Francis Yang : Hello Ruilin,

I think your take on the “punishment and reward” idea in Mozi’s noble lie is actually really interesting. When I saw it, I immediately thought that it would only be applicable to the common folk since the king would be the being closest to heaven in the kingdom and as such would be the one giving the punishments. However, Mozi specifically highlights the King as being a “Sage King.” His concept of the king is not one with any trace of divinity but rather one of sound mind and wisdom. This means that the king should also be someone who can be judged by Heaven should he lose said mind and wisdom, which is solid support for your claim that Mozi’s noble lie actually does support revolutionary change.

6.Is there any school of ancient Chinese thought that we have studied so far that would have been congenial to or compatible with Theravada Buddhism? If so identify it and explain why. If not, explain why not.

( reply 150 words):

example’s :

example 1 : Theravada Buddhism and Daoism

Daoism is a good example of a school of ancient Chinese thought that is in some ways compatible with Theravada Buddhism. First of all, both philosophies were founded during the sixth century, and one of their main objectives was to stress the importance of helping the soul become liberated from human physical conditions. Although the two schools of thought had different core teachings, the two became consolidated in some ways as Buddhism began to spread among the Chinese people. For instance, Daoism adopted various significant Buddhist features such as moral elements and monastic organizations. In addition, Buddhism also adopted some Daoist features, such as emphasizing body practices.

Similarly, although the two philosophies sustained their differences, in theory, they integrated most of their meditation strategies. Daoists started to use the posture of the Indian lotus during meditation, while Buddhists began to emphasize the lower belly during meditation instead of the breath in the nose. In addition, Buddhism and Daoism had similar places of worship, including monasteries, shrines, and temples. Other than that, the two schools of thought are compatible in that they share a similar means of salvation. In Taoism, enlightenment is attained by following the Tao, while in Theravada Buddhism, Nirvana or enlightenment is attained through the Noble eightfold path.

example 2 :

I did not know about the meditation commonalities! I agree that Buddhism and Daoism are compatible in their focus on attaining enlightenment, especially with their emphasis on perceiving existence and the universe beyond what the immediate senses can provide. I like that you pointed out followers of Daoism follow the Dao, while followers of Theravada Buddhism follow the Noble eightfold path; this reflects the different, yet similar pathways that each school guides their followers along. I suppose a major theme that both share is the importance of accepting one’s place as an impermanent being in the ever-changing universe. For Buddhism, there is a stronger push towards moving towards something: Nirvana. For Daoism, there is a stronger push to submit to the flow of the universe and let oneself become one with it.

I would be curious to know what you think about the two vehicles in Theravada Buddhism, and if you think Daoism aligns more closely with one over the other. Though I mentioned in my post that Confucian practices align with Pratyekabuddha in that they both emphasize personal efforts, it has also occurred to me that perhaps Mencius would have preferred Mahayana Buddhism over Theravada because of its inclusivity.

(reply / comment peer 100 words):

Tianpei Hu,

I did not know about the meditation commonalities! I agree that Buddhism and Daoism are compatible in their focus on attaining enlightenment, especially with their emphasis on perceiving existence and the universe beyond what the immediate senses can provide. I like that you pointed out followers of Daoism follow the Dao, while followers of Theravada Buddhism follow the Noble eightfold path; this reflects the different, yet similar pathways that each school guides their followers along. I suppose a major theme that both share is the importance of accepting one’s place as an impermanent being in the ever-changing universe. For Buddhism, there is a stronger push towards moving towards something: Nirvana. For Daoism, there is a stronger push to submit to the flow of the universe and let oneself become one with it.

I would be curious to know what you think about the two vehicles in Theravada Buddhism, and if you think Daoism aligns more closely with one over the other. Though I mentioned in my post that Confucian practices align with Pratyekabuddha in that they both emphasize personal efforts, it has also occurred to me that perhaps Mencius would have preferred Mahayana Buddhism over Theravada because of its inclusivity.

7. Where does the Book of Change (Yijing) fit best in the chart in the Handout on the “Political Orientations of Major Ancient Chinese Philosophers”? In other words, which school of thought is best supported by the Book of Change?

( reply 150 words):

(reply / comment peer 100 words):

Ruilin Hu :

Dihui,

I definitely agree with you that Daoist writings frequently implement concepts that also appear in the Book of Change. The binary theory you mentioned is fascinating, as it shows a potential common ground that exists in not just Daoism or the Book of Change but also other philosophies. As I mentioned in my own post, the division between “the honorable and the humble” is shared between Confucianism and the Book of Change, and such separation places things into a binary category based on virtue (Chan 265).

Moreover, I believe that the Book of Change should be placed under the left part of Confucianism on “Political Orientations of Major Ancient Chinese Philosophers” handout, precisely because the Book of Change includes those concepts that one can utilize to support Daoism. Also, the Book of Change does not focus on the need for established authority, potentially undermining some more legalistic views among Confucianists (on the right of the handout). It is safe to say that both the Confucianists and the Daoists can support their claims using the Book of Change.

8.Could Mahayana Buddhism have enhanced the legitimacy of the emperor in ancient China? If so, how? If not, why not?

( reply 150 words):

ruin hu : Megha,

(reply / comment peer 100 words):

I am amazed at the light you shine to this question as you analyze Mahayana Buddhism’s compatibility with the ancient Chinese social hierarchy. The “lineage” of legitimization, or acknowledgment (in my personal opinion), is a fascinating point to focus on here. Indeed, there has been a tradition of passing down the thrown, but Confucianists would argue that the thrown is offered to those who claim to have received the Mandate of Heaven. This is the reason why I actually think Mahayana Buddhism has integrated well with this Confucian concept, which is suggested by how Buddhas would be protecting those who preach the Sutra. Specifically, while Sakyamuni’s divine power protects the guardian-king and his kingdom, external influences cannot possibly bring chaos into the king’s reign. Therefore, rulers can potentially appeal to Mahayana Buddhism to legitimize their ruling by placing themselves as the guardian of the Lotus Sutra.