Promoting Morality for Ultimate Liberation: The Philosophy of Moral Education in Religious Taoism and Buddhism
This chapter describes a period of conflict and the integration of the three teachings/religions.
The first section deals with religious Taoism’s adoption of Confucian moral education principles such as filial piety and loyalty, as represented by Ge Hong; it also discusses Ge’s interpretation of morality as a prerequisite for becoming a celestial being. The second section focuses on Buddhism’s conflicts, adoption, and fusion with Confucian doctrines, including Hui-yuan’s insistence upon monks’ exemption from secular rites and his concepts of karma and reincarnation for religious/moral education purpose; Hui-neng’s ideas about retrieving Buddha’s nature, sudden enlightenment, confession, promoting good and eradicating evil in facilitating people’s moral development; and Qi-song’s efforts to incorporate filial piety into Buddhism.
- Ge, H., & Wang, M. (1985). Collation and connotation on the inner chapters of Paopuzi. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.Google Scholar
- Ge, H., & Yang, M. (1991). Collation on the outer chapters of Paopuzi. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.Google Scholar
- Guo, S. (2010). New interpretation on Hui-yuan’s karmic retribution. Journal of Anhui Normal University (Liberal & Social Sciences), 38(5), 571–575.Google Scholar
- Huang, Z. (2011). History of thought of Chinese ancient moral education. Beijing: Chinese Social Science Press.Google Scholar
- Hui, N. (2010). The platform sutra of the sixth patriarch. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.Google Scholar
- Hui, Y. (1991). On why monks should not bow down before kings. In H. Seng (Ed.), Collections of hongming (p. 7). Shanghai: Shanghai Ancient Works Publishing House.Google Scholar
- Le, S. (1986). The transformation of the relationships between Confucianism and Mingjiao. Journal of Anhui University (Philosophy & Social Sciences), 4, 12–17.Google Scholar
- Li, G. (2000a). Ge Hong and his life philosophy. Journal of Literature, History & Philosophy, 5, 108–114.Google Scholar
- Li, X. (2000b). The classic of changes in “commentaries and explanations to the thirteen classics”. Beijing Peking: Peking University Press.Google Scholar
- Pan, X. (2012). Understanding of Zhou Dunyi’s explanation of the diagram of the Supreme Ultimate. Daguan Weekly, 35, 28–28.Google Scholar
- Peng, H. (2010). On the Confucianization of ethics in Buddhism and Taoism. Journal of Xihua University (Philosophy & Social Sciences), 2, 14–18.Google Scholar
- Qi, S. (1981). Collections of Chanjin. In Y. Ji (Ed.), Imperial collection of four (Vol. 8). Shanghai: Shanghai Ancient Works Publishing House.Google Scholar
- Qi, S. (1983). Collections of Chanjin. In Da Zheng Zang (Vol. 52). Taipei: New Wenfeng Publishing House.Google Scholar