimate or Absolute. In Buddhism it may be a process-Absolute instead of a substantial one, but it is an absolute nonetheless. It is absolute in the sense that nothing is greater than or beyond it...

This review does a great job of arguing that we deeply question the ethical nature of Dharma, as it is a term that seems to be used in what we would today call ontological or phenomenological ways. And it would be meaningless question-begging to say that, "oh, that all is ethics too!"

Any thoughts?

Prudence

From Philosoph-L, a summary of worthy contemporary and recent work on the concept of Prudence. Kant and Aristotle were mentioned a few times so I figured it's worth posting.

Literature on Prudence:

Aubenque, ‘La Prudence chez Kant’, Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale, 1975
Bloomfeld, P. (ed.) Morality and Self-Interest.
Beiner, R., Political Judgement (Chicago 1983)
Borma, F.J. and C. Schroeder (eds.), Abwaegende Vernunft (de Gruyter 2004)
Bricker, P., ‘Prudence’. Journal of Philosophy 1980 (7)
Churchman, C.W., ‘Kant – a decision theorist?’ Theory and Decision 1, 1970
Davie, W.E., ‘Being prudent and acting prudently’ American Phil. Quarterly
10 (1), 1973
Fleischacker, S., A Third Concept of Liberty: Judgement and Freedom in
Kant and A. Smith (Princeton 1999)
Garver, E. Machiavelli and the History of Prudence (1987)
Grice, Aspects of Reason.
Hariman, R. (ed.), Prudence: Classical Virtue, Postmodern Practice
(Pennsylvania State U. Press 2003).
Hirschman, A., The Passions and the Interests: Arguments for Capitalism
before its Triumph (Princeton 1977)
Luckner, A., Klugheit (de Gruyter 2005)
Mabbot, J.D., ‘Prudence’, Proceedings of the Aristot. Society, suppl. Vol.
XXXVI, 6, (1962)
Mabbot, J.D., ‘Reason and Desire’. Philosophy 28 (1953)
Nagel, T. The Possibility of Altruism (1978).
Nussbaum, M., Liberty of Conscience (2008)
Parellada, R., ‘Moral Judgement in States of Equilibrium’, Revista de
Filosofia 31 (2006).
Parrelada, R., ‘Aristotle’s Theory of Practical Wisdom’, Modern Schoolman:
A Quarterly Journal of Philosophy 83 (2005).
Pieper, J., Cardinal Virtues.
Rotenstreich, N., ‘Prudence and Folly’, American Phil. Quart. 22 (2), 1985
Scmidtz, D., ‘Self-Interest: what’s in it for me? Soc. Phil. & Pol. 14
(1), 1997
Steinberger, P. The Concept of Political Judgement (Chicago 1993)
Sturm, T. Kant und die Wissenschaften vom Menschen (Paderborn: Mentis 2009)
Wieland, W., Kants Rechslehre der Urteilskraft

Snapshot of some Kantian Ethics resources

Some books:

I would not waste your time with S.G.M. Weerasighe's "A Comparative Study of Early Buddhism and Kantian Philosophy." Even though it sounds fantastic, it's not. I have it. I might pull an idea or two for my thesis (which is practically based on the exact same topic), but probably not.

I WOULD have a look at Philip Olson's "The Discipline of Freedom: A Kantian View of the Role of Moral Precepts in Zen Practice." It is a very good, scholarly (even though the author is a lawyer and zen priest) approach to the topic - though written lucidly so that a lay reader will have no trouble.

Websites of present interest:

GUYER, PAUL (1998, 2004). Kant, Immanuel. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/DB047

Kant: An Overview

LibriVox - Kant's books read to you!

Lawrence Hinman's Ethics Site.

It all begins with Morality

Passed on from an email from Bhikkhu Samahita: http://What-Buddha-Said.net

The Blessed Buddha once said:
The rewarding fruition of morality is freedom from regrets!
The rewarding fruition of freedom from regret is gladness!
The rewarding fruition of gladness is rapturous joy!
The rewarding fruition of joy is serene tranquillity!
The rewarding fruition of tranquillity is Happiness!
The rewarding fruition of happiness is concentration!
The rewarding fruition of concentration is knowing & seeing!
The rewarding fruition of knowing & seeing is realism!
The rewarding fruition of realism is disillusion!
The rewarding fruition of disillusion is release!
Step by step does morality thus lead to the highest!
Source: AN 10:1

About Fruition (Phala):
http://what-buddha-said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/n_r/phala.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/saamanna_phala.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/a/ariya_puggala.htm

Buddhism and Kant: Pisa 2010

http://www.kant2010.it/index.php/kantkongress/kant2010

Worth a shot!

Dharma as a (transcendent?) foundation for ethics

As stated in the Saṃyutta Nikāya II 25ff:

‘…whether there is an arising of Tathāgatas or no arising of Tathāgatas, that element still persists, the stableness of the Dhamma, the fixed course of the Dhamma, specific conditionality. A Tathāgata awakens to this and breaks through to it. Having done so, he explains it, teaches it, proclaims it, establishes it, discloses it, analyses it, elucidates it.’[1]

---

[1] Bhikkhu Bodhi 2000, p.551.