I would like to discuss this article: http://faculty.fullerton.edu/jeelooliu/ ... ua-yan.pdf
Is there really such a huge gap between Tiantai and Huayan metaphysics as the author claims here? Before reading this, I assumed that they are more or less the same.
In a nutshell, the author claims that Tiantai worldview is close to "commonsense realism", while comparing Huayan metaphysics to subjective idealism. This is really a surprising claim, at least for me, especially considering that he goes on to identify Yogacara as objective idealism.
Anyway, I fail to see how any Buddhist philosophy can be compatible with commonsense realism, since this position is arguably one of the principal obstacles to liberation. I am unable to judge whether this presentation of Tiantai is accurate, since I still do not have a sufficient understanding of Tiantai philosophy, but I strongly suspect that something is wrong here. Huayan position as presented in the article seems at least coherent to me, more or less in line with what I know about Yogacara and Buddhist philosophy in general, although I still question the offhand use of Western philosophical terms.
So, is there really such a sharp contradiction? My intuition is telling me that something is wrong here, the author may be over-exaggerating the difference, perhaps misinterpreting the Tiantai doctrine. But maybe I am wrong?
Also, does the situation change with Tendai and Kegon?