Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Encyclopedia of India–China Cultural Contacts v1.c7.s8: B. Concepts

Encyclopedia of India–China Cultural Contacts v1.c7.s8

Language
English

Contents

B. Concepts

Brahmatmaikya

v1.c7.s8.t1.1

Brahman is “Atman” which is the core concept in the Brahman philosophy of Ancient India. It appears first in some early Upanishads. It is later regarded as the main philosophical thought by the Vedanta. The Hinduism which is popular in the later ages of India also takes it as its theoretical basis.

v1.c7.s8.t1.2

Upanishad is a batch of Veda document in the later ages which put forward large amount of clear philosophy theories earlier in India. The main content discussed in the documents is the relationship between Brahman and Atman. The so called Brahman is the noumenon of all things. It is the highest reality in the cosmos. The so-called “I” is the transliteration of Atman. It usually refers to the subject and soul of biological phenomena.

v1.c7.s8.t1.3

Many ideologists of Upanishad think that Brahman is the highest reality without any specific property, and we cannot give a precise definition to Brahman by the general conceptual category. If we are sure to know the true meaning of Brahman, we can only understand and realise it by various negations. In Upanishad, Brahman is described as the supreme god by some thinkers. It is viewed as the fundamental cause or the creator for things in the world.

v1.c7.s8.t1.4

There are many meanings for “Atman” in Sanskrit, such as self, breath, nature, the whole body and the highest noumenon of human life. In Upanishad, this word is used in two meanings. One meaning of “Atman” refers to self (individual), which is used as the main part of many organs in human’s body or the centre of vital movement, being the so-called “individual”. Another sense of “Atman” means “Brahman”. When discussing Brahman as the noumenon of the world by many Upanishads, “Atman” (I) is only applied instead of “Brahman”. Such kind of “Atman” is the so-called “Collective Self” or “Brahman”. The “Atman” in this kind of Upanishad is the noumenon of everything, which has no difference as that of “Brahman” in its actual meaning.

v1.c7.s8.t1.5

In Upanishad or the Indian philosophy of religion in later generations, “I” or “Atman” is generally made use of the former meaning. If not otherwise indicated, it means the subject-of-a-life or the master of spirit and consciousness of person, being the main body of eternal cycle of birth and death. In modern times, “I” or “Atman” is frequently translated into “soul”. There are many types of “Atman”, however numerous forms of “Atman” are known as the phenomenal world.

v1.c7.s8.t1.6

In Upanishad, many ideologists discuss the relationship between Brahman and Atman, and the predominant viewpoint is the so-called “Brahman is Atman”. They consider that the noumenon of thing (Brahman or the spiritual self) and the human’s main part (Atman or individual) are the same at heart.

v1.c7.s8.t1.7

“Brahman is Atman” has an important position in the development of Brahman later. The key reference or branch of Vedanta, which is mostly influenced in the Indian Philosophy, has this kind of thoughts. However, many ideologists of this school have different attitudes towards the same degree or the actual relation to Brahman and Atman; thus, diverse branches of Vedanta have been formed.

v1.c7.s8.t1.8

Badarayana, the originator of Vedanta has a standpoint of “bhedābheda” in this main work named “Brahma-sutra”. He thinks that the creator of world or fundamental cause (Brahman) and Atman or the phenomenal world are different. Therefore, Atman has the nature of Brahman. If all things cannot be existent in the world without Brahman, then Brahman and Atman is the same.

v1.c7.s8.t1.9

Gaudapada and Sankara, the thinkers of Vedanta, think that Brahman and Atman have the relationship of “Advaita”. In their opinions, Brahman or the spiritual self is the universal foundation; everything is the image of Brahman or spiritual self without things other than being independent of Brahman or spiritual self. Individual is not the part of Brahman, nor its variation. As the life phenomenon, innumerable individual and spiritual self are the same thing, only due to the limitation of the body, they are different; in fact, both of them are the same things. Ramanuja, the ideologist of Vedanta, considers that Brahman and Atman have the relationship of “Visistadvaita”. In his opinion, Atman (individual or phenomenal world) is the property or part of Brahman (substance or entity). Although the property or part attaches to substance or entity, we cannot think that the property and part are not complied with each other. The phenomenon in the world is not visional. However, Ramanuja is also acknowledging that the supreme Atman

v1.c7.s8.t1.10

*Upanishads: The Holy Spirit of Vedas (front cover)*

v1.c7.s8.t1.11

or Brahman exists as noumenon. He deems that although the phenomenal world (individual) is not meaningless, it is only to limit the nature or part of the supreme entity. The supreme entities of an object are same or identical.

v1.c7.s8.t1.12

In modern and contemporary times of India, “Brahman is Atman” still has a great influence. Because the mainstream ideology of Vedanta, “Advaita” has been mainly accepted by the great majority ideologists, while the origin of thought or the core ideology of “Advaita” originates from “Brahman is Atman” in Upanishad.

v1.c7.s8.t1.13

“Brahman is Atman” has had its influence on China. In ancient China, when some Chinese Buddhist scriptures criticised the heterodox ideology, the thought of Upanishad or Vedanta had been related or demonstrated. In modern and contemporary times of China, the orthodoxy of ancient philosophy in India has been given great importance in the academic world, to do research on Upanishad and Vedanta. There are many research papers on “Brahman is Atman” in Chinese academic journals. The introduction to “Brahman is Atman” is also published by China in the treatise or textbook about the Indian philosophy of religion.

v1.c7.s8.t1.14

*(Yao Weiqun)*

Samsara

v1.c7.s8.t2.1

Samsara is an important part of the ancient Indian philosophy of religion. Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism regard it as the fundamental part of their own theoretical system. The concept has also been introduced in China, and produced great influence to Chinese culture.

v1.c7.s8.t2.2

Samsara concept in Vedic Upanishad - In the vedic period, Indians started to think where they would go after death. ègveda mentions of Death “Yama” and Western Pure Land, and believed that people who do good will enter Western Pure Land after they die. ègveda says that “reuniting with ancestor, meeting Yama, and obtaining the returns of benevolence in Western Pure Land”. In Vedic period, people believed that the soul lasted forever, and death meant that the soul could walk from one world to another. Indian religions in later ages emphasised that Samsara was directly related to a human’s behaviour. Such contents were also mentioned in the Veda, but the difference was that the latter stressed that people doing good would ascend to heaven, but it had not directly shown that people doing evil things would go to hell.

v1.c7.s8.t2.3

The core thought of Indian philosophy of religion was formed in the Upanishad period, when the Samsara concept gradually developed into a system. At this period, Samsara was directly related to Vimukti, and closely connected with ethics. The famous theory of Samsara in Upanishad was “five stages and two approaches”. “Five stages” referred to the five Samsara stages from death to rebirth, namely, a human is cremated after death, first enters the moon, then becomes the rain, subsequently, turns into food after raining, sperm after eating food, finally enters the mother’s womb. The so-called “two approaches” referred to devayana and pitçyàna. Devayana is the road in which humans cannot return to the original world after death, while pitçyàna is the road in which humans can return to the original world following the order of the five stages after death.

v1.c7.s8.t2.4

Ideologists of Upanishad have made a clear distinction between good and bad results of Samsara, and have had a definite concept of karma. The good and bad results of Samsara were considered to be related to a human’s behaviour (ie good or evil). Well-doing and evildoing produce their corresponding karmas, which directly affects the living pattern or state of the doer in life and afterlife. Ideologists of Upanishad believe that people doing good will become saint, while doing evil will become villain. Well-doing mainly refers to compliance with various religious regulations of Brahmanism and performance of various obligations. Many ideologists of Upanishad clearly put forward the subject of Samsara during discussion, that is “me” or “Altman”, which is the producer of Karma, and the bearer of good and evil results in Samsara. Ideologists of Upanishad believe that the state of Samsara is associated with pain. Therefore, people should jump out of Samsara to reach a state of liberation, and to achieve this goal, the most fundamental point is to know the true nature of things, and obtain the supreme wisdom of “Brahman and Atman are one”. Samsara concept in Vedic Upanishad produces enormous influence to the philosophy of religion of later generations in India.

v1.c7.s8.t2.5

*Wheel of Life painting*

v1.c7.s8.t2.6

**Samsara concept in Astikya** - About 300 BCE to early CE, Brahmanism developed “Astikya”, namely Sankhya, Yoga, Vaishesika, Nyaya, Mimamsa and Vedanta. In Samsara concept, Vedanta inherits the core idea of ancient scripture of Brahmanism. Its famous ideologist Sankaracarya (788-820 CE) adhered to the thought that “Brahman and Atman are one” in Upanishad, and thought that Brahman was same with the phenomenal world composed of innumerable ego and related things in nature. Everything in the world is Brahman in nature, and if people fail to realise it, they will get caught into ignorance and Samsara. Mimamsa holds that what makes people fall into the Samsara are proper dharma and improper dharma, and what produces proper dharma and improper dharma is behaviour (karma). If people want to jump out of Samsara, they should not hate the troubles confronted in the world, and realise that happiness is always associated with pain, and that they should give up enjoyment, so no karma will be produced, and “Atman” will no longer return to Samsara. According to *Samkhya*, Samsara is the combination of two entities - Prakriti and Purusha, divides Samsara into natural law, animal law and humanity, and believes that everything in Samsara is painful in nature. The way to be free from pain is to eliminate the mistaken understanding, make Prakriti and Purusha survive alone, in this way, Samsara can be eliminated. The Samsara concept of Yoga is similar to that of *Samkhya*, which thinks that everything in Samsara is painful. If people want to jump out of it, it is necessary to eliminate ignorance and practice yoga to achieve liberation. Vaisesika believes that the state of Samsara is the combination of “Atman” and the body, which results from the ‘invisible force”. Invisible force is generated by man’s good and evil behaviour. If there is no invisible force, there is also not the combination of “Atman” and the body; thus, no body will appear, so it will annihilate Samsara. Nyaya believes that the state of Samsara is “pain”. Pain evolves from “rebirth”, rebirth from “behaviour” (proper dharma and improper dharma), behaviour from “negligence”, and negligence from mistaken understanding. When people obtain the “correct understanding”, the mistaken understanding will disappear, thus, no mistaken understanding means no negligence, no negligence means no behaviour, no behaviour means no rebirth, and finally, no rebirth means no pain. Nyaya holds that to get the correct understanding is key to get rid of pain. Mistake and mistaken thought lead to Samsara, and the way to correct it is to obtain the “correct understanding”, thereby eliminating negligence and getting rid of Samsara.

v1.c7.s8.t2.7

**Samsara concept in Buddhism** - The theoretical system of early Buddhism absorbs the Samsara concept in Vedic Upanishad. It thinks that life phenomenon is controlled by the karma of sentient beings, and believes that there is a circulation process, namely, so-called Samsara, but denies that there is an eternal Samsara subject. Buddhism advocates the “theory of Anatman” (or theory of no subject), uses the idea of “destiny” to explain the phenomena in the world or life, and thinks that things and human are composed of many elements or “destinies”, the changes in life phenomena of things or human are just the separation and reunion of various elements or destinies, and the causality in life phenomena are correlative or interdependent relationship of various elements or destinies. Early Buddhist scriptures put forward the Samsara of "five paths lam lnga" (heaven, hell, hungry ghost, human and animal). On the basis of five paths lam lnga, the later Buddhism schools add an "Asura", forming "six-path metempsychosis". In the division of Samsara forms, Mahayana adds some paths from Samsara to nirvana, namely, Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddha, Bodhisattva and Buddhism, thus, there is a ten-path theory in Mahayana.

v1.c7.s8.t2.8

*Wheel of Life painting, Tibetan Buddhism*

v1.c7.s8.t2.9

*Wheel of Life, Dazu Rock Carvings, Chongqing, China*

v1.c7.s8.t2.10

**Samsara concept in Jainism** - Jainism thinks that the subject of Samsara phenomenon is "jāva" (soul), and jāva can be divided into two kinds - jāva being in Samsara and jāva achieving liberation. Jāva being in Samsara is divided into the immobile jāva and mobile jāva. The immobile jāva exists in land, water and plants, while mobile jāva exists in animals with more than two sense organs. Jainism argues that material of karma produced by behaviour of body, words and thoughts flowing into "jāva" will make people be bound and fall into Samsara. Samsara concept in Indian history has been keeping a wide range of effects, except for Lokayatika, all sects of Indian philosophy of religion insist on this theory until modern times.

v1.c7.s8.t2.11

**The spread and influence in China** - Samsara concept was introduced in China with Buddhism. In ancient China, the most famous representative who advocates that there is a subject in Samsara is Hui Yuan in the Eastern Jin Dynasty. He thinks that "the body can be destroyed, but the spirit cannot be". In *Disrespect of Sramana to King*, he says that "desire is the mother of life, while spirit is the root of desire. Desire can change things from one form to another, while spirit can also be transmitted with it", "firewood is burned to ashes, while fire can spread from one firewood to another, never extinguished Similarly, the body is destroyed, while the spirit can move from one body to another". Hui Yuan thinks that there exists an immortal "spirit" in life phenomenon, and that once the human body is dead, the "spirit" is still alive, because it can move to another body, which is a typical theory of Atman. Hui Yuan advocating such theory is related to the influence of the original traditional culture in ancient China, (e.g., theory of Chuang tzu and Yellow Emperor).

v1.c7.s8.t2.12

In the Northern and Southern Dynasties, a heated debate about whether humans have an eternal subject after death has ever been conducted. For example, Fan Zhen in Qi and Liang Dynasties struggles against the independent existence of "spirit" (soul). He says in his *Theory of Spiritual Perishability* that, "the spirit and the body are the same one. They are interdependent whether existence or destruction". Fan Zhen does not fight against the theory of Atman on the basis of the theory of *Anatman* of Buddhism, but against the theory of *Samsara*. However, in Northern and Southern Dynasty, there are also many people who think that there exists a Samsara subject after death, such as Emperor Wu of Liang, Cao Siwen. They believe in the existence of Samsara from the point of view of Buddhism. About the retribution forms in *Samsara*, Chinese Buddhism not only absorbs a lot of relevant contents from Indian Buddhism, but also keeps its own characteristics. For instance, Hui Yuan in his *Theory of Three Retributions* puts forward three forms of retribution: present-life retribution, next-life retribution and future-life retribution. After Sui and Tang Dynasty, there were many discussions on Samsara by some Chinese Buddhism sects such as Tiantai Sect.

v1.c7.s8.t2.13

*Samsara* concept also produces a huge impact on Chinese masses, and it is also reflected in Chinese literary and artistic works. The thought of *Samsara* and *karma* plays a role of restricting people’s behaviour. The thought of “the good will be rewarded with good and the evil with evil” is deeply rooted in people’s minds. Many people do good, pray to Buddha and worship Bodhisattva to get a good retribution or have a good end-result in the afterlife. Considering karma, those who believe in *Samsara* will actively do good and strictly avoid evil to seek advantages and keep away from the disadvantages, which is of positive significance for social peace and stability.

v1.c7.s8.t2.14

*Wheel of Life mural at Zhaohua temple, Hebei, China*

Vimukti

v1.c7.s8.t3.1

*Vimukti* or *vimokùa* is an important part of the ancient Indian philosophy of religion. Many major religious sects also involve such content. Its early ideological form can be seen in Upanishad and other ancient Indian scriptures obviously. Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism all take it as the ultimate goal that everyone pursues. This concept is also introduced into China, exerting an influence on Chinese religion. Vimukti in Upanishad philosophy - *Vimukti* in ancient India mainly refers to freeing people from pain. Indian religions think that the specific form of life is *Samsara* which is filled with pain, while *Vimukti* is free from *Samsara*. The concept of *Vimukti* can be found earliest in Upanishad in India. Upanishad philosophy thinks that *Samsara* is painful in nature, while *Vimukti* is jumping out of the *Samsara* and getting rid of the pain. There are two approaches in Upanishad: pitr·yāna and devayāna. *Pitr·yāna* is the road to *Samsara*, while *devayāna* is the road to *Vimukti*.

v1.c7.s8.t3.2

In the view of many ideologists of Upanishad, *Vimukti* in the highest level is directly related to the understanding of the relationship between *Brahman* and *Atman*. *Brahman* is the core concept of the Upanishad and even the entire Indian philosophy. In Upanishad, Brahman is described as the noumenon of everything and the highest reality of the universe by most ideologists. Brahman is a kind of consciousness in essence, but it is different from those common ones in the world. Brahman cannot be understood as and described by common concepts. Atman’s transliteration is Ateman, and it is usually used with two meanings in Upanishad. One refers to “ego” or the individual soul, ie it is taken as the subject of human’s body organs or the centre of human’s life activities for use, and the other refers to Brahman. When discussing the Brahman as the noumenon of the world, many Upanishads will not use Brahman, but only use Atman, and such “ego” is the so-called “spiritual self”. Among the discussions in Upanishad on the relationship between Brahman and Atman by many ideologists, the dominant view is the so-called “Brahman and Atman are one”. They think that the Brahman (spiritual self) as the noumenon of universe and the Atman (ego) as the individual are same in essence. Brahman is the root of everything, and is the essence of the ego. The worldly people regard Brahman and ego as different things, think that only the ego is the root of human, and do not know Brahman, which is ignorance. Ignorance urges people to pursue things that does not exist in fact, which will need the concrete behaviour. People think that behaviour will produce a variety of “karma”, promoting people to suffer in the Samsara. Therefore, to get rid of the pain for achieving the Vimukti, people shall obtain the greatest wisdom, and the wisdom is the cognition of “Brahman and Atman are one”. In such state, people will no longer pursue something outside the Brahman, and no longer believe that there is difference between Brahman (spiritual self) and Atman (ego). People who have such cognition will no longer have the desire and behaviour, and no behaviour means no karma, then no karma means no Samsara, finally Vimukti is achieved. One sentence in Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is that “people understanding the Brahman will go to heaven and achieve Vimukti after they die.” The concept of Vimukti in Upanishad produces some influence upon that of many schools of philosophy of religion in India.

v1.c7.s8.t3.3

**Vimukti in Astikya:** Various philosophical schools of Brahmanism appeared very early in India, about 300 BCE to early CE. There are six schools, namely, *Sankhya*, *Yoga*, *Vaishesika*, *Nyaya*, *Mimamsa* and *Vedanta*, being collectively called “Astikya”. These schools have their own opinion on the Vimukti.

v1.c7.s8.t3.4

Vedanta directly inherits the Vimukti in Upanishad, and thinks that achieving the cognition of “Brahman and Atman are one” is liberation. Sankaracarya, the most influential ideologist of Vedanta, thinks that liberation can be divided into “gradual liberation” and “true liberation”. Gradual liberation means that people’s ego will enter Brahmaloka for enjoyments after they die, which is not a complete liberation, while true liberation is achieved after eliminating ignorance, knowing spiritual self or Brahman, which is “non-body liberation”. Sankaracarya believes that human nature is pure, and true liberation is to eliminate ignorance, know spiritual self or real Brahman. Two ideologists Prabhakara and Kumarila of Mimamsa in the 8th century or so had more discussions on liberation. They argue that liberation is that eliminating the proper dharma and improper dharma according to the principle stipulated in Brahman’s scripture makes “Atman” is unable to return to the world of Samsara. Kumarila thought that liberation is that “Atman” gets rid of all the pains to reach the state of self-nature, also keeps the state of the destruction of body possessed by “Atman” and unproduced body in the future.

v1.c7.s8.t3.5

Statue of reclining Buddha, Nirvana Temple, Kushinagar

v1.c7.s8.t3.6

Sankhya holds the opinion that Samsara is produced by the combination of material entity - Prakriti and spiritual entity - Purusha. Liberation is escaping from the world of Samsara full of pain. The way to be free from pain is to prevent their combination. Yoga thinks that the process producing life or everything in the Samsara is painful. The cause of suffering is the combination of the observer and the observed. Achieving “Samadhi” through the practice of yoga can eradicate all troubles and ungodliness to obtain liberation. Vaisesika thought that Samsara is the combination of “Atman” and the body, which results from the ‘invisible force”. Invisible force is generated by man’s good and evil behaviours. If there is no invisible force, there is also no combination of “Atman” and the body. When the Samsara is over, people will get liberated. Nyaya believes that liberation is to get rid of the pain in Samsara. Samsara is the existence of life form. The emergence of the form is connected with the karma produced by human behaviour, and karma relates to mistaken understanding. In order to eliminate the mistaken understanding, people shall get the correct knowledge. In the view of Nyaya, the correct knowledge is related to man’s appropriate reasoning and debate, as well as thinking method. And such knowledge mainly exists in the theoretical system of Nyaya’s “16 truths” (16 basic concepts involving rules of reasoning and debate). By knowing 16 truths, people can eliminate the mistaken understanding to reach the state of “highest good”, namely, liberation.

v1.c7.s8.t3.7

**Vimukti in Buddhism:** It is mainly manifested in its “nirvana” theory. The original meaning of Nirvana (nirvàoa in Sanskrit, nibbàna in Pali) is “extinguishing”. In Buddhism, its main meaning is removing troubles to achieve the highest state without any troubles, ie to obtain the supreme consciousness or liberation. Although various schools of Buddhism all discuss nirvana, the interpretations of nirvana are different.

v1.c7.s8.t3.8

Buddhism believes that the world is full of pain, which is directly related to man’s greed or desire, and desire comes from ignorance. Everything in the world or life phenomena is nothing but the separation and reunion of karma. With people being in ignorance believe that there are everlasting things, and pursue the eternal existence of self, but finally fail to realise it, which is because that everything is changeable, life is short, and there is no eternal entity (Atman) in life phenomena. When people pursue those things beyond their reach with the ignorant opinion, they will confront all sorts of troubles and pains. If people realise that everything or life phenomena is preordained, changeable and egoless, they will eliminate ignorance and not go for those that do not exist, thus, they will have no greed. In this way, people can remove the trouble and pain, or reach nirvana or liberation.

v1.c7.s8.t3.9

Hinayana thinks that if you want to reach nirvana, it is necessary to become a monk and live the ascetic life. It puts emphasis on individual liberation, not on helping others for liberation. Directed against the Vimukti in Hinayana, Mahayana puts forward the concept of taking across sentient beings universally, and it emphasises the unity of nirvana and world. Volume five of *Saddharmapundarika-sutra* writes that “For taking across sentient beings universally and showing what nirvana will become after life ends, the Bodhisattva will not conduct the real nirvana”. The sutra is to show that nirvana is not isolated from the world, instead, lives in the world, which is because of the reason that Bodhisattva need to moralise humans. Volume 4 of *Madhyamika-sastra*, the main works of Madhyamaka, writes that “there is no difference between nirvana and world”. The sutra emphasises that nirvana is a spiritual or cognitive state relating to the world. In this state, people realise that all dharmas are atyanta-sunyata, and don’t persist in any prejudice.

v1.c7.s8.t3.10

*Mahaparinirvana-sutra* defines a new boundary between nirvana and world, which maintains the independence of Buddhist sangha to a certain extent. But from the view of Buddhism going deep into the secular society, it is not as convenient as the theory of Madhyamika, because “reality nirvana” theory of Madhyamika provides an important theoretical basis for Mahayana going deep into secular society for religious activities.

v1.c7.s8.t3.11

**Vimukti in Jainism:** Jainism argues that liberation refers to the state that jīva (soul) as the subject of human or life phenomena gets rid of the Samsara. Jainism thinks that jīva can be divided into two kinds - jīva being in Samsara and jīva achieving liberation. The former is bound, while the latter is unbound. The reason that jīva gets into Samsara and is bound is that the materials of karma produced by the behaviour of body, words and thoughts flow into it, making jīva and material combine to form the body, from birth to death. Such material flowing into jīva is called a 'leak'. For liberation, it is necessary to destroy the leak and make jīva free from the material. For ways to destroy the leak or to achieve liberation, the main scripture of Jainism - *Tattvarthadhigama* thinks that jāva can get rid of the yoke of the material to reach liberation by relying on “three treasures” of Jainism, namely - correct faith, correct wisdom and correct behaviour.

v1.c7.s8.t3.12

**Spread and influence in China:** Vimukti was introduced into China with Buddhism. Chinese translation of *Mahaparinirvana-sutra* and other Buddhism scriptures provide direct discussions on the concept of nirvana of Buddhism, and there are also many discussions on nirvana or liberation in Indian Buddhism. In China, Vimukti in Mahayana is the most prevalent. The understanding of Indian Vimukti by the Chinese mainly refers to being Buddha or enlightenment, which can be reflected from some main sects of Buddhism in China. The dominant one among Chinese Buddhist sects is dhyana, and its *Altar Sutra* puts forward that, “The Buddhadharma is here in the world, enlightenment is not apart from the world”, which shows the basic opinion of Chinese Buddhism on liberation or being Buddha, namely, enlightenment or liberation shall be conducted in the world. Pure land sect advocates some Indian Buddhist scriptures, and takes the rebirth in West Pure Land as the main content of liberation. Other Chinese Buddhist sects often take the realisation of greatest wisdom of Buddhist scriptures as the state of liberation. These thoughts about liberation are widely spread in China and exert a profound influence on Chinese culture.

v1.c7.s8.t3.13

In addition to Buddhism, Indian thoughts introduced into China also include Brahmanism thought. These thoughts also include Vimukti. Some important literatures (*Hiran Yasaptati* and *Vais/es!ika-das/a-pada^rtha-prakaran!a*) of Samkhya and Vaisesika in Brahmanism Astikya were translated into Chinese in ancient China, making the Chinese gain some knowledge of basic thoughts of Indian Brahmanism philosophy about liberation. These thoughts and Buddhism thoughts produce influence on Chinese culture to some extent, and are the important contents of cultural exchange between ancient India and China.

v1.c7.s8.t3.14

In modern China, India’s Vimukti still has some impacts on the Chinese public, and this concept in Buddhism still plays a major role. The Vimukti is also attached great importance in modern Chinese academic circle, and is given the special attention in study of Indian religious culture. Many papers on this aspect are often published in Chinese academic journals, and China has even published the monograph on such contents.

v1.c7.s8.t3.15

(*Yao Weiqun*)

Linked texts (8)