论佛学的修学

说起佛学，应该有两方面的含义：第一，佛学是佛法的修学，佛法的实践。释尊教示我们，修学佛法，不外乎“增上戒学，增上心学，增上慧学”——三学。声闻乘的比丘戒，名为比丘学处。大乘的六度、四摄，名为“菩萨学处”。在三学、六度的学程中，名为“有学”。到了解脱生死，圆满菩提，学程完毕了，名为“无学”。从这佛法以行证为本来说，佛法之学，就是佛法的实践。但为了实践的佛学，不能不有义解的佛学，理论的说明的佛学。释尊的教导学众，称为“教授”，“教诫”；约内容说，名为“法(达磨)毗奈耶”；其后集成经与律。对于法与律的分别抉择，释尊与大弟子们，早就开展了论义，称为“阿毗达磨，阿毗毗奈耶”。特别是法义的分别，经弟子们大大的发扬，终于独立成部(论)，与经、律合称为三藏。经、律、论三藏，是文字章句的藄辑，是释尊一代教义的集成，但内容不外乎三学(六度)。所以古德说，从三脏的偏重来说，经是明定学的，律是明戒学的，论是明慧学的。在实践方面，戒、定、慧学如鼎的三足一样，是不可偏缺的。在义解方面，经、律、论也一样是不可偏废的。这才是圆满的佛学，中正的学佛之道。
　　行证的佛学，义解的佛学，也可说有浅深。因为在修学的学程中，闻、思慧位，主要是义解的佛学；思、修慧位，主要是行证的佛学。可以说：教义的佛学，是为了初学；行证的佛学，是为了久行。这就是‘楞伽经’所说的说通与宗通了。但在完整的佛学中，这不但是先后次第，而且还是相依相成，如依言教而引入行证，从行证而流出言教。佛学是不能离此二方面的，所以说：“佛正法有二，谓教证为体，有持说行者，此便住世间”。
　　页4
　　释尊住世的时候，在佛是应机施教，在弟子是随解成行，所以佛学的实践与义解，是相依而不是相离的。如出家人，受了戒，就在僧团中。一方面依师而住，在五年内，不得一晚离依止师而自主行动；一方面依师有学，一切律仪，威仪——衣食行住等一切，都依律制而实习。但这决不是偏重戒学，在律仪的生活中，除出外乞食而外，不是去听闻佛及弟子们的说法，便是水边林下，“精勤禅思”；“初夜后夜，精勤佛道”——修习定慧。这种“解行相应”，“三学相资”的佛学，实是最理想的佛学模范！释尊制立的清净僧团，以戒学为本而“三学相资”，所以传说的：“五夏以前，专精戒律；五夏以后，方许听教参禅”，可说是事出有因，而不免误解了！
　　释尊晚年，弟子间由于根性不同，已经是“十大弟子各有一能”；不但是各有一能，而且是志同道合，各成一团，如说：“多闻者与多闻者俱，持律者与持律者俱”等。特别是结集三藏以后，佛教界就有经师，律师，论师，禅师或瑜伽师；后一些，还有(从经师演化而来的)通俗布教的譬喻师(神秘的咒师，更迟些)。对于三藏或三学，有了偏重的倾向。虽说偏重，也只是看得特别重要些。在印度的正法五百年中，小乘佛教盛行时代，始终是依律而住，三学与三藏，也保持密切联系。就是到了像法五百年，大乘佛教隆盛的时代，如龙树、提婆、无着、世亲等，也还是依律而在，大小并重的。这要到密宗大兴，这才将依律而住的清净僧团破坏了！
　　从自己的修学来说，三藏与三学并重。但由于宏传佛学，经师、律师、论师、禅师、譬喻师，都是分类的专学，也可说是分科的专宏。正法五百年的佛教界，如下：
　　页5
　　经师、律师、论师，是从佛的教授教诫中，精研深究，而精确了解佛说的真意。但三者的研求方法，各不相同，如说：“修多罗次第所显，毗奈耶因缘所显，阿毗达磨性相所显”。
　　对于经——修多罗，最主要是了解经的文义次第，因为不了解一经的组织科段，是不能明了全经的脉络，不能把握一经的关要。不是断章取义，望文生义，就是散而无归。这不但不能通经，反而会障蔽经义。所以佛说契经的意义，要从文义次第中去显发出来。如无着以七句义十八住解说‘金刚经’；世亲以十六种相解说‘宝积经’；弥勒以八段七十义解说‘大般若经’；清凉以信解行证科分‘华严经’等：都是从次第中纶贯全经，显发全经的意趣。
　　毗奈耶——律的研求，是“因缘所显”，是要从制戒的因缘中去显发佛意。戒律，狭义是戒经，广义是一切律制。这些，佛为什么制？为什么制了又开？开了又制？如不把制戒以及制订僧团法规的原意弄明白，就不能判别是犯是不犯，犯轻或犯重；也不能随时地环境的不同，而应付种种新起的事例。所以，律师不仅是严持律义，而是要善识开遮持犯，善识时地因缘，能判定犯与不犯，也能如法的为人出罪。我国的律学久衰，僧众不能依律而住，这才学会口呼“一起向上排班”，也就以律师见称了！
　　阿毗达磨——论，不重次第，不重因缘，而着重于“不违性相”。如来的随机说法，是富有适应的，不一定都是“尽理之谈”。所以要从如来应机的不同散说中，总集而加以研求，探求性相——事理的实义，使成为有理有则——的法义。这是被一般看作甚深哲理的部分，其实也抉择佛说的了义与不了义，而作为思修的观境。如天台宗的二重事理三千，贤首家的十玄门等，都可说是论义。起初，阿毗达磨、中观、瑜伽，我国的天台、贤首宗学，都是从观(修持)出教的；等到集成论而为后人承学时，就流为偏于义解的理论了。
　　依上面的解说看来，经师、律师、论师，或“三藏法师”，是何等重要？不是这些专门探求三藏深义的大德，展转传授，佛法早就晦
　　页6
　　昧而被人遗忘，或变成盲修瞎炼的神教了。当然，大通家——三藏法师是最为理想的，但事实上，自修(维持)虽然该“三学相资”，而三藏的全盘深入探求，谈何容易！真能深入一门，或经、或律、或论，也就能续佛慧命，为后学作依止了！
　　授教定慧的禅师，也称瑜伽师。在我国的佛教史上，如安世高、佛陀跋陀罗、佛陀、达磨都是。禅师特重于定慧的修习，凭着传承来的，自己经验来的来教化，所以每有三藏所不曾详说的。由于师资接受，下手功夫的多少不同，引起禅观的分成别派。小大空有显密的分化，大抵与此有关。举譬喻说：三藏的深究，如纯理论科学，也如儒家的汉学；禅师的传授定慧，如应用科学及技工，也如儒学的理学。理学与实践的互成，才是完满的佛学。否则，脱离了理论的持行，与缺乏实行的空论，都容易走上偏失的歧途。
　　至于通俗教化的譬喻师，在向民间推行佛陀的教化时，功绩比三藏法师及禅师更大。但通俗教化，不宜脱离三藏的研求与定慧的实习。如古代的大譬喻师，都是兼通三藏与有着修持的。假使不重三藏的修学，定慧的实习，通俗教化，容易使佛法庸俗化。如我国古代的通俗教化，从变文而演变到宝卷，就是一例。总之，三藏的深究，定慧的传授，是少数的，但是佛教的中坚，佛教生命的根源。从此流出的广大教化，时时承受三藏(义学)禅观的策导，才能发为正确的通俗教化的佛学。
　　佛学的修学传习，到了大乘佛教时，义学的分科修学，与初五百年略有出入。我们时常憧憬印度那烂陀寺的佛学，那寺成为印度佛教中心的时代，佛学的修学次第与类别，在唐义净三藏的著作中，有着明白的叙述。如‘南海寄归传’说：“学法次第先事声明。……必先通文字，而后方能了义”。然后，“致想因明，虔诚俱舍。然后函丈传经(指大乘法)，多在那寺，或伐腊毗”。义净在‘求法高僧传’中，说到玄照的修学次第，是：“沈情俱舍，清想律仪。后之那寺，就胜光学中百，宝师子受瑜伽”。智弘的修学次第是：“既解俱舍，
　　页7
　　后善因明。至于那寺，则披览大乘”。法朗的修学次第是：“习因明之秘册，聆俱舍之幽宗。既而虔诚五篇(律)”。这可见，当时的修学佛法，首先是通文字。其次是佛教的论理学——因明，代表三藏——法毗奈耶的俱舍与律义。然后修学大乘，即是中观与瑜伽(唯识)。大乘佛教时代，不重经而重论，因为契经都是适应一类众生，阐明某部分的法义，而论才是究尽性相的实义。这种重论的学风，到超岩寺为印度佛教中心的时代，也还是如此。如传入西藏的佛学，主要的称五大部，就是‘因明’，‘戒律’，‘俱舍’，‘中观’，‘现观庄严论’。这与义净时代传学的佛学，可说大体一致。只是以传说为弥勒所造的‘现观庄严论’，代替传说为弥勒所造的‘瑜伽论’而已！印度大乘佛教时代的佛学，分科与修学次第，是这样的，这应该可以作为今日中国佛学研求的参考！
　　太虚大师为我们近代的大师，他倡议的佛学院，晚年修正为：一、律仪院，二、教理院，三、参学处(定慧实习)。教理院的修学，主张从五乘共法，到三乘共法，再进学大乘不共法。大乘法中，分为三系，也就是在‘中观’与‘瑜伽’外，增入中国特别发扬的法界圆觉学——台、贤等义学。这一修学次第，戒定慧三学，理解与实践，都圆满无缺，与印度传统的佛学修习法也相近。如中国佛教而能开展出这样理想的佛学院，这是足以媲美那烂陀的。只是在近代的中国佛教环境中，还不易实现而已。
　　页8
　　Cultivating the Study of Buddhism
　　Master Yin-shun
　　When we talk about the study of Buddhism two levels of meaning should be taken into consideration. One is the cultivation of buddhadharma or the practice of the Buddha's law. 'Saakyamuni taught us that the cultivation of the study of Buddhism encompasses the three learnings -“the higher learning of morality”, “the higher learning of meditation”, and “the higher learning of wisdom”. The monk's vows of the Hearer Vehicle are referred to as “the points a monk has to train himself in” while the six perfections and four means of attraction of the Universal Vehicle are called “the points a bodhisattva must familiarize himself with”. During the course of mastering the three learnings and the six perfections, one is labelled a “learner”; having attained liberation from samsaara or perfect awakening by completing the course, one's title becomes “non-learner”. The essence of buddhadharma lies in practice and realization, and thus the study of buddhadharma amounts to putting the buddha's law into practice. But in order to practice the study of Buddhism, one must have an understanding of the meaning of Buddhist learning or an explanation of its theory. The guidance 'Saakyamuni offered his students is called “advice” or “instructions”. From the viewpoint of content, these teachings are referred to as “law (dharma) and vinaya (discipline)”. They were later compiled into the Discourses and the Discipline. Regarding the discrimination of the finer points of dharma and vinaya, 'Saakyamuni and his great disciples engaged very early on in discussion which was known as “abhidharma” and “abhivinaya” respectively. Especially discernment regarding the meaning of dharma became highly developed by the disciples until it finally was given independent status as the Treatises. These
　　页9
　　form together with the Discourses and the Discipline the so-called three baskets which are, as edited language and text, the collection of all the teachings 'Saakyamuni gave during his lifetime. Their contents cover the three learnings (and the six perfections) wherefore the masters of old said that in terms of emphasis the Discourses elucidate the learning of samaadhi, the Discipline that of morality, and the Treatises that of wisdom. From the viewpoint of practice, morality, meditative absorption, and wisdom are like the three legs of a tripod none of which must be missing. Likewise, from the viewpoint of the understanding of the meaning, neither the Discourses nor the Discipline or the Treatises can be one-sidedly discarded. Only in this way is the study of Buddhism complete, a middle way in learning to become a Buddha.
　　There is a difference in depth between the study of Buddhism which consists in practice and realization and that which deals with understanding of the meaning since in the course of studying and cultivating, the stages of the wisdoms resulting from listening and pondering respectively belong mainly to the study of the understanding of Buddhism while the stages of the wisdoms resulting from pondering and meditating primarily have to do with the study of the cultivation and realization of Buddhism. One might well say that the study of the doctrines of Buddhism is for the beginner and the study of the actual realization of Buddhism for one experienced in practice. The La^nkaavataara Suutra refers to them as the penetrations of the spoken teaching and of the principle. From the point of view of the complete study of Buddhism, this is, however, not only a matter of a sequence in time, but also one of mutual dependence. For example, one enters practice and realization through the spoken teaching, and one's own teaching flows from practice and realization. The study of Buddhism cannot be separated from these two. Thus it is said: “The right law of the Buddha has two aspects, i.e. its es-
　　页10
　　sence is the teaching and realization. One who practices only by sticking to the spoken word is bound to remain in the world.”
　　During his lifetime, 'Saakyamuni gave advice in accordance with the conditions of sentient beings and his disciples put into practice whatever they had understood. This means the practical realization and the theoretical understanding of the study of Buddhism went hand in hand and were not divorced from each other. Monks, for example, remained in the monastic community after taking the vows. On one hand, they stayed following their master. For five years, they were not allowed to leave their spiritual guide and do something on their own even for one night. On the other hand, they studied all the monastic vows and rules of deportment following their master, and trained to do everything -wearing the robes, eating, walking, standing etc.- in accordance with the regulations of the discipline. This, however, does in no way imply one-sided emphasis on the learning of ethics. Leading a life of proper conduct, they left the monastery compound besides the regular alms round to beg for food only to listen to teachings given by the Buddha and his great disciples or “to practice vigorous meditation” on the bank of a river or in the forest, “spending the first and last parts of the night in the serious practice of the Buddha's path”, i.e. they cultivated meditation and wisdom. Such a study of Buddhism in which understanding and practice are unified and the three learnings enrich each other, really represents the most ideal model of studying Buddhism. The pure monastic community established by 'Saakyamuni took the learning of ethics as its foundation but had the three learnings support each other. Thus we can understand that the traditional saying “the first five years in the community one exclusively concentrates on the monastic rules, only after the fifth year is one allowed to listen to teachings and get instruction in meditation”, though not completely groundless, is tainted by misconception.
　　页11
　　When 'Saakyamuni reached old age, all of his ten major disciples had, thanks to their individual dispositions and potential, already developed specific abilities. Not only this, each of them had gathered similarly inclined disciples around himself forming a congregation. Thus it was said that “the learned ones stayed together with the learned ones, those keeping the rules strictly with those keeping the rules strictly” and so on. Especially after the compilation of the three baskets, one could find masters of the Discourses, masters of the Discipline, masters of the Treatises, and masters of meditative absorption or of yoga within the community. Somewhat later masters of parables who had branched off from the masters of the Discourses and specialized in popular preaching appeared (and, even later, the mystical masters of magical spells). In terms of the three baskets or three learnings, these teachers showed a tendency to specialize, which means however only that they placed somewhat more emphasis on certain aspects. During the five hundred years of the proper law in India when the Smaller Vehicle was flourishing, life strictly in accordance with the discipline was the norm, and the three baskets and three learnings were closely connected. Even during the five hundred years of the semblance law when the Universal Vehicle reached its pinnacle with Naagaarjuna, Deva, Asa^nga, Vasubandhu etc., the sangha still lived in observance of the discipline with equal emphasis on the mahaayaana and the hiinayana. It was only when tantric Buddhism reached its height that the pure monastic community which abided by the discipline was finally destroyed.
　　In terms of the cultivation and practice of an individual, the three baskets and the three learnings were of equal importance but for the sake of spreading the study of Buddhism, the masters of the Discourses, of the Discipline, of the Treatises, of meditative absorption, and of parables became specialists in their respective fields. We can call this specialised propaga-
　　页12
　　tion. The Buddhist community of the five hundred years of the proper law looked like that:
　　I. teaching others: preaching according to specialisation (while abiding in the discipline):
　　A. doing special research into the meaning of the law
　　1. the masters of the Discourses
　　2. the masters of the Discipline
　　3. the masters of the Treatises
　　B. giving special instructions in the practice of meditative absorption and wisdom - the masters of meditative absorption
　　C. teaching in a popular way - the masters of parable
　　II. practising oneself: the three learnings supporting each other
　　The masters of the Discourses, the Discipline, and the Treatises studied the advice and instructions given by the Buddha in depth and detail and gained a correct understanding of the real meaning of the Buddha's words. However, they differed in their methods of research wherefore it was said that “the suutras are made clear through their progressive stages, the vinaya through the incidents, and the abhidharma through essence and appearance.”
　　Regarding the Discourses (or suutras), the most important thing is to understand the progressive stages of textual meaning because, in case you do not comprehend the structure and arrangement of a discourse, the train of thought of the whole text will escape you, and you will be unable to get hold of the important points of the complete scripture. You will either misquote out of context and offer unfounded interpretations, or merely understand bits and pieces lacking the view of the whole. In this way it is not only impossible to penetrate the discourse, one will in addition obfuscate the purport to the text. Therefore the Buddha said the meaning of discourses had to
　　页13
　　be made clear through the progressive stages of textual meaning. Asa^nga, for example, explained the Diamond Suutra by way of the meaning of seven sentences and eighteen stages, Vasubandhu expounded the Ratnakuta Suutra through sixteen aspects, Maitreya employed seventy topics in eight sections to elucidate the Praj~naapaaramitaa Suutra, and Ch'ing-liang divided the Avatamsaka Suutra under the headings “trust”, “understanding”, “practice”, and “realization”. They all integrated the whole text through its progressive stages and thus made its meaning obvious.
　　The study of the vinaya or Discipline consists in elucidation by means of instances, i.e. in making the Buddha's intent clear through the incidents which lead to the introduction of rules. In its narrow sense, “monastic rules” refer to the text containing the vows; in its broader sense it encompasses all regulations by means of discipline. Why did the Buddha introduce the rules? And why did he allow for exceptions when he introduced rules in the first place and set further rules despite exceptions? If one cannot win clarity about the purpose behind the introduction of the rules and the establishment of a set of prescriptions for the monastic community, then one is in no position to judge what constitutes a transgression and what not, what a-mounts to a grave offence and what is a minor. Neither is one in a position to deal with new cases which happen in different historical or geographic settings. Thus a master of the Discipline is not only strictly keeping to the rules and regulations of deportment, but is also well versed in the definitions of exception and prohibition, maintenance and break. He must be familiar with the temporal and special setting of cases so that he is able to judge whether anything falls under transgression, and is also knowledgeable about how to help others expiate offences in accordance with the law. The study of the Discipline has been declining in China for a long time wherefore the sangha is unable to live together in accordance with the vows. Under these
　　页14
　　circumstances, those who manage to call everybody to queue up in front of the altar are called “masters of the Discipline”!
　　The abhidharma or Treatises emphasize neither progressive stages nor instances but stress compliance with the essence and the appearances. The Tathaagata taught in accordance with given situations which is a highly adaptable method but does not necessarily produce thoroughly philosophical speech. Thus there was the need to gather the scattered teachings given in compliance with all kinds of situations, to pursue in-depth research and find out the real meaning of the essence and the appearances, or of the principle and phenomena, so that it could be transformed into a well-structured system of the meaning of the law. This part is generally regarded as profoundly philosophical. Actually, it also involves the differentiation between what is ultimate and what is provisional in the Buddha's teachings so that it can become the object of analytical meditation. The twofold triple thousand world of phenomena and principle T'ien-t'ai is talking about or the ten profound doors of the Hua-yen tradition are all examples of this meaning of the Treatises. In the beginning, the abhidharma, the Madhyamaka, the Yogaacaara, and the teachings of T'ien-t'ai and Hua-yen in China, all originated from the practice of meditation. However, after they were compiled into treatises and became accepted by later scholars, they degenerated into the mere theoretical understanding of philosophical meaning.
　　Judging from the explanation just given, the masters of the Discourses, the Discipline, the Treatises or “masters of all the three baskets together” were extremely important. If it had not been for these virtuous ones who studied the profound meaning of the three baskets in detail and then handed it down generation after generation, buddhadharma would have been lost and forgotten long ago, or would have turned into a theological teaching of blind practice. Of course, those who penetrate the whole, i.e. the masters of the
　　页15
　　three baskets, are the ideal case but in reality, though the three learnings should support each other in one's personal practice, to probe deeply into the three baskets in their completeness is much easier said than done. If someone is able to really address one aspect in depth, be it the Discourses, the Discipline or the Treatises, he will be able to prolong the life of Buddhist wisdom and is in a position to be relied upon by future generations.
　　The meditation masters who taught the wisdom of stable absorption were also called yogis. Examples are, in Chinese Buddhist history, An Shih-kao, Buddhabhadra, and Bodhidharma. They put special emphasis on the cultivation of the wisdom arising from meditative absorption and gave instructions in what they had received through their lineage or through personal experience. Thus there was always something which had not been explained in detail in the three baskets. Due to the personal way of learning from a master, there were differences in the methods they used which in turn led to the appearance of separate schools of meditation. The split into the Smaller and Universal Vehicles, into proponents of emptiness and of existence, into exoteric and exoteric is probably related to this. To give an example: the in-depth study of the three baskets is like pure theoretical science or like Han Dynasty Confucianism, while the meditation masters' teaching of the wisdom arising from meditative absorption resembles applied science and technology or Neo-Confucianism. Only if theory and practice accomplish each other, the study of Buddhism is perfect. Otherwise cultivation removed from theory or empty talk which lacks practical application easily lead to extreme aberration.
　　As to the masters of parable who educated in an easily accessible way, they got much better results than the masters of the three baskets or those of meditation when it came to propagate the Buddha's teaching among the general public. However, popular teaching should not become divorced
　　页16
　　from research and study of the three baskets and the practice of the wisdom of meditative absorption. All the great masters of parable of yore had at the same time a thorough grasp of the three baskets and experience in practical cultivation. If they did not emphasize the practical study of meditation and the actual realization of the wisdom resulting from meditative stabilisation, popular teaching easily led to the vulgarisation of the buddhadharma. That “transformation texts” developed into “precious scrolls” is one example related to popular preaching in ancient China. To sum it up, those who studied the three baskets in-depth or transmitted the wisdom resulting from meditative stabilisation, though a minority, were the pillars of the Buddha's teaching and the very root of living Buddhism. The vast teachings flowing from them received constant guidance from the three baskets (the study of the meaning) and meditative contemplation thus being able to develop into a correct popular presentation of Buddhist study.
　　When the practice and transmission of the study of Buddhism reached the stage of the Universal Vehicle, the divisions made in the course of the study of meaning were slightly different from those in the first five hundred years. We often think with longing about the Buddhist studies at Naalandaa Monastery when it was the centre of Indian Buddhism. Tripitaka Master Yi-ching of the T'ang Dynasty recorded in his works in detail which courses where taken there in the study of Buddhism and in which sequence. The Nan-hai chi-kuei chuan for example says: “As to the sequence of studying dharma, the primary subject is logic.... One must first have a firm grasp of letters before one can understand the definite meaning.” And then: “When one has applied one's mind to logic, one treats the Abhidharmako'sa full respect. After that, the master transmits the suutras (which means the teaching of the Universal Vehicle). Much of this happened in Naalandaa or Valabhii.” In his Ch'iu-fa kao-seng chuan, Yi-ching mentions the way
　　页17
　　Hsüan-chao studied: “He immersed himself in the Abhidharmako'sa and devoted himself with pure mind to the rules of deportment. Later he came to Naalandaa where he studied with Jinaprabha the Maadhyamika and 'Sata, and with Ratnasi.mha the Yogaacaaryabhuumi.” The sequence of Chih-hun's study was: “After he understood the Abhidharmako'sa, he became well versed in logic. When he arrived in Naalandaa, he read Mahaayaana texts.” And in the case of Fa-lang: “He trained in the hidden works of logic and listened to the explanation of the profound essence of the Abhidharmako'sa. After that he devoted himself to the five parts (of the Discipline).” It is obvious that the first step in the training and study of buddhadharma at that time was the understanding of writing. This was followed by Buddhist logic (hetuvidyaa) and the representatives of the three baskets -Abhidharmako'sa for the law and the rules of deportment for the discipline. This was followed by the study of the Universal Vehicle, which means the Middle View and the Yogaacaara (Consciousness Only). In the time of the Mahaayaana, the treatises were emphasized, not the Discourses because the latter only fit one type of sentient beings, only explain one part of the meaning of dharma while the former treat the real meaning of essence and appearances in entirety. This emphasis on treatises was still in vogue when Vikrama'silaa became the centre of Indian Buddhism. The Buddhism which was transmitted to Tibet, for example, centres around the “five topics” of logic, monastic regulations, Abhidharmako'sa, Middle View, and Abhisamayaala^nkaara which is more or less the same as in the times described by Yi-ching. The only difference was that the Abhisamayaala^nkaara ascribed to Maitreya was substituted for the Yogaacaaryabhuumi which according to tradition was also Maitreya's work. Thus were the contents of and steps in the study of Buddhism during the time of the Universal Vehicle. Chinese Buddhism today might well get some inspiration therefrom.
　　页18
　　Ven. T'ai-hsü was an outstanding monk in modern China. In his later days, he revised the concept of Buddhist Colleges he had proposed and suggested instead first the college for Monastic Rules, second the college for Doctrines, and third the Place for Engaging in Practice (i.e. the cultivation of the wisdom arising from meditation). For the study of doctrines, he envisioned a curriculum covering the dharma common to all five vehicles up to the dharma common to the three vehicles, and finally the uncommon dharma of the Universal Vehicle. Within the Universal Vehicle, he distinguished three systems -besides the Madhyamaka and the Cittamatra he introduced a system which became especially developed in China, the Dharmadhaatu Teaching of Perfect Awakening which includes the teachings of the T'ien-t'ai and Hua-yen Schools, among others. These courses of gradual study cover everything in a holistic manner: the three learnings of ethics, meditation, and wisdom, theoretical understanding and practical application. They are moreover quite similar to the traditional Indian method of engaging in the study of Buddhism. If ideal colleges like that could be developed within Chinese Buddhism, they could well compete with Naalandaa. However, this is not at all so easy within the context of modern Chinese Buddhism.