77-110

Chung-Hwa Buddhist Studies, No. 11, pp. 77-110 (2010)

Taipei: The Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies
ISSN: 1026-969X

77

69-73

2010.08.132010.10.11

78

79

1930-2009
9 14
20

31 1907-1977

1975 1978
1902-1988
1 1989
2005

2009 2 3 80
2
1960 1982
2000

21-24

321

3-4187-188

80

69-73 1980-1984 6

1982 12 22 6

81

40 1906-2005

1906-1987
1929 1890-1947
1930
1931 37
1948
25 1972

1980

412

409-432

82

48

1981
1987
82 45 3 1989
9

10

11
12

1.

2.

5-10 25
273-285

10

http://www.fgs.org.tw/fgs_book/fgs_drser.aspx2010.07.24

11

5
88-112187-195 316 4950

12

564

83

3.

4.

5.

6.

13

14

1599-1655 15

13

49-56

14

25

15

?-1354

84

1861-1940
16

17

1982 12 1
3

18
1982 25

47 1972 299

167
16

171-174

17

25-48

18

109-111

85

19

613618?-681

20

21

19

56-68
13-47

20

37

21

37 1753 277

86

22

23

24

22

65

23

50

24

40-41

87

25

26

69-731980-1984 20

27 1980-1984
25

4-5

26

47 1972 295

27

88

1-2
95 2006
22
1984

1987

1982

1980-1984

71.04.15

71.10.01

71.10.01

71.10.08

71.10.08

71.11.01

71.10-11

89

71.12.22

72.01.01

10

72.01.08

11

72.02.01

12

72.03

13

72.05

14

72.05

15

72.06

16

72.07

17

72.11

18

72.12

19

73.01.01

20

73

19 7

90

77.11

22

82.04.02

23

82.04

24

88

21

25

26

92.03

95.04

27

95.07

28

95.09

29

99.02

1926-? 1921-2002 197120071920- 28

1915- 29
1891-1986

28

7-911-1819-2527-45

29

47-6163-77127-147
21-26
3-5

91

30
311949- 32
1918-
33 1917-1999
341930-2003
35 1922-
36
1917- 37
1905-2000
38
39

1.

30

121-145149-153
387-562

31

482-507
290-312 7997

32

113-120

33

79-108

34

149-157

35

27-30

36

6-8

37

16-18 + 50

38

178-181
544-551

39

21-25

92

40
2.
41
3.
42
4.

43
5.
44
6.

45
7.

46

47
48

40

456-463

41

150-153

42

126

43

131-132

44

149

45

138-139

46

516-525

47

409-414

48

484-491

93

49
50

49

82-87

50

445-448

94

1982 12 22 1988 11
1993 4 2
2010 2

51

51

62

95

52

53

1.

54
55

52

62

53

62-63

54

12 365 346

55

73-74

12 360 278

96

56

57

58

59

60

56

6 59

57

63

58

143

32 1670B 717

59

26 1521 33

60

143 6
17-19

97

61
62

2.
1982

63

64

65

61

145

62

143-145 96-97

63

64

97-98

65

98

1993

66
1

2
3
4
67

66

60-61

67

12 368 351352

99

68

69

2010

68

61

69

62

100

70

71

72

3.

73
70

142

71

113

72

127

73

63-6466

101

74

75

74

17-19

75

59-60

47 1963 89-90

102

76

77

1. 2. 3.
1. 2.
3.

78

76

336-337

77

60

78

60

103

1.

83

79
80

81

79

65

80

65-66

81

108

104

82

83

2.

84

85

82

23-2426-2789161205326

83

46-47

84

81-82

85

82

105

86

69 1980

48

73 1984 20

86

82

106

87

87

125

107

26 1521
12 366
12 360
12 365
32 1670B
12 368
47 1972
47 1963
37 1753

1996 1997
1999
2009 49 544-551
2006a
2006b 2007

1983a 136 21-26

1983b 141 3-5
2000
1983 22.6 6-8
1991
1983 59
1993
2006a
2006b 1 79-97
2001
1994

108

2006
2002
2010

1982 36
1993
1983 366 27-30
2003
1983 6 5-48
1988
1999a 1-3
1999b 5-8
1999c 8-2
2005 8-10
2010
2010
1983 372 16-18 + 50
2010.07.24http://www.fgs.org.tw/fgs_book/fgs_drser.aspx

109

Analysis and Discussion of Master Sheng Yens With or Without

Karma one Would Enter Pure Land

Wang, Ching-Sz
Masters Student
Department of Chinese Language and Literature, National Pingtung University of Education

Abstract
From 1980 and 1984 there appeared around Buddhism circles a dispute about who,
those died with sinful Karma or those without sinful Karma, could enter the
Amitabha Buddhas Pure Land? It started with replacing the traditional saying of
die with [good, sinful, doubtful, etc.] Karma by the one die without [sinful]
Karma, which was advocated by Tibetan Buddhism gymnosophist Chen, ChengMing. Due to the reason that its involved with the questions of traditional authority
of faith and the interpretation of doctrines, it raised the dissatisfaction and
condemnation of people who believed in Pure Land. Moreover, discussions and
disputed sayings from all Buddhism sects began to appear one after another.
Master Sheng Yen has been continuously paying attention to this issue and
introduced it as one of his Pure Land teaching. He had at first contemplated the
disputation without criticizing, and then turned to accept part of the opinions from
Chen, Cheng-Ming. Master Sheng Yen had incorporated the traditional with [sinful]
Karma and Chen, Cheng-Mings without [sinful] Karma into his own theory
with or without [sinful] Karma one would enter [the Amitabha Buddhas] Pure
Land. He had believed that dying without or with less [sinful] Karma is more
reliable and encouraged the public to practice pious Buddhism to enter Pure Land
with pure Karma. Moreover, though he believed inherited Karma cant be
changed, one would still clear his Karma by letting go the cling to life. Thus,
ones heart would appear as Pure Land.

110

The results of this thesis are as following:

I conclude that Master Sheng Yen had gained his opinions on die with Karma and
die without Karma through his study of scriptures about Pure Land and the
practice experiences by other buddhists, and the different principles from greater
and lesser vehicle doctrines. Its obvious that Master Shen Yen has acted as a
mediator of the two theories. But sometimes hed preach accordingly by adopting
the theory of the traditional die with [sinful] Karma theory, which is proposed by
the founder of Pure Land sect of Buddhism, and that of Chen, Cheng-Mings die
without [sinful] Karma. Additionally, sometimes he even adopts the Zens theory
of clear Karma with clear mind in order to actually propose some solutions for a
believers problems. He also advocated the idea of enhancing human quality and
creating a Pure Land on earth to help the public to clear as much sinful Karma and
bring as less sinful Karma as they can so that they can enter the Buddhism Pure
Land and reach a higher lotus level in the future.

Keywords:
Master Sheng Yen, Chen Cheng-Ming, Die with Karma, Die without Karma,
Amitabha Buddhas Pure Land