THE REVIVAL OF BUDDHIST MONASTICISM IN MEDIEVAL CHINA

HUAIYU CHEN

A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY

OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE

OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

RECOMMENDATED FOR ACCEPTANCE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF

RELIGION

APRIL, 2005

UMI Number: 3156036

3156036

2005

Copyright 2005 by

Chen, Huaiyu

UMI Microform

CopyrightAll rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

All rights reserved.

by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

Copyright by Huaiyu Chen, 2005. All rights reserved.

ii

ABSTRACT

Having recovered from political persecution and resolved problems within the sangha,

Buddhism reached a summit in its development during Sui and Early Tang China (581-

755). Daoxuan (596-667) played an unparalleled role in shaping the direction of

Buddhist history during the medieval period through both his rich writings and his

innovations of monastic rituals and regulations. This dissertation focuses on several key

issues in his work, including the veneration of Buddha-relics and its relationship to the

reconstruction and renovation of Buddhist monasteries as authoritative structures and as

ground for the monastic community, the recreation of the ordination platform and

ordination ritual, and the way in which the Buddhist community reclassified and dealt

with monastic property. First, it discusses the historical background of Chinese Buddhism

from the fifth to the seventh centuries. This study then argues that, in reinterpreting the

image of southern Buddhism as a cultural tradition, Daoxuan sought a new model for the

Chinese Buddhist tradition as a whole. More specifically, this study argues that the ritual

of venerating relics as a commemorative ceremony functioned to expand the religious

power of Buddhism in Chinese society and enhance the bonds within the monastic

community. This study also interprets the creation of the ordination platform as a crucial

element in the restoration of the Chinese monastic order. In addition, this study suggests

that Daoxuan developed his new rules to create an innovative model for the Buddhist

community as a ground for individual monks spiritual progress. He did this in part by

reclassifying monastic property as communal and individual property. In sum, Daoxuan

created a new tradition of Chinese Buddhist monasticism.

iii

Table of Contents Acknowledgements Introduction

1. A Case Study in the Revival of Monastic Discipline ----------------------------------1 2. Theorizing Buddhist Monasticism -------------------------------------------------------7 3. Structural Overview ----------------------------------------------------------------------12

Chapter I: Buddhism in South China as a Cultural Imaginaire 1. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------15 2. Contextualizing Culture in the North and South China-------------------------------21 3. South China as the Kingdom of Culture -----------------------------------------------27 4. From the Kingdom of Culture to the Kingdom of Buddhism -----------------------34 5. Tradition and Training -------------------------------------------------------------------47 6. The Diaspora of Southern Culture ------------------------------------------------------53 7. A Son of a Southern Father and a Disciple of a Southern Master ------------------64 8. Concluding Remarks: Buddhism and Society -----------------------------------------69

Chapter II: Relics and Monasteries in Buddhist Monasticism

1. Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------72 2. An Overview of the Relics in Asian History ------------------------------------------77 3. Authentication and Authority: Relics in China ---------------------------------------82 4. The Practice of Venerating Relics ------------------------------------------------------87 5. Rituals of Releasing life and Self-Destruction ----------------------------------------92 6. The Dead and the Living -----------------------------------------------------------------98 7. Manifestation of Incarnation -----------------------------------------------------------101 8. Multiple Buddhas ------------------------------------------------------------------------105 9. Concluding Remarks: The Past Becomes the Present ------------------------------110

Chapter III: Ordination Platform and Ordination Ritual

1. Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------114 2. Hybridizing the Ordination Tradition: From South China to Central Asia ------121 3. The Origin of Ordination Platform ----------------------------------------------------126 4. Mahyna Interpretation on Ordination Platform -----------------------------------136 5. The Scripture of Bequeathed Teaching and Ordination Ritual --------------------144 6. The Roles in the Ordination Ritual ----------------------------------------------------150 7. Ordination Ritual as an Initiation Rite ------------------------------------------------154 8. Concluding Remarks: Dimensions of Power and Knowledge ---------------------158

Chapter IV: Property in Buddhist Monasticism

1. Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------163 2. Contextualizing the Text ---------------------------------------------------------------169 3. Ownership: Private Property and Communal Property -----------------------------173 4. Classifications of Monastic Property -------------------------------------------------180 5. Laborers, Slaves and Servants ---------------------------------------------------------188

iv

6. Animals -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------191 7. Plants --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------197 8. Books --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------201 9. Jewels and Money -----------------------------------------------------------------------206 10. Medicines and Medical Works --------------------------------------------------------209 11. Clothing -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------215 12. Concluding Remarks: Differentiating Individuals and Community---------------219

Conclusions: The Revival of Buddhist Monasticism

1. From Margin to Center -----------------------------------------------------------------224 2. Discipline and Liberation -------------------------------------------------------------- 228 3. Textual Community and Scholasticism ---------------------------------------------- 230 4. Monastic and Secular Spheres -------------------------------------------------------- 232

Appendix

The Procedure of Ordination Ritual in Chinese Buddhism ---------------------------- 234 Bibliography Primary Sources

1. Works by Daoxuan -----------------------------------------------------------------------244 2. Works in Collection ---------------------------------------------------------------------245 Secondary Sources 1. Sources in Western Languages ---------------------------------------------------------246 2. Sources in Chinese and Japanese Languages -----------------------------------------268

v

Acknowledgements My journey to the West comes to an end. As a report of this long journey, this dissertation marks one of the last steps in the rite of passage of my academic life. It documents my transformation from a novice of Buddhist studies to a monkish scholar. It would never be in the current form without the supports of many great virtues (Skt. bhadanta, Ch. dade) at Princeton and beyond. First and foremost, I am extremely grateful to my advisor Stephen (Buzzy) F. Teiser. Buzzys supervision has profoundly reshaped the ways I read, write and think about intellectual issues. Buzzy has guided me through the treacherous water of graduate school onto the correct path with his infinite wisdom, benevolence, and patience. Professor Willard J. Peterson remains particularly inspiring and insightful, with whom I was fortunate to read both Chinese intellectual history and the tradition of Sinology in the West. I am also grateful to Professor Jacqueline (Jackie) Stone for introducing me to the field of Japanese Religions. In addition to the transfer of knowledge, she also assisted my research in Japan by kindly introducing me to many Japanese scholars in the field. I am also indebted to Professor Jeffrey Stout for giving me the first taste of studying religions at Princeton and in the West, and for his continuous support. My appreciation also goes to Professor Yang Lu for his tireless encouragement and support. As a great teacher and role model, Master Lu (Lu Daren) has not only provided many intellectual nourishments, he has also been uncommonly generous with his time and advice on matters both academic and personal. Lastly, I also would like to offer my appreciation to professors Martin Collcutt, Susan Naquin, and Robert Wuthnow for their various supports. I have also been on the receiving end of Professors Yu Ying-shihs and Zhang Guangdas invaluable guidance and encouragement. During their three years at Princeton, Professor Zhang Guangda and his wife, Professor Xu Tingyun, warmly invited me to their home many times treated me to delicious home cooking, and most importantly shared with me their experience as Chinese intellectuals and historians. I owe a great deal to many scholars outside of Princeton as well. First of all, Professor Rong Xinjiang at PKU has continuously supported my study and research since I first became his masters student in 1994. It was he who first introduced me to Buzzy and Professor Zhang Guangda, and to the academic world. Professors Wang Bangwei and Lin Meicun at PKU also showed me great generosity. Professors Cai Hongsheng, Jiang Boqin, and Lin Wushu kindly invited me to Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou and shared with me their insights of Tang history. In Hong Kong, Professor Jao Tsung-i put some time aside from his busy schedule to discuss with me Buddhist historiography. In Taiwan, Professor Cheng A-tsai and his wife, Professor Chu Feng-yu, offered me numerous materials on Dunhuang studies. Professors Chikusa Masaaki, Funayama Toru, Sueki Fumihiko, and Takata Tokio helped my research in Japan. In Europe, I am indebted to the supports of Professors Kuo Li-ying, Jens-Uwe Hartman, and Haiyan Hu-von Hinber. I am especially grateful to Dr. Joseph McDermott for inviting me to present a chapter of my dissertation at Cambridge University, where I was fortunate to have received comments from Professor Richard F. Gombrich, which have saved me from many errors. Dr. Henrietta Harrison, teaching in Leeds, also helped me in the early stage of my dissertation project during her stay at Institute for Advanced Study. Professor Yung Sai-hsing also extended to me his helping hands during his stay at Princeton. In the US, many

vi

scholars have helped me in various stages of this project. Professor Victor H. Mair has kindly answered many of my questions through emails and conversations since we first met in 1997. Professor Yu Chun-fang has devoted hours of her valuable time to discuss with me my dissertation project, most importantly, she offered me an opportunity to teach at Rutgers University. Professors Shinohara Koichi and Eric Reinders and Dr. Tan Zhihui both offered suggestions on my study of Daoxuan during its earliest stage. I am equally indebted to many friends I came to know at Princeton. Ji Xiao-bin (Ji Daren), as a traditional Confucian gentleman, has patiently shared with me his research and teaching experience. Without his helps, my life and study would without doubt be much harder. I am also grateful to Wei Yang Teiser and Lucy Lo for their supports. My life and study at Princeton have also been greatly enriched by a circle of good friends (Skt. kalynamitra, Ch. shanyou). I would like to especially highlight the significance of Caitlin J. Anderson, Jessey J.C Choo, and Alexei K. Ditter for their companionship. Caitlin, Alexei, and I have been on a same boat for a seemingly endless journey of pursuing our degrees. I thank them for the sharing of sadness and happiness in the past seven years and Jessey for kindly brought me lunch and dinner while I was writing general examinations. I am also grateful to Jennifer Eichman and Lori Meeks for their support in the early stage of my graduate school life. In addition, many have helped me through various stages: Micah Auerbach, Ian Chapman, Paul Copp, Chunmei Du, Haiyan Gu, Zhigang Hu, Xiaojuan Huang, Ryan B. Joo, Kevin Osterloh, Mark Rowe, Asuka Sango, Lianying Shan, Fabien Simonis, Yinggang Sun, Tat-kee Tan, Eric Thomas, Hui-min Tzeng, Haicheng Wang, Chuck Wooldridge, Xiaojin Wu, Lanjun Xu, Stuart Young, Hui-chun Yu, Jimmy Yu, Ya Zuo. In addition, Courtney Palmbush offers great help with final proofreading. I am also grateful to many friends who kindly hosted me during my academic trips with in the US, as well as those to Asia and Europe: Chen Ming, Steve Covell, Dang Baohai, Egawa Shikibu, Lei Wen, Lin Peiying, Liu Guanglin, Liu Houbin, Meng Xianshi, Wang Chengwen, Wang Xianhua, Wong Yung, Ye Wei, Yu Xin, Zhang Lun, Zhang Mingxin, Zhang Tao, and Zhou Guanghui. My thanks also go to all institutions that funded my study and research in the past several years: Association of Princeton Graduate Alumni, Center for the Study of Religion, Council on Regional Studies, East Asian Studies Department and Program, Graduate School, Religion Department, Princeton; Japanese School, Middlebury College; China Times Cultural Foundation. I would also like to thank the following people for their assistance: Patricia A. Bogdziewicz, Richard Chafey, Lorraine Fuhrmann, Anita Klein, Kerry Smith, and Hue Kim Su. I am also grateful to Martin Heijdra and Yasuko Makino and East Asian Library at Princeton for their bibliographical support. Last but not the least, I am grateful to my family for their indispensable support: my parents, my younger sisters, my wife, my parents-in-law, and all relatives who are now struggling for better life in Jiangxi, Fujian, Hebei and Tianjin. For twenty years I have been away from home and relatives to pursue my study. It has been hard for my parents. Without their understanding and support, I would never be able to concentrate on my study. I also would not complete my dissertation without hearing my wifes voice across

vii

the distance: Little Tiger! Hurry up and complete your dissertation. Come home! May Buddhas and Bodhisattvas bless them!

viii

1

Introduction

A Case Study in the Revival of Monastic Discipline This study examines the formation of Buddhist monasticism in medieval China by

analyzing the writings of one of most important Chinese Buddhist monks, Daoxuan, who

was later viewed as the founder of the Sino-Japanese Vinaya School. My interest in

Daoxuan ( 596-667) was inspired by a key figure in the modern history of Chinese

Buddhism, Hongyi ( 1880-1942).1 Both Hongyi and Daoxuan lived in periods when

Buddhism in China was thought to be in decline, and they were regarded by later

generations as reviving Buddhism through their learning and practice of Buddhist

monastic discipline. Hongyi claimed that he was a follower of Daoxuans tradition of the

Four-part Vinaya (Caturvargika-vinaya, Sifenl , usually called Dharmagupta-

vinaya in modern scholarship).2 Hongyi engaged in the extensive study of this tradition in

order to save Chinese Buddhist monastic order from decline. He engaged in strict practice

1 Before Hongyi entered the Buddhist monastic order, his secular name was Li Shutong. Before

his time, China had been forced to open up to Western powers since the Opium War (1840-1842). In the 1850s, South China, where Li was raised, experienced the devastation of the Taiping Rebellion (1856-1864). Taiping rebels destroyed many traditional Confucian and Buddhist cultural expressions and Christianity spread all over the country. Many members of the younger generation became aware of the crisis of Chinese culture and attempted to find solutions. Li Shutong went abroad and studied in Japan. He became very familiar with forms of Western arts. He even performed French dramas. After he went back to China, he became famous for his cultural activities. Yet he soon quit the cultural scene in South China and entered the Buddhist order in his forties. For a recent study of master Hongyi, see Raoil Birnbaum, Master Hongyi Looks Back: A Modern Man Became a Monk in Twentieth-Century China, in: Steven Heine and Charles S. Prebish, eds., Buddhism in the Modern World: Adaptation of an Ancient Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 75-124.

2 The Chinese term if Sifenl. I prefer to use the Sanskrit reconstruction of Caturvargika-Vinaya,

which is a direct back-translation of the meaning of the Chinese: Four-part Vinaya. My practice runs contrary to current practice, which usually calls the Sifenl the Dharmagupta-Vinaya, which refers to the school (Dharmagupta) of Buddhism that used the Four-part Vinaya. My reasoning is based on two arguments. One is that the Chinese who inherited and remade the tradition viewed it as a textual tradition based on the Four-part Vinaya, and did not emphasize the specific doctrines of the Dharmagupta School. The other reason is that when Chinese authors did refer explicitly to the Dharmagupta School, they tended to use another word, not associated with the Vinaya: Fazang, which was a more literal translation (Dharma treasury) of the Schools name.

2

of the Vinaya. He studied and commented on numerous writings by Daoxuan. He also

wrote a short sketch of Daoxuans life. He hoped to revive Chinese culture by bringing

about a revival of Buddhist monasticism and scholarship. I see Hongyi in the shadow of

Daoxuan, almost as if he were a reincarnation of Daoxuan. Like Hongyi, I have made

Daoxuan the subject of this study.3 I also believe that monasticism and scholasticism can

play a vital role in reviving Chinese Buddhism, after a period of nearly endless revolution

in the twentieth century.

My study analyzes the writings of Daoxuan, one of the greatest scholarly-monks

in the history of Chinese Buddhism. Daoxuan was born in Jingzhao (Shaanxi) in 596. His

family was from southeastern China, and his father rose to a high position in the central

government of the Chen Dynasty. As the son of a gentry family, Daoxuan would have

received a good education in the Confucian classics. His biography says that he was also

good at composing rhyme-prose (fu). His early monastic education under the supervision

of Vinaya masters Huijun (564-637) and Zhishou (567-635) took place near the Sui

Dynasty (589-618) capital, Chang'an (Shaanxi). In the Tang Dynasty (618-907) he later

studied at a variety of monasteries and traveled across China, spreading his interpretation

of the monastic code,4 collecting texts for his new interpretation of monastic discipline

and ritual, and writing histories and other works. His career in the state-controlled

monkhood flourished, and in 658 the Emperor appointed him as superintendent (Skt.

sthavira, Ch. shangzuo), the highest monastic position in the empire, and invited him to

live in the newly erected Ximing Monastery in Changan. He was very active in

3 My dissertation is limited loosely to the problem of monasticism. I hope to return to

scholasticism in a later project. 4 Skt. vinaya, Ch. l.

3

administering the Buddhist Church and representing its interests to the state. He died in

667. He composed many Vinaya texts and commentaries, all focusing on the ritual and

institutional life of monks and nuns. Later sectarian scholarship canonized his scholarship

on Vinaya, calling it The Five Great Books of the Vinaya School (Lzong wu dabu):

Selections with Annotations on Bhikksu Precepts of the Four-part Vinaya (Sifenl biqiu

hanzhu jieben), Commentary on the Four-part Vinaya with Annotations and Additions

(Sifenl shanfan buque xingshi chao), Occasional Karma with Deletions and Additions of

the Four-part Vinaya (Sifenl shanbu suiji jiemo), Selections from Ten Vinayas of the

Four-part Vinaya (Sifenl shi bini chao), Selections on Bhikhsuni Precepts of the Four-

part Vinaya (Sifenl biqiuni jieben). He distinguished himself as a Buddhist historian

with his Continued Biographies of Eminent Monks (Xu gaoseng zhuan), and as the

highest-ranking monk in China he defined the canon of Chinese Buddhism in his

Catalogue of Buddhist Scriptures of the Great Tang (Da Tang neidian lu).5 He also

compiled collections of miracle tales and wrote an anthology of apologetic literature

concerning debates between Buddhists, Daoists, and Confucians. Daoxuan was one of the

most important Buddhist monks of his generation and his writings were prolific. Later

generations regarded him as the founder of the Vinaya School and credited his

contributions to other schools, including Pure Land, Huayan, and Chan.6

5 For brief discussion of Daoxuans vinaya contribution in English, see Yifa, The Origins of

Buddhist Monastic Codes in China: An Annotated Translation and Study of the Chanyuan qinggui (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002), pp. 23-28; and Tso Sze-bong, The Transformation of Buddhist Vinaya in China (PhD dissertation. Caberra: Australia National University, 1982).

6 If these schools existed as self-conscius institutional entities or religious movements in China, it

is still controversy. See Robert Sharf, Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatuse (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002), p. 9.

4

My study is especially concerned with Daoxuans understanding of the crisis

confronting the Buddhist community. In his view, the crisis was partly caused by

shortcomings in ascetic and ritual practice of monks and nuns. My work provides a

history of the institution of the celibate monkhood. Daoxuan devoted himself to restoring

order to Buddhist monastic communities in a variety of ways. He reformed the ordination

system and wrote monastic regulations for both monks and nuns, stressing the importance

of personal asceticism and advocating changes in how the monastic community dealt

with property. These efforts were the internal side of Daoxuan's broader attempts to

assuage conflicts between secular and Buddhist communities. This perspective makes my

study different from the conventional approach to early Tang Buddhism and to Daoxuan,

which focuses on his external solutions to conflict between the state and the church.

Although Daoxuan is one of the most important scholar-monks in Chinese

Buddhist history, no comprehensive work on Daoxuan has been written in any language.

In Chinese, there is only one book on Daoxuan for general readers. In Japanese, most

articles on Daoxuan concern only small segments of his works, either his Vinaya

commentaries or his historical scholarship. These works are limited in scope, viewing

Daoxuan entirely through a sectarian lens.7 Fujiyoshi Masumi for the first time published

a book devoting to Daoxuans life. He draws a picture of Daoxuans life and work

chronically by meticulous textual studies.8 The problem with that approach is that it is not

only anachronistic since the Vinaya School did not exist as such in Daoxuans time

7 In this view Daoxuan was the founder of so-called Vinaya School. Contemporary scholarship now is more and more aware of the problem of this sectarian approach. For an example on Japanese side, Ryichi Ab criticizes the sectarian scholarship for their viewing Kkai as the founder of Shingon School; see Abe, The Weaving of Mantra: Kkai and the Construction of Esoteric Buddhist Discourse (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), pp. 3-4.

8 See Fujiyoshi Masumi, Dsen den no kenky (Kyoto: Kyt daigaku shuppankai, 2002).

5

it also underestimates the breadth of Daoxuans scholarship and the variety of sources on

which we need to draw. And this study is limited within the scope of traditional sectarian

Buddhist scholarship. Thus, there is still a great need for a comprehensive study that

places Daoxuan in the context of medieval Chinese Buddhist history. In English, there

are four dissertations mostly devoted to Daoxuan's historical writings and ritual texts, but

most of them pay little attention to Daoxuan's Vinaya texts.9 Many scholars have noted

that there has not been any considerable progress in Chinese Vinaya studies.10 Following

a long tradition in Buddhology, contemporary scholarship still focuses on scriptures and

treatises. By approaching Daoxuan's Vinaya works in relation to monastic life and social

history, my work will contribute to this subject as well.

My approach broadens the traditional view of Daoxuan's scholarship, which

places him in the Buddhist tradition of Sengyou (445-518). A renowned master of

9 John Kieschnick, The Idea of the Monk in Medieval China: Asceticism, Thaumaturgy, and

Scholarship in the Biographies of Eminent Monk (Ph. D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1995), later it appeared as a book, Eminent Monk: Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese Hagiography (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997); Robin Beth Wagner, Buddhism, Biography and Power: A Study of Daoxuan's Continued Lives of Eminent Monks (Ph D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1995); Eric Reinders, Buddhist Rituals of Obeisance and the Contestation of the Monks Body in Medieval China (PhD. Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara, 1997); Tan, Zhihui. Daoxuans Vision of Jetavana: Imagining a Utopian Monastery in Early Tang (Ph.D. thesis, The University of Arizona, 2002). Friederike Assandri finished a dissertation drawing upon Daoxuans work Ji gujin fodao lunheng, but his focus is the debate between Buddhists and Daoists. See Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten in der Frher Tang-Zeit und die Changxuan-Lehre des Daoismus (The Debates between Daoists and Buddhists in the early Tang and the Chongxuan Teaching of Daoism. A Study of Daoxuans Ji gujin fodao lunheng, T. 2104), Heidelberg University, Germany, 2002. Ann Heirmans dissertation deals with a section of Four-part Vinaya. It came out as a book titled The Discipline in Four Parts, Rules for Nuns according to the Dharmaguptakavinaya (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 2002), 3 vols.

10 John McRae, Chinese Religions -- The State of Field: Buddhism. Journal of Asian Studies 54:

2 (1995): 354-371. Koichi Shinohara is an exception. He published many articles either dealing with Daoxuan or Vinaya. see his Buddhist Precepts in Mdeieval Chinese Biographies of Monks, in Charles Fu et al., Buddhist Behavioral Codes and the Modern World (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1994), pp. 75-94; Changing roles for miraculous images in medieval Chinese Buddhism: a study of the miraculous images section of Daoxuan's Ji shenzhou sanbao gantonglu, in Richard Davis ed., Images, Miracles, and Authority in Asian Religious Traditions (Boulder: Westview Press, 1998), pp. 141-188; The Kasaya robe of the past Buddha Kasyapa in the miraculous instruction given to the Vinaya master Daoxuan (596-667), Chung-hua Buddhist Journal 12 (2000), pp. 299-367.

6

monastic codes, Sengyou compiled a catalogue of the Buddhist canon and a collection of

texts regarding the debates between Buddhists, Daoists, and Confucians. Restricting

one's review to Daoxuan's place in Sengyou's scholarly tradition makes it difficult to

account for the breadth of Daoxuan's works and his involvement in broader social

movements. I will demonstrate that Daoxuan was indebted to a much broader Buddhist

heritage than that represented by Sengyou. Daoxuan first studied at Riyan monastery,

established in the late Sui Dynasty in the capital Chang'an, where he was trained in the

southern tradition under his master Huijun. He was also probably influenced by other

masters from South China in the Riyan Monastery. However, contrary to Sengyou, who

never left the South, Daoxuan lived in a period of unification that allowed him to travel

across the empire and thereby to access more diverse intellectual sources. In his travels,

Daoxuan became familiar with the practices of many monastic communities. By carefully

exploring the complex interaction between scholarly and monastic concerns in Daoxuan's

life, I will present a new picture of the social and cultural history of early Tang

Buddhism. Although scholarship has recently made some progress on the Buddhism of

the fifth to ninth centuries, it has paid little attention to the changes in Buddhism during

the transition from the late douthern and northern dynasties to the early Tang period in

the late sixth and early seventh centuries.

The main sources I will deal with in this study come from Daoxuans writings on

Vinaya, ritual, history, and miracle tales, which have been largely neglected in current

scholarship.11 These ritual texts include Record of the Miraculous Responses of the

Discipline (Lxiang gantong zhuan), Illustrated Scripture of the Establishment of the

11 Most of them can be found in the volume 45 of the Taish edition of the modern Buddhist

canon. See primary sources: part 1 for a brief listing of Daoxuans writings.

7

Ordination Platform within the Pass (Guanzhong chuangli jietan tujing), Methods of

Instructing Contemplation for Purifying the Mind (Jingxin jieguan fa), Rituals for

Buddhist Robes (Shimen zhangfu yi), Ritual for Measuring and Handling Light and

Heavy Property (Liangchu qingzhong yi), Ritual on Buddhist Conversion and Veneration

(Shimen guijing yi), and Regulations and Rituals for Teaching and Regulating New

Monks Travel and Safety (Jiaojie xinxue biqiu xinghu lyi).12 These ritual texts should

be read as practical manuals, aimed at simplicity and clarity. They are not doctrinally

profound and complex, unlike some of his other work, such as his commentaries on the

Four Part Vinaya (Sifenl). One of the things I attempt to show is that these practical

handbooks are just as important, as they function as commentaries on the monastic code.

Theorizing Buddhist Monasticism

Monasticism is now viewed as a cross-cultural phenomenon and has been

examined from many disciplines. However, in modern scholarship, the study of

monasticism historically derives from the study of the history of Christianity. In

Christianity, monasticism, as a term, derives from the Greek word monos, which means

dwelling alone. Monasticism as a way of life emerged in the Egyptian deserts as early

as the first century C. E. Early Christian monasticism concentrates on individual

asceticism and involves three key elements: poverty, chastity, and obedience. All three

were established on the basis of Christian faith. Later monasticism was rapidly

institutionalized with the establishment of Christian monasteries.13 Although in Victorian

12 T. no. 1892-1898. My study will only focus on several texts here. My future research will

further the discussion on asceticism by analyzing other texts including Methods of Instructing Contemplation for Purifying Mind (Jingxin jieguan fa), Ritual on Buddhist Robes (Shimen zhangfu yi), and Daoxuans commentaries on Vinayas. Moreover, I will not focus on Daoxuans text Zhong tianzhu sheweiguo zhiyuansi tujing, which has been dealt with in Tan Zhihuis Ph. D. dissertation (University of Arizona, 2002) recently.

8

England, Catholic missionaries frequently compared Buddhism and Christianity in terms

of monasticism,14 in the field of Buddhist Studies it has emerged only recently.15

Although the word and concept originated in the study of early Christian history,

monasticism is now understood and defined in many different ways. In the recently

published Encyclopedia of Monasticism, Editor William M. Johnston notes that

Monasticism is defined as a single-minded commitment to religious life conducted apart

from the surrounding society (almost always in celibacy and relative poverty) and

following a rule that usually involves emulating or obeying a founder.16 Although the

first two conditions usually fit the Buddhist case, the last one does not match so well. In

the same encyclopedia, in the entry on monasticism from the Buddhist perspective,

Mahinda Deegalle does not even mention the relationship of monasticism to the Buddha

as founder. Deegalle points out that the typical definition of Buddhist monasticism is

based on a pre-understanding of Christian monasticism. Deegale argues that, compared to

the Christian monastic life which was strictly regulated by monastic rules and in which

the monasteries functioned as ideal places for practicing austerities, Buddhist

13 Marilyn J. Dunn, The Emergence of Monaticism: From the Desert Fathers to the Early Middle

Ages (London: Blackwell Publishers, 2002), chs. 1 and 5. 14 Philip C. Almond, The British Discovery of Buddhism (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1988), pp. 111-132. 15 For example, aiming at Tibetan Buddhism, Georges B. J. Dreyfus says that Buddhist

monasticism attempts to create a form of disciplined life separate from the world in order to pursue the ascetic world-transcendent religious ideal. See Dreyfus, The Sound of Two Hands Clapping: The Education of a Tibetan Buddhist Monk (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), pp. 32-37. Monasticism has also been the focus on Buddhist traditions in other Asian areas. In 2002, there was a conference on Buddhist monasticism in Asia held at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. The conference volume, tentatively titled Buddhist Monasticism: Asian Perspectives is unpublished. In 2004, a conference on Buddhist Monasticism in East Asia was held in Cambridge University, Cambridge, England.

16 William M. Johnston, ed., Encyclopedia of Monasticism (Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn, 2000), p.

1

9

monasticism combined dwelling, traveling, and preaching. In tracing a short history of

Buddhist monastic communities in Asia, he also states that Buddhist monasticism might

be the oldest monastic system in the world. Deegalle suggests that Buddhist monasticism

does not view renunciation as the first step in religious training. He also agrees against

applying the Christian concept to Buddhism because Buddhist monks and nuns were not

hermits who lived independently. Instead, Buddhist monks and nuns received support

from human settlements and also disseminated the Buddhas teachings.17

Moreover, in Catholic monasticism, monks developed their own monastic culture,

which was independent from the culture of surrounding society. As Jean Gribomont in

New Catholic Encyclopedia notes, Monasticism is defined as an institution of ancient

and medieval origins, establishing and regulating the ascetical and social conditions of

the manner of religious life lived in common or in contemplative solitude.18 Gribomont

also concludes that,

Monasticism was a development of primitive Christian asceticism along various lines: the anchoritic and cenobitic types were not the original nucleus but rather successful forms on which others patterned themselves. The monks had their own culture; it was independent of the classical world of antiquity and often local popular traditions, Coptic and Syriac. The monks brought the church an ideal of asceticism, forms of prayer such as the use of the Psalter, a rich experience of inwardness, and new literary forms. The movement became a triumphant power that, despite its resistance to cultural changes, was to give a distinguishing character to the Middle Ages.19

Gribomont clearly suggests that monks had their own culture independent from local

traditions in early Near East. Christian monks created their tradition in Greek which was

17 Mahinda Deegalle, Monasticism, Definitions of: Buddhist Perspective, ibid., pp. 868-871. 18 New Catholic Encyclopedia, prepared by an editorial staff at the Catholic University of America

in association with Thomson-Gale (New York: Thomson-Gale, 2002), p. 786. 19 Ibid., p. 788.

10

different from local Coptic and Syriac cultural traditions. Their practices included

asceticism, praying the Psalter, experiencing inwardness, and using their new literary

forms. Similarly, Buddhist monks also created their own traditions in Buddhist Sanskrit

language, using their own literary forms, praying their eulogies, and practicing their

middle way.

Monasticism can also be defined as an institution of communal living in order to

pursue a spiritual state. Monastic members are required to live a disciplined and ritualized

daily life. In this context, Livia Kohn emphasizes the social roles played by monastics.

For her, monasticism is always located between the need to provide optimal conditions

for the individuals attainment of holiness and the necessity to keep order and control

within the monastic community and in its interaction with normative society.20 Indeed,

the social aspects are very important.

In the Middle Ages, in many religious traditions, including Christianity,

Buddhism, and Daoism, monasticism centered on the monasteries and monks. The ideal

of spiritual practice and salvation dominated the lives of monks. In medieval Chinese

Buddhism, particularly, monasticism refers to a single-minded commitment of ascetic

religious life pursuing spiritual enlightenment, or pursuing the attainment of

Buddhahood. 21 Similar to Christian monasticism, Chinese Buddhist monks also

developed their own culture. They had their own educational and training system. As I

will show, although the Buddha played an important role in shaping the formation of

20 Livia Kohn, Monastic Life in Medieval Daoism: A Cross-cultural Perspective (Honolulu:

University of Hawaii Press, 2003), p. 1.

21 In early Buddhism, monasticism aimed to seek the attainment of nibbana, escaping from the suffering (dukka). See The Book of the Discipline (Vinaya-pataka), volume V (Callavagga), I. B. Horner trans. (London: Luzac & Company LTD., 1963), p. 219.

11

Buddhist monastic establishments and the ordination ritual, the monks did not strictly

obey the founder, the historical Buddha. Rather, they followed the Buddhist truth they

believed for their own spiritual cultivation. However, to me, the Buddha played an

indispensable role in authorizing the establishment of Chinese Buddhist monasteries and

in overseeing the enterance of the monk to the Buddhist monastic order.

There are numerous works dealing with monastic life in medieval China. Most of

them deal with monastic life from the perspective of social history.22 The approach of

social history successfully reveals the integration between monastic and lay communities,

especially via economic activities. However, these works might have missed the religious

implication of the monastic life that monasticism stresses. The observation that focuses

solely on the physical structure of society therefore ignores the religious mentality of the

participants as they carry out economic activities. As I will show, in dealing with

monastic property, as a master, Daoxuan has a clear sense of Buddhist ethics, including

compassion, detachment from the secular sphere, and so forth. Therefore, in the sense of

mentality, the life of monastic members was largely shaped on the basis of their religious

faith, their spiritual pursuit. 23 This is particularly true of the elite cleric class, who

concentrated on spiritual progress and the stabilization of the monastic order. They were

devoted to conferring Buddhist values and principles of an ascetic ideal over to ordinary

22 We may name a few of them, for example, Jacques Gernet, Buddhism in Chinese Society: An

Economic History from the Fifth to Tenth Centuries (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995); Hao Chunwen, Tang houqi wudai Song chu Dunhuang sengni de shehui shenghuo (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1997). Both works draw upon large amount of Dunhuang manuscripts, which also largely reflect the locality of Buddhism in Dunhuang, a politically autonomous area in northwestern China. To what extent the conclusion drawn from Dunhuang materials is applicable in central China, it is still under the debate.

23 Janet Burton, Medieval Monasticism Headstart Historical Papers (Oxford: Plantagene Press,

1993).

12

monks, generation by generation. These goals are illustrated in their practice of Buddhist

monasticism. As my study will show, Daoxuan is one of the great cases.

My approach to Buddhist monasticism in medieval China will focus on several

essential aspects of monasticism, for example, the relationship between the veneration

ritual of the Buddhas relics and the construction of pagodas, as well as the relationship

of these practiese to the renovation of monasteries, the participation of Buddha present in

the form of his relics in the ritual of ordination, and with the way that personal and

communal property was dealt with in the monastic community. I believe that these issues

have been involved with the formation of Buddhist monasticism in medieval China.

Structural Overview

My study of Daoxuan is divided into four chapters. Chapter one deals with

historical context. It lays a historical and structural foundation for later chapters. In this

chapter I argue that, after the Chinese empire had been in disunity for several hundred

years and was then reunified,24 the history of Chinese Buddhism followed a new path. It

essentially followed the Southern tradition, as we can see in Daoxuans writings. This

tradition puts particular emphasis on monastic practice. It also accentuates the Chinese

characteristics of Buddhist monasticism, which are different from Indian Buddhist

monasticism.25 It focuses on three issues: the worship of relics and the reconstruction of

monasteries, the construction of the ordination platform, and meditation methods.26

24 Around late third century, with the collapse of the Han Empire, China fell into three kingdoms,

and later on even more kingdoms. Only in 589 did the Sui regime reunify the Chinese empire again. 25 For Indian monasticism, see Nalinaksha Dutt, Early Monastic Buddhism (Calcutta: Firma K. L.

Mukhopadhyay, 1971). More recently, Gregory Schopen has offered a fresh approach to Indian Buddhist monasticism by focusing on inscriptional sources. See his Bones, Stones, and Buddhist Monks: Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy, and Texts of Monastic Buddhism in India (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997); and Buddhist Monks and Business Matters: Still More Papers on Monastic Buddhism in India (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2004.

13

From chapter two to chapter four, I examine three aspects I have selected from

Daoxuans numerous writings. Chapter two examines the relationship between relics and

monasteries. I suggest that in Chinese Buddhism, relics always occupied a central

position in the monastic compound. Relics, as a representation of the Buddha,

participated in the reconstruction of Chinese monasteries, and therefore, the

reconstruction of the monastic order. The ceremony of venerating Buddhas relics bridges

the gap between the dead historcial Buddha and his Chinese followers, and between the

monastic community and the lay community. Chapter three moves to discuss the

ordination ritual by focusing on the design and construction of the ordination platform. I

argue that the promotion of the ordination platform is one of Daoxuans greatest

contributions to Chinese Buddhism. Daoxuans ordination platform mixes both

traditional Indian Buddhist ideas with his own creation. Its three-level design creates a

new form of ordination ritual in East Asian Buddhism. On this three-level platform,

Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, and senior masters play a crucial role in leading the ceremony,

while other monastic members are merely onlookers. In analyzing how to deal with

property in the monastic community, chapter four turns to examine how the monastic

community deals with the people and goods it owns, receives, and inherits. I argue that

Daoxuan formulated new rules for the ownership and distribution of property in the

Chinese Buddhist monastic community.27

26 More on meditation practice will be beyond the scope of this study and deserve a future project.

27 I planned to analyze the monastic practices by reading a Daoxuans manual about the method of

purifying mind. However, I realize that this is a huge topic which goes beyond the scope of this study. I will develop it in future research.

14

In this study, I merely focus on Daoxuans creation of a new tradition of medieval

Chinese Buddhist monasticism. This study does not cover some appealing issues in

Daoxuans works, such as his definition of canon, his view of miracles and statues, his

biographical standards, and his contributions to scholasticism. I hope to turn to them in

other work.

15

Chapter I: Buddhism in South China as a Cultural Imaginaire

The island barbarians lived in the Southern Region where the land was low and full of weird ether. The passion and will of people were elevated. Therefore it was called the Prefecture of Elevation (Yangzhou). The Jin regime fled to the South, thus it was called the Cultural Kingdom. And for this reason, it was said that the South was transformed from a barbarian culture to Chinese culture. Thus even Confucius who lived in the nine barbarian regions was not illiterate.28 , , , , , ,

-- Daoxuan

Introduction

Although Chinese culture usually appears singular and unique in modern Western

and Chinese discourse, other interpretations are possible. The assumption that Chinese

culture is unitary assumes a cultural system centered on Confucianism, which was

believed to have been dominant since the former Han Dynasty (206 BC 8 AD),

especially since the Emperor Wu (r. 140-87 BCE) promoted Dong Zhongshus ()

version of Confucianism as the official ideology. However, other cultural traditions also

played a crucial role in the life of Han people in some regions of the Han Empire. For

example, in northern Sichuan and Southern Shaanxi area, the people practiced the Five-

peck Rice Way (Wudoumi dao ). And in the Shandong area, the people

practiced the Way of Yellow Emperor and Laozi (Huanglao dao ). Thus, when we

talk about ancient Chinese culture, we should take regional diversity into account. The

Han Empire fell and divied into three kingdoms (Wei, Shu, and Wu) in the third century.

28 Guang hongmingji (chapter 6), Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 127a.

16

Developing out of the largest kingdom, Wei, the Jin Empire unified China and thereafter

quickly declined under the attack of nomads from the Mongolian plateau. In early fourth

century, the Jin court was forced to move to Jiankang (modern Nanjing) and there

continued its regime. Before the Sui regime unified China as an empire in the sixth

century, Chinese history seems to have been divided into two traditions: Northern

dynasties and Southern dynasties. Northern dynasties were usually established by nomads

who were called barbarians in medieval Chinese sources. Southern dynasties, however,

claimed their cultural heritage from the Han Empire. After the fourth century, following

the division of political regimes into North and South, different forms of economy and

culture developed. Although Buddhism entered China in the first century (the former Han

Dynasty), the first Chinese Buddhist community (Sangha) was not established until the

third century. These radical developments in Chinese political history beginning in the

fourth century had a strong influence on the history of Buddhism in China. As I will

show in the following pages, this change can also be discussed taking into account the

fact of regional diversity.

Modern scholarship has paid some attention to the different traditions of

Buddhism in the Northern and Southern dynasties.29 The dominant viewpoint in this

scholarship, initiated by Tang Yongtong, is that Buddhism in the South was a religion

devoted to the exegetical study (yixue ), or the study of wisdom, one of three

29 Erik Zrcher suggests that the Buddhist conquest of China was a historical development of

gentry Buddhism by focusing on how the aristocracy in this period accepted Buddhism, but his argument seems to be based on the case in the South. See The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Early Medieval China (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1959). His sociological study is indebted to Tang Yongtongs book titled Wei Jin nanbeichao fojiao shi (Originally published in Shanghai, 1938; Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982, reprinted).

17

divisions of Buddhist practice (morality, concentration, and wisdom).30 In this view,

Southern Buddhism was concerned with the exchange of philosophical ideas between

eminent monks and the literati, while in Northern dynasties, Buddhism was a religion

centered on meditation practice. This approach suggests that most monks in north China

focused on meditation practice, rather than doctrinal debates.31 Tang writes,

Buddhist Dharma to the east of the [Yangtze] River focused on the method of meaning [yimen]; as to meditation method, it was probably not [as strong] as it was in [North China].32

Tang explains that the focus of Buddhism in South China was the study of wisdom. He

argues that in South China, the monks and lay followers were devoted to studying the

meaning of the Buddhist scriptures and treaties, debating theoretical issues, and writing

commentaries. His strongest evidence in support of this viewpoint comes from his

reading of surviving traditional Buddhist sources, especially the biographies of monks

and histories. These biographies, typically, were written by eminent monks. In terms of

social class, these biographies were focused on eminent monks who mostly came from

big clans. Tangs viewpoint is based on selective biased biographies.33 In sum, Tangs

30 Ch. sanxue . However, when we talk about sanxue as a single word indicating three

learnings, it refers to a textual study of the three practices. So I will use practices and learnings on different occasions for different indications.

31 Erik Zrcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in

Early Medieval China (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1959); Tang Yongtong. Tang Zhangru echoes Tangs viewpoint; see Wei Jin nanbeichao Sui Tang shi sanlun (Wuhan: Wuhandaxue chubanshe, 1993), pp. 224-225.

32 Tang Yongtong, Han Wei liang Jin nanbeichao fojiao shi (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan,

1938), p. 799. 33 I will discuss these biographies in the context of Daoxuans scholarship in a seperate project.

For more current study on the biographies of eminent monks, see John Kieschnick, Eminent Monk: Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese Hagiography (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1997); Robin Beth Wagner, Buddhism, Biography and Power: A Study of Daoxuan's Continued Lives of Eminent Monks (Ph D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1995).

18

viewpoint does not offer a comprehensive picture of Buddhist monks in the time of the

Northern and Southern dynasties.

Buddhism was not the only cultural tradition in medieval China. If its learning

manifested in different ways in the North and South, other cultural traditions might also

reflect this regional difference. Discussing Buddhist learning in a broader context may

offer us a better understanding of medieval Chinese Buddhist history in general. In going

beyond the field of Buddhist studies, we might broaden our discussion on the different

traditions of scholarly learning in Northern and Southern dynasties.

In the Sui and Tang Dynasties, scholars were aware of the different modes of

Confucian learning in the North and South. For example, Tang official historians

commented on the difference between Northern and Southern learning as follows,

Mostly the Southerners [learning] is simple and plain, grasping the essence of the learning; while Northern learning is profound and sophisticated, exhausting the details [branches and leaves].34

This observation indicates that Southern literati were interested in abstract learning. In

other words, they paid more attention to theoretical issues. In the Buddhist tradition, it

was called the exegetical study (yixue). This tradition focuses on the search for the

philosophical meaning of Buddhist concepts and opinions.35 This feature of Buddhist

34 The History of Sui (Sui shu), ch. 75: The Biographies of Confucian scholars (Rulin zhuan), p.

Many contemporary scholars have examined the relationship between Buddhism and Confucianism, as well as Daoism at this time. See Mori Mikisabur, Rikuch shidaifu no seishin (Kyoto: Dhsha, 1986), pp. 165-196.

35 In his The Buddhist Conquest of China, Zrcher translates the Chinese word yi as opinion,

theory, and interpretation (p. 100), and the word yixue as exegesis (p. 116). The first translation is fine, while the second translation does not accurately apply to this word which is composed of two Chinese characters. So I translate yixue as exegetical study. He makes no comments on other relevant Chinese words including yimen and yizong. I translate yimen as exegetical method and yizong as exegetical tradition.

19

learning in the South seems to correspond to features of Confucian learning in the south.

Likewise, in North China, as the Tang historian indicated, Confucian scholars were more

interested in concrete details, as were followers of the Buddhist tradition in the North.

Given this correlation to the Confucian approach to learning, it is easier to understand

that Northern Buddhists paid more attention to the concrete practice of meditation.

However, in my opinion, conventional ideas regarding the similarities and

differences between Buddhist development in the North and South do not offer a clear

logical position, nor are they an accurate reflection of the historical and cultural milieu of

Buddhism in southern dynasties. Tangs study was mostly based on textual analysis and

was written in the 1930s. Some of his observations should be read critically against

discovery of new sources and the progress of modern scholarship. On the one hand, vast

archaeological discoveries have made it possible to draw a new image of Buddhism in the

North. For example, in examining the inscriptions on Buddhist statues, Liu Shufen and

Hou Xudong have demonstrated that Buddhist beliefs and practices in the north among

the common people were more complex than originally thought. In addition to the

practice of meditation, establishing statues and making prayers were of also significant

among Buddhists in North China.36 New case studies of Buddhist figures and rituals in

south China contribute to our understanding of Buddhism in the South.37 For the South,

not many new inscriptions are available; we might not be able to reexamine its history as

thoroughly as Hou and Liu have done for the North. Nevertheless, we can still find an

36 Liu Shufen, Wu zhi liu shiji huabei xiangcun de fojiao xinyang, Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi

yuyan yanjiusuo jikan 63: 3 (1993), pp. 497-544; idem, Art, Ritual and Society: Buddhist Practice in Rural China during the Northern Dynasties, Asia Major 8: 1 (1997), pp. 19-46; Hou Xudong, Wu liu shiji beifang minzhong fojiao xinyang (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1998).

37 For example, many scholars have studied the practice of self-immolation in the six dynasties. A

detailed discussion on this can be found in chapter two.

20

alternative way to approach the Buddhism in the South in general through a closer

reading of important Buddhist writings beyond the biographies of eminent monks.

Among these writings, Daoxuans writings should be given more attention.

Daoxuan has his own viewpoint about Buddhism in South China, which is quite

different from that of Tang Yongtong. In Tangs scholarship, Daoxuans voice is ignored.

Tang does not speak about how Buddhist figures throughout history viewed their own

history; rather, he applies a method of outside observation. Tang fails to think about why

these Buddhist figures had their own viewpoints about the same social facts. I attempt to

understand Daoxuans viewpoint regarding Buddhism in South China and to ask why he

had such a view. In my reading, Daoxuans perspective was formed by his observation of

the aftermath of the political persecution of Buddhism in the late Northern dynasties, and

it led directly to his search for a better model for the development of Buddhism at his

time. As I will show below, Daoxuans image of Buddhism in the South came not only

from his reading in Buddhist history, but also from his early monastic experience in the

Riyan Monastery.38 My reading also draws a picture of Southern Buddhism as a unique

tradition in Daoxuans writings.

38 The Riyan Monastery was founded in the nineteenth year of the Kaihuang period (599 AD) by

the Prince of Jin Yang Guang when he came to the capital of the Sui Dynasty to see Emperor Wen. In the following year, Yang Guang was made the Crown Prince. All sources in the Buddhist canon cite Yang Guang as the Prince of Jin while mentioning the Riyan Monastery. Yamazaki Hiroshi suggests that it was set up to host many monks from the Huiri Monastery (Daochang) in the South by Emperor Yang (Yang Guang); cf. Ydai no shidj, Ty gakuh 34 (1952), pp. 22-35; Zui-T bukky shi no kenky (Kyoto: Hzkan, 1980), p. 100. But he thought its established date was AD 601 by following no Katsutoshis opinion; cf. Ono Katsutoshi, Chgoku Zui-T Chan jiin shiry sh: Shiry hen (Kyoto: Hzkan, 1989), p. 141. Two Chinese scholars also agree with his opinion. Tang Yongtong, Sui Tang fojiao shigao (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1982), p. 7. Victor Cun-rui Xiong, Sui-Tang Changan A Study in the Urban History of Medieval China (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, the University of Michigan, 2000), p. 259 and p. 309 table. In my opinion, this monastery was established by the Prince of Jin Yang Guang in the nineteen year of the Kaihuang period (599) when he came to the capital to see the emperor Yang Jian from Jiangdu (present Yangzhou, Jiangsu province). Many biographies of eminent monks who were invited to Riyan Monastery said that they were invited by the Prince of Jin rather than the Crown Prince, which means that

21

Contextualizing Culture in South and North China

Daoxuan was born in a newly unified empire, the Sui Dynasty. His life, his

thoughts, and his monastic career were greatly shaped by his era. When we discuss his

ideas and thoughts, we cannot ignore the historical context. The Sui Empire seceded

from the Northern Zhou, which was founded by the nomadic Xianbei. Since the fourth

century, the first kingdom, founded by the Xianbei, Northern Wei, had developed a

process of absorbing Han cultural and political institutions. However, to a great extent

during the period of disunity, the kingdoms in the North debated whether they should

accept Han culture. In the South, this had never been a problem. For several hundred

years, therefore, in the North and South, the development of culture was shaped by the

regional differences created by the collapse of a unified empire. Once the Sui regime

unified the country, it proceeded to develop its own cultural traditions. However, the

people who survived from the collapse maintained their own memory about their own

cultural traditions, which had been developed over time in their own regions. As a well-

educated monk, Daoxuan must have been conscious of this situation.

In addition to Tang Yongtongs views, Chen Yinke makes a contribution to the

discussion of the historical context of early medieval Chinese history, offering a grand

image of Chinese history from the fourth century to seventh century. He claims that the

newly unified Sui and Tang regimes took their political institutions, rituals, and cultural

heritage from three sources: the Northern kingdoms (former Northern Zhou and Northern

Yang Guang was not Crown Prince when he established the Riyan Monastery, cf. Zhiju, T. no. 2060, vol. 50: 509b; Zhituo, 498c; Falun, 500a. According to the History of Sui Dynasty (Suishu), Yang Guang was bestowed the title of Crown Prince in the twentieth year of Kaihuang period (600) and came to Changan in the nineteenth year of Kaihuang. So the monastery must be established during his staying in Changan in the nineteenth year of Kaihuang (AD 599). Cf. Fang Xuanling et al., Sui shu (The History of Sui Dynasty) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975), pp. 44, 45, 1469, 1559.

22

Qi Dynasties), the Southern kingdoms (Liang and Chen Dynasties), and the northwestern

area (former Han and Wei Dynasties). Chen traces the origin of the rituals and rites in the

Sui Dynasty back to the Southern kingdom, the Liang Dynasty.39 Chen suggests that the

culture in the Sui and Tang period was a mixture of both Southern and Northern elements.

Chens viewpoints have been accepted and elaborated by Tang Zhangru. Tang proceeds

to suggest that the Southern tradition became dominant in the Sui and Tang Dynasties.

His argument broadens many dimensions of early medieval history, and solidly explains

the Southern contributions to the formation of the political, economic, and cultural

institutions of the Sui and Tang Empires. For instance, Tang argues that Confucian

scholarship on the classics in the Tang period accepted the Southern tradition, which

focused more on philosophical interpretation than on philological exegesis. He shows that

in the Northern and Southern dynasties, Southern scholars under the influence of

mysterious learning (xuanxue ) emphasized philosophical interpretation when they

studied three classics, including the Book of Change of the Zhou Dynasty (Zhou Yi), the

Book of Documents (Shangshu), and the Zuo Commentary on the Annals of Spring and

Autumn (Chunqiu zuoshi zhuan). In the North, Confucian scholars sought the meaning of

each single character in classic texts and the technical term for each institution, place, and

person. Tang concludes that this trend of Confucian classical studies in the Southern

tradition can be understood as the natural consequence of the conquest of advanced

Southern culture after the chaos in the fourth century.40 Tang also claims that the new

39 Chen Yinke, Sui Tang zhengzhi zhidu yuanyuan luelun gao (Taipei: Liren shuju, 1994), pp. 9-

10. Chen also explores the origins of civil institutions, law system, music, military institutions, and financial institutions in the Sui and Tang Dynasties and categorizes them into three regional traditions.

40 Tang Zhangru, Wei Jin nanbeichao Sui Tang shi sanlun (Wuhan: Wuhan daxue chubanshe,

1993), pp. 460-462.

23

trend of focusing on philosophical issues in Confucian studies began in the Liang

Dynasty as a result of the cultural policy of the Liang Emperor Wu. Emperor Wu indeed

appeared to be a Buddhist, converting from Daoism. He was very skilled in Confucian

interpretation and the mysterious learning of Buddhism. By contrast, in the North, the

Confucian scholarly atmosphere still followed the tradition of the Han Dynasty. Tang

Zhangru supports Tang Yongtongs viewpoint on the developmental differences of

Buddhism in the North and South, which says that the Buddhists focused more on

religious practice in the North, while those in the South focused more on mysterious

learning and philosophical issues. 41 Tang Zhangrus idea is particularly important.

However, both Tang Zhangru and Tang Yongtongs arguments seem to concentrate on

the scholarly learning of Confucian and Buddhist traditions. Can we also explore other

dimensions and aspects of Confucian and Buddhist traditions in early medieval period?

My particular interest is in the practice dimension of the Buddhist tradition.42

In the early medieval period, since many Chinese eminent monks were from

cultural clans, textual learning retained its significance in monastic life. In the Sui and

Tang Dynasties, the governments organized many translation teams and supported large

scale translation work. So they invited many Northern monks to the capital, Changan. It

seems that at least in this period, these monks from North China had more experience

with translation. If, as Tang Yongtong has suggested, philosophical learning was not the

focus of monastic scholarship in the North, the monks could not have precisely

41 Ibid., pp. 212-237, esp. 222. 42 Many scholars have studied the relationship between Buddhism and the state in the early Tang

period. See, for instance, Yuki Reimon,Shot bukky no shisteki mujun to kokka kenryoku to no ksatsu, Ty bunka kenkyjo kiy 25 (1961), pp. 1-28.

24

understood the meaning of scriptures and translated them effectively. Hence, it is likely

that the Buddhist sources put too much emphasis on translation activities and ignored

their efforts toward philosophical learning. On the other hand, many Southern monks

moved to Changan upon the invitation of the Sui Emperor Yang (Yang Guang ).

Most of them resided in the Riyan Monastery. Most of these Southern monks were well

known in philosophical learning.43 This became the turning point where Daoxuan made

his connection to the Buddhist tradition of the South.

Modern scholarship has posited that Yang Guang played an indispensable role in

accepting the cultural tradition of South China. It is not surprising that Yang Guang had a

tight connection with south China. In Chinese history, he is portrayed as a hero because

he conquered the Chen Dynasty in the South in 589. After that, he governed in the South

for ten years. Not only was his political career connected with South China, but he was

also famous for his cultural connection with the South. Many facts point to this cultural

connection. First, his wife was the daughter of Xiao Kui ( 542-585), the Emperor

Ming of the later Liang Dynasty based in Jiangling (modern Hubei). The Xiao clan was

famous for producing the Liang Emperor Wu, who founded the Liang Dynasty; also, it

was a clan with strongly defined traditions. It was said of Yang Guangs wife that [she]

was intelligent, fond of learning and good at literary composition and [she] attempted

to assist her husband (Yang Guang). 44 Second, Yang Guang was ordained with

43 Yamazaki Hiroshi, Shina chsei bukky no tenkai (Tokyo: Shimizu shoten, 1942); ibid., Zui-T

bukkyshi no kenky (Kyoto: Hzkan, 1967). Wang Yarong, Riyansi kao Jianlun Suidai nanfang yixue de beichuan, Zhonghua foxue xuebao 12 (1991), pp. 191-203.

44 Sui shu, ch. 36, the biography of Xiao Huanghou. For study of the relationship between

notable figure from this clan Xiao Yu and Buddhism, see Atago Hajime, Zuimatsu tsho ni okeru ranry

25

Bodhisattva precepts by Zhiyi , a famous master based at Mount Tiantai in the

south.45 Yang Guang also exchanged some letters with Zhiyi. He invited Zhiyi to lecture

in Changan, but Zhiyi did not accept. Third, Yang Guang had close connections with

many Southern literati. He wrote many poems and essays, and exchanged them with

these Southern men.46 In sum, Yang Guang seemed to promote both Southern cultural

traditions and Southern Buddhism in the North by inviting literati and monks to

Changan. This effort must have made an impression on Daoxuan during his stay in the

Riyan Monastery, which I will document further.

Daoxuans perspective on Buddhism was also affected by the political situation in

the early Tang period. Daoxuan was forced to think about the charge of corruption made

against the Buddhist Church. The Buddhist community was curtailed during the Wude

period (618-627). In the Zhenguan period (627-649), the Tang Emperor Taizong also

expressed his concern for the corruption of Buddhism.47 In the Zhenguan period, Taizong

issued this edict:

The root of moral practice is non-action. Numerous monks and lay followers indulge in popular customs. They either artificially claim to have had divine

shuku no bukky juy shuyuku o chshin ni shite, Chgoku chsei no shky to bunka (1982), pp. 539-574.

45 Yamauchi Shunyu, Tendai Chisha Daishi to yotei to no kankei ni tsuite, Indogaku

bukkygaku kenky 9 (1957), pp. 136-137. For a general survey of the Sui policy towards Buddhism, see Asada Mamoru, Zuidai bukky seisaku ni kann suru kenky, Rykoku daigaku daigakuin kiy 9 (1988), pp. 142-143.

46 Yoshikawa Tadao, Rikuchmatsu Zui T sho no jurin to bukky, in Amaraki Noritoshi ed.,

Hokuch Zui T Chgoku bukky shisshi (2000), pp. 427-455. 47 Arthur F. Wright, T'ang T'ai-tsung and Buddhism, in Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twichett,

eds. Perspectives on the T'ang (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), pp. 239-263; Shigenoi Shizuka, T no tais riseimin to bukky, Bukky no rekishi to bunka: Bukkyshi gakkai sanj shnen kinen ronshu (1980), pp. 216-235. Jan Yun-hua suggests that late in his life, Taizong realized that his military conquest took too many lives and he began his confession by supporting Buddhism, see Xuanzang dashi yu Tang Taizong ji qi zhengzhi lixiang tanwei, Huagang foxue xuebao 8 (1985), pp. 135-157.

26

contact and communication with demons, or state medicine and magic in order to obtain wealth or they visit the offices to send dirty money, or penetrate skin and burn fingers in order surprise the common people.48

It offered some solutions, as follows:

I have asked them to follow Buddhist discipline, supplementing laws with the regulations and institutions. This is for purifying the dharma gate. The local officials should examine them. If in those regions there are any monks violating the law, and the officials do not reveal it, the local office should make a record and inform the central government. Therefore the good monks will be praised, while the evil monks should be scolded. [This is] so that the monastic land will be pure and know the taste of dharma, and the bodhi enlightened path, to cut off from the dust of meaning.49

From this passage, we see that at that time, the government believed that many monks

and lay followers did not observe the precepts very well. They might have been pursuing

fame and wealth as well as a secular life style.

This charge from the political authority might have directed Daoxuans attention

to the historical experience of the political persecution that happened in the Northern Wei

and Zhou Dynasties. For Daoxuan, all political persecution toward Buddhism happened

in the North. In his historical writing titled The kya Gazetteer (Shijia fangzhi

), Daoxuan even attempted to connect this persecution with the idea of Final Dharma

(mofa).50 Daoxuan wrote,

48 Tang taizong du tianxia seng zhao, in Guang hongming ji, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 329b. 49 Ibid., T. no. 2103, 52: 329b. 50 About mofa in Northern and Southern dynasties, see Won Yong-sang, Nanbokujidai no

gigiky niokeru mab shiso no keisei, Indogaku bukkygaku kenky 101(51-1), (2002), pp. 197-199.

27

As the Maya-stra said, the Buddha Dharma will last in this world for ten thousand years. Afterwards, the scriptures will return to the Nga palace and the sculptures will collapse automatically. All monks will be equal to the secular people, different only by keeping shaved heads and wearing the robes (kaya). (The Buddha Dharma came to China, and has been persecuted three times [scriptures have been burned, and the monks have been killed]. First, Helian bobo established the so-called Xia Kingdom. This kingdom destroyed Changan and the soldiers killed every monk they met. Second, Emperor Taiwu of the Northern Wei Dynasty followed the words of Cui Hao and destroyed the three jewels. Third, the Emperor Wu of the Northern Zhou Dynasty forced monks to give up monkhood and to return to lay life. All evil people died in ways they should not have, as the record has said in details.51 ()

From Daoxuans writing, we can see that Daoxuan recorded three devastating instances

of persecution in North China. During these persecutions, Buddhist scriptures were burnt

and monks were killed. Buddhist communities were destroyed. Daoxuan connected these

persecutions to the coming of the Final Dharma.52 This connection between the idea of

degenerating dharma and the experience of Buddhism in North China inspired Daoxuans

promotion of the Buddhist tradition of South China, because Buddhism seemed more

successful in the South.

South China as the Kingdom of Culture

Daoxuans worldview is not related to his contemporary social reality. Having

finished its unification, the Sui regime started reconstructing Buddhist communities

51 Shijia fangzhi (Gazetteer of the akya Clan), Daoxuan, T. no. 2088, 51: 973c. 52 For a detailed study on Final Dharma, see Jan Nattier, Once Upon a Future Time: Studies in a

Buddhist Prophecy of Decline (Berkeley: Asian Humanities Press, 1990).

28

across the country. Daoxuans sensitivity came not only from his experience witnessing

the reconstruction of Buddhism in the Sui Dynasty, but also from his position as an elite

Southern monk.

Using Daoxuan as an example, I aim to revise the conventional image of

Buddhism in South China. For traditional scholarship, Buddhism in South China was a

religion of the gentry class and a religion focused on exegetical study. I aim to show that

Southern Buddhism was also characterized by the widespread worship of pagodas with

Buddha relics, the widespread establishment of the ordination platform, the practice of

purification techniques, and the propagation of meditation practice. I argue that, in the

South, it was unlikely that Buddhism was confined to an elite class sponsoring the

monastic order or literati involved in philosophical debate. Rather, members of the lower

class were also involved with Buddhism; they too practiced Buddhism. Daoxuan writes:

The Southerners who saw the elaborate tapestry of mountains and rivers and indulged in the beautiful landscape to the south of Yangtze and Han Rivers were easily moved by these external appearances. They had passion, wisdom, courage, and brave hearts. Thus they could fully comprehend Buddhism and relied on it without any doubt or hesitation, without forgetting it.53

My hunch that Daoxuan had a pioneering understanding of Southern Buddhism

was inspired by a fascinating new term Daoxuan uses to describe South China. He calls

South China the cultural kingdom (wenguo ) at least four times in his works. For

instance, he claims that after the Eastern Jin Dynasty moved to the South, it became a

cultural kingdom. Daoxuan calls earlier Southerners by the common term island

barbarians (daoyi ), but once the Jin court moved to the South, the land was

53 Daoxuan lshi gantong lu, Daoxuan, T. no. 2107, 52: 441c.

29

transformed from the land of barbarians into the cultural kingdom. 54 Daoxuan

considered the regime in the North a kingdom established by barbarians, while he

regarded the Jin regime as the political orthodoxy of China. So for Daoxuan, the South

represented political orthodoxy in a period of disunity. Daoxuan also calls the Chen

Dynasty a cultural kingdom twice in his writings.55

For Daoxuan, cultural kingdom is not just a name for the South in terms of

political authority; it also signifies a superior cultural tradition, especially with regard to

Buddhism. This term is connected with the flourishing of Buddhism in the South. He

writes:

Although the historical record of the Southern kingdoms was known in the past generations, does it appear in the written record nowadays? The region of the two rivers in the Central Plain was divided into sixteen kingdoms after the Jin regime moved to the South and these kingdoms fought with each other by force. Buddhism was persecuted three times in the Northern Region where the rulers were the descendants of the Huns, rather than the descendants of the cultural kingdoms. Thus that is the reason. So the rise of the ordination platform is the grand form of the Dharma's enduring.56

Daoxuan believes that in South China both the rulers and lay people respected Buddhism,

while in North China, Buddhism faced political persecution because the rulers there

54 Guang hongmingji, chapter 6, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 127a. 55 For example, he explicitly writes, The Chen Dynasty was called the cultural kingdom

(wenguo). See Yuanguang, Daoxuan, T. no. 2060, vol. 50: 523c. In the biography of his master Huijun (554-637), Daoxuan used the term the cultural kingdom again when he mentioned the Chen Dynasty, see Huijun, Daoxuan, T. no. 2060, 50: 533c.

56 See Guanzhong jietan tujing, Daoxuan, in T. no. 1892, 45: 814a. Daoxuan restates the same idea

in his Da Tang neidian lu, T. no. 2149, 55: 326a.

30

favored Daoism. The Northern people could not maintain their Buddhist belief after the

political persecution.57

When Daoxuan uses cultural kingdom to name South China, he seems to

indicate that the culture of South China preserved the essence of Chinese culture during

the period of disunity. Daoxuans viewpoint is unique in discussion of Chinese Buddhist

history. The debate between Buddhists and Daoists (as well as Confucians) on the

relationship between Buddhism and Chinese culture has a long history. The political,

religious, and cultural debates usually centered on the issue of whether civilized Chinese

should view Buddhism as a barbarian tradition or not. This debate began with Master

Mou in the Han Dynasty. Master Mous Treatise on Removing Doubts [toward

Buddhism] (Mouzi lihuo lun ) defended Buddhism against the challenge that

it was merely barbarian.58 The modern scholar Tang Yongtong claims,

In North China the struggle between Daoism and Buddhism was about power, thus it resulted that military power which had chosen to support Daoism destroyed Buddhism. However, in South China the struggle between Daoism and Buddhism was centered on theoretical debates. The goal for both sides was to undermine each other theoretically. Southern scholars proposed two theories against Buddhism: the disappearance of the spirituality (shen mie) and the distinction between the barbarians (Yi) and Chinese (Xia).59 In the Southern dynasties, a famous Daoist scholar Gu Huan ( 420-483)

attacked Buddhism as a non-Chinese tradition. Gu wrote a work titled Treatise on

57 Guang hongming ji, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 127a. 58 Mouzi, Mouzi lihuo lun, in Hongming ji, Sengyou (445-518), T. no. 2102, 52: 1a-7a. 59 Tang Yongtong, Han Wei liang Jin NanBei chao fojiao shi vol. 2 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju,

1982), Chapter 13: The Southern Branch of Buddhism, especially p. 35.

31

Barbarians and Chinese (Yixia lun ).60 In his view, according to The Scripture of

How Laozi Transformed the Barbarians (Laozi huahu jing ), Laozi played an

important role in the rise and development of Buddhism. Thus, Buddhism came into

existence after the rise of Daoism. Second, Buddhists were accused of having customs

that were in conflict with those of Chinese culture. For instance, the Chinese kept their

hair and wore their own clothes, while Buddhist barbarians cut their hair and wore casual

clothes. Third, Buddhist rites and rituals were in conflict with those of China. For

instance, the Chinese sat straight and bowed to each other, following the rites, while the

barbarians [sat] like foxes and [stood] like dogs; Chinese funerary rites required coffins,

graves, and tombs; the barbarians burnt the bodies of the deceased or threw the bodies

into water. Gu Huan also criticized Chinese people who followed the barbarian style of

renouncing family, thereby breaking the clan lineage. This viewpoint clearly reflects that

the reaction of Southern scholars holding Confucian family values against the Buddhist

ideal of renouncing worldly life. Thus, Chinese Buddhists had to resolve the traditional

conflict between Chinese culture and Buddhism. When Daoxuan named South China a

cultural kingdom, then, he was making Southern Buddhism a part of the Chinese cultural

tradition.

Although Buddhism was accepted by millions of Chinese by the time of the Tang

Dynasty, critics continued to deplore its barbarian aspects. As Daoxuans Extended

Collection of Propagating and Illustrating Buddhism documents, in the Tang period, Fu

Yi , a Daoist official in the Tang court, also accused Buddhism of being a barbarian

tradition. Fu Yi said that in Chinese history many generals including Fu Rong and

60 Yixia lun, Gu Huan, T. no. 2036, 49: 541c-542b.

32

L Guang betrayed their emperors because of their belief in Buddhism.61 For Fu Yi,

in the Han Dynasty, there were no Buddhists in the Central China (Central Plain); and in

the Wei and Jin Dynasties, only one-tenth of the barbarians were Buddhists. By contrast,

after Fu Rong and L Guangs rebellions in Central China, the barbarian deity was

accepted by more than half of the Chinese. He calls the Buddha a barbarian deity

(hushen ) and the Buddha Hall the hall of the barbarian deity (hushen zhi tang

).62 He attacked Buddhists for their disrespect toward the emperor and parents.

The Buddhists responded to Fu Yi by saying that only Buddhism offered compassion and

salvation for the Chinese who encountered chaos during rebellions.63 Furthermore, a

famous Buddhist master in the early Tang period, Falin, suggested that the Buddha was

the Great Sage (dasheng ) by discussing the dialogue between Confucius and the Wu

Prime Minister Bi.64 Falin also insisted that Laozi learned from the Buddha during his

trip to the West.65 In this approach, the Buddha becomes the ancient sage for both

61 Ogasawara Senshu, T no haibutsuronja fueki ni tsuite, Shina bukky shigaku 1: 3 (1937), pp.

84-93. Yoshioka Yoshitoyo, Shot ni okeru butsudrons no ichishiryo: dky gis no seiritsu ni tsuite, Indogaku bukkygaku kenky 7 (4-1) (1956), pp. 58-66.

62 Taishiling chaosandafu chen Fu Yi shang jiansheng sita fei sengni shi shiyou yitiao, in Guang

hongming ji, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 160b. 63 Guang hongming ji, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 160b. 64 Nishiyama Fukiko, Hrin hajaron ni tsuite, Suzuki gakujtsu zaidan nenh 9 (1973), pp. 69-

86. Takeuchi Hajime, Hrin ni okeru jia tosh no ishiki: hajaron to benshron o chshin toshite , Nihon bukky gakkai nenh 48 (1983), pp. 193-208 Miwa Haruo, T goh shamon Hrin nitsuite, Indogaku bukkygaku kenky 44 (22-2) (1974): 290-295.

65 Guang hongming ji, Daoxuan, T. no. 2103, 52: 161b. Falins strategy is to find the contradiction

between two Daoist texts. For example, he cited a Daoist text titled the Scripture of the Wisdom, Contemplating the Body and the Great Precepts (Zhihui guanshen daj