major doctrines of Buddhism and exemplify the Chi-
nese penchant for order and hierarchy. Within a given
taxonomy each doctrine is recognized as a meaningful
part of the totality of Buddhist teachings, while the
whole structure performs the hermeneutical function
of relating diverse Buddhist traditions to each other
and integrating them into a comprehensive conceptual
framework. At the same time, within such a rigid hi-
erarchical ordering, all teachings, with the exception of
the highest teaching, are judged to convey only partial
understanding of the ultimate truth. The best-known
Huayan taxonomy is the fivefold classificatory scheme
created by Fazang. Within it, the lowest level is repre-
sented by the HINAYANAteaching, which reveals the
emptiness of self but not the emptiness of phenomena
(dharma). Next comes the elementary teaching of Ma-
hayana, which consists of two parts: the Faxiang ver-
sion of Yogacara and the Madhyamaka/Sanlun teach-
ing of S ́UNYATA(EMPTINESS). At the third level there is
the advanced teaching of Mahayana, which is identi-
fied with the tathagatagarbha doctrine (combined with
the earlier type of Yogacara that was transmitted to
China by Paramartha). That is followed by the sudden
teaching, which involves the abandonment of words
and concepts and the immediate realization of reality.
Finally, at the pinnacle there is the perfect teaching that
consummately reveals the whole truth without the
slightest deficiency or partiality; Fazang identifies this
teaching exclusively with the Huayan jing. While
Fazang’s fivefold nomenclature was based on earlier
classificatory schemes developed by Zhiyan, who him-
self drew on taxonomies formulated by pre-Tang
scholars such as Huiguang, his taxonomy represents
an important point of departure inasmuch as it is the
first one to present Huayan as being absolutely supe-
rior to all other traditions.
Fazang was criticized by his disciple Huiyuan for in-
cluding the sudden teaching in his doctrinal taxonomy.
Huiyuan argued that the sudden teaching does not
qualify as a separate category because it has no doctri-
nal content specific to it. Following criteria employed
in Tiantai taxonomies, he also noted that the sudden
teaching refers to the manner of instruction and thus
does not belong to Fazang’s classification, given that
its basic organizing principle is the content of the
teaching rather than the manner in which it is com-
municated. Fazang’s doctrinal taxonomy was defended
by Chengguan, who argued (perhaps not entirely con-
vincingly) that Huiyuan’s critique was unwarranted,
since he failed to realize that the sudden teaching cor-
responded to the newly formed Chan tradition. By
identifying Chan with the sudden teaching, Cheng-
guan was able to assign Chan a high position within
his taxonomy and integrate it into the Buddhist main-
stream, while still subordinating it to Huayan.Doctrines
Huayan’s system of religious philosophy and practice
is a vast conglomeration of abstruse doctrines, ex-
pounded by recourse to a highly technical vocabulary.
At its core is a holistic vision of the universe as a dy-
namic web of causal interrelationships, in which each
and every thing and event is related to everything else
as they interpenetrate without any obstruction. The
Huayan depiction of reality is an ingenious reworking
of the central Buddhist doctrine of PRATITYASAMUT-
PADA(DEPENDENT ORIGINATION), which postulates that
things are empty of self-nature and thus lack indepen-
dent existence, and yet they exist provisionally as they
are created through the interaction of various causal
factors. In Huayan’s discussion of causality, the focus
shifts away from the correlation between emptiness and
form representative of PRAJN
APARAMITA LITERATURE
and toward the relationship between individual phe-
nomena or events (shi) and the basic principle(s) of re-
ality (li). The causal relationship between phenomena
and principle is that of mutual inclusion, interpenetra-
tion, and identity. Thatrelationship is elaborated in
Chengguan’s doctrine of the four realms of reality
(dharmadhatu): (1) the realm of individual phenom-
ena (shi fajie); (2) the realm of principle (li fajie); (3)
the realm of nonobstruction between principle and
phenomena (lishi wuai fajie); and (4) the realm of non-
obstruction between all phenomena (shishi wuai fajie).
The last two realms are also explained by the doc-
trines of nature origination and dependent origination
of the realm of reality, respectively. According to
Fazang’s explanation of nature origination, all phe-
nomena are ultimately created based on the “nature,”
which stands for the emptiness or suchness of things.
Therefore, the nature is the source of all phenomena,
and yet it does not exist outside of them. In that sense,
the theory does not postulate a dichotomy between the
absolute and phenomenal orders, but rather elucidates
the interdependent relationship between ultimate re-
ality and phenomenal appearances. The doctrine of de-
pendent origination of the realm of reality goes a step
further and shifts the focus to the causal relationship
that obtains between individual phenomena. Based on
the notions of lack of self-nature and the dependentHUAYANSCHOOL