How Did Chinese Buddhists Incorporate Indian Metaphors? A Study of Lushan Huiyuan’s Use of Firewood–Fire Metaphors in the Shadow of Indian Canons

In the discourse of Lushan Huiyuan 廬山慧遠, the firewood–fire metaphor (xinghuozhiyu 薪火之喻) is employed to illustrate personhood (shen 神), referring to pudgala. Scholars often criticize Huiyuan for interpreting personhood as a true “self” (ātman) under the influence of the Vātsīputrīya school, thus contradicting the doctrine of non-self. This paper suggests that this might be a dual misunderstanding of both Huiyuan and the Vātsīputrīya school. Huiyuan’s firewood–fire metaphor is indeed profoundly influenced by the Vātsīputrīyas’ three kinds of designation. Yet, he never commits to the substantial self, and his argument primarily aims to refute the view of annihilationism (duanmie 斷滅), that is, that life ceases to exist after one period ends. This stance fully aligns with the doctrine of non-self that has been central since the inception of Buddhism. Additionally, Huiyuan’s explanation of the indestructibility of personhood (shen bumie 神不滅) is a reluctant proposition; its fundamental purpose does not lie in discussing transmigration, but rather in demonstrating the state of “body and mind both cease” following the cessation of causes and conditions once “transmigration ends”.