Daoxuan & Meditation

An Alternative View of the Meditation Tradition in China: Meditation in the Life and Worksof Daoxuan (596-667)Author(s): Chen JinhuaReviewed work(s):Source: T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 88, Fasc. 4/5 (2002), pp. 332-395Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4528904 .Accessed: 19/10/2012 23:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to T'oung Pao.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4528904?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF THE MEDITATION TRADITION IN CHINA: MEDITATION IN THE LIFE

AND WORKS OF DAOXUAN (596-667)*

BY

CHENJINHUA University of British Columbia

The early Tang Buddhist monk Daoxuan L Ms (596-667) was a

prolific vinaya master and an erudite monastic historian, bibliogra- pher and biographer. While his commentaries on vinaya texts played an unrivalled role in the formation and transformation of various

vinaya traditions in medieval East Asia, his works on Chinese monastic history, institutions, and bibliography have remained a major source for modern scholars of Chinese Buddhism. In contrast to his

well-acknowledged status as a vinaya master and Buddhist historian, however, Daoxuan's own training in meditation and his writings on the history of meditation in China have remained largely unexplored. Regarding his connections with meditation, scholars familiar with Daoxuan's life might immediately think of his position as a third- generation disciple of the great meditation master Sengchou ft~1 (480-560).' But it turns out that Daoxuan's ties with the Chinese meditation tradition ran far deeper than this. This article will discuss the role of meditation in Daoxuan's career and reappraise some aspects of what we might call the pre-history of the Chan school.

Although Daoxuan did not leave any works exclusively devoted to theories of meditation,2 one of his treatises, the "Xichan lun" f^^-"

*The author wishes to thank James Benn and two anonymous readers for their insightful comments, which he has incorporated in this article.

1 As we will see below, one of Daoxuan's principal teachers was a second-

generation disciple of Sengchou. 2 It should be noted, however, that his Jingxin jieguanfa ,iL,tSI (Recom-

mending Contemplation Methods for Purifying the Mind) refers to various forms of meditation and contemplation, a fact that fully attests to his expertise in meditation. Written for one of his disciples who had just entered the samgha, this two-

juan manual aimed at providing some measures for keeping the precepts with the aid of meditation and contemplation. The work is included in the Taish6 canon, no. 1893. See An 1988, Sato 1987.

© Brill, Leiden, 2002 Also available online - www.brill.nl

T'oung Pao LXXXVIII

ALTERNATIVE VIEW OF MEDITATION TRADITION IN CHINA 333

(Critical Discussion on the Practice of Meditation), included in his Xu gaoseng zhuan fl A.,f{4{ (A Continuation of the Biographies of Eminent Monks), is a historical document of crucial significance for our understanding of the Chinese meditation tradition. The Xu gaoseng zhuan is a biographical anthology that Daoxuan composed on "eminent" Buddhist monks active in China from the start of the sixth century until the middle of the seventh century.3 Composed of thirty

juan, the work is divided into ten sections (such as "Translators" [y#jing -=",], "Exegetes" [yijie Af], "Practitioners of meditation" [xichan

grTg] "Preceptors" [mingiu h!FJ], "Defenders of Buddhism" [hufa -"IJ)' to each of which Daoxuan attached a synoptic treatise.4 One of these synoptic treatises, the "Xichan lun," can be regarded as both an introduction and a conclusion to the xichan section in the Xu gaoseng zhuan. Not only does it elucidate Daoxuan's own understanding of the practice of meditation, but also, if read in conjunction with the biographies in the xichan section, it yields the earliest and most reli- able picture of the Chinese meditation tradition during this crucial period. Unfortunately, despite its importance scholars of Chinese Buddhist meditation, and historians of Chan in particular, have not paid sufficient attention to this document. To the best of my knowledge, the only systematic investigation of it has been made byJan Yunhua f4-! in one of his recent articles.5 Professor Jan's study

T Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p.572c5-15. The "Xichan lun" is located at pp. 595c26- 597b23. In the preface to his Xu gaoseng zhuan, Daoxuan makes it clear that his anthology covers the period of time from the early Liang dynasty (502-57) to Zhenguan 19 (645) (Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 425b21-22). The latter date obviously refers to the time when he finished the initial version of the anthology. However, it should be noted that after 645 Daoxuan continued to prepare new biographies of "eminent monks," probably until his death in 667. While the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Fachong t4i (586/587 - after 664/665, p. 666b2 1) was prepared during the Linde era (664-665) (p. 666c23), another Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (of Tanguang * [d. before 665], a vinaya master) was written in Linde 2 (665) (p. 624b8-9), a mere two years before Daoxuan's own death. For this reason, we may say that the Xu gaoseng zhuan covers a period of one and half centuries from the very beginning of the sixth century (coinciding with the beginning of Liang Wudi's reign) to the middle of the seventh century, when Daoxuan was approaching the last years of his life.

4 The Xu gaoseng zhuan also circulated in editions of thirty-one or forty juan. For the complicated history of the different versions of the text, see Ibuki 1990. The other five sections are gantong M ("Thaumaturges"), yishen M4 ("Self-immolators"), dusong f ("Reciters"), xingfu F ("Benefactors"), and zake tf4 ("Mis- cellaneous").

5 Jan 1990. In addition, Yinshun (1997: 33-37) also briefly discusses some portions of the "Xichan lun" (cf. Ibuki [tr.] 1997: 40-46).

334 CHEN JINHUA

succeeds in explicating some philological and doctrinal complexities implied in this rather abstruse work; however, it still leaves important issues unexplored. The first two parts of the present article will treat certain aspects of this difficult text mainly, Daoxuan's own understanding of meditation (dhyana practice), and the regional affiliations of meditation practitioners as they are described by him.

As we shall learn, Daoxuan was not merely a commentator on meditation and its history in China; he was also an intensive practitioner of this Buddhist discipline. Our rediscovery of his close relationship with a capital monastery that was a base for the erstwhile Sui dynasty national meditation center reveals a long forgotten di- mension of Daoxuan's intellectual life. The third part of the article will therefore be devoted to identifying this new evidence for Daoxuan's involvement in the Chinese meditation tradition.

(I) Daoxuan's Understanding of Meditation

In this part we will delineate some major points of Daoxuan's understanding of meditation as expressed in his "Xichan lun," including (1) his general understanding of dhyana practice, (2) his ideas on dhyana practice in connection with the notion of the tripartite division of the Law of the Buddha, and (3) his criticism of some views and practices that his contemporaries conceived and carried out in relation to meditation.

(I. 1) Dhydna Practice (Meditation): Nature and Function

Daoxuan begins his "Xichan lun" with what appears as a canoni- cal quotation:

Isn't this asserted in the sutra(s)? "Dhyana and knowledge (zhi gr; Skt. jna-na) complement each other, while recollection (nian ;; Skt. smrtz) and wisdom (hui M; Skt. prajind) inspire one another; the spirit roams about [the realm of] awakening (jue W, Skt. bodhi) and contemplation (guan I; Skt. vipasyand, or vidarsana), stimulating envoys to run between them."

6 The Korean edition of the Xu gaoseng zhuan on which the Taisho Buddhist canon is based has huo A, while it is gan M,, in four other editions (of the Song, Yuan, Ming and the Kunaisho). See Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 5060, p. 596, editorial note 1. It seems to me that gan fits in better with the context.

7 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, vol. 2060, pp. 595c26-596al.


I have been unable to identify the source or sources for these two paired phrases. It may be that Daoxuan did not quote literally from one particular source, but rather was condensing and paraphrasing ideas found in a number of scriptures. Whatever the case may have been, it is clear that he is stressing the interdependent and mutually complementary relationship between dhyana practice (meditation) and doctrinal studies (wisdom) two of the three fundamental Bud- dhist disciplines which he presents here as two pairs of practices, dhyana vis-a-vis knowledge, recollection vis-a-vis wisdom.

Immediately after this abstract statement, Daoxuan explains for his reader what he believes these phrases assert:

PjJJ2:M:AUNK ? fRMAYR U-144, 1VVfiTCUiO; WE , -$vf AMEAfL

W ~~~~~~~~~8

How do we know that this is true? It is simply because the realm of desire (yujie AYt) confounds good [intentions] and by its nature extends to the "six heavens" (liutian A)\);9 and because the realm of form (sejie ,h) contains the accomplishment of concentration (ding Z, Skt. sam&dhi), whose substance covers the "eight stages" (badi ,fJt).'0 Both of these two realms fall within the domain of secular ties, without one differing from the other in their "taste for craving." Both are nothing but samudaya jidi = "causes for the origi- nation of suffering") to different degrees. Therefore, although in retribution they yield suffering and pleasure [respectively], in the final analysis they only represent transmigration in different realms. Neither of them can be said definitely to transcend [re]birth. Provisionally these two levels are roughly distinguished by the two conditions of being chaotic and being peaceful. Thus, the sages and worthies of the "Three Vehicles" (sansheng i5.R) and the practitioners of the "six heterodox schools" all came to rely on the "preliminary stages of concentration" (chuding VJJ) in order to suppress the turbulence [of the mind] and to ease worries. This is really because the minds [of practitioners] differ from one another in coarseness and subtlety, and it is thanks to the wisdom that the whole path is initiated. Therefore, by getting hold of this single stage [of concentration], people are able to carry it out to the limit, whether the path is heterodox or orthodox.

8 "Xichan lun," T vol. 50, vol. 2060, p. 596a1-8. 9 The "six heavens" denote the six levels of existence in the realm of desire:

the heavens of the Catur-maharaja-kayikas, Trayastrirmsah, Yama, Tusita, Nir- manarati, Paranirmita-vasavartin.

10 "Eight Stages" here most likely refers to the four stages of dhyana in the realm of form and the same number in the "realm of formlessness" (wuse jie !4E

1 Emend diji M% to jidi =

336 CHEN JINHUA

Daoxuan takes ding (concentration, or samadhi), a form of meditation, as a method that both Buddhist and non-Buddhist practitioners could use for different purposes. He is also of the opinion that, although belonging to the realm of form, which is above the realm of desire, concentration alone will not deliver practitioners from the cycle of birth and death. In Daoxuan's understanding, meditation in general and concentration in particular are no more than a tech- nique which, properly employed, may contribute to the spiritual development of the practitioner, but not necessarily to achieving enlightenment. Obviously, such an understanding of meditation is a far cry from the one envisioned by later Chan ideologues, according to whom meditation alone was the single necessary and sufficient means to enlightenment.

(1.2) Dhydna Practice in Connection with the Notion of the "Three Epochs"

After this brief discussion of the nature and function of concentration, Daoxuan turns to a problem that some of his contemporaries had perceived regarding the feasibility of dhyana practice in a period far away from that of the Buddha. Related to the notion of the tripartite division of the Law of the Buddha: (1) Right Law (zhengfa IEjA, saddharma), (2) Simulated Law (xiangfa fA, pratiruipakadharma), and (3) Law of the End (mofa *jA, pascimadharna), this problem was based on the understanding that meditation could only be practiced during the first two epochs, when Buddhist teachings remained relatively pure, and that it was not appropriate for those living in the final epoch, when the faculties of people had become so dull that they were not qualified to practice any Buddhist discipline other than vinaya (precepts).'2_

Daoxuan explicated the problem by showing the relativity of the division of the "Three Epochs." Indeed, he says, this tripartite division is stipulated on the basis of the relative sharpness of the practitioners' faculties. But this is only a very general classification, which should not discourage people from vigorously practicing any particular discipline of Buddhism. Daoxuan assures the skeptics that success in Buddhist practice depends on the efforts of the practitioner. If one is able to return to the origin, to experience the Way directly and profoundly detach oneself from all beings, then study-

12 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596a23-26. Nattier 1991.


ing Buddhism in the period of mofa can still be as effective as in the Buddha's own time. 13

Daoxuan supplements this general remark with a detailed discussion of the "Three Epochs" based on the Shanjian lu Q (i.e. Shanjianli piposha < Skt. Sudars'ana vibhdsa vinaya), as he himself acknowledges.'4 It is interesting to note that Daoxuan was under the belief that his time was already part of the mofa epoch, which meant that for him the parinirvan.a had happened no later than 1333 BC since, according to the scheme of the "Three Epochs," the mofa did not begin until two thousand years after the parinirvana and that he himself was writing before AD 667. " This understand-

13 "Xichan lun," T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596a26-b 1. 14 Tvol. 24, no. 1462, p. 796c20ff. In fact the Sudarsana vibhdsa vinaya does not

explicitly expound the tripartite division of the Law of Buddha; but Daoxuan is not the only Sui-Tang author to have attributed the 1,000-1,000-10,000 division of the "Three Epochs" to that vinaya text. For another example, see Fei Zhang- fang , (d. after 598), Lidai sanbao ji f{f 5WtE*, (Records of the Three Treasures through the Ages), T vol. 49, no. 2034, p. 107bl4-15. There were different theories regarding the classification of the Three Epochs (Takao 1952: 54-96). The classification that Daoxuan opts for is as follows ("Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p.596bl-7):

Zhengfa: The first millennium after the parinirvana is called zhengfa. During this period, people were able to combine all the true ways for the accomplishment of sagehood, with their faculties and enlightenment no different [from those of the people who lived in the Buddha's time].

Xiangfa: The second millennium after the parinirvana, during which people practiced in accordance with the Buddha's teachings. People's abilities gradually got duller and duller, leading to the loss of the stages through which people come to comprehend the principle of enlightenment. When people sustained and upheld the dharma by focusing their minds on quiescence, they were able to understand nature and essence only vaguely. As for wisdom, however, it was no longer so well cultivated and expounded. Since it only bore some resemblance to the Way, this period was called xiangfa.

Mofa: The ten millennia after the parinirvana, during which people deviated from meditation and wisdom, and only the ordinary precepts were pro- moted. People used the "awe-inspiring deportments" (weii *Iff) to compose their minds and protect their decorum. In appearance they seemed to be in conformity with the traces of meditation. However, as the functions of mind were adrift, they were not in harmony with the correct attitudes to practice.

15 There existed various dates for the parinirvana. For example, Huisi , (515-77) proposed 1067 BC and Fei Zhangfang, 609 BC. See Forte 1988: 30-31, Forte 1996: 479-81; see also Chappell 1980. In one of his works written in his later years, Daoxuan lists several variant dates for the Buddha, ranging from (1) the

338 CHEN JINHUA

ing varies from the idea that the time when Daoxuan was living was falling under the xiangfa epoch, which seems to have been more widely accepted among his contemporaries (even Daoxuan himself was occasionally an upholder of this idea)."6

Daoxuan then reiterates the importance of concentration: contrary to those who leave their minds as unstable as flowing water and will never achieve any religious goal in this world, those who succeed in pacifying their thoughts and detaching themselves from objects will definitely sustain the purity of the Buddhist truth and distinguish it more clearly. He says that if a man sits peacefully in a village even a Taoist immortal might deride him; but if he lies down to sleep in an empty forest, he will be unequivocally praised by all the sages. According to Daoxuan the reason for this is quite simple: if one seeks the mind through quiescence one will have little difficulty in com-

reign of KingJie 1, the notorious tyrant who was the last ruler of the Xia dynasty (ca. 21St century BC - ca. 16th century BC), to (2) the Shang dynasty (ca. 16th

century BC - ca. 1 th century BC), (3) the period of King Zhao of the Zhou (r. 1052 BC - 1002 BC), and (4) the period of Duke Zhuang of Lu (r. 561 BC - 510 BC). See Daoxuan liishi gantong lu IA O& (Record of the Miraculous In- structions Given [by the Deities] to Vinaya Master Daoxuan), Tvol. 52, no. 2107, p. 439bl-8. The original text gives the Duke of Lu as Zhuanggong 45&i, but since there was no Duke of Lu by that name I suspect that it is a mistake for Zhaogong

16 See Daoxuan's preface to his Sf/en la shanfan buque xingshi chao Rg}Hf$I V_ w V (Extracts from the Sfen la about the Procedures and Rituals, [with an

Eye to] Deleting the Superfluous and Supplementing the Insufficient [in the Vi- naya Text]), T vol. 40, no. 1804, p. 16, in which he describes his age as xiang1i f , that is, xiangfa zhiji iA.* (the end of the xiangfa epoch). Cf. Yuanzhao's R,fA (1048-1116) Sffenli xingshi chao zichi ji j* (Supporting Notes on the Sifen lu xingshi chao) (Tvol. 40, no. 1805, p. 160b18-19), according to which Daoxuan, who lived over fifteen hundred years after the parinirvania, was at the end of the xiangfa (xiangfa zhi mo ft). On other occasions Daoxuan also uses the ambiguous expression xiangmo f&*. For example, in his synoptic treatise on the Xu gaoseng zhuan section on "Self-immolators," the "Yishen lun" a4iwf, he observes that the practice of self-immolation can be relied on by people in the epoch(s) of xiangmo. James Benn, who provides a superb translation of the entirety of this highly elusive text in his ground-breaking study of self- immolation in medieval China, leaves it open whether xiangmo should be understood as "the end of the xiangfa" or as "the epochs of xiangfa and mofa" (Benn 2001: 123, note 131). Benn's prudence is laudable given that Daoxuan himself was oscillating about whether to denote his own age as xiangfa or mofa. The Sui Bud- dhist ideologue Fei Zhangfang, on the other hand, strongly believed that his time belonged to the beginning of the xiangfa epoch. See Lidai sanbao ji, T vol. 49, no.2034, p. 107bl2-15, as discussed in ChenJinhua 2002: 81, n. 96.


posing one's scattered mind, which may in turn lead to liberation.17 After lauding the merits of dhyana practice emphatically even during

the mofa epoch, Daoxuan lashes out at the large number of contem-

porary Buddhist practitioners who, according to him, are blatantly abusing the teachings and the practice of meditation:

: . B ff#Rt~3#° ,, tReE{XW° J i GUGHM, -ffi2e n I; L, , FSAA B^ ° ¢ mMP. , : H/ i ° mHJA E

In the current world there are some "students of concentration" (dingxue MT) who wrongly transmit the "teachings of transformation (literally, 'wind')." They mix up secular practices [with Buddhist techniques] and do not take meditation practice (literally, "rituals") seriously. They discuss the expounding of emptiness through form in both their mind and speech. They essentialize confusion as quiescence and firmly embody it in [their] attachment. Spiritual function is drowned under their words and orders, and the [true] marks of concentration become rotten on their lips. They both reject the lesser vehicle and abandon the great vehicle, and [in doing so] establish a separate school that stands alone. [The ways in which] they attempt to maintain and help [people] and to sustain and uphold [the dharma] are startlingly perverted and eccentric. What the [Da] ,hi[du] lun [J<]~[/]g (Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom) has recounted is amply demonstrated in the accounts above."9 Recently, those who follow this [type of meditation] have been many.

Daoxuan warns these misguided dhyana practitioners that the ef-

ficacy of focusing one's mind on quiescence is recounted in all the texts, whereas the effectiveness of composing one's consciousness amidst chaos and confusion has never been proved either in the past or in the present.20 In short, he makes it crystal clear that meditation must be advocated and seriously practiced in the age of mofa, not in spite but because of the degenerate nature of that age.

As a final remark on the unique function and importance of meditation, Daoxuan admits, on the one hand, that meditation and wisdom constitute two irreplaceable disciplines in Buddhism; and on the other hand, it is to meditation alone that he attributes certain

supernatural powers, like that of bringing about continuous propi-

7 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596b17-21. 18 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596b22-26. 19 This probably refers to some understandings and practices related to medi-

tation that are condemned as perverted in the Da zhidu lun, Tvol. 25, no. 1509, p. 189a-b (I thank James Benn for his assistance in identifying this source).

20 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p.596b27-29.

CHEN JINHUA

tious signs, of predicting what has not come into being, of attaining ease and pleasure in the world, and of securing the assistance and protection of Heavenly Beings.21

This understanding is strongly reminiscent of that of his predeces- sor Huijiao M1e (497-554), as expressed in the latter's synoptic treatise attached to the dhyana section of his famous anthology of monastic biographies.22 But this appreciation for dhyana practice never led Daoxuan to emphasize it at the expense of the other two Buddhist disciplines, doctrinal studies (prajna, zhihui %N,) and the observance of precepts (vinaya,jielii J ). Rather, he condemned the tendency to separate dhyana practice from doctrinal and vinaya cultivation and to bring any of them into conflict.

(1.3) Daoxuan's Criticism of Some Views and Practices Related to Meditation

Let us first look at the opposition of dhyana practice to doctrinal studies, which Daoxuan subjected to severe criticism:

LtAf±Lf z , nv- MgJ -r ° r' _t~, °fi Y o ,, T o a ~f,i~tfi,

I IN ° -

i ,

[ -mm wCIRm; M^¢ t, 2

t R18mL\m ° R4fW=k9K, XX4MO mw-S49SS, ^ fT t - u mkn ,%, "ZVb ° <'t, t{g|-P ? VW , Efi28 ° «tt +1R, ,1MtMt 23

Most of the practitioners of concentration in recent times devalue the "gate of doctrine" (yimen arj). They take what they [occasionally] heard on the road as their standard and attempt to learn [meditation] in accordance with it. They fail to think it over and make thoughtful selection. This results in their violation of the sutras of "perfect meaning" (liao[yZ] T [X]). Whenever

they attempt to grasp the ultimate truth, more often than not they end up having their reputation damaged. They spew out sayings that invite ridicule and repeat them again and again. Some of them have indulged in worldly forms of concentration, calling it the "practice of true emptiness." Reciting and memorizing the [names of the Buddha Amitayus in the] west, they are eagerly intent to destroy delusion. Draping rosaries over their shoulders and necks, they finger them at random, calling this "meditation by counting [the numbers]" (chanshu rft!). Wearing monastic robes, they beg for food to eat, taking [intellectual] calculations as the "Way of Mind" (xindao jl_). Fur- thermore, there are some who take shelter in the halls [of monasteries], cir-

21 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p.597al8-21. 22

Gaoseng zhuan iWf#fii (Biographies of Eminent Monks), Tvol. 50, no. 2059, p. 400bl6ff; Jan 1990: 3ff.

23 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597a21-29.

340


cumambulating there in the hope of exhausting their pieties. Pacifying their bodies with heterodox beliefs, they just maintain these crooked views, to which they cling as truth to the exclusion of the other teachings, which they dismiss as all wrong. Harboring biases as hard as ice, who among them will be able to recognize his inverted view of the self? These are two kinds of attachment towards the precepts and views which are activated [by their biases]. Unless they rid themselves of their stubbornness and attachment, their stupidity and dullness will keep growing.

The casual attitude that these dhyana practitioners assumed towards Buddhist doctrines led them to deviate from the fundamental Buddhist truths and only brought them humiliation. The range of dhyana-related practices that Daoxuan criticizes here seems rather extensive. They included some apparently Pure Land-related practices (e.g. nianfo -&f and visualization of the Pure Land), begging for food (qishi '-A) one of the twelve acts of dhiita (austerities) and even a peculiar form ofjingxing, fj (Skt. cankramana, circumam- bulation).

While highly critical of dhyana practitioners of this sort, who ignore doctrinal studies, Daoxuan shows even stronger censure of those who practice dhyana without due regard to precepts, which should not surprise us given his status as a vinaya master:

t I< 'N't LE

Moreover, ther aresom h ar obsesse wit the> exera apperanc [of mdtaton andwho, ou of thi como interest, gather wtogehe in oe Wiedn axes, andknive te do n F - TotaoAiLd [hrig caRes JWhet they

co, dr"ink an eat, dfo thTy evr L e f eig t nigt(i[ A ski [ 2cET" R fT O -E TE-m ,k XL 23A O2

Moreover, there are some who are obsessed with the external appearance [of meditation] and who, out of their common interest, gather together in some monasteries (shanmen trX). They are confused in observing the monastic prohibitions and in their actions remain trapped in the "net of physical form." Wielding axes and knives, they do not avoid [hurting] creatures. When they cook, drink and eat, do they ever feel ashamed of eating at night (xiu [shi] fR [-A]) and eating in impure places (chu gQ)?25 Though strong and upright in nature, some of them are prone in their will to associate with lesser types. They do

24 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, vol. 2060, p. 597b5-18. 25 The expression xiuchu gA is rarely attested and hard to understand. The

tentative translation proposed here is based on Yinshun (1997: 35). No eating after noon, much less at night, was allowed according to Buddhist precepts. Likewise, Buddhist precepts require that no eating be conducted in unclean places.

342 CHEN JINHUA

not seek out good friends and rarely read the authentic scriptures. When they happen to hear a sentence [from the scriptures], they immediately take it as their guide. They claim that their "five polluting conditions" (wuzhu 7fift)26 have long been defeated and that they are just about to complete the "Ten Stages" (shidi +--t).27 They [claim that] they have discovered the dharma- nature from early on and have already clearly understood the wisdom of the Buddha. All these [delusions] come from placing the mind on conditioned objects and falsely commenting on the [spiritual] clarity and tranquility. Returning to attach to the "mental states" (xinzhu iLf,), their minds con- tinue to change following these external appearances. Unaware of the tran- sition of their minds, they embrace this vain dependence. They contemplate purity after the mind is activated; so how could their minds attain and ac- cord with the truth? Therefore, when the sutras describe the marks of the mind, they are compared with [an] incessantly drifting (piaogu ,*) [boat]. The tongues of snakes, the flames of lamps, the standing mountains and the flowing water-[all these phenomena] rise and are destroyed with every single thought; ever changing, they renew themselves again and again. Not being aware of these confused thoughts, they embrace instead the "net of perverted views." Proclaiming each other as "Masters of Dhyana" (chanzong !f,), they are in fact unfamiliar with the basics (literally, "letters" [zi -]) of dhyana. This kind of persons are so numerous that all the expounders [of Buddhism] make light of them, which has led to the popularity of this saying: "Ignorant old men are called meditation masters, while the men of confused understanding all take refuge in [the way of] 'clarifying the virtue [of the human mind]' (mingde Hftj)." Turning back from this confusion will lead to great illumination, while following this falsehood will obscure the true categories [of religious practice]. Since they have not considered this saying carefully, they just engage in talking to each other about names and reality.

"Gathering together at some monasteries" (, LU__') probably means that the dhyana practitioners described here constituted their own monastic communities, whereas "wielding axes and knives" ( ,JI_- J) should probably be understood as indicating some communal manual labor, like gardening or woodcutting, a practice which later Chan monastic codes feature as "puqing zuowu" ~ji{'fS (literally, "universally inviting the monastic members to participate in labor work").28 Obviously, Daoxuan is dealing here with some pioneers of Chan monasticism. As they had to build monasteries on wasteland

26 Wuzhu (or wuzhudi ±ESfiti, or wuzhudihuo hfiJft,_,) refers to the five fundamental conditions of the passions and delusions that prevent one from achieving enlightenment. For a list of these five conditions, see Nakamura 1981: 366, Ding 1984: 260.

27 Shidi (or shizhu +t±f) refers to the ten stages (bhami) of the bodhisattva path. A list of these ten stages can be found in Nakamura 1981: 654, Ding 1984: 112.

28 See, for example, the Chanyuan qinggui 03U'M[ (Pure Codes for the Chan Gardens [Monasteries]), X,J 111, p. 464d14ff.


and support themselves, at least in part, with the fruit of their own labor, they could not avoid working in the fields or other "impure" places that could appear repugnant to a strict vinaya upholder like Daoxuan. Such dhyana practitioners also attempted to demonstrate

(or discover) spiritual tranquility in the external objects and daily life, a theoretical orientation which Daoxuan criticizes here as "com-

menting falsely on [spiritual] clarity and tranquility by focusing their minds on conditioned objects" (iJt~iLt , X 20i), "attaching the mind to 'mental states' and letting it follow the external appearance" (j_l6,L{f , "f4t'l,C), "contemplating purity after the mind is activated" (4L,,,), and so on. This kind of tendency also echoes the later Chan ideology of envisioning meditation as a religious form rooted in daily life and accessible to ordinary people. Combining all the theoretical and practical "defects" that Daoxuan attributes to these dhyana practitioners, we get the impression that they rather

closely match several salient features that both later Chan ideologues (starting from the Song and Yuan periods) and some modern Chan scholars have invoked to characterize Chan monasticism and sec- tarianism. They include the effort to incorporate Chan enlightenment into daily life, advocacy of communal manual labor and economic self-sufficiency, etc.29 Although some scholars have recently challenged the existence of such a "proto-Chan" ideology and movement under the Tang dynasty,30 Daoxuan's descriptions and criticisms-albeit obviously biased and even hostile-seem to provide serious evidence that a significant number of dhyana practitioners were experimenting with these ideas as early as the middle of the seventh century.

Daoxuan also accused them of breaking monastic rules and/or

prohibitions not merely because their circumstances had "degraded" them to the level of commoners, but also because of their over-con- fidence in their own religious achievements, which in his view was no more than self-conceit, a fundamental obstacle to enlightenment. Daoxuan found to his distress that those dhyana practitioners who belittled or even totally abandoned the observance of precepts seri-

ously damaged not only their own image, but also that of the meditation practitioners as a whole, who as a result became objects of ridicule in the eyes of contemporary Buddhist preachers.

29 Ui 1935: 81-90, summarized and discussed in Foulk 1987: 308ff. 30 See particularly Foulk's thought-provoking study (1987, especially Chapter

VII).

344 CHEN JINHUA

Out of his antipathy to such narrow-minded and lopsided attitudes toward dhyana practice, Daoxuan strongly commended the even- handed stress on cultivation of wisdom and meditation that was characteristic of the Tiantai f tradition:

rnl4 INtL 1 , mr m-, ;t r q f4- m P,, I' ,Q1 HA N a tiMt & a aA-

R tt0, #i"? _1_f)J2 r>+It [ 2 31

In the past, there were some who did not begin to participate in the dharma- gate until they had severed all ties with the [secular] world. Extensively attending lectures on the sastras and satras, they understood clearly and were well versed in wisdom and precepts. Only after that did they turn their spirit to concentrating on consciousness. Taking the words of the sages as criteria, in all their actions they followed the precepts. In cultivating the principles of tranquility they did not forget about the former teachings of [Buddhist] knowledge (zhi X'). Surely they conformed to the twin mirrors of humanity and the dharma and to the "Four Necessities" (szyi E {f), both the true and the provisional ones.32 How could any false consciousness remain if they had not known this penetration into knowledge?33 If one practices meditation in this way, there will be no dhyana without wisdom. Thus, it was on the peaks of Heng[yue] and the cliffs of Mount [Tian]tai that this style (literally, "wind") of [dhyana] arose.

According to Daoxuan, Huisi and Zhiyi, who resided at Hengyue and Tiantai respectively, as well as other dhyana practitioners who followed in their path, are to be applauded because they prepared their dhyana practice with cultivation in Buddhist wisdom (teachings) and precepts, which enabled them to integrate the three fundamental Buddhist disciplines into a coherent and dynamic whole.

On the basis of the foregoing discussion we may conclude as follows. Compared with dhyana practitioners, both in his day and later, who evinced an obvious tendency to exaggerate the function of meditation, Daoxuan clearly differs by taking meditation as no more than one of the three major Buddhist disciplines, each of which, he

31 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597a29-b5. 32 The four necessities, or things on which the religious rely. They were of two

kinds, practical (xing {j) and spiritual (dharma, fa jA), which might correspond to what Daoxuan calls here the "provisional" (su f{) and "true" (zhen jR) four necessities. The practical four necessities were (1) rag clothing, (2) begging for food, (3) sitting under trees, and (4) purgatives and diuretics as moral and spiritual means. The spiritual four necessities included (1) the Buddhist truth, (2) the siutras of "perfect meaning," (3) the meaning (or spirit) of the sutras, and (4) Buddha-wisdom. See Nakamura 1981: 502, Ding 1984: 386-87, Soothill 1981: 170.

33 This sentence does not make sense in the context. Some characters may have been corrupted.


asserts, should complement the others rather than replace any of them. Starting from there, Daoxuan repeatedly highlights the necessity of supporting dhyana practice with broad study of the Buddhist doctrine and intense observance of the precepts areas that might be thought to lie outside the domain of dhyana practice proper. Com- pared with Tiantai's double emphasis on meditation and wisdom, Daoxuan's approach can be characterized as a "triple" stress on meditation, wisdom and precepts, from which we can easily discern a persistent effort to bring dhyana practice as a whole into a different kind of relationship with the Buddhist tradition at large.

It is hard to ignore the vitriolic side of Daoxuan's attacks against the nameless practitioners of dhyana of his own time. One may well wonder, "How did Daoxuan come to hold such strong resentment?", and "Who were the subjects of such bitter criticisms?" We will only be able to answer these questions after having properly reviewed Daoxuan's discussion of the regional filiations and internecine po- lemics of dhyana practice in sixth- and seventh-century China.

(II) Meditation Traditions in Sixth- and Seventh-Century China in the Eyes of Daoxuan34

Daoxuan's "Xichan lun" describes meditative practice in China in the sixth and seventh centuries in terms of six meditation groups led and represented by six meditation masters, based in the following locations:

(1) some areas in the Northeast centered around Yexia X-S (in present-day

Anyang , Henan) and Luoyang: Sengchou {Wf (480-560);

(2) some areas in the Northwest centered around Chang'an: Sengshi fWW (476-563);

(3) some areas around the Yangtze and Luo *Z Rivers: Bodhidharma R Apo (fl. 5th c.);

(4) the area ofJinling , (present-day Nanjing): Zhicui t (var. Zhiguan , d. after 577);

(5) Nanyue -A,* (i.e. Hengyue MW, present-day Hengyang WM, Hunan), Jingzhou 14PJ4' (in present-day Hubei) and Tiantai *: Huisi , (515-77) (followed by Zhiyi WM [538-97]);

3 More detailed information on these meditation traditions can be found in

Chen Jinhua 2002, Chapter Four.

CHEN JINHUA

(6) some areas in present-day Shanxi, centered around Jinyang § (i.e. Taiyuan kj#,): Huizan Ma (536-607).

In this second part of our analysis we will first look into the way Daoxuan presents these six meditation groups in the treatise and in the separate biographies of their chief members in the Xu gaoseng zhuan; then we will examine the interrelations between the six groups as understood by Daoxuan himself.

(II. 1) Sengchou and Sengshi

Daoxuan first introduces us to the two northern meditation groups led by Sengchou and Sengshi respectively, highlighting the extra-

ordinary esteem the two masters attracted from the Northern Qi (550-77) and Northern Zhou (557-81) rulers, which in his eyes was comparable with the favor that the famous Buddhist monks Fotu

Cheng f[FIf (?-348) and Daoan L _ (312-85) enjoyed from their own patrons.35 Daoxuan ascribes the creation of the Chinese meditation tradition to them: "Therefore, it was only thanks to these two worthies that the guiding principles were opened for the meditative tradition in central China; like one step after the other, one lamp after the other, their transmission was carried on without ceasing."36 Daoxuan spares no energy in praising Sengchou and Sengshi for their tremendous contribution to the spread of meditation practice in China. His record of the two monks and of their groups confirms that they were indeed predominant driving forces behind its development in northern China during the sixth century and afterwards.

Sengchou had been a successful and highly respected Confucian

professor at the National Academy (Taixue boshi / ;tl±) before

becoming a monk at the age of twenty-eight, in the year 507, under the reign of Emperor Xuanwu of the Northern Wei (r. 499-515). He first studied with Daofang X,M_ (d. after 506), an outstanding dis-

ciple of the Indian dhyana master Buddha (Ch. Fotuo fpS'; var. Bhadra [Ch. Batuo &rWt], fl. 525-38), before going to visit Buddha himself at Songshan UII and receiving instruction from him personally. His accomplishments in meditation were highly commended by Buddha, who praised him as the person most proficient in that discipline in all the areas east of the Pamirs. Sengchou enjoyed the

35 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596b29-c4. 36 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596c4-5.

346


respect of Emperor Xiaowu of the Northern Wei (r. 532-34), and particularly of Emperor Wenxuan of the Northern Qi (r. 550-59), who in 552 built the Yunmensi wPi4TY for him at Longshan fLu, to the southwest of his capital Yexia, and at the same time appointed him superintendent of the grotto temples around that area. In addition, and apparently at Sengchou's instigation, the Northern QJ emperor established a number of "meditation training centers" (chansi fif) all over his state, which proved quite effective in spreading meditation in Northern China.37

As far as Sengchou's meditation teaching is concerned, most modern scholars, probably based mainly on his Xu gaoseng zhuan biography, have characterized it in terms of such traditional Hinayana meditation forms as si nianchu E ("Four Foundations of Mindfulness"), wuting HI# ("Five Ways of Stopping [Thoughts]"), shiliu tesheng

+A,XF"J ("Sixteen Extraordinary and Victorious Methods"), and others.38 This sort of characterization may need to be altered in the light of the recent archaeological discovery of two meditation grotto- complexes with which Sengchou and his group were deeply involved:39 the inscriptions found there demonstrate that Sengchou's meditation methods were based on a combination of the Nirvana sitra and Avatamsaka siitra, which was crucial for the later development of the Mahayana meditation tradition in China.40

With the two distinguished monks Daofang A, (d. after 506) and Huiguang #Y (d. after 560)41 as his fellow-disciples under Buddha,

37 Sengchou's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 553b-555b); for studies of this remarkable monk, see the series of articles by Jan Yun-hua (1983, 1990, 1990a, 1990b). See also Yanagida 1970, Faure 1986, Yan (1995, 1998) and Inamoto 2000.

38 E.g. Jan 1983, Yanagida 1970. 39 Located in Anyang , Henan, these two grotto-complexes are currently

designated as "Bei Xiangtangshan shiku" 4L2WLEV and "Xiao Nanhai shiku" IJ\1Xi;EI2. For Sengchou and his group's ties to these two grotto temples, see Yan's and Inamoto's studies quoted above.

40 Yan 1995: 78-89. 4" Sengchou studied with Daofang before going to study with Buddha. Though

Huiguang was mainly celebrated as a forerunner of the Chinese vinaya tradition, his group was also deeply involved in the practice of meditation; for this, see my discussion in Chen Jinhua (2002: section 1.2.2). It is almost a consensus among scholars that Huiguang was born in 468 and died in 537 at the age of seventy. I have shown elsewhere (Chen Jinhua 2002: 25-27, n. 41) that it is problematic to date Huiguang's birth and death in this way. Rather, I have found evidence to show that Huiguang lived beyond 560.

348 CHEN JINHUA

Sengchou is said to have attracted over one thousand disciples, which does not seem to be an exaggeration given his influence under the Northern and Eastern Wei dynasties and the Northern Qi. Only four of them are known to us, however: (1) Tanxun ft- (515-99), whom Sui Wendi (r. 581-604) held in great esteem; (2) Zhishun X (533- 604), an intensive practitioner of austerities and a philanthropic activist; (3) Sengyong Ng (543-631), apparently one of the youngest disciples of Sengchou, who became later a disciple and successor of the Sanjiejiao - t leader Xinxing ft-1fT (541-94); and (4) Zhimin % (d. after 603), who became a (if not the) successor of Sengchou at Yunmensi.42

Let us now turn to Sengshi and his group. Sengshi studied meditation under the Central Indian monk Ratnamati (Ch. Lenamoti Ih#3,@!f4, d. ca. 513) in Luoyang.43 Ratnamati was said to have a

very high regard for his achievement in meditation. Probably sometime after 534 or 535, when Northern China was again divided into two rival states, the Eastern and Western Wei, Sengshi returned to his native place in Chang'an; there he quickly captured the attention of Yuwen Tai F (505-56), who was then dominating the Western Wei regime (535-56) in the capacity of prime minister. Apparently prompted by Yuwen Tai, the Western Wei government appointed Sengshi as the "National Master of the Three Canons" (Guo sanzang -X), probably the highest monastic authority within its territory.44 After Yuwen Tai's third son YuwenJue F (542- 557, Emperor Xiaomin of the Northern Zhou [r. 556-57]) replaced the Western Wei with his own dynasty, the Northern Zhou ILJMJ (556-81), Sengshi's prestige increased to even greater heights. He was keenly sought out by members of the Northern Zhou royal family

42 For Tanxun, Zhixun and Sengyong, see their Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 559a-c, 569c-570b, 583c-584a; for Zhimin, see the relevant discussion below, 111.2.

4 Ratnamati arrived in China towards the end of the fifth century. A learned scholar and a proficient meditation master, he was also responsible for translating into Chinese several Buddhist texts, including the Dasabhiumikasitra sastra (Shidijing lun +tfq&w, T no. 1522). Due to his role in translating and advocating that treatise he came to be recognized as the initiator of the southern branch of the Dilunzong Mfp_&, (the Chinese Buddhist tradition based on the Dasabhumikasiitra sdstra), as opposed to the northern branch headed by his colleague Bodhiruci and his disciple Daochong L9 (fl. 520s).

44 For the title "Guo sanzang" and another closely related title, "Zhou sanzang" ')4'I15g ("Prefectural Master of the Three Canons"), see Chen Jinhua 2001: 24-25.


for bodhisattva-precepts. Despite his fame in his time, however, almost nothing is known of the style of Sengshi's meditation practice, except for his alleged reliance on the method of "jiuci" JLT, probably referring to the jiu cidi ding JL;. ("Nine Stages of Concen-

tration"), a traditional meditation method.

Sengshi's disciples included (1) Tanxiang ftS (?-582), who was remembered not only for his meditation skills but also for his supernatural ability to predict the future; (2) Sengyuan fiM (519-602); and (3) his life-time colleague Dharma Master Yi (Yi Fashi fyZl, 534-602). Both Sengyuan and Yi were instrumental in promoting meditation in Shu - (present-day Sichuan).45 None of Sengyuan's or Yi's disciples is known to us, but four monks are known to have been Tanxiang's disciples: (1) Huiduan IME (Jingduan ,fi, 543-

606), who was to distinguish himself as a leading Buddhist monk under the reigns of the two Sui Emperors, Wendi and Yangdi (r. 605-17); (2) Senghuang {f (534-618); (3) Facheng jg (563-640); and (4) Acarya Hui *ir]* (d. after 596). A strict observer of precepts, particularly proficient in the Shisong lii + ± O (Sarvdstivadavinaya, or Dasa- dhydyavinaya) and in the Mohe Sengqi lii {f9ftf (Mahdsamghika vinaya), Senghuang was appointed by the Northern Zhou government as "Prefectural Master of the Three Canons" (Zhou sanzang J'[-i R) in Mianzhou '$[J'[ (in present-day Sichuan). Facheng was also a very prestigious monk from whom Sui Wendi is said to have sought bodhisattva-precepts; after having declined this unusual honor, he retired to a mountain temple at Lantian HB (at Zhongnanshan g]- J).46

45 For Tanxiang, see his Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 558b-c; For Sengyuan and Yi, see their joint biography at Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 574b-c.

46 For Huiduan, Facheng and Senghuang, see their Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies at T vol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 576b-c, 688c-689b, and 694b-695a (for their discipleship under Tanxiang, see pp. 576cl, 688c21-22, 694c17). Facheng's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography merely identifies his teacher as Meditation Master Xiang t§ of the Chanlinsi fflt,--; this was obviously Tanxiang: the latter's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (p. 558c12) records the existence of his portraits at the Chanlinsi, suggesting that he must have resided at the temple for some time during his life. We know the existence of a student of Tanxiang by the name of Acarya Hui through an interesting story in which Tanxiang is believed to have been reborn as a monk called Huikuan MX (584-653) in present-day Sichuan (see Huikuan's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 600b-601b, particularly pp. 600c28-601a8).

CHEN JINHUA

(11.2) Bodhidharma

Immediately after Sengchou and Sengshi, Daoxuan turns to Bodhidharma. So much has been said about this Indian monk, who was to be extolled as the source of all the subsequent Chinese meditation traditions, that it seems unnecessary to elaborate further. We shall limit ourselves here to quoting Daoxuan's comment on Bodhidharma and his meditation group:

9 V 4L= t2 L* fg,- t L IMft J i 3Y o A M , xTAAM ritO

At _ - , ime,th cta4w t4k d, e ta frma T ' ~_, att-~l ° ~,,~tt , ~tî~- $?4 7

At the time there was a certain Bodhidharma who, taking divine transformation as his principle, expounded [his teachings] and guided [people] in the

regions of the Yangtse and Luo rivers. His highest merit derived from his Mahayana [method of] "Wall-gazing Contemplation" (biguan _-.). Buddhist students in the world followed him like people flocking to the marketplace. But the words he recited were difficult [for them] to understand exhaustively, and few were valorous and rigorous [enough to practice his teaching]. When I closely examine what he aspired to and modeled himself on, [I find that] he was determined to discard or negate; when I study the teaching he estab-

lished, [I find that] he abandoned the two principles of sin and merit. Upon closer inspection, the two wings of the true and provisional, the two wheels of the empty and being, cannot be caught even by Indra's net, nor can they be drawn in by tainted views. Was it because he was enlightened to this

[truth] through meditation that [Bodhidharma] chose to abstain from words?48

In this short passage, Daoxuan uses three Chinese phrases with

highly negative connotations in talking about Bodhidharma and his meditation group-qiandang Off ("discard and negate"), liangshe Wfi ("double-abandoning"), and jueyan ~i§ ("abstaining from the use of words"). This demonstrates his attempt to characterize Bodhi- dharma's meditation teaching in highly critical terms. Daoxuan also

emphasizes Bodhidharma's influence by saying that the people who claimed to have been his followers were as many as those flocking to a market-place. Yet only Huike KM,. (ca. 485-ca. 578),49 Tanlin |lH; (d. after 577), and Daoyu Lf (d.u.) are known to have been Bodhidharma's disciples. Finally, it is worthy of note that, although

47 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596c8-13. 48 Bernard Faure's translation of this passage, which differs from mine in some

points, is found in Faure 1997: 143. 49 For this new dating of Huike's death, see Chen Jinhua forthcoming (a).

350


Daoxuan praises Bodhidharma himself for his effort to promote a Mahayana form of meditation ("Wall-gazing Contemplation"), he remains rather skeptical of the effectiveness of this form for less talented and devoted practitioners. He is particularly critical of Bodhidharma's self-proclaimed followers who, he claims, fell far short of living up to his teaching.

(11.3) Zhicui-Huixiao and Huisi-Zh/iy

Following Bodhidharma, Daoxuan treats three monks together: Huisi and two of his disciples, Zhicui *rYfW (var. Zhiguan WM, d. after 577)50 and Zhiyi. Like Huisi, who had a "profound understanding of the mysterious and the subtle, while his deeds and virtues were unfathomable," Zhicui was also very proficient at meditation, attracting the attention of the Chen royal family who received his precepts and reverently worshipped his portrait. According to Daoxuan, Zhicui's fame as a meditation master swept all over southern China.5' Re- garding the merits and shortcomings of Zhicui's meditation teachings, Daoxuan makes the following comments:

rp _ ta0R, @gat o52

The merit of Zhicui's meditation method lay in its ability to promulgate [meditation], while it fell short of providing effective antidotes against [people's afflictions]. No one was more respected by the secular rulers than he. Not until he met Hengyue (i.e. Huisi) did Huisi get the opportunity to tell him of the errors [implied in his (Zhicui's) meditation], but he died without having overcome them.

50 Zhicui is said to have associated in Jinling with a Northern Buddhist leader when the latter was driven there by the suppression that the Northern Zhou rulers waged against Buddhism within the former Northern Qi territory, which fell into their hands in 577 (see below). From this, we can tell that Zhicui lived beyond 577. On another occasion, Zhicui's name is given as Zhiguan (see below). Although it is not clear which was the correct form of his name, compared with guan X (a kind of jade), cui IW ("bright") in combination with zhi ("knowledge") seems a more likely dharma-name (Zhicui W , "Wisdom as bright [as a star]"). Therefore I will stick to Zhicui, even though on some occasions the same monk is referred to as Zhiguan. According to a passage of Zhiyi's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 565c7-8), Chen Xuandi (r. 568-82) once welcomed Zhiyi to his court with the same protocols as previously accorded to the national master Acarya Guan (var. Cui). This Acarya Guan/Cui must have been Zhicui.

51 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 596c27-597al. 52 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597al-3.

352 CHEN JINHUA

As for Zhiyi-another and more famous disciple of Huisi's- Daoxuan was able to write his detailed biography mainly on the basis of a separate biography composed by his disciple Guanding i#IW (561-632); and he confines himself to brief remarks on his influence at the time, saying that as an eminent meditation master and an in- vincible expounder Zhiyi was respected as a national master by the Chen rulers, who heaped on him numerous honors such as they had never bestowed on any of their other subjects.53

It is well known that Huisi and Zhiyi initiated a meditation tradition which was based in three different areas, even though it is roughly designated under the general rubric "Tiantai": (1) Nanyue ME, where Huisi spent the last decade of his life; (2) Jingzhou, Zhiyi's native place, where in the early 590s he built the Yuquansi 7 an important base for his Tiantai tradition; and (3) Mount Tiantai, the headquarters of Zhiyi and his group, at least during his lifetime and in the decade following his death.54

While Zhiyi's meditation tradition has been well studied, very limited scholarly attention has been paid to the meditation group represented by Zhicui, which therefore deserves a more detailed discussion. Treated here as a disciple of Huisi, Zhicui actually did not become so until late in his life.55 Earlier on he had already distinguished himself as a

"Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597a8-l0. 54 Some Japanese and Western Tiantai scholars have called attention to Tian-

tai power bases other than Mount Tiantai (more specifically, the Guoqingsi Mm 4 on that mountain), especially the Yuquansi inJingzhou. The expansion of the Tiantai tradition intensified after Zhiyi died at the end of the sixth century; see Sekiguchi 1959, Penkower 1993, 1997.

55 When and where Zhicui met and studied with Huisi is not clear, even though the relevant account in Daoxuan's "Xichan lun" suggests that he did not meet Huisi until after he had achieved his extraordinary fame with the Chen rulers. If this is true, Zhicui must have met Huisi when the latter visited Jinling, which the Song-dynasty Tiantai Buddhist historian Zhipan , (d. after 1269) dates to Taijian 1 (569); see Fozu tongji {%$1FI..gE (General Record of the Buddha and Other Patriarchs), Tvol. 49, no. 2035, p. 180a4-26. This assumption becomes more plausible if we take into account the following fact. During his visit toJinling Huisi stayed at the Qixuansi j; on Sheshan J* b (Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 563c3), the temple where Huixiao was probably also staying at this time (see below), judging at least by the record about Huixiao's affiliation with the temple in 582 (see note 56). Given Zhicui's close relationship with Huixiao, he probably was also residing at the Qixuansi at the time of Huisi's visit. Zhicui's discipleship under Huisi is confirmed by Zhipan, who provides a brief entry on him in the Fozu tongii section devoted to Huisi's disciples (Tvol. 49, no. 2035, p. 196a9- 11). According to this note, Zhicui had studied with Huisi from an early age (which seems incompatible with Daoxuan's account) and engaged in the practice


representative of the meditation tradition based injinling. As we saw, Daoxuan suggests that despite his great success as a promoter of meditation Zhicui's system had some fundamental flaws, which he did not correct in the end even though Huisi had called his attention to them.

Daoxuan names Zhicui as the representative of the meditation group inJinling during the Chen dynasty, but in fact another meditation monk, Huixiao MU (d. after 582),56 was similarly respected by the Chen rulers for his expertise in that domain: this is what Daoxuan clearly implies in his biography of Tanqian a (542-607), who befriended Huixiao and Zhicui during his exile inJinling after the Northern Zhou Emperor Wudi (r. 560-78) had extended his perse- cution of Buddhism to the newly annexed Northern Qi in 577. Daoxuan features them as the "Axes of the Way" (daozhou X"J) under the Chen, as the "most eminent monks south of the Yangtze" who enjoyed the highest respect from the Chen rulers. While Huixiao was versed in both Confucianism and Buddhism and was particularly good at meditation, Zhicui had a profound understanding of meditation and of prajn-a teachings.57

of the Lotus samddhi (Fahua sanmei z&_ ), of which he attained a very profound understanding. Later he lived as a recluse on Zhongshan, from where he did not emerge until he reluctantly accepted Sui Yangdi's summons. This would mean that he lived beyond 605, and seems in contradiction with Daoxuan's suggestion in the "Xichan lun" to the effect that Zhicui died without having corrected the flaws in his meditation even after Huisi had pointed them out-suggesting a date not too long after the meeting with Huisi in 569 (probably shortly after 577, the latest date when he is known to have been alive).

56 The Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Huikuang VJO (534-613), one of Zhiyi's teachers before Huisi, reports that sometime around 605 Huikuang, who was posted at the Qixiasi t9 at Sheshan, decided to stay at the Guishan chanfang UoftiW, on the same mountain. The same biography also observes that the Guishan chanfang was formerly known as the "Qixuan jingshe" 1;3 ' (or Qixuansi), where a Meditation Master Huixiao Jj1fi% used to stay (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 503c6- 11). If this Meditation Master Huixiao was the Chen "National Master" Huixiao (which seems rather likely), then he must also have been the "Meditation Master Xiao of the Qixuansi" ;tAA4,Aig whom one of Para- martha's disciples, Zhijiao Wtu (var. Zhifu tt, d. 601), met in Yangdu II (i.e. Jinling) in Taijian 14 (582) while he was searching for some portions of the [irvJtza siutra (see Zhijiao's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 431c16- 26). For this reason I assume that Huixiao was still alive in 582 and that he had already been affiliated with the Qixuansi by the time (as will be seen below, he was at Zhongshan around 560, when he supervised a newly ordained Buddhist monk).

57 See Tanqian's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 572a16- 18. Tanqian was a prominent figure in Sui Buddhism and politics, mainly because

354 CHEN JINHUA

Thus, even though we do not know the details of Huixiao's relationship with Zhicui,58 it seems clear that the two monks can be considered as representatives of theJinling meditation group in the latter half of the sixth century. It may be that they had Sengding @E (ca. 540-624), a Tattvasiddhi scholar turned meditation spe-

cialist, as their colleague at Zhongshan LLT (orJiangshan M [I, east ofJinling). Among the disciples they trained at Zhongshan were two young and talented monks, Huiyin ME1 (539-627) and Baogong {Xffi

(542-621), the latter being also a disciple of Sengding.59 Baogong and Huiyin later became two leaders at the Sui national meditation center established at the very beginning of the seventh century (that is, the Chandingsi). After the Tang conquered the Sui the two monks remained powerful leaders of the samgha in the capital.60

The fragmentary information about Zhicui and Huixiao gleaned from different sources suggests the two mountains in thejinling area, Zhongshan and Sheshan (located forty 1i northwest ofJinling), as the main locus of activity of at least Huixiao, and possibly both of them. This is only natural since these mountains had emerged as two of

of his important role in distributing Buddhist relics to more than a hundred pre- fectures in the country and in the construction and running of the Chandingsi ifrIT5, as a national meditation center. Both projects were carried out at the beginning of the seventh century, in the last years of Sui Wendi (more about Chandingsi will be found below in section 11.5). Despite his importance, Tanqian has not received sufficient scholarly attention. To the best of my knowledge, only two articles have been published on him so far (Yuikei 1961, Lai 1983). I am myself now publishing a book on Tanqian and his group (Chen Jinhua 2002).

58 The only thing we know somehow is that they were apparently colleagues at Zhongshan, where they shared two disciples (see note 59).

59 Huiyin's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 522al3-17) suggests that he started to study with both Huixiao and Zhiguan sometime after he was fifteen and before he was ordained, or shortly after he was ordained. Knowing that in general one was ordained as a Buddhist monk shortly after age twenty, Huiyin's discipleship under Huixiao and Zhiguan probably took place in 560 (he was born in 539). For its part, Baogong's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 512c 11) tells us that he began to study under Huixiao after his ordination (around 562, supposing he was also ordained around twenty). Thus, almost at the same time when Huiyin started to study with both Huixiao and Zhicui on Zhongshan, Baogong became a disciple of Huixiao on the same mountain. It seems rather likely that Baogong also studied with Zhicui there. Baogong's discipleship under Sengding is explicitly noted in Sengding's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 579b20-21).

60 On the lives of Sengding, Baoging and Huiyin, see their Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 579b-c, 512c-513a, and 522a-b.


the most important meditation centers in the south from the early Northern and Southern Dynasties period (386-589).

The first known meditation master associated with Zhongshan was a "Kashmiri" Buddhist missionary, Dharmamitra (Ch. Tanmomiduo

MW, 356-442), who arrived injinling sometime before Yuanjia 10 (433). Dharmamitra built a temple on Zhongshan, the Upper Dinglinsi (Dinglin shangsi 5tf*zEI), which later became an important meditation center. An alleged translator of several meditation texts, he was highly respected for his outstanding achievements in meditation, which earned him the title of "Da Chanshi" *Cr-Ti (Great Meditation Master).6' After Liang Wudi had ascended the throne at the beginning of the sixth century Zhongshan's prominence as a meditation center increased. The first six juan of the Xu gaoseng zhuan section on meditation specialists feature five important meditation masters related to Zhongshan: (1) Sengfu {fg1J (464-524), who heads the entire section and spent the larger part of his brilliant monastic career at two Zhongshan monasteries, the Lower Dinglinsi (Dinglin xiasi YtT) and the Kaishansi ; (2) Huisheng ,J (540?- 510?), a disciple of the foreign meditation master Dharmadeva (Ch. Damotipo Wffl , fl. 560s) and a resident of the Yanxingsi M 4 on Zhongshan; (3) Huichu &i9J (448-524), whose meditation expertise earned him the respect of Liang Wudi; and finally (4) Zhiyuan 9Y (495-571) and (5) Daohui L- (d. after ca. 550), two close friends and co-residents of the Kaishansi.62

The fame of Sheshan, the other mountain, as the birthplace of

theJinling Sanlun 5. tradition has somehow eclipsed its position as a meditation center in South China. As a matter of fact, as early

61 See Dharmamitra's biography in the Chu sanzang jiji - (Collection of Records Concerning the Translations of the Tripitaka), T vol. 55, no. 2145, pp. 104c- 105b. This biography is almost literally reproduced in the one by Huijiao in Gaoseng zhuan (Tvol. 50, no. 2059, pp. 342c-343a). Judging by one of its extracts made by the Japanese monk Shuisho -1t (1202-92) in the Bunryaku era (5 No- vember 1234 - 19 September 1235), the Meisi den shAU $I{fW4f (Extracts from the Mingseng zhuan ${@{W [Biographies of Distinguished Monks]) (XJ vol. 134, p. 19a6-16), the Mingseng zhuan compiled by Baochang If,% (464-after 514) also contains a biography for Dharmamitra. The differences between this Mingseng zhuan biography and its counterparts in the Chu sanzang jiji and Gaoseng zhuan are meticulously analyzed in Yamabe 1999: 48-49; for Baochang's dates, see Chen Jinhua forthcoming (b).

62 Sengfu's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography is located at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 550a- c; Huisheng and Huichu share a biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 550c; Zhiyuan and Daohui share another at p. 556a.

356 CHEN JINHUA

as the middle of the fifth century Sengshen f# (416-90), a leading disciple of Dharmamitra, was already active on the mountain, where he supervised the Qixuansi t .63 During his close to a half century of tenure at the Qixuansi, Sengshen most likely met his contemporary Fadu jAt (437-500), the founder of the Qixiasi M on the same mountain. Fadu died only two years before the enthrone- ment of Liang Wudi, under whose auspices Sheshan's status as a meditation center increased to the extent that the famous authorJiang Zong JIA (519-94) characterized the mountain as a "Realm of Four Dhyanas" (sichan zhijing SYiWkt,) peopled by "Companions of the Eight [Stages of] Meditation" (bading zhi l ,kf{g).64 In 512 Liang Wudi sent ten Buddhist monks to Sheshan to study with Fadu's successor Senglang ##M (d. after 512). One of these ten monks, Sengquan {f'- (d. after 557),65 emerged as the most serious and accomplished student; after Senglang died he became the new leader of the Sheshan Sanlun group.

Although how much Fadu or Senglang were devoted to meditation remains unclear, Sengquan was definitely an enthusiastic practitioner of it, given that he named his temple the Zhiguansi ILm4 after the two basic Buddhist meditation techniques of "Calm Abid- ing" and "Clear Observation" (this was either the renamed Qixiasi or a separate temple). An anecdote involving the Tiantai master Zhiyi and another Jinling monk also demonstrates the esteem in which Sengquan was held by his contemporaries for his meditation expertise.66 Possibly with a meditation master called Feng ,i,fJi (fl. 530) as his colleague at Sheshan,67 he was surrounded by several famous

63 See Sengshen's Gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2059, pp. 399c- 400a.

64 "Qixiasi bei" j (Memorial] Inscription for [Mount] Qixia), in Han Wei Liuchao baisan jia ji AN\*f _ , vol. 6, p. 3488a7.

65 Chen Jinhua forthcoming (a). 66 According to this anecdote, a Jinling monk named Faji j;t (d. after 567)

boasted of his meditation skills in front of Zhiyi, saying that once in meditation he felt the shaking of Sheshan, which in turn brought him to the realization that Sengquan was then practicing the "meditation of Impermanence (wuchang 4EM)" at Sheshan. See Sui Tiantai Zhizhe Dashi biezhuan i *,1iM'IiW (Separate Biography of Great Master Zhizhe [i.e. Zhiyi] of Mount Tiantai under the Sui), T vol. 50, no. 2050, p. 192b7-13.

67 The existence of Feng as a meditation master at Sheshan is known through the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Sengwei {i# (513-73) (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 558a-b), a former disciple of the renowned vinaya master Tanyuan *f (494?- 575?).


disciples: Falang i;X (also known as Senglang MJH, or Daolang

JUM, 507-81), Huibian ,# (var. Zhibian S$, d. after 567), Hui- yong 9 (515-83), Huibu M1F (518-87), and Huifeng jdi (503?- 562?).68 Two of them, Huibu and Huifeng, were particularly renowned as meditation experts.

Huibu's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography attests to his dedication to the practice and to his association with famous meditation masters of the time, including Huike, Huisi and Huimiao #V (fl. 560s).69 In his late years he was so dedicated to meditation that he decided to subject the Sheshan community to the regulation of a meditation master from outside Sheshan, Baogong. Under Huibu and Baogong's capable supervision, Sheshan rapidly emerged as a meditation center in Jinling comparable with Zhongshan. At Sheshan Huibu was joined by a certain Meditation Master Kan (Kan Chanshi fi{RfR1, probably Huikan {fNL [524-605]), who was more likely his colleague than his disciple.70 For his part, Zhicong 9 (550-648, or 551-649), another Sheshan meditation master, was apparently Huibu's disciple at the Zhiguansi.7'

This brief review reveals that, due to their geographical proximity, the two meditation centers based on Sheshan and Zhongshan maintained close connections through the ages. Sengshen, the first known meditation master at the Qixuansi on Sheshan, was a leading disciple of Dharmamitra, himself the first renowned meditation master on Zhongshan. Further, although Huixiao, like his two colleagues Zhicui and Sengding, was mainly based on Zhongshan, he seems to have spent his late years at the Guishan Chanfang (i.e. the Qixuansi) on Sheshan. Moreover, the Sheshan meditation group was later entrusted to the regulation of Baogong, who was originally trained

68 The first four were known in their time as the "Quangong siyou" a2IWRYk ("Four Comrades under Master Quan"). For their identification see Hirai 1976: 275-81, Ono 1994: 1994: 653, ChenJinhua forthcoming (a). For Huifeng see his Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 65 1c.

69 T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 480c19-20, 481al6 and pp. 480c20-481a4. 70 See Huikan and Huibu's Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies at Tvol. 50, no. 2060,

p. 652b21-2, 481a26-b9. Huikan was very likely a disciple of Meditation Master He fH tMI, who has been mistaken as a disciple of Huike but was in fact no more than an acquaintance; on this obscure monk and his relationship with Huikan, see Chen Jinhua forthcoming (a), in which I also argue for Meditation Master He's background being in the Sheshan-Zhongshan meditation tradition.

71 Zhicong's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 595a28-29) informs us that he affiliated himself with the Zhiguansi in order to attend Sanlun lectures.

358 CHEN JINHUA

in the Zhongshan Buddhist community. Finally, Huiyin, a leading disciple of Huixiao and Zhiguan, later became a successor to Huibian, one of the four most important disciples of Sengquan. Thus, the Sheshan and Zhongshan meditation groups can be considered on the whole as constituting a single tradition that took the Prajfidparamita siutra and the three Madhyamika sastras as its doctrinal basis.

(11.4) Huizan

Finally, Daoxuan speaks of a meditation group which was based in several areas in what is now Shanxi and whose initiator was the monk Huizan MA (536-607). Though classified as a meditation master, Huizan placed a great emphasis on vinaya. His interest in that discipline further intensified after he had received the tonsure. He had traveled far and wide to study vinaya until he finally affiliated himself with a vinaya center in Dingzhou ZJ+f, where he became later a vinaya lecturer for some years. When the anti-Buddhist Northern Zhou rulers annexed the Northern Qi in 577, Huizan, like other Northern Qi monks, including Tanqian, fled to the south- probably with Jinling as his destination. He did not return to the north until Sui Wendi restored Buddhism at the beginning of the Kaihuang era (581-600). With his influence extending to a number of major areas in present-day Shanxi, he eventually settled down in Taiyuan , where the Prince of Qin 0 (YangJun 4Rfk [571- 600], Wendi's third son), who was then governor of Bingzhou AfiJ44, built for him a temple called Kaihuasi f'JL Y sometime after 591.172 From then on the Kaihuasi became Huizan's home-temple and was the place where he accepted many disciples, and at which he stayed until he was summoned to the Chandingsi in 603. While staying at the Chandingsi, he was also invited to the Longchisi ' f!, in the Zhongnan Mountains jJ LU. There people eagerly sought him out,

72 In the eleventh month of Kaihuang 10 (590), Sui Wendi switched the posi- tions of his second and third sons Yang Guang and YangJun, then Area Com- manders-in-chief (zongguan e* ) of Bingzhou and Yangzhou, respectively; see Zizhi tong/ian <WnA 177: 5532. Knowing that YangJun's governorship in Bing- zhou began in 590, the Kaihuasi must have been constructed after that year. Like other members of the imperial Yang family, YangJun was known for his interest in Buddhism. Apart from Huizan, another major Buddhist monk with whom Yang Jun is said to have associated is Zhiyi. Two of the letters he wrote to Zhiyi are still preserved in the Tiantai collection, Guoqing bailu j (One Hundred Docu- ments Related to the Guoqing[si]) (T vol. 46, no. 1934, pp. 802c26-803a8).


day and night, for instruction. He died at that mountain temple.73 One of the most notable characteristics of Huizan's meditation group

was its heavy reliance on vinaya practice: this Daoxuan emphasizes in the "Xichan lun" when he writes that the way Huizan regulated his disciples was in accordance with the "awe-inspiring deportments" and did not "violate the principles of vinaya" (1SJUA))iM 'A

7{_ ).74 The Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies of Huizan and his disciples also attest fully to the importance they attached to the observance of precepts. Concerning the disciples, we should note, first, that true to his fame as an extraordinarily successful Buddhist teacher Huizan had at least six direct disciples important enough to have separate entries in the Xu gaoseng zhuan.75 All of them, with the exception of Daochuo LAO (562-645), a forerunner of the Pure Land movement in China, were serious vinaya practitioners and at the same time meditation masters; two (Huijin jL [560-645] and Daoliang LSA [569 - after 645]) are classified as preceptors in the Xu gaoseng zhuan, while the other three (Zhichao -: [571-641, Huizan's appointed successor], Tanyun _ [ca. 562-642], and Zhiman 9j'~ [551-628]) are all known to have extensively administered bodhisattva-precepts to many people.76

It is remarkable that Huizan and his group should have risen and declined so rapidly as a new Buddhist force at the beginning of the Tang. This can be considered in connection with the close ties that the group had fostered with Li Yuan 4Eff (566-635), the future Tang Gaozu (r. 618-26), and his chief confidant Pei Ji , (ca. 568-ca.

73 See Huizan's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 575a-b; Michihata 1985: 152-54; Sato 1985: 275-77.

7 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597al4. 75 In this regard Huizan surpassed even Sengchou, who had only three such

direct disciples. In addition to the six monks there is a seventh monk Huichao ME (ca. 554-624) from Bingzhou, who may also have been a disciple of Huizan. After staying at the Chandingsi for a decade and a half (603-618), Huichao returned to his former home-temple, the Daxing guosi , where he died seven years later. That Huichao was buried beside the Kaihuasi, the home-temple of Huizan and his group, suggests a close relationship with Huizan, and even that he was possibly his disciple. This appears even more likely when we take into account that Huichao was trained in meditation in Jinyang ff I, where Huizan's meditation group was very influential by then. See Huichao's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 581c22-582a23 (especially p. 581c22-24, 582a 19-20).

76 See these five monks' Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 618c-619b, p. 619b-c, pp. 591c-592c, pp. 592c-593c, p. 583a-c.

360 CHEN JINHUA

628), who in his later years was involved in political infighting with the ambitious prince Li Shimin t (599-649), the future Taizong (r. 626-49). Some of Huizan's followers, especially a monk called Xinxing {A-j (d. ca. 620, distinct from the famous Sanjiejiao founder by the same dharma-name), were also involved in the political clash, which ended with Pei Ji's defeat and subsequent exile.77 The dis- honor incurred by PeiJi may have been one of the important reasons for the sudden decline of Huizan's group.

(11.5) The Relationships between the Six Meditation Groups

Concerning the six meditation groups mentioned, we may first note that Daoxuan speaks in the same breath of two pairs of traditions- those of Sengchou and Sengshi, and of Huisi (Zhiyi) and Zhicui (Huixiao). This is not surprising in the case of Huisi and Zhicui when we remember that the latter was the disciple of the former. Since Zhicui, and probably also Huixiao (who had a close relationship with him), can be considered as Huisi's disciples, the Jinling meditation practice at the time ought to have been strongly colored by Huisi's meditation teaching. The close relationship between Zhicui and Huisi's meditation groups is also supported by the following fact. The Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Huichao* 1 (546-622), one of Huisi's principal disciples, informs us that at the beginning of the Tang dynasty, when Huichao*'s reputation was growing, two eminent monks, Baogong and Huiyin, went (among others) to stay with him at the Wuzhensi ff O, where they enjoyed each other's company very much.78 They probably did so because of Huichao*'s connection to their common teacher Zhicui, who was also a disciple of Huisi and therefore a fellow-disciple of Huichao*. This tie may have enabled Huiyin and Baogong to rely on Huichao* as their "dharma- uncle." As for Sengchou and Sengshi, one of the main reasons why Daoxuan drew them so closely together may have been that these two groups, as Daoxuan understood them, shared some common source. According to one account found in a Xu gaoseng zhuan biography,

77Jiu Tang shu Ws 57: 2288-89, Xin Tang shu VJ*2J1 88: 3738, Zizhi tong/ian 193: 6062. For Xinxing's connections with Huizan and his group, see T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 575b8ff.

78 XU gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 687b26-29. This Huichao* should not be confused with the homonymous monk who was a probable disciple of Huizan (discussed in note 75).


two of Sengchou's fellow-disciples, Daofang and Huiguang, also studied with Sengshi's teacher Ratnamati.79

Concerning Huizan, although his religious background is not clearly indicated in his biography there is some evidence to support his close relationship with Huiguang's meditation-vinaya group. Huizan's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography tells us that he attended a vinaya center in Dingzhou ZJ+I, which happened to be Huiguang's hometown. Af- ter studying vinaya and meditation with Buddha for some time, Huiguang returned to Dingzhou, where he was ordained and attended many vinaya lectures. Four years later, he began to lecture on the Sengqi hi.80 Thus, given the influence of Huiguang's vinaya in Dingzhou, the probability seems rather high that the vinaya lecturing center that Huizan attended there was run by a vinaya master in Huiguang's line. In addition, Huizan also had a dynamic association with the Jinling meditation group during his exile in the area during the 570s.81

The six meditation groups which Daoxuan discusses in his "Xichan lun" can therefore be arranged into the following three "camps": (1) Sengchou (Sengshi, Huizan), (2) Huisi-Zhiyi (Zhicui), and (3) Bodhidharma. Sengchou's and Huisi's groups were well connected during the Northern Zhou suppression of Buddhism: Huizan and Tanqian, who were either directly derived from or closely related to the Sengchou-Huiguang meditation-vinaya groups, went toJinling, where they were exposed to thejinling meditation group then headed by Zhicui and Huixiao, at least one of whom was a disciple of Huisi. In Daoxuan's opinion, the first two "camps" were obviously compatible with each other. It is largely based on this understanding that he reduced the six meditation groups to two rival "parties" led by Sengchou and Bodhidharma:

7 See Daochong's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 482c 18- 19), according to which Ratnamati taught three monks: while he taught the "method of mind" (xinfa iL;, i.e. meditation) to Fang , and Ding Z, he instructed Huiguang alone in monastic "procedures and precepts" (faliu &M). Al- though it remains hard to identify the monk Ding, the monk Fang is very likely Daofang, a leading disciple of Buddha (Bhadra).

80 Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 607cl-10. "Sengqi lu" refers to the Mohe Sengqi lu. 81 Huizan's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 575a23-24)

records that under the Chen (most likely in the capital Jinling) he attended a variety of Buddhist lectures, which he criticized and modified. It is easy to imagine that in Jinling Huizan was significantly exposed to the Jinling meditation group and engaged in dynamic interactions with meditation masters there.

362 CHEN JINHUA

, 3 " g - ° 4,Iff N J w , ;J - 82

However, looking at the two principles [represented by Bodhidharma and Sengchou], [we find that] they were two separate tracks for vehicles. [Seng]chou cherished [the practice of "[four] applications of mind," setting up a pure example that can be [easily] learned. [Bodhidhar]ma followed the principle of emptiness, leaving mysterious ideas, deep and complicated. For being learn- able, [Sengchou's] traces are easy to show. For being deep and complicated, the principles and facts [related to Bodhidharma] are difficult to understand.

Here Daoxuan makes no secret of his preference for Sengchou's meditation group over Bodhidharma's: he praises Sengchou's meditation teaching for its clarity and applicability, and blames Bodhi- dharma's for being difficult to grasp and impracticable. Even though he appears to have still held Bodhiharma and Huike in considerable esteem, he was very critical of their disciples. The following long passage in Daoxuan's "Xichan lun" demonstrates more clearly his attitude towards the followers of Bodhidharma and Huike:83

Therefore, [Bodhidharma's followers] only attained his traces, as [superfi- cially] as if they had just been showered [by the water of his teaching]. As for

those who were blocked by the function of their mind and were engaged in

JF,Ufffa , L,f ,fi0# r,- L ° - ? 84 BSX S m & tEIg omp"W;tm rf "o 0 m Ma m ; °

Therefore, [Bodhidharma's followers] only attained his traces, as [superfi- cially] as if they had just been showered [by the water of his teaching]. As for those who were blocked by the function of their mind and were engaged in empty talk, they were certainly unable to carry on [Bodhidharma's] teaching. Only with long-term study and distillation can doctrinal issues be solved as satisfactorily as is expected at the outset. This is why the "Ten Abodes" (i.e. the "Ten Stages [bhimi]" of the bodhisattva practice) of cultivation were set up. Those who are of shallow understanding and those who are degenerate and lazy enter the gate of meditation in the morning and start promoting their teaching in the evening.85 They transmit their teaching to each other,

82 Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596cl 3-16. For Faure's translation of this passage, see Faure 1986: 190, 1993: 130.

83 We know that these criticisms were targeted at the Bodhidharma-Huike meditation group because they follow the sentence in which Daoxuan criticizes Bodhidharma for the impracticability of his teaching.

84 Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 596c16-27. 85

Compare this opinion of Daoxuan's with the criticism that a northern Chan master, Zhanran ,ig, (?-796), is said to have leveled at the Southern Chan sects, especially the one led by Mazu Daoyi ,%ffXS- (709-88), during a debate in 796 between several Chan sects: "The way to buddhahood is remote and arduous. One has to undergo innumerable kalpas [before attaining buddhahood]. People


claiming that they have each exhaustively mastered the very source [of meditation]. With the divine way obscured, who can distinguish the straightfor- ward from the obstructed? Therefore, [we] know that what can be attained by thought and what the intellect can scheme are no more than false [mental] objects and the deluded mind. In this, they cannot trace back the radi- ance of their thought, and they rashly cling to external objects. Although the mind is originally calm, the waves [of consciousness] are disturbing and pro- duce many hindrances to meditation. But they proclaim immediately [these hindrances] to be "meritorious functions" (gongyong YXf) [of the mind], which [, as they believed,] proved the power of their meditation [only] .86 They boast of their teaching in the world, displaying both arrogance and ignorance. This is exactly a case of people who do not know how to deal with the hindrances, and so always act with the mistaken belief in the self.87 They also mistake what is supported by an external force for the "right cause" (zhengye IEV). The true and false become confused, and they completely fail to understand. Once one understands that it is just the mind [which produces them], one will not be attached to these illusory objects. They perversely cling to these objects, [which come] from the mind not being cultivated. How could followers of this kind of [teachings] be qualified to talk about the Way?

from the southern border have cheated and harmed the practitioners of later generations (fO ' JOlP , k I &,j " This debate is recorded in the "Xingfusi neidaochang gongfeng dade Dayi Chanshi beiming" f4gM

l8mAgSt+XtXffiffi[WA@% (Stele Inscription for Chan Master Dayi of the Xingfu Monastery, Who Was a Bhadanta [Great Virtue] and Palace Chaplain; Quan Tang wen ; 715: 7352-54), i.e. the funeral inscription that the Tang writer and statesman Wei Chuhou !%JI (773-828) wrote in 818 for Mazu Dao- yi's disciple Ehu Dayi MjMZ- (746-818) (the quotation is found in Quan Tang wen 715: 7353al 1-12). For this debate and the identity of monk Zhanran, who has been mistaken for his homonymous contemporary, the Tiantai master Zhanran

t (711-82), see ChenJinhua 1999: 29-38 (especially 32-33). Also contrast this criticism with the one that Daoxuan levels at some unnamed dhyana groups in his "Xichan lun" (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597bl4-15): "Not being aware of these confused thoughts, they embrace instead the 'net of perverted views.' Proclaiming each other 'Masters of Dhyana,' they actually are not familiar with the basics of dhyana."

86 This reminds us of one of Zongmi's a (780-841) criticisms toward a Southern Chan branch, the Hongzhou JI'I sect led by Mazu. As they are presented in Zongmi's Zhonghua chuanxindi chanmen shizi chengxi tu SPfL'tVTIi iq" (Chart of the Master-Disciple Succession of the Chan Gate that Trans- mits the Mind-ground in China), the Hongzhou followers believed that "all actions and activities are the functioning of the entire essence of the Buddha-nature" (XJ vol. 110, p. 435d4-6); see Kamata 1971: 307, Gregory 1991: 237.

87 Cf. another attack by Daoxuan on some dhyana practitioners in the "Xichan lun" (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 597a27-28): "Pacifying their bodies with heterodox beliefs, they just maintain these crooked views, to which they cling as truth, to the exclusion of all the other teachings, which they all dismiss as wrong. Harboring biases as hard as ice, who among them is able to recognize their inverted view of the self?"

CHEN JINHUA

Although a few sentences in this passage perhaps seem hard to understand, we may still summarize the main thrust of Daoxuan's argument in the following way. He believed that no enlightenment can be attained without sustained and arduous effort. Meditation must therefore be undertaken through carefully selected procedures. As for those self-proclaimed followers of Bodhidharma and Huike, Dao- xuan accused them of having only a superficial understanding of the two masters' teachings. With only very limited practice, they pre- tended to be transmitters of the single true meditation tradition, just like someone who, entering the "gate of meditation" in the morn-

ing, starts touting his meditation skills to the world in the evening. More dangerously, they mistook the illusions of their minds for the

proofs of the power of their meditation and so were distracted farther and farther from the truth.

This passage also serves as a clue to solve certain puzzles that we encountered when we discussed Daoxuan's understanding of meditation: Who were the dhyana practitioners Daoxuan so rigorously censured? Even a casual comparison of some of the accusations leveled by Daoxuan at Bodhidharma's followers with those he resorted to in his attacks against the unnamed group of dhyana practitioners clearly reveals that he was in fact aiming at the same target.88 Espe- cially, the reader may have been startled to notice that some of the ideological claims that Daoxuan attributes to those unnamed dhyana practitioners (e.g., "'five polluting conditions' already defeated" [EifIf5 L ] and "'Ten Bodhisattva-like Stages' to be completed soon" [+ftI-¥ii], "dharma-nature and Buddha-wisdom already discovered and understood from early on" [t;'[t-Y1 , f4 ~E HA], and so on) appear to anticipate the so-called "Sudden" (dun $i) teachings that certain later Chan schools (especially those designated as Southern) advocated, or are believed to have advocated. In this light, we would do well to devote our attention to this rare contemporary view of the pre-history of Chan, and bear in mind the way it may have colored later views of the developing Chan tradition. It may be that later Chan followers deliberately echoed these words to make clear their filiation with the Bodhidharma-Huike style of meditation, even if they actually had no contact with it, or no direct knowledge of it. It might be that all they had was no more than Daoxuan's somewhat derogatory description.89

88 See notes 85, 87. 89

My thanks to James Benn for mentioning this intriguing possibility.

364


Daoxuan again demonstrates his preference for the Sengchou tradition and his antipathy toward Bodhidharma and his legacy in the

following concluding observation in his " Xichan lun":

AA2_~ tr o ; , ~~i~ o = - , °-ik ° m - RaNL etyH, A° -, W ° af1L A

fiz, ? 90

After investigating the purpose of concentration and wisdom, [we find that] it definitely consists in the "gate of contemplation" (guanmen S.rj), for which what is narrated in the sastras really provides clear proofs. If one succeeds in

penetrating into this truth, one will obtain the merits of the study of meditation that transcends confusion, and accomplish the "illumination of wisdom"

(huiming ,B H) that sees through illusion. This resembles the two wheels' reaching afar and is equal to the journeying together of the ultimate and provisional [truths]. Therefore, [Hui]si and [Hui]yuan have stimulated the pure style, while [Seng]chou and [Seng]shi excelled in their glorious reputation [as meditation masters]. Leaving their models to posterity, the sources (of their dhyana practice) are traceable. They are all recorded by the ancients, how could they be in vain?

What is worth particular notice in this passage is not only what Daoxuan says-concerning the four Buddhist monks (Huiyuan, Huisi, Sengchou and Sengshi) whom he extols as meditation masters par excellence-but also what he does not say-his complete omission of Bodhidharma or any member of his group. The deliberateness with which Daoxuan refrains from "anointing" Bodhidharma and Huike as meditative exemplars presents a stark contrast to their

paramount status as Chan patriarchs in later ideological constructs of the Chan lineage.

Given Daoxuan's close relationship with Sengchou's tradition, such comments cannot be simply read as historical criticism; rather, they should also be taken as a reflection of the bitter rivalry between the two meditation groups placed under the names of Bodhidharma and

Sengchou. Let us end this part with a discussion of some further evidence for this rivalry, which proved to be a major impetus for the transformation of the Chinese meditation tradition in the sixth cen-

tury and during the several centuries that followed. In 603, Sui Wendi ordered the construction of a monastery in the

southwest of the capital, Chang'an. Although he dedicated it to the

memory of his recently deceased empress, Wendi declared that the

monastery, named "Chandingsi" Tr ,s- ("Monastery of Meditation"),

90 "Xichan lun," Tvol. 50, vol. 2060, pp. 597b18-23.

366 CHEN JINHUA

was to function as a base for restoring the meditation tradition cre- ated by Sengchou. The Sui government appointed Tanqian as the first Abbot (sizhu #t). One hundred and twenty meditation masters, each accompanied by two assistants, were soon summoned to the Chandingsi and resided there permanently.9' Two years later, in 605, the Chandingsi was supplemented by a neighboring monastery of the same size, structure and almost the same name, the Da Chandingsi )iJ (Great Chandingsi), on the order of Wendi's successor, Sui Yangdi. The Da Chandingsi was officially devoted to the spirit of Wendi, who had died one year earlier, but it was also aimed at promoting meditation, even though entry to the monastery was also gradually granted to Buddhist exegetes. The twin Chandingsi monasteries, especially the earlier one, functioned as the first national meditation center in existence in China. It was certainly an unprecedented event in the history of Chinese Buddhism that three hundred and sixty accomplished meditation masters with varied backgrounds should be gathered under the same roof in a metropolitan monastery.92

If most of these Chandingsi meditation specialists have long faded into oblivion, some of them are still identifiable.93 A close investigation of their backgrounds suggests that Tanqian, the leader of the meditation center installed at the twin Chandingsi monasteries, attempted deliberately to block the Bodhidharma-Huike tradition from entering the place, while on the other hand he enthusiastically enrolled representatives of the other five major meditation groups (es-

91 All this is recorded in an imperial edict quoted in Tanqian's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 573cl7-23.

92 Since the attendants of the 120 meditation masters summoned to the Chandingsi were also accomplished meditation practitioners, Wendi actually summoned 360 "masters" to the monastery. In spite of their importance, very limited scholarly attention has been paid to the twin monasteries. An old article by Furuta (1939) remains the only significant contribution. Ono Katsutoshi provides a brief survey of the twin monasteries in Ono 1989: (2) 199-204. For the latest study of the Chandingsi monasteries, and especially of the meditation traditions therein, see Chen Jinhua forthcoming (Chapter Four).

93 In my book on Tanqian (Chen Jinhua 2002, Chapter Four) I have found twenty-six meditators who were recruited to the twin Chandingsi monasteries from 603 to 607 while the monasteries were both under the supervision of Tanqian. Of those twenty-six, twelve, three, four, three, and one belonged to the five groups derived from Sengchou, Sengshi, Zhicui/Huixiao, Huisi/Zhiyi and Huizan, respectively; the remaining three monks have unidentifiable affiliations, but it seems unlikely that any of them belonged to the Bodhidharma-Huike group.


pecially the one deriving from Sengchou). Given that Tanqian was a second-generation disciple of Huiguang, the leading fellow-disciple of Sengchou, I am inclined to interpret his attitude towards the Bodhi- dharma-Huike group as a reflection of the rivalry between the two meditation groups initiated by (or, perhaps more properly, carried on in the names of) Sengchou and Bodhidharma. Thus, the highly critical comments that Daoxuan made about the Bodhidharma-Huike group seem consistent with the undisguised biases shown against the same group by Tanqian, who can be regarded as his "dharma-uncle" in the sense that Daoxuan was a third-generation disciple of a monk (Sengchou) whom Tanqian recognized as a "dharma grand-uncle."94

In view of the proclaimed purpose of building the Chandingsi and of the dominance of the Sengchou meditation group there, the Chandingsi can be regarded as the headquarters of that group in the early seventh century. Daoxuan's extraordinarily close ties with the Sengchou group can only lead us to speculate whether he had any relationship with the meditation center and to what extent. It is to this intriguing aspect of Daoxuan's intellectual life that we now turn.

(III) Daoxuan and the Great Chandingsi

Daoxuan's importance has already attracted a great deal of scholarly attention, and the past decades have witnessed significant progress in understanding his life and teachings.95 It therefore appears ironic that despite Daoxuan's reputation as a vinaya master we should still be, by and large, in the dark as to the temple where he was ordained as a monk and the temple or temples where he studied with his chief vinaya teacher, Zhishou *N- (567-635).96

9 Tanqian's teacher Tanzun * (d. after 560) was a leading disciple of Huiguang. For Tanqian's and Tanzun's discipleship under Tanzun and Hui- guang, see their Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 571 c23-24 and 484a 14-19, respectively.

95 Fujiyoshi Masumi has published a series of important articles on Daoxuan's life (1979, 1979a, 1986, 1991, 1992). For Daoxuan's life and his contributions to the Chinese vinaya tradition, see also Sato 1986: 67-228. Suwa (1997: 291-300) recently contributed an interesting study of biographical materials on Daoxuan. In western languages the most notable scholarship on Daoxuan and his works is found in the articles published by Koichi Shinohara over the past decade (see especially Shinohara 1990, 1991, 1998, 2000, 2000a).

96 A reconstructed life of this important monk can be found below in 111.2.

368 CHEN JINHUA

In discussing Daoxuan's ordination at the hand of Zhishou, Sata Tatsugen refers to Zhishou as a monk of the Hongfusi in Chang'an, implying that the ordination took place in the monastery.97 This identification must have been influenced by a seventeenth-century vinaya historico-biographical collection compiled by theJapanese monk Eken

MN (1649-1704), according to whom Daoshi and Daoxuan were ordained by the Hongfusi monk Zhishou in the year Daye I 1 (615).98 Both Eken and Tatsugen are obviously drawing on the title of Zhishou's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography, "Tang Jingshi Hongfusi Shi Zhishou zhuan" *-"4L (A Biography of the Monk Zhishou of the Hongfusi in the Capital [Chang'an]).99 But does this necessarily mean that Zhishou was at the Hongfusi when he ordained Daoxuan? It seems that such was not the case. As will become clear below, it was only in the last year of his life or so (634-35) that Zhishou lived at the Hongfusi. It is obviously impossible to believe that Zhishou ordained Daoxuan at a monastery with which he was not affiliated until two decades later. As far as I know, only one scholar has raised the possibility that Daoshi LtLH (ca. 596 - 683)100 studied with Zhishou at the Great Chandingsi. Since Daoshi was Daoxuan's fellow- disciple under Zhishou, this would mean that Daoxuan also studied under Zhishou at the same monastery."'0 Unfortunately, this scholar does not provide any reason for this assumption.102 In other words, there still remain obscurities in the early phase of Daoxuan's monastic life.

(III. 1) Some Obscurities in Daoxuan's Early Monastic Career

Daoxuan first studied as a novice under the monk Huiyun '990Q (564-637). He was then ordained by Zhishou, who was responsible for training the young novice in vinaya. We will discuss Zhishou in some detail later: here let us briefly remark on Huiyun.

97 Sato 1986: 77. 98 See Ritsuen sobo den f4, (Biographies of the Samgha-gem of the

Vinaya garden), DBZ vol. 105, p. 53a2-3. 99 Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 613c19. 10 For dates, see Chen Jinhua 2002: 24-25, n. 39. 101 Daoshi makes this clear in his Fayuan zhulin: "Vinaya Master [Daoxuan] was

my fellow-disciple. On the day when we ascended the [ordination] platform, we received instruction from the same teacher [Zhishou]" (T vol. 53, no. 2122, 354bl6-1 7).

102 See Chen Yuzhen 1992: 236.


Originally belonging to the great Zhang clan of Qinghe -iigJ, Huiyun's ancestors emigrated toJianye ,-I during the Yongjia era

(307-13) of theJin Dynasty (265-316). He was first trained as a Tao- ist priest and became well versed in many forms of Taoist learning. Sometime in the Taijian era (569-82) under Chen Xuandi (r. 568-

82), he formally shifted his faith from Taoism to Buddhism by hav-

ing himself ordained as a Buddhist monk and affiliating himself with the Tongtaisi IM~71 . After the overthrow of the Chen by the Sui he fled toJiangdu ·T_I (Yangzhou), where he resided at the Hualinsi 0#4.- and devoted several years to the study of the Chengshi lun

&-Jtif (Tattvasiddhi). Toward the end of the Kaihuang era (581-600) he was summoned to the Riyansi ElH Ai , where he interacted with a number of highly accomplished Buddhist scholars. It was at the same monastery that he abandoned his interest in the Chengshi lun for the Madhyamika and Yogacara teachings. After he had been relocated at the Chongyisi T. f, established in Wude 2 (619) by Gaozu's elder sister Princess Guiyang tP± for the posthumous welfare of her husband,103 Huiyun was frequently invited by the renowned

vinaya master Xuanwan t (562-636) to preside over vinaya cer- emonies at the Puguangsi h-= , which attests to his prestige, not to speak of his expertise in vinaya.104

Concerning Daoxuan's experience as a disciple under the vinaya master Zhishou, his biography in the Songgaoseng zhuan 5ji.{ffltells us the following:

m F B : AIt L 1 EA, ' a° - 5 OM 0 94 V R' A 1051 p ~t- o" t[-a lr +JE E - , sII, ? W Mt^ o 0105

During the Daye era of the Sui (605-17), [Daoxuan] was ordained by Vinaya Master Zhishou. In the Wude era (618-27) he studied vinaya with [Zhi]shou. After he had gone through only one series of lectures he decided to practice meditation. Master [Zhi]yun scolded him: "To arrive at a remote destination one has to start from a location near: one understands the abstruse by means of the evident. There is a time to practice [meditation] or not: one has to

103 Ono 1988 (1): 287-88, Xiong 2000: 314. 104 Huiyun's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography is found at T vol. 50, no. 2060, pp.

533c-534b. Daoxuan's teacher Huiyun is not to be confused with a contemporary monk with the same dharma-name (564-630, Xu gaoseng zhuan biography is found at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 535ac) (strikingly, the two homonymous monks were born in the same year although one outlived the other by seven years).

105 Tvol. 50, no. 2061, p. 790b17-21.

370 CHEN JINHUA

fulfill one's wish for the meritorious. It is not appropriate to stop studying vinaya right now." He ordered him to finish attending twenty series of [vinaya] lectures. Only after that did [Daoxuan] sit in the mountains and forests, cul-

tivating meditation and wisdom.

This passage is imprecise in several respects, failing as it does to

specify the exact year when Daoxuan was ordained by Zhishou, the exact year when he began to study vinaya under him, and the vinaya text in which Zhishou instructed Daoxuan twenty times. Only the

year of his ordination, Daye 11 (615), can be elucidated through information given in other parts of his Songgaoseng zhuan biography.106 For the rest, we need to turn to other sources.

In the postscript that Daoxuan wrote for one of his most important vinaya commentaries, the Sifen lii hanzhujieben shu E/y- $t'S._-

_it (Sub-commentary to the Sifen lii hanzhujieben [Commentary on the Prdtimoksa-text Used in the Dharmagupta Sect of the Vinaya School]),107 Daoxuan provides us with the following autobiographi- cal facts concerning his activities between the late Daye and early Zhenguan years:

) Spmi o .t - dt,° ", . GF.2m ° o r ° SSt.

4mVA111 ? &Ut - 1 PA W & ° ifcB MIMm+A - I°C1t1#41- I

f;V ~ "o+S ~ '. - 5m, itAC,0 , ,~ ~ o 5X/t,,M,

m ? -+ ° m \ O ,MU On1S; °- 01 W mmm'hS S t-@ ° X&m^ h -Xt9S ° EIt - S1Effi ° ILm _9, _J 0o 108

106 His Song gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2061, p. 791a20-21) informs us that Daoxuan died in 667 at seventy-two with a monastic age of fifty-two, implying that he was ordained when he turned twenty and in 615 (Daye 11).

107 The Sifen lii hanzhujieben shu []/y fI3sIIijt, or Sifen lii biqiu hanzhujieben shu -[Zg}8_If-'-1F; f-iFL, is Daoxuan's sub-commentary to his Sifen li biqiu hanzhujieben |Z3'fl-;L i-t (T no. 1806), which was in turn a three-juan commentary written in 630 to the Sifen lii biqiujieben E3H-HtftfjEt. Also known as Tanwudejieben ~l,,^- 2 or Sfen jieben, the one-juan Sifen lii biqiujieben (T no. 1429) was a Chinese version of the pratimoksa text used in the Dharmagupta sect of the vinaya school (Dharmagupta prdtimoksa sutra). The Chinese translation was done in Chang'an by Buddhayasas (Ch. Fotuoyeshe IfS4[X, fl. 400), sometime between 408 and 413. The Sifen lii hanhu jieben shu is now circulated as a part of the voluminous Sifen ii hanzhu jieben shu xingzongji fi3} ' T-tfifT E (Ac- count of the Practices and Essentials in the Sifen ii hanzhu jieben shu), composed by Yuanzhao in 1088 (XZJ vol. 62, pp. 309-1026).


In the late Daye era I received ordination. At the time, the [spread ofl the Buddha's Law was blocked, with monasteries being regularly shut down. There was no way to search for masters who could teach vinaya. I limited myself to reading the texts and was ignorant of precepts and prohibitions (ch/fan MIR).109

After the Great Tang established their rule over the world, the [activities of the] samgha were occasionally curtailed and [its numbers] limited." 0 Some- time I intended to go for vinaya lectures, but I was prevented from fulfilling my will. It was not until Wude 4 (621) that I was able to attend the lectures. After only one series of lectures, I wanted to practice sitting meditation. My Upadhyaya (i.e. Huiyun)"' instructed me: "Only the pure practice of precepts and the luminous [power of] meditation can provide support for one's cultivation of wisdom. With one series of lectures you are not familiar [enough with vinaya]: how do you know the precepts and prohibitions? You just con- centrate on the lectures. I will take care of your monastic duties on your behalf." Thus, I went to attend ten more series of lectures. [During this] my heart remained fond of meditation, forgetting it neither at night nor in day. The instruction about precepts and violations penetrated my innermost heart. But as for the text itself, I did not make much effort to look into it closely. [After the ten series of lectures], I once again [expressed my] desire to practice seated meditation. [My] Upadhyaya again told me: "After ten more series of lectures your wish can be followed." I went back to the vinaya lectures, taking my [old] seat to engage in the study [of vinaya]. At the time, Vinaya Master [Zhi]shou requested in person that I act as his "repeater" (i.e. lecturing assistant). 112 Scrutinizing myself, I found myself foolish and ignorant, lacking accomplishment in textual study. As for the meaning and principle, I did no more than recite in reverence according to the original text. None of this was done through enlightenment of the mind. How was I qualified to be a "repeater"? Therefore, I was not bold enough to accept [the offer]. It took me six years to attend the twenty series of [Sifen lu] lectures.

In the early Zhenguan era I extensively visited many lecturing centers in search of renowned masters, both on mountains and in the city. Thereupon

108 XZJ vol. 62, pp. 1024b. I 1-1 025a7. 109 ChIfan, which means literally "maintaining and violating," refers here to

precepts that regulate what one is to maintain (the "right") and to abstain from (the "wrong").

l1o Referring to the policy that Gaozu employed to control and rectify the Buddhist monastic order (Weinstein 1987: 5-11).

ll Heshang, the Chinese translation (with partial transliteration) for the Sanskrit upddhy4ya, sometimes designates the monk under whom an under-age person studied as a Buddhist novice. In addition to taking care of the daily life and spiritual development of the novice, the heshang, if he happened to be a qualified vinaya master, could also ordain him when he had reached sufficient age and intellectual maturity. Usually the young novice was sent to another vinaya master for ordination, as was the case with Daoxuan, who had Huiyun as his heshang and Zhishou as his ordination master.

112 A Fudu f (or fujiang MAN), literally a "repeater," functioned as an "assistant lecturer," or as Leon Hurvitz (1962: 163) puts it, an "assistant homilist."

372 CHEN JINHUA

I composed a three-juan extract [of the vinaya] on the basis of my understanding. Before I had a chance to polish it, the draft was copied and circulated. From Zhenguan 4 (630) I began to travel afar to the "horizons of civilization."'3 To the north I traveled to Bing[zhou] andJin[zhou]; to the east I reached the land of Wei." 4

This passage informs us that beginning in Wude 4 (621) Daoxuan spent six years under Zhishou and attended twenty series of lectures on a vinaya text, which was the Sifen lu (Dharmagupta-vinaya)." 15 Four more points are worth noting. First of all, Daoxuan, who had been ordained by Zhishou as early as 615, did not begin to study vinaya formally until six years later. This suggests that he did not stay with Zhishou (or at least did not stay very long) after his ordination. This assumption is confirmed by the various difficulties and hindrances that Daoxuan encountered during that period to find a qualified vinaya master, which would not have happened if he had been in Zhishou's company.

Second, it is remarkable that it should have taken Daoxuan six years to finish attending the twenty series of Sjfen la lectures, implying that on average Zhishou delivered ten series in three years. This is indeed compatible with information recorded in Zhishou's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography, to the effect that Zhishou finished one hundred series of Sifen la lectures throughout his lecturing career, which lasted, as is suggested by the biography, about four decades: he must therefore have lectured on the Sifen lui at the speed of ten series every three or four years (about three months per lecture)." 6

Third, Zanning differs from Daoxuan himself in reporting the reasons, why Huiyun rejected Daoxuan's premature decision to study meditation. According to Zanning's Song gaoseng zhuan biography of Daoxuan, Huiyun seems to have contrasted vinaya and meditation

113 Huabiao here indicates the area covered by Chinese civilization, correspond- ing to most of present-day Northern China.

114 Bing andJin were in parts of present-day Hebei and Shandong; Wei refers to an area covering parts of present-day Hebei and Henan.

115 We know that the text in question was the Sifen la because the postscript was attached to a sub-commentary to a basic text belonging to the Dharmagupta-vinaya tradition.

116 Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614c26-29. Daoxuan suggests there that Zhishou's lecturing career started at his hometown near Zhanghe i and was brought to an end on the side of the River Wei Miq, referring to Chang'an. Zhishou began to lecture in Yunmen when he was barely thirty years old (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614b3-4), and died at sixty-nine.


in terms of what is close and far, or of what is evident (and therefore

shallow) and abstruse (and therefore profound). But according to Daoxuan himself, Huiyun's objection was that one cannot pursue a form of Buddhist practice at the expense of another that is more fundamental. Daoxuan repeats this when he retells the story at the end of his biography of Huiyun:

;F%IA>8 s 1tMEJ · ° WEtHE="0 B 9"s2HM M m^-t^ ° 9tjt -e -[ M ---I "-, . ,I--' + , _,

, _` R _ o 117

Shortly after receiving ordination, out of my natural fondness for the gate of meditation I reported to the master what I wanted to practice. He told me:

"Precepts aim at purity and meditation aims at illumination [of the mind]. This is the order in which one practices the Way. One should study precepts first, until becoming clear and adept at maintaining the precepts and prohibitions. Not until then is one qualified to practice [meditation]." After I started

attending the lectures on precepts it took over ten years. Therefore, follow-

ing the commentaries [on the vinaya], I have come to enjoy what was practiced by the patriarchs.

Fourth, we should note Daoxuan's avid enthusiasm for meditation and his relative lack of interest in vinaya during the first seven- teen years of his monastic career (610-27). When he was offered the

job of working as Zhishou's assistant lecturer shortly after returning to him for another ten series of Sifen li lectures, he flatly declined an honor that might have been widely envied by his fellow-disciples. Ostensibly, Daoxuan's refusal was out of modesty. However, know-

ing that his expertise in vinaya at the time must already have been

extraordinarily advanced, as it is easy to see from the vinaya works he composed several years later, I suspect that in fact he was still in

the thralls of meditation practice and not very fond of vinaya. We even have reasons to assume that, in fact, what Daoxuan de-

clined on this occasion was the status of "heir apparent" to perhaps the greatest vinaya master of his day. It seems to have been a general rule in medieval Chinese Buddhism that when a Buddhist master appointed a disciple as his assistant lecturer, he expected actually the disciple to be his successor-in-waiting. Two well-known examples will suffice here. When Zhiyi studied under Huisi, Huisi appointed him as his assistant lecturer (daijiang {fU).118 Similarly, while Jizang

117 XU gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 534bl-4. 118 Sui Tiantai Zhizhe Dashi biezhuan, T vol. 50, no. 2050, p. 192a22-23; cf.

Zhiyi's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 564b23-24: ~tW S

374 CHEN JINHUA

> (549-623), the Sanlun master, was barely nineteen years old he started to act as the assistant lecturer of his teacher Falang at the latter's request."9 Thus, it does not seem too far from the truth to assume that Daoxuan's refusal to be Zhishou's assistant can be interpreted as a purposeful avoidance of the status of Zhishou's future successor.

Finally, it is very likely that at the beginning of the Zhenguan era, right after his six years of intensive study under Zhishou, Daoxuan turned to other famed Buddhist masters, either active in the capital or in reclusion in the neighboring mountains. 120 After spending three to four years visiting and studying with these masters, Daoxuan started a long journey that was to lead him to a number of famous Buddhist sites but also, by keeping him out of Chang'an for the next decade, to deprive him of the opportunity to see again his two principal teachers, Huiyun and Zhishou: they died five and three years respectively before he returned to the capital sometime around Zhenguan 14 (640).121 Thus, Daoxuan did not return after 627 to resume his study with Zhishou. This enables us to understand better a somehow ambiguous remark that he makes about the period of his study under Zhishou. Without telling us when it started or ended, he states at the end of his biography of Zhishou that he had studied under him "for a decade" (g)4, i1+Z).122 As has been made clear, except for his ordination Daoxuan seems to have maintained a very tenuous relationship with Zhishou during the period from 615 to the day in 621 when he returned to study the Sifen lI with him. In other words, from that time until 627 he actually spent only about six years under Zhishou. So, when he claims that he studied under Zhishou "for a decade," either he is counting the length of his discipleship under Zhishou from the date of his ordination, or he im-

{Ati-' Jwff L' ("From then on, [Huisi] often ordered [Zhiyi] to lecture on his behalf and Zhiyi succeeded in winning over the audience").

11 See Jizang's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 514a2-3. 120 Here we should note the different expressions that Daoxuan uses in describ-

ing his studies under Zhishou and the ones he undertook in the early Zhenguan era. For the former he uses the word lilyan 'f$L (vinaya lectures), while he refers to the latter using jiangsi ME, which probably indicates lectures about more general Buddhist studies, including siitras and s'astras.

121 We do not know exactly when Daoxuan returned to Chang'an from this long journey; however, it is made clear by Daoxuan himself in the postscript that this definitely happened before Zhenguan 16 (642), when his mother died.

122 Xu gaoseng zhuan, T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 61 5a20.


plies that he continued to study with Zhishou sometime after 627, when his six-year Sifen lii study was over. But since we have excluded the possibility of Daoxuan studying under Zhishou after 627, we have to assume that when speaking of "a decade" he was actually reckon-

ing his discipleship under Zhishou from 615.123 With all of this we are now in a position to determine the monastery

or monasteries where Zhishou ordained the young Daoxuan in 615, and instructed him in the Sifen li until 627. The question, then, is: with which monastery or monasteries was Zhishou affiliated between 615 and 627? To solve this, we need to look more closely into Zhishou's life.

(III.2) A Reconstructed Life of Zhishou

Zhishou was born to the Huangfu vIm family on the banks of the Zhanghe 1llJ (Zhangbin gM) in present-day Qinghe i?J, Hebei; this was, roughly, the place then known as Xiangzhou tiJ''[I, at that time the political and Buddhist center in the north. Origi- nally based in Anding ts (present-day Dingxi -i, Gansu), the

Huangfu family produced a number of renowned literati and states-

men, including the great author Huangfu Mi _Tffi (style-name Xuanyan T-, 215-82) in theJin Dynasty. In pursuit of their political careers, Zhishou's ancestors moved from their native Anding to

Zhanghe. Zhishou abandoned family life during his childhood and became

a disciple of Zhimin, a leading disciple of the great meditation master Sengchou who was then residing at, and possibly presiding over, the Yunmensi in Xiangzhou, a monastery originally built for him

by the Northern Qi rulers.124 Because of Zhishou's youth, Zhimin did not instruct him in the precepts, but he managed to master them

123 According to this understanding, Daoxuan's discipleship under Zhishou

lasted from eleven to twelve years. In this sense, Daoxuan appears to have used the expression shizai +-- ("ten years") roughly rather than literally.

124 Zhimin does not have a separate entry in the Xu gaoseng zhuan. He is merely mentioned in Zhishou's biography, where he is described as one of the main

disciples of Sengchou and an outstanding master of the "Cultivation of the Mind"

(xinxue ,L{, meditation) (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614a4-5). The same biography notes that Zhishou accompanied Zhimin to reside at the Chandingsi when it was built in 603 (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614b6-8), from which it results that Zhimin must have died after that year.

376 CHEN JINHUA

on his own by seeking the help of vinaya masters who visited the Yunmensi. Shortly afterwards, Zhishou's mother followed him in renouncing the secular life and was ordained as a nun with the dharma- name Fashi jP&. In the hope that Zhishou could stay with her permanently she entreated Zhimin to ordain her son. But Zhimin rejected her demand, apparently because he was affraid that Zhishou was not mature enough. Zhishou was not deterred, however, and he continued to practice the precepts diligently. Quickly noting his extraordinary morality and talent, Zhimin agreed in the end to ordain him. This time it was Zhishou who was afraid not to be qualified enough, and he traveled to other places for more extensive study. Only after three years of study, when he had turned twenty-two, did he agree to receive ordination.

After this event Zhishou went to attend the vinaya lectures delivered by the monk Daohong Lje (d.u.) who, as a second-generation disciple of Huiguang, was considered at the time a distinguished vinaya master.125 It did not take him long to distinguish himself from his peers. Although Zhimin had been Zhishou's first mentor and had taken care of his material and spiritual needs while he studied under him as a novice, Zhishou's biography in the Xu gaoseng zhuan gives the impression that he actually did not learn much from Zhimin about precepts, despite Zhimin's undeniable expertise in vinaya and quali- fications as a preceptor, as suggested by the fact that he eventually administered precepts to Zhishou. In this sense, it is likely that Daohong was Zhishou's first formal vinaya instructor, which made Zhishou also a second generation disciple of Huiguang-hence his status as a common "dharma-grandson" of both Sengchou and Huiguang.

When the Chandingsi was built in 603, Zhishou, who was one of the two attendants of Zhimin, accompanied him to the capital and resided at the monastery. Zhishou's residence at the Chandingsi apparently did not exceed two years, because he was called to the Great Chandingsi when it was built in 605.126 Why he moved there

125 Daohong was a disciple of Daoyun L (d.u.), a major disciple of Hui- guang. Daoxuan attaches a short biographical note on Daohong to the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Hongzun A4 (530-608), a common disciple of Daoyun and of Daohui L2HW (d.u.), himself another leading disciple of Huiguang (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 612a13-16). The vinaya master Daohong should not be confused with the contemporary homonymous monk (568-646), who was an exegete (see his Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 547a-b).

126 In dating this shift of afflliation, Daoxuan uses in his Xu gaoseng zhuan bio-


is not known, but it appears that Zhimin was already dead at the time and therefore that Zhishou had started his own independent career.

During his stay at the Great Chandingsi Zhishou built two pago- das at the mountain temple Guangyansi , on the ruins of the Yunmensi:127 one at the place where he had become a Buddhist novice and the other at the place where he received ordination. In other words, he may have briefly returned to his home-temple for memorial projects.'28 No source tells us when this happened and how long Zhishou stayed there, but it appears to have been a brief sojourn. In any event, after this sketchy account of Zhishou's activities during his stay at the Great Chandingsi the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography jumps to the year Zhenguan 1 (627), when Zhishou was enrolled in a translation project. The Yunmensi trip is, essentially, the only event mentioned in Zhishou's Xu gaoseng zhuan concerning his life during the period from 605 to 627. The biography even fails to tell us whether or not he remained in the Great Chandingsi throughout this twenty- two-year period. In order to solve this problem, we have to resort to other sources.

The first source to help us is a note in a Xu gaoseng zhuan biography to the effect that Zhishou was still at the Great Chandingsi in Daye 8 (612). 129 Another Xu gaoseng zhuan biography tells us that sometime at the end of the Daye era (605-17) he spent a summer lecturing on the Sifen lu at the Daxing guosi )M 4 in Tongzhou [J'I'4I (present-day Dali kAE, Shaanxi).130 Finally, an eleventh-centuryJapa-

graphy of Zhishou the ambiguous expression Daye zhi shi ;k t, which can mean the first year, or the early period, of the Daye era (605-17). Thus, Zhishou moved from the Chandingsi to the Great Chandingsi either in, or a few years after, 605. But since the transfer is mentioned in the same breath as the establishment of the monastery, it seems rather likely that he moved there shortly after the monastery was built in 605.

127 At least according to Daoxuan, this would suggest that the Yunmensi had already been abolished during Zhishou's later years, and that in Daoxuan's time a new temple, named Guangyansi, was built on the ruins of the Yunmensi, a fact also confirmed by a note in Sengchou's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 555a12-16).

128 T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614c9-16. 129 This is in the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography of Daoyue LO (568/578-636), a

specialist of the Abhidhannakosabhasya and a close friend of Zhishou (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 527c13-18).

130 His summer lecturing at the Daxing guosi was arranged by Daozong LN (554-638), then the abbot of the temple (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 534bl8-26). Formerly a nunnery called Poruonisi , the Daxing guosi in Tongzhou

CHEN JINHUA

nese Buddhist catalogue, examined in combination with other relevant Chinese Buddhist sources, establishes that at least until Wude 6 (623) Zhishou was still a monk of the Great Chandingsi.

This catalogue is the Toiki dento mokuroku fA f4Xi f H (Catalogue of the Transmission of the Lamp in the Eastern Territory [i.e., Ja- pan]), compiled in 1094, and it includes this interlinear note follow-

ing an entry on a commentary to the Sifen lii:

Cotao ° S rBn . a Zutf the Gra t 0g 131

Composed by Sramana Zhishou of the Great Chandingsi; originally in twenty juan. Finished on the third (?) day of the jianchen gS (third) month'32 of the sixth year of the Wude era of the Tang [623], year guiwei. The editing work was completed at the Riyansi of the Western Capital [Chang'an]. It can be read in comparison with the Xiduan version of the Sifen lii commentary, in nine juan.

What is worthy of note here is, first, the identification of Zhishou as a monk of the Da Chandingsi, confirming that he was a resident of that monastery at the time. On the other hand, it is puzzling that Zhishou, a monk of the Great Chandingsi, should have finished editing the final version of his Sifen li commentary in another monastery, the Riyansi. At first glance this might suggest that Zhishou's Sifen lii lectures, on which his commentary may well have been based, were delivered at the Riyansi. But on further analysis I find this very unlikely. As demonstrated below, Zhishou spent three to four months to com-

plete one series of Sifen lii lectures, and it seems to have been his habit to lecture on the vinaya text for ten series without a break, taking him about three years. It would be an unusual, albeit not totally unlikely, practice that a monk be allowed to stay at another monas-

tery for more than three years as a guest lecturer-that is, without changing his previous temple affiliation.133 As a matter of fact, evi-

was the place where YangJian, the future Sui Wendi, was born; for the legend related to that birth, see Tsukamoto 1975: 145-91; Chen Jinhua 2002, Chapter Two.

131 T vol. 55, no. 2183, p. 1155bl2-12. 132 In literary Chinese jianchen indicates the third month of the lunar year. For

this reason, zhi in jianchen zhi ri must be a mistake for a character indicating a one-digit number. Given the similarity in form between zhi ; and san E (three), I suggest that here san was wrongly copied as zhi.

133 We have noted earlier the rate at which Zhishou delivered his Sifen lii lectures.

378


dence suggests that Zhishou's ten series of Sifen li lectures from 621 to 624 were not delivered at the Riyansi.

As has been observed in Part III. 1, the first of the two sets of ten series of Sifen lii lectures by Zhishou that Daoxuan attended was delivered from 621 to 624. Discussing this experience, Daoxuan uses the expressionyou wang tinglii shibian IS.T~-I (once again I went to attend ten series of vinaya lectures), suggesting that in order to attend the lectures he left his temple for another temple. Since he resided with Huiyun at the Riyansi before going to study with Zhishou, he would not have had to leave his own temple in order to attend Zhishou's lectures if they had been delivered at the Riyansi.

How, then, do we explain that Zhishou finished editing his own

Sifen lu commentary at the Riyansi? Here we have to consider Zhishou's close connection with Daoxuan's teacher, Huiyun. According to

Huiyun's biography, Zhishou and Daoyue, both befriended by Huiyun, used to visit frequently the latter at the Riyansi, where they discussed issues related to vinaya and edited their works:

S ' Daelan o we' eu t p r o 134

Sramanas Zhishou, Daoyue and others were all learned enough to penetrate into the past and to construct [Buddhist] projects soaring into the sky. In their admiration for Huiyun's virtue and manners, they [sometimes] stayed over-

night at his temple, thoroughly discussing the dharma and precepts, amend-

ing and correcting their commentaries [together]. They went back [to their own temples] happy and laughing; but before long they returned to visit

[Huiyun].

According to this, Zhishou frequented Huiyun's temples-mainly the Riyansi, where Huiyun spent most of his time in Chang'an-to discuss vinaya and other forms of Buddhist teachings with him. He also occasionally edited his commentaries at Huiyun's temple(s). It is important to note that Zhishou stayed there only temporarily, as is confirmed by such expressions as liulian xinxiu WL{M?f ("stayed overnight [at his temple]"), huanxiao er xuan SX^ff ("going back

happy and laughing"), and xunfu zaozhan X"t'l0_ ("returning to visit [Huiyun] before long"). Therefore, Zhishou's stay at the Riyansi in 623 must have been one of these visits, assuming of course that

Huiyun was still residing at the Riyansi at the time; and this is the

question we must now ask.

134 Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 55, no. 2183, p. 524al 1-13.

380 CHEN JINHUA

In the Xu gaoseng zhuan biography he wrote for Huiyun, Daoxuan tells us that he moved to the Chongyisi in the Wude era (618-26), without giving the specific year. Fortunately, he indicates on another occasion that this happened in Wude 7 (624):

A 135

In Wude 7 the Riyansi was abolished. Monks [affiliated with it] were scattered and allotted [to different temples], the rooms at the monastery being confiscated by the government [...]. Ten people, including myself [Daoxuan], my master [Huiyun] and [eight] disciples, 136 were lodged at the Chongyi[si].

This allows us to conclude that during Zhishou's 623 visit to the Riyansi Huiyun was still at the temple, in view of which it should not be surprising that Zhishou, although formally affiliated with the Great Chandingsi at the time, edited the final version of one of his works at the Riyansi.

Thus, Zhishou, who started living at the Great Chandingsi in 605, was still said to be staying there not only in 612 but also in 623, eleven years later. This strongly suggests that he stayed continuously at the Great Chandingsi from 605 to 623. At this juncture, the following information is relevant for our discussion. According to a work by Daoxuan, in the six years from 621 to 627 Zhishou preached twenty series of Sifen li lectures for Daoxuan and others. Since, as we saw, he preached the Sifen lu at the rate of approximately ten series every three years, I assume that the first of these two sets of ten series occurred from 621 to 624. And since Zhishou was still a Great Chandingsi monk in 623, that is, two years after he started the ten series of lectures attended by Daoxuan, the ten series were probably entirely delivered at the same monastery, which would extend Zhishou's residence at the Great Chandingsi for at least one more year, until 624.

Therefore, Zhishou stayed at the Great Chandingsi from 605 to 624, even though during this period he was absent from the monastery

135 Ji Shenzhou sanbao gantong lu = W[ 6_,Aj (Account of the [Mysterious] Stimuli and Responses Related to the ThreeJewels in China), Tvol. 52, no. 2106, p. 406a23-6; cf. Daoshi's report in the Fayuan zhulin, T vol. 53, no. 2122, p. 586alO-13; Fujiyoshi 1991: 89.

136 The expression "yu shitu shiren" gt.i+--- is ambiguous. It can mean (i) "ten people including myself and nine of my disciples," or (ii) "ten people including myself, my master, and eight of my fellow-disciples." In this specific context the expression should be understood in the second way, since Daoxuan, still under the guidance of Huiyun, was not yet an independent Buddhist master at the time.


at least twice, once traveling to the Yunmensi and once giving a guest lecture at the Daxing guosi in Tongzhou. Now, assuming that, very likely, it was at the Great Chandingsi that Zhishou delivered his first ten series of Sifen la lectures attended by Daoxuan, where did he deliver the other ten series, which Daoxuan also attended during a further three-year period (624-27)? There, unfortunately, we seem to have less solid evidence. The best we can do is to delineate the available circumstantial evidence that allows us to sketch the likely itinerary of Zhishou during the last eleven years of his life (624-35).

First of all, we know from other sources that in the third month of Zhenguan 3 (30 March-28 April 629) Zhishou was called to the Daxing- shansi i4 translation office headed by the Indian monk Boluo- pomiduoluo h (Prabhamitra, 565-633).117 Sometime after the fourth month of Zhenguan 4 (18 May-15 June 630), when the translation of the Baoxing [tuoluonijing g [ (Mahasamnipata- ratnaketudha-ran7 sutra) was completed, the translation office was moved to the Shengguangsi Th'U,. Zhishou must have followed his translator colleagues to the Shengguangsi and stayed there until the translation project was abolished, sometime after Prabhamitra died on the sixth day of the fourth month of Zhenguan 7 (19 May 633).138

137 See the Ka'yuan shijiao lu r,fjrffi (Catalogue of [the Texts Related to] the Buddhist Teachings, [Compiled in] the Kaiyuan era [713-41]), Tvol. 55, no. 2154, p. 553b-c, which agrees with Prabhamitra's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography (T vol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 439c-440c) in dating the establishment of Prabhamitra's translation office (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 440a24ff). In addition, according to his biography in the Xu gaoseng zhuan, Prabhamitra arrived in Chang'an in the twelfth month of Wude 9 (24 December 626-22 January 627) (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 440al7-18); for his part Falin tA;t (572-640), who was among the nineteen members of Prabhamitra's translation team and wrote a preface to a translation (that of the Baoxing tuoluoni jing) produced by it, tells us that Prabhamitra arrived in Chang'an in Zhenguan 1 (627); see "Baoxing jing xu" WRgJ (Preface to the Baoxing [tuoluonijjing), Tvol. 13, no. 402, p. 536c16-17.

138 Concerning Zhishou's participation in the early Zhenguan Buddhist translation project, his own Xu gaoseng zhuan biography reports that in Zhenguan 1 an Indian Tripitaka brought some Sanskrit texts to China hoping to have them trans- lated into Chinese, and that it was Zhishou who was chosen after Taizong had ordered the relevant government ministries to search for outstanding monks capable of assisting the Indian monk in translating the texts (T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614c16-18). The source is ambiguous and even misleading, as it does not give Prabhamitra's name or specify the date at which Zhishou was appointed as a member of the translation committee (the mention of the year Zhenguan 1 might give readers the mistaken impression that Zhishou was called to the Buddhist center in that year, but this did not happen until two years later). Rather, it emphasizes Zhishou's prestige as a vinaya master by saying that in the course of

382 CHEN JINHUA

Zhishou probably stayed on at the Shengguangsi for a while before he was appointed Rector (shangzuo F)9Ag) of the newly built Hongfusi q&6 monastery in Zhenguan 8 (634); he died there one year later.'39 Thus, we know Zhishou's whereabouts during his last six years (629- 35): from the Daxingshansi (629-30) to the Shengguangsi (630-34) and on to the Hongfusi (634-35). But where was he during the period from Wude 7 (624) to Zhenguan 3 (629), when he was summoned to the Daxingshansi?

FromJinglin's PI4# (565-640) Xu gaoseng zhuan biography we know that, sometime after Wude 3 (620), Zhishou became affiliated with the Hongfasi qQA 4, where he stayed for three years at the invita- tion of Jinglin, the first Rector of this state monastery.'40 Since he had remained at the Chandingsi until at least 624, and from 629 until his death in 635 he was successively affiliated with the Daxingshansi, the Shengguangsi and the Hongfusi, therefore the three- year lecturing tenure at the Hongfasi must have occurred either between 624 and 627 or between 627 and 629. Which is more likely?

Suppose it happened between 624 and 627, and that Zhishou left the Hongfasi in 627. AsJinglin was a meditation monk with strong vinaya inclinations, and judging by what is said in his Xu gaoseng zhuan biography, Zhishou's vinaya expertise and his influence must have been highly appreciated at the Hongfasi, and so there would have been few reasons for him to leave such a favorable environment.141 It is therefore unlikely that Zhishou moved to the Hongfasi in 624, and that after three years he left from there for another unspecified monastery, where he would have stayed three more years before being called to the Daxingshansi in 629. On the contrary, if we suppose that Zhishou entered the Hongfasi from the Great Chandingsi in 627, there is a good reason for his departure three years later, namely,

the translating he was always consulted when a problem regarding vinaya emerged (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614c18-19).

139 T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 614cl9-615al. 140 T vol. 50, no. 2060, p. 590c14-15. No source tells us when or how long

Zhishou stayed at the Hongfasi. Yet, as we saw, he needed about three years to deliver ten series of Sifen la lectures, and this must have been the duration of his stay. It is said that Jinglin himself attended the lectures, which popularized vinaya at the capital and more particularly at the Hongfasi to such an extent that it became known even to Buddhist novices and to the monastic servants of the monastery (Tvol. 50, no. 2060, p. 590c15-17).

141 One possible reason for his departure from the Hongfasi would have been the death of his good friend Jinglin. However, Jinglin lived until 640.


the imperial edict that required his transfer to the Daxingshansi translation center. Thus, it seems more likely that Zhishou did not move to the Hongfasi until 627 and stayed at his home-temple, the Great

Chandingsi, until that time. All of the above allows us to propose the following brief chronol-

ogy for Zhishou:

567 born in Xiangzhou (at the side of Zhanghe)ca. 577 becomes a Buddhist novice under Zhimin 588ab formally ordained 603-05 stays at the Chandingsi 605-27 stays at the Great Chandingsi 627-29 resides at the Hongfasi (?) 629-30 Daxingshansi 630-34 Shengguangsi 634-35 Hongfusi; dies there

Regarding Zhishou's residence at the twin Chandingsi monaster-

ies, this chronology supports the conclusion that after his two-year residence at the Chandingsi in 603-05, Zhishou stayed at the Great

Chandingsi for at least nineteen years (605-24), and in fact probably twenty-two years (605-27). Thus we can solve the problem of the

monastery where Daoxuan studied vinaya under Zhishou: since Zhishou resided at the Great Chandingsi from 605 to 627, and that for his part Daoxuan received his ordination from Zhishou in 621 and was trained in vinaya by him for the six following years, to 627, it ensues that this took place at the Great Chandingsi.142

To conclude with the early period of Daoxuan's monastic career, we can say that after he had been ordained by Zhishou in 615 at the Great Chandingsi, he returned to the Riyansi to stay with his origi-

142 Strictly speaking, Daoxuan did not attend the second set of ten series of Sifen li lectures right after the first. In all probability, after the first ten series he returned to the Riyansi, to be transferred to the Chongyisi shortly afterwards: we saw that he went there along with Huiyun in 624 (see above, Part III.2). If this is true, then it was from the Chongyisi that Daoxuan was sent back to Zhishou for another ten series of Sifen lii lectures. After that second set he returned to the Chongyisi, by which affiliation he identified himself in a few vinaya commentaries that he drafted around the period, such as the Sifen li shanbu sujijiemo EI5-JW1 MfI^flo^ (Karman [Ch.jiemo JS, "procedures"] in the Sifen lii [compiled with an Eye] to Deleting the Superfluous and Supplementing the Insufficient [in the Vinaya Text] in accordance with Circumstances; see Tvol. 40, no. 1804, p. la3), the Sifen li shanfan buque xingshi chao (Tvol. 40, no. 1808, p. 492a4), and others. However, given that shortly after leaving Huiyun Daoxuan started searching for Buddhist masters in and, later, outside Chang'an, I do not believe that he stayed at the Chongyisi for very long.

384 CHEN JINHUA

nal teacher Huiyun; six years later, in 621, he went to study the Sifen lu with Zhishou at the Great Chandingsi for three years;143 then, after a brief return to the Riyansi followed by a short stay at the Chongyisi, he went back once again to Zhishou for another three years of Sifen hi study; and, very likely, this new period of study also took place at the Great Chandingsi.

Concluding Remarks

Daoxuan's treatise on the history of Chinese meditation gives us some revealing glimpses into meditation practice in sixth- and seventh-century China which cannot be obtained in other sources and which, unfortunately, have been overlooked by scholars interested in the formation of the Chan tradition. According to this treatise, during the period extending from the very beginning of the sixth century to the middle of the seventh century there were at least six meditation groups active in China, both in the north and in the south. The existence of these six groups is supported by the Xu gaoseng zhuan biographies of the representatives of the six meditation traditions and their followers. This article has attempted to reconstruct these six groups on the basis of Daoxuan's treatise and of the relevant biographies.

Of the six groups, the one led by Sengchou seems to have been the most influential, especially in the north. In comparison, the group in the line of Bodhidharma and Huike was regarded, at least at the outset, as marginal or even heterodox. Still, it gradually managed to gain greater influence among grass-roots Buddhist communities. Furthermore, if we except the Bodhidharma-Huike group, the other five groups were compatible with each other and maintained continuous and sometimes very close communications. Finally, it is important to take notice of the rivalry between the groups of Bodhidharma and Sengchou: it proved crucial for the emergence of the Bodhidharma-Huike group as the dominant force in the Chi- nese meditation tradition in the following centuries. The confronta- tion between the groups of Sengchou and Bodhidharma led to the exclusion of the Bodhidharma-Huike tradition from the Sui national

"'1 That Daoxuan made his vain attempt to learn meditation right after finishing one series of Sifen la lectures by Zhishou also suggests that it was at the Great Chandingsi that he attended them: I suspect that it was precisely the environment of the Great Chandingsi that triggered his interest in meditation.


meditation center based at the twin Chandingsi monasteries. How- ever, this apparent disadvantage suffered by the Bodhidharma-Huike group turned out to be a blessing in terms of its later development and of the prestige of Bodhidharma and Huike as meditation masters. As the charismatic leaders of the other five major traditions were brought to the capital, they lost contact with their followers in the provinces. Furthermore, since one chief purpose of the Chandingsi was to boost Buddhism as the Sui state ideology, the subsequent downfall of the Sui unavoidably affected the credibility of the meditation traditions involved in this politico-religious program. In contrast, for its very lack of connections with the Chandingsi the Bo- dhidharma-Huike tradition may have attracted more followers at grass- roots level at a time when the other meditation masters were busy collaborating with each other at the capital monastery. And the Bodhidharma-Huike tradition must have benefited from the collapse of the secular power closely wedded to the religious force (represented by Tanqian) that had stood against and suppressed it. This possibly was an important factor contributing to the configuration of later Chan Buddhism, based as it was on the authority of the teachings attributed to Bodhidharma and Huike.

Daoxuan's treatise also demonstrates the extent to which he was personally involved in such sectarian rivalries. This involvement was due, first of all, to Daoxuan's status as a third-generation disciple of Sengchou, and secondly, to his own background at the Great Chan- dingsi, the state monastery which was an important power-base for the Sengchou meditation group. Are there, in addition to their direct contribution to Daoxuan's critical attitude towards Bodhidharma's group, more profound and far-reaching implications underlying his ties to the Great Chandingsi? Of course, those ties underscore the necessity of correlating Daoxuan's Sifen li teachings with those advocated by his Great Chandingsi teacher Zhishou. To do this will require a meticulous comparative reading of Daoxuan's numerous vinaya texts and of Zhishou's extant works. Hopefully, such comparison will throw light on the true connection between Zhishou and Daoxuan and also pinpoint where Daoxuan developed (or deviated) from his master's teachings. However, this task lies far beyond the scope of this article and I prefer to leave it to more capable and qualified scholars.

I propose instead to interpret Daoxuan's Great Chandingsi ties from another perspective. As noted before, the Great Chandingsi, like its twin monastery the Chandingsi, was planned as a national

386 CHEN JINHUA

meditation center, and in effect it fulfilled this role, at least in the few years after its foundation. In view of this, we need, first, to consider seriously Daoxuan's personal interest in meditation, and then to evaluate how his background in meditation shaped his ideas about the Chinese meditation tradition, and what influence they exerted on its development.

To date, Daoxuan has been mainly understood and appreciated as a vinaya master, which is certainly justifiable in view of his contribution to the vinaya tradition in East Asia. And yet, it seems to me that at least during his early monastic career Daoxuan did not have that much interest in vinaya. Had the young Daoxuan taken a serious interest in vinaya, surely he would have made much better use of the precious opportunity of having the great vinaya master Zhishou as his ordination master, and would have stayed with him after his ordination. Instead, he left Zhishou quickly. What prevented Daoxuan from studying vinaya with Zhishou during the Daye era may have been the social turmoil at the time, which he stresses in his postscript, and it may also have been other reasons unknown to us.'44 But it seems difficult to exclude the possibility that he simply lacked interest in vinaya during this period. This impression deep- ens when we consider his attitude towards vinaya in the following decade, when he was much more mature intellectually. During his six-year formal study under Zhishou, Daoxuan made repeated, though vain, attempts to escape from vinaya to meditation. It was only under the strong pressure of his "original teacher" Huiyun that he reluctantly carried on his vinaya studies. What is most striking about Daoxuan's attitude towards vinaya during these years is the fact that he declined the opportunity of being considered as a successor to Zhishou, arguably the greatest vinaya master at the time.

It seems that Daoxuan's interest in vinaya developed rapidly in the course of his decade-long traveling starting in 630. To uncover the reasons underlying this shift in his religious concerns and inter- ests will require much more research; still, one important factor might well be the great deal of attention that vinaya masters succeeded in attracting from the government in the early Tang.'45

"' For example, the necessity that he felt to stay and study with his original master Huiyun, then based at the Riyansi.

145 Concerning this point, we should remember Daoxuan's observation that, due to the efforts of Xuanwan and other vinaya masters, the vinaya group became well disciplined and monks belonging to it became so respected and accomplished that in the early Tang the outstanding monks selected by the government came


In any event, Daoxuan's image as one of the most important vinaya masters in East Asia has unfortunately obscured his connection to other Buddhist traditions, like Tiantai and, particularly, meditation. While his relationship with Tiantai has attracted some scholarly attention, so far his background in meditation has largely remained unnoticed. Daoxuan suggests in his postscript to the Sifen la hanzhu jieben shu that, at least in the early period of his monastic career, his main religious interest lay in meditation. After finishing attending one series of the Sften li lectures, he eagerly sought permission from Huiyun to practise meditation. Huiyun sent him back to Zhishou for more training in vinaya giving as a reason that vinaya was a necessary stage preliminary to meditation and wisdom. Daoxuan's enthusiasm for meditation did not abate during and even after ten more series of Sifen lI lectures by Zhishou. On the contrary, he himself states explicitly that throughout the period he did not forget meditation even for a moment. More remarkable, it was only with Huiyun's promise that he would be allowed to practise meditation that Daoxuan reluctantly went back to Zhishou for another ten series of Sifen li lectures. According to his Song gaoseng zhuan biography, after his vinaya training Daoxuan eventually went to the mountains and forests, where he concentrated on meditation. How long and how deeply did he do so we do not know; but, again, it seems beyond doubt that Daoxuan's image as a vinaya author and master has long blocked our view on other aspects of his intellectual life, particularly his intense interest in meditation.

It is a fact that, knowing the relatively intense meditation environment at the Great Chandingsi and Zhishou's own status as a third-generation disciple of the great meditation master Sengchou, Daoxuan's prompt departure from Zhishou and the Great Chandingsi in 615 suggests a lack of interest in meditation at that time. It seems that he did not become seriously interested in it until his return to the Great Chandingsi in the Wude era (618-27). Another important reason might be an increasingly clear consciousness on his part that he was not only a disciple of Zhishou the vinaya master, but also a "dharma great-grandson," i.e. a "third-generation disciple" (through the intermediary of Zhimin and Zhishou) of Sengchou, whose meditation tradition was dominant before the Bodhidharma-Huike tradition got the upper hand. Originally, Huiyun had sent Daoxuan to

mostly from it (see Xuanwan's Xu gaoseng zhuan biography at T Vol. 50, no. 2060,

p. 617b29-c5).

388 CHEN JINHUA

Zhishou at the Great Chandingsi with an eye to having him trained as a vinaya master. Ironically, it was under Zhishou and at the Great Chandingsi that Daoxuan became more inclined toward meditation. Even though he eventually became one of the greatest vinaya masters in East Asia (Huiyun was not unsuccessful in this sense), his experiences at the Great Chandingsi left an indelible mark on his intellectual life, which, in turn, informed to a great extent his general idea of meditation. The emphasis Daoxuan gave to the Chinese meditation tradition in his authoritative monastic historico-biographical work, the Xu gaoseng zhuan, and the way he interpreted and reinter- preted the rise, development and mutual relations of several distinct meditation traditions from the late fifth century up to his own day all of this might be better understood with reference to Daoxuan's hitherto unnoticed Great Chandingsi ties.

Finally, knowing the importance that the section on "Meditation masters" in the Xu gaoseng zhuan had for later Chan ideologies, and in particular for the formation of Chan/Zen literature, Daoxuan's status as a shaper of the East Asian meditation tradition seems to have remained significantly under-estimated. Having highlighted his personal ties to the Great Chandingsi and his definite status within a leading meditation tradition in China, I hope that in the future scholars will be less reluctant to investigate his background in and contribution to the Chinese meditation tradition. In particular, while the role of dynastic politics in the subsequent shaping of the Chan tradition is now taken seriously, we must be prepared to admit that the Sui project of the twin Chanding monasteries was a definitive influence in the rise of the Bodhidharma-Huike lineage. In Daoxuan we have not only an important witness to this period, but also an active participant in a crucial phase of the development of East Asian Buddhism. It is, therefore, worth it to consider carefully what he says exactly and why he says it.

Bibliography

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE FOOTNOTES:

DBZ TakakusuJunijiro A <R, F et al., comp. 1913-22: Dainihon bukkyo zensho H f0ftit (A Complete Collection of the

Buddhist Texts Produced in the GreatJapan), 100 vols., Tokyo: Tokyo insatsu kabushiki kaisha (Tokyo: Kodansha, 1970-73; rept. of the Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan 7iAKYstiW4ISI version [1913-22]).

T TakakusuJunijiro, Watanabe Kaigyoku ;ftE, et al., eds.


1924-32: Taisho shinshu daizokyo / -IEFff il jM (A New Buddhist Canon Com-

piled in the Taisho Reign-era [1912-26]), 100 vols., Tokyo: Taisho issaikyo kankokai.

XZJ Xin wenfeng chuban gongsi ~fiZ5A± ft;. ~ }R , comp. 1968-70: Wanzi xuzangjing F[IJdI;S, 150 vols., Taipei: Xin wenfeng chuban

gongsi; rept. of the Dai Nihon zokuzokyo k < EH ;(,# ( (120 cases, ed. Nakano Tatsue rp;5.; Kyoto: Zoky6 shoin F: , 1905-12).

A) PRIMARY SOURCES:

"Baoxing jing xu" ,ff4j J (Preface to the Baoxing [tuoluoni] ing), by Falin /ttAf (572-640), in or shortly after 630, Tvol. 13, no. 402, p. 536c

Baoxing tuoluoni jing WSV E : (Mahasamnipata-ratna-ketu-dhdran -sutra), 10 or 8

juan, tr. Prabhamitra (Ch. Boluopomiduoluo fliXi~ [Bopo itfl], or Guangzhi 74:, 565-633), between 629 and 630, Tvol. 13, no. 402

Chanyuan qinggui iT~-i-fi. (Pure Codes for the Chan Gardens [Monasteries]), 10 juan, by Zongyi mT (active 1103), XZJ 111: 875-942

Chu sanzangjiji jH_RlB U (Collection of Records Concerning the Translations of the "Three [Buddhist] Canons"), 15 juan, initially compiled by Sengyou {fff (445-518) in 515; Tvol. 55, no. 2145.

Da zhidu lun 5t< J (Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom), 100 juan, attributed to Nagarjuna, tr. Kumarajiva (344-413), Tvol. 25, no. 1509

Daoxuan liishi gantong lu m_ lS I ,I=,5ff Si. (Record of the Miraculous Instructions Given [by the Deities] to Vinaya Master Daoxuan), 1 juan, by Daoxuan )-f (596-667), 664, Tvol. 52, no. 2107

Fayuan zhulin JAf-ifJ (Pearl-forest of the Dharma-Garden), 100 juan, by Daoshi -tS: (ca. 596- after 683), 668, Tvol. 53, no. 2122

Fozu tongji {ifiE]A;i6 (General Record of the Buddha and Other Patriarchs), 54 juan, compiled by Zhipan ,,- (d. after 1269), between 1258 and 1269, Tvol. 49, no. 2035

Gaoseng zhuan Affif (Biographies of Eminent Monks), 14juan, initially completed by Huijiao Mfl (497-554), between 519 and 522 (final version probably completed ca. 530), Tvol. 50, no. 2059

Guoqing bailu 1î1: (One Hundred Documents Related to the Guoqing[si]), 4 juan, compiled by Guanding lTUl (561-632), ca. 607, Tvol. 46, no. 1934

Han Wei Liuchao baisanjiaji ~I/A-<~ - (A Collection of the Works by One Hundred and Three Authors in the Han and Wei Dynasties and the Six Dy- nasties Period), compiled by Zhang Pu N$ (1602-41); Taipei: Xinxing shuju youxian gongsi, 1976 (6 vols.)

Jingxin jieguanfa Di,,~S/I (Recommending Contemplation Methods for Puri- fying the Mind), 2 juan, by Daoxuan, Tvol. 45, no. 1893

Jiu Tangshu / t (Old History of the Tang, 618-907), 200 juan, completed in 945 under the direction of Liu Xu WfniJ (887-946); Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975

Ji shenzhou sanbao gantong lu 'Jq'-l M (Account of the [Mysterious] Stimuli and Responses Related to the ThreeJewels in China), 3 juan, by Daoxuan, 664, Tvol. 52, no. 2106

Ka'yuan shijiao lu rIff.~J, (Catalogue of [the Texts Related to] the Buddhist Teachings, [Compiled in] the Kaiyuan Reign-era [713-41]), 20juan, by Zhisheng

1- (700-786), 730, Tvol. 50, no. 2154

CHEN JINHUA

Lidai sanbaoji I-t -EW, (Records of the Three Treasures through the Ages), 15

juan, completed by Fei Zhangfang <-A - (d. after 597) and presented to the court at the beginning of 598, Tvol. 49, no. 2034

Meiso den sho t {.,P6 (Extracts from the Mingseng zhuan [Biographies of Distin-

guished Monks]), 1 juan, compiled by Shusho 't1 (1202-92) in the Bunryaku 3ZP era (5 November 1234-19 September 1235), XZJ vol. 134, pp. 1-34

Mingseng zhuan f 4{l (Biographies of Distinguished Monks), 30 or 31 juan, com-

piled by Baochang SWfR (464-after 514), between 510 and 514; some portions preserved in the Meiso den sho

Mohe Sengqi lii -Jgjf T (Mahdsanighika vinaya), 40 juan, trs. Buddhabhadra (Ch. Fotuobatuoluo Of lgk[IW, orJuexian W:, Foxian ff, 359-429) and Faxian

j;i,t (ca. 342-ca. 423), between 416 and 418, Tvol. 22, no. 1425 "Qixiasi bei" git ,- ([Memorial] Inscription for the Qixiasi), composed byJiang

Zong -t.g& (519-94) sometime before 587; Han Wei Liuchao baisanjiaji 6: 3487- 90

Quan Tang wen itff3 (Complete Collection of Tang Prose), 1,000juan, completed in 1814 by Dong Gao X_ (1740-1818) and others; Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987

Ritsuen sobo den T{at{ffW4 (Biographies of the Samgha-gem of the Vinaya-garden), 15juan, compiled by Eken n (1649-1704) in 1689; DBZ 105: 125-304

Shanjian lii M (i.e. Shanjianpiposha lii lM 'i?; Skt. Sudarsana vibhdsa vinaya), 18 juan, tr. Sengqiebatuoluo {@c<{gk (Samghabhadra, active 488), Tvol.

24, no. 1462

Shidijing lun +f- ;i^ (Daiabhumika-sutra-sastra), 12 juan, tr. Bodhiruci (Ch. Putiliuzhi -~= X%, fl. 508-35), between 508 and 535, Tvol. 26, no. 1522

Shisong lii -fIf- (Sarvastivadavinaya, or Dasddhyayavinaya), 61 juan, trs. Punyatara (Ch. Furuoduoluo 5 ~, fl. 410), Dharmaruci (Ch. Tanmoliuzhi aJe'%, d. after 405), and Kumarajiva (344-413), Tvol. 22, no. 1435

Sifen lii VyH/y- (Dharmagupta-vinaya), 60 juan, trs. Buddhayasas (Ch. Fotuoyeshe {ffFf4 , fl. 400) and Zhu Fonian * ,^ (Skt. Buddhasmrti?, fl. 400), Chang'an, between 410-12, Tvol. 22, no. 1428

Sifen lii biqiujieben - .Lf_ 4s- (or Tanwudejieben *4ft~,#J, Sifenjieben IY-

-t$, Sifen lii biqiujieben IZ lT)-4 -_rJt.b _; Skt. Dharmagupta prdtimokma sutra), 1

juan, tr. Buddhayasas (fl. 400), Chang'an, between 408 and 413, Tvol. 22, no. 1429

Sifen lii biqiu hanzhujieben shu ±ZTzS LhL,f lt$ (Suggestive Annotation on the

Sifen lii biqiujieben), 3 juan, by Daoxuan, 630, Tvol. 40, no. 1806

Sifen lii hanzhu jieben shu Z3/- t£.thE3S (i.e. Sifen lii biqiu hanzhu jieben shu KZ 3tLy- rjiit-1--Et*i) (Sub-commentary on the Sifen lii biqiu hanzhu jieben), by Daoxuan, after 630, XJ vol. 62, pp. 309-1026

Sifen lii hanzhujieben shu xingzongji `[E/ l3tEi iS:t E- , (Account of the Practices and Essentials in the Sifen lii hanzhujieben shu), 21 juan, comp. Yuanzhao J,tC (1048-1116), 1088, XJ vol. 62, pp. 309-1026

Sifen lii shanbu suijijiemo ['H f 'J{flifi]JlS_ (Karman [Ch.jiemo ,o , Procedures] in the Sifen lii [Compiled with an Eye] to Deleting the Superfluous and Supple- menting the Insufficient [in the Vinaya Text] in accordance with Circumstances), 2 juan, by Daoxuan, 635, Tvol. 40, no. 1804

Sfen lii shanfan buque xingshi chao [S Jf ~,f_1tJil (Extracts from the Sifen lii about the Procedures and Rituals, [with an Eye] to Deleting the Superfluous and Supplementing the Insufficient [in the Vinaya Text]), 12juan, by Daoxuan, 630, Tvol. 40, no. 1808

390


Sifen li xingshi chao zichi ji ji M5 41 3 (Supporting notes about the Sifen la xingshi chao), 16juan, by Yuanzhao ff, (1048-1116), Tvol. 40, no. 1805

Song gaoseng zhuan *?lNffffW (Biographies of Eminent Monks Compiled in the Song Dynasty [960-1279]), 30 juan, by Zanning * (919-1001), 988, Tvol. 50, no. 2061

Sui Tiantai Zhizhe Dashi biezhuan . kr11i;IJ{W (Separate Biography of Great Master Zhizhe of Mount Tiantai, [under the Dynasty of] the Sui), 1 juan, by Guanding 4$T (561-632), ca. 605, Tvol. 50, no. 2050

Toiki dentJ mokuroku *J1AP{HO (Catalogue of the Transmission of the Lamp in the Eastern Territory [i.e., Japan]), 1 juan, by Eicho5 i7ki (10 14-95), 1094, T vol. 55, no. 2183

"Xichan lun" TOM (Critical Discussion on Meditation), by Daoxuan, included in his Xu gaoseng zhuan, Tvol. 50, no. 2060, pp. 595c26-597b23

Xin Tang shu Wit (New History of the Tang, 618-907), 225 juan, compiled by Ouyang Xiu 1f (1007-72), Song Qi 5iff[ (998-1061) and others between 1043 and 1060; Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975.

"Xingfusi neidaochang gongfeng dade Dayi Chanshi beiming" gX* 1A* 7ttXw1WM!S (Stele Inscription for Chan Master Dayi of the Xingfu Monastery, Who was a Bhadanta [Great Virtue] and Palace Chaplain), by Wei Chuhou iJAN (773-828), 818, Quan Tang wen 715: 7352-54

Xu gaoseng zhuan NAA f{f{W (Continuation of Biographies of Eminent Monks), 30 juan, initially completed by Daoxuan in 645, Tvol. 50, no. 2060

Zhonghua chuanxindi chanmen shizi chengxi tu L (Chart of the Master-Disciple Succession of the Chan Gate that Transmits the Mind- ground in China), 1 juan, by Zongmi v (780-84 1) and Pei Xiu WSK (?-860 or 870), XJ vol. 110, pp. 866-76

Zizhi tong/ian WMiA (Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government), 294 juan, compiled by Sima Guang =)%1 (1019-1086) and others and presented to the court in 1084; Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976

B) MODERN WORKS QUOTED:

An Chung Cheul 9i_f 1988: "Dosen no shtudokan" L E 0)f1gtQ ("Tao-hsuian's View on the Cultivation of the Path"). Indogaku Bukkyjgaku kenkyut ff& fi (Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies) 37.1, pp. 92-94.

Benn, James 2001: "Burning for the Buddha: Self-immolation in Chinese Buddhism," Ph. D. dissertation, UCLA

Chappell, David 1980: "Early Forebodings of the Death of Buddhism," Numen 27: 122-53

Chen Jinhua 1t,t 1999: "One Name, Three Monks: Two Northern Chan Masters Emerge from the Shadow of Their Contemporary, the Tiantai Master Zhanran AM (711- 782)," Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 22.1: 1-91 2001: "A Holy Alliance: The Court-appointed 'Monks of Great Virtue' and their Religious and Political Role under the Sui Dynasty (581-617)," Tangyanjiu

JfiBP (7ournal of Tang Studies) 7: 19-37

392 CHEN JINHUA

2002: Monks and Monarchs, Kinship and Kingship: Tanqian in Sui Buddhism and Poli- tics, Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies Forthcoming (a): Fame and Obscurity: Chan Legends and Ideologies Centering on the "Third Chan Patriarch" Forthcoming (b): "What is in a Name? The Existence of Two Contemporary Sengyous, the Dates of the Mingseng zhuan and Gaoseng Zhuan"

Chen Yuzhen M 1992: "Daoshi yu Fayuan zhulin" iA* Wht,-# (Daoshi and the Fayuan zhulin [Pearl-forest in the Dharma-garden]), Zhonghuafoxue xuebao rP * (Chung- hwa Buddhist Journal) 7: 233-62

Ding Fubao 1T9 1984: Foxue dacidian %AT A (Great Dictionary of Buddhism), Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe (reprint)

Faure, Bernard 1986: "Bodhidharma as Textual and Religious Paradigm," Histogy of Religions 25/3: 187-98 1993: Chan Insights and Oversights: An Epistemological Critique of Chan, Princeton: Princeton University Press 1997: The Will to Orthodoxy: A Critical Genealogy ofNorthern Chan Buddhism, Stanford: Stanford University Press

Forte, Antonino 1988: Mingtang and Buddhist Utopias in the Histo?y of the Astronomical Clock: 7he Tower, Statue and Armillaiy Sphere Constructed by Empress Wu, Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (Series Orientale Roma, vol. LIX), and Paris: Ecole Francaise d'Extreme-Orient (Publications de 1' Ecole Francaise d'Extreme- Orient, vol. CXLV) 1996: "A Literary Model for Adam: The Dhuita Monastery Inscription," in L'inscription nestorienne de Si-ngan-fou: A Posthumous Work by Paul Pelliot (ed. Antonino Forte), Kyoto: Scuola di Studi sull'Asia Orientale, and Paris: College de France, Institut des Hautes Etudes Chinoises, pp. 473-87

Foulk, T. Griffith 1987: "The 'Chan School' and Its Place in the Monastic Tradition," Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan

Fujiyoshi Masumi WYE 1979: "Dasen no yuibo to ni san no chosaku ni tsuite (ichi)" iQDiI tz =-@ f 1ot oT[-] (Daoxuan's Traveling Experiences and Several of His Works [Part One]), Sanzo E5i 189: 1-8 1979: "Dosen no yiibo to ni san no chosaku ni tsuite (ni)" i L 0 : * - 0 _ -)o Cf-] (Daoxuan's Traveling Experiences and Several of His Works [Part Two]), Sanzo 190: 1- 8 1986: "Dosen no shutsuji o megutte - Goko no Senshi" M '_ ) X & ; N <-D

ÂED ; (On Daoxuan's Origin: The Qian Clan in Wuxing), Bukkyo shigaku kenkyiu {L6tJ 28/2: 1-22 1991: "D6sen no zenhansei" i ( V L +k (The Earlier Half of Daoxuan's Life), in Chiugokushi to se'y6 sekai no tenkai4y2 e i Tokyo: Mishima shobo, pp. 73-95 1992: "Bannen no Dasen" IF- (Daoxuan in His Late Years), Kansai daigaku bungaku ronshui i 41/2: 29-58 1992: "Dosen to reikei mondai" I L- i rMIN (Daoxuan and the Problems of Monks Paying Homage [to the Sovereigns]), Kansai daigaku bungaku ronshiu 41/4: 47-70


Furuta Shokin N fl 1939: "Zenjo ji no hensen to sono jasa" LS e R{tIM (The Chandingsi: Its Transformation and Residents), Shina bukkyj shigaku X 3/2: 77-85

Hirai Shun'ei i 1976: Chuigoku hannya shisoshi kenkyu7 rPMRMVMR,U3f. (A Study of the Histoy and Thought of Chinese Prajfndparamitd), Tokyo: Shunjasha

Hurvitz, Leon 1962: Chih-i (538-597): An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of a Chinese Buddhist Monk, Brussels: Institut Belge des Hautes Etudes Chinoises (Melanges Chinois et Bouddhiques, vol. 12)

Ibuki, Atsushi fMIA 1990: "Zoku ka soden no zok6 ni kansuru kenkyui" {w {4Q0 lJ;I5h3T (A Study on the Expansion of the Xu gaoseng zhuan), Toyoi no shiso to shakyd 0I , ,D R L- 7: 58-74

Ibuki, Atsushi, tr. 1997: Chtigoku zenshiu shi: zen shiso no danjo -4J1f : ITM R 6) Aikt (A History of Chinese Chan Buddhism: The Birth of Chan Thought), Tokyo: Sankibo busshorin Japanese translation of Yinshun 1997)

Inamoto Yasuo Th**4t 2000: "Shanankai chtukutsu to S6chuCi Zenshi - Hokucho sekkutsu kenkytujosetsu" /1JM4 F-?gg L- ffi,

- iL -k I (The Middle Grotto in the Xiaonanhai Grotto-group - A Preliminary Study of the Grottoes in North China [during the Southern and Northern Dynasties Period, 386-589]), in Hokucho Zui-To Chugoku bukkyoshi 1L JL 5$ (History of Buddhist Thought under the Northern Dynasties, the Sui and Tang Dynasties) (ed. Aramaki Noritoshi AU t{), Kyoto: Hozokan, pp. 270-310

Jan Yun-hua 4Vi-t 1983: "Seng-ch'ou's Method of Dhyana," in Early Ch'an in China and Tibet (Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series, no. 5), eds. Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster, Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, pp. 51-63 1990: "Zhonguo zaoqi chanfa de liuchuan he tedian - Huijiao, Daoxuan suozhu 'Xichan pian' yanjiu" UKst i - &W-UPWI TAM: (The Transformation and Characteristics of the Early Chinese Meditation Traditions: A Study of Two Treatises on Meditation Practices by Huijiao V3 [497-554] and Daoxuan AH [596-667]), in Jan Yun-hua, Zhongguo chanxueyanjiu lunji EP Nfi* eff Taipei: Dongchu chubanshe, pp. 1-49 1990a: "Dunhuang wenxian yu Sengchou de chanfa" 11 IT, (Dunhuang Manuscripts and Sengchou's Meditative Methods), in Zhongguo chanxue yanjiu lunji, pp. 54-89 1 990b: "Chou Chanshi yi de yanjiu" N jl00)iw NfU R (A Study on the Chou Chanshi

yi [Meanings of Meditation Master (Seng)chou]), in Zhongguo chanxueyanjiu lunji, pp. 90-107

Kamata Shigeo i ElANj, tr. 197 1: Zengen shosenshui tojo ,Tf'fi P=tB1 [Chanyuan zhuquan ji duxu] (Preface to the Collected Writings on the Source of Chan), Zen no goroku AT X=niM 9, Tokyo: Chikuma shobo

Lai, Whalen W. 1983: "Tan-ch'ien and the Early Ch'an Tradition: Translation and Analysis of the Essay 'Wang-shih-fei-lun,"' in Early Ch'an in China and Tibet (Berkeley Buddhist Studies Series, no. 5), eds. Whalen Lai and Lewis R. Lancaster, Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, pp. 65-88

CHEN JINHUA

Michihata Ryoshiu iM1Al 1985: Chigoku bukkyoshi zenshu lW$t 4-.kMt (A Complete Collection of [Michi- hata Ryoshui's Works on] the History of Chinese Buddhism), 11 vols., Tokyo: Kabushiki kaisha shoen

Nakamura Hajime rt4tC 1981: Bukkyogo daijiten gRtWigSA4 (A Great Dictionary of Buddhist Terms), 1 vol., Tokyo: Tokyo shoseki (originally published in 3 vols., 1975)

Nattier, Jan 1991: Once upon a Future Time: Studies in a Buddhist Prophecy of Decline, Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press

Ono Katsutoshi /JH,f q 1989: Chugoku Zui To Choanjiin shiryo shusei 4ir [A:t tZ : f (Compilation of Historical Information about the Temples of Chang'an), 2 vols.: materials ("shiryo-hen" 3V[7), and explanations ("kaisetsu-hen" frM), Kyoto: Hozokan

Penkower, Linda L. 1993: "T'ien-t'ai during the T'ang Dynasty: Chan-jan and the Sinification of Buddhism," Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University 1997: "Making and Remaking Tradition: Chan-jan's Strategies toward a T'ang T'ien-T'ai Agenda," in Tendai Daishi kenkyu IX0D ;yE (Study of Great Master Tiantai [Zhiyi]), ed. Tendai Daishi kenkyi henshu iinkai X I S ; ik3ll:l, Kyoto: Kahoku insatsu kabushiki kaisha, pp. 1138-1289

Sato Seijun it/~lrl 1985: Chugoku bukkyo shisoshi no kenkyu rP NlW ,t~,!© A (A Study in the History of Buddhist Thought in China), Tokyo: Sankib6 busshorin

Sat6 Tatsugen fhilU 1986: Chugoku bukkyo ni okeru kairitsu no kenkyu rP i g1gtl : 6 Y ¢;©fk (A Study of Precepts in Chinese Buddhism), Tokyo: Mukujisha 1987: "D6sen no zenkan shis6" L''Xii fTO,M,,, in Bukkyoshi Bukkyogaku ronshu: Nomura rosho Hakushi koki kinenshu i ~i: W:f± tS i,0,A' (Collection of Articles on the History and Teachings of Buddhism: A Collection for Celebrating the Seventieth Birthday of Doctor Nomura Y6sh6) (ed. Nomura Yosho Hakushi koki kinenshu kank6 iinkai *tFE" ±3 1 -tf , ThI JT , Tokyo: Shunjisha jtk:±, 1987), pp. 53-71.

Sekiguchi Shindai R AR 1959: "Gyokusen Tendai ni tsuite" i*Xt- o^ 'C (About the Tiantai Group at the Yuquansi), Tendai gakuho Xi-SPi 1: 10-17

Shinohara Koichi 1990: "Daoxuan's Collection of Miracle Stories about Supernatural Monks (Shenseng

gantong lu): An Analysis of its Sources," Zhonghuafoxue xuebao 3: 319-389 1991: "The i shenzhou sanbao gantong lu: Exploratory Notes," in Kalyana-Mitta: Profes- sor Hajime Nakamura Felicitation Volume, ed. V N. Jha, Delhi, pp. 203-224 1998: "Changing Roles for Miraculous Images in Medieval Chinese Buddhism: A Study of the Miraculous Images Section of Daoxuan's Ji shenzhou sanbao gantonglu," in Images, Miracles, and Authority in Asian Religious Traditions, ed. Richard Davis, Boul- der, Colorado: Westview Press, pp. 141-188 2000: "The Ka'aya Robe of the Past Buddha: Kasaya in the Miraculous Instruction Given to the Vinaya Master Daoxuan (596-667)," Zhonghuafoxue xuebao 12: 299-367 2000a: "Daoxuan," in Encyclopedia of Monasticism, ed. William M.Johnson, Chicago & London: Fitzroy Dearborn, pp. 359-361

Soothill, William Edward 1981: A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms, Taipei: Dongrong yinshuju (reprint)

394


Suwa Gijun X~b_4 1997: Chiugoku nanchi bukkyoshi no kenkyiu dgf'w _ rr (Studies in Southern Dynasties Buddhism History), Kyoto: Hozokan

Tsukamoto Zenryui W*A13 (1898-1980) 1975: "Zui no Konan seifuku to bukkyo" @i IVtEK L gtft (Buddhism in the Conquest of South China by the Sui), in Tsukamoto Zenryu chosaku shiu W*1 f'f (Collected Works of Tsukamoto Zenryu, 7 vols.), Tokyo: Daito Shuppansha, vol. 3, pp. 145-91

Takao Giken ,A 1952: Chuigoku bukkyo- shiron Ptft-4 F (Historical Studies in Chinese Buddhism), Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten

Ui Hakuju 4t{Hf 1935: Zenshiushi kenkyii ifil r (A Study of the History of Chan Buddhism), Tokyo: Iwanami shoten

Weinstein, Stanley 1987: Buddhism under the T'ang, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Xiong, Victor C. 2000: Sui-Tang Chang'an: A Study in the Urban Histoy of Medieval China, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Chinese Studies

Yamabe Nobuyoshi HI,L 1999: "The Suitra on the Ocean-like Samadhi of the Visualization of the Buddha: The Interfusion of the Chinese and Indian Cultures in Central Asia as Reflected in a Fifth Century Apocryphal Suitra," Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University

Yanagida Seizan 0P0[IR0i 1970: "Daruma Zen to sono haikei" S a (Bodhidharma's Medi- tation Tradition and Its Background), in Hokugi bukkyo no kenkyiiu kLA{LA_c_Et (A Study in Northern Wei Buddhism), ed. Ocha Enichi t&k F, Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, pp. 115-178

Yan Juanying MAOM 1995: "Bei Qi Xiaonanhai shiku yu Sengchou" / (The Xiao- nanhai Grotto[-group] of the Northern Qi Dynasty and Sengchou), in Fojiao sixiang de chuanchengyufazhan-Yinshun Daoshijiuzhi huadan zhushou wenji It

8$Z)- F1J1l 5lgAR= zEtt (The Transmission and Development of Buddhist Thought-A Collection of Papers Dedicated to Master Yinshun on the occasion of His Ninetieth Birthday), ed. Shi Hengqing aIftiA, Taipei: Dongda gufen youxian gongsi, pp. 561-98 1998: "Bei Qi changuan ku de tuxiang kao-Cong Xiaonanhai shiku dao Xiangtangshan shiku" k0E MV -A iW'i / iJ*A[5 (An Inves- tigation of the Pictures in the Grottoes for Meditation and Contemplation during the Northern Qi Period [550-77] From the Xiaonanhai Grottoes to the Xiangtangshan Grottoes), Toho gakuho Atf 70: 3 75-440

Yinshun MR'iG 1998: Zhongguo chanzong shi: cong rindu chan dao Zhongguo chan 4P ORMt4!: AWUMU-_11 'Pg1 (A History of Chinese Chan Buddhism: From Indian Dhyana to Chinese Chan), Taipei: Zhengwen chubanshe (eighth edition; first edition 1971)

Ytuki Reimon MA- 1961: "Zui Seikyo Zenjodojoi Shaku Dosen no kenky-u" , OaAM (A Study of Tanqian, a Monk of the Chanding daochang [i.e. Chandingsi] of the Western Capital [i.e. Chang'an] of the Sui), in Toyo- shiso- ronshii Aif-=EM fi (A Collection of Articles on Far-Eastern Thought), Tokyo: Waseda daigaku chodoka insatsusho, pp. 708-21