The Middle Kingdom and the Dharma Wheel: Aspects of the Relationship Between the Buddhist Saṃgha and the State in Chinese History 9004322582, 9789004322585

Citation preview

i



The Middle Kingdom and the Dharma Wheel

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_001

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

ii

Sinica Leidensia



Edited by Barend J. ter Haar Maghiel van Crevel In co-operation with P.K. Bol, D.R. Knechtges, E.S. Rawski, W.L. Idema, H.T. Zurndorfer

VOLUME 133

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/sinl

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access



The Middle Kingdom and the Dharma Wheel

iii

Aspects of the Relationship between the Buddhist Saṃgha and the State in Chinese History Edited by

Thomas Jülch

LEIDEN | BOSTON

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

iv



Cover illustration: Jing An Tempel in Shanghai (https://de.fotolia.com/id/66667868). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Jülch, Thomas, editor. Title: The Middle Kingdom and the Dharma Wheel : aspects of the relationship between  the Buddhist Saṃgha and the state in Chinese history / edited by Thomas Jülch. Description: Leiden ; Boston : Brill, 2016. | Series: Sinica Leidensia, ISSN 0169-9563 ;  volume 133 |Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016020871 (print) | LCCN 2016021443 (ebook) | ISBN 9789004309654  (hardback : alk. paper) | ISBN 9789004322585 (E-book) Subjects: LCSH: Buddhism--China--History. | Buddhism and state--China--History. | Buddhist  sanghas--China. Classification: LCC BQ626 .M535 2016 (print) | LCC BQ626 (ebook) | DDC 294.3/3720951--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016020871

Want or need Open Access? Brill Open offers you the choice to make your research freely accessible online in exchange for a publication charge. Review your various options on brill.com/brill-open. Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. issn 0169-9563 isbn 978-90-04-30965-4 (hardback) isbn 978-90-04-32258-5 (e-book) Copyright 2016 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi and Hotei Publishing. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill nv provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, ma 01923, usa. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Contents Contents

v

Contents Notes on the Contributors ix Introduction 1 Thomas Jülch 1 Clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese State 1 2 The Utilization of Buddhism to Ideologically Strengthen the Emperor 7 3 The Contribution of Buddhism to the Improvement of Social Life 14 Bibliography 15 In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Buddhist Apologetic Mission of the Early Tang Monk Falin 18 Thomas Jülch I

The Political Setting for Buddhist Apologetic Writing in the Early Tang 21 II Falinʼs Life History as Presented in the Hagiographic Sources 26 III Falinʼs Apologetic Argumentation 39 IV Further Developments and Later Reception 78 Bibliography 85 The Political Position of Xuanzang: The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji 94 Max Deeg A Complicated Figure with Complex Relationships: The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions  140 Chen Jinhua 1 Buddhist Sources about Huifan 145 2 Huifan as Presented in Secular Sources 162 3 Huifan’s Life: A Preliminary Reconstruction 195 4 Concluding Remarks 204 Appendix 1: A Chronicle of Huifan’s 惠/慧範 (?–713) Life 206 Appendix 2: Secular Sources on Huifan—A Thematic Analysis 208 Bibliography 218

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

vi

Contents

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi: Zanning’s Topical Compendium of the Buddhist Clergy (Da Song seng shi lüe 大宋僧史略) and the Politics of Buddhist Accommodation at the Song Court 222 Albert Welter I Introduction and Context 222 II Neo-Confucian Critiques of Buddhism  226 III Buddhist Kingdoms and Confucian States: the Cakravartin Ideal vs. Realpolitik 229 Iv The Confucian Revival in China and the Buddhist Revival in Wuyue 230 V Yongming Yanshou and the Cakravartin Model in Wuyue 233 V The Early Song Intellectual Terrain: A Typology of Confucian and Buddhist Participants 237 VII Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi: Zanning and Buddhist Realpolitik in the Song 247 IX Concluding Remarks: Confucian Monks as Buddhist Junzi 270 Bibliography 273 Buddhists as Natives: Changing Positions in the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty 278 Christopher P. Atwood I The Mongol Yuan Context 280 II Limited or Full Tax Exemptions? 284 III Communal Autonomy? 291 IV Invidious Distinctions Among the Four Religions 295 V Dashmad as the Odd Men Out 297 VI Landed Religions vs. Commercial Religions 304 VII The Yisün-Temür Reign and Its Aftermath 309 VIII Conclusions 315 Bibliography 318 Engaged but not Entangled: Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court 322 Zhang Dewei I Life: An Orphan, Earthquakes, and a Prince  326 II Thought: Chan, the Huayan jing, and Deqing  334 III Service: Architect, Local Society, and the Inner Court 343

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

vii

Contents

IV Success: the “Genuine Buddhist,” Politics, and the saṃgha  353 V Concluding Remarks 369 Bibliography 372 State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period: A New Look at Old Figures 379 Barend J. ter Haar I Preliminary Considerations 379 II Quantifying the saṃgha 382 III A Brief Excursus on the Tang Dynasty Quantitative Data 393 IV The Extent of Institutional Control 394 V Concluding Remarks  402 Bibliography 405 Indices 409 Index of Personal Names 409 Index of Place Names 415 Index of Terms 417 Index of Work Titles 418

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

viii

Contents

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Notes on the Contributors Notes on the Contributors

ix

Notes on the Contributors Thomas Jülch Ph.D. Ludwigs-Maximilians-Universität München, is Research Fellow in Chi­ nese studies at Ghent University. He specializes in Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought and the religious tradition of the Tiantai Mountains. His publications include Der Orden des Sima Chengzhen und des Wang Ziqiao: Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Shangqing-Daoismus in den Tiantai-Bergen (München, 2011) and Bodhisattva der Apologetik: die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin (München, 2014), 3 vols. Max Deeg Ph.D. Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, is Professor of Buddhist Stud­ ies at Cardiff University. His research covers a wide variety of themes in the history of Buddhism in India and China, and also extends to other religions of Asia. His publications include the monumental study Das Gaoseng-FaxianZhuan als religionsgeschichtliche Quelle (Wiesbaden, 2005), and a new translation of the Lotos-Sūtra (Darmstadt, 2009). Chen Jinhua Ph.D. McMaster University, is Professor of East Asian Buddhism at the Uni­ versity of British Columbia. He is considered the world’s leading authority on Buddhism in medieval China. In the field of Tiantai Buddhist sectarian his­to­ riography his interest extends also to the Japanese Tendai school. His publi­cations include Making and Remaking History: A Study of Tiantai Sectarian His­torio­graphy (Tokyo, 1999); Monks and Monarchs, Kinship and Kingship: Tanqian in Sui Buddhism and Politics (Kyoto, 2002); Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (Leiden, 2007); Legend and Legitimation: The Formation of Tendai Esoteric Buddhism in Japan (Louvain, 2009); Crossfire: Shingon-Tendai Strife as Seen in Two Twelfth-century Polemics (Tokyo, 2010). Albert Welter Ph.D. McMaster University, is Head and Professor of the Department of East Asian Studies at the University of Arizona. He is the leading scholar on Chan Buddhism in the Song dynasty. His publications include The Meaning of Myriad Good Deeds: A Study of Yung-ming Yen-shou and the Wan-shan t’ung-kuei chi (New York, 1993); Monks, Rulers, and Literati: The Political Ascendancy of Chan Buddhism (Oxford, 2006); The Linji lu and the Creation of Chan Orthodoxy: The

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

x

Notes On The Contributors

Development of Chan’s Records of Sayings Literature (Oxford, 2008); Yongming Yanshou’s Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu (Oxford, 2011). Christopher P. Atwood Ph.D. Indiana University, is Associate Professor of Central Eurasian Studies at Indiana University. He specializes on Mongolian History and Yuan dynasty China. His publications include Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (New York, 2004); Young Mongols and Vigilantes in Inner Mongolia’s Interregnum Decades 1911-1931 (Leiden, 2002). Zhang Dewei Ph.D.’s Beijing University and University of British Columbia, is Research Fel­ low at Sun Yat-sen University and Visiting Lecturer at Macau University. His publications include a broad variety of important articles in the area of Bud­ dhism during the Ming dynasty. Here is a selection: “Where the Two Worlds Met: Spreading the Ming Beizang 明北藏 in Wanli (1573-1620) China," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (Third Series) 26, no. 1 (2016): 1-22; “Challenging the Reigning Emperor for Success: Hanshan Deqing 憨山德清 (1546-1623) and Late Ming Court Politics," Journal of the American Oriental Society 134, no. 2 (2014): 263-85; “The Collapse of Beijing as a Buddhist Centre: Viewed from the Activi­ ties of Eminent Monks, 1522 to 1620,” Journal of Asian History 43, no. 2 (2009): 137-63. Barend J. ter Haar Ph.D. Leiden University, is Professor of Chinese studies at Oxford University. In his research he addresses various themes in the history of late imperial China. His publications include The White Lotus Teachings in Chinese Religious History (Leiden, 1999); The Ritual and Mythology of the Chinese Triads: Creating an Identity (Leiden, 1998); Telling Stories: Witchcraft and Scapegoating in Chinese History (Leiden, 2006); Practicing Scripture: A Lay Buddhist Movement in Late Imperial China (Honolulu, 2014).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction Introduction

1

Introduction Thomas Jülch The relationship between the Buddhist saṃgha and the Chinese state is a wide and many-facetted field. In approaching this matter, one is forced to ­concentrate on particular aspects. So rather than attempting to cover the field in its totality, the articles united in the present volume refer to specific subjects. The present introduction is designed to offer a wider panorama of the matter of saṃgha-state relations in Chinese history by succinctly going through the whole scope in a cursory manner. In this way I hope to provide a background to the included articles enabling to relate the specialized subjects to the general matter the volume is dedicated to. Serving this purpose, the present introduction will address three different fields: (1) clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese state; (2) utilization of Buddhism to ideologically strengthen the ruler; (3) contributions of Buddhism to the improvement of social life.1 1

Clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese State

With regard to the matter of clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese state I will subsequently refer to the themes of (1.a) whether or not monks were expected to bow to the emperor, (1.b) economic calamities caused by the saṃgha, and (1.c) the endangerment of imperial rule by millenarian sects. I cannot trace these themes through all of Chinese history here. Instead I will confine myself to succinctly throwing spotlights on those periods in which the clashes connected with those themes most prominently occurred. For 1.a and 1.b these would be the period from the Nanbeichao era to the end of the Tang dynasty, and for 1.c the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties. (1.a) As a religion originating from India, Buddhism also in China based itself on Indian social customs. In ancient India spiritual authorities stood above worldly authorities. On this background, in the Buddhist saṃgha the doctrine was formulated that in China, too, monks should not be asked to bow to the emperor. This doctrine was entirely irreconcilable with the Confucian understanding, according to which the emperor was the supreme head of the state, 1 Buddhist sources are in the present introduction quoted on the basis of the Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 正新修大藏經, which is hereafter referred to in abbreviation as T.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_002

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

2

Jülch

and as such also head of all religions that were practiced in China. Because of the confrontational nature of the doctrine, it was not supported by all parts of the saṃgha. Monks interested in good relationships with the court frequently developed alternative approaches. E.g. in 419 the monk Faguo 法果 declared that he was prepared to bow to his emperor, since he saw him as a Buddha.2 However those monks who established themselves as spokesmen of the aforementioned doctrinaire position gave rise to an extensive controversy which went on for centuries. For the period from the beginnings up to the times of Tang Gaozong 唐高宗 it is documented in the Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi 集沙門不應拜俗等事 (T 2108, Collection [of texts] on the matter that śramaṇas should not bow to laity), compiled by the Tang Buddhist monk Yancong 彥悰 (ca. 650–688) in six juan. First, the doctrine that monks should not bow to the emperor was prominently formulated in the treatises “Shamen bujing wangzhe lun” 沙門不敬王者論 (Treatise on the matter that śramaṇas should not bow to kings) by Huiyuan 慧遠 (334–416)3 and “Futian lun” 福田論 (Treatise on the fields of blessedness) by Yancong 彥琮 (557–610, not to be confused with the afore-mentioned compiler).4 In both cases the reason for writing was a policy requesting Buddhist monks to bow to the ruler.5 Huiyuan was concerned with anti-clerical measures of Huan Xuan 桓玄, and Yancong with a law

2 Kenneth Ch’en, “On Some Factors Responsible for the Anti-Buddhist Persecution under the Pei-Ch’ao,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (1954), 266; Thomas Jansen, “Der chinesische Kaiser Liang Wudi (reg. 502–549) und der Buddhismus,” in Zwischen Säkularismus und Hierokratie: Studien zum Verhältnis von Religion und Staat in Süd- und Ostasien, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2001), 91, note 7. 3 Leon Hurvitz, “‘Render unto Cesar’ in Early Chinese Buddhism: Huiyuan’s Treatise on the Exemption of the Buddhist Clergy from the Requirements of Civil Etiquette,” in Liebenthal Festschrift, ed. Kshitis Roy (Santiniketan: Visvabharati, 1975): 80–114. The full text is preserved in Hongming ji, juan 5: T 2102, p. 29, c19–p. 32, b11. The main part of the “Shamen bujing wangzhe lun” is also seen in the Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi, juan 2: T 2108, p. 449, a12–p. 451, b10. 4 Thomas Jülch, “On Whether or Not Buddhist Monks Should Bow to the Emperor: Yancong’s Treatise on the Fields of Blessedness,” Monumenta Serica 60 (2012): 1–43. The full text is preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 25 (T 2103, p. 280, c18–p. 283, a9). The main part of the “Futian lun” is also seen in the Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi, juan 2: T 2108, p. 452, c3–p. 454, b28. 5 With regard to the case under Huan Xuan, see: Leon Hurvitz, “‘Render unto Cesar,’” 80. With regard to the case under Sui Yangdi, see: Thomas Jülch, “On Whether or Not Buddhist Monks Should Bow to the Emperor,” 11.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

3

issued by Sui Yangdi 隋煬帝. In both cases it was achieved, that the emperor adjusted his position, so that monks were no longer expected to bow to him.6 The texts compiled in the Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi culminate in a debate taking place under Tang Gaozong (see juan 3–6). Here not only the relationship of monks to the emperor, but also the relationship of monks to their parents was discussed. In the latter matter there was potential for conflict between Buddhism and Confucianism, too: While in Confucianism it was a requirement of filial piety (xiao, 孝) that each person had to pay homage to the own parents, in Buddhism the central ideal was monkhood, so that monks received homage from all laity including their parents. In 657 the conflict began with an edict entitled Sengni bude shou fumu bai zhao 僧尼不得受父母 拜詔 (Edict Requiring that Buddhist Monks and Nuns do not Receive Homage from their Parents),7 which incited wide protest among the saṃgha. The senior monks leading the protests were Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667) and Weixiu 威秀 (life dates unknown). In 662 Tang Gaozong finally ordered the debate in order to settle the matter. As the Buddhist side prevailed, Tang Gaozong in the same year issued a new edict, in which he still maintained that monks had to act in terms of filial piety, but dropped the requirement that monks had to bow to the emperor. It was entitled Ling sengdao zhi bai fumu zhao 令僧道致拜父母詔 (Edict Ordering Buddhist Monks and Daoist Priests to Pay Homage to their Parents).8 In 733 Tang Xuanzong 唐玄宗 again decreed that monks had to bow to the emperor.9 However under his successor, Tang Suzong 唐肅宗, the decree was rescinded in 761.10 (1.b) While the matter of whether monks had to bow to the emperor was primarily an ideological question, clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese 6

7 8

9 10

With regard to the case under Huan Xuan, see: Leon Hurvitz, “‘Render unto Cesar,’” 91. With regard to the case under Sui Yangdi, see: Thomas Jülch, “On Whether or Not Buddhist Monks Should Bow to the Emperor,” 12 f. The edict is seen in Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集, juan 113 (Song Minqiu 宋敏求, Tang da zhaoling ji [Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1959], 587). The edict is seen in Quan Tangwen 全唐文, juan 12 (Dong Gao 董誥, Quan Tangwen [­Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001], vol. 1, 148). The entire proceedings under Gaozong have been described in: Mamoru Tonami, “Policy towards the Buddhist Church in the Reign of T’ang Hsüan-tsung,” Acta Asiatica 55 (1988), 40 f. Mamoru Tonami, “Policy towards the Buddhist Church in the Reign of T’ang Hsüantsung,” 44. Ibid., 46. For further reading regarding the course of the controversy in the middle ages, see: Eric Reinders, Buddhist and Christian Responses to the Kowtow Problem in China (London: Bloomsbury, 2015).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

4

Jülch

state also extended to economic matters, which impaired the interests of the ruling elites much more seriously. Traditionally monks were relieved from taxation and corvée services, which significantly deprived the Chinese state of financial resources and manpower. As Jacques Gernet explains, there were exceptions from both privileges. For example, in times in which the need for corvée service was particularly great, monks sometimes had to pay a special tax as compensation for the exemption from the corvée duties. Or, if the situation required it, monks also were conscripted. E.g. in 577 the Chen state, due to battles along the Huai and Fei rivers, obliged monks to military corvées.11 The privileges of monks could however not be compromised on a general level, since the sacredness of monkhood was acknowledged by a wide public.12 Thus the privileges connected with monkhood made the saṃgha attractive to peasants who otherwise had no interest in Buddhism, and became monks merely in order to avoid taxation and corvée service. The government undertook various measures to counteract this development. Kenneth Ch’en points out that in the times of Tang Xuanzong the following measures were taken: Firstly, the monastic community was subjected to purges which were designed to identify and to weed out those who had joined the saṃgha for improper motifs. As a result of such purges, in 714 roughly 12,000 monks, and on another occasion in the Kaiyuan era more than 30,000 monks were defrocked. Secondly, in 747, as a means of avoiding the ordination of unworthy men, the emperor introduced a system of “official ordination” (gongdu, 公度): applicants were required to undergo a state examination, and those who passed were given ordination certificates (dudie, 度牒).13 However, as Ch’en explains, despite those measures the state lost control over the growth of the saṃgha. In order to accumulate financial resources to subdue the rebellion of An Lushan, the government in 756 started to sell ordination certificates. In the further course, local officials also discovered the sale of ordination certificates as a means of filling their own pockets, and illegally organized so-called “private ordinations” (sidu, 私 度).14 The purchase of ordination certificates became popular among peasant families, as it enabled them to shield their sons against the incommodities of taxation and corvée services. Ch’en provides a list of addresses officials directed 11

12 13 14

Jacques Gernet, Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries, trans. Franciscus Verellen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), 31 f. Ibid., 30. Kenneth Ch’en, “The Economic Background of the Hui-Ch’ang Suppression of Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 19 (1956), 79. Ibid., 80.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

5

to the government complaining about the resulting shortages in tax income and corvée laborers.15 An even bigger problem connected with the growth of the saṃgha in China was however that, as Ch’en points out, massive land holdings were allotted in the hands of the monasteries. While in India monks and nuns were not allowed to keep personal possessions, in Tang China, based on the equal-field regulations, each monk was given 30 mou of fields, and each nun 20.16 On top of that, monasteries accumulated tremendous possessions through donations. Donations could come from emperors intending to grant favors to particular monasteries. E.g. Sui Wendi had donated 100 qing of land to the Shaolin si 少林 寺, and Tang Taizong added another 40 qing. But also noble families and high ranking officials generously donated to monasteries.17 It is unclear whether monastery lands—like the individuals of the monastic community—were generally tax exempt. However, as we know from various regulations, many monastery lands were.18 So through the allotment of land in the hands of the saṃgha, the state significantly lost sources of income again. As all this shows, the saṃgha rendered the Chinese state in a situation of economic calamity. In reaction, Tang Wuzong 唐武宗, in the Huichang 會 昌 era, ordered the greatest persecution of Buddhism in Chinese history: in 845, except for one monastery in each of the major prefectures and four monasteries in both of the capitals (i.e. Chang’an and Luoyang), all Buddhist estab­lishments were destroyed. Each monastery was to have 30 monks. The other monks and nuns were returned to lay life.19 The Huichang persecution was more widespread and more devastating than the earlier two persecutions under Taiwudi 太武帝 of the Northern Wei in 446, and under Zhou Wudi 周 武帝 of the Northern Zhou in 574–577. Due to the jurisdiction of the Northern Wei and the Northern Zhou, those persecutions were limited to the North of China. They also did not have lasting effects on Buddhism. The Huichang persecution meant a much deeper incision. However the recovery began soon. In 846 Tang Wuzong died, and his successor, Tang Xuanzong 唐宣宗, allowed the saṃgha to grow again.20 The sale of ordination certificates remained a welcome source of income to both the government and local officials. Gradually 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ibid., 81. Ibid., 90. Ibid., 95 f. Ibid., 97 f. Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), 230 ff. Ibid., 232 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

6

Jülch

ordination certificates became detached from an actual entry into the saṃgha. In the Song dynasty they were passed on from person to person as a means of payment, and eventually became an early paper money.21 (1.c) As we have seen, clashes between Buddhism and the Chinese state involved serious economic problems causing the state true calamities. Beyond that, through concepts of millenarianism, Buddhism could even threaten an emperor’s rule. The term of millenarianism refers to the employment of eschatological concepts to inspire hopes for a pending age of bliss. Such concepts were frequently connected with the figure of Buddha Maitreya. The legend says that Maitreya is currently being prepared for his Buddhahood in the Tuṣita heaven, and that, once when Śākyamuni’s revelation of the dharma will have been forgotten, Maitreya will introduce an age of bliss manifesting himself as the new Buddha.22 As we will see in 2.d, under Wu Zetian it was attempted to employ this concept in favor of the empress. However in Song, Yuan, Ming, and Qing times, millenarianism, as practiced in diverse lay movements, was directed against the state. In the Southern Song, Buddhist societies, previously attached to Buddhist monasteries, broke free, took over Daoist ideas, and started rebellions in protest against various factors such as social decay and corrupt government. In those movements Maitreya was envisaged as a future saviour with whose appearance all the present evils would be removed. And Maitreyism was combined with Amidism, as those who had attained rebirth in the Pure Land of Buddha Amitābha were requested to strife for another rebirth on earth, and to manifest themselves as virtuous officials also helping to remove the evils. Most powerful among the lay movements was the White Lotus Society (bailian she, 白蓮社), which in 1133 was founded by the Tiantai monk Mao Ziyuan 茅子元 (1086–1166).23 When China came under Yuan rule, the White Lotus Society first remained relatively peaceful, but was still prohibited three times. Finally, in 1351, the White Lotus leader Han Shantong 韓山童 († 1355) started a major rebellion.24 Han Shantong proclaimed himself as Maitreya and as a descendant of the Song emperor Huizong 徽宗 (r. 1100–1126). The rebellion failed; Han 21 22

23 24

Jacques Gernet, Buddhism in Chinese Society, 60. Padmanabh S. Jaini, “Stages in the Bodhisattva career of the Tathāgata Maitreya,” in Maitreya, the future Buddha, ed. Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 71–76. Daniel L. Overmyer, “Folk-Buddhist Religion: Creation and Eschatology in Medieval China” History of Religions 12, no. 1 (1972), 43–46. Ibid., 49–53.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

7

Introduction

Shantong was arrested and executed. However Han Shantong’s general, Liu Futong 劉福通, was able to escape, and started a new rebellion together with Han Santong’s son, Han Liner 韓林兒. The new rebellion was however competing with other rebellions taking place simultaneously, and was not able to assert itself. Still, as one of Han Liner’s commanders, Zhu Yuanzhang 朱元璋 was highly successful. When, after 1359, Han Liner’s and Liu Futong’s military power declined, Zhu Yuanzhang established his own power base, finally overthrew the Yuan rule, and as Ming Taizu 明太祖 established the Ming dynasty in 1368.25 Aware of the political power of millenarianism, Ming Taizu in 1370 ­prohibited all millenarian sects. But still, as secret sects, they remained in existence.26 The White Lotus Society existed until 1813, when its last uprising was subdued.27 I shall keep my remarks regarding sectarian religion brief, since the matter is of rather marginal relevance to the present volume. As lay movements, the White Lotus Society and the other millenarian sects did not belong to the orthodox saṃgha. Speaking about the relationship between Buddhism and the state in general, the millenarian sects were however of central importance, so that they cannot be left entirely unmentioned either. 2

The Utilization of Buddhism to Ideologically Strengthen the Emperor

In order to secure and to stabilize its position in China, the Chinese saṃgha since the fourth and fifth centuries attempted to court imperial favour.28 A prominent tool in this struggle for imperial protection was to make Buddhism available for the ideological legitimation of an emperor’s rule. On this basis, throughout Chinese history, many emperors entered alliances with Buddhism. 25

26 27 28

Barend ter Haar, The White Lotus Teachings in Chinese Religious History (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999), 115–118. For further reading see an article by Chan Hok-lam which importantly corrects details of the previous understanding of millenarian symbolism in Han Liner and Zhu Yuanzhang (Chan Hok-lam, “The ‘Song’ Dynasty Legacy: Symbolism and Legitimation from Han Liner to Zhu Yuanzhang of the Ming Dynasty,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 68, no. 1 [2008]: 91–133). Daniel L. Overmyer, “Folk-Buddhist Religion,” 53. Ibid., 46. An account of the early stages of this development is given in: Erik Zürcher, “Tidings from the South: Chinese Court Buddhism and Overseas Relations in the Fifth Century AD,” in A Life Journey to the East: Sinological Studies in Memory of Giuliano Bertuccioli (1923–2001), ed. Antonino Forte (Kyoto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’ Asia Orientale, 2002): 21–43.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

8

Jülch

Buddhist authorities were able to ascribe soteriological significance to an emperor’s reign, and in return the emperor would patronize Buddhism. Buddhist methodologies employed to make an emperor appear as soteriologically significant, implied many different elements. I will introduce the most important ones below. (2.a) In Buddhism, the most obvious way of ascribing soteriological significance to a ruler was to hail him as a Buddha. The appearance of a Buddha was viewed as a highly auspicious event that would throughout the world expel evils and guide sentient beings on the right path. Apart from its soteriological aspect, hailing the ruler as a Buddha had yet another advantage: it encouraged the large numbers of people inspired by Buddhism to worship him, which helped to further stabilize his rule. The first reported case of an ideology styling a Chinese emperor as a Buddha is known from the Tuoba-Wei dynasty in connection with the afore-mentioned statement of the monk Faguo (see 1.a). There is the possibility that a claim of the Tuoba-Wei rulers being Buddhas is represented in the Buddhist art of the cave temples of Yungang 雲岡 that were constructed close to the Tuoba-Wei capital of Datong 大同. Tsukamoto Zenryū established the theory that major Buddha statues within these caves were designed to resemble Tuoba-Wei emperors.29 Marylin Martin Rhie introduces a different theory, but also provides an overview of previous research regarding this matter, and lists all those authors who saw a connection between the Tuoba-Wei emperors and the Buddha statues.30 Much better documented is the legitimation ideology of Liang Wudi 梁武帝 (r. 502–550). He, too, was styled as a Buddha. Ku Cheng-mei names and discusses literary works, in which the claim of Liang Wudi being a Buddha is articulated. Most important among them would be the Foji xu 佛記序 (Preface to the Records of the Buddha), preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 15, which was composed by Shen Yue 沈約 (441–513),31 and the Dafa song bing xu 大法頌 並序 (Eulogy on the Great Dharma with preface), preserved in Guang

29 30 31

Tsukamoto Zenryū 塚本善隆, Hoku chō bukkyō shi kenkyū 北朝佛教史研究 (Tōkyō: Daitō shuppansha 大東 出版社, 1974). Marylin Martin Rhie, Early Buddhist Art of China & Central Asia, vol. 3 (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 467–480. Ku Cathy Cheng-mei, “The Buddharāja image of Emperor Wu of Liang,” in Philosophy and Religion in Early Medieval China, ed. Alan K.L. Chan (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010), 271.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

9

Hongming ji, juan 20, which was composed by the crown prince Xiao Gang 蕭

綱 (503–551).32

(2.b) A particularly popular means of styling an emperor as a figure of soteriological significance was the concept of the cakravartin, or wheel-turning king (chin.: zhuanlun wang, 轉輪王). A basic formulation of the cakravartin ideal is found in the “Cakkavatti Sīhanāda Sutta” of the Dīgha Nikāya, the first collection of teachings in the Suttapiṭaka of the Pāli-canon. The account refers to a legendary cakravartin named Daḷhanemi, whose rule is said to have created a golden age at the beginning of the present kalpa, in which social problems of any kind were completely unknown to the population. Among the insignia of a cakravartin is the “noble wheel” (skt.: cakraratna), which the title “cakravartin” is derived from. At the beginning of his reign, Daḷhanemi subdued all kings with the wheel rolling ahead of him. Wherever the wheel rolled, kings submitted to Daḷhanemi’s power. Finally the wheel rolled back to the capital, where it took position above Daḷhanemi’s residence palace symbolizing Daḷhanemi’s cakravartin-status. After a long period of time the wheel did however begin to sink, which marked the end of Daḷhanemi’s rule. After Daḷhanemi there were still further rulers who also reached the cakravartin-status, but eventually rulers were no longer able to live up to the cakravartin-ideal. This, we are told, brought the world into its present unfortunate state.33 The Abidharmakośa by Vasubandhu differentiates four kinds of cakravartins. The most noble one is the cakravartin with a golden wheel (skt.: suvarṇa­cakravartin), who rules all four continents of the traditional Indian world view (Jambudvīpa in the South, Uttarakuru in the North, Purvavideha in the East, and Avaragodaniya in the West). In the second place is the cakravartin with the silver wheel (skt.: rūpyacakravartin), who rules the continents Jambudvīpa, Purvavideha, and Avaragodaniya. In the third place is the cakravartin with the copper wheel (skr.: tāmracakravartin), who rules the continents Jambudvīpa and Purvavideha. In the fourth place is the cakravartin with the iron wheel (skt.: ayaścakravartin), who only rules Jambudvīpa (i.e. India). The suvarṇacakravartin, represented by Daḷhanemi, spread his rule in a way entirely free of conflicts. But the lower the level of the cakravartin, the stronger the resistance against the spread of his power became. The Indian emperor Aśoka (r. 274–236 BC), who greatly contributed to the spread of Buddhism in India, was traditionally classified as an ayaścakravartin, while the cakravartins of 32 33

Ibid., 274. John S. Strong, The Legend of King Aśoka. A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 45 ff.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

10

Jülch

the higher levels were idealized so strongly that their reigns were not applicable to those of historical rulers.34 The concept of the cakravartin was employed in the ideology designed to legitimize the rule of Liang Wudi. The afore-mentioned literary works Foji xu and Dafa song bing xu (see 2.a) style Liang Wudi as both a Buddha and a cakravartin.35 To underline his cakravartinship Liang Wudi took the religious and political policies of Aśoka as a model for his own reign. He did however not follow the model of Aśoka as far as the symbolism of the cakravartin wheels is concerned. While Aśoka was classified as an ayaścakravartin with an iron wheel, Liang Wudi placing himself on the highest level claimed the golden wheel for himself,36 and assumed the title “wheel turning sage king of the golden wheel” (chin.: jinlun zhuanlun shengwang, 金輪轉輪聖王).37 Another emperor also styled as a cakravartin was Sui Wendi 隋文帝 (r. 581– 605). In 581, the year he established himself as emperor, Sui Wendi ordered Buddhist temples and steles with inscribed edicts to be erected on the battlefields where he and his father before him had won the victories through which the Sui dynasty was established. As Arthur F. Wright explains, these edicts introduce Sui Wendi as a cakravartin in order to demonstrate the legitimacy of the new emperor’s claim to the mandate of heaven.38 Also Wu Zetian 武則天 (r. 690–705) was styled as a cakravartin. As far as this aspect of her legitimation strategy is concerned, the monk Fuli 復禮 (d. after 705) through his Shimen bianhuo lun 十門辯惑論 had prepared the ground. The Shimen bianhuo lun, published in 681, was written as a rejoinder to the Shidian jiyi 釋典稽疑 by the Confucian scholar Quan Wuer 權無二, which in ten sections raised doubts about Buddhism, while the Shimen bianhuo lun replies to each section with an apologetic statement. The Shidian jiyi says in section 10 that the cakravartin concept, as an Indian ideal of rulership, could not be applied to China. Fuli in his counterstatement demonstrates that China could be ruled perfectly well by a cakravartin.39 As Fuli was awarded important 34 35 36 37 38 39

John S. Strong, The Legend of King Aśoka, 49–52. Ku Cathy Cheng-mei, “The Buddharāja image of Emperor Wu of Liang,” 271 f., 274 f. The rulers Sui Wendi and Wu Zetian, whose claim to the cakravartin title I will refer to below, were also depicted as cakravartins endowed with the golden wheel. Yan Shangwen 顔尚文, Liang Wudi 梁武帝 (Taibei: Dongda tushu gongsi 東大圖書公 司, 2000), 286. Arthur F. Wright, “The Formation of Sui Ideology, 581–604,” in Chinese Thought and Institutions, ed. John K. Fairbank (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), 97 f. Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Dunhuang Document S. 6502 Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

11

positions under Wu Zetian, he must have been connected to the circle of monks who formulated the imperial ideology for the empress. It would therefore appear that the tenth section in his Shimen bianhuo lun contributed to laying the foundations for the integration of the cakravartin ideal into Wu Zetian’s legitimation strategy.40 Antonello Palumbo points out that the employment of the cakravartin ideal in Chinese Buddhist ruling ideologies was based on a misrepresentation of the Indian sources.41 However, being aware that in the Indian tradition the cakravartin ideal was not meant to be a tool in the legitimation of a ruler, I must, for the purposes of the present introduction, confine myself to the question of how the Indian sources were instrumentalized in the Chinese tradition. (2.c) A second way of ascribing soteriological significance to an emperor’s rule was connected to the Buddhist eschatological concept of the gradual decay of the dharma. It introduces the understanding of the dharma slipping into oblivion in three phases since it was revealed by Śākyamuni. Directly after its revelation the dharma was remembered perfectly. This was the phase of the “correct dharma” (chin.: zhengfa, 正法). Subsequently, the dharma was remembered in defiled form. This was the phase of the “semblance dharma” (chin.: xiangfa, 像法). In the end a situation would be reached in which only miniscule traces of the dharma would still be remembered. This would be the phase of the “final dharma” (chin.: mofa, 末法). This eschatological conception played a major role in the ideology legitimizing the rule of Sui Wendi. According to the Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三寶紀 (T 2034) by Fei Zhangfang 費長房, a text eminently contributing to the Buddhist legitimation ideology of the Sui dynasty, with the persecutions of Buddhism under Taiwu Di and Zhou Wudi the age of the final dharma had been reached.42 As the Lidai sanbao ji stresses, however, Sui Wendi appeared then as a savior through whom the dharma was spread again, and through whom the sufferings of the population were

40 41

42

2005), 205 f. On Fuli and his relevance to the legitimation strategy of Wu Zetian see also: Chen Jinhua, “Sarira and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, no. 1–2 (2002), 76 f. Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China, 177, 207. Antonello Palumbo, “Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China,” in Zhonggu shidai de liyi, zongjiao yu zhidu 中古時代的禮儀，宗教与制度, ed. Yu Xin 余欣 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2012), 288, 317 f. Erik Zürcher, “‘Prince Moonlight:’ Messianism and Eschatology in Early Medieval Chinese Buddhism,” T’oung Pao 68 (1982), 16.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

12

Jülch

eased.43 In order to present Sui Wendi as such a savior, he was styled as the “Prince Moonlight” (skt.: Candraprabhakumāra, chin.: yueguang tongzi, 月光 童子), whose story is mainly known from the Yueguang tongzi jing 月光童子經 (T 534), the Shenri jing 申日經 (T 535), and the Shenri er ben jing 申日兒本經 (T 536). Briefly summarized, the story says that Candraprabhakumāra’s evil father, Śrīgupta (transcribed as shenri, 申日; translated as dehu, 德護), wanted to kill the Buddha, while Candraprabhakumāra, depicted as the moral counterpart to his father, attempted to persuade him to give up the plan. When the father remained stubborn, the Buddha used his miraculous powers to frustrate the plot, and Śrīgupta, deeply ashamed, became a follower of the Buddha.44 In the Shenri jing the Buddha announces that in the age of the final dharma Candraprabhakumāra would be reborn in China, where he would appear as a saintly ruler through whom the dharma will be spread again.45 On this basis, the Indian monk Narendrayaśas (517–589), under the title Dehu zhangzhe jing 德護長者經 (T 545), in 583 at the beginning of the Sui dynasty, presented yet another version of the story, in which the Buddha’s prophecy is made even more explicit. Here it is said that in the age of the final dharma Candraprabhakumāra will reappear as the ruler of the Great Sui (this being a clear reference to Sui Wendi).46 (2.d) Also the myth of Maitreya (see 1.c), who would manifest himself as the new Buddha in the end of the phase of the final dharma, was employed to introduce an eschatological element into Buddhist legitimation ideologies. The earliest known case is that of the Tuoba-Wei emperors, who—in being styled as Buddhas (see 2.a)—were apparently seen as emanations of Buddha Maitreya.47 More famous is however the case of Wu Zetian. As Antonino Forte has shown, the Maitreyan element in her legitimation ideology was however not as uncontested as assumed in previous research, and may have been confined to the propaganda of Xue Huaiyi 薛懷義. Originally a man from simple conditions, Xue Huaiyi was promoted by the later empress, ordained as a 43

44 45 46 47

Max Deeg, “Zwischen Spannung und Harmonie: Das Problem von Chronologie und Synchronologie in der frühen chinesischen buddhistischen Historiographie,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010), 121 f. Erik Zürcher, “‘Prince Moonlight:’ Messianism and Eschatology in Early Medieval Chinese Buddhism,” 23. Ibid., 24. Ibid., 25 f. Jan Nattier, “The Meanings of the Maitreya Myth,” in Maitreya, the future Buddha, ed. Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 31.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

13

Buddhist monk, and, in 685, prestigiously installed as abbot of the Baima Monastery 白馬寺 in the capital city Luoyang. Xue Huaiyi sought to style Wu Zetian as Maitreya, and later historians chose to describe Wu Zetian in terms of that ideology—possibly as a warning to later rulers not to follow Maitreyan movements, which were known for their subversive tendencies already at that time. It would appear that other members of the Buddhist clergy involved in the formulation of Wu Zetian’s legitimation ideology were not prepared to support Wu Zetian’s identification with Maitreya.48 The legitimation of Wu Zetian’s rule was mainly based on an employment of the Mahāmegha sūtra (chin.: Dayun jing, 大雲經). In 690, the year in which Wu Zetian was crowned empress, a group of bhadantas, or monks of great virtue (chin.: dade, 大德), formulated a commentary entitled Dayun jing shenhuang shouji yishu 大雲經 神皇授記義疏 (Commentary on the interpretation of the prophecy regarding the divine empress in the Dayun jing). While R.W.L. Guisso still believed that Xue Huaiyi, together with the other bhadantas, composed the commentary to style Wu Zetian as Maitreya,49 Forte can demonstrate that things were different: Firstly, Xue Huaiyi may not have been directly involved in the composition of the commentary.50 Secondly, the commentary suggests that—accurately speaking—Wu Zetian was a bodhisattva not to be identified with Maitreya. The identification of Wu Zetian with Maitreya is in the commentary depicted as a vulgar explanation, designed for people with no deeper understanding of Buddhism.51 (2.e) In the Yuan and Qing dynasties a new flavor was introduced, as both dynasties patronized schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The Yuan dynasty patronized the Sakya, and the Qing dynasty the Geluk school. In Tibetan Buddhism Mañjuśrī was considered a bodhisattva of great importance. So, as David M. Farquhar points out, both dynasties also shared the tradition of styling their emperors as incarnations of bodhisattva Mañjuśrī.52 The claim that the Yuan emperors were incarnations of Mañjuśrī is found primarily in Mongolian sources, and less often in Tibetan sources.53 The Qing emperors, however, were declared incarnations of Mañjuśrī by the authorities of the Tibetan Geluk 48 49 50 51 52 53

Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China, 224 f. R.W.L. Guisso, Wu Tse-t’ien and the Politics of Legitimation in T’ang China (Bellingham: Western Washington University, 1978), 36. Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China, 97. Ibid., 225–229. David M. Farquhar, “Emperor As Bodhisattva in the Governance of the Ch’ing Empire,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 38, no. 1 (1978): 5–34. Ibid., 11–14.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

14

Jülch

school. In 1640 the fifth Dalai Lama and his teacher, the first Panchen Lama, jointly sent a letter to Qing Taizong 清太宗 (r. 1626–1643), in which they addressed him as “Mañjuśrī-Great-Emperor.” The crucial step, however, was taken in 1653, when the fifth Dalai Lama, invited by Qing Shizu 清世祖 (r. 1643– 1661), travelled to Beijing and presented the emperor with a golden plate carrying an inscription that hailed him solemnly as an incarnation of Mañjuśrī.54 Under Qing Shengzu 清聖祖, the Kangxi emperor, (r. 1661–1722) and Qing Gaozong 清高宗, the Qianlong emperor, (r. 1735–1795) the cult of the Qing emperor as an incarnation of Mañjuśrī was cultivated even more emphatically.55 Both the Yuan emperors and the Qing emperors also gave expression to the cult of Mañjuśrī by paying homage to Mount Wutai 五臺山, which—based on a tradition from the Avataṃsaka sūtra—was seen as Mañjuśrī’s place of residence. Both Yuan and Qing emperors undertook many pilgrimages to the holy sites of Mañjuśrī on Mount Wutai.56 (2.f) It is however important to note that styling the ruler as an incarnation of Mañjuśrī is not the only type of Buddhism-based legitimation strategy we find in late imperial China. The empress dowager Cixi 慈禧, an important political leader during the late Qing, was styled as an incarnation of Guanyin 觀音, and she also used to dress up as Guanyin.57 Interestingly, she enjoyed having a popular string ballad (tanci, 彈詞) rendering the legend of Guanyin performed at her court theatre. The title of the piece is Da Xiangshan 大香山 (The Great Xiangshan), but it was also known as Guanyin you shi dian 觀音游 十殿 (Guanyin Touring the Ten Palaces).58 3

The Contribution of Buddhism to the Improvement of Social Life

Apart from ideologically legitimizing an emperor’s rule, the Buddhist saṃgha was also of use to the state through its charitable engagements. Within the doctrine of Mahāyāna Buddhism, charity originates from the concept of “dāna,” 54 55 56

57 58

Ibid., 19 f. Ibid., 6–9. For the Yuan emperors see: ibid. 15. For the Qing emperors see: ibid. 24. For further reading regarding the involvement of the Kangxi emperor with Mount Wutai and Mañjuśrī see: Nathalie Köhle, “Why did the Kangxi Emperor go to Wutai shan? Patronage, Pilgrimage, and the Place of Tibetan Buddhism at the Early Qing Court,” Late Imperial China 29, no. 1 (2008): 73–119. Yü Chün-fang, Kuan-yin: The Chinese Transformation of Avalokiteśvara (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001), 5. Ibid., 330. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

15

or generosity, the first of the “six pāramitās,” or six perfections. As, on the path of the bodhisattva, practitioners were expected to show compassion with sentient beings in need, charity was considered particularly important. The Foshuo zhude futian jing 佛說諸德福田經 (T 683) names seven actions monks could undertake in order to accumulate merit. Six of them are practices of charity: – “[Establishment of] fruit gardens, bathing tanks, and trees for refresh­­­ment” 園果、浴池、樹木清涼 (T 683, p. 777, b4) – “Donating medicine to rescue the sick” 常施醫藥，療救眾病 (T 683, p. 777, b4–5) – “Construction of sturdy boats to ferry people” 作牢堅船，濟度人民 (T 683, p. 777, b5) – “Construction of bridges, so that elderly people could cross” 安設橋梁，過度羸弱 (T 683, p. 777, b6) – “Digging wells along roads, so that thirsty [travelers] get to drink” 近道作井，渴乏得飲 (T 683, p. 777, b6–7) – “Construction of toilet facilities as places offered for the convenience [of the public]” 造作圊廁，施便利處 (T 683, p. 777, b7)59 As this shows, Buddhist charity was practiced in ways which supported the state in its responsibility for the welfare of its subjects. As Jacques Gernet demonstrates, many of the biographies seen in the Gaoseng zhuan also mention that monks practiced charity by giving their personal belongings to the poor.60 This too could be seen as an engagement for public welfare, augmenting the social balance in the society.

Bibliography



Primary Sources

Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2103). Hongming ji 弘明集. Sengyou 僧祐 (T 2102). Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi 集沙門不應拜俗等事. Yancong 彥悰 (T 2108). Quan Tangwen 全唐文. Dong Gao 董誥 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001). Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集. Song Minqiu 宋敏求 (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1959). 59 60

Kenneth Ch’en, The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973], 296 Jacques Gernet, Buddhism in Chinese Society, 219 f. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

16

Jülch

Secondary Sources

Chan, Hok-lam. “The ‘Song’ Dynasty Legacy: Symbolism and Legitimation from Han Liner to Zhu Yuanzhang of the Ming Dynasty,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 68, no. 1 (2008): 91–133. Chen, Jinhua. “Sarira and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, no. 1–2 (2002): 33–150. Ch’en, Kenneth. “On Some Factors Responsible for the Anti-Buddhist Persecution under the Pei-Ch’ao,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (1954): 261–274. Ch’en, Kenneth. “The Economic Background of the Hui-Ch’ang Suppression of Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 19 (1956): 67–105. Ch’en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964). Ch’en, Kenneth. The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973). Deeg, Max. “Zwischen Spannung und Harmonie: Das Problem von Chronologie und Synchronologie in der frühen chinesischen buddhistischen Historiographie,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010): 96–139. Farquhar, David M. “Emperor As Bodhisattva in the Governance of the Ch’ing Empire,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 38, no. 1 (1978): 5–34. Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Dunhuang Document S. 6502 Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 2005). Gernet, Jacques. Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries, trans. Franciscus Verellen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995). Guisso, R.W.L. Wu Tse-t’ien and the Politics of Legitimation in T’ang China (Bellingham: Western Washington University, 1978). Haar, Barend ter. The White Lotus Teachings in Chinese Religious History (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999). Hurvitz, Leon. “‘Render unto Cesar’ in Early Chinese Buddhism: Huiyuan’s Treatise on the Exemption of the Buddhist Clergy from the Requirements of Civil Etiquette,” in Liebenthal Festschrift, ed. Kshitis Roy (Santiniketan: Visvabharati, 1975): 80–114. Jaini, Padmanabh S. “Stages in the Bodhisattva career of the Tathāgata Maitreya,” in Maitreya, the future Buddha, ed. Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988): 54–90. Jansen, Thomas. “Der chinesische Kaiser Liang Wudi (reg. 502–549) und der Buddhismus,” in Zwischen Säkularismus und Hierokratie: Studien zum Verhältnis von Religion und

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Introduction

17

Staat in Süd- und Ostasien, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2001): 89–118. Jülch, Thomas. “On Whether or Not Buddhist Monks Should Bow to the Emperor: Yancong’s Treatise on the Fields of Blessedness,” Monumenta Serica 60 (2012): 1–43. Köhle, Nathalie. “Why did the Kangxi Emperor go to Wutai shan? Patronage, Pilgrimage, and the Place of Tibetan Buddhism at the Early Qing Court,” Late Imperial China 29, no. 1 (2008): 73–119. Ku, Cathy Cheng-mei. “The Buddharāja image of Emperor Wu of Liang,” in Philosophy and Religion in Early Medieval China, ed. Alan K.L. Chan (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010): 265–290. Nattier, Jan. “The Meanings of the Maitreya Myth,” in Maitreya, the future Buddha, ed. Alan Sponberg and Helen Hardacre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988): 23–47. Overmyer, Daniel L. “Folk-Buddhist Religion: Creation and Eschatology in Medieval China” History of Religions 12, no. 1 (1972): 42–70. Palumbo, Antonello. “Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China,” in Zhonggu shidai de liyi, zongjiao yu zhidu 中古時代的禮儀，宗教与制度, ed. Yu Xin 余欣 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2012): 287–338. Reinders, Eric. Buddhist and Christian Responses to the Kowtow Problem in China (London: Bloomsbury, 2015). Strong, John S. The Legend of King Aśoka. A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983). Tonami, Mamoru. “Policy towards the Buddhist Church in the Reign of T’ang Hsüantsung,” Acta Asiatica 55 (1988): 27–47. Tsukamoto, Zenryū. Hoku chō bukkyō shi kenkyū 北朝佛教史研究 (Tōkyō: Daitō shuppansha 大東出版社, 1974). Wright, Arthur F. “The Formation of Sui Ideology, 581–604,” in Chinese Thought and Institutions, ed. John K. Fairbank (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957): 71–104. Rhie, Marylin Martin. Early Buddhist Art of China & Central Asia, vol. 3 (Leiden: Brill, 2010). Yan, Shangwen 顔尚文. Liang Wudi 梁武帝 (Taibei: Dongda tushu gongsi 東大圖書公 司, 2000). Yü, Chün-fang. Kuan-yin: The Chinese Transformation of Avalokiteśvara (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001). Zürcher, Erik. “‘Prince Moonlight:’ Messianism and Eschatology in Early Medieval Chinese Buddhism,” T’oung Pao 68 (1982): 1–75. Zürcher, Erik. “Tidings from the South: Chinese Court Buddhism and Overseas Relations in the Fifth Century AD,” in A Life Journey to the East: Sinological Studies in Memory of Giuliano Bertuccioli (1923–2001), ed. Antonino Forte (Kyoto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’ Asia Orientale, 2002): 21–43.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

18

Jülch

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Buddhist Apologetic Mission of the Early Tang Monk Falin Thomas Jülch The situation of Buddhism in medieval China can in many ways be compared to the situation of early Christianity in the Roman Empire. In medieval China, Buddhism was seen as an alien religion irreconcilable with the Chinese high culture. Similarly, in the Roman Empire, early Christianity was considered a cult originating from one of the empire’s outer districts and being in opposition to the traditional Roman way of life. For these reasons and being in the signified contexts, both religions developed an apologetic literature in order to express their claims to the state. In both cases we also find that apologetic thought was directly addressed to the emperor. In early Christianity, Quadratus and Aristides composed apologies that were addressed to Emperor Hadrian (r. 117–138 AD), Justin Martyr addressed an apology to Emperor Antoninus Pius (r. 138–161 AD), and Melito addressed one to Emperor Marcus Aurelius (r. 161– 180 AD). Paul L. Maier summarizes the situation of the early Christian apologists in the following words: “It was a … warfare pursued boldly by an inspired few who did not scruple to address their defenses of Christianity to no less than the Roman emperors themselves. Known as the early apologists …, intellectuals such as Quadratus, Aristides, Justin, and Melito—at great personal risk— reminded emperors of how their predecessors had modified the previous governmental policy of hunting out Christians.”1 This description is highly reminiscent of the situation of Buddhist apologetic thought in medieval China, and especially of the outstanding Buddhist apologist Falin 法琳 (572–640), to whom the present article is dedicated. Falin addressed apologetic writings to various members of the imperial family of the early Tang dynasty, and in two audiences he also had occasion to express his apologetic ideas directly to the emperor. “Great personal risk” was also involved in his case, because as we will see in the end he was banished for his efforts. The list of parallels goes on: Firstly we observe that both early Christian apologetic thought in the Roman Empire and Buddhist apologetic thought in medieval China attempted to ­present their respective religion as being in tune with the respective state’s 1 Paul L. Maier, Eusebius: The Church History (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel, 2007), 147.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_003

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

19

traditional culture. For example the apology addressed to Antoninus Pius by Justin Martyr seeks to demonstrate that Christianity had much in common with heathen Platonism.2 Similarly, as we will see, Falin attempted to demonstrate that Buddhism was in tune with Confucianism. Secondly, early Christian apologetic thought in the Roman Empire and medieval Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought both had to present their religion as being superior to rivaling religious traditions. Early Christian apologists needed to present Christianity as being superior to Judaism and heathen polytheism. For example, the first part of the apology that Aristides addressed to Hadrian is famous for its attack on polytheism.3 And Justin Martyr, in his Pros Tryphōna Iudaion Dialogos (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew), argues that Christianity is superior to Judaism.4 Similarly, in the Buddhist apologetic literature of medieval China much space is devoted to demonstrating the superiority of Buddhism to the rivaling Chinese religion of Daoism. Thirdly, it should be taken into account that both in early Christianity and in medieval Chinese Buddhism the dialogue was employed as a presentation style for apologetic writings. In his study of Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Ben Zion Bokser explains that, for the purposes of apologetic writing, dialogues were formulated as taking place between a “discussion leader” representing the religion to be defended, and a supporter of a rivaling religion, whose views would be disproved in the course of the confrontation.5 As Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann points out, the genre of the anti-jewish dialogue was to have a long history in Christian apologetic literature.6 Also in

2 Richard A. Norris, “The Apologists,” in The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, ed. Frances Young (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 38 f. 3 Richard A. Norris, “The Apologists,” 37. 4 Richard A. Norris, “The Apologists,” 39 f. 5 Bokser writes: “The discussion leader knows the truth from the start, but he uses the conversational method to bring his participant in the conversation to a concurrence with his views. This is the typical character of the Platonic dialogues. This is also the character of the dialogue with Trypho. … At the conclusion of the dialogue Trypho does not announce his full conversion to Christianity, but he has clearly been impressed, and one has the feeling that the final step is likely to follow” (Ben Zion Bokser, “Justin Martyr and the Jews,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 64, no. 2 [1973], 98). 6 Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann writes: “Anknüpfend an die griechischen antijüdischen Gespräche der Spätantike, setzt die byzantinische Literatur diese Textsorte fort. Zwischen dem 5. und 15. Jahrhundert entstanden 37 antijüdische Dialoge im Ostreich” (Carmen Cardelle de Hartmann, Lateinische Dialoge 1200–1400: literaturhistorische Studie und Repertorium [Leiden: Brill, 2007], 108).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

20

Jülch

medieval Chinese Buddhist apologetic literature, we observe that apologetic treatises were frequently composed in dialogic shape.7 Fourthly, it is interesting to note that the first Christian church historian, Eusebius of Caesarea (260/64–339/340), in his Ekklesiastices Historias (Church History) revisits the earlier apologists in a particularly elaborate and friendly style.8 He obviously does so in order to make their apologetic voices stronger. For the same purpose, Falin is emphatically glorified in various hagiographic sources, mostly authored by monks who were his younger contemporaries. As these hagiographic sources are designed to enhance Falin’s apologetic legacy, the present study seeks to explore Falin’s apologetic work together with the enhancements it receives in the hagiographic sources.9 Falinʼs own apologetic writings are the treatises of Poxie lun 破邪論 (T 2109) and Bianzheng lun 辯正 論 (T 2110). The most important hagiographic sources are: (1) Falinʼs independent biography, the Tang hufa shamen Falin biezhuan 唐護法沙門法琳別傳 (T 2051, hereafter: Falin biezhuan); (2) Falinʼs biography in Xu Gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 (T 2060), juan 24; (3) the court debates of Ji guijin fodao lunheng 集 古今佛道論衡 (T 2104, hereafter: Fodao lunheng), juan 3, that reveal details about the life of Falin.10 The relevance of the hagiographic sources in this respect becomes manifest in three different observations. Firstly, the hagiographic sources provide background stories to various aspects of Falinʼs apologetic writing. Secondly, the 7

8 9 10

In the present article I will not be able to devote very much space to the discussion of this matter, as I intend to concentrate on the ideological rather than on the philological aspects of Falin’s work. I will however briefly refer to the role the dialogic presentation style plays in Falin’s treatises. Paul L. Maier, Eusebius: The Church History—on Quadratus, see: p. 110 f., 119; on Aristides, see: p. 119; on Justin, see: p. 62 f., 123 f., 126 ff., 135–138, 165; on Melito, see: p. 142–145; 179. Buddhist sources are in the present article quoted on the basis of the Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 正新修大藏經, which is hereafter referred to in abbreviation as T. The court debates included here usually present a dispute between a Buddhist monk and a Daoist opponent, with the Buddhist monk presented as the glorious victor. Such accounts cannot be called biographies and hence are not hagiographies, as they only describe a small part of the life of the relevant monk. However, they are still of biographic and hagiographic relevance, as they do describe an achievement of great importance to the relevant monk’s life. For this reason, the court debates also have to be seen as hagiographic sources. The argument that works that cannot be called hagiographies can still be of hagiographic value was previously introduced by Christoph Kleine (Christoph Kleine, “Geschichte und Geschichten im ostasiatischen Buddhismus: Hagiographie zwischen Historiographie und Erbauung,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk [Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010], 11 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

21

hagiographic sources provide additional apologetic speeches ascribed to Falin and not found in Poxie lun or Bianzheng lun. Thirdly, the hagiographic sources seek to enhance the authority ascribed to Falinʼs apologetic diction by glorifying him as a “bodhisattva of apologetic thought.”11 The understanding that Falinʼs apologetic scriptures and the hagiographic sources referring to Falin both contribute to an enhanced picture of Falinʼs apologetic mission was first introduced in my Falin monograph,12 which also includes an extensive translation section, offering (1) a complete translation of the complete Poxie lun,13 (2) translations of the parts of the Bianzheng lun most relevant in terms of apologetic argumentation,14 as well as (3) translations of all the afore-mentioned hagiographic sources.15 Drawing on this previous work, the present article provides an account of both the life and thought of Falin. The article is divided into four chapters. The first chapter introduces the political context needed to understand Falin’s Buddhist apologetic mission. The second chapter gives an account of Falinʼs life history as presented in the hagiographic sources. The third chapter, based on both Falinʼs apologetic scriptures and the further apologetic speeches rendered in the hagiographic sources, presents the main arguments of Falin’s apologetic work, and also demonstrates in how far these arguments were adopted from previous apologetic thought. The fourth chapter offers a brief outview on the extent to which the apologetic traditions united in Falin were still employed in the transformed ideological climate of the Song dynasty. I

The Political Setting for Buddhist Apologetic Writing in the Early Tang

During the early Tang dynasty, the situation for Buddhism was particularly difficult. In medieval China, imperial dynasties generally needed religion to provide spiritual legitimation for their rule. This legitimation could be provided by either Buddhism or Daoism. There had been a number of monarchs in medieval China who had their rule legitimized by Buddhism. Most famous 11

12 13 14 15

Both the Falin biezhuan and the Fodao lunheng contain explicit expressions to be translated as such. In Falin biezhuan, juan 1, Falin is called “hufa pusa” 護法菩薩 (T 2051, p. 201, c27), and in Fodao lunheng, juan 3, “hufa zhi kaishi” 護法之開士 (T 2104, p. 381, a13). Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik: die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin, 3 vols. (München: Utz, 2014). Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 189–374. Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 1–396. Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 1–270.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

22

Jülch

among them were Liang Wudi 梁武帝 (r.: 502–549), Sui Wendi 隋文帝 (r.: 581– 604), and Wu Zetian 吳則天 (r.: 684–705).16 The early Tang emperors, however, chose Daoism as the basis for their legitimation ideology. This may have been a result of their need to dissociate themselves from the preceding Sui dynasty, which had legitimized its rule in terms of a Buddhism-based system. But apart from that, Daoism also suited the imperial house of the Tang dynasty particularly well, as the Tang imperial family happened to have the same surname as Li Er 李耳, who, in Shiji, juan 63, is identified as Laozi.17 During the Sui dynasty there was a popular prophecy saying that at some point China would find itself in political turmoil, and a descendant of Laozi would emerge to save the country. The decline of the Sui was accompanied by political turmoil, and when the Tang founder Li Yuan 李淵 (the later Tang Gaozu 唐高祖) was campaigning against the Sui, he was, because of his surname, hailed as the expected descendant of Laozi.18 As a result of this propaganda instituted by Wang Yuanzhi 王遠 知 (528–635),19 the patriarch of the Daoist Shangqing 上清 order, Laozi was later declared the imperial ancestor of the Tang dynasty, and Daoism was embraced as the state religion. Because the Daoist clergy had supported the Tang dynasty in its rise to power, certain Daoist priests were given influential positions at the early Tang court. For example, the Daoist priest Fu Yi 傅奕 (555–639)20 was assigned the position of Taishi ling 太史令 (Grand Astrologer) by the first emperor Tang Gaozu (r. 618–627). He used his influence at court in order to agitate against Buddhism. According to Fozu tongji 佛祖統紀, juan 39, he submitted seven petitions to the throne which served this purpose.21 However, only three of them survive.22 One of the surviving petitions, submitted in 621, is entitled “Eleven theses requesting the reduction of [Buddhist] monasteries and pagodas, of [Buddhist] monks and nuns, in order to benefit the state and to help the

16 17 18 19 20

21 22

On this matter see the introduction to the present volume. Sima Qian 司馬遷, Shiji 史記 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959), vol. 7, 2139. Barbara Hendrischke, “Der Taoismus in der Tang-Zeit,” minima sinica (1993), 113 f. On Wang Yuanzhi, see: Yoshikawa Tadao 吉川忠夫, “Ō Genshi kō” 王遠知考, Tōhō gakuhō 東方學報 62 (1990): 69–98. On Fu Yi, see: Senshū Ogasawara 小笠原宣秀, “Tō no haibutsuronsha Fu Eki ni tsuite” 唐の排佛論者傅奕について, Shina Bukkyōshigaku 支那佛教史學 1 (1937): 84–93; Arthur F. Wright, “Fu I and the Rejection of Buddhism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 12, no. 1 (1951): 33–47. T 2035, p. 362, c18 (Jan Yün-hua, A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 581–960 ad: Translations from Monk Chih-p’an’s Fo-tsu T’ung-chi [Santiniketan: Visva-Bharati, 1966], 22). Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 61 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

23

people” 減省寺塔僧尼益國利民事十一條 (hereafter: Eleven theses).23 The Eleven theses point to disadvantages the Chinese state and the Chinese society experienced due to the presence of Buddhism. The contents do not need to be discussed in detail here, as they have been discussed and contextualized elaborately by Arthur F. Wright.24 How far Fu Yiʼs agitation influenced Tang Gaozu is hard to say. But Tang Gaozu did pursue a profoundly anti-Buddhist course. When in 625 he participated in the Shidian 釋奠 rite,25 a debate was held between representatives of the three teachings (Daoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism). As is known from Fodao lunheng, juan 3, Tang Gaozu at the beginning of the debate decreed that the representatives of Daoism were to be seated in the highest position, the representatives of Confucianism in the intermediate position, and the representatives of Buddhism in the lowest position. The reason the emperor gave was that Buddhism was not originally a Chinese teaching, and would therefore in its relationship to Daoism and Confucianism have to be treated in terms of the “rites for guests” 客禮.26 Although Tang Gaozu supported an anti-Buddhist religious policy, there were also supporters of Buddhism within his government. Subsequent to the Shidian debate, tensions resulting from the discrepancies between the attitudes represented at court came to the fore. In particular the chancellor, Xiao Yu 蕭瑀 (575–648), defended Buddhism. According to Fozu tongji, juan 39, Xiao Yu, in reaction to Fu Yiʼs seventh petition (dated 626), accused Fu Yi of having slandered a “shengren” 聖人 (i.e. a sage) through his attacks on the Buddha.27 When Tang Gaozu subsequently asked his ministers what they thought about Fu Yi, Pei Ji 裴寂 (570–629) spoke up, saying that in spite of Fu Yiʼs agitation Buddhism was important for Tang Gaozuʼs reign. This is recorded in both Fozu tongji, juan 39,28 and Falin biezhuan, juan 1.29 Despite these counsels, Tang Gaozu took drastic action against Buddhism. In 626 he issued his Shatai fodao zhao 沙汰佛道詔 (Edict for the purification of Buddhism and Daoism), which is preserved in Jiu Tangshu, juan 1,30 and in 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

The Eleven theses are preserved in Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集, T 2103, juan 7, p. 134, a8. Arthur F. Wright, “Fu I and the Rejection of Buddhism,” 40–45. I.e. a sacrificial ritual of Confucianism, see: David McMullen, State and Scholars in T’ang China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 32. T 2104, p. 381, a22–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 220 f.). T 2035, p. 362, c20–26 (Jan Yün-hua, A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 22). T 2035, p. 362, c26–p. 363, a1 (Jan Yün-hua, A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 22). T 2051, p. 201, a17–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 16 f.). Liu Xu 劉昫, Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975), vol. 1, 16 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

24

Jülch

Quan Tangwen, juan 3.31 The title of the edict makes one think it will criticize Buddhism and Daoism equally, but in fact it criticizes almost exclusively the Buddhist monks. A count of the characters shows that the edict spends 25 times as much space criticizing Buddhism as it does criticizing Daoism. Towards the end of the edict, the emperor decrees that the number of both Buddhist and Daoist monasteries was to be reduced. In the capital, three Buddhist and two Daoist monasteries were allowed to remain, while in each prefecture only one Buddhist and one Daoist monastery was allowed to remain. If this edict would have been fully implemented—which, as we will see, did not happen—Buddhism would have been impaired much more seriously than Daoism. In the capital the Buddhist saṃgha would have been reduced to onefortieth and the Daoist community to one-fifth of its former size.32 Hence it is clear that the edict basically had an anti-Buddhist character. Li Shimin 李世民 (599–649), the Prince of Qin 秦王, one of the three sons Tang Gaozu had with his main wife Taimu 太穆, used the struggles between pro-Buddhist and anti-Buddhist positions in his fatherʼs government for his own purposes. Tang Gaozu had clearly positioned himself against Buddhism, and the two other sons he had with his main wife, i.e. the crown prince, Li Jiancheng 李建成 (589–626),33 and the Prince of Qi 齊王, Li Yuanji 李元吉 (603–626),34 were both loyal to their father. Li Shimin thus saw a chance to install himself as emperor by presenting himself as leader of a pro-Buddhist faction.35 This faction became a strong force, as it had the support of many sympathizers of Buddhism among the courtiers. When Tang Gaozu issued the Shatai fodao zhao, Li Shimin felt that his time had come. On the third day of the sixth month of the ninth year of the Wude period (626), Li Shimin, together with twelve of his closest followers, ambushed and killed his two brothers at the Xuanwumen 玄武門, a gate in the Northern palace wall.36 With that, Li 31 32 33

34 35 36

Dong Gao 董誥, Quan Tangwen 全唐文 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001), vol. 1, 38. Stanley Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 8 f. Biographies of Li Jiancheng are found in Jiu Tangshu, juan 64 (Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu, vol. 7, 2414–2419), and Xin Tangshu, juan 79 (Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, Xin Tangshu 新唐書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975), vol. 11, 3540–3545). Biographies of Li Yuanji are found in Jiu Tangshu, juan 64 (Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu, vol. 7, 2420–2423), and Xin Tangshu, juan 79 (Ouyang Xiu, Xin Tangshu, vol. 11, 3545–3547). Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” in Perspectives on the T’ang, ed. Arthur Wright and Denis Twitchett (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), 246. For research regarding the Xuanwumen incident, see: Woodbridge Bingham, “Li Shihmin’s Coup in AD 626. II: Action at the Hsüan-wu Gate,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 70, no. 4 (1950): 259–271; Andrew Eisenberg, “Kingship, Power and the Hsüan-wu

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

25

Shimin became the new crown prince, as he was the only surviving son acceptable for succession. After the Xuanwumen incident, the power of Li Shimin was such, that he was able to take control over the government, forcing his father to take back the Shatai fodao zhao.37 In a matter of months, he forced his father to abdicate, and installed himself as the second Tang emperor, Tang Taizong 唐太宗 (r. 627–650).38 While as prince Li Shimin needed the support of the pro-Buddhist courtiers, as emperor he had different interests. As emperor, Tang Taizongʼs main priority in religious politics was to ensure that the flourishing Buddhist saṃgha would not interfere with the interests of the state. Because Tang Taizongʼs ambiguous relationship to Buddhism has been elaborately discussed in research, I need not go into too much detail here.39 One matter of relevance to the present article, however, is the fact that Tang Taizong in 637 issued an edict declaring that Daoist priests henceforth were to rank above Buddhist monks, as Laozi was the imperial ancestor of the Tang dynasty.40 As we will see, Falin was involved in the protests against this edict, which marked the beginning of his downfall. The subsequent chapter will show how—according to the available sources, and in the context of the political situation briefly summarized above—Falin’s Buddhist apologetic mission arose.

37 38

39

40

Men Incident of the T’ang,” T’oung Pao 80 (1994): 223–259. An elaborate description of the incident is found in Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑑, juan 191 (Sima Guang 司馬光, Zizhi tongjian [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997], vol. 2, 6010 f.). It has been translated by Jack W. Chen (Jack W. Chen, The Poetics of Sovereignty: On Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010], 24 f.). Stanley Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang, 11. Howard J. Wechsler, “The Founding of the T’ang Dynasty: Kao-tsu (reign 618–26),” in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 3, ed. Denis Twitchett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 186. Weinstein convincingly demonstrates that Li Shimin may have been enthusiastic about Buddhism when it served his interests in the factional confrontation with his brothers, but as emperor patronized Buddhism hardly beyond what he considered useful in stabilizing his power, and in fact carried out a number of measures that severely restricted the saṃgha (Stanley Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang, 11–15). The edict is rendered in Fodao lunheng, juan 3: T 2104, p. 382, b29-c15 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhi­sattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 233 f.), and it is also found in Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔 令集, juan 113 (Song Minqiu 宋敏求, Tang da zhaoling ji [Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1959], 586 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

26 II

Jülch

Falinʼs Life History as Presented in the Hagiographic Sources

In establishing a history of Falinʼs life, it is essential to note that all sources substantially providing relevant information are of hagiographic nature. Hagiographic sources have a strong interest in glorifying the person they are referring to. As John Kieschnick in his book The Eminent Monk points out, one of the main functions of Buddhist hagiographic writing was to glorify lives and deeds of Buddhist monks to such a degree that the accounts would serve to impress the ruler, to win the ruler’s sympathy for Buddhism, and hence to establish Buddhism as a state religion for the Chinese empire.41 For this reason, the life history that can be developed from the hagiographic sources might, in certain respects, diverge from the factual life of Falin. However, to the best of my knowledge, the only non-hagiographic source giving an account of Falinʼs life is the Falin biography in Taiping guangji 太平廣記, juan 91.42 I translated this short account in my Falin monograph.43 It is a typical zhiguai 志怪 story, portraying Falin in a way that indeed has little in common with the accounts given in the hagiographic sources. However it does not provide enough concrete information to serve as a useful corrective. Due to the scarcity of non-hagiographic sources, it would probably be difficult if not impossible to establish a life history of Falin entirely based on historical facts. But this would not be an objective for the present study anyway. The subsequent investigation seeks to reveal Falin’s life history as it is presented to us in the hagiographic sources. The image of Falin emerging from these texts is how Falin’s contemporaries in the saṃgha chose to present Falin to us. This is how Falin and his apologetic mission were styled to reach the greatest possible effect in the ongoing struggles for the survival of Buddhism in China. As Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer explains, in the context of religious controversies in medieval China all sides attempted to establish their own truth.44 It is this Chinese Buddhist truth of Falin’s life which the subsequent investigation seeks to reveal. I will for this purpose subsequently evaluate the hagiographic sources, also taking into account where and how they contradict each other.

41 42 43 44

John Kieschnick, The Eminent Monk: Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese Hagiography (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997), 7. Li Fang 李昉, Taiping guangji 太平廣記 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1986), vol. 2, 604. Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol 1, 184 f. Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, “Why has the Question of Truth Remained an Open Question Throughout Chinese History?” in Historical Truth, Historical Criticism and Ideology, ed. Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 123 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

27

With regard to Falinʼs youth, the accounts given in the Falin beizhuan and in Falinʼs biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan are largely in agreement: Falinʼs worldly surname was Chen 陳; his family originated from Yingchuan 頴川; one of his ancestors had moved to Xiangyang 襄陽, as he was offered an official position there, so that Falin also grew up in Xiangyang.45 Having entered the saṃgha, Falin went to Jinling 金陵 (i.e. modern Nanjing) and Ying in Chu 楚郢 for studies,46 which probably means that Falin attended lectures given by the great master Zhiyi 智顗 (538–597) in both places. In 586, the ruler of the state of Chen invited Zhiyi to his capital of Jinling, where Zhiyi gave lectures regarding the Da zhidu lun 大智度論 (T 1509) and the Renwang bore poluomi jing 仁王般若波羅蜜經 (T 245).47 As is known from Zhiyi’s biography Sui Tiantai Zhizhe dashi biezhuan 隋天台智者大師別傳 (T 2050)48 and from Fozu tongji, juan 39,49 Zhiyi subsequently moved to the Yuquan si 玉泉寺 in Jingzhou 荊州 (a place in the environs of the ancient site of Ying in Chu),50 where he preached the Fahua xuanyi 法華玄義 (T 1716) and the Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀 (T 1911).51 Masumi Shōno has shown that—in all likelihood—Falin 45

46

47

48 49 50

51

Falin biezhuan, juan 1: T 2051, p. 198, b18–19 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 1); Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24: T 2060, p. 636, b23–24 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 167). Xiangyang is close to Yingchuan. Both are situated in present-day Hebei. Falin biezhuan, juan 1: T 2051, p. 198, b20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 1); Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24: T 2060, p. 636, b24–25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik. vol. 3, 167) Koichi Shinohara, “Guanding’s Biography of Zhiyi, the Fourth Patriarch of the Tiantai Tradition,” in Speaking of Monks: Religious Biography in India and China, ed. Phyllis E. Granoff (Oakville, Ontario: Mosaic, 1992), 124. T 2050, p. 195, a26. T 2035, p. 360, a23–25, b22–25, c1–2, c5–6. Ying in Chu had, in 689 BC, become the capital of the state of Chu. The precise location of the site has long been subject to debate. Through recent archaeological findings, the site has however been localized on the Southwestern tip of Lake Chang 長湖 in Hubei (Thomas Höllmann, Jinan: Die Chu-Hauptstadt Ying im China der Späteren Zhou-Zeit [München: Beck, 1986], 9 f.). This is where we also find Jingzhou, where the Yuquan si, in which Zhiyi gave his lectures, was located. The Fahua xuanyi (The Profound Meaning of the Lotus sūtra) and the Mohe zhiguan (The Great Calming and Contemplation) are two of Zhiyi’s most important works. They are based on Zhiyi’s lectures, and were written down by Zhiyi’s main student Guanding 灌頂 (561–632). Regarding the Fahua xuanyi, see: Shen Haiyan, The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra: T’ien-t’ai Philosophy of Buddhism (New Delhi: Originals, 2005). Regarding the Mohe zhiguan, see: Neal Donner and Daniel B. Stevenson, The Great Calming and Contemplation: A Study and Annotated Translation of the First Chapter of Chih-i’s Mo-ho chih-kuan (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1993).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

28

Jülch

was present in both places to attend Zhiyiʼs lectures.52 After Zhiyi had stopped giving lectures in the Yuquan si, Falin withdrew into the nearby Guigu cave 鬼 谷洞 on Mount Qingxi 青溪山,53 where he studied both the Buddhist sūtras and the Confucian classics (the Xu Gaoseng zhuan says that he studied the Buddhist sūtras during the day, and the Confucian classics during the night).54 According to the Falin biezhuan, Falin described his life on Mount Qingxi in an account entitled Qingxi shan ji 青溪山記, a now lost text which, as the Falin biezhuan reports, had a length of “more than 8,000 words.”55 There is no mention of this text in the Falin biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan. Both the Falin biezhuan and the Falin biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan record that Falin, during the turmoil at the end of the Sui dynasty, traveled in the disguise of a Daoist priest, visiting various Daoist monasteries. The sources emphasize that during these visits Falin had ample opportunity to familiarize himself with the teachings of religious Daoism, and saw that they had no authentic background and did not qualify as an effective system of spirituality.56 The Falin biezhuan and the Falin biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan do not fully agree as far as the names of the places Falin visited on these travels are concerned: In the Xu Gaoseng zhuan we find the place names of the Eight Shui 八水 57 and the Three Qin 三秦 58 introduced parallel to each other.59 In the Falin biezhuan however we do not find the Three Qin but the Three Yang

52 53 54

55 56

57

58

59

Masumi Shōno 莊野真澄, “Tō shamon Hōrin den ni tsuite” 唐沙門法琳傳について, Shien 史淵 14 (1936), 48 ff; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 46 f. Masumi Shōno, “Tō shamon Hōrin den ni tsuite,” 49. Falin biezhuan, juan 1: T 2051, p. 198, b20–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 1 f.); Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24: T 2060, p. 636, b27 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 167). T 2051, juan 1, p. 198, b27 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 3). Falin biezhuan, juan 1: T 2051, p. 198, c3–8 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 3 f.); Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24: T 2060, p. 636, c2–6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 168 f.). The term Eight Shui 八水 refers to the main rivers on the territory of present-day Shaanxi (Wei Songshan 魏嵩山, ed. Zhongguo lishi diming da cidian 中國歷史地名大辭典 [Guangzhou: Guangdong jiaoyu chubanshe 廣東教育出版社, 1995], 10). As is known from Shiji, juan 6, the term of the “Three Qin” originally referred to three generals of the Qin dynasty. Their names were Zhang Han 章邯, Sima Xin 司馬欣, and Dong Yi 董翳. When Xiang Yu 項羽 was marching up to the capital of Qin, each of them was charged with the defense of one particular area around the capital (Sima Qian, Shiji, vol. 1, 270). On this basis the term of the Three Qin later on became a geographical designation for the area around Chang’an. T 2060, juan 24, p. 636, c1 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 168).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

29

三陽 60 put parallel to the Eight Shui.61 Since the Eight Shui and the Three Qin—as well as other places Falin visited on his travels62—are all locatable around the Chinese capital of Chang’an, while the Three Yang are situated in a completely different area, the “Three Yang” would appear to be a miswriting of the “Three Qin” here. Falinʼs studies in the Guigu cave and the time he spent in Daoist monasteries crucially prepared the ground for his later activity as a Buddhist apologist. In these stages of his life, Falin acquired profound knowledge of the teachings of both Confucianism and Daoism, which later on, within his Buddhist apologetic writing, allowed him to employ quotations from Confucian and Daoist classics in order to disprove Confucian and Daoist arguments brought forward by the anti-Buddhist agitators attacking the saṃgha. In the year 618, we are told, Falin ended his travels, returned into the Buddhist saṃgha, and took residence in the Jifa si 濟法寺 in Changʼan.63 During the time in which Falin resided in the Jifa si, the Buddhist saṃgha was confronted with the Eleven theses submitted by Fu Yi in 621. Tang Gaozu passed on the Eleven theses to the saṃgha, asking for justification. Several treatises were written in reply. The monk Minggai 明槩 replied with a treatise entitled Juedui Fu Yi fei foseng shi 決對傅奕廢佛僧事.64 The official Li Shizheng 李師政 replied with a treatise entitled Neide lun 內德論.65 The Falin biezhuan names three works written in reply to Fu Yi: the Neide lun by Li Shizheng, the Zhengxie lun 正邪論 by the same author, and the Poxie lun 破邪論 by a monk named Puying 普應.66 The Zhengxie lun by Li Shizheng and the Poxie lun by Puying are lost. As we learn from the Falin biezhuan, Falin was dissatisfied with these expressions of apologetic thought, as they base their counter-argumentation on Buddhist sources. According to the Falin biezhuan, Falin argued that Fu Yi, as an opponent of Buddhism, would generally distrust Buddhist sources, so that an argumentation based on Buddhist sources could not convince or disprove him. It is related that Falin, for this reason, took it upon himself to write a rejoinder designed to disprove Fu Yi on the basis of Confucian and Daoist 60

61 62 63 64 65 66

The term Three Yang 三陽 refers to three districts distant from Chang’an. These are the districts of Shanyang 山陽 in present-day Jiangsu, and Dongyang 東陽 and Jiyang 暨陽 in present-day Zhejiang (Wei Songshan, Zhongguo lishi diming da cidian, 19). T 2051, juan 1, p. 198, c1 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 3). The other places are named in the same passage of Falin biezhuan, juan 1 (T 2051, p. 198, c1; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 3). T 2060, juan 24, p. 636, c12–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 169). It is preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 12. It is preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 14. T 2051, juan 1, p. 199, a20–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 9 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

30

Jülch

sources which Fu Yi would have to respect.67 As Puying’s treatise before, Falin’s work is entitled Poxie lun. Wherever this title hereafter appears in the present article, it refers to Falinʼs and not to Puyingʼs treatise. The Poxie lun—or, to be more precise, the relevant parts of the Poxie lun—were submitted to Li Shimin and probably also to Li Jiancheng by Falin’s patron, the highranking official Du Ruhui 杜如晦 (585–630).68 Falin’s other patron, the renowned calligrapher Yu Shinan 虞世南 (558–638),69 wrote a laudatory foreword and the commentary to the Poxie lun.70 The Poxie lun, as received today, is a work consisting of six independent texts. The texts are: (A) the foreword by Yu Shinan;71 (B) a petition addressed to the “crown prince” 儲后;72 (C) an anti-Buddhist text by Fu Yi,73 which was probably written as a preface to the Eleven theses, as it closes by saying that the 67 68

69

70

71 72 73

T 2051, juan 1, p. 199, a23–29 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 10). Biographies of Du Ruhui are found in Jiu Tangshu, juan 66 (Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu, vol. 7, 2467–2473) and in Xin Tangshu, juan 96 (Ouyang Xiu, Xin Tangshu, vol. 12, 3858–3866). In the times of the factional fight between Li Shimin and his brothers, Du Ruhui belonged to the faction of Li Shimin, who promoted him to a highranking position when he became emperor as Tang Taizong. (In fact Du Ruhui was even involved in the assassination of Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji at the Xuanwumen, see: Howard J. Wechsler, “The founding of the T’ang dynasty: Kao-tsu,” 185.) Being a Buddhist supporter, Du Ruhui suited the faction of Li Shimin, which—as we have seen before—attempted to win public support by protecting the Buddhist saṃgha. As a Buddhist supporter, Du Ruhui also became a patron of Falin. That the Poxie lun was passed on through Du Ruhui is known as in a letter to Du Ruhui Falin thanks him for having submitted the work. This letter is rendered in both Bianzheng lun, juan 8 (T 2110, p. 550, a27-b29) and Falin biezhuan, juan 1 (T 2051, p. 201, b13-c16; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 20–26). The letter leaves open whether Du Ruhui submitted the material only to Li Shimin or also to Li Jiancheng. But, as we will see below, an analysis of the Poxie lun makes it seem likely that Du Ruhui submitted the material to both princes. Yu Shinan, too, belonged to the faction of Li Shimin, and was, together with Du Ruhui, member of Li Shimin’s academy for literary studies (Alexander Leonhard Mayer, Xuanzang: Übersetzer und Heiliger [Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1992], 83). For an introduction to Yu Shinan’s importance as a calligrapher, see: Lothar Ledderose, Mi Fu and the Classical Tradition of Chinese Calligraphy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979), 20–26. Due to Yu Shinan’s renown as a calligrapher, his foreword to the Poxie lun is also relevant to the history of Chinese calligraphy. An engraving of the foreword on the basis of Yu Shinan’s original handwriting is shown as the title image of my Falin monograph. T 2109, juan 1, p. 474, c16–p. 475, a27 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 189– 195). T 2109, juan 1, p. 475, a28-c1 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 196–201). T 2109, juan 1, p. 475, c1–p. 476, b5 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 202– 215).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

31

Eleven theses would be presented subsequently;74 (D) a petition addressed to the “Prince of Qin” 秦王, i.e. Li Shimin;75 (E) the main text of the Poxie lun,76 which goes through the Eleven theses one by one and replies to each of them separately; (F) Falinʼs initial reply to Tang Gaozuʼs call for justification on the part of the saṃgha77—it is a short text composed prior to the main text of the Poxie lun. The only dated parts of the Poxie lun are the petition to the crown prince, submitted on the 27th day of the first month of the fifth year of the Wude period, i.e. 622 (i.e. text B),78 and the petition to Li Shimin, submitted on the 12th day of the first month of the same year (i.e. text D).79 Text F, presenting Falinʼs direct reaction to Tang Gaozuʼs address to the Buddhist saṃgha, probably appeared in 621, the year in which the address was made.80 Regarding the two petitions contained in the Poxie lun, it is important to note that the petition addressed to the “crown prince” does not give the name of the addressee. In 622 the crown prince was still Li Jiancheng. Initially, therefore, this petition must have been addressed to him. It seems that the version of this petition contained in the Poxie lun purposely dispenses with stating Li Jianchengʼs name, so that it could also be seen as a petition to the new crown prince.81 This editorial change can however not have been made before 626, the year in which Li Shimin became crown prince. It is conceivable that in 622 texts B, C, and E of the Poxie lun were submitted to Li Jiancheng, while texts C, D, and E were submitted to Li Shimin. Even though Du Ruhui was a member of Li Shimin’s faction, he may have submitted the material to both Li Shimin and Li Jiancheng. We do have text B of the Poxie lun, which appears to be a petition addressed to Li Jiancheng. And since also this petition to Li Jiancheng must

74 75 76 77 78 79 80

81

T 2109, juan 1, p. 476, b2–3 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 215). T 2109, juan 1, p. 476, b6–p. 477, b7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 216– 228). T 2109, juan 1–2, p. 477, b8–p. 489, b12 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 229–370). T 2109, juan 2, p. 489, b13-c9 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 371–374). For the dating, see: T 2109, juan 1, p. 475, b29-c1 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 201). For the dating, see: T 2109, juan 1, p. 477, b6–7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 228). Here I am following Fukiko Nishiyama’s discussion of the Poxie lun, in which she determines the sequence in which its six parts came into being (Nishiyama Fukiko 西山蕗子, “Hōrin Haja ron ni tsuite” 法琳《破邪論》について, Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan nenpō 鈴木學術財團年報 9 [1973], 74 f.). Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 15 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

32

Jülch

have been a petition submitted in reaction to the Eleven theses,82 it will have been submitted together with texts C and E. It appears that the petitions to Li Jiancheng and Li Shimin were both written as cover letters attached to which were text C, as Fu Yi’s preface to the Eleven theses, and text E as Falin’s rejoinder.83 The final arrangement of the Poxie lun, which includes both petitions, and elegantly avoids including the name of the crown prince in the petition originally addressed to Li Jiancheng, must have been designed by Yu Shinan, who also added the foreword (i.e. text A), added Falin’s initial reply to Tang Gaozu (i.e. text F), and wrote the commentary to the Poxie lun which is mainly confined to sharp rebuttals of Fu Yi’s statements in text C. That the Poxie lun is a compilation of texts brought together by Yu Shinan is documented in the Falin biezhuan, where we read: “He (i.e. Yu Shinan) then collected the dharma master’s (i.e. Falin’s) texts, and composed a foreword for them” 乃集法師之 文。為之敘。 84 Subsequent to these introductory words, the Falin biezhuan provides a complete rendition of Yu Shinan’s foreword to the Poxie lun.85 Falinʼs apologetic mission was however not confined to his reactions to the anti-Buddhist agitation of Fu Yi. With Li Zhongqing 李仲卿 and Liu Jinxi 劉進 喜 there were two further Daoist priests who also submitted anti-Buddhist petitions to the throne. The petition by Li Zhongqing was entitled Shiyi jiumi lun 十異九迷論, and the petition by Liu Jinxi Xianzheng lun 顯正論. As we know from the Fodao lunheng, both petitions were submitted through Fu Yi.86 When exactly this happened is however difficult to determine. According to the Fodao lunheng, both petitions were submitted in 626.87 Yet in the Falin biezhuan it is said that Falin had obtained the Shiyi jiumi lun and the Xianzheng 82

83

84 85

86 87

I see three factors which suggest that the petition to Li Jiancheng was submitted in reaction to Fu Yi’s Eleven theses: (1) The petition to Li Jiancheng was submitted only 15 days after the petition to Li Shimin. (2) Thus, also the petition to Li Jiancheng followed quickly on the promulgation of the Eleven theses among the saṃgha. (3) The petition to Li Jiancheng is included in the Poxie lun, a work concerned with Falin’s reaction to Fu Yi’s Eleven theses. One might wonder why in the final arrangement of the Poxie lun texts B and D are not presented together as two alternative cover letters then. The answer might be that Yu Shinan, faithful to Li Shimin, wanted to present text D, which Falin had actually addressed to Li Shimin, as the direct introduction to text E, the main part of the Poxie lun. T 2051, juan 3, p. 212, b11–12 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 159). As part of the Poxie lun, the foreword is found in T 2109, juan 1, p. 474, c17–p. 475, a27 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 189–195). For the rendition in the Falin biezhuan, see: T 2051, juan 3, p. 212, b13-c21. In my Falin monograph, I translate the foreword as included in the Poxie lun only. T 2104, juan 3, p. 382, b15–16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 230). T 2104, juan 3, p. 382, b14–15 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 230).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

33

lun already in the year 621, i.e. in the same year in which Fu Yi had also submitted his Eleven theses.88 To the petitions by Li Zhongqing and Liu Jinxi, Falin replied with yet another apologetic work entitled Bianzheng lun 辯正論 (T 2110). For the Bianzheng lun, the foreword and commentary were written by Chen Ziliang 陳子良.89 Chen Ziliang was a scholar belonging to the faction of Li Jiancheng. After Li Shimin had established himself as the second Tang emperor, Chen Ziliang was banished to Sichuan where he was assigned the low-ranking position of the administrator of the Xiangru district 相如縣令.90 It is unthinkable that Falin would have invited Chen Ziliang to write a foreword for the Bianzheng lun after, with the incident at the Xuanwumen, it became clear that Li Jianchengʼs faction had lost. For this reason it is more likely that Falin had obtained the petitions by Li Zhongqing and Liu Jinxi already in 621. However, if we assume that prior to the incident at the Xuanwumen there was a version of the Bianzheng lun, which Chen Ziliang had written a foreword and commentary for, this can only have been a preliminary version, not identical with the version received today. In his letter to Du Ruhui, which was previously mentioned in note 68, Falin explains that the progress in his work on the Bianzheng lun was slow, because he needed to consult sources which he did not have at hand. He asks Du Ruhui to use his influence to make the sources available to him.91 Du Ruhui in his reply grants the request.92 When the 88 89 90

91

92

T 2051, juan 2, p. 205, b4–6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 71). On Chen Ziliang, see: Nakanishi Hisami 中西久味, “Hōrin zōki (zoku)” 法琳雑記 (続), Hikaku shūkyō shisō kenkyū 比較宗教思想研究 4 (2004): 2–11. The Xiangru district, in the sixth year of the Tianjian 天監 era of the Liang dynasty (i.e. 507), was founded on a part of the territory of the Anhan 安漢 district, where the famous Han dynasty poet Sima Xiangru 司馬相如 (179–117 BC) had lived. When Chen Ziliang assumed his new position, he wrote an Essay Commemorating Sima Xiangru 祭司馬相如 文, preserved in Quan Tangwen, juan 134, in order to pay homage to the name patron of the district he now was administrator of. The text, in which Chen Ziliang selfidentifies as “administrator of the Xiangru district” 相如縣令, is dated on the first year of the Zhenguan era, which demonstrates that he had this position from that time on (Dong Gao, Quan Tangwen, vol. 2, 1354–1355). For the rendition in Bianzheng lun, juan 8, see: T 2110, p. 550, b11–22; for the rendition in Falin biezhuan, juan 1, see: T 2051, p. 201, b26-c9 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 23 ff.). Du Ruhui’s reply is not included in the Bianzheng lun, but in the Falin biezhuan only (T 2051, juan 1, p. 201, c16–p. 202, a9; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 26–30). In the end of his letter, Du Ruhui says: “As soon as I have a day of leisure, I will visit [you] immediately. At that time I will supply the dharma master with all he is in need of” 休沐之日即當馳謁。時法師所闕。杜公給而足焉。 (T 2051, juan 1, p. 202, a8–9; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 30).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

34

Jülch

Bianzheng lun was finalized is hard to determine. In Bianzheng lun, juan 4, we find a passage explaining that the translation project supervised by Prabhākaramitra (transliterated: Boluopojialuomiduoluo 波羅頗迦羅密多羅, translated: Zhishi 知識),93 which—as we will see below—Falin was involved in, was completed in the sixth year of the Zhenguan era (i.e. 632).94 The fact that this is mentioned in the Bianzheng lun demonstrates that the Bianzheng lun cannot have been finalized before 632. However other evidence suggests an even later date of completion. In Bianzheng lun, juan 4, we find a text headed with “Datang Gaozu taiwu huangdi” 大唐高祖太武皇帝.95 “Taiwu huangdi” 太 武皇帝 respectively “Dawu huangdi” 大武皇帝 (the characters “da” 大 and “tai” 太 are often confused) was Tang Gaozu’s posthumous title.96 The fact that Tang Gaozu’s posthumous title is used in the Bianzheng lun shows that the Bianzheng lun cannot have been finalized before Tang Gaozu’s death. The abdicated Tang Gaozu only died in 635. So, while it cannot be determined when the Bianzheng lun was finalized, the year 635 would appear to be the terminus postquem. The Bianzheng lun is a much more massive work than the Poxie lun. As preserved in the Taishō tripiṭaka, the Poxie lun has two juan, and the Bianzheng lun has eight juan. With regard to the Poxie lun, the bibliographical records vary however, as in some of the scripture catalogues the Poxie lun is listed as having one juan only.97 The Bianzheng lun consists of twelve scriptures plus the foreword by Chen Ziliang. In contrast to the Poxie lun, which consists of six independent texts, some of the scriptures of the Bianzheng lun are interconnected. For example, scriptures 1–4 are styled as dialogues which can be seen as succeeding each other, as at the beginning of each new scripture the dialogue continues between the same characters who were conversing with each other at the end of the previous scripture. In this article I do not have the space to demonstrate in detail which characters are present in which scripture, and how the scriptures are interconnected on this basis. All of this is explained in my Falin monograph however.98 At the beginning of Tang Taizong’s reign, Falin enjoyed the favor of the new emperor. In 627, the first year of his reign, Tang Taizong had the Dahe Palace 大 和宮 in the Zhongnan Mountains 終南山, South of the capital Chang’an, transformed into a Buddhist monastery, named Longtian si 龍田寺. Tang Taizong 93 94 95 96 97 98

T 2110, p. 513, b8–9. T 2110, p. 513, c21–22. T 2110, p. 511, a26. Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu, vol. 1, 18. Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 23. Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 16–20.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

35

had the Longtian si erected in honor of his abdicated father. Falin was chosen to become the abbot of this important monastery.99 And from the time in which Falin was abbot of the Longtian si, we have even more evidence of Falin’s good relationship with the emperor, as, in working for the afore-mentioned master Prabhākaramitra, Falin also supported a project important for the prestige of the dynasty. Prabhākaramitra, a great Buddhist scholar from Nālandā, had gone to the Western Turks to spread the dharma among them. The Tang court had made great efforts to bring him to China. Li Daoli 李道立, the Prince of Gaoping 高平王, was sent on a mission to the Western Turks, and succeeded in bringing Prabhākaramitra to Chang’an. From 629 onwards, Prabhākaramitra, in the Daxingshan si 大興善寺, started an ambitious translation project, which became very important for Chinese Buddhism.100 The emperor had called for learned Chinese monks to support Prabhākaramitra in his translation work. Falin followed the emperor’s call, and joined Prabhākaramitra’s team of translators.101 As all this shows, Falin once had a good relationship with Tang Taizong. However, towards the end of his life, he fell out of favor with the emperor. The first clash occurred in 637, when Tang Taizong issued the edict declaring that Daoist priests were to rank above Buddhist monks. The edict was not issued in the capital Chang’an, but in Luoyang. Friederike Assandri speculates that Tang Taizong may have chosen Luoyang as the place for issuing this edict as to avoid the resistance of the Buddhist saṃgha which was much more strongly represented in Chang’an.102 A group of Buddhist monks did however follow the emperor to Luoyang and articulated their protest there.103 A petition asking for the edict to be rescinded was formulated, which, according to Falin biezhuan, juan 2, was voiced by Falin.104 However, in other works, we find the same petition cited as the words of the monk Zhishi 智實. This is the case in the biography

99

100 101 102 103 104

Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Dunhuang Document S. 6502 Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 2005), 45 f. Kuwayama Shōshin, “How Xuanzang learned about Nālandā,” in Tang China and Beyond, ed. Antonino Forte (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 1988), 23–29. Friederike Assandri, Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten der frühen Tang-Zeit und die Chongxuan-Lehre des Daoismus (Ph.D. diss, Heidelberg University, 2002), 171. Friederike Assandri, Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten der frühen Tang-Zeit, 143. Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” 258 f. T 2051, p. 203, c26 ‒ p. 204, a17.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

36

Jülch

of Zhishi in Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24,105 as well as in presentations of the subject in Fodao lunheng, juan 3,106 and in Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集, juan 25.107 In Fozu tongji, juan 39, we read that Zhishi and Falin protested together (even though the petition is not quoted here).108 For the purpose of this article, I have to confine myself to the discussion of the petition as ascribed to Falin. The Falin biezhuan, the only source that renders the petition as presented by Falin, records that the high official Cen Wenben 岑文本 reacted to it by informing the monks that continued protest would be punished severely. At this point the Falin biezhuan states that Falin suppressed his anger, discontinued the protest, and suffered no further consequences. (According to the sources that render the petition as the words of Zhishi, the consequences for Zhishi were much more severe.109) The petition in Luoyang did not cost Falin the emperor’s favor yet, but that time marked the beginning of Falin’s downfall. Shortly after the petition in Luoyang, the Daoist priest Qin Shiying 秦世英 sued Falin for having slandered Laozi in the Bianzheng lun.110 In the Falin biezhuan and in Falin’s biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan the charge is dated 639,111 in the Fodao lunheng it is dated 640.112 Tang Taizong took the charge seriously, ordered Falin arrested, and had him interrogated by an investigation commission headed by Liu Dewei 劉德威. The Falin biezhuan, in juan 2–3, contains an account of this interrogation, which runs to great length and is not found in other sources.113 According to this account, the commission confronted Falin with ten reproaches, and Falin replied to each with an apologetic speech. While the first and the second reproach are rather general attacks on Falin’s apologetic thought, the remaining eight reproaches more explicitly refer to the Bianzheng lun. All of those eight reproaches follow the same pattern: the commission quotes one particular statement from the Bianzheng lun, criticizes it, and asks 105 106 107 108 109 110

111 112 113

T 2060, p. 635, c8–25. T 2104, p. 382, c18–p. 383, a5. T 2103, p. 283, c26–p. 284, a13. T 2035, p. 364, c13. I have discussed this in more detail in: Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 56 f. This is known from Falin biezhuan, juan 2 (T 2051, p. 204, a23-b2), the Falin biography in Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24 (T 2060, p. 638, a22–28), and Fodao lunheng, juan 3 (T 2104, p. 385, a13–21). Falin biezhuan, juan 2, T 2051, p. 204, a23–24; Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24, T 2060, p. 638, a22–23. T 2104, juan 3, p. 385, a13. T 2051, p. 204, b29–p. 210, a4 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 60–126).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

37

Falin for justification. The rendition of the interrogation closes by saying that the commission around Liu Dewei noted everything and submitted a report to the throne.114 Based on this report, Tang Taizong summoned Falin for an audience. The conversation the emperor had with Falin at this occasion is rendered elaborately in the Falin biezhuan,115 in a condensed form in the Falin biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan,116 and in the Fodao lunheng.117 According to the elaborate version given in the Falin biezhuan, the conversation takes the following shape: The emperor opens by stressing that he was a descendant of Laozi. He praises Laozi, and asks Falin how he could dare to slander him.118 Falin, in his reply, states that the Tang ruling house did in fact not descend from Laozi, whom he belittles arguing that he would also be an inappropriate ancestor for an imperial dynasty. The true ancestor of the Tang ruling house, Falin argues, was Li Hu 李虎 (d. 551), a general of the Western Tuoba-Wei (535–556), who because of his military merits would be a much more adequate ancestor for the Tang.119 This, however, makes the emperor even more angry. He says that, as required by the ancestor worshipping customs, he would need to remain loyal to his ancestor, and could for this reason not accept Falin’s proposal. Falin replies that the Confucian principle of ancestor worship would not be the way of heaven, meaning it would not be a principle of profound spiritual validity.120 With that the audience ends, and the emperor reacts to Falin’s words with a sentence recorded in the Falin biezhuan,121 Falin’s biography in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan,122 and in the Fodao lunheng.123 In the sentence the emperor cynically quotes a passage from the Bianzheng lun telling the story of a devout Buddhist practitioner who having been sentenced to death prayed to Guanyin, and as a

114 115 116 117 118 119

120 121 122 123

T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, a4 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 126). T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, a5-c6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 127–135). T 2060, juan 24, p. 638, a29-b7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 194 f.). T 2104, juan 3, p. 385, a22–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 258 f.). T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, a5–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 127). T 2051, p. 210, a11-b18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 127–132); see also: Hoong Teik Toh 卓鴻澤, “Saizhong yuanliu ji Li Tang shizu wenti yu Laozi zhi guage” 塞 種源流及李唐氏族問題與老子之瓜葛, Zhongyang yanjiu yuan lishi yuyan yanjiu suo jikan 中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊 78, no. 1 (2008), 204–206. T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, b19-c6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 133 ff.). T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, c7–9 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 135). T 2060, juan 24, p. 638, b16–19 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 197). T 2104, juan 3, p. 385, b8–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 260 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

38

Jülch

result of his prayers could not be harmed by the executioner’s sword.124 The emperor says that he would give Falin seven days to pray to Guanyin, and that afterwards he would see whether an executioner’s sword could harm him or not.125 The following events are most elaborately described in the Falin biezhuan. The main aspects are also represented in the Xu Gaoseng zhuan, and in the Fodao lunheng, but for the sake of simplicity I will confine myself to a brief summary of the account given in the Falin biezhuan here: Close to the end of the seven day period, Liu Dewei comes into Falin’s prison cell, and asks Falin which effects he expects his prayers to have on the day of punishment. Falin replies that instead of praying to Guanyin he had only prayed to Tang Taizong.126 When Liu Dewei asks why he had done that, Falin replies that he would see Tang Taizong as a perfect embodiment of Guanyin.127 Liu Dewei notes everything and passes it on to the emperor.128 The emperor is pleased and summons Falin for a second audience, in which he gives Falin another opportunity to dissociate himself from the slandering of Laozi contained in the Bianzheng lun.129 Falin, however, replies with a speech in which he stresses that the Buddha would be superior to Laozi, and that Buddhism would be superior to Daoism.130 After this speech the emperor’s final decision is quoted with the following words: “Falin may have slandered the imperial ancestor, but did not fail to present source-based evidence. In this case the ultimate punishment131 can be remitted. He will be exiled to [the monastery in] Yibu,132 and remain as a monk there” 法琳雖毀朕宗祖非無典據。 特可赦其極犯。 徙在益部為 僧。 133 Falin dies on his way to his exile place.134 124

125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134

The story the emperor refers to is hinted to in Bianzheng lun, juan 7 (T 2110, p. 537, b29). The subsequent commentary passage renders the story more elaborately (T 2110, p. 537, b29-c1). It is a legendary tradition being discussed more elaborately by Yü Chün-fang (Yü Chün-fang, Kuan-yin: The Chinese Transformation of Avalokitesvara [New York: Columbia University Press, 2001], 110–113). Falin biezhuan, juan 3: T 2051, p. 210, c7–9; Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 24: T 2060, p. 638, b16– 19; Fodao lunheng, juan 3: T 2104, p. 385, b8–10. T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, c21–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 138 f.). T 2051, juan 3, p. 210, c29–p. 211, a11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 139 f.). T 2051, juan 3, p. 211, a11–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 140). T 2051, juan 3, p. 211, a13–16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 141). T 2051, juan 3, p. 211, a16-c16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 141–148). i.e. the death penalty Yibu is situated in present-day Sichuan. T 2051, juan 3, p. 211, c19–20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 148). T 2051, juan 3, p. 212, a29-b6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 157 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

39

After the previous evaluation of the sources regarding Falin’s life has shown how Falin’s apologetic work allegedly came into being, the following chapter will discuss Falin’s argumentation strategy. III

Falinʼs Apologetic Argumentation

In order to ensure the survival of the saṃgha in China, Falin through his apologetic writings attempted to win imperial favor for Buddhism. He thereby employed a strategy that had long enjoyed great popularity in Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought, because, if imperial favor was granted, the preservation of Buddhism in China was guaranteed. The apologetic tradition that came into being on the basis of this approach is built around three main objectives. Courting imperial favor meant presenting Buddhism as a system of thought the emperor could employ to stabilize and religiously legitimize his rule. In order to present Buddhism as an attractive option in this respect, Buddhism needed to be brought in line with Confucianism. Since the Han dynasty, Confucianism had been the basis of imperial rule in China. So, in order to make Buddhism a religion the emperor could employ for his purposes, it had to be presented as a doctrine that complemented Confucianism. For this reason the first objective of Falinʼs apologetic work was to demonstrate that Buddhism, despite its non-Chinese origin, was compatible with Confucianism. In order to avoid depicting Buddhism as a system merely resembling Con­ fucianism, it was however necessary to demonstrate that Buddhism could offer something to the state which Confucianism could not offer. So, while Buddhism and Confucianism were presented as having common values, it was implied that Buddhism possessed a superior sanctity, and that only through an employment of Buddhism the common values of both teachings could be successfully asserted. Featuring the second objective of Falin’s apologetic work, this claim found implicit expression in different arguments demonstrating the superiority of Buddhism to Confucianism. The main opponent of Buddhism in China, however, was Daoism. While Confucianism was not a religious system, Buddhism and Daoism both offered religious concepts, and hence were in constant rivalry with each other. On the background of this rivalry, it was the third objective of Falinʼs apologetic work to show that in fact Daoism was in many ways inferior to Buddhism, and that Daoism was system of lies, deception, and debauchery. Many of the arguments Falin presents in connection with these three objectives are known from previous Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought. However, through its enormous complexity, Falinʼs apologetic work is distinguished from

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

40

Jülch

all earlier treatises of its kind. While the earlier treatises presenting apologetic thought in an argumentative fashion tended to be short works hardly extending beyond the length of one juan, Poxie lun and Bianzheng lun taken together have ten juan, adding to which, for the purposes of the present article, also the apologetic speeches received through the hagiographic sources are understood as part of Falin’s apologetic work.135 This corpus of texts is to be seen as a big melting pot in which many arguments known from diverse pre­vious treatises were brought together, and were enhanced by some new argu­ments not known from previous apologetic thought yet. In the following discussion, I will introduce the main arguments presented in Falinʼs apologetic work, ascribing each of them to one of the three objectives, and thereby grouping them into three categories.136 To demonstrate to which extent Falinʼs apologetic work stands in the tradition of earlier apologetic writing, I will, in the case of arguments known from previous treatises, also name the earlier passages the relevant argument appeared in. In classifying the treatises of earlier apologetic literature, it is necessary to introduce a differentiation between two different genres: (1) works that are written as apologetic treatises in the first place, and (2) Buddhist historiographic works also written with apologetic intent. Works belonging to the first genre have concrete apologetic objectives and focus on presenting arguments in support of those objectives. Falin’s work continues the development of this genre. Works belonging to the second genre have a more general interest in describing the history of Buddhism, are however also written with apologetic intent, as in early Chinese Buddhism an important purpose of historiography was to make the saṃgha appear in a favorable light in order to ensure its survival in China. Because historiographic traditions frequently were of apologetic argumentative value, also traditions originating from the second genre frequently reappear in the work of Falin. Through its complexity Falin’s work marks the apex of the first genre. Works of the second genre, however, sometimes reach even greater lengths, as historiographic works are not confined to pointed discussions but comprise a wider array of themes. 135

136

One cannot know whether the additional apologetic speeches presented in the hagiographic sources were truly delivered by Falin or not. However, as explained in the opening of chapter II, in the present article I am less interested in historical truth about Falin, but more in the image of Falin developed in the hagiographic sources. And according to this image, the additional speeches are certainly part of Falin’s apologetic legacy. I would like to stress that the account offered here is far from complete. Because of the limited space, I need to confine myself to a presentation of those arguments which would appear to be most important to Falin’s apologetic thought and to Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought in general.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

41

Earlier apologetic works belonging to the first genre include the Mouzi lihuo lun 牟子理惑論 (Treatise on how Master Mou removes our doubts);137 the Zhengwu lun 正誣論 (Treatise on the rectification of unjustified criticism);138 the Ronghua lun zhe Gu daoshi Yixia lun 戎華論折顧道士夷夏論 (Treatise on barbarians and Chinese, directed against the Yixia lun by the Daoist Gu; hereafter abbreviated as Ronghua lun);139 the Bianhuo lun 辯惑論 (Treatise discriminating errors);140 the Erjiao lun 二教論 (Treatise on the two jiao);141 and the Xiaodao lun 笑道論 (Treatise on laughing at the Dao).142 Among the earlier apologetic works belonging to the second genre the Gaoseng zhuan 高 僧傳 (T 2059, Biographies of eminent monks)143 and the Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三 寶紀 (T 2034, Record of the three jewels throughout successive dynasties)144 are most important. In addition to these, early Buddhist apologetic thought also appears in works that were not written as Buddhist works in the first place, but still contain Buddhist apologetic thought in certain chapters. As far as Buddhist apologetic content in argumentative style is concerned, most important are 137

138

139 140 141

142

143

144

This treatise is preserved in Hongming ji, juan 1 (T 2102, p. 1, a28–p. 7, a22). For a study and translation, see: John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts: A reader-response study and translation of the ‘Mou-tzu Li-huo lun’ (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994). This treatise is preserved in Hongming ji, juan 1 (T 2102, p. 7, a23–p. 9, a24). For a study and translation, see: Arthur Link, “Cheng-wu lun: The Rectification of Unjustified Criticism,” Oriens Extremus 8 (1961): 136–65. This treatise is preserved in Hongming ji, juan 7 (T 2102, p. 47, a9–p. 48, a2). This treatise is preserved in Hongming ji, juan 8 (T 2102, p. 48, a11–p. 49, c2). This treatise is preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 8 (T 2103, p. 136, b13–p. 143, c12). For a study and translation, see: Catherine Despeux, “La culture lettrée au service d’un ­plaidoyer pour le Bouddhisme: Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ (‘Erjiao Lun’) de Dao’an,” in Bouddhisme et lettrés dans la Chine médiévale, ed. Catherine Despeux (Paris: Peeters, 2002): 145–227. This treatise is preserved in Guang Hongming ji, juan 9 (T 2103, p. 143, c20–p. 152, c17). For a study and translation, see: Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao: Debates among Buddhists and Daoists in Medieval China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). For an introduction to this work, see: Arthur F. Wright, “Biography and Hagiography: HuiChiao’s Lives of Eminent Monks,” in Studies in Chinese Buddhism, ed. Robert M. Somers (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990): 73–111. For an introduction to this work, see: Max Deeg, “Zwischen Spannung und Harmonie: Das Problem von Chronologie und Synchronologie in der frühen chinesischen buddhistischen Historiographie,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010): 96–139.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

42

Jülch

the two chapters of “Yangsheng” 養生 (Nourishing life) and “Guixin” 歸心 (Where the heart returns) appearing in the Yanshi jiaxun 顔氏家訓 (Family Teachings for the Yan clan).145 As far as Buddhist apologetic content in historiographic style is concerned, most important is the chapter of “Shilao zhi” 釋 老志 (Monograph on Buddhism and Daoism) appearing in the Weishu 魏書.146 Finally, early Buddhist apologetic thought was also expressed in Chinese Buddhist apocrypha.147 The genre of apocryphal writing served as a format enabling to formulate Buddhist apologetic concepts in texts which, through their alleged Indian origin, could claim a higher level of credibility. Arguments Demonstrating the Compatibility of Buddhism with Confucianism With regard to the argumentation demonstrating the compatibility of Buddhism with Confucianism, I will firstly refer to arguments discussing how Buddhism presented itself in Chinese history (sections A.1-A.4), and secondly to arguments pointing to the agreement between Buddhist and Confucian ethics (sections A.5-A.6).

A

A.1 Buddhism as Part of the Golden Age of Chinese Antiquity The Confucian understanding of history is based on the concept that in Chinese antiquity there was a golden age within which China was governed by sages (chin.: “shengren,” 聖人), who through their example defined ideal rulership, and under whom China found itself in the state of “taiping” 太平 (great peace). The concept of taiping was not yet present in the ancient scriptures of Confucianism, and was prominently introduced only in the Chunqiu fanlu 春

145

146

147

For a translation of the Yanshi jiaxun, see: Teng Ssu-yü, Family Instructions for the Yen Clan (Leiden: Brill, 1968). For a discussion of the work and details regarding the personal background of the author, Yan Zhitui 顔之推 (531–591), see: Thomas H.C. Lee, Education in Traditional China: A History (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 486–489. For a general introduction to the “jiaxun” genre, see: ibid. 223–226. On Yan Zhitui see also: Albert E. Dien, “Yen Chih-t’ui (531–591): A Buddho-Confucian,” in Confucian Personalities, ed. Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1962): 43–64; Albert E. Dien, Pei Ch’i shu 45: Biography of Yen Chih-t’ui (Bern: Peter Lang, 1976). For a translation of the Weishu Shilao zhi, see: Leon Hurvitz, Treatise on Buddhism and Taoism, Wei Shou: An English translation of the original Chinese text of Wei-Shu CXIV and the Japanese annotation of Tsukamoto Zenryū (Kyōto: Jimbunkagaku Kenkyusho, 1956). For an introduction to the matter of Chinese Buddhist apocrypha, see: Robert E. Buswell, “Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures,” in Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, ed. Robert E. Buswell (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1990): 1–30.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

43

秋繁露 ascribed to Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (179?–104? BC).148 The Confucian claim was that the treasure of wisdom dating back to this golden age of Chinese antiquity was all-embracing, so that any teaching that was not part of it had to be seen as not worth being studied. On this basis, the Confucian elites of the Chinese state condemned Buddhism, a religion that entered China from the outside, as unworthy and as inferior to the Confucian tradition of China. In order to depict Buddhism as being compatible with Confucianism, Buddhist apologists needed to show that Buddhism, just like Confucianism, was deeply rooted in the golden age of Chinese antiquity. For this purpose in Buddhist apologetic thought a variety of legends was developed. One of the apologetic traditions designed to anchor Buddhism in the golden age of Chinese antiquity was based on a Buddhist apocrypha known as the Zhoushu yiji 周書異記. From this now lost source Buddhist apologetic texts frequently quote a legend according to which both the birth and the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha brought about omens which were felt in China. The omens testifying to the birth of the Buddha were witnessed by King Zhao of Zhou 周昭 王. The omens testifying to the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha alarmed King Mu of Zhou 周穆王, motivating him to embark on his journey to the West. The earliest received record of this tradition is found in Poxie lun, juan 1.149 The theme of King Mu of Zhou travelling to the West goes back to the ancient account of the Mu tianzi zhuan 穆天子傳, which depicts King Mu’s journey as motivated by the King’s wish to meet the Queen Mother of the West (chin.: Xiwangmu, 西 王母). The Buddhist legend quoted from the Zhoushu yiji appears to be designed as a reinterpretation of this ancient tradition, by means of which Buddhist apologists were able to show that King Mu’s journey, a famous event of China’s ancient history, was caused by Buddhism.150 Another legendary tradition employed to make Buddhism part of the golden age of the Chinese antiquity was connected to the figure of the Indian King Aśoka. While the oldest layers of the Aśoka legend are found in the closing

148

149

150

Barbara Hendrischke, The Scripture on Great Peace: The Taiping jing and the Beginnings of Daoism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006), 6; Michael Loewe, Dong Zhongshu, a ‘Confucian’ Heritage and the Chunqiu fanlu (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 94. T 2109, p. 478, b6–25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik. vol. 1, 238 ff.). A translation of this Zhoushu yiji passage is also found in Zürcher, who quotes it from the Poxie lun as well (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaption of Buddhism in Early Medieval China [Leiden: Brill, 2007], 273). In a previous article I had a closer look at the role this legend played in Buddhist apologetic thought (Thomas Jülch, “The Buddhist Re-interpretation of the Legends Surrounding King Mu of Zhou,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 130, no. 4 [2010], 625–627).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

44

Jülch

stanzas of the Buddhacarita by Aśvaghoṣa,151 the legend was given a more elaborate expression in the Aśokāvadāna,152 which became known in China through a translation of dubious dating. It is entitled Ayu wang zhuan 阿育王 傳 (T 2042),153 and is traditionally attributed to the Parthian monk An Faqin 安 法欽.154 The legend claims that Aśoka had the relics of the Buddha distributed all over Jambudvīpa. We are told that a grand total of 84,000 stūpas were built to enshrine them, with nineteen of the stūpas situated on Chinese territory.155 The Aśoka legend was used to demonstrate that—through the Aśoka stūpas— Buddhism was already present in China during antiquity. In Falin we find this argument represented in Poxie lun, juan 2.156 From the account given here, it also becomes clear that the argument was based on the assumption that Aśoka lived earlier than we now know he did.157 A third tradition used for the same purpose refers to Liu Xiang 劉向 (ca. 77–6 BC), the alleged author of the Liexian zhuan 列仙傳, a collection of biographies of Daoist immortals.158 Liu Jun’s 劉峻 (d. 521) commentary to the Shishuo xinyu 世說新語 includes a textual passage claiming to quote a passage from Liu Xiang’s preface to the Liexian zhuan which is not contained in the received version of the preface. In this passage, Liu Xiang—if he is the author— declares that he had originally collected 146 immortals’ biographies, but included only 72 of them in his Liexian zhuan, because the remaining 74 biog151

152

153 154

155 156 157

158

Antonello Palumbo, “Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China,” in Zhonggu shidai de liyi, zongjiao yu zhidu 中古時代的禮儀，宗教与制度, ed. Yu Xin 余欣 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2012), 309. The Sanskrit original of the Aśokāvadāna is lost. Parts of it have been preserved in the Divyāvadāna. On this basis the text has been translated in: John S. Strong, The Legend of King Aśoka: A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 173–294. For a translation from the Chinese, see: Jean Przyluski, La légende de l’empereur Açoka (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1923). An Faqin was active as a translator in Luoyang during the Western Jin dynasty (roughly between 281 and 306). The Ayu wang zhuan is, however, for the first time quoted in the much later Lidai sanbao ji (completed in 598), which is why the attribution to An Faqin is seen critically in modern research (see: Antonello Palumbo, “Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China,” 311). Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 277–280. T 2109, p. 484, c4–7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 303). The actual dates of his reign were 268–233 BC. However, according to the given Poxie lun passage, the Aśoka stūpas were constructed in the 26th year of King Jing of Zhou 周敬王, which translates as 493 BC. For a translation of this work, see: Max Kaltenmark, Le Lie-sien tchouan (Peking: Centre d’études sinologiques de Pékin, 1953).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

45

raphies would already be known from the Buddhist scriptures.159 The claim that the ancient material retrieved by Liu Xiang contained Buddhist biographies, was in Buddhist apologetic thought employed to demonstrate that already in the Chinese antiquity there were Buddhist masters. The oldest Buddhist text in which this argument is represented is probably the Mingfo lun 明佛論 by Zong Bing 宗炳 (375–443). Here we find a brief reference saying “74 of the people from the Liexian records (i.e. the Liexian zhuan) by Liu Xiang are found in the Buddhist sūtras” 劉向列仙敘七十四人在佛經.160 The tradition is also seen in Lidai sanbao ji, juan 2.161 In Falin it is found in Poxie lun, juan 2.162 It is given, too, in Chen Ziliang’s commentary to Bianzheng lun, juan 5.163 A fourth tradition employed in the given context is based on the Mañjuśrī parinirvāṇa sūtra 佛說文殊師利般涅槃經 (T 463). This text, allegedly translated by Nie Daozhen 聶道眞, a lay Buddhist of the Western Jin dynasty, is probably a Chinese Buddhist apocryphal scripture rather than a translation of a Sanskrit original.164 The text reports that Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī appeared in the “Snow Mountains” 雪山 (i.e. in the Himalayas), and preached in front of 500 (Chinese) immortals,165 afterwards entering nirvāṇa. In Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought it is claimed that through the appearance of Mañjuśrī in the Snow Mountains Buddhism was transferred into the Chinese antiquity. An early quotation of this tradition is found in Lidai sanbao ji, juan 2.166 In Falin it is seen in Poxie lun, juan 2.167 Finally there is the tradition of the missionary Shi Lifang 釋利防 (also written 室利房), who allegedly attempted to spread Buddhism at the court of Qin Shihuang 秦始皇 (221–210 BC). The tradition says that Qin Shihuang first had him arrested, but soon regreted as Shi Lifang demonstrated his supernatural 159 160

161 162 163 164

165 166 167

Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 21. Hongming ji, juan 2: T 2102, p. 12, c8–9 (Zong Bing means to say that the biographies of those 74 people were part of the material Liu Xiang had collected in preparation for writing the Liexian zhuan, even though these biographies did not actually become part of the Liexian zhuan.) T 2034, p. 29, c2–9. T 2109, p. 484, c12–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 304 f.). T 2110, p. 524, b20–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 221). David Quinter writes: “the attribution to Nie Daozhen and corresponding dating is dubious at best. The Mañjuśrī Parinirvāṇa Sūtra is not extant in Sanskrit or other Chinese or Tibetan translations” (David Quinter, “Visualizing the Mañjuśrī Parinirvāṇa Sūtra as a Contemplation Sutra,” Asia Major, third series, 23, no. 2 [2010], 97 f.). T 463, p. 480, c20–27 (David Quinter, “Visualizing the Mañjuśrī Parinirvāṇa Sūtra,” 109). T 2034, p. 30, a14. T 2109, p. 484, c23–25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 305).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

46

Jülch

powers. Erik Zürcher explains that the earliest extant account of this tradition is that in Lidai sanbao ji, juan 1.168 Falin takes the story up in Poxie lun, juan 2.169 Glimpses of the dharma during the eclipse of Buddhism A.2 Works of Chinese Buddhist apologetic and historiographic writing widely share the conception that, even though Buddhism had been spread during the Chinese antiquity, it was eclipsed through the burning of books under Qin Shihuang.170 It is argued that in the times of Han Wudi 漢武帝 (r. 141–87 BC), even though Buddhism was being eclipsed, there were certain historical instances documenting that knowledge of Buddhism was still shining through. The official reintroduction of Buddhism is envisaged for the rule of Han Mingdi 漢明帝 (r. 57–75 AD). The apologetic value of describing this era of eclipse and its end is complementary to the apologetic value of the traditions listed in section A.1. Opposing the Confucian view that Buddhism was not part of the Chinese high culture, the Buddhist counter-concept suggests that since the earliest antiquity Buddhism was never fully absent from China. In the Weishu-chapter “Shilao zhi” 釋老志 we read that Huo Qubing 霍去病, one of Han Wudi’s most important generals, during his campaigns against the Xiongnu captured a “golden man” 金人, which was subsequently displayed in the Ganquan Palace 甘泉宮 and worshiped as a deity.171 It is related that Han Wudi sent out Zhang Qian 張騫 as an explorer to find out about the region the cult of the golden man originated from. Zhang Qian came back with a report about India, which makes clear that the golden man represented the Buddha. In Falin the account of the golden man is found in Poxie lun, juan 1.172 That knowledge of Buddhism was present in China during the times of Han Wudi is documented through yet another anecdote, which is seen in the biog168 169 170

171 172

T 2034, p. 23, c20–23 (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 20 and 324, note 2). T 2109, p. 484, c7–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 303 f.). In Falin, an example documenting this conception is found in Poxie lun, juan 2. There we read: “Even though [Buddhism] was eclipsed in the Qin dynasty, with the ascendancy of the Han dynasty it again became manifest” 雖遭秦世焚除。漢興復出。 (T 2109, p. 484, c29–p. 485, a1). There is no clash between the tradition of Shi Lifang’s mission to the court of Qin Shihuang and the eclipse of Buddhism through Qin Shihuang’s burning of books. As Fozu tongji, juan 34, points out, the mission of Shi Lifang was envisaged for the fourth year (T 2035, p. 328, b24–27) and the burning of the books for the 34th year (T 2035, p. 328, c3–6) of Qin Shihuang’s rule. So the conception would be that early in his rule Qin Shihuang may have been impressed by the magical powers of Shi Lifang, but still decided to burn the Buddhist scriptures in his later years. Leon Hurvitz, Treatise on Buddhism and Taoism, 26 f. T 2109, p. 478, c11–20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 241 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

47

raphy of Zhu Falan 竺法蘭 in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 1. Zhu Falan was one of the Indian monks who brought Buddhism to China under Han Mingdi. The anecdote found in his biography has the following content: When Han Wudi had the Kunming Lake 昆明池 excavated,173 black ashes were found in the earth. He asked his advisor, Dongfang Shuo 東方朔, where such a substance could have originated from. Dongfang Shuo replied that he did not know and that one should ask the people of the Western territories about the matter. So when, under Han Mingdi, Zhu Falan finally came to China, the question was presented to him, and he explained that those ashes were remnants of the last kalpa disaster (meaning it turned out that the matter needed to be explained on the basis of the Buddhist world view).174 In Buddhist apologetic thought it is concluded that, since Dongfang Shuo knew the explanation had to be searched for among the people of the Western territories, he did have a glimpse of Buddhism. In Falin the argument is mainly found in Poxie lun, juan 2,175 but it is also alluded to in Falin’s first apologetic speech within the interrogation preserved in the Falin biezhuan.176 The official reintroduction of Buddhism into China is visualized in terms of a famous legend referring to Han Mingdi. It reports that in a dream the emperor saw the Buddha in the shape of a golden man, and subsequently sent messengers to India to find out about the Buddha’s teaching. It is related that, invited by the Chinese messengers, the Indian monks Kāśyapa-Mātaṇga (chin.: 攝摩 騰) and Zhu Falan came to Han Mingdi’s court at Luoyang to spread the teachings of the Buddha there. This tradition is seen in Kāśyapa-Mātaṇga’s biography in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 1.177 This is the first biography in the Gaoseng zhuan, and it is succeeded by the biography of Zhu Falan. The official reintroduction of Buddhism into China is the historical instance with which the biographies in the Gaoseng zhuan begin. The story of Buddhism being reintroduced under Han Mingdi is also seen in a now lost Chinese Buddhist apocryphal scripture 173

174 175 176 177

The Kunming Lake is an artificially created lake in present-day Shanxi, the excavation of which was ordered by Han Wudi. The event is documented in Hanshu, juan 6. There we read: “Degraded officials were sent to excavate the Kunming Lake” 發謫吏穿昆明池 (Ban Gu 班固, Hanshu 漢書 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2009], vol. 1, 177). Dubs remarks that Han Wudi had the lake created in a style modelled on a lake in the state of Kunming (in present-day Yunnan), and that the purpose was to have navy maneuvers conducted there (H. H. Dubs, History of the Former Han Dynasty [Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1938– 1955], vol. 2, 63). T 2059, p. 323, a19–22 (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 20). T 2109, p. 485, a13–18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 308 f.). T 2051, juan 2, p. 205, a14–15 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 68). T 2059, p. 322, c20–28 (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 22).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

48

Jülch

entitled Han faben neizhuan 漢法本内傳 (Inner Transmission Regarding the Origin of the Dharma in the Han Dynasty). In Poxie lun, juan 1, it is quoted from there.178 A.3

Buddhist Missionaries Were Able to Convert Chinese Rulers to Buddhism The compatibility of Buddhism with Confucianism is also demonstrated by pointing to conversions of Chinese rulers to Buddhism achieved by Buddhist monk missionaries. In the first place, the intention here is to demonstrate that Buddhism is a teaching which can change a ruler for the better, and can motivate him to observe basic ethical principles which would be equally central to the Confucian doctrine. Apart from that, one might even see a parallel between Buddhist monk missionaries and Confucius, who travelled through China for thirteen years offering his advice to many different rulers. In the biography of the missionary Fotudeng 佛圖澄 in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 9, we are told about Fotudengʼs influence on the tyrannic rulers Shi Le 石勒 (r. 319–333) and Shi Hu 石虎 (r. 334–349). When Shi Le had conquered Luoyang in 311, he established a reign of terror. Out of compassion for the suffering population, Fotudeng sought contact to Shi Le, and, while conversing with him, made a splendid lotus grow out of his begging bowl. Through this demonstration of his power as a wonder worker, Fotudeng was able to convert Shi Le to Buddhism. Shi Leʼs mind was purified, and he rectified his policies.179 The account of Fotudeng and Shi Hu is similar in nature. When Shi Hu expressed doubts about the dharma, as one of his military campaigns had failed even though he had made offerings to the Buddha beforehand, Fotudeng—enabled through his clairvoyance—told Shi Hu about his previous lives. This helped Shi Hu to understand that the chain of incarnations, within which he was finally established as a ruler, had worked out to his advantage. In this way, Fotudeng was able to motivate Shi Hu to respect the dharma.180 In Poxie lun, juan 2, Falin has a passage referring to Fotudeng converting both Shi Le and Shi Hu. The actual conversion stories known from the Gaoseng zhuan are not given here, but it is stressed that Fotudeng was talking to the two rulers out of compassion for the population.181 In Bianzheng lun, juan 1, we find a passage referring to the matter of how Fotudeng converted Shi Hu more explicitly. Here the conversion 178 179 180 181

T 2109, p. 479, b11–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 248 f.). T 2059, p. 383, c7–15 (Arthur F. Wright, “Fo-t’u-teng: A Biography,” Harvard Journal of Asia­ tic Studies 11 [1948], 339 f.). T 2059, p. 385, a19–27 (Arthur F. Wright, “Fo-t’u-teng: A Biography,” 351). T 2109, p. 488, a5–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 349 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

49

story is included, and we even find a direct intertextual agreement with the account given in the Gaoseng zhuan.182 In Gaoseng zhuan, juan 1, we find the story of the missionary Kang Senghui 康僧會 converting the Wu emperor Sun Quan 孫權 (r. 222–252): Kang Senghui demonstrates the supernatural powers of Buddhism to Sun Quan by presenting a Buddha relic which can neither be cut open nor burned. Instead, the fire with which Sun Quan attempts to burn the relic forms a Lotus filling the entire palace hall. Sighing in awe, Sun Quan becomes a disciple of the Buddha.183 In Falin, the story is found in Poxie lun, juan 1.184 Here intertextual agreements with the Gaoseng zhuan account are, however, relatively rare. In Gaoseng zhuan, juan 3, we find the story of the missionary Guṇavarman (chin.: qiunabamo, 求那跋摩) converting the Liu-Song emperor Song Wendi 宋文帝 (r. 424–454): Guṇavarman explains to Song Wendi that the actions of the ruler would exert much more influence than the actions of any other person, because—unlike any other being—the emperor would be responsible for the entire people. It is implied that for this reason the emperor, by accepting Buddhism, could perform an act of truly soteriological significance which nobody else would be capable of.185 In Bianzheng lun, juan 1, we find a rendition of the dialogue through which Guṇavarman converted Song Wendi.186 For the most part it is in intertextual agreement with the Gaoseng zhuan account. A.4 Liang Wudi and Sui Wendi Patronized Buddhism Also the patronage Buddhism received from emperors was employed to demonstrate the cooperation between Buddhism and the state. Buddhist apologetic literature stresses that with Liang Wudi 梁武帝 (r.: 502–549) and Sui Wendi 隋 文帝 (r.: 581–604) two Chinese emperors patronized Buddhism. The apologetic intention here is to demonstrate that under those two emperors Buddhism proved to be perfectly compatible with the Confucian state cult, as otherwise a Chinese emperor could never have patronized it. Both Liang Wudi and Sui Wendi are covered very elaborately in the Lidai sanbao ji: Liang Wudi is styled as an emperor exemplary in his patronage of Buddhism. He is contrasted against Zhou Wudi 周武帝 (r. 561–579), under

182 183 184 185 186

T 2110, p. 496, b15–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 95). T 2059, p. 325, b6-c5. T 2109, p. 480, c2–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 258 f.). T 2059, p. 340, c29–p. 341, a12. T 2110, p. 496, a22-b10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 92 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

50

Jülch

whose rule Buddhism was persecuted and decimated badly.187 In Lidai sanbao ji, juan 12, Sui Wendi’s accession to the throne is then celebrated as the beginning of an age of bliss during which Buddhism was anchored in China more strongly than ever: “It can be said that the torch of the dharma having been eclipsed is now even brighter [than before Zhou Wudi], and that, after the evil age, the bliss has returned” 可謂法炬滅而更明。否時還泰者也。 188 Also in Falin, Liang Wudi and Sui Wendi play prominent roles. As far as Liang Wudi is concerned, Poxie lun, juan 2, says that being a Buddhist devotee himself he personally practiced Buddhist spirituality, dedicated himself to a contemplative lifestyle, and had monasteries and pagodas constructed all over the empire.189 Bianzheng lun, juan 3, which is not translated in my Falin monograph, presents various traditions regarding Liang Wudi’s respect for authorities of Buddhism. As we read, Liang Wudi in particular esteemed the Buddhist scholar Fu Xi 傅翕 (497–569), commonly styled as “Mahāsattva Fu” 傅大士. When Liang Wudi was preaching the Sanhui bore jing 三慧般若經 at the Chongyun Hall 重雲殿 in the Hualin Garden 華林園, he honored Mahāsattva Fu seating him alone on a slightly elevated couch (ta, 榻).190 Sui Wendi is in Poxie lun, juan 2, again introduced as the emperor who organized the splendid revival of Buddhism after the persecution under Zhou Wudi. It is related that, as the saṃgha regained strength, China found itself in a state of bliss.191 In addition, Falin here employs a more specific, however historically not fully accurate claim to further document the compatibility of Sui Wendi’s patronage of Buddhism with the Confucian state cult. Falin says that Sui Wendi, who relied on Buddhism so strongly, also incorporated the Confucian Fengshan 封禪 sacrifice into his soteriological agenda,192 and thus 187 188 189 190

191 192

Mark Strange, “Representations of Liang Emperor Wu as a Buddhist Ruler in Sixth- and Seventh-century Texts,” Asia Major, third series, 24, no. 2 (2011), 63 f. T 2034, p. 102, a1–2. T 2109, p. 487, b12–22 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 342 ff.). T 2110, p. 506, b6–7; on this matter see also: Chen Jinhua, “Pañcavārṣika Assemblies in Liang Wudi’s Buddhist Palace Chapel,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 66, no. 1 (2006), 52. For a broader background on Mahāsattva Fu, see: Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, “Eine Ehrenrettung für den Süden: Pao-chih (418–514) und Fu Hsi (497–569), zwei Heilige aus dem unteren Yangtse Tal,” in Religion und Philosophie in Ostasien: Festschrift für Hans ­Steiniger, ed. Gert Naundorf (Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1985): 247–265. T 2109, p. 488, b19–25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, p. 356). The Fengshan sacrifice was an important sacrificial rite performed on Mount Tai 泰山 by emperors of the Chinese antiquity. Qin Shihuang 秦始皇 performed the rite in 219 BC. Han Wudi 漢武帝 performed it twice in 110 and 106 BC. Sui Wendi considered to restore the ancient tradition and made preparations, but finally decided against performing the

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

51

even realized the Confucian ideal of taiping.193 In Bianzheng lun, juan 3, Sui Wendi is, in a more general manner, praised for the upsurge Buddhism took through his patronage. We read: “He was a pillar for the three jewels. He was bearing the burden [for the sentient beings of] the four kinds of birth.” 棟梁三 寶。荷負四生。 194 A.5

Congruences between Aspects of the Buddhist and the Confucian Teachings In order to demonstrate the compatibility of Buddhism with Confucianism, Buddhist apologetic literature also points to congruences between aspects of the Buddhist and the Confucian teachings. The most prominent example is the congruence of the five Buddhist śīlas195 to the five Confucian cardinal virtues.196 The theme is found in Yanshi jiaxun, chapter “Guixin,”197 and in Weishu, chapter “Shilao zhi.”198 Furthermore the matter is discussed very elaborately in the Jinguangming jing wenju 金光明經文句 (T 1785, Notes on the Sūtra of Golden Light) by Zhiyi.199 In Falin the argument of the congruence between the five śīlas and the five cardinal virtues is employed in various places. A rather brief representation is found in Poxie lun, juan 1.200 In Bianzheng lun, juan 1, we find the matter embedded in a dialogue structure: First, the fictional Confucian supporter stresses the indispensability of the five Confucian cardinal virtues.201 In reply to this, the fictional Buddhist supporter—in elaborate description— presents the Buddhist śīlas as a fully functional alternative.202 traditional Fengshan sacrifice, and instead in 595 made a sacrifice at the foot of Mount Tai (Howard J. Wechsler, Offerings of Jade and Silk: Ritual and Symbol in the Legitimation of the T’ang Dynasty [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985], 175 f.). 193 T 2109, p. 488, b25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, p. 356). 194 T 2110, p. 508, c13. The “three jewels” are Buddha, dharma, and saṃgha. The “four kinds of birth” are the births through womb, egg, moisture, and transformation. 195 The five Buddhist śīlas are: (1) not killing 不殺, (2) not stealing 不盜, (3) no debauchery 不邪婬, (4) no consumption of alcohol 不飲酒, (5) no false speech 不妄語. 196 The five Confucian cardinal virtues are: (1) humaneness 仁, (2) righteousness 義, (3) propriety 禮, (4) wisdom 智, (5) trust 信. 197 Wang Liqi 王利器, Yanshi jiaxun jijie 顔氏家訓集解 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1993), 368; Teng Ssu-yü, Family Instructions for the Yen Clan, 138 f. 198 Leon Hurvitz, Treatise on Buddhism and Taoism, 33. 199 Kenneth Ch’en, The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1973), 57. 200 T 2109, p. 479, a28–29 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 246). 201 T 2110, p. 493, b14–18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 58). 202 T 2110, p. 493, c12–p. 494, b12 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 62–71).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

52

Jülch

Far less prominent is the congruence of the three Buddhist refuges (sangui,

三歸)203 to the three Confucian reverences (sanwei, 三畏).204 Both in Weishu,

chapter “Shilao zhi,” and in Poxie lun, juan 1, it is presented as parallel to the congruence of the five Buddhist śīlas to the five Confucian cardinal virtues.205 A.6 Filial Piety is also Respected in Buddhism Deeply rooted in the Xiaojing 孝經 as well as in other Confucian classics, filial piety (xiao, 孝) is the core value in Confucian ethics. Buddhism was accused of not respecting this essential requirement, as in order to become a Buddhist monk one had to subject oneself to the act of “leaving the family” (chujia, 出 家).206 To defend the claim of Buddhism’s compatibility with Confucianism, Buddhist apologists sought to demonstrate that—despite the rite of leaving the family—the requirement of filial piety was honored and observed in Buddhism as well. In Mouzi lihuo lun, chapter 15, we find the argument that in becoming a Buddhist monk one could serve oneʼs parents even better than in terms of the Confucian understanding of filial piety, as through their spirituality monks would tremendously benefit all sentient beings, including their parents.207 In Falinʼs apologetic scriptures we find this argument employed in two different places in Bianzheng lun, juan 6.208 In order to demonstrate that in fact Buddhist monks excelled in practicing filial piety, Chinese Buddhist literature incorporates a remarkable wealth of tales depicting the deep devotion particular practitioners showed for their parents. The most famous story is that of Maudgalyāyana (chin.: mulian, 目蓮), a direct disciple of the Buddha, who through his spiritual practice managed to

203 The three Buddhist refuges are the refuges to Buddha, dharma, and saṃgha. 204 The three Confucian reverences, according to Lunyu 16.8, are the reverence of the mandate of heaven 畏天命, the reverence of great men 畏大人, and the reverence of sages 畏聖人 (D.C. Lau, Confucius: The Analects [Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2002], 164 f.). 205 For the reference in the “Shilao zhi,” see: Leon Hurvitz, Treatise on Buddhism and Taoism, 33. For the reference in the Poxie lun, see: T 2109, p. 479, a28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 246). 206 Anthony C. Yu, State and Religion in China: Historical and Textual Perspectives (Chicago: Open Court, 2005), 96–100. 207 Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 4, a8–13 (John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 106). 208 The two places are: T 2110, p. 529, b18-c3 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 284–287) and T 2110, p. 533, a6–17 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 339– 346).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

53

get his deceased mother out of hell.209 Surprisingly, the Maudgalyāyana legend is not prominently represented in Falin. However, in Bianzheng lun, juan 6, with brief references to the stories of Ding Lan 丁蘭 and Dong Yong 董永, we find representations of two other legends also designed to demonstrate the strength of devotion Buddhist practitioners feel for their parents.210 Arguments Demonstrating the Superiority of Buddhism to Confucianism With regard to the argumentation demonstrating the superiority of Buddhism to Confucianism, I will firstly refer to the introduction of a new geographical conception (section B.1), secondly to the depreciation of the Confucian sages (sections B.2–B.3), and thirdly to arguments highlighting the superiority of Buddhism in guaranteeing political stability (sections B.4–B.5). B

India as the Center of the World B.1 In the traditional Confucian world view, China was seen as the center of the world. This becomes clear through the term “middle kingdom” (chin.: zhongguo, 中國), which already in medieval China was employed to geographically locate the Chinese cultural sphere.211 Facing the establishment of Buddhism in China, this sinocentric world view, designed to make the Chinese cultural 209 Kenneth Ch’en, The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism, 18–28; Kenneth Ch’en, “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 28 (1968): 81–97. 210 For the reference to Ding Lan, see T 2110, p. 526, c4; for the reference to Dong Yong, see T 2110, p. 526, c4–5 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 247 f.). An additional reference to Ding Lan is seen in Poxie lun, juan 2 (T 2109, p. 488, b11–12; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 355). The full tales of Ding Lan and Dong Yong only survive in later compilations. For a translation of the tale of Ding Lan, see: Keith Knapp, “Confucian Views of the Supernatural,” in: Early Medieval China: A Sourcebook, ed. Wendy Swartz (New York: Columbia University Press, 2014), 644 f. For a translation of the tale of Dong Yong, see: Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 248, note 156. 211 Endymion Wilkinson explains that officially the term “zhongguo” 中國 only became a name for the Chinese state in the 19th century, whereas already in ancient China the term was used to signify the Chinese cultural sphere: “The expression is also used in the classics as a cultural concept to differentiate the Huaxia from the Barbarians” (Endymion Wilkinson, Chinese History: A Manual. Revised and Enlarged [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000], 132). In the anti-Buddhist polemicism Falin stood up against, we also find a passage using the term “zhongguo” in that sense. In a petition by Fu Yi preserved in Jiu Tangshu, juan 79, we read: “Prior to the Western Jin, the state had strict regulations that did not allow people of the middle kingdom (i.e. China) to undergo ceremonies of ordination lightly” 西晉以上. 國有嚴科. 不許中國之人. 輒行髡髮之事. (Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu. vol. 8, 2716).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

54

Jülch

sphere appear as superior, and the non-Chinese cultures as inferior, was employed to depreciate Buddhism. In reaction to this, Buddhist apologetic thought introduced a contrary world view presenting India as the center of the world. The term “zhongguo” was applied to India and taken as a Chinese translation of the Sanskrit expression “madhyadeśa.”212 The argument was that the center of the world would have to be the place in which the Buddha, as the most noble being of all, appeared. One of the early displays of this counter-­ideol­ogy is seen in Mouzi lihuo lun, chapters 1213 and 14.214 In Falin, this argument is seen in Bianzheng lun, juan 6. Here it is said that the place where the Buddha appeared necessarily had to be the center of the world, because if the Buddha had appeared anywhere closer to the fringe of the world, the world would have tilted.215 One very particular element employed in the argumentation depicting India as madhyadeśa is the account of the controversy between He Chengtian 何承天 (370–447), a Confucian scholar of the Liu-Song dynasty, and the Buddhist monk Huiyan 慧嚴. In this controversy, known from Gaoseng zhuan, juan 7, He Chengtian supports the Confucian view of China being the center of the world, while Huiyan explains that India had to be the center of the world, because on the day of the summer solstice objects would cast no shadow there. It is implied that the lack of shadow demonstrates that the sun stood in zenith over India, marking India as the center of the world.216 In Falin, we find the controversy rendered in Bianzheng lun, juan 6.217 One difference, however, is that in this rendition He Chengtian’s Buddhist opponent is not Huiyan. Here his opponents are two monks named Zhiyan 智嚴 and Huiguan 慧觀. In the Bianzheng lun, the argumentation is also developed more elaborately, and what is only implied in the Gaoseng zhuan is here spelled out.

212 213 214 215 216 217

Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 266. Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 1, c25–26 (John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 61). Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 3, c21–23 (John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 103). T 2110, p. 525, b11–12 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 233). For the whole dialogue between He Chengtian and Huiyan, see: T 2059, p. 368, a13–20; for the argument referred to here, see: T 2059, p. 368, a14–15. T 2110, p. 525, b12–18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 233).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

55

B.2 The Buddha is Superior to the Confucian Sages Using Yao 堯 as an example, Lunyu 8.19 says that the sages, in their wisdom, modelled themselves upon heaven.218 This expresses the Confucian claim that the wisdom of the sages was unsurpassable. Buddhist apologists rejected this claim, and asserted that the Buddha, not the Confucian sages, possessed the highest wisdom. An early representation of this idea is found in Mouzi lihuo lun, chapter 7.219 Later works of Buddhist apologetic thought very prominently stress the superiority of the Buddha to the Confucian sages using a passage from Liezi 列 子, chapter 4. This passage quotes a dialogue between Confucius and Chancellor Pi 太宰嚭, in which Confucius explains that he was not certain whether the Confucian sages were real sages, while the only person whom he could identify as a real sage was the sage of the West. There has been a discussion in research of whether this sage of the West was meant to be the Buddha or Laozi, who, according to the huahu theory (see C.1), manifested himself in India as the Buddha.220 Be that as it may, it is safe to say that the Buddhist apologetic texts quoting this famous Liezi passage take the sage of the West as the Buddha. In Buddhist apologetic literature prior to Falin we find this passage employed in Erjiao lun, chapter 7,221 and in Xiaodao lun, chapter 34.222 In Falin it is found in

218

219

220

221

222

The passage reads: “Great indeed was Yao as a ruler! How lofty! It is heaven that is great and it was Yao who modelled himself upon it.” 大哉堯之為君也！巍巍乎！唯天為 大，唯堯則之. (D.C. Lau, Confucius: The Analects, 72 f.). Here we read: “Even though these four masters (i.e. Yao, Shun, the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius) were sages, comparing them with the Buddha would be like comparing a white deer with the unicorn, or a martin with the phoenix” 四師雖聖。比之於佛。猶 白鹿之與麒麟。燕鳥之與鳳凰也。 (Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 2, c4–5; John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 79). Tang Yongtong says that the sage of the West, known from the Liezi, would have to be Laozi having appeared in India as the Buddha (Tang Yongtong 湯用彤, Han Wei Liangjin Nanbeichao fojiao shi 漢魏兩晉南北朝佛教史 [Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 1997], 5). Erik Zürcher, however, stresses that the Liezi text received today appears to be a forgery replacing an original which was lost early. He argues that the forgery presents itself as being written in support of Buddhism also in many other places, so that it would be more likely that the text, when speaking of the sage of the West, means to refer to the Buddha directly (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 274 ff.). Guang Hongming ji, juan 8 : T 2103, p. 139, b27-c6 (Catherine Despeux, “La culture lettrée au service d’un plaidoyer pour le Bouddhisme: Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 193). Guang Hongming ji, juan 9 : T 2103, p. 152, a9–12 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 146).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

56

Jülch

two different places in Poxie lun, juan 1.223 It is interesting to note that, apparently out of outrage regarding the frequent employment of this Liezi passage in Buddhist apologetic literature, the Neoconfucian philosopher Wang Anshi 王 安石 (1021–1086) with his Daren lun 大人論 formulated a sharp rejoinder.224 Apart from this very popular tradition, Poxie lun, juan 2, also points to the superiority of the Buddha to the Confucian sages by means of comparing the relics. The statement is that the Buddha relics would be distinguished from the relics of the Confucian sages, as the Buddha relics emitted splendor and could neither be burned nor smashed.225 The Inferiority of Confucius B.3 In the Confucian ideology, Confucius was seen as the last sage. The claim was that, after the wisdom of the sages of the golden age of Chinese antiquity (Yao, Shun, and so forth) had long been forgotten, Confucius was the only one still able to communicate this ancient wisdom tradition into the present.226 Because Confucius plays this crucial role among the Confucian sages, by depreciating Confucius Buddhist apologists could depreciate Confucianism itself. In order to accomplish this depreciation, they attacked Confucius for his failure to convince the dukes of the Warring States to employ more humane policies. Already in Mouzi lihuo lun, chapter 14, we read: “Zhongni was not employed in Lu or Wei, and Mencius was not utilized in Qi or Liang. [Not being used even in China], how then could they have gained official employment among the barbar­ians?” 及仲尼不容於魯衛。 孟軻不用於齊梁。 豈 復仕於夷狄乎。 227 In the context of the Buddhist world view, this passage rests on the understanding that the so-called barbarians are in fact superior to the Chinese civilzation, so that Confucius and Mencius, if they did not even succeed in China, would have had even less success where the Buddha comes from.

223

An elaborate quotation is found in: T 2109, p. 476, c28–p. 477, a7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 224). An abbreviated quotation is found in: T 2109, p. 478, b25–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 239 f.). 224 I have previously discussed and translated this rejoinder in the following article: Thomas Jülch, “Wang Anshi’s ‘Treatise on Great Men,’” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 66, no. 2 (2013): 197–204. 225 T 2109, p. 485, b7–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 311). 226 Rudolf G. Wagner, “Die Unhandlichkeit des Konfuzius,” in Weisheit: Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation (III), ed. Aleida Assmann (München: Wilhelm Fink, 1991), 456. 227 Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 3, c18–19 (John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 103).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

57

In Falin, we find a passage in Poxie lun, juan 2, which also attacks Confucius for his inefficiency as a moral authority.228 Remarkably, the statement is here further supported by an enhancement consisting of four essentialized quotations of particular anecdotes from Confucius’s Shiji biography, which serve to further illustrate the negative image of the historical Confucius.229 The most humiliating of these anecdotes is probably the one in which a stranger observing Confucius describes him as looking like a stray dog.230 Falin, in depreciating Confucius, also employs anecdotes originating from the Zhuangzi and from the Lunyu. In Poxie lun, juan 2, we find a couplet of essentialized quotations of anecdotes the first of which is taken from Zhuangzi, chapter 29, and the second of which is taken from Lunyu 18.7. The first line of the couplet refers to the anecdote of Confucius being intimidated by the Robber Zhi.231 The second line of the couplet refers to the anecdote of Confucius being mocked by an old man.232 Bianzheng lun, juan 2, more elaborately quotes the famous anecdote found in Zhuangzi, chapter 14, which says that Confucius asked Laozi about the Dao.233 228 229 230

231

232

233

T 2109, p. 485, c18–20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 318). T 2109, p. 485, c20–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 318 f.). In the Shiji we read: “Going to Zheng, Confucius was separated from his followers. He was standing alone at the East Gate when a citizen of Zheng remarked to Zigong: ‘There is a man at the East Gate with a forehead like Yao, a neck like Gaoyao and shoulders like Zizhan, and just three inches shorter below the waist than Yu. Lost as a stray dog he looks!’” 孔子適鄭，與弟子相失. 孔子獨立郭東門，鄭人或謂子貢曰：「東門有 人，其顙似堯，其項類皋陶，其肩類子產，然自要以下不及禹三寸. 纍纍若喪 家之狗. 」 (Sima Qian, Shiji, vol. 6, 1921 f.; Yang Hsien-yi, Records of the Historian [Hongkong: The Commercial Press, 1975], 11). The story is also seen in the Kongzi jiayu: Hans van Ess, “Einige Anmerkungen zur Biographie des Konfuzius im Shih-chi und vergleichbaren Stellen im K’ung-tzu chia-yü,” Oriens Extremus 50 (2011), 170. For the original passage in the Zhuangzi, see: Chen Guying 陳鼓應, Zhuangzi jinzhu jinyi 莊子今注今譯 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001), vol. 3, 776–780 (Victor H. Mair, Wandering on the Way: Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chuang Tzu [Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1994], 298–305). For the employment of the passage in the Poxie lun, see: T 2109, p. 486, a4 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 320). For the original passage in the Lunyu, see: D.C. Lau, Confucius: The Analects, 184–187. For the employment of the passage in the Poxie lun, see: T 2109, p. 486, a5 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 320). For the original passage in the Zhuangzi, see: Chen Guying. Zhuangzi jinzhu jinyi, vol. 2, 377 f. (Victor H. Mair, Wandering on the Way, 138). (For a discussion of this Zhuangzi passage, see: Volker Olles, “Die Metamorphosen des Meisters: Einige Eindrücke vom Bild des Konfuzius im Buch Zhuangzi,” in Chinesische Religion und Philosophie–Konfuzianismus– Mohismus–Daoismus–Buddhismus, ed. Konrad Meisig [Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005],

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

58

Jülch

Another prominent argument employed to demonstrate that the status of Confucius would at least have to be lower than that of the Buddha is extracted from a number of Chinese Buddhist apocrypha. The claim presented here is that Confucius, Yan Hui, and Laozi were in fact all reincarnations of Indian bodhisattvas.234 Confucius is introduced as a reincarnation of a bodhisattva named Rutong 儒童. If Confucius was a reincarnation of an Indian bodhisattva, his status would rank below that of the Buddha, as bodhisattvas generally rank below the Buddha. Falin, in Poxie lun, juan 1, quotes this argument from the Qingjing faxing jing,235 and, in Bianzheng lun, juan 5, from the Kongji suo wen jing.236 Peace and Stability Come with Buddhism, not with Confucianism B.4 In the Confucian conception, the value of the sages—in connection with the conception of taiping—mainly lies in the stability they had brought China. Falin, however, introduces an argumentation designed to break down this image of the Confucian sages. In different places, Poxie lun, juan 2, argues that the golden age of Chinese antiquity was not the era of uninterrupted peace imagined in the Confucian ideology, and that the system that truly brought peace and stability to China was Buddhism. In one passage, basing himself on the Shiji 史記, on the Huainan zi 淮南子, and on the Bamboo Annals, Falin shows that the state of peace in the so-called golden age of Chinese antiquity was interrupted by bad rulers such as Jie 桀 (the last ruler of the Xia dynasty) and Zhou 紂 (the last ruler of the Shang dynasty).237 In another passage Falin refers to the Qin and Western Han dynasties (i.e. mainly to the period with regard to which Buddhism was considered eclipsed), and recounts that during those times hostile invasions, rebellions and the like 72 f.) For the employment of the passage in the Bianzheng lun, see: T 2110, p. 498, c19–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 123). 234 The apocrypha being of relevance here include the Qingjing faxing jing 清淨法行經 (Sūtra of the Practice of the Pure Dharma), the Xumi siyu jing 須彌四域經 (Sūtra of the four Regions of Mount Sumeru), the Xumi xiangtu shan jing 須彌像圖山經 (Sūtra on Mount Sumeru with Illustrations), the Laozi daquan pusa jing 老子大權菩薩經 (Sūtra of Laozi, the Bodhisattva of Great Expediency), the Shier you jing 十二遊經 (Sūtra of the Twelve Rambles), and the Kongji suo wen jing 空寂所問經 (Sūtra of the Questions of Kongji). Zürcher explains that all of these apocrypha are lost, but frequently get quoted in Buddhist apologetic literature (Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 313 f.). 235 T 2109, p. 478, c9–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 241). 236 T 2110, p. 524, b17–19 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 220). 237 T 2109, p. 482, c7–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 280 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

59

frequently compromised political stability.238 Subsequently we find a list of the Eastern Han emperors demonstrating that they all had long reign periods, which is considered an indication of political conditions being stable.239 In a new paragraph, we are given a description of the blissful developments that in particular characterized the time of Han Mingdi, the second Eastern Han emperor,240 during whose rule the official reintroduction of Buddhism was said to have taken place (see A.2). In this way Falin is able to show the contrast between the times of the eclipse of Buddhism, and the times following the reintroduction of Buddhism. He seeks to demonstrate that, when the state had to rely on the Chinese teachings only, the political conditions were unstable, while based on the Buddhist teachings stability and bliss came about. If the Ruler Turns to Buddhism, the State Enjoys Perfect Protection B.5 Falin also employs the Renwang jing 仁王經,241 belonging to the so-called “state protection sūtras,”242 in order to reveal the unparalleled means Buddhism possesses in protecting the state against every disaster. In Bianzheng lun, juan 1, we find a lengthy quotation from the Renwang jing. Within the quoted passage it is first explained that on Jambudvīpa there are sixteen big states, 500 intermediate states, and 10,000 small states, all of which would generally be threatened by seven disasters 七難, while any of the states whose rulers would convert to Buddhism would be completely safeguarded.243 Next, a list of the seven disasters is presented, within which in connection with each disaster it is stressed that, in the event of an outbreak, the Renwang jing should be recited. The seven disasters are: (1) an alteration of the system of sun and moon; (2) a derailment of the 28 lunar lodges; (3) devastating conflagrations; (4) major

238 239 240 241

242

243

T 2109, p. 484, a2–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 295 f.). T 2109, p. 484, a11–15 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 296 f.). T 2109, p. 484, a17–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 297 f.). The Renwang jing has been translated into Chinese by Kumārajīva (T 245) and by Amoghavajra (T 246). For a study and a translation based on the text by Amoghavajra, see: Charles D. Orzech, Politics and Transcendent Wisdom: The Scripture for Humane Kings in the Creation of Chinese Buddhism (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998). The Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經 (Lotus sūtra, T 262), the Renwang jing 仁王經 (Scripture for Humane Kings, T 245–246), and the Jinguangming jing 金光明經 (Sūtra of Golden Light, T 663) are known as the “state protection sūtras,” as they were employed to offer spiritual protection to the state (Robert E. Buswell, The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014], 363). T 2110, p. 496, b21–27 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 96).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

60

Jülch

inundations; (5) huge thunderstorms; (6) great droughts; (7) raids carried out by robbers.244 Arguments Demonstrating the Superiority of Buddhism to Daoism C With regard to the argumentation demonstrating the superiority of Buddhism to Daoism, I will refer firstly to arguments comparing Laozi to the Buddha (sections C.1-C.4), secondly to arguments criticizing the teaching system of Daoism (sections C.5-C.10), thirdly to arguments concerning habitual patterns regarded as common among members of the Daoist clergy (sections C.11-C.12), and fourthly to the argumentative employment of subversive tendencies within Daoism (section C.13). Buddhist Counters to the Huahu jing C.1 The Huahu jing 化胡經 (Scripture of the Conversion of the Barbarians) is a scripture central to the anti-Buddhist argumentation developed in Daoism. It says that the Buddha was in fact no other than Laozi, who, after his ascension into heaven described in the Xisheng jing 西昇經 (Scripture of Western Ascension), re-appeared in India incarnated as the Buddha in order to convert the Barbarians. Hence, Buddhism is seen as a subdivision of Daoism simplified for the barbarians to understand. This idea is known as the huahu theory. Subsequently I will introduce the most important Buddhist counter concepts. One Buddhist counter concept claimed that the Buddha lived earlier than Laozi. This claim did not only serve in contradicting the huahu theory. Claiming that the Buddha was older than Laozi and that hence Buddhism was older than Daoism, also meant to present Buddhism as the more venerable teaching with the longer tradition. Probably the most important source in this respect is the court debate between the Daoist priest Jiang Bin 姜斌 and the Buddhist monk Tanmozui 曇謨最 held at the court of Wei Mingdi 魏明帝 (r.: 516–528). This court debate is rendered in Poxie lun, juan 1.245 It is also found in many other works of Chinese Buddhist apologetic thought, but the rendition in the Poxie lun appears to be the earliest one. Wei Mingdi opens the debate asking “Did the Buddha and Laozi live at the same time or not?” 佛與老子同時以不.246 Jiang Bin, speaking in support of the huahu theory, claims that the Buddha and 244 T 2110, p. 496, b27-c16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 96 f.). Orzech provides an extra translation of the relevant passage from the Kumārajīva version of the Renwang jing (Charles D. Orzech, Politics and Transcendent Wisdom, 283 ff.). In the Amoghavajra version the disasters are referred to much more briefly (ibid. 246). 245 T 2109, p. 481, b8-c18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 264–268). 246 T 2109, p. 481, b13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 264 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

61

Laozi lived at the same time.247 Tanmozui, however, demonstrates that Laozi’s Western ascension into heaven could only have taken place 425 years after the Buddha had entered the nirvāṇa.248 In the end it is said that Wei Mingdi accepts Tanmozui᾿s position as the correct one, and sentences Jiang Bin to death. Only due to the plea of another dharma master, we are told, Wei Mingdi takes the death sentence back, and confines himself to only making Jiang Bin work in the horse stable.249 The court debate between Jiang Bin and Tanmozui is however not the only tradition supporting the concept that the Buddha lived earlier than Laozi. The Bianzheng lun contains many passages which say or at least imply this. For example, in Bianzheng lun, juan 5, there is a passage claiming that Laozi travelled to Kashmir, found an image of the Buddha there, and fell into deep mourning, because he was born so much later than the Buddha, and could not meet him.250 A second Buddhist counter concept employed as a response to the huahu theory claims that Laozi was a disciple of the Buddha. This concept accepts the claim of the huahu theory that Laozi, after his ascension into heaven, reappeared in India. But it introduces the modification that Laozi did not re-appear there as the Buddha but as somebody who in India took the Buddha as his master. With Laozi becoming a disciple of the Buddha, Daoism also became a subdivision of Buddhism. Daoism was seen as a system developed on the basis of the teachings of the Buddha by a disciple of the Buddha. As all of this was presentable on the basis of the huahu theory, this concept was frequently introduced through modified versions of the Huahu jing designed to support the purposes of Buddhist apologetic thought.251 As far as the Buddhist apologetic treatises are concerned, an early representation of the concept depicting Laozi as a disciple of the Buddha is found in the Zhengwu lun: “Laozi was a disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, the [Xisheng] jing states: ‘He [i.e. Laozi] heard the way in Zhuqian. [In that country] there was a venerable master who had consumately entered nirvāṇa, [a state that knows] neither beginning nor end, and eternally continues without intermission.’252 ‘Zhuqian’ 247 248 249 250 251 252

T 2109, p. 481, b13–14 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 265). T 2109, p. 481, b26–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 266). T 2109, p. 481, c16–18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 268). T 2110, p. 522, b13–16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 190 f.). Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 312 f. This can be identified as a quotation from the Xisheng jing (Livia Kohn, Taoist Mystical Philosophy: The Scripture of Western Ascension [Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991], 323). The passage is however crucially modified. While in the Xisheng jing we read that in Zhuqian the venerable master consumately entered wuwei, the Zhengwu lun puts nirvāṇa in the place of wuwei, and subsequently adds an explanation saying that

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

62

Jülch

is India. ‘Nirvāṇa’ is a Sanskrit-term, which in Chinese means wuwei.” 老子即 佛弟子也。故其經云。聞道竺乾。有古先生。善入泥洹。不始不終。 永存 綿綿。竺乾者天竺也。泥洹者梵語。晉言無為也。253 In this passage we can

see how the ideas of Laozi being a disciple of the Buddha, and Daoism being developed out of Buddhism are brought together. The latter is shown, as the Daoist principle of “wuwei” 無為 (inactivity) is depicted as being derived from the Buddhist principle of nirvāṇa. In Falin, the ideology of Laozi being a disciple of the Buddha is represented in many different variants. In two different places in Poxie lun, juan 1, Laozi is quoted with statements in which he praises the Buddha as his master. Both times the statement ascribed to Laozi is presented as a quotation from the Xisheng jing.254 In Bianzheng lun, juan 5, we find a lengthy list of traditions serving to document that Laozi was a disciple of the Buddha, and that Daoism is based on Buddhism.255 I cannot name all of these traditions here. Just to provide an example, I would like to point to a passage in which Laozi calls the Buddha his master and goes on to stress that on this basis the Daoist conception of the highest trurth would have its origin in Buddhism.256 Directly afterwards we find another interesting passage claiming that Daoist terms such as ‘great dao’ 大道, ‘ziran’ 自然, and so forth, would all be ways of referring to the Buddha.257 In Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we are told that ‘greatly awakened’ 大覺258 is the Chinese term for ‘Buddha,’ ‘great dao’ the Chinese term for ‘bodhi,’ and ‘wuwei’ the Chinese term for ‘nirvāṇa.’259 Even though we see that regarding these equations the Bianzheng lun can also be selfcontradictory, it is clear that all of them serve to demonstrate that Daoist terms are usually Chinese translations of Buddhist Sanskrit-terms. A third Buddhist counter concept to the propaganda developed in the Huahu jing is the tradition known from Chinese Buddhist apocrypha, such as the Qingjing faxing jing and the Kongji suo wen jing, that have already been introduced above in connection with the Buddhist view of Confucius. As those wuwei would just be a Chinese translation of nirvāṇa. Also the subsequent statement that Zhuqian has to be India has been added by the author of the Zhengwu lun. 253 Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 7, b4–6 (Arthur Link, “Cheng-wu lun,” 140). 254 One place is: T 2109, p. 477, a9–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 225). Another place is: T 2109, p. 477, c9–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 232). 255 T 2110, p. 524, a9–24 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 214 ff.). 256 T 2110, p. 524, a10–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 214). 257 T 2110, p. 524, a11–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 214). 258 This is a key term in Zhuangzi, chapter 2 (Chen Guying, Zhuangzi jinzhu jinyi, vol. 1, p. 85; Victor H. Mair, Wandering on the Way, 22). 259 T 2110, p. 530, c8–10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 305).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

63

apocrypha introduce Confucius as a reincarnation of Rutong, they introduce Laozi as a reincarnation of Mahākāśyapa 摩訶迦葉 (frequently abbreviated as Kāśyapa 迦葉).260 Mahākāśyapa was one of the main disciples of the Buddha. So the claim that Laozi was a Chinese reincarnation of Mahākāśyapa is another variation on the theme of Laozi being a disciple of the Buddha. Within Buddhist apologetic treatises, the claim that Laozi was a reincarnation of Mahākāśyapa is already found in the Ronghua lun261 and in Erjiao lun, chapter 9.262 In Falin’s apologetic treatises, the claim is found in different places of Poxie lun, juan 1.263 Apart from that we find it in the context of the afore-mentioned quotations from the Qingjing faxing jing (which is quoted in Poxie lun, juan 1)264 and the Kongji suo wen jing (which is quoted in Bianzheng lun, juan 5).265 In contradicting the huahu theory, Buddhist apologists also sought to discredit Wang Fu 王浮, the author of the Huahu jing. It was argued that in debates with his Buddhist opponent Bo Yuan 帛遠, also known as Fazu 法祖, he was frequently defeated so that he composed the Huahu jing out of shame and anger. An even older tradition refers to Wang Fu’s postmortal fate. It says that Yamarāja 閻羅王 (the king of the netherworld, who judges the dead) received lectures from Bo Yuan regarding the Śūrangama sūtra, while Wang Fu was tied up and begged Bo Yuan for forgiveness. In Bo Yuan’s biography in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 1, we find both traditions presented together.266 The latter tradition however already appeared in the Youming lu 幽明錄, a collection of zhiguai stories by Liu Yiqing 劉義慶 (403–444).267 Both traditions are taken up in Chen Ziliang’s commentary to Bianzheng lun, juan 5.268

260 Erik Zürcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, 313 f. 261 Hongming ji, juan 7: T 2102, p. 47, b12. 262 Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 140, a7–8 (Catherine Despeux, “La culture lettrée au service d’un plaidoyer pour le Bouddhisme: Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 197). 263 One place is T 2109, p. 477, c22–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 234). Another place is T 2109, p. 478, c8–9 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 241). 264 T 2109, p. 478, c9–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 241). 265 T 2110, p. 524, b17–19 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 220). 266 T 2059, p. 327, b16–22. 267 Zhang Zhenjun, Buddhism and Tales of the Supernatural in Early Medieval China: A Study of Liu Yiqing’s (403–444) Youming lu (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 134. 268 T 2110, p. 522, c1–4 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 193 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

64

Jülch

C.2 The Birth of the Buddha was Nobler than that of Laozi Within the deification of Laozi in Daoism, various myths glorifying the birth of Laozi were established. In the Santian neijie jing 三天内解經 (DZ 1205, fasc. 876) we read that Laozi was born by the Xuanmiao yunü 玄妙玉女 (Jade Woman of Mysterious Wonder), whom he had previously created out of cosmic energies.269 This glorification provoked a reaction in Buddhist apologetic writing. In Falin, the nobility of the birth of Laozi is diminished, and the traditional Buddha hagiography is employed to demonstrate that the birth of the Buddha was much nobler. In order to diminish the nobility of the birth of Laozi, Falin repeatedly says that Laozi was in fact not the son of a Jade Woman of Mysterious Wonder, but the son of a shepherd maiden (written either 牧母 or 牧女). This statement is found in Poxie lun, juan 1,270 in Bianzheng lun, juan 6,271 and in the speech rendered in Falin biezhuan, juan 3, which Falin gave when he was summoned to the emperor after his interrogation.272 In the Bianzheng lun the diminution of the birth of Laozi is put in contrast to the praise of the birth of the Buddha. In fine parallel style we read: “Laojun opposed the norm, and was born out of the left side of a shepherd maiden. The world honored one followed the world, and was born out of the right side of his holy mother.” 老君逆常。 託牧女而左出。 世尊順化。 因聖母而右生。 273 In the diction of this couplet, the birth of the Buddha is distinguished from the birth of Laozi in two important respects. Firstly, the status of the Buddha’s mother was higher than the status of Laozi’s mother. Secondly, the Buddha came out of the right side of his mother, whereas Laozi came out of the left side of his mother. In both respects Falin, in depicting the birth of the Buddha, relies on the ancient Indian accounts of the Buddha hagiography, which, roughly summarized, present the birth of the Buddha as follows: The Buddha’s mother, Mahāmāyā, was the queen of the North Indian state of Śākya. The Buddha was prepared in the Tuṣita heaven, from where he descended into Mahāmāyā’s womb in the guise of (or riding on) a white elephant with six tusks. After the pregnancy, Mahāmāyā standing under a tree in the Lumbinī garden gave birth to the Buddha, who came into the world cutting open his 269 Livia Kohn, “The Lao-tzu Myth,” in Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, ed. Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998), 51 ff.; Livia Kohn, God of the Dao: Lord Lao in History and Myth (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, The University of Michigan, 1998), 15 f. 270 T 2109, p. 482, b23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 278). 271 T 2110, p. 525, a10 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 229). 272 T 2051, p. 210, a16–17 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 128). 273 T 2110, p. 525, a10–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 229).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

65

mother’s right side without hurting his mother in any way.274 References to the holy and noble birth of the Buddha are found all over Falin’s apologetic works.275 The distinction between the Buddha being born out of the right side, and Laozi being born out of the left side, is in Falin contextualized with the fact that in traditional Chinese culture, the right side was generally valued higher than the left side. We find this contextualization in one paragraph of Bianzheng lun, juan 6, which provides a lengthy list of quotations from classical Chinese literature testifying to the fact that preference has always been given to the right and not to the left.276 The Bodily Features of the Buddha are Nobler than Those of Laozi C.3 In Daoism, the bodily marks of Laozi were first described in the second-century scripture Laozi bianhua jing 老子變化經. As far as the facial marks are concerned, we find further elaborations in Laozi᾿s biography in the Shenxian zhuan 神仙傳. In the fifth century, Laozi᾿s bodily marks were standardized and grew to their full number of 81.277 In Buddhism, the bodily marks of the Buddha are known as lakṣaṇas (chin.: xiang, 相) and vyañjanas (chin.: hao, 好). Falin, in Bianzheng lun, juan 6, devotes substantial space to comparing the bodily marks 274

275 276 277

For evaluations of the relevant sections of the hagiographic accounts, see: Hans-Joachim Klimkeit, Der Buddha: Leben und Lehre (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1990), 49–61; Hans H. Penner, Rediscovering the Buddha: Legends of the Buddha and Their Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 21–23. It needs to be remarked that the traditional Buddha hagiography—contrary to the Buddha hagiography presented in Mahāyānistic texts such as the Lalitavistara—is based on the understanding that the Buddha only reached Buddhahood in the enlightenment scene under the bodhi tree, and was a bodhisattva (i.e. a Buddha-to-be) until then. So the traditional Buddha hagiography speaks of the birth of the bodhisattva rather than of the birth of the Buddha. However the birth story as presented in the traditional Buddha hagiography was also taken over into the Mahāyānistic Buddha hagiography, where it was however claimed that the Buddha had already reached Buddhahood a very long time ago, and under the bodhi tree only seemingly went through the enlightenment process again, in order to demonstrate to the sentient beings how Buddhahood could be reached. So the Mahāyānistic understanding allows to speak of the birth of the Buddha. Falin, in the quoted passage, avoids the problem by simply calling the Buddha the “world honored one” 世尊. However the Lalitavistara was translated into Chinese already in 308 AD by Dharmarakṣa, so that we can assume that Falin was at least aware of it, and may have had an understanding conflating traditional and Mahāyānistic ideas. Probably the most important representation is found in Poxie lun, juan 2: T 2109, p. 484, b16–22 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 301 f.). T 2110, p. 526, c28–p. 527, a18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 251–254). Livia Kohn, “The Looks of Laozi,” in Asian Folklore Studies 55, no. 2 (1996), 207.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

66

Jülch

of Laozi to those of the Buddha. The relevant passage first describes the bodily marks of Laozi as plump and primitive, and subsequently depicts the bodily marks of the Buddha as noble and magnificent.278 C.4 The Life Span of the Buddha is Longer than That of Laozi In the context of the deification of Laozi, Daoist texts such as the Laozi bianhua jing and the Shenxian zhuan claim that Laozi had had various previous incarnations throughout Chinese antiquity. According to the Shenxian zhuan, Laozi in the times of Huangdi 黃帝 appeared as Guangcheng zi 廣成子; in the times of Zhuanxu 顓頊 as Chiqing zi 赤精子; in the times of Diku 帝嚳 as Lutu zi 祿圖子; in the times of Yao 堯 as Wucheng zi 務成子; in the times of Shun 舜 as Yinshou zi 尹壽子; in the times of Yu of Xia 夏禹 as Zhenxing zi 真行子; in the times of Tang of Yin 殷湯 as Xize zi 錫則子; and in the times of King Wen (of Zhou) 文王 as Wenyi xiansheng 文邑先生.279 With regard to the exact attributions there are also deviations between the different Daoist scriptures. Livia Kohn has created a table stating for each scripture which incarnation is attributed to the times of which ruler.280 Already in the Xiaodao lun we find criticism of this legendary tradition wantonly ascribing previous incarnations to Laozi.281 Falin does however not confine himself to criticism, but also compares the life span of Laozi to that of the Buddha. Bianzheng lun, juan 6, says that, as the alleged earlier incarnations of Laozi are all invented, the true life span of Laozi would have to be confined to the biography of the historical Laozi.282 In contrast, it is said that the Buddha’s life span must be imagined as infinite, because, beyond his biography as the historical Buddha, he exists eternally in the dharmakāya.283 C.5

Daoism is Only Legitimate as “Philosophical Daoism,” Not as “Religious Daoism” In order to understand Falin’s apologetic work, it is necessary to differentiate between “philosophical Daoism” (chin.: daojia, 道家) and “religious Daoism” (chin.: daojiao, 道教). While the Laozi is seen as the main scripture 278 279

T 2110, p. 526, a24-b8 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 242 ff.). Zhou Qicheng 周啓成, Shenxian zhuan (Taibei: Sanmin shuju, 2004), 358; Robert Ford Campany, To Live as Long as Heaven and Earth: A Translation and Study of Ge Hong’s Traditions of Divine Transcendents (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), 194 f. 280 Livia Kohn, God of the Dao, 218. 281 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 144, c22–25 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 59); T 2103, p. 148, c8–10 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 104). 282 T 2110, p. 528, a14–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 266 f.). 283 T 2110, p. 528, a28-b7 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 267 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

67

of philos­ophical Daoism, religious Daoism was based on new traditions such as the Way of the Celestial Masters (chin.: tianshi dao, 天師道) as well as Shangqing 上清 and Lingbao 靈寶 Daoism. In modern sinology, the differentiation between philosophical Daoism and religious Daoism is not accepted any more.284 However, much of Buddhist apologetic thought strongly argues in terms of this differentiation. An important argument based on this differentiation was introduced in the Erjiao lun. As the title hints in speaking of “two jiao,” the treatise suggests that only Confucianism and Buddhism could be called “jiao” 教, while Daoism could only be legitimate as a “jia” 家. This means that “philosophical Daoism” was seen as the only legitimate representation of Daoism, while “religious Daoism” was considered illegitimate. The underlying understanding is that the Laozi was the legitimate basis for Daoism, while the later traditions of the Celestial Masters, of Shangqing and Lingbao Daoism were regarded as the result of wanton invention. So, as Daoism could not be legitimate as a “jiao” but only as a “jia,” it was different from Confucianism and Buddhism, which, in the argumentation of the Erjiao lun, both clearly were “jiao.” In Erjiao lun, chapter 1, we read: “Therefore one has to speak of Confu­cianism and Buddhism. Buddhism refers to the inner (i.e. to the mind), Confucianism refers to the outer (i.e. to the world). … There are only those two jiao. How could there be a third one?” 則可云儒釋。釋教為內儒教 為外。 … 教唯有二。寧得有三。 285 This was meant to suggest that Daoism did not stand on the same level as Confucianism and Buddhism. The idea was that, as Daoism did not stand on the same level, it had to be a system of lesser significance. The Erjiao lun in a later passage also claims that neither Confucius nor Laozi could however be regarded as “founders of a jiao” (jiaozhu, 教主).286 This position is taken up by Falin, who employs it to further consolidate the doctrine that Daoism could not be a jiao. In Bianzheng lun, juan 2, Falin argues that a “jiao” would need to have a founder or a series of founders, and explains that Confucianism would have its founding figures in the three sovereigns (sanhuang, 三皇) and in the five monarchs (wudi, 五帝), while Buddhism would 284 Isabelle Robinet, Taoism: Growth of a Religion (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 3. 285 Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 136, c15–17 (Catherine Despeux, “Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 169). 286 Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 138, a26-b13 (Catherine Despeux, “Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 180 ff.) ; see also T.H. Barrett, “The Advent of the ­Buddhist Conception of Religion in China and its Consequences for the Analysis of Daoism,” in Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies 9, no. 2 (2009), 158 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

68

Jülch

have its founding figure in the Buddha.287 Laozi, he says, would however not qualify as a founder of a jiao, since a legitimate jiao-founder would need to be a sage. The conclusion is that, since Daoism does not have a sage as a founder, it cannot be a jiao.288 That Laozi was not a sage was known from the “Gujin renbiao” 古今人表 (Table of Personalities from Antiquity to Present Times).289 C.6 Religious Daoism is not Based on the Laozi In Buddhist apologetic writing a high priority was given to the demonstration of the fact that religious Daoism was totally different from the teachings of philosophical Daoism. Since philosophical Daoism was seen as the only legitimate basis for Daoist thought, the detachment of religious Daoism from philosophical Daoism was a tool by means of which the entire system of religious Daoism—which was the actual competitor Buddhism in the early Tang dynasty was confronted with—could be discredited. For the purpose of this argumentation, religious Daoism was typically depicted as a system based on the misled ideas of the first Celestial Master, Zhang Daoling 張道陵, and not based on the system of philosophical Daoism. Already in Erjiao lun, chapter 9, we read: “But the present-day Daoists trace [their teachings] back to Zhang [Dao]ling. This is a demonic way which has nothing in common with Laozi.” 但 今之道士始自張陵。乃是鬼道。 不關老子。 290 In Poxie lun, juan 2, we find 287

The three sovereigns and the five monarchs represent the Confucian sages of Chinese antiquity. For both terms we have different lists. I will here confine myself to providing the most common definitions. The three sovereigns are commonly seen as Fuxi 伏羲, Shennong 神農, and Huangdi 黃帝 (Pang Ming 龐溟, “Sanhuang” 三皇, in Kongzi da cidian 孔子大辭典, ed. Zhang Dainian 張岱年 [Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 1993], 111). The five monarchs are commonly seen as Shaohao 少昊, Zhuanxu 顓頊, Gaoxin 高 辛, Yao 堯, and Shun 舜 (Pang Ming, “Wudi” 五帝, in Kongzi da cidian, ed. Zhang Dainian [Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 1993], 111). 288 T 2110, p. 499, a2–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 125–128); see also: Kobayashi Masayoshi, “The Establishment of the Daoist Religion (Taochiao) and its Structure,” Acta Asiatica 68 (1995), 27–30. 289 The “Gujin renbiao” is found in Hanshu, juan 20 (Ban Gu, Hanshu, vol. 3, 861–954). It is a table categorizing historical personalities based on their moral integrity. There are three main categories being “shang” 上 (good), “zhong” 中 (intermediate), and “xia” 下 (bad), each of which again has “shang,” “zhong,” and “xia” as subcatergories. So all together there are nine categories from “shang shang” (the good among the good) to “xia xia” (the bad among the bad). Sages are those in the category “shang shang,” which is indicated at the beginning of the table. Laozi is however only found in the category “zhong shang” (the good among the intermediate) (Ban Gu, Hanshu, vol. 3, 926). 290 Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 140, a18–19 (Catherine Despeux, “Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 198).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

69

a similar statement, which in addition names “talismanic writing” 符書 291 and “petition ceremonies” 章醮 292 as aspects of the practices introduced by Zhang Daoling in order to illustrate the deviation of the Way of the Celestial Masters from philosophical Daoism. The passage reads: “Since [Zhang Dao]ling there were three generations293 specifically practicing the demonic ways. Talismanic writing and petition ceremonies are detached from philosophical Daoism. [Those who followed the Celestial Masters] exorcised demons, and strangely discussed good and bad omens. From here the heresies arose.” 自陵三世專行 鬼道。 符書章醮出自道家。 禁厭妖孽妄談吉凶。 姦由茲起。 294 In Bian­ zheng lun, juan 6, we find a similar statement naming other aspects of religious Daoism in order to depict religious Daoism as being detached from the Laozi.295 In Bianzheng lun, juan 2, we find a statement in which Falin stresses that also the Daoists contemporary to him were detached from the philosophical thought of the Laozi: “The present-day Daoists do not respect his (i.e. Laozi’s) laws, but resemble Zhang Yu, who wantonly wrote chapter- and sentence-commentaries.” 今之道士不遵其法。 反同張禹漫行章句。 296 The chapter- and sentence-commentaries of the Han dynasty were known for excesses within which the actual intention of the text easily slipped out of sight.297 The Han dynasty scholar Zhang Yu 張禹 (d. 5 BC) authored a chapter- and sentencecommentary to the Lunyu (entitled Lunyu zhangju 論語章句). Falin’s statement is that the practices of religious Daoism were as detached from the Laozi as Zhang Yu’s Lunyu commentary was detached from the Lunyu. 291

292

293

294 295 296 297

Talismanic writing was a magic form of writing, which was mostly illegible to humans, and was used by Daoist priests to establish connections to the spirit world (see: Monika Drexler, Daoistische Schriftmagie: Interpretationen zu den Schriftamuletten Fu im Daozang [Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994]; Catherine Despeux, “Talismans and Diagrams,” in Daoism Handbook, ed. Livia Kohn [Leiden: Brill, 2000]: 498–540). Petition ceremonies were practices carried out by Daoist priests to request deities to change particular matters for the better (Michel Strickmann, “Therapeutische Rituale und das Problem des Bösen im frühen Daoismus,” in Religion und Philosophie in Ostasien: Festschrift für Hans Steininger, ed. Gert Naundorf [Würzburg: Königshausen und ­Neumann, 1985], 191 f.). This is a reference to the first three Celestial Masters Zhang Daoling 張道陵, and his two successors Zhang Heng 張衡 and Zhang Lu 張魯, who are also known as the “three Zhang” 三張. T 2109, p. 486, b22–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 328). T 2110, p. 526, b24–25 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 246 f.). T 2110, p. 499, c27–28 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 134). John Makeham, Transmitters and Creators: Chinese Commentators and Commentaries on the Analects (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003), 373 ff.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

70

Jülch

Being able to depict religious Daoism as detached from the Laozi was also of advantage for Falin, because, as we have seen, Laozi was styled as the imperial ancestor of the Tang dynasty, which made it dangerous to attack him or the text traditionally ascribed to him. So Falin’s strategy was to exclude this text from his sharpest attacks,298 which were rather directed against religious Daoism (see the subsequent sections C.7-C.11). Daoist Immortality or Longevity Teachings are Deceitful C.7 One of the main differences between philosophical and religious Daoism is that in religious Daoism a great variety of techniques were introduced by means of which adepts could pursue the objective of attaining immortality or longevity. (Longevity in religious Daoism was supposed to mean living for several hundred years.) The main techniques were grouped in the categories of “outer alchemy” (chin.: waidan, 外丹), i.e. methods based on the consumption of particular medicaments, and “inner alchemy” (chin.: neidan, 內丹), i.e. methods based on spiritual practice. Apart from that religious Daoism also included gymnastic practices and breathing techniques by means of which practitioners could strive for immortality or longevity. Among these are “guiding and pulling” (chin.: daoyin, 導引)299 and “exhaling and inhaling” (chin.: tuna, 吐納).300 In Buddhist apologetic writing it is stressed that religious Daoism misleads the people by claiming that through such practices immortality or longevity could be reached. For example, Mouzi lihuo lun, chapter 37, employs a great variety of references to traditions found in Chinese classical literature in order to demonstrate that avoiding death would be impossible.301 In Yanshi jiaxun, chapter “Yangsheng,” we find another passage, which attacks the Daoist immortality cult in general, but—by referring to devices employed in the production of immortality pills—also ridicules outer alchemy in particular.302 Further passages attacking outer alchemy can be found in the Xiaodao lun. For example in Xiaodao lun, chapter 28, we read that the claim that out of cinnabar 298 As we have seen in C.3, Falin did however depreciate Laozi as a person in comparing him to the Buddha. Apparently those milder attacks were already sufficient for Qin Shiying to sue Falin for having slandered Laozi. 299 Catherine Despeux, “daoyin—guiding and pulling,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 1, 334–337. 300 Catherine Despeux, “tuna—exhaling and inhaling,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 2, 1000. 301 Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 7, a1–12 (John P. Keenan, How Master Mou removes our doubts, 170–174). 302 Wang Liqi, Yanshi jiaxun jijie, 356 (Teng Ssu-yü, Family Instructions for the Yen Clan, 131 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

71

and quicksilver immortality pills could be produced would have to be deceitful, as otherwise anybody possessing those substances could reach immortality.303 In the Zhengwu lun, we find a statement explaining that through bodily practices, such as daoyin and tuna, neither longevity nor immortality could be reached.304 The refutation of the Daoist cult of immortality or longevity is also an important theme in Falin. The relevant passages are mainly found in the Bianzheng lun. In Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we find an abbreviated quotation of the passage from Yanshi jiaxun, chapter “Yangsheng,” highlighting the ineffectiveness of Daoist longevity techniques.305 In another place of Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we read: “It has not yet been seen that through consuming cinnabar death was avoided, nor that through drinking elixirs longevity was attained” 未見服丹 不死餌液長生.306 Directly subsequent to this passage we find an interesting pentasyllabic shi-poem dedicated to ridiculing the Daoist immortality and longevity cult.307 The first two lines of the poem read: “Consuming [medical] foods in order to become a divine immortal frequently results in a failure of the medicaments” 服食求神仙。多為藥所誤。 308 With the Biandao lun 辯道 論, a treatise by the well-known early medieval poet Cao Zhi 曹植 (192–232), Bianzheng lun, juan 2, also quotes a lengthy prose text presenting different anecdotes in order to demonstrate that attaining immortality is downrightly impossible.309 The quotation of the text in the Bianzheng lun is relatively elaborate, although numerous passages are left out.310 Chen Ziliang’s commentary to Bianzheng lun, juan 6, provides a briefer quotation of the text.311

303 304 305 306 307 308

Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 150, c15–17 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 129). Hongming ji, juan 1: T 2102, p. 8, c4–6 (Arthur Link, “Cheng-wu lun,” 158). T 2110, p. 536, a11–14 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 383). T 2110, p. 531, c17 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 322). T 2110, p. 531, c17–20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 323). Interestingly, these first two lines of the poem are also found in Jiu Tangshu, juan 14 (Liu Xu, Jiu Tangshu, vol. 2, 432), and in Tang huiyao, juan 52 (Wang Pu 王溥, Tang huiyao 唐 會要 [Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006], vol. 1, 1053 f.). The first four lines of the poem are found in Yiwen leiju 藝文類聚, juan 41 (Ouyang Xun 歐陽詢, Yiwen leiju [Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1965], vol. 1, 749). 309 A partial translation of the Biandao lun is presented in: Robert Joe Cutter, Cao Zhi and his Poetry (Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1983), 300–303. A full translation is found in: Donald Holzman, “Ts’ao Chih and the Immortals,” Asia Major, third series, 1, no. 1 (1988), 16–23. 310 T 2110, p. 500, c10–p. 501, a24 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 146–151). 311 T 2110, p. 532, a17–22 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 326 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

72

Jülch

C.8 Daoist Sexual Practices are Immoral Religious Daoism also includes sexual practices. Most important among the Daoist scriptures of sexo-yogic content is probably the Huangshu 黄書, which is said to date back to Zhang Daoling.312 The sexo-yogic practices seen in the Huangshu and in other Daoist sources offered a significant target to the antiDaoist argumentation in Buddhist apologetic writing. Pointing to those rituals, Buddhist apologists were able to criticize religious Daoism for its debauchery.313 Zhenluan 甄鸞, the author of the Xiaodao lun, who had been a Daoist novice before he converted to Buddhism, describes the sexo-yogic ritual of the Huangshu based on his own experience, depicting it as a most shameful event.314 Further accounts attacking religious Daoism on the basis of the sexo-yogic practices of the Huangshu, are found in the Erjiao lun315 and in the Bianhuo lun.316 Falin, in Bianzheng lun, juan 6, provides a quotation from the Huangshu.317 Another quotation from the scripture is found in Chen Ziliangʼs commentary to a later passage of Bianzheng lun, juan 6.318 Both quotations simply aim at demonstrating that the Huangshu is a scripture of sexually explicit content. And within his eighth apologetic speech in the interrogation preserved in the Falin biezhuan, Falin refers to a Daoist master called Putong 蒲童, about whom he says: “He considered the bed important. When he [once] came to his room, he sat upon it and said: ‘fifteen young maidens have just received the [sexo-

312

313 314

315

316 317 318

While the Huangshu 黄書 (Yellow Book) itself is no longer extant, traces of it still survive in the Dongzhen huangshu 洞真黄書 (Yellow Book of the Dongzhen [Canon], DZ 1343, fasc. 1031), and in the Shangqing huangshu guodu yi 上清黄書過度儀 (Ritual of Passage of the Yellow Book of the Shangqing, DZ 1294, fasc. 1009) (see: Kristofer Schipper, “Dongzhen Huangshu” and “Shangqing huangshuguodu yi,” in The Taoist Canon, ed. Kristofer Schipper and Franciscus Verellen [Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004]: 129– 131). Douglas Wile, The Chinese Sexual Yoga Classics Including Women’s Solo Meditation Texts (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992), 25. Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 152, a27-b3 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 149 f.); see also: Gil Raz, “The Way of the Yellow and the Red: Re-examining the Sexual Initiation Rite of Celestial Master Daoism,” Nan Nü 10 (2008), 87. Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 140, c7–8 (Catherine Despeux, “La culture lettrée au service d’un plaidoyer pour le Bouddhisme: Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 202). Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2102, p. 48, b24-c6. T 2110, p. 531, c26-p. 532, a1 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 324). T 2110, p. 533, c23–26 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 354 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

73

yogic] methods,’ and made the maidens come into [his] bed.” 重床。 至屋却 坐其上云。 十五童女方堪受法。 令女登床。 319 C.9

The Great Canopy, the Jade Capitoline, and the Celestial Worthy are Freely Invented Apart from immortality techniques and sexual practices, another important component of religious Daoism is the system of mysticism developed in the Lingbao scriptures. It is built around the key concepts of the Celestial Worthy (tianzun, 天尊), the Great Canopy (daluo, 大羅), and the Jade Capitoline (yujing, 玉京). In Lingbao Daoism, the Celestial Worthy is considered the highest deity, whose emergence predated the creation of heaven and earth;320 the Great Canopy is considered the highest heaven;321 and the Jade Capitoline a heavenly mountain situated in the center of this heaven.322 In Buddhist apologetic thought, the Lingbao teachings are discredited by claiming that all of these concepts were freely invented. Early attacks on the Great Canopy, the Jade Capitoline, and the Celestial Worthy are found in Xiaodao lun, chapters 1,323 10,324 15,325 23,326 and 27.327 In Falin, too, Lingbao mysticism is ridiculed in various places. Bianzheng lun, 5, offers an ironic description of the Celestial Worthy also referring to the Great Canopy and the Jade Capitoline as his imagined surroundings: “How could there be a such one who would wear a golden crown on his head, and would have his body wrapped into yellow cloth; whose templehair would hang down in white strands, and who would hold a jade scepter in his hand—[one] who would be called Celestial Worthy with his alternative name, and would reside on top of the Great Canopy; who would alone be called the great Dao, and would govern within the Jade Capitoline” 豈有頭戴金冠身 披黃褐。 鬢垂素髮手把玉璋。 別號天尊。 居大羅之上。 獨名大道。 治

319 320

T 2051, juan 3, p. 208, b20–21 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 107). Stephen R. Bokenkamp, Early Daoist Scriptures (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 380 f. 321 The Great Canopy is on the one hand considered the highest heaven in the system of the Thirty-two Heavens 三十二天, and on the other hand regarded as the heaven on top of the Three Clarities 三清 (Amy Lynn Miller, “Daluo tian—Great Canopy Heaven,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio [London: Routledge, 2008], vol. 1, 299). 322 Stephen R. Bokenkamp, Early Daoist Scriptures, 410. 323 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 144, c7 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 56 f.). 324 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 147, a25-b2 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 86). 325 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 148, a10–22 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 97). 326 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 149, c17–26 (Livia, Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 117 f.). 327 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 150, b6–23 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 124 ff.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

74

Jülch

玉京之中。 328 A similar passage is found in Falin’s fourth apologetic speech

within the interrogation preserved in the Falin biezhuan. Here the main argument is that the stories about the Celestial Worthy and the Great Canopy could not be real, as otherwise they would have been taken into account in the allcomprising wisdom of the classics of the Chinese antiquity.329

The Teachings of Religious Daoism are Partially Adopted from Buddhism In order to establish its religious system, Daoism also adopted Buddhist concepts. As Stephen R. Bokenkamp explains, the most prominent example would be the Celestial Worthy, whom he describes as a “Daoist version of the Buddha in his cosmic form.”330 A wider account of the adoption of Buddhist concepts by religious Daoism has been provided by Erik Zürcher.331 In Buddhist apologetic literature these borrowings are frequently employed as evidence demonstrating that religious Daoism significantly depended on Buddhism. For example in Erjiao lun, chapter 10, we read: “The Huangting [ jing] and the Yuanyang [ jing] are picked from the Lotus sūtra, with [the term] ‘Buddha’ replaced by [the term] ‘Dao’” 黃庭元陽採撮法華以道換佛.332 Also in the Ronghua lun we find a statement which fits into this context: “Therefore it is known that … the Daoist scriptures are close but dark, while the Buddhist sūtras are remote but bright. You (i.e. Gu Huan) [wish to] convert [those who wear the dharma] robes into laymen, while in actual fact you adopt the high manners (i.e. Buddhism)” 故知 … 道經則近而闇。佛經則遠而明。君染服改 素實參高風也。 333 In Falin, the argument that religious Daoism borrowed many of its concepts from Buddhism is found in many places. E.g. in Bianzheng lun, juan 2, we read that religious Daoism adopted the sequence of the “Three Realms” 三界 as well as the conception of its pantheon from Buddhism: “Their [conception of] the sequence of the Three Realms, as well as their [conception of] ranks and number of all the deities, are all based on the Buddhist sūtras, which have been C.10

328 329 330 331 332 333

T 2110, p. 523, c21–23 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 211). T 2051, juan 2, p. 206, b2–8 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 83 f.). Stephen R. Bokenkamp, Early Daoist Scriptures, 375. Erik Zürcher, “Buddhist Influence on Early Taoism,” T’oung Pao 66, no. 1/3 (1980): 84–147. Guang Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2103, p. 141, b11–12 (Catherine Despeux, “Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ [‘Erjiao Lun’] de Dao’an,” 208). Hongming ji, juan 7: T 2102, p. 47, c21–24. The Daoist priest Gu Huan 顧歡 (420/428– 483/491), author of the Yixia lun 夷夏論 which the Ronghua lun is directed against, is hereby accused of opposing Buddhism as a competing religion while secretly practicing Buddhism himself.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

75

falsely employed to establish the terminology [of religious Daoism].334 [The Daoists] add or abbreviate, either visibly or secretly. [So their teachings] seem to be different, but really are the same” 其三界品次諸天重數。 並依傍佛經假 立名字。而增減出沒。 似異而同。 335 In Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we also find a textual passage attributed to Master Chonghe 冲和子,336 which expresses the general claim that—apart from immor­­tality or longevity practices and so forth—the true innermost teachings of Daoism would in fact originate from Buddhism.337 Authorities of Religious Daoism Practiced Buddhism C.11 Perhaps owing to the fact that religious Daoism adopted much from Buddhism, well-known authorities of religious Daoism reportedly made Buddhist forms of worship part of their personal spirituality. A prominent example is the Shangqing patriarch Tao Hongjing 陶弘景 (456–536), also known as Tao Yinju 陶隱居. His close ties with Buddhism are documented both in his biography in Liangshu 梁書, juan 51,338 and in the Daoxue zhuan 道學傳.339 In Falin, such traditions are employed to demonstrate that great Daoist masters regarded Buddhism as indispensable. In Bianzheng lun, juan 6, it is explained that both Tao Hongjing and Master Chonghe respected the Buddha dharma, admired Buddhist monks, were in actual fact adepts of Buddhism themselves, and also instructed their students to recite Buddhist sūtras.340 In Chen Ziliangʼs commentary to Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we also read that Tao Hongjing endowed his 334

The statement is that the Daoist concept of the Three Realms derives from the Buddhist concept of triloka (being the Sanskrit name of the Three Realms), and that the Daoist pantheon was modelled on the Buddhist pantheon as far as ranks and number of the deities are concerned. Amy Lynn Miller explains: “Like the heavens of Indian Buddhism, the Thirty-two Heavens of Lingbao are divided among the Three Realms (sanjie 三界) of desire (yu 欲, six heavens), form (se 色, twelve heavens) and formlessness (wuse 無色, ten heavens)” (Amy Lynn Miller, “sanshi’er tian—Thirty-two Heavens,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio [London: Routledge, 2008], vol. 2, 847). 335 T 2110, p. 498, c16–17 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 123). 336 Chonghe was a master of Daoist sexual practices one of whose texts is found in: Livia Kohn, The Taoist Experience: An Anthology (Albany: New York State University Press, 1993), 155–159. 337 T 2110, p. 534, b13–24 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 364 f.). 338 Yao Silian 姚思廉, Liangshu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1973), vol. 3, p. 743. 339 Stephan Peter Bumbacher, The Fragments of the Daoxue zhuan: Critical Edition, Translation and Analysis of a Medieval Collection of Daoist Biographies (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2000), 227. 340 T 2110, p. 534, c1–13 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 366 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

76

Jülch

residence on Mount Mao 茅山 with both a Daoist and a Buddhist hall of worship.341 Daoist Priests Tend to be Greedy C.12 In Buddhist apologetic literature, Daoist priests were frequently accused of being greedy. In the Bianhuo lun we read that, only if paid with brocade and gold, Daoist priests were prepared to make their sacred texts available, so that less wealthy visitors of Daoist temples would never get to see them.342 In Falin the theme is taken up in various places. In Bianzheng lun, juan 6, we read that Daoist priests would typically spend their entire lifetimes accumulating wealth, missing out the fact that such wealth could not offer true stability, as constant comfort would depend on karmic causations.343 In another place Bianzheng lun, juan 6, offers a comparison between Daoist priests and Buddhist monks. Regarding Daoist priests it is said that they would be prepared even to expose themselves to great danger in order to obtain wealth. Regarding Buddhist monks it is said that they disregard power and wealth, solely being interested in finding the truth. The conclusion is that Daoist priests focus on obtaining wealth, while Buddhist monks focus on finding the truth.344 Religious Daoism as a Subversive Movement C.13 In addition to questioning the authenticity of the teachings of religious Daoism, Buddhist apologists also stressed its subversive character. Within the Eastern Han, the Celestial Masters (see C.6) founded a state of their own which was organized in 24 parishes (chin.: zhi, 治), and occupied present-day Sichuan as well as present-day Southern Shaanxi.345 Closely connected, also the rebellion of the Yellow Turbans (chin.: Huangjin, 黄巾) of the Taiping dao 太平道 led by Zhang Jue 張角 contributed to a fundamental destabilization of the Chinese state.346 Both movements together indirectly led to the fall of the Han 341 342 343 344 345

T 2110, p. 535, b1–2 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 373). Hongming ji, juan 8: T 2102, p. 48, b1–3. T 2110, p. 531, c13–17 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 322). T 2110, p. 532, a9–12 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 2, 325 f.). Regarding the 24 parishes of the Celestial Master state, see: Franciscus Verellen, “The Twenty-Four Dioceses and Zhang Daoling: Spatio-Liturgical Organization in Early Heavenly Master Taoism,” in Pilgrims, Patrons, and Place: Localizing Sanctity in Asian Religions, ed. Phyllis Granoff and Koichi Shinohara (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2003): 15–67. 346 The Taiping dao rebellion of the Yellow Turbans has been subject to many studies: Howard Levy, “Yellow Turban Religion and Rebellion at the End of the Han,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 76 (1956), 214–227; Akizuki Kan’ei 秋月觀暎, “Kōkin no ran no

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

77

dynasty, as the Han general Cao Cao 曹操 (155–220), who through his victories defeated both the Celestial Masters and the Yellow Turbans, accumulated such power, that his son, Cao Pi 曹丕, was able to found the Cao-Wei 曹魏 dynasty. The state of the Celestial Masters and the rebellion of the Yellow Turbans were the foremost of many uprisings originating from the circles of religious Daoism. In Buddhist apologetic thought mainly those two but also other movements were instrumentalized to depict religious Daoism as a danger to the Chinese state. Xiaodao lun, chapter 7, contains an elaborate description of how the Celestial Masters, Zhang Daoling 張道陵, Zhang Heng 張衡, and Zhang Lu 張 魯, misled the people and—in interaction with the Yellow Turban uprising— prepared the ground for the fall of the Han dynasty.347 In Falin, the subversive character of religious Daoism is addressed in various places. Especially in the Poxie lun, juan 2, much space is devoted to the matter. Here we find a collection of quotations from the Hou Hanshu 後漢書 and the Sanguo zhi 三國志, all of which serve to reveal the subversive potential of both the Yellow Turbans and the Celestial Masters.348 Subsequently a list is provided within which a greater multitude of subversive actions inspired by religious Daoism are briefly named.349 While most of the references provided here again refer to matters connected to the Yellow Turbans and the Celestial Masters, the most notable one among the further entries refers to Sun En 孫恩 (d. 402), who revolted against the Jin.350 shūkyōsei” 黃巾の亂の宗教性, Tōyō shi kenkyū 東洋史研究 15, no. 1 (1956): 43–56; Paul Michaud, “The Yellow Turbans,” Monumenta Serica 17 (1958): 47–127; Rolf A. Stein, “Remarques sur les mouvements du Taoïsme politico religieux au IIe siècle ap. J.-C.,” T’oung Pao 50 (1963): 1–78; Ōfuchi Ninji 大淵忍爾, “Kōkin no ran to Gotobeidō” 黃巾の 亂と五斗米道, in Iwanamikōza sekai rekishi 岩波講座世界歷史 (Tōkyō: Iwanami Shoten 岩波書店, 1970), vol. 5, 23–52; Fukui Shigemasa 福井重雅, “Kōkin no ran to dentō no mondai” 黃巾の亂と傳統の問題, Tōyō shi kenkyū 東洋史研究 34, no. 1 (1975): 24–57; Ōfuchi Ninji, Shoki no dōkyō 初期の道教 (Tōkyō: Sōbunsha 創文社, 1991), 76–136; Barbara Hendrischke, “Early Daoist Movements,” in Daoism Handbook, ed. Livia Kohn (Leiden: Brill, 2000): 134–164; Michael Farmer, “The Three Chaste Ones of Ba: Local Perspectives on the Yellow Turban Rebellion on the Chengdu Plain,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 125, no. 2 (2005): 191–202. 347 Guang Hongming ji, juan 9: T 2103, p. 146, b19-c1 (Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 77 ff.). 348 T 2109, p. 486, a15-b16 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 323–326). 349 T 2109, p. 486, b16–20 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 326 ff.). 350 On this rebellion, see: Werner Eichhorn, “Description of the Rebellion of Sun En and Earlier Taoist Rebellions,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 2 (1954): 325–352; Werner Eichhorn, “Nachträgliche Bemerkungen zum Aufstande des Sun En,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 2 (1954): 463–476; Hisayuki Miyakawa, “Local Cults around Mount Lu at the Time of Sun En’s Rebellion,” in Facets of Taoism: Essays in Chinese

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

78

Jülch

Also, within his eighth apologetic speech in the interrogation preserved in the Falin biezhuan, Falin elaborately describes the devastating effects of various revolts incited through religious Daoism. At the beginning we find a paragraph describing how Zhang Daoling was inspired to establish the 24 parishes, and how the people living in the relevant areas suffered from the rule of the Celestial Masters.351 Subsequently we find a description of how the state of the Celestial Masters under Zhang Lu and the Yellow Turbans under their leader Zhang Jue 張角 became militarily aggressive and were finally defeated by the Han troops.352 Next, Falin goes through a number of scarcely known rebellions, which—for reasons of space—I cannot introduce here.353 IV

Further Developments and Later Reception

In the time directly subsequent to the apologetic activity of Falin, the BuddhistDaoist struggles still went on. Firstly one might think of the Fodao lunheng, which was compiled by Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667) in 661.354 The Fodao lunheng records the Buddhist-Daoist court debates since the emergence of Buddhism in China. In juan 3 it includes the debates Falin was involved in, and the entire juan 4 of the work is dedicated to debates that took place under Tang Gaozong 唐高宗 (r. 649–683). Secondly with the Zhenzheng lun 甄正論 (T 2112) we find a sharp anti-Daoist treatise composed by the Buddhist monk Xuanyi 玄嶷 between 690 and 694. The work mainly refutes the legends regarding the Celestial Worthy and the huahu theory. It was designed “to strike the final blow

351 352 353 354

Religion, ed. Holmes Welch and Anna Seidel (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979): 83–101. T 2051, juan 3, p. 208, a28-b6 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 106). T 2051, juan 3, p. 208, b6–11 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 106 f.). T 2051, juan 3, p. 208, b11–18 (Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 107). For a structural overview of the contents of Fodao lunheng, juan 1–3, see: Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 1, 27–31. An introduction of the debaters appearing in the Fodao lunheng is given in: Friederike Assandri, Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten der frühen Tang-Zeit, 153–187. For partial translations of the Fodao lunheng, see: Friederike Assandri, Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten der frühen Tang-Zeit, 213–431; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, vol. 3, 205–270. For a general introduction to the Fodao lunheng, see: Friederike Assandri, “Inter-religious Debate at the Court of the Early Tang: An Introduction to Daoxuan’s Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng,” in From Early Tang Court Debates to China’s Peaceful Rise, ed. Friederike Assandri (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009): 15–32.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

79

to the Lingbao church, a troublesome competitor in the ideological struggle.”355 Written in the early years of Wu Zetian 武則天 (r. 690–705), the Zhenzheng lun was the last Buddhist apologetic treatise of medieval China substantially attacking Daoism. As the anti-Buddhist agitation of the Daoist clergy subsided and the political pressure Buddhism was confronted with eased off, the tradition of anti-Daoist Buddhist apologetic writing gradually died away. Already in 674 Wu Zhao 武照 rescinded the 637 edict with which Tang Taizong had given Daoist priests precedence over Buddhist monks.356 And when Wu Zhao became empress as Wu Zetian she established a regime under which Buddhism was all the more held in honor.357 Under Tang Xuanzong 唐玄宗 (r. 712–756) and even more seriously during the Huichang 會昌 persecution under Tang Wuzong 唐武宗 (r. 840–846) the Buddhist saṃgha was again confronted with heavy political pressure. The measures undertaken by these rulers did however not result from anti-Buddhist sentiments among the Daoist clergy, but from concerns regarding the economic role Buddhist monasteries played in the Chinese state.358 Thus they did not reincite the Buddhist-Daoist struggles. The decline of the medieval Buddhist apologetic tradition is graphically described in a statement by Livia Kohn, which for the sake of simplicity ignores the minor apologetic products of the reign periods of Tang Gaozong and Wu Zetian, and pointedly depicts Falin’s work as the main culmination point essentially concluding the medieval Chinese Buddhist apologetic endeavors: “The great medieval debates among Buddhists and Taoists with their lengthy expositions and convoluted arguments thus ended in the seventh century with works like Falin’s Bianzheng lun. This extraordinary summary and masterful integration of everything that happened before was like a last long, loud shout at the end of the drama. Then the lights gradually dimmed over the scene that had formed an important aspect of the religious and political life in medieval China.”359 In the late Tang dynasty, through the Huichang persecution of 845, the structure of the Chinese saṃgha was changed in such a way that instead of defending Buddhism against Daoism another matter became the main con355

356 357 358

359

Antonello Palumbo, “On the Author and Date of the Zhenzhenglun: An Obscure Page in the Struggle between Buddhists and Taoists in Medieval China,” Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 57 (1997), 317. Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 36. As explained in the introduction to the present volume, Wu Zetian based her legitimation ideology on Buddhism (see chapters 2.b and 2.d). The economic background to the anti-Buddhist measures undertaken during the reigns of Tang Xuanzong and Tang Wuzong has been discussed in the introduction to the present volume (see chapter 1.b). Livia Kohn, Laughing at the Tao, 37.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

80

Jülch

cern of Buddhist apologetic writing. Up to the Huichang persecution Chinese Buddhism was characterized by a multitude of different schools. After the persecution, the Tiantai 天台 and Chan 禪 orders were the only schools which fully recovered. As a result, Chinese Buddhism found itself in a bipolar situation dominated by the rivalry between the Tiantai and Chan orders. Rather than writing treatises directed against Daoism, Buddhist scholars now composed huge corpuses of literature designed to either defend Tiantai Buddhism against Chan Buddhism or Chan Buddhism against Tiantai Buddhism. Seeking to present the history of the own school embedded in a wider background, these works do however devote much space to general historiographic accounts of Buddhism in China. And in this context some of the traditional positions which we find summarized in Falin are typically still employed. Below I will present a list documenting cases of such employment. This is not the place to go through the abundant variety of Song dynasty texts that could be consulted. Instead I have chosen to use one exemplary Chinese Buddhist historiographic account written in the Southern Song. It appears in the Fozu tongji—the most extensive among the Tiantai apologies in the controversy with Chan Buddhism—and is entitled “Fayun tongsai zhi” 法運通塞志 (Monograph on success and obstructions in the spread of the dharma). Covering Fozu tongji, juan 34–48, the “Fayun tongsai zhi” is a general annalistic history of Buddhism in China.360 According to Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer it is “zweifellos einer der interessantesten Texte der buddhistischen Geschichts­schreibung” (without doubt one of the most interesting texts of Buddhist historiography).361 The “Fayun tongsai zhi” contains a wealth of traditions that have previously been seen in Falin. In the subsequent list I will however confine myself to naming those which were introduced in chapter III. Seeing the presentation in chapter III in relation with the reception in the “Fayun tongsai zhi,” it becomes clear that subchapter A is represented much more strongly than subchapters B and C. This is not a coincidence. As the Fozu tongji mainly focuses on inner-Buddhist rivalries,362 also in the general histo360 For a general introduction to the “Fayun tongsai zhi,” see: Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, Die Identität der buddhistischen Schulen und die Kompilation buddhistischer Universalgeschichten in China: Ein Beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte der Sung-Zeit (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1982), 119 f. The parts on the Sui and Tang dynasties (i.e. Fozu tongji, juan 39–42) have been translated in: Jan Yün-hua, A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 11–118. 361 Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, Die Identität der buddhistischen Schulen und die Kompilation buddhistischer Universalgeschichten in China, 120. 362 While the main concern of the Fozu tongji is to represent the Tiantai school in its rivalry with the Chan school, the Fozu tongji also serves other purposes. In controversies within the Tiantai school, the Fozu tongji holds up the orthodox tradition of “shanjia” 山家 (on

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

81

riographic account given in the “Fayun tongsai zhi” no dominant interest in arguments directed against Confucianism or Daoism can be discerned. On the contrary, owing to the Neoconfucian spirit of the times, the “Fayun tongsai zhi” reflects on Confucianism and Daoism in particularly respectful ways.363 As far as the reception of Confucianism is concerned, contrary to the argumentation depicted in B.3, the “Fayun tongsai zhi” describes birth and bodily appearance of Confucius in terms of auspicious mysteries: “The Records of Queli364 say: ‘On the evening on which [Confucius] was born, two dragons circled around the house, and five elders descended into the hall. In the room of Mrs. Yan365 music from the center of heaven could be heard. [Confucius had] moon horns and a sun shape, river eyes and an ocean mouth. His eyebrows had 12 colors. His eyes had 64 textures.’” 闕里記云。 誕生之夕。 二龍 遶室。 五老降庭。 顏氏之房聞鈞天之樂。 月角日準河目海口。 眉有十 二采。 目有六十四理。 366 Also the book of Mengzi, which became canonical through Zhu Xi 朱熹 (1130–1200), and hence played an important role in

Neoconfucianism, is quoted in the “Fayun tongsai zhi.”367 In a later passage we find a lengthy quotation from an essay by Su Dongpo 蘇東坡 (1037–1101), which was written in condemnation of Mengzi’s opponent Xunzi 荀子.368 As far as the reception of Daoism is concerned, the “Fayun tongsai zhi” even contains an account praising the Celestial Masters. Contrary to the Buddhist apologetic tradition outlined in C.6 and C.13, the image developed in the

363

364 365 366

367 368

the mountain) in its controversy with the dissenters referred to as “shanwai” 山外 (off the mountain). And the Fozu tongji also contains accounts of other Buddhist schools, such as especially the Jingtu 净土 (Pure Land) school. Even though the relationship between Neoconfucianism and Daoism was complicated and ambivalent, the two teachings being native to China came together in a certain alliance against Buddhism, the foreign teaching, which had dominated Chinese culture throughout the Nanbeichao, Sui, and Tang times up to the ascendancy of the guwen 古文 movement. It seems that the “Fayun tongsai zhi” reacts with a strategy seeking to appease Neoconfucian and Daoist supporters. Queli 闕里 was the hometown of Confucius in the state of Lu 魯. This is Yan Zhengzai 顏徵在, the mother of Confucius. T 2035, juan 35, p. 332, c17–20. The tradition quoted here appears in various earlier sources. In a slightly diverging variant it is documented in the Chunqiu zhanguo yici 春秋 戰國異辭, which in juan 3 presents traditions from the state of Lu. The relevant passage is found under the heading “Queli shizai” 闕里世載, as the second half of the paragraph (Wenyuange Siku quanshu 文淵閣四庫全書, vol. 403, p. 130). T 2035, juan 35, p. 333, c24–p. 334, a12. Here we find quotations from the book of Mengzi intermingled with references to the biography of Mengzi. T 2035, juan 35, p. 334, b3–24. The essay quoted here is the “Xun Qing lun” 荀卿論 (Kong Fanli 孔凡禮, Su Shi wenji 蘇軾文集 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2004], vol. 1, p. 100 f.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

82

Jülch

“Fayun tongsai zhi” acknowledges the spiritual accomplishments of the Celestial Masters, and seeks to disentangle their cult from the Yellow Turban rebellion of the Taiping dao, while the endangering of the Chinese state is ascribed to the latter only.369 Also the Daoist immortality cult, including the consumption of cinnabar, being subject to the criticism outlined in C.7, is in the “Fayun tongsai zhi” described in a friendly style. Ge Hong 葛洪 is introduced as a great master who, through the consumption of cinnabar, attained immortality.370 Directly afterwards there is a lengthy account of another Daoist master, who achieved immortality not only for himself but for his entire family.371 Despite all this, parts of the anti-Confucian and the anti-Daoist argumentation seen in subchapters B and C are however still employed in the “Fayun tongsai zhi.” Hence it has to be said that the respectful approach to Confucianism and Daoism, as well as the dispensation with arguments directed against Confucianism or Daoism, appears in the “Fayun tongsai zhi” as a tendency rather than as a categorically observed principle. Reference Argumentative content in outline in chapter III

Corresponding passage in the “Fayun tongsai zhi”

A.1

T 2035, juan 34, p. 325, c9–13 T 2035, juan 34, p. 327, a17–20 T 2035, juan 34, p. 327, b27-c10 T 2035, juan 34, p. 327, c27–29

King Zhao of Zhou witnessed omens testifying to the birth of the Buddha King Mu of Zhou witnessed omens testifying to the parinirvāṇa of the Buddha Scattered all over Jambudvīpa Aśoka had 84,000 pagodas erected Mañjuśrī appeared in the Snow Mountains, preached in front of 500 (Chinese) immortals, and entered the nirvāṇa Shi Lifang’s mission to the court of Qin Shihuang Liu Xiang had found biographies dating back to the Chinese antiquity

T 2035, juan 34, p. 328, b24–27 T 2035, juan 35, p. 329, a17–21

369 T 2035, juan 35, p. 337, b28-c23. 370 T 2035, juan 36, p. 348, a7–15. 371 T 2035, juan 36, p. 348, a16-b11.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

83

Reference Argumentative content in outline in chapter III

Corresponding passage in the “Fayun tongsai zhi”

A.2

Huo Qubing captured a “golden man,” which was subsequently displayed in the Ganquan Palace and worshiped as a deity The official reintroduction of Buddhism under Han Mingdi

T 2035, juan 35, p. 329, a9–12

Fotudeng converted Shi Le

T 2035, juan 36, p. 339, a8–17 T 2035, juan 36, p. 339, a22–26 T 2035, juan 35, p. 331, c10–19 T 2035, juan 36, p. 344, b29-c8

A.3

Fotudeng converted Shi Hu Kang Senghui converted Sun Quan Guṇavarman converted Song Wendi

T 2035, juan 35, p. 329, b17-c6

A.4

Liang Wudi seated Mahāsattva Fu on a slightly elevated couch With Sui Wendi Buddhism took a general upsurgea

T 2035, juan 37, p. 350, c9–12 T 2035, juan 39, p. 359, b19–29

A.5

The five śīlas resemble the five cardinal virtues; the three refuges resemble the three reverences

T 2035, juan 38, p. 356, b19–22

B.2

Confucius says that he would not know whether T 2035, juan 34, the Confucian sages were real sages, while there p. 328, a24–27 would be a real sage in the West

B.3

Confucius, Yan Hui, and Laozi were all reincarna- T 2035, juan 35, tions of Indian bodhisattvas p. 333, b27-c5

C.1

T 2035, juan 36, Wang Fu wrote the Huahu jing out of anger about having been beaten by Bo Yuan in debate; p. 339, c29– p. 340, a6 Wang Fu postmortally begged Bo Yuan for forgiveness

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

84

Jülch

Reference Argumentative content in outline in chapter III

Corresponding passage in the “Fayun tongsai zhi”

The court debate between Tanmozui and Jiang Bin

T 2035, juan 38, p. 355, c18–26

C.11

Tao Hongjing had close ties with Buddhism

T 2035, juan 37, p. 349, b22–26

C.13

The Taiping dao and the Yellow Turban Rebellion T 2035, juan 35, endangered the Chinese state p. 337, b16–27

a Jan Yün-hua, A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 11.

While the controversy between Buddhism and Daoism was largely muted since the times of Wu Zetian and Tang Xuanzong, in the Yuan dynasty the rivalry between the two religions broke out again. It was incited by a Daoist pamphlet entitled Laozi bashiyi hua tu 老 子八十一化圖 (Illustrations of Laozi’s Eighty-One Transformations of Lord Lao), which revived the huahu theory claiming that the Buddha was one of the transformations of Laozi.372 The resulting Buddhist-Daoist controversy has been recorded in the Bianwei lu 辯偽錄 (T 2116, Accounts of Disputation of [Daoist] Falsehood), composed in 1291 by the Buddhist monk Xiangmai 祥邁.373 As the Bianwei lu tells us, the controversy ended with a victory of the Buddhist side and a condemnation of 372

373

For a translation of the Laozi bashiyi hua tu, see: Florian C. Reiter, Leben und Wirken Laotzu’s in Schrift und Bild: Lao-chün pa-shih-i-hua t’u-shuo (Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1990). For studies of the work, see: Kenneth Ch’en, “Buddhist-Taoist Mixtures in the Pa-shih-i-hua-t’u,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic studies 9 (1945): 1–12; Florian C. Reiter, “Die ‘Einundachtzig Bildtexte zu den Inkarnationen und Wirkungen Lao-chün’s.’ Dokumente einer tausendjährigen Polemik in China,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 136 (1986): 450–91. Under the title Laojun lishi yinghua tushuo 老君歷 世應化圖説 there is an “extended re-edition” of the work, which has been studied in: Florian C. Reiter, “An Introduction to the Book ‘Explanations and Pictures Concerning the Responses and Incarnations of Lao-chün During all Generations’ (Lao-chün li-shih yinghua t’u-shuo, Chengdu 1936),” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 151 (2001): 163–205. Joseph Thiel, “Der Streit der Buddhisten und Taoisten zur Mongolenzeit,” Monumenta Serica 20 (1961), 6 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

85

Daoism by the Yuan emperor.374 The Fozu lidai tongzai 佛祖歷代通載 (T 2036, A Comprehensive Registry of the Successive Ages of the Buddha and the Patriarchs), completed in 1333 or 1334 and composed by the Buddhist monk Nianchang 念常,375 again devotes space to the refutation of the Daoist huahu theory. Much of the relevant content is adopted from the Bianwei lu, although the Fozu lidai tongzai offers important enhancements.376 Contextualizing the apologetic tradition represented by Falin with the revival in the Yuan dynasty, T.H. Barrett writes that Falin’s apologetic work is “the most complete surviving statement of the issues between Buddhism and Taoism until the renewed debates of the Mongol period.”377

Bibliography



Primary Sources

Bianzheng lun 辯正論. Falin 法琳 (T 2110). Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳. Huijiao 慧皎 (T 2059). Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2103). Hanshu 漢書. Ban Gu 班固 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2009). Hongming ji 弘明集. Sengyou 僧祐 (T 2102). Ji guijin fodao lunheng 集古今佛道論衡. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2104). Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書. Liu Xu 劉昫 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975). Liangshu 梁書. Yao Silian 姚思廉 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1973). Poxie lun 破邪論. Falin 法琳 (T 2109). Quan Tangwen 全唐文. Dong Gao 董誥 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001). Shenxian zhuan 神仙傳. Zhou Qicheng 周啓成 (Taibei: Sanmin shuju, 2004). Shiji 史記. Sima Qian 司馬遷 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959). Su Shi wenji 蘇軾文集. Kong Fanli 孔凡禮 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2004). Taiping guangji 太平廣記. Li Fang 李昉 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1986). Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集. Song Minqiu 宋敏求 (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1959). Tang hufa shamen Falin biezhuan 唐護法沙門法琳別傳. Yancong 彥悰 (T 2051). 374 375

376 377

Joseph Thiel, “Der Streit der Buddhisten und Taoisten zur Mongolenzeit,” 44 ff. For a general introduction to the work, see: Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, Die Identität der buddhistischen Schulen und die Kompilation buddhistischer Universalgeschichten in China, 148–153. Joseph Thiel, “Der Streit der Buddhisten und Taoisten zur Mongolenzeit,” 8 f. T.H. Barrett, “Bianzheng lun—Essays of Disputation and Correction,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 1, 233.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

86

Jülch

Tang huiyao 唐會要. Wang Pu 王溥 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2006). Wenyuange Siku quanshu 文淵閣四庫全書. Zhu Jianmin 朱建民 (Taibei: Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan, 1986). Xin Tangshu 新唐書. Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975). Xu Gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2060). Yanshi jiaxun jijie 顔氏家訓集解. Wang Liqi 王利器 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1993). Zhuangzi jinzhu jinyi 莊子今注今譯. Chen Guying 陳鼓應 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2001). Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑑. Sima Guang 司馬光 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997).



Secondary Sources

Akizuki, Kan’ei 秋月觀暎. “Kōkin no ran no shūkyōsei” 黃巾の亂の宗教性, Tōyō shi kenkyū 東洋史研究 15, no. 1 (1956): 43–56. Assandri, Friederike. Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten der frühen TangZeit und die Chongxuan-Lehre des Daoismus (Ph.D. diss, Heidelberg University, 2002). Assandri, Friederike. “Inter-religious Debate at the Court of the Early Tang: An Introduction to Daoxuan’s Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng,” in From Early Tang Court Debates to China’s Peaceful Rise, ed. Friederike Assandri (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2009): 15–32. Barrett, T.H. “Bianzheng lun—Essays of Disputation and Correction,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 1, 232–233. Barrett, T.H. “The Advent of the Buddhist Conception of Religion in China and its Consequences for the Analysis of Daoism,” in Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies 9, no. 2 (2009): 149–165. Bingham, Woodbridge. “Li Shih-min’s Coup in AD 626. II: Action at the Hsüan-wu Gate,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 70, no. 4 (1950): 259–271. Bokenkamp, Stephen R. Early Daoist Scriptures (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). Bokser, Ben Zion. “Justin Martyr and the Jews,” The Jewish Quarterly Review 64, no. 2 (1973): 97–122. Bumbacher, Stephan Peter. The Fragments of the Daoxue zhuan: Critical Edition, Translation and Analysis of a Medieval Collection of Daoist Biographies (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2000). Buswell, Robert E. “Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures,” in Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, ed. Robert E. Buswell (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1990): 1–30. Buswell, Robert E. The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

87

Campany, Robert Ford. To Live as Long as Heaven and Earth: A Translation and Study of Ge Hong’s Traditions of Divine Transcendents (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002). Chen, Jack W. The Poetics of Sovereignty: On Emperor Taizong of the Tang Dynasty (Cam­ bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2010). Chen, Jinhua. “Pañcavārṣika Assemblies in Liang Wudi’s Buddhist Palace Chapel,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 66, no. 1 (2006): 43–103. Ch’en, Kenneth. “Buddhist-Taoist Mixtures in the Pa-shih-i-hua-t’u,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic studies 9 (1945): 1–12. Ch’en, Kenneth. “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 28 (1968): 81–97. Ch’en, Kenneth. The Chinese Transformation of Buddhism (Princeton: Princeton Uni­ versity Press, 1973). Cutter, Robert Joe. Cao Zhi and his Poetry (Ph.D. diss., University of Washington, 1983). Deeg, Max. “Zwischen Spannung und Harmonie: Das Problem von Chronologie und Synchronologie in der frühen chinesischen buddhistischen Historiographie,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010): 96–139. Despeux, Catherine. “daoyin—guiding and pulling,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 1, 334–337. Despeux, Catherine. “La culture lettrée au service d’un plaidoyer pour le Bouddhis­me: Le ‘Traité des deux doctrines’ (‘Erjiao Lun’) de Dao’an,” in Bouddhisme et lettrés dans la Chine médiévale, ed. Catherine Despeux (Paris: Peeters, 2002): 145–227. Despeux, Catherine. “Talismans and Diagrams,” in Daoism Handbook, ed. Livia Kohn (Leiden: Brill, 2000): 498–540. Despeux, Catherine. “tuna—exhaling and inhaling,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London, New York: Routledge, 2008), vol. 2, 1000. Dien, Albert E. “Yen Chih-t’ui (531–591): A Buddho-Confucian,” in Confucian Personalities, ed. Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1962): 43–64. Dien, Albert E. Pei Ch’i shu 45: Biography of Yen Chih-t’ui (Bern: Peter Lang, 1976). Donner, Neal; Stevenson, Daniel B. The Great Calming and Contemplation: A Study and Annotated Translation of the First Chapter of Chih-i’s Mo-ho chih-kuan (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1993). Drexler, Monika. Daoistische Schriftmagie: Interpretationen zu den Schriftamuletten Fu im Daozang (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994). Dubs, H. H. History of the Former Han Dynasty (Baltimore: Waverly Press, 1938–1955). Eichhorn, Werner. “Description of the Rebellion of Sun En and Earlier Taoist Rebellions,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 2 (1954): 325–352.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

88

Jülch

Eichhorn, Werner. “Nachträgliche Bemerkungen zum Aufstande des Sun En,” Mittei­ lungen des Instituts für Orientforschung 2 (1954): 463–476. Eisenberg, Andrew. “Kingship, Power and the Hsüan-wu Men Incident of the T’ang,” T’oung Pao 80 (1994): 223–259. Ess, Hans van. “Einige Anmerkungen zur Biographie des Konfuzius im Shih-chi und ver­gleichbaren Stellen im K’ung-tzu chia-yü,” Oriens Extremus 50 (2011): 157–180. Farmer, Michael. “The Three Chaste Ones of Ba: Local Perspectives on the Yellow Turban Rebellion on the Chengdu Plain,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 125, no. 2 (2005): 191–202. Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Dunhuang Document S. 6502 Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 2005). Fukui, Shigemasa 福井重雅. “Kōkin no ran to dentō no mondai” 黃巾の亂と傳統の問 題, Tōyō shi kenkyū 東洋史研究 34, no. 1 (1975): 24–57. Hendrischke, Barbara. “Der Taoismus in der Tang-Zeit,” minima sinica (1993): 110–143. Hendrischke, Barbara. “Early Daoist Movements,” in Daoism Handbook, ed. Livia Kohn (Leiden: Brill, 2000): 134–164. Hendrischke, Barbara. The Scripture on Great Peace: The Taiping jing and the Beginnings of Daoism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2006). Hoong, Teik Toh 卓鴻澤. “Saizhong yuanliu ji Li Tang shizu wenti yu Laozi zhi guage” 塞種源流及李唐氏族問題與老子之瓜葛, Zhongyang yanjiu yuan lishi yuyan yanjiu suo jikan 中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊 78, no. 1 (2008): 183–223. Höllmann, Thomas. Jinan: Die Chu-Hauptstadt Ying im China der Späteren Zhou-Zeit (München: Beck, 1986). Holzman, Donald. “Ts’ao Chih and the Immortals,” Asia Major, third series, 1, no. 1 (1988): 15–57. Hurvitz, Leon. Treatise on Buddhism and Taoism, Wei Shou: An English translation of the original Chinese text of Wei-Shu CXIV and the Japanese annotation of Tsukamoto Zenryū (Kyōto: Jimbunkagaku Kenkyusho, 1956). Jan, Yün-hua. A Chronicle of Buddhism in China, 581–960 ad: Translations from Monk Chih-p’an’s Fo-tsu T’ung-chi (Santiniketan: Visva-Bharati, 1966). Jülch, Thomas. Bodhisattva der Apologetik: die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin, 3 vols. (München: Utz, 2014). Jülch, Thomas. “The Buddhist Re-interpretation of the Legends Surrounding King Mu of Zhou,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 130, no. 4 (2010): 625–627. Jülch, Thomas. “Wang Anshi’s ‘Treatise on Great Men,’” Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 66, no. 2 (2013): 197–204. Kaltenmark, Max. Le Lie-sien tchouan (Peking: Centre d’études sinologiques de Pékin, 1953).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

89

Keenan, John P. How Master Mou removes our doubts: A reader-response study and translation of the ‘Mou-tzu Li-huo lun’ (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994). Kieschnick, John. The Eminent Monk: Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese Hagiography (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1997). Kleine, Christoph. “Geschichte und Geschichten im ostasiatischen Buddhismus: Hagiographie zwischen Historiographie und Erbauung,” in Geschichten und Geschichte: Historiographie und Hagiographie in der asiatischen Religionsgeschichte, ed. Peter Schalk (Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2010): 3–56. Klimkeit, Hans-Joachim. Der Buddha: Leben und Lehre (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1990). Knapp, Keith. “Confucian Views of the Supernatural,” in: Early Medieval China: A Sourcebook, ed. Wendy Swartz (New York: Columbia University Press, 2014): 640–651. Kobayashi, Masayoshi. “The Establishment of the Daoist Religion (Taochiao) and its Structure,” Acta Asiatica 68 (1995): 19–36. Kohn, Livia. God of the Dao: Lord Lao in History and Myth (Ann Arbor: Center for Chinese Studies, The University of Michigan, 1998). Kohn, Livia. Laughing at the Tao: Debates among Buddhists and Daoists in Medieval China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995). Kohn, Livia. Taoist Mystical Philosophy: The Scripture of Western Ascension (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991). Kohn, Livia. “The Lao-tzu Myth,” in Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, ed. Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1998): 41–62. Kohn, Livia. “The Looks of Laozi,” in Asian Folklore Studies 55, no. 2 (1996): 193–236. Kuwayama, Shōshin. “How Xuanzang learned about Nālandā,” in Tang China and Beyond, ed. Antonino Forte (Kyōto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 1988): 1–33. Lau, D.C. Confucius: The Analects (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2002). Ledderose, Lothar. Mi Fu and the Classical Tradition of Chinese Calligraphy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979). Lee, Thomas H.C. Education in Traditional China: A History (Leiden: Brill, 2000). Levy, Howard. “Yellow Turban Religion and Rebellion at the End of the Han,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 76 (1956), 214–227. Link, Arthur. “Cheng-wu lun: The Rectification of Unjustified Criticism,” Oriens Extremus 8 (1961): 136–65. Loewe, Michael. Dong Zhongshu, a ‘Confucian’ Heritage and the Chunqiu fanlu (Leiden: Brill, 2011). Maier, Paul L. Eusebius: The Church History (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel, 2007). Mair, Victor H. Wandering on the Way: Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chuang Tzu (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1994).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

90

Jülch

Makeham, John. Transmitters and Creators: Chinese Commentators and Commentaries on the Analects (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003). Masumi, Shōno 莊野真澄. “Tō shamon Hōrin den ni tsuite” 唐沙門法琳傳について, Shien 史淵 14 (1936): 39–59. Mayer, Alexander Leonhard. Xuanzang: Übersetzer und Heiliger (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1992). McMullen, David. State and Scholars in T’ang China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). Michaud, Paul. “The Yellow Turbans,” Monumenta Serica 17 (1958): 47–127. Miller, Amy Lynn. “Daluo tian—Great Canopy Heaven,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London: Routledge, 2008), vol. 1, 299. Miller, Amy Lynn. “sanshi’er tian—Thirty-two Heavens,” in The Encyclopedia of Taoism, ed. Fabrizio Pregadio (London: Routledge, 2008), vol. 2, 847. Miyakawa, Hisayuki. “Local Cults around Mount Lu at the Time of Sun En’s Rebellion,” in Facets of Taoism: Essays in Chinese Religion, ed. Holmes Welch and Anna Seidel (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979): 83–101. Nakanishi Hisami 中西久味, „Hōrin zōki (zoku)“ 法琳雑記 (続), Hikaku shūkyō shisō kenkyū 比較宗教思想研究 4 (2004): 2–11. Nishiyama, Fukiko 西山蕗子. “Hōrin Haja ron ni tsuite” 法琳《破邪論》について, Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan nenpō 鈴木學術財團年報 9 (1973): 69–86. Norris, Richard A. “The Apologists,” in The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, ed. Frances Young (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004): 36–44. Ōfuchi, Ninji 大淵忍爾. “Kōkin no ran to Gotobeidō” 黃巾の亂と五斗米道, in Iwanamikōza sekai rekishi 岩波講座世界歷史 (Tōkyō: Iwanami Shoten 岩波書店, 1970), vol. 5, 23–52. Ōfuchi, Ninji. Shoki no dōkyō 初期の道教 (Tōkyō: Sōbunsha 創文社, 1991), 76–136. Olles, Volker. “Die Metamorphosen des Meisters: Einige Eindrücke vom Bild des Konfuzius im Buch Zhuangzi,” in Chinesische Religion und Philosophie–Konfuzia­nis­ mus–Mohismus–Daoismus–Buddhismus, ed. Konrad Meisig (Wiesbaden: Harrasso­ witz, 2005): 69–91. Orzech, Charles D. Politics and Transcendent Wisdom: The Scripture for Humane Kings in the Creation of Chinese Buddhism (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998). Palumbo, Antonello. “Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China,” in Zhonggu shidai de liyi, zongjiao yu zhidu 中古時代的禮儀，宗教与制度, ed. Yu Xin 余欣 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2012): 287–338. Palumbo, Antonello. “On the Author and Date of the Zhenzhenglun: An Obscure Page in the Struggle between Buddhists and Taoists in Medieval China,” Annali dell’Istituto Orientale di Napoli 57 (1997): 305–322.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

91

Pang, Ming 龐溟. “Sanhuang” 三皇, in Kongzi da cidian 孔子大辭典, ed. Zhang Dainian 張岱年 (Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 1993), 111. Pang, Ming. “Wudi” 五帝, in Kongzi da cidian, ed. Zhang Dainian (Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 1993), 111. Penner, Hans H. Rediscovering the Buddha: Legends of the Buddha and Their Interpretation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). Przyluski, Jean. La légende de l’empereur Açoka (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1923). Quinter, David. “Visualizing the Mañjuśrī Parinirvāṇa Sūtra as a Contemplation Sutra,” Asia Major, third series, 23, no. 2 (2010). Raz, Gil. “The Way of the Yellow and the Red: Re-examining the Sexual Initiation Rite of Celestial Master Daoism,” Nan Nü 10 (2008): 86–120. Reiter, Florian C. “Die ‘Einundachtzig Bildtexte zu den Inkarnationen und Wirkungen Lao-chün’s.’ Dokumente einer tausendjährigen Polemik in China,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 136 (1986): 450–91. Reiter, Florian C. “An Introduction to the Book ‘Explanations and Pictures Concerning the Responses and Incarnations of Lao-chün During all Generations’ (Lao-chün lishih ying-hua t’u-shuo, Chengdu 1936),” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 151 (2001): 163–205. Reiter, Florian C. Leben und Wirken Lao-tzu’s in Schrift und Bild: Lao-chün pa-shih-i-hua t’u-shuo (Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1990). Robinet, Isabelle. Taoism: Growth of a Religion (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997). Schipper, Kristofer. “Dongzhen Huangshu,” in The Taoist Canon, ed. Kristofer Schipper and Franciscus Verellen (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004): 129–130. Schipper, Kristofer. “Shangqing huangshuguodu yi,” in The Taoist Canon, ed. Kristofer Schipper and Franciscus Verellen (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004): 130–131. Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig. Die Identität der buddhistischen Schulen und die Kompilation buddhistischer Universalgeschichten in China: Ein Beitrag zur Geistesgeschichte der Sung-Zeit (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1982). Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig. “Eine Ehrenrettung für den Süden: Pao-chih (418–514) und Fu Hsi (497–569), zwei Heilige aus dem unteren Yangtse Tal,” in Religion und Philosophie in Ostasien: Festschrift für Hans Steiniger, ed. Gert Naundorf (Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1985): 247–265. Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig. “Why has the Question of Truth Remained an Open Question Throughout Chinese History?,” in Historical Truth, Historical Criticism and Ideology, ed. Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer (Leiden: Brill, 2005): 115–130. Senshū, Ogasawara 小笠原宣秀. “Tō no haibutsuronsha Fu Eki ni tsuite” 唐の排佛論者 傅奕について, Shina Bukkyōshigaku 支那佛教史學 1 (1937): 84–93.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

92

Jülch

Shen, Haiyan. The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra: T’ien-t’ai Philosophy of Buddhism (New Delhi: Originals, 2005). Shinohara, Koichi. “Guanding’s Biography of Zhiyi, the Fourth Patriarch of the Tiantai Tradition,” in Speaking of Monks: Religious Biography in India and China, ed. Phyllis E. Granoff (Oakville, Ontario: Mosaic, 1992): 97–218. Stein, Rolf A. “Remarques sur les mouvements du Taoïsme politico religieux au IIe siècle ap. J.-C.,” T’oung Pao 50 (1963): 1–78. Strange, Mark. “Representations of Liang Emperor Wu as a Buddhist Ruler in Sixth- and Seventh-century Texts,” Asia Major, third series, 24, no. 2 (2011): 53–112. Strickmann, Michel. “Therapeutische Rituale und das Problem des Bösen im frühen Daoismus,” in Religion und Philosophie in Ostasien: Festschrift für Hans Steininger, ed. Gert Naundorf (Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 1985): 185–200. Strong, John S. The Legend of King Aśoka: A Study and Translation of the Aśokāvadāna (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983). Tang, Yongtong 湯用彤. Han Wei Liangjin Nanbeichao fojiao shi 漢魏兩晉南北朝佛教史 (Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 1997). Teng, Ssu-yü. Family Instructions for the Yen Clan (Leiden: Brill, 1968). Thiel, Joseph. “Der Streit der Buddhisten und Taoisten zur Mongolenzeit,” Monumenta Serica 20 (1961): 1–81. Verellen, Franciscus. “The Twenty-Four Dioceses and Zhang Daoling: Spatio-Liturgical Organization in Early Heavenly Master Taoism,” in Pilgrims, Patrons, and Place: Localizing Sanctity in Asian Religions, ed. Phyllis Granoff and Koichi Shinohara (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2003): 15–67. Wagner, Rudolf G. “Die Unhandlichkeit des Konfuzius,” in Weisheit: Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation (III), ed. Aleida Assmann (München: Wilhelm Fink, 1991): 455–464. Wechsler, Howard J. Offerings of Jade and Silk: Ritual and Symbol in the Legitimation of the T’ang Dynasty (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985). Wechsler, Howard J. “The Founding of the T’ang Dynasty: Kao-tsu (reign 618–26),” in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 3, ed. Denis Twitchett (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press, 1979): 150–187. Wei, Songshan 魏嵩山, ed. Zhongguo lishi diming da cidian 中國歷史地名大辭典 (Guangzhou: Guangdong jiaoyu chubanshe 廣東教育出版社, 1995). Weinstein, Stanley. Buddhism under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Wile, Douglas. The Chinese Sexual Yoga Classics Including Women’s Solo Meditation Texts (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992). Wilkinson, Endymion. Chinese History: A Manual. Revised and Enlarged (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2000).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

In Defense of the Saṃgha: The Early Tang Monk Falin

93

Wright, Arthur F. “Biography and Hagiography: Hui-Chiao’s Lives of Eminent Monks,” in Studies in Chinese Buddhism, ed. Robert M. Somers (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990): 73–111. Wright, Arthur F. “Fo-t’u-teng: A Biography,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 11 (1948): 321–371. Wright, Arthur F. “Fu I and the Rejection of Buddhism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 12, no. 1 (1951): 33–47. Wright, Arthur F. “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” in Perspectives on the T’ang, ed. Arthur Wright and Denis Twitchett (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973): 239–263. Yang, Hsien-yi. Records of the Historian (Hongkong: The Commercial Press, 1975). Yoshikawa, Tadao 吉川忠夫. “Ō Genshi kō” 王遠知考, Tōhō gakuhō 東方學報 62 (1990): 69–98. Yu, Anthony C. State and Religion in China: Historical and Textual Perspectives (Chicago: Open Court, 2005). Yü, Chün-fang. Kuan-yin: The Chinese Transformation of Avalokitesvara (New York: Columbia University Press, 2001). Zhang, Zhenjun. Buddhism and Tales of the Supernatural in Early Medieval China: A Study of Liu Yiqing’s (403–444) Youming lu (Leiden: Brill, 2014). Zürcher, Erik. “Buddhist Influence on Early Taoism,” T’oung Pao 66, no. 1/3 (1980): 84–147. Zürcher, Erik. The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaption of Buddhism in Early Medieval China (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

94

Deeg

The Political Position of Xuanzang: The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji* Max Deeg In the year 629,1 a Chinese Buddhist monk, who had been ordained for only one year, left the Chinese capital of Chang’an for a long journey through Central Asia and across the high mountain passes of the Pamir and Hindukush ranges. The journey would bring him to the sacred homeland of his religion, India, where he would reside for more than a decade to study at the monastic university of Nālandā in the Northeast of the subcontinent. He also travelled extensively in India. This perilous adventure not only made him famous in his own time, but has certainly also made him the most well-known and venerated Buddhist monk in East Asia and beyond to this day.2 His name was Xuanzang 玄奘 (600 or 602–664,3 travelled 629–645). Xuanzang would probably not have achieved such an eminent status had he not, on the orders of the Tang emperor Taizong 太宗 (*598, ruled 626–649), written—in the first year after his return to China—an extensive report of his journey, which is entitled the “Record of the Western Regions of the [Period of the] Great Tang,” the Datang xiyu ji 大唐 西域記 (T 2087). His fame and close relationship with the imperial court and especially with the second Tang emperor, Taizong 太宗 (r. 626–649), which he had already achieved during his lifetime, earned him an individual biography,

* 1

2

3

A great deal of puṇya or gongde 功德 has to go, as so often, to my colleague and friend James Hegarty for having corrected my English. This is the date now widely accepted (Shōshin Kuwayama, “How Xuanzang Learned About Nālandā,” in: Tang China and Beyond. Studies on East Asia from the Seventh to the Tenth Century, ed. Antonino Forte [Kyoto: Istituto Italiano di Cultura, Scuola di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 1988], 29 ff.), while another date for the departure, 627, has been supported by earlier Japanese and Chinese scholars, see: Alexander Leonhard Mayer, Xuanzangs Leben und Werk, Teil 1: Xuanzang, Übersetzer und Heiliger (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1992), 116 f.; 265 f., note 388. On a brief discussion of Xuanzang’s impact on the “cultural memory” of East Asian cultures and Western imagination, see: Max Deeg, “‘Show Me the Land Where the Buddha Dwelled …’—Xuanzang’s ‘Record of the Western Regions’ (Xiyu ji): A Misunderstood Text?,” China Report 48 (2012): 89–113. On the problem of the different biographical dates, especially the date of birth (596, 600, 604, 605), see: A. Mayer, Xuanzang’s Leben und Werk, 260 f., note 336.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_004

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

95

compiled by his disciple Huili 慧立 (615–?) and later revised and extended by Yancong 彥悰 (fl. second half of 7th cent.). It is entitled the Datang Ciensi sanzang fashi zhuan 大唐慈恩寺三藏法師傳 (“Biography of the Tripiṭaka Dharma Master from the Cien-temple of the Great Tang;” subsequently called Biography for reasons of brevity; T 2053).4 His influence and importance even led to the inclusion of a brief biographical sketch in the official Tang histories.5 Although due credit is normally given to Xuanzang’s moral and religious influence on the Tang emperor Taizong, as is reflected in the Biography, and scholars emphasize the role which the monk played in altering the emperor’s indifferent attitude towards Buddhism as a religion,6 the full political agenda of Xuanzang, as it is displayed in the Xiyu ji, has, in my opinion, not been fully explored. This seems strange in the light of the fact that a lot of recent schol-

4 5

6

On the problem of the date and compilation of the Biography, see the discussion in A. Mayer, Xuanzang’s Leben und Werk, 41 ff. See Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書, juan 191, where the favors bestowed on Xuanzang by the emperor are described as follows: “In the nineteenth year of [the era] Zhenguan (645) [Xuanzang] returned to the capital [Chang’an]. When Taizong saw him [he] was very happy and held discussions with him. Then [the emperor] issued an edict [ordering] that the 657 Sanskrit texts should be translated in the Hongfusi, and [he] also ordered the vice director to the right Fang Xuanling and the mentor to the left of the heir adherent Xu Jingzong to summon more than fifty learned śramanas to work together to bring [them] in order.” 貞觀十 九年，歸至京師。太宗見之，大悅，與之談論。於是詔將梵本六百五十七部 於弘福寺翻譯，仍敕右僕射房玄齡、太子左庶子許敬宗，廣召碩學沙門五十 餘人，相助整比。 The assistance of Taizong’s highly respected and influential advisors and high officials Fang Xuanling 房玄齡 (579–648) and Xu Jingzong 許敬宗 (592– 672) who were involved or, in the case of the latter, became involved under the next emperor in the compilation of histories of the previous dynasties that contained important information about the Western Region as an extending sphere of influence of the Tang shows the political context in which Xuanzang found himself after his return from India. See Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-Tsung: The Man and the Persona,” in: Essays on T’ang Society. The Interplay of Social, Political and Economic Forms, ed. John Curtis Perry and Bardwell L. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 30 f.; Stanley Weinstein, Buddhism Under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 13 ff.; A. Mayer, Xuanzang’s Leben und Werk, 66 ff.; Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik: Die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin, 3 vols. (München: Utz, 2014), vol. 1, 13.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

96

Deeg

arly work, such as that of Antonino Forte,7 Chen Jinhua,8 Sen Tansen,9 and others10 has focused on the interface between politics and religion, both in general and in relation to specific historical figures and ideologies, especially— but not only—Buddhism11 in the Tang period. But, so far, the pivotal figure of Xuanzang and his role as a political agent in the early Tang period seems to have slipped “through Indra’s net” of scholarly investigation. In fact, Xuanzang's roles as a translator, commentator, and philosopher—even as a founder of a rather short-lived Buddhist school, the Faxiang-zong 法相宗 —have received more attention than his role as an advisor and educator.12 These last two roles are those that will detain us now by means of a close reading of selected passages from the Xiyu ji. Before I turn to this analysis, it is worth spending a little more time considering the patterns of reception and (mis)interpretation of Xuanzang's work in scholarly discourse. Bold as such an assertion might seem, I would go so far as to suggest that no Chinese Buddhist text has been, and is being, quoted so often (and mostly in its late 19th century English translation)13 and, at the same 7

8

9 10 11 12

13

See e.g. Antonino Forte, Mingtang and Buddhist Utopias in the History of the Astronomical Clock. The Tower, Statue and Armillary Sphere Constructed by Empress Wu (Rome, Paris: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1988) (Serie Orientale Roma 59; Publications d’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 145); Antonino Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century. Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Tunhuang Document S. 6502, Followed by an Annotated Translation (Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale 2005, second edition, first published 1976). To give just two examples: Chen Jinhua, “Śarīra and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, 1–2 (2002): 33–150; Chen Jinhua, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (643– 712) (Leiden: Brill, 2007). See Sen Tansen, Buddhism, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Realignment of Sino-Indian Relations, 600–1400 (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002). See the most recent study of the monk Falin: Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik, and also contributions in the present volume. On Daoism under the Tang, see: Timothy H. Barrett, Taoism under the T’ang. Religion & Empire During the Golden Age of Chinese History (London: WellSweep, 1996). A recent exception is Liu Shufen’s detailed article on the last decade in Xuanzang’s life and his relation to Gaozong and politics: Liu Shufen 劉淑芬, “Xuanzang zuihou shinian (655–664): Jianlun zongzhang ernian (669) gaizangshi” 玄奘最後十年 (655–664): 兼論 總章二年 (669) 改葬事, Zhonghua wenshi luncong 中華文史論叢 95 (2009.3): 1–97. It is striking that even after the more recent translation of the Xiyu ji by Li Rongxi—Li Rongxi, The Great Tang Dynasty Record of the Western Regions. Translated by the TripiṭakaMaster Xuanzang under Imperial Order, Composed by Śramaṇa Bianji of the Great Zhongchi Monastery (Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

97

time, is so understudied particularly in Western scholarship as the Xiyu ji.14 In my opinion, this neglect of Xuanzang and the “Records of the Western Regions” as a serious object of research has been caused by two factors: 1. The “indianization” of Xuanzang’s Xiyu ji. By this I refer to the way that the Xiyu Ji is approached as a text that mainly describes Indian matters15 rather than as a text that should be read and understood, in the first instance, in its Chinese historical context. This is also the very reason, in my eyes, that the Xiyu ji has been used (and misused) since it first was translated into Western languages, first into French16 and then into English,17 as a tool for reconstructing Indian history without, in most cases, consulting, analyzing and contextualizing the original Chinese text. This would be akin to Marco Polo’s Il Millione being used as the main source for the reconstruction of the history of Yuan China under Kublai Khan without taking into account the circumstance of the text’s production and wider historical context, which is, of course, rather Medieval Europe than Mongol China and Asia!

14

15

16

17

1996)—scholars are still quoting Beal’s translation which is not without serious problems. Another odd phenomenon is that the paraphrases of the Xiyu ji contained in Watters’— Thomas Watters, On Yuan Chwang’s Travels in India, 2 vols. (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1904–05)—commentary are often taken and quoted as translation. Even sinologically knowledgeable scholars very often do not quote the original text, and references to the extensive commentaries in East Asian languages—e.g. in Japanese Mizutani Shinjō 水谷真成, Daitō-saiiki-ki 大唐西域記, 3 vols. (Tokyo: Tōyō bunko 東洋 文庫, 1999), and in Chinese Ji Xianlin 季羨林, et.al., Datang xiyuji xiaozhu 大唐西域記 校注 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985)—are very rare. This strong, sometimes naïve, belief in the value of Xuanzang as a source for the reconstruction of Indian and Buddhist history did not prevent the criticism and dismissal of Xuanzang (and his biography by historians of medieval India) if there was a discrepancy between the Indian sources (inscriptions, Bāṇa’s Harṣacarita) and the Chinese sources: see, for example, R.C. Majumdar, “Harsha-Vardhana and His Time,” in: The History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume Three: The Classical Age, fourth edition, ed. R.C. Majumdar (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1988), 100: “It would appear … that the account of the Chinese pilgrim is confused and absurd”; ibid., 109: “Hiuen Tsang … was ill-informed about [Harṣa’s] early career, …”. Shankar Goyal, Harsha: A Multidisciplinary Political Study (Jodpur: Kusumanjali Book World, 2006), 50: “[Xuanzang’s] Confucian and Buddhist ethics made him a deliberately honest observer and narrator but prone to exaggeration in the direction of his own biases.” Stanislas Julien, Mémoires sur les contrées occidentales, traduits du Sanscrit en Chinois, en l’an 648, par Hiouen-Thsang, et du Chinois en Français, 2 tômes (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1857–58). Samuel Beal, Si-yu-ki. Buddhist Records of the Western World, translated from the Chinese of Hiuen-Tsiang (ad 629), 2 vols. (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1884).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

98

Deeg

2. The conflation of the Xiyu ji and the Biography as historical sources. This goes hand in hand with a tendency to let the highly hagiographic Biography dominate interpretation of the Xiyu ji. This is because of the latter’s lack of narrative elements. The problem is particularly acute in cases where there is a discrepancy between the two sources. This approach—common amongst both scholars and other readers18 of these texts—has severely restricted, I would suggest, the awareness of the political and moral—and the latter is not necessarily restricted to Buddhism—influence which Xuanzang tried to exert on the emperor Taizong by exposing him to educational narratives and episodes which conveyed a clear and understandable message in this respect. Such passages in the Xiyu ji, which I have elsewhere called “royal stories” since they deal, for the most part, with rulers and their behavior, are distributed across the text; their contextualization in the light of courtly politics during Taizong’s rule not only helps to explain why Xuanzang included them in the Xiyu ji, but is also capable of throwing some light on the political role which he assumed: educating and advising the emperor not as one of his officials, but as a spiritus rector in the Buddhist tradition of a kalyāṇamitra, a “beneficial friend.”19 In the light of Taizong’s sensitivity to his own standing, reputation and the impression he would make on future generations,20 it becomes clear that Xuanzang had to maneuver and act quite adroitly to convey the politically and morally critical messages directed to his emperor. The assumption that these episodes, the “royal” stories, were specifically used for this purpose is indirectly supported by the fact that most of them are either missing or touched upon only very briefly in the Biography, which was a text aimed mainly at a Buddhist readership and was written as a hagiographic eulogy of the “dharma master” (fashi 法師).21 I have explored this kind of indirect criticism and admonition directed to the emperor elsewhere in the context of the focus in the Xiyu ji on the story of Aśoka’s son Kuṇāla, who was blinded by his father because of the accusation of 18 19

20 21

For a brief discussion of what could be called the popular usage of the Xiyu ji and the Biography, see: M. Deeg, “‘Show me the land,” 94 ff. Max Deeg, “Writing for the Emperor—Xuanzang Between Piety, Religious Propaganda, Intelligence, and Modern Imagination,” in: Pāsādikadānaṃ. Festschrift für Bhikkhu Pāsādika, ed. Martin Straube, Roland Steiner, Jayandra Soni, Michael Hahn, Mitsuyo Demoto (Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag, 2009): 30–60. See below. With the telling exceptions of Xuanzang’s meetings with kings, e.g. the khagan of the Western Turks, king Harṣa of Kanauj and king Kumāra Bhāskaravarman of Kāmarūpa / Assam (see below). The respect paid to and the material wealth heaped on Xuanzang by these rulers could be and were, of course, utilized to alleviate the master’s status.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

99

having an affair with Aśoka’s queen. This seems to relate to events at the Tang court: the (real or rumored) romance of the crown prince and later emperor Gaozong 高宗 (*628, ruled 649–683) with one of Taizong’s consorts, who then became Gaozong’s spouse and, subsequently, Empress Wu Zetian 武澤天 (625–705, ruled as empress 690–705).22 Xuanzang clearly ventures not only thematically, but also by means of the manipulation of information, into the realm of politics when he relates his encounters and discussions with two historical Indian rulers, king Harṣavar­ dhana Śīlāditya (r. 606–648) of Kanyākubja, and the king of Kāmarūpa (Assam) Kumāra (Bhāskaravarman).23 I have argued elsewhere that the report of these encounters were supposed to suggest an alliance between India and China,24 which does not seem to be too far-fetched in the light of the embassies going back and forth between the two empires in the years of Xuanzang’s stay in India and afterwards, which included the ambassador Wang Xuance’s 王玄策 missions to India,25 and the death of both Taizong in the year 649 and Harṣa two years before, in 647.26 This paper will concentrate on Xuanzang’s description of the Puṣpabhūti27 king Harṣavardhana Śīlāditya, briefly called Harṣa, and his early career (dynastic lineage, ascension to the throne, pacification of the realm) in comparison with the Indian sources and the implications that this has for the underlying motives and political agenda of Xuanzang’s description of the Indian ruler and 22 23

24 25 26 27

M. Deeg, “‘Show me the land,” 103 ff. See Richard Mather, “Chinese and Indian Perceptions of Each Other Between the First and Seventh Centuries,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 112, no. 1 (1992): 1–8; Sen Tansen, “The Travel Records of Chinese Pilgrims Faxian, Xuanzang and Yijing,” Education About Asia 11, no. 3 (2006), 30, and Sen Tansen, Buddhism, Trade, and Diplomacy, 18 ff.; M. Deeg, “Writing for the Emperor,” 55 ff. M. Deeg, “‘Show me the land,” 106 ff. On Wang and the diplomatic relations between the Tang court and Kanyākubja, see: Sen Tansen, Buddhism, Trade, and Diplomacy, 21 ff. On the wider historical context of Sino-Indian relations, see: Sen Tansen, Buddhism, Trade, and Diplomacy. This dynastic name is used by many scholars. The form Puṣyabhūti has been suggested by Georg Bühler, “The Madhuban Copper Plate of Harsha, Dated Samvat 25,” Epigraphia Indica 1 (1892), 68, and has been used by others as well. Bāṇa, however, as the only witness for this name, uses the form Puṣpabhūti, and is followed by D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998), 65 ff., and others. Recently Hans Bakker has taken up the issue and pointed out the connection between the eponymous hero and one of the Pāśupata “patriarchs” in the Kuru-lineage, Puṣpaka: Hans Bakker, “Thanesar, the Pāśupata Order and the Skandapurāṇa. Studies in the Skandapurāṇa IX,” Journal of Indological Studies 19 (2007), 3 f. (see also below).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

100

Deeg

his dynasty. I am arguing that the Indian king is portrayed not as a historical person, but as an idealized Buddhist ruler and—as I have already argued elsewhere28—as a speculum, or a “mirror,” held before Taizong. There is thus something of an educational program in the Xiyu ji, which seeks to show the Chinese emperor the behavior of an ideal Buddhist ruler. Harṣa is actually one of the few Indian kings in early Indian medieval history about whom we have quite a wealth of information from the Indian side:29 – We have six of the Harṣa’s inscriptions from which we get, in the standard formulaic fashion, information about dynastic self-perception and the religious inclination of the different Puṣpabhūti rulers.30 These inscriptions are: 1. the Sonipat copper seal inscription;31 2. the Banskhera plate inscription (year 22 = 628);32 3. the copper plate inscription from the area around Thanesar (year 23 = 629);33 4. the Madhuban copper plate inscription (year 25 = 631);34 4. the Nālandā seal inscription;35 5. the copper plate inscription from Nabha, Punjab (year 8 = 614, or rather year 33 = 639).36 Harṣa is also 28 29

30 31

32 33 34 35 36

See M. Deeg, “Writing for the Emperor”. There are a number of monograph-long studies of Harṣa which all rely, more or less, on the Chinese sources: Maurice Léon Ettinghausen, Harṣa Vardhana, empereur et poète de l’Inde Septentrionale (606–648). Étude de sa vie et son temps (Londres, Paris, Louvain: Luzac & Co., Ernest Leroux, J.-B. Istas, 1906); K.M. Panikkar, Sri Harsha of Kanauj. A monograph on the history of India in the first half of the 7th century ad (Bombay: D.B. Taradorevala Sons & Co., 1922); Radha Kumud Mookerji, Harsha (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1926); Baijnath Sharma, Harṣa and His Times (Varanasi: Sushma Prakashan, 1970); D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study; S. Goyal, Harsha. For an overview of scholarship, see: S. Goyal, Harsha, 2 ff. One could add the short inscription on the gold coin of Harṣa found in Uttar Pradesh, see: S. Goyal, Harsha: 58 f. John Faithful Fleet, Inscriptions of the Early Gupta Kings and Their Successors (London: Superintendent of Government Printing, 1888), 231 f.; Kiran Kumar Thalpyal, Inscriptions of the Maukharīs, Later Guptas, Puṣpabhūtis and Yaśovarman of Kanauj (New Delhi: Agam Prakash, 1985), 188; the readable portion of this seal is almost identical with the Nālandā seal inscription. Georg Bühler, “Banskhêra plate of Harsha, the year 22,” Epigraphia Indica 4 (1896–97): 208–11; K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 177 ff. See S. Goyal, Harsha, 60 ff., who calls this inscription which was discovered in the year 1999, “Kurukshetra-Varanasi grant”. G. Bühler, “The Madhuban Copper Plate”; K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 182 ff. H. Sastri, “The clay seals of Nālandā: The seals of Harsha or Harshavardhana,” Epigraphia Indica 21 (1931–32): 74–77; K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 186 f. See Ashvini Agrawal, “A New Copper-Plate Grant of Harṣavardhana from the Punjab, Year 8,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 66, no. 2 (2003): 220–28. There is,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

101

mentioned in inscriptions of other Indian rulers, e.g. the Aihole inscription of the Cālaukya king Pulakeśin II from 634/35,37 the Aphsad inscription of

37

however, some debate on the reading of the year 8 by Agrawal which indeed would be very early, especially in the light of the similarity with the other copper plate inscriptions which are all from the later period of Harṣa’s reign, see: D.P. Dubey, A.K. Dubey and Neelima Mishra, “Important Epigraphic Discoveries in U.P. During the Last 25 Years,” Journal of History & Social Sciences 2.2 (July-December 2011), ) (who read year 33 instead of 8). Franz Kielhorn, “Aihole of Pulakêśin II.; Śaka-Saṁvat 556,” Epigraphia Indica 6 (1900–01): 1–12; in this inscription Pulakeśin claims a victory over Harṣa (pp. 6 and 10, V.23). Whether or not Pulakeśin really won a victory over Harṣa as claimed in the inscription is a matter of debate—see e.g. R.C. Majumdar, “Harsha-Vardhana and His Time,” 105 f., and D. ­Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study, 97 ff. However Harṣa’s attempt and failure to conquer Pulakeśin’s kingdom is confirmed, at least, in Xuanzang’s record on Mahārāṣṭra (or Prākṛt Mahāra(ṭ)­ṭha) / Mohelacha 摩訶剌侘 / *ma-xa-lat-trhh (all Early Middle Chinese reconstructions in this paper—marked with *—follow Edwin G. Pulleyblank, Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin [Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1991]), Datang xiyu ji, juan 11: “The king is of the caste of the kṣatriya [and] is called Buluojishe 補羅稽舍 (*pɔ’-la-kεj-ɕia’, *Pulakeśa). [His] strategic [capability] is far-sighted, [his] benevolence far-reaching, [his] ministers serve [him well and] are absolutely loyal. Recently, [when] the great king Śīlāditya invaded the East and attacked the West, [and people] from afar recognized [him as their ruler, and those] near respected [him], [but] only the people of this kingdom did not subside [to him]; [so he] repeatedly took command of the armies of the Five Indias and summoned fierce warriors from all kingdoms to attack [this kingdom] in punitive expeditions, [but he] has not been able yet to defeat [it]. [Although] their soldiers are [as fierce] as this, their customs are like that: the people like learning, venerate both the hete­ rodox and orthodox [teachings]. [There are] more than one hundred saṅghārāmas [and] more than five thousand monks accumulating merit by studying comprehensively both the Great and the Small Vehicle. [There are] several hundred deva shrines, and a huge number of heretics.” 王，剎帝利種也，名補羅稽舍。謀猷弘遠，仁慈廣被。臣 下事之，盡其忠矣。今戒日大王東征西伐，遠賓邇肅，唯此國人獨不臣伏。 屢率五印度甲兵及募 召 諸國烈將，躬往討伐，猶未克勝。其兵也如此，其俗 也如彼。人知好學，邪正兼崇。伽藍百餘所，僧徒五千餘人，大小二乘兼功 綜習。天祠百數，異道甚多。 (T 2087, p. 935, a22–29; punctuation following Ji Xianlin 季羨林, et.al., Datang xiyuji xiaozhu 大唐西域記校注 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985], 891) Xuanzang’s very positive description of the king is obviously influenced by the excellent condition of Buddhism in this kingdom, but there could also be an indirect hint to Taizong’s attempts to conquer the Korean kingdom of Koguryŏ 高麗 and his pending campaign against the kingdom in early 645. According to the Biography, shortly after Xuanzang’s return from India Taizong had tried to convince the monk to accompany him on the spring campaign of 645 against the Korean kingdom which Xuanzang refused by pointing out that he just would be a burden and that, for him as a monk, it would not be

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

102

Deeg

Ādityasena,38 and the Gurjara copper-plate grant of Jayabhaṭa from Nausāri.39 – Three Sanskrit plays are attributed to Harṣa: the Ratnāvalī, the Priyadarṣikā, and, probably the most famous, the Nāgānanda (see below).40 The particular feature of the Nāgānanda is that its second part presents a Buddhist theme: the story of the nāga prince Jīmūtavāhana who sacrifices himself, like the bodhisattva in numerous Jātakas, instead of another nāga, to the snakedevouring mythical bird Garuḍa. The king’s authorship of the Nāgānanda and his interest in Buddhist literary matters is supported by a passage in Yijing’s 義淨 (635–713, traveled 671–695) “Record of the Inner Law Sent Back from the Southern Sea,” Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan 南海寄歸內法傳.41

38

39

40

41

appropriate to be involved in military affairs (T 2053, p. 253, b21-c1); see: S. Weinstein, Buddhism Under the T’ang, 24. J.F. Fleet, Inscriptions of the Early Gupta Kings, 200 ff.; K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 160 ff. (esp. 163, verse 15); according to this inscription the Mālava king Mādhavagupta and father of Ādityasena, also known from the Harṣacarita, seeks a meeting with Harṣa (śrīharṣadevanijasa[ṃ]gamavāñchā). Bhagwānlāl Indrajī, “A New Gurjara Copper-Plate Grant,” Indian Antiquary 13 (1884): 70–81; Jayabhaṭa’s predecessor Dadda is said to have helped the king of Valabhī against Harṣa. Editions and translations of all three dramas are found in Bak Kun Bae, Śrī Harṣa’s Plays. Translated into English with Full Sanskrit Text (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1964), and for a recent translation of the Nāgānanda into English, see: Andrew Skilton, “How the Nāgas Were Pleased” by Harṣa & “The Shattered Thighs” by Bhāsa (New York: New York University Press, 2009). There are many other editions of translations of the individual dramas, see: Klaus Mylius, Geschichte der altindischen Literatur. Die 3000-jährige Ent­wicklung der religiös-philosophischen, belletristischen und wissenschaftlichen Literatur Indiens von den Veden bis zur Etablierung des Islam, 2., überarbeitete und ergänzte Auflage (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003), 197 ff. juan 4: “[At this] time king Śīlāditya [who] very much loved literature issued an imperial order saying: “If any of [you] gentlemen loves poetic eulogies then show [it] to us by tomorrow morning.” And when all these were collected [he] received five hundred bundles. [When he] opened them and read most of them were [from] the Jātakamālā. It was then that [the king] knew that of the eulogies these were the most exquisite ones. … Then also king Śīlāditya used the story of the bodhisattva “Riding the Clouds” (Jīmūtavāhana) giving his body for a nāga to produce a hymn, [and he had it] performed by musicians playing strings and winds, had it performed and danced, [and it] was widely known in [his] time.” 時戒日王極好文筆，乃下評曰﹕ “諸君但有好詩讚者，明日旦朝， 咸 將示朕。” 及其總集，得五百夾。展而閱之，多是 社 得迦摩羅矣。方知讚 詠之中，斯為美極。 … 又戒日王取乘雲菩薩以身代龍之事，緝為歌詠，奏諧 絃管，令人作樂，舞之蹈之，流布於代。 (T 2125, p. 228, a1–8; punctuation and text following the edition of Wang Bangwei 王邦維, Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan xiaozhu 南

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

103

– There is also the Harṣacarita, the “Deeds of Harṣa,” a Sanskrit prose biography of the king by his poeta laureatus, Bāṇa, in which the period of Harṣa’s accession to the throne and the events and campaigns that follow are described.42 While Bāṇa himself was a Śaiva, the Harṣacarita does, however, contain numerous references to Buddhism.43 Bāṇa is also the only source that mentions Harṣa’s dynastically eponymous ancestor Puṣpabhūti (see below).44 The evidence is thus more extensive than anything we have about any Indian ruler until the Mogul period and such a pool of information creates a solid basis for comparison with the facts and events given by Xuanzang in the Xiyu ji. It also confronts us with some discrepancies and differences in the two strands of sources: the Chinese and the South-Asian. Generally speaking the Indian sources, the inscriptions and Harṣa’s biography, are more in accordance with each other, while Xuanzang’s description, while containing information compatible with the former sources, seems to emphasize, as is to be expected, the Buddhist aspect, but also other aspects that call for explanation and inter­­pretation. To highlight the selective and intentionally motivated method which Xuan­ zang applies, it may be appropriate to start with what the Xiyu ji does not mention about Harṣa and his dynasty, but which Xuanzang must definitely have known. The original territory of Harṣa’s Puṣpabhūti dynasty, Sthāṇvīśvara (or Sthāṇeśvara; modern Thanesar), although it is mentioned in the Xiyu ji, is not linked with the royal house at all.45 Sthāṇvīśvara, as the homeland of

42

43

44

45

海寄歸內法傳校注 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1995], 182 ff.). For a critical discussion of the Nāgānanda, see: Roland Steiner, Untersuchungen zu Harṣadevas Nāgānanda und zum indischen Schauspiel (Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica, 1997). The date of composition of the Harṣacarita is an unsettled question. The different scholarly views, between a very early and a very late date during Harṣa’s life or reign, are presented by S. Goyal, Harsha, 41 ff. On Bāṇa, see: Neeta Sharma, Bāṇabhaṭṭa, A Literary Study (Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1968); K. Mylius, Geschichte der altindischen Literatur, 171 f. For an analysis of the protagonists and their lineages in the Harṣacarita, see: Kumkum Roy, “Poetic Pasts: Patrons, Poets and Lesser Mortals in Bāṇa’s ‘Biography’,” Religions of South Asia 5, no. 1/2 (2011): 303–317. P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa. Text of Uchchvāsas I-VIII (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1997), 44, line 25 ff.; E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1897), 83. See D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study, 65: “… [Xuanzang] appears to ignore the fact that it (i.e. Sthāṇveśvara, MD) was the paternal home of Harṣa.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

104

Deeg

the dynasty and of Harṣa, is eulogized in Bāṇa’s biography.46 The original form of the name seems to have been Sthāṇeśvara,47 but Bāṇa uses the form Sthāṇvīśvara which may have been the result of a strong Śaiva emphasis under Harṣa (on Harṣa as a Śaiva in his inscriptions, see below).48 Xuanzang’s report on the region is marked by a rather strange, probably Buddhist, version of the Mahābhārata story and the genesis of the Bhagavadgītā (without mentioning the titles of these texts), which I have discussed elsewhere; it concerns a king luring his people into a disastrous battle by having a Brahmin fabricate a text—the Gītā—which promises them merit for fighting in the war.49 Whatever the motivation behind this, obviously polemical, Buddhist presentation of this story, Xuanzang calls the region—with an almost sarcastic undertone—fudi 福地, Skt. puṇyakṣetra, somehow echoing the dharmakṣetre kurukṣetre “formula” of the Gītā.50 The bloody and inauspicious content of the latter would not have gone very well with the description of Harṣa as a pious Buddhist king. Such an attempt to “cover up” the non-Buddhist, orthodox brahminical, origin of the dynasty may also be the reason that 46 47

48

49 50

P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 43, line 22 ff.; E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 81 ff. The earliest occurrence of the name in this form seems to be a in an inscription on a clay tablet around the 5th century found near the modern city of Thanesar, see: Elliott McCarter, Kurukshetra. Bending the Narrative Into Place (PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2013), 148 f. One could speculate about the motivation behind this “renaming”—if it really was one— or reinterpretation in the light of the Sthāṇu myth, see: David Shulman, “Terror of Symbols and Symbols of Terror: Notes on the Myth of Śiva as Sthāṇu,” History of Religions 26, No. 2 (1986): 101–124. If the name is interpreted as a bāhuvrīhi in the sense of “the region which has Sthāṇu as its Lord” it may have been used as a starting point of a religious ideology of divine centre: Sthāṇu as the deity who has helped to establish the Puṣpabhūti dynasty in the region, and therefore as the tutelary regional god. One could speculate if there was a central pillar (sthāṇu) / liṅga in the capital. This also seems not to be unlikely in the light of the connection which the Sthāṇu myth has with the Mahābhārata. This is certainly reflected in Bāṇa’s narrative of the dynasty’s origin in Puṣpabhūta who is said to have been, from his youth and without being instructed, an adherent of Śiva. In this respect it is also striking that Bāṇa does not mention the veneration of the sun god (Sūrya) assigned to Harṣa’s father and grandfather in the king’s own inscriptions (see below): the whole focus in the Harṣacarita, also highlighted by the prophecy of Harṣa’s kingship to Puṣpabhūti through the goddess Lakṣmī, seems to be to establish the legitimizing link between the progenitor of the dynasty and Bāṇa’s king and hero. See M. Deeg, “‘Show me the land,” 101 ff. See Minoru Hara, “A Note on the Phrase dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre,” Journal of Indian Philos­ophy 27 (1999), 58 f. On a “deep history” of Sthānvīśvara see E. McCarter, Kurukshetra—the Xiyu ji story is discussed on pp. 148 ff.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

105

the Chinese monk does not mention the semi-mythical narrative of the founder of the dynasty, Puṣpabhūti as it is reported by Bāṇa: Puṣpabhūti is said to have defeated a nāga king Śrīkaṇṭha with the help of a Śaiva teacher, Bhairavācārya, thus clearly establishing the dynasty on the basis of Śaiva authority and legitimation.51 On the other hand, the imperial centre of Harṣa, according to Xuanzang, is the region around Kanyākubja, Chin. Jieruojushe 羯若鞠闍 / *kɨat-ɲɨak-kuwkdʐia, translated as Qunü 曲女, “Crooked Daughters,” into Chinese. Xuanzang’s report reads as if this had been the dynastic homeland of the ruler’s family. This is, however, in contradiction to Bhāṇa’s clear statement that Kanyākubja was taken over and chosen by Harṣa as power base and imperial center only after he had undertaken a punitive campaign against the king of Mālava, the invader and murderer of the kingdom’s ruler, the Maukhari king Grahavarman, who was Harṣa’s brother-in-law and was married to his younger sister Rājyaśrī (for more on Rājyaśrī and her rescue through Harṣa, see below).52 That Xuanzang was well informed as to the local traditions and stories about, and around, a wide variety of locales is clearly shown by the fact that he records a long etiological story of how Kanyākubja received its name, which has a direct parallel in the Indian epic, the Rāmāyana. Both etiological legends tell us the story of a powerful deity (Xuanzang) or saint (ṛṣi) (Rāmāyana) who condemns a king’s daughters (kanyā) to crookedness (kubj-) because they refuse him, this being the reason why the city is called Kanyākubja. The Rāmāyana story is found in the first chapter, the Bālasarga (I.31–33), where it is told by the narrator Visvāmitra to the young heroes Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa as a geo-genealogical history of his own family background. The 51

52

P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 45, line 24 ff.; E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 85 ff. See also H. Bakker, “Thanesar,” 4. This myth of origin seems to have been important enough to still be known by king Yaśovarman, one of Harṣa’s successors on the throne of Kanauj (first half of 8th cent.), according to Vākpati’s eulogy on the king, the Gaüdavāho (verse 472 ff.), with his court paying a visit to Śrīkaṇṭha, the homeland of his predecessor, to commemorize the snake sacrifice (sarpasattra) of the famous Vedic king Janamejaya; see: Shankar Pāṇḍurang Paṇḍit, The Gaüdavāho, A Historical Poem in Prākṛit by Vākpati (Bombay: Government Central Book Depot, 1887): xxviii, and 134 ff. (text). On a foundation myth of Sthāneśvara in the Skandapurāṇa according to which the Śaiva sage Dadhīca defeats his Vaiṣṇava opponent Kṣupa, see: H. Bakker, “Thanesar,” 7 f. The fact that Bāṇa does not directly identify Sthāneśvara with Dharmakṣetra, emphasized by E. McCarter, Kurukshetra: 150, may be caused by his own strong Śaiva conviction and Harṣa’s emphasis on the veneration of Maheśvara as the deus loci (see below) which did not go very well with the clear Vaiṣṇava identity of the Mahābhārata / Bhagavadgītā. This inconsistency was already noted in: S. Pāṇḍurang, The Gaüdavāho, cxi, note †.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

106

Deeg

story, despite its differences in the plot, clearly has some common features with Xuanzang’s version: in the Rāmāyaṇa story53 it is the wind god Vāyu who directly asks the one hundred daughters of king Kuśanābha to become his consorts. When the girls (kanyā) offensively decline to follow the god’s request by pointing out that it is their father’s pre-right to choose them a husband, he enters their bodies and disfigures them (kubja). Kuśanābha, praising them for their steadfastness, marries them to Brahmadatta, the son of the ṛṣi Cūlin and a gandharva woman called Somadā, and king of Kāmpilyā. Brahmadatta, by his miraculous power, restores the girls to their former shape and beauty.54 In Xuanzang’s story, some names and functions seem to have been shifted: Brahmadatta is the father of the girls, and Vāyu has become a ṛṣi. The girls passively react to the proposal, turning it down against the fathers will, in order to turn the “happy” end of the epic into a disastrous one. The princesses do exactly what they explicitly refrain from in the Rāmāyaṇa: svayaṃvara, by which is meant the self-choice of a husband, or, rather, in this case, the refusal to choose a preferred suitor. They therefore have to stay crooked. In the epic there seems to be a reflection of the ṛṣi in Xuanzang’s story: Brahmadatta’s father Cūlin, whose name can be interpreted as “the becrested one” (having the tree on top of his head?), is served and attended by the gandharva girl Somadā, the daughter of Ūrmilā, in the same way as the king, in Xuanzang’s story, proposes to the ṛṣi. Keeping in mind the relatively open frame of the first sarga of the Rāmāyaṇa it could well be that Vāyu was introduced here into an older form of the legend in which it was the ṛṣi who enacted a curse—a very common motive in brahminical narratives (see e.g. in Kālidāsa’s Śakuntalā). That these stories have a closer connection than is implied at first glance in the standard version of the epic, in which the crucial aetiological moment of name-giving is missing, becomes clear in the fact that the Northern ms. tradition inserts a couplet (after 32.10, before choosing Brahmadatta as the husband) giving exactly this aetiology: yad vāyunā ca tāḥ kanyās tatra kubjīkṛtāḥ purā, kanyākubjam iti khyātaṃ tataḥ prabhṛti tat puram.55 “Since, long ago, these girls (kanyāḥ) were deformed (kubjīkṛtāḥ) there by Vāyu, the town has, from 53 54

55

See Robert P. Goldman and Sally J. Sutherland, The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki. An Epic of Ancient India, Volume I: Bālakāṇḍa (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), 184 ff. For a general discussion of the Rāmāyana story in the framework of the epic and especially the Bālasarga, see: Robert P. Goldman and Sally J. Sutherland, The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, 64 ff. G.H. Bhatt, The Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa (Critically edited for the first time), Fascicule 1: The Bālakāṇḍa, The First Book of the Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa, The National Epic of India (Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1982), 198, note under 10.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

107

then on, become known as Kanyākubja.”56 The story is also alluded to in Kalhāṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī (4.133).57 Xuanzang’s version of the story presents us with a nameless “immortal” (xianren 仙人; Skt. ṛṣi); the other protagonist, the king, called “Brahma-Given,” Skt. Brahmadatta, Chin. Fanshou 梵授, is obviously an adaptation from the genre of jātakas where Brahmadatta is normally the king of Vārāṇasī (or Kāśī), and indicates the in-illo-tempore time-frame of the story (“At the time when king Brahmadatta was king in Vārāṇasī …”).58 I give a translation of Xuanzang’s version of the complete narrative (Datang xiyu ji 大唐西域記, juan 5): “In the time when the lifespan of the people of Kanyākubja was [still] longer, its old royal city was called Jusumobuluo59 (in the language of the Tang [this means] ‘Flower-Palace’); the king was called ‘Brahma-Given.’ Rich in wisdom and great in talents, well equipped with civil and military [abilities], [he] deterred Jambu[dvīpa], and shattered the neighbouring kingdoms with the sound [of his war drums]. [He] altogether had one thousand sons, wise and brave, with broad and strong minds. He also had one hundred daughters of beautiful and elegant appearance. At that time there was an immortal living at the side of the river Gaṅgā [who] had already tamed his spirit and entered contemplation for several ten thousand years [and whose] shape looked like a withered tree. Roaming birds perched [on him], [and they] left nijulü60[seeds which] grew on the shoulders of the immortal. Through the hot and cold 56 57

58

59

60

Slightly changed from R.P. Goldman and S.J. Sutherland, The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, 347 f., note ad 10. In relation to the conquests of the Kaśmīran king Lalitāditya (Muktāpīḍa) (first half of the 8th cent.): “Where the [god] “Wind” (Marut) inflicted crookedness on the girls in Gādhipura (Kanyākubja) the laudable [king Lalitāditya] imposed fear on men” (my translation). See also M.A. Stein, Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. A Chronicle of the Kings of Kaśmīr, Vol.I: Introduction. Books I-VII (1900; Indian reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1989), 132; kanyānāṃ yatra kubjatvaṃ vyadhād gādhipure marut, tatraiva śaṃsanīyaḥ sa puṃsāṃ cakāra bhayaspṛśām.; M.A. Stein, Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. A Chronicle of the Kings of Kaśmīr, Vol.III: Sanskrit Text With Critical Notes (1892; Indian reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988), 49. In Buddhist narratives there is also the king Brahmadatta / Fanshou in Śrāvastī, father of Prasenajit, e.g. in Yijing’s Mūlasarvāstivādavinaya translation, T 1443, p. 908, a12; T 1451, p. 297, b4. In this translation Yijing uses both Fanshou and the transliteration Fanmodaduo 梵摩達多. 拘蘇磨補羅 / *kuə́ -sɔ-ma-pɔ’-la, Kusumapura, Chin. Huagong 花宮. This former name given here for Kanyākubja is, in Buddhist but also Hindu tradition the ancient name for Pāṭaliputra. 尼拘律 / *nri-kuə́ -lwit, corresponds to Skt. nyagrodha, but is an older transliteration based on a Prākṛt word.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

108

Deeg

seasons it gave [him] shade and embraced [him for protection]. After many years [he] rose from contemplation and wanted to leave this tree, [but he] was afraid that [he] would topple the birds’ nests; thereupon people praised [his] virtues and called [him] the ‘Great Tree Immortal.’61 [Once, when] the immortal overlooked the riverbank and let [his] gaze roam around the jungle, [he] saw the daughters of the king engaged with each other in playing, [and] the love of the realm of desire arose [in him], [and] tainting desire rose in [his] mind. [He] went to ‘Flower-Palace’ and formally wanted to present his wish. [When] the king heard that the immortal had arrived, he in person welcomed him sympathetically: ‘The great immortal resides outside [of the realm of] living beings—how can [he] move so hastily?’ The immortal said: ‘Dwelling in the jungle I have piled up many years of time. [When I] emerged from meditation and looked around, [I] saw the king’s daughters and came from afar to ask for [one of them].’ [When] the king heard these words, he saw no way to decline [the request] and said to the immortal: ‘Return to where you are dwelling, and please wait for an auspicious time!’ [When] the immortal heard the request, he returned to the jungle. The king [then] asked one daughter after the other, [but] none wanted to marry [the immortal]. The king feared the power of the immortal, and became weak with worries. His youngest daughter waited for a break in the royal affairs, [and then] leisurely asked [him]: ‘[My] father, the king, has altogether one thousand sons, ten thousand kingdoms admire [you] and have submitted to [your] rule; why are [you] worried, and what is [your] fear?’ The king said: ‘The Great Tree Immortal has honoured [us] with a marriage proposal, but you girls do not want to follow his request. The immortal has power and is able to cause damage or blessing; if [we] do not fulfil [what he] wants, he definitely will become angry and will destroy [our] kingdom and eliminate [our] ancestral lineage [which] will be a humiliation for [our] former kings. [I] deeply ponder about this misfortune fearing that this will really happen.’ The younger daughter apologized and said: ‘Having caused [you] deep worries is [indeed] our fault. May through [my] humble person the fortune of the kingdom continue [to thrive]!’ [When] the king heard [this he] was full of joy and ordered to prepare the chariots in order to bring [her to the immortal]. When they arrived at the immortal’s hut, [the king] apologized and said: ‘[May] the great immortal bestow [us] with his outwardly affection, grant the world his attention—[I] dare offer [you my] youngest daughter to serve [you] in cleaning the ground.’ The immortal looked [at her], was not pleased and said to the king: ‘[You dare] depreciate me old man by giving [me] this not [very] 61

Dashu xianren 大樹仙人, Skt. *ṛṣi Mahāvṛkṣa or Mahādruma. Mahāvṛkṣa is attested as a medical tree in the Āyurveda, both in the Suśruta- and Caraka-saṃhitā.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

109

good looking [girl] for marriage.’ The king said: ‘[I] have asked all my daughter, one after the other, [but they] do not want to obey [me] except this youngest [daughter of mine]—may [you] accept [her] as [your] servant!’ The immortal became enraged and uttered a curse: ‘The ninety-nine daughters immediately shall have crooked waists [so that their] bodies are ruined, [and they] will not get married for the rest of their lives!’ The king sent messengers to check, [but they] indeed were already hunchbacked. From then on this city was called ‘Crooked Daughters.’” 羯若鞠闍國人長壽時，其舊王城號拘蘇磨補羅 (唐言花 宮)，王號梵授，福智宿資，文武允備，威懾贍部，聲震隣國。具足千子， 智勇弘毅。復有百女，儀貌妍雅。時有仙人居殑伽河側，棲神入定，經數 萬歲，形如枯木。遊禽棲集，遺尼拘律，果於仙人肩上。暑往寒來，垂蔭 合拱。多歷年所，從定而起，欲去其樹，恐覆鳥巢，時人美其德，號大樹 仙人。仙人寓目河濱，遊觀林薄，見王諸女相從嬉戲，欲界愛起，染著心 生。便詣華宮，欲事禮請。王聞仙至，躬迎慰曰﹕ “大仙棲情物外，何能輕 舉？” 仙人曰﹕“我棲林藪，彌積歲時。出定遊覽，見王諸女，染愛心生， 自遠來請！” 王聞其辭，計無所出，謂仙人曰﹕ “今還所止，請俟嘉辰。” 仙 人聞命，遂還林藪。王乃歷問諸女，無肯應娉。王懼仙威，憂愁毀悴。其 幼稚女候王事隙，從容問曰﹕ “父王千子具足，萬國慕化，何故憂愁，如有 所懼？” 王曰﹕ “大樹仙人幸顧求婚，而汝曹輩莫肯從命。仙有威力，能作 災祥，儻不遂心，必起瞋怒，毀國滅祀，辱及先王。深惟此禍，誠有所 懼。” 稚女謝曰﹕ “遺此深憂，我曹罪也。願以微軀，得延國祚！” 王聞喜 悅，命駕送歸。既至仙廬，謝仙人曰﹕ “大仙俯方外之情，垂世間之顧，敢 奉稚女，以供灑掃！” 仙人見而不悅，乃謂王曰﹕ “輕吾老噤62，配此不 妍。” 王曰﹕ “歷問諸女，無肯從命，唯此幼稚，願充給使。” 仙人懷怒，便 惡呪曰﹕ “九十九女，一時腰曲，形既毀弊，畢世無婚！ ” 王使往驗，果已 背傴。從是之後，便名曲女城焉。 (T.2087, p.893, c19–894, a19)

The first observation I would like to make is that it seems that Xuanzang felt more inclined to identify Kanyākubja as the dynastic centre of the Indian dynasty, although he clearly should have known that this was Sthāṇeśvara (Chin. Satanishifaluo 薩他泥濕伐羅 / *sat-tha-nεjh-çip-buat-la). Historically, Kanyākubja did not belong to the territory of the Puṣpabhūti king until Harṣa ascended its throne after the murder of his brother-in-law, an incident about which Xuanzang is completely silent. Sthāṇeśvara is clearly described as the homeland of the dynasty by Bāṇa, who describes it as an almost bucolic Śaiva landscape. Instead, Sthāṇeśvara is mentioned and described by Xuanzang in the context of a Buddhist polemical version of the Mahābhārata story and the

62

Instead of T. 叟.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

110

Deeg

production of the Bhagavadgīta.63 The region was also attached to a prominent Śaiva-Maheśvara cult which was probably part of the ritual program of Harṣa’s dynasty. In Xuanzang’s account, however, the image of Harṣa as an ideal Buddhist ruler (see below) could not be tainted by his other strong religious affiliations with the Maheśvara cult. Xuanzang’s contrasting approach to both regions, Sthāṇeśvara on the one side and Kanyākubja on the other, is also reflected in the general description of the Xiyu ji: while Sthāṇeśvara is described as nonBuddhist, degenerate and selfish,64 Kanyākubja is portrayed in a very positive way.65 As I have already pointed out, in another passage in the Xiyu ji, Xuanzang describes a direct encounter which he had with Harṣa. In the presentation of this encounter Xuanzang demonstrates his political and educational acumen by not offending the Chinese emperor (by portraying the Indian king as superior), but, at the same time, evoking an ideal Buddhist ruler, in this case Harṣa,

63 64

65

M. Deeg, “‘Show me the land”. Datang xiyu ji, juan 4: “The seasons are hot, and the customs are degenerated. The households are richly endowed and compete in extravagance. [The people] are deeply engaged in magical [practices], [and they] hold special talents in high esteem. Most [of them] pursue their own profit, [and only] a few are engaged in agriculture. Rare objects from [different] regions are amassed in this kingdom. There are three monasteries with more than seven hundred monks who all study the teaching of the dharma of the Hīnayāna. There are more than one hundred deva-temples and a high number of heretics” 氣序溫 暑，風俗澆薄。家室富饒，競為奢侈。深閑幻術，高尚異能。多逐利，少務 農，諸方奇貨多聚其國。伽藍三所，僧徒七百餘人，並皆習學小乘法教。天 祠百餘所，異道甚多。 (T 2087, p. 890, c11–15). Datang xiyu ji, juan 5: “The city’s fortifications are firm, [and its] towers face each other from some distance. [Its] splendid forests are fresh and bright, [and its] ponds clear like mirrors. Plenty of marvelous goods from foreign regions are amassed there. The popu­la­ tion is rich and happy, [and] the houses are abundant. Flowers and fruits are all flourishing, and farm work is performed in time. The seasons are harmonious, [and] the customs simple and pure. [People’s] appearance is beautiful and elegant, [and their] clothes and adornments are clean and beautiful. [They] indulge in learning, enjoy the arts, [and] discuss in a lucid way. Both the heretic and the true Way are [distributed] half and half [in terms of] believers. There are more than one hundred monasteries, and more than ten thousand monks [who] simultaneously study both the Mayāyāna and the Hīnayāna. There are more than two hundred deva-temples and several thousand heretics” 城隍 堅峻，臺閣相望。花林池沼，光鮮澄鏡。異方奇貨，多聚於此。居人豐樂， 家室富饒。華菓具繁，稼穡時播。氣序和洽，風俗淳質。容貌妍雅，服飾鮮 綺。篤學遊藝，談論清遠。邪正二道，信者相半。伽藍百餘所，僧徒萬餘 人，大小二乘兼功習學。天祠二百餘所，異道數千餘人。 (T 2087, p. 893, 12–18).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

111

as a model of how a king should act and behave.66 In Xuanzang’s Biography, Harṣa is portrayed as a direct supporter and protector of the Chinese monk, who tries very hard to persuade him not to return to China and to stay in India with him. Indeed, Harṣa only lets him return home when Xuanzang threatens that the king may suffer from inferior reincarnations if he stops him from spreading the dharma in his homeland, China.67 The next passage from the Xiyu ji that I wish to focus on is Xuanzang’s description of the Puṣpabhūti dynasty, which includes an account of their origin and Harṣa’s ascension to the throne, which follows directly after the aforementioned etiological story of the origin of Kanyākubja. In this passage, Xuanzang’s attempts are far more concerned with exerting influence on the Chinese emperor rather than with providing a sort of “objective or real” historical account (Datang xiyu ji, juan 5): “The present king originally comes from a vaiśya clan,68 and is called Harṣavardhana69 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Increaser of Happiness”); as rulers of the land [the dynasty] is in its second generation and [has] the third king.70 [His] father was called Pra[bhā]karavardhana71 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Increaser of Making-Light”), [his] elder brother was called Rāj[y]avardhana72 (in the language of the Tang (this is) “Royal Increaser”). Rāj[y]avardhana succeeded to the throne by seniority and 66

67

68 69 70 71

72

See M. Deeg, “Writing for the Emperor”. Zhang Yuan’s recent attempt to establish elements of this encounter as historically real is methodologically problematic and naïve and has not convinced me, see: Zhang Yuan 张远, “‘Qinwang pochen yue’ shifou chuanru Yindu ji qita—jianyu Ning Fanfu jiaoshou shangque” 《秦王破陈乐》是否传入印度 及其他—兼与宁梵夫教授商榷, Nanya yanjiu 南亚研究 104 (2013.2): 140–156. T 2053, p. 249, a. I would see this episode, although it is not directly found in the Xiyu ji, as a faint critical reflex of Taizong’s attempt to convince Xuanzang to become his secular advisor. feishe(-zhong) 吠奢種 / *buajh-çia. Helishafadanna 曷利沙伐彈那 / *ɣat-lih--buat-danh-na’, Chin. Xizeng 喜增. sanwang 三王 in the Chinese context can refer to a whole range of triads of ancient beneficial kings (see HDC, s.v.), and it is difficult to decide which triad is meant here. Boluojieluofadanna 波羅羯羅伐彈那 / *pa-la-kɨat-la-buat-danh-na’, Chin. Zuoguangzeng 作光增. The name of this king in the Indian sources is Prabhākaravardhana. Xuanzang’s transliteration of the king’s name omits one syllable—-bhā- = guang 光 (po 婆 ?)—which is clearly represented in his translation Zuoguangzeng, while the Biography (see below) just has Zuozeng 作增 (Prakaravardhana) which corresponds to the transliteration. Heluoshefadanna 曷邏闍伐彈那 / *ɣat-lah-dʐia-buat-danh-na’, Chin. Wangzeng 王增 which both indicates Rājavardhana. According to the inscriptions the name of the brother should be Rājyavardhana (a missing ye 耶 ?).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

112

Deeg

ruled by virtue; at that time the king of the East-Indian kingdom of Karṇa­ suvarṇa73 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Golden Ear”) Śaśāṅka74 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Moon”) often said to [his] officials: “[That] our neighbors have a virtuous ruler is [our] kingdom’s misfortune.” Thereupon [he] lured [Rājyavardhana] into a meeting and killed [him]. When the people had lost their ruler, the kingdom also fell into turmoil. At this time the supreme minister Bhāṇi[n]75 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Debator”), who with dignity, said to the assembly of officials: “The most important matters of the kingdom will be decided today. The son of [our] former king, the younger brother of [our] late king, has benevolence and the natural ability [to rule],76 pious respect77 and a kind heart,78 kindness79 and

73

74 75

76

77 78 79

Jiluonasufalana 羯羅拏蘇伐剌那 / *kɨat-la-na-sɔ-buat-lat-na’, Chin. Jin’er 金耳. The Chinese name is slightly odd as it inverts the word order of the Skt. compound which would rather mean “Ear-Gold” than “Golden Ear”. Sheshangjia 設賞迦 / *ɕiat-ɕɨaŋ-kɨa, Chin. Yue 月, king of Gauḍa / Bengal. My reconstruction of Poni 婆尼 / *ba-nri; the Chin. translation Bianliao 辯了 and 尼 / * nri clearly indicate a derivation from √bhaṇ-, “to speak”, although such a name is not preserved in the Indian sources. G. Bühler, “The Madhuban Copper Plate,” 70, note 13, and others identify the Chinese with Harṣa’s cousin and companion Bhaṇḍin mentioned in the Harṣacarita, but that name does not justify a translation “Debator”. Bhaṇḍin also is too young to be supreme minister at the time when Harṣa ascends the throne. The explanation in the Biography, mingliao 明了 (see below), does not connect to √bhaṇ- but seems to point to the root √bhā-, “to shine,” and, despite the clear transliteration of a cerebral ṇ by ni 尼 / *nri, suggest a name form *Bhāni(n) (cp. Skt. nouns like bhānu, bhāna). One could speculate—although this would be phonetically difficult again because of the different nasals (n–ṇ)—if there is any connection with the reconstructed name Bhāna / Bhānu of the official (mahākṣapaṭalādhikaraṇādhikṛta-mahāsāmanta-mahārāja) in the Sonipat inscription (K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 179, no.14), in a similar way as G. ­Bühler, “The ­Madhuban Copper Plate,” 72, has proposed to identify the official with the same titles and the name Skandagupta in the inscriptions of Madhuban and Banskhera with the “chief of the all elephant troups” (aśeṣagajasādhanādhikṛta) in the Harṣacarita (P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 104, line 3 f.; E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 189). tianxing 天性 : this is an alternative term for the Mandate of Heaven (see HDC, s.v., 1). This and the following terms are taken from the traditional “arsenal” of a ruler’s virtues and present a presentatio sinica of Harṣa, in which one wonders what Indian concepts are exactly matching them. xiaojing 孝敬, like the next term, is already found in the Shijing 詩經. yinxin 因心. qinxian 親賢, found in the Liji 禮記 and explained by the commentary as the kind treatment of the son by the father.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

113

has the trust80 [of his] own people, [and I] wish that he accepts the throne. What to do in this matter? Each of you tell [me] what you think [about it]!” They all respectfully [acknowledged Harṣa’s] virtues, and no other plan was [proposed]. Thereupon all the ministers and the [other] officials went in front of his majesty and said: “The prince may grant [us his] ear. The former king had accumulated merit and collected virtues,81 and there was wide fortune in the kingdom. [As for] the heir to the throne, Rāj[y]avardhana, because his life was ended, the ministers were not good, and placed themselves into the hands of foes; this is a great shame for the kingdom and is the fault of inferior officials. A public opinion is at present spread [that people] trust in a return of the highest virtue [of you], [that you] approach the country, take control over friend and foe, wipe away the shame of the kingdom, increase the glory of the deeds of your father, and strive to achieve greatness therein—[we] hope that you will not decline!” The prince said: “The burden of the heir to the throne has always been hard to [carry]. As for the position of the ruler, [he] should be established after a careful investigation. I really have [only] few virtues, and my father and elder brother have passed away; [so] urging [me] to accept the throne—whom can this bring benefit to? [If] the public opinion [considers it] appropriate, [I] dare to neglect [my] shortcomings. There is now, at the bank of the river Gaṅgā, the statue of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara82 [who] has already often shown miracles—[I] wish to go [there] and ask for a message!” He immediately went in front of the statue of the Bodhisattva, fasted, and prayed. The Bodhisattva felt his sincerity, showed his real form and asked: “What is it you ask for that [you] strive so hard?” The prince said: “I have only accumulated misfortune: my compassionate father has passed away, and to add to this cruel punishment my elder brother has been killed. I myself, however, have [only] few virtues, [but] the people of the kingdom held me in high esteem and 80

81

82

yun 允 : the semantic range of this term is complex; it refers to the interaction between the ruler and the ruled: a government of justice and rightfulness leading to the faith and trust of the people (see HDC, s.v. yun). jigong leide 積功累德 : I translate the first binom in its Buddhist meaning but it has clear implications of ideal rulership in the sense of “exhausted [himself] in fulfilling his duties,” already found from the Shiji onwards. The term leide 累德 is often combined with preceding similar expressions like jigong as jishan 積善, “accumulate goodness”, jiyi 積義, “accumulate righteousness” (see HDC, s.v. leide). Guanzizai 觀自在; on this translation of Skt. Avalokiteśvara, see: Seishi Karashima 辛 昵靜志, “Hokke-kyō no bunkengaku-teki-kenkyū (2)—Kannon Avalokitasvara no goikaishaku” 法華經の文獻的研究〔二〕—觀音 Avalokitasvara 語義の解釋, Sōkadaigaku-kokusai-bukkyōgaku-kōtō-kenkyūjo-nenpō 1998 創價大學國際佛教學高等研 究所年報平成 10 年度 / Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Ad­­ vanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 1998 (1999): 39–66.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

114

Deeg

are [trying to] cause me to accept the throne and to increase the glory of my father. Being stupid and ignorant I dare to hope for [your] holy instruction!” The Bodhisattva told [him]: “In a former existence you were a forest monk83 in these woods and persevered in [your] efforts. Through the power of these merits [you] became this prince [you are now]. Since the king of the kingdom Śaśāṅka has destroyed the dharma of the Buddha, you [must] accept the throne, and it is appropriate [for you to cause it] to prosper again; compassion should be [your] will and mercy may be your feelings. Before long [you] will rule over the territory of the Five Indias. Out of [your] wish to extend the fortune of [your] kingdom [you] should follow my instruction, [then] blessings will be widely conferred, and [you] will have no powerful enemy [as your] neighbor. [But] do not ascend the lion-seat,84 and do not assume the title of ‘Great King.’85” After he had received the instructions, he withdrew; even though he accepted the throne he called himself “prince”86 and took the name Śīlāditya87 (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Sun of Discipline”). Then he said to [his] officials: “As long as the foes of my elder brother have not been punished, and the neighboring kingdoms have not rendered [me] due respect, [I will] not [use] my right hand to eat food. All you officials, be of one heart and unite [your] strength!” Thereupon he summoned the army of the kingdom, trained [his] warriors, [until he] had five thousand elephant troops, twenty thousand of cavalry, and fifty thousand of infantry, marched from the west to the east for punitive expeditions against those who had not been subjugated [under his rulership]. The saddles were not taken off the elephants, the men did not unbind [their] armors, and in six years [he] had subjugated the Five Indias; when he had extended his territory he increased his army to sixty thousand elephant troops, and a hundred thousand of cavalry. For almost thirty years no weapons were raised any more, government and education were peaceful, administrative duties were practiced in a frugal way, [the people] strove for merit and cultivated goodness88 [to an extent] that [they] forgot sleeping and eating.” 今王，本吠奢種也，字曷利沙伐彈那 (唐言喜增)。君臨有土， 83

84 85

86 87 88

lianruo-bichu 練若苾芻 / *lianh-ɲɨak-pih-tşhu, Skt. āraṇyakabhikṣu, with an elided initial a 阿 / *ʔa of the Chinese transliteration for the sake of the bi-syllabic structure of the transliteration. shizi-zhi-zuo 師子之座, Skt. siṃhāsana. dawang 大王, Skt. mahārāja, or even, corresponding to the titles of Harṣa’s father and elder brother in the inscriptions, mahārājādhirāja which Xuanzang reduced to a position between the Chinese titles “king, duke,” wang 王, and “emperor,” huang(di) 皇 (帝). wangzi 王子, Skt. rājaputra or (rāja)kumāra. Shiluoadieduo 尸羅阿迭多 / *ɕi-la-ʔa-dεt-ta, Chin. Jieri 戒日. shu shan 樹善 : “to plant the roots [of goodness] (Skt. kauśalyamūla)”.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

115

二世三王。父字波羅羯羅伐彈那 (唐言作光增)。兄字曷邏闍伐彈那 (唐言王 增)。王增以長嗣位，以德治政。時東印度羯羅拏蘇伐剌那 (唐言金耳) 國 設賞迦王 (唐言月)，每謂臣曰： “隣有賢主，國之禍也。” 於是誘請，會而 害之。人既失君，國亦荒亂。時大臣婆尼 (唐言辯了)，職望隆重，謂僚庶 曰： “國之大計，定於今日。先王之子，亡君之弟，仁慈天性，孝敬因心， 親賢允屬，欲以襲位。於事何如？各言爾志。” 眾咸仰德，嘗無異謀。於 是輔臣執事咸勸進曰：“王子垂聽，先王積功累德，光有國祚。嗣及王增， 謂終壽考；輔佐無良，棄身讎手，為國大恥，下臣罪也。物議時謠，允歸 明德。光臨土宇，克復親讎，雪國之恥，光父之業，功孰大焉？幸無辭 矣！” 王子曰： “國嗣之重，今古為難，君人之位，興立宜審。我誠寡德， 父兄遐棄，推襲大位，其能濟乎？物議為宜，敢忘虛薄？今者殑伽河岸， 有觀自在菩薩像，既多靈鑒，願往請辭。” 即至菩薩像前，斷食祈請。菩 薩感其誠心，現形問曰： “爾何所求，若此勤懇？” 王子曰： “我惟積禍， 慈父云亡；重茲酷罰，仁兄見害。自顧寡德，國人推尊，令襲大位，光父 之業。愚昧無知，敢希聖旨！” 菩薩告曰： “汝於先身，在此林中為練若苾 芻，而精勤不懈。承茲福力，為此王子。金耳國王既毀佛法，爾紹王位， 宜重興隆，慈悲為志，傷愍居懷，不久當王五印度境。欲延國祚，當從我 誨，冥加景福，隣無強敵。勿昇師子之座，勿稱大王之號。” 於是受教而 退，即襲王位，自稱曰王子，號尸羅阿迭多 (唐言戒日)。於是謂臣曰： “兄 讎未報，隣國不賓，終無右手進食之期。凡爾庶僚，同心勠力。” 遂總率國 兵，講習戰士。象軍五千，馬軍二萬，步軍五萬，自西徂東，征伐不臣。 象不解鞍，人不釋甲，於六年中，臣五印度。既廣其地，更增甲兵。象軍 六萬，馬軍十萬。垂三十年，兵戈不起，政教和平，務修節儉，營福樹 善，忘寢與食。 (T 2087, p. 894, a20-b28; punctuation and text following the

edition of Ji: 428 f.). What then follows is a long and elaborate description of the support which Harṣa gave to Buddhism and other religious groups, his building of numerous stūpas and distribution of supplies to the saṃgha. Xuanzang’s Biography is much briefer and presents us with considerably less information. It is clearly based on the Xiyu ji, but skips most of those details which only make sense if they are interpreted as “educational prompts” to the emperor (e.g. Harṣa’s reluctant ascension to the throne, the war against Śaśāṅka, the pacification of the realm), but which are not really of interest in a hagiography that focuses on Xuanzang himself (Datang daciensi sanzang fashi zhuan 大唐大慈恩寺三藏法師傳, juan 2): “The king of this [kingdom] comes from a vaiśya-clan and is called Harṣa­ vardhana (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Increaser of Happiness”). [His father] was called Pra[bhā]karavardhana (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Increaser of Making”), and [his] older brother was called Rāj[y] avardhana (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Royal Increaser”).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

116

Deeg

“Increaser of Happiness”89 ruled with benevolence and compassion, [and] the people of the kingdom praised [him]. At that time king Śaśāṅka (in the language of the Tang [this means] the same as [explained] above) of the kingdom of Karṇasuvarṇa (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Golden Ear”) in Eastern India hated his intelligent strategy and was worried about [his] vicinity, and therefore killed him by luring [him into an ambush]. The great minister Poni (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Wise”) and the other officials deplored [the fact] that the people had no ruler, and altogether made his younger brother Śīlāditya (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Sun of Discipline”) the successor in the dynastic lineage.” 其王吠奢種也，字曷利沙 伐彈那 (唐言喜增)。父字波羅羯邏伐彈那 (唐言作增)，先兄字遏羅闍伐彈 那 (唐言王增)。喜增在位仁慈，國人稱詠。時東印度羯羅拏蘇伐剌那 (唐言 金耳) 國設賞迦王 (唐言同上) 惡其明略而為隣患，乃誘而害之。大臣婆尼 (唐言明了) 及群僚等，悲蒼生之無主，共立其弟尸羅阿迭多 (唐言戒日) 統 承宗廟。 (T 2053, p. 233, b8–14)

The passage in the Xiyu ji reads like a description of actual political events and describes king Harṣa as a righteous and devout Buddhist ruler, who hesitates to ascend the throne as a fully consecrated king after the assassination of his older brother Rājyavardhana through the machinations of the evil king Śaśāṅka of East-Indian Gauḍa (Bengal). If we take into account the Indian sources available from, and about, the period of the Vardhana or, as they are also called in Bāṇa’s record, the Puṣpabhūti dynasty, we find, however, some serious differences from the information given by Xuanzang, and these discrepancies beg for answers more insightful than simply claiming, as many scholars working with the Indian material used to claim, that Xuanzang 'got it wrong.'90 Xuanzang states that the rulers originally come from a vaiśya background. This is a claim that is questionable in the light of the Indian evidence, where no hint is found for such a low origin of the dynasty.91 The proponents of a vaiśya89 90

91

Following the logic of the plot this should be the older brother, Rāj[y]avardhana / Wangzeng, “Royal Increaser,” and not Harṣavardhana. Such a typical positivist reaction, playing out one piece of information from one source against another from a different source, is, e.g., Bühler’s complete dismissal of Xuanzang’s report as false. See already G. Bühler, “The Madhuban Copper Plate,” 68, note 4; D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study, 83, and 126. I think that playing out one position against another is too positivist-simplistic. One has to differentiate between different discourses—one of the dynastic self-perception, and others of specific textual contexts, agenda and intentionalities like, in our case, Xuanzang’s, the one of a text like the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa, etc.—, and has to assume that there is not clear cut access to an historical reality in which the origin

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

117

origin of the Puṣpabhūti dynasty92 normally refer both to Xuanzang and the historical chapter in the voluminous Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa,93 a Buddhist Sanskrit text from the late 8th or early 9th century. Unfortunately the wider context of both sources is neglected: it is clear from the general line of argumentation of the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa that the text here is following a theory of decay by which dynasties more distant from the Buddha’s lifetime are consequently lowered in social status, i.e. caste, until the last dynasty covered, a Bengal royal lineage, is made śūdra or even mleccha,94 and following this logic many of the dynasties or royal houses before had to be vaiśya.95 This pattern of description, however, was certainly not the one Xuanzang had in mind when he ascribed vaiśya descent to the dynasty. Furthermore, the lineage of the Puṣpabhūtis in the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa is not reliable at all: it is inconsistent and has it start with an otherwise completely unknown (see below) Viṣṇu(vardhana).96 It is highly unlikely that the Puṣpabhūtis themselves claimed a vaiśya origin—none of Harṣa’s inscriptions give a hint in that direction. The recurring part of their personal names, °-vardhana, is not a clear sign of vaiśya origin as has been claimed; otherwise it should be expected that the eponymous ancestor (“Urahne”) had the same name element as well, but his name is given by Bāṇa as Puṣpabhūti, and he is described as a valiant and victorious warrior and

92 93

94 95

96

of a dynasty was absolutely evident and clear. These different discourses can be detected sometimes, when, for instance, Xuanzang claims brāhmaṇa ancestry for Kumāra, the king of Kāmarūpa / Assam, while a note in Daoxuan’s 道宣 (596–667) Shijia fangzhi 釋迦方 志 from 650 declares the king kṣatriya origin: “But king Kumāra is from a kṣatriya clan [and] said to the ambassador Li Yibiao: ‘[Our] succession line goes back four thousand years, [and] the first saintly [ruler] came flying from the land of the Han to rule over this land.’” T 2088, p. 958, a17–19 然童子王剎帝利姓，語使人李義表曰﹕“上世相承四 千年，先人神聖從漢地飛來，王於此土。” See most recently S. Goyal, Harsha, 121 ff. K.P. Jayaswal, An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text [c. 700 bc–c. 770 ad] With a Special Commentary on Later Gupta Period (With the Sanskrit Text Revised by Ven. Rāhula Sāṅkṛityāyana) (Lahore: The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot, 1934), 28; K.K. Thalpyal, Inscriptions, 52. K.P. Jayaswal, An Imperial History of India, 54 (Indian pagination): mleccharājya. K.P. Jayaswal, An Imperial History of India, 53 (Indian pagination): both Rājyavardhana and Harṣavardhana are called “of vaiśya origin”, vaiśyavṛtti (verses 819 and 822). At the same time the text calls the king “founded in the dharma of [warrior] power (kṣatra)”, kṣatradharme samāśṛta (verse 823). K.P. Jayaswal, An Imperial History of India, 45 (Indian pagination), verse 614. It is striking that the caste origin of the king Viṣṇu is not given at all but only as vaiśya for Āditya(vardhana) and the following kings (verse 617).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

118

Deeg

compared with numerous heroes from the Mahābhārata.97 While it could be objected that this reflects a dynastic strategy of self-legitimation, the fact remains that the self-understanding of the dynasty was one of kṣatriya origin, and this is also reflected in the language and rhetoric of the description of some of Harṣa’s predecessors in the king’s own inscriptions (see below). Therefore Xuanzang must have had a different motivation for assigning them such low origin—different also from the one in the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa –, and I think that it is an attempt to put the house of the Tang on a par with the Indian dynasty (on the origin of the Tang see below). Xuanzang stresses the point that the Indian dynasty so far had only three rulers over a period of two generations (jun lin you tu, ershi sanwang 君臨有 土，二世三王), Pra(bhā)karavardhana, Rāj(y)avardhana and Harṣa: Prabhākaravardhana       /  \        Rājyavardhana (II.) Harṣavardhana This stands in sharp contrast with what we know from the Indian sources. Bāṇa in his panegyric biography of the king, the Harṣacarita,98 indicates a longer lineage, but a longer and more detailed and extensive family tree can be derived in a consistent form from Harṣa’s own inscriptions with a longer royal lineage stretching back over five (or six) generations (six / resp. seven rulers):99 97 98

99

Arjuna, Bhīṣma, Niṣadha, see: E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 84; P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 44, line 30 f. Bāṇa only mentions the founder of the dynasty, Puṣpabhūti, and Harṣa’s father and brother (E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 100 f.; P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 56, line 6 ff.). See, e.g., the copper plate grant from the year 8 (or 33), A. Agrawal, “A New Copper-Plate Grant,” 221, and the relevant text passage of the inscription: “Hail! From the residence at Śrī vardhamānakoṭi, the great victorious camp (having) boats (navy), elephants and horses (cavalry). The great king, the illustrious Naravarddhana; his son, favoured by his feet, born of the illustrious queen Vajriṇī, most devout worshipper of the Sun, the great king, the illustrious Rājyavarddhana; his son, favoured by his feet, born of the illustrious queen Apsaro, most devout worshipper of the Sun, the great king, the illustrious Ādityavar­ ddhana; his son, favoured by his feet, born of the illustrious queen Mahāsenaguptā, he whose fame had spread beyond the four oceans, who had subdued other kings by his majesty (and) affection, whose sovereign power was engaged in establishing (the order of) castes and stages of life, who (was) the remover of the afflictions of the subjects like (the god) whose chariot has a single wheel (i.e. the Sun), a most devout worshipper of the Sun, the supreme lord, the supreme king of great kings, the illustrious Prabhākaravarddhana; his son, favoured by his feet, who covered the circumference of the entire world with the canopy of his brilliant fame, who completely appropriated the lustre of the guardians Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

119

(Puṣpabhūti) : : Naravardhana | Rājyavardhana (I.) | Ādityavardhana | Prabhākaravardhana (Pratāpaśīla)       / \      Rājyavardhana (II.)    Harṣavardhana

of the earth, Dhanada, Varuṇa, Indra and so forth, who with his wealth gained in righteous manner gladdened the heart of needy men by many gifts of land, who surpassed the achievements of former kings, born of the illustrious queen Yaśomatī possessed of blemishless fame, (who was) the most devout worshipper of the Buddha, and was devoted to the good of others like the Buddha (himself), the supreme lord, the supreme king of great kings, the illustrious Rājyavarddhana; by whom the kings Devagupta and others were turned back and subdued, like wicked horses made to turn away from the lashes of the whip; who after uprooting his enemies, conquering the earth, and enhancing the welfare of this subjects, in consequence of his adherence to his promise gave up his life in the house of his enemy. His younger brother, favoured by his (elder brother’s) feet, a most devout worshipper of Maheśvara, who like Maheśvara is compassionate towards all creatures, the supreme lord, the supreme king of great kings, the illustrious Harṣa, …” Svasti [‖*] mahānauhastyaśvajayaskandhāvāra-Śri Vardhamānakoṭīvāsakaḥ [‖*] Mahārāja śri-Nara-varddhanaḥ [‖*] tasya putras tatpādānudhyātaḥ śri-Vajriṇīdevyām utpannaḥ paramādityabhakto mahārāja śri-Rā[ jya]varddhanaḥ [‖*] tasya putras tat­pādā­nudhyātaḥ śrimad-Apsaradevyām utpannaḥ paramādityabhakto mahārāja śrimad-Ādityavarddhanaḥ [‖*] tasya putras tatpādānu-dhyātaḥ śri-Mahāsenaguptyām ut­pan-naḥ catussamudrātikrāntakīrttiḥ pratāpanurāgopanatānyarājo-varṇāśrama­vya­ vasthā­pa­na­pravṛttacakra ekacakra-ratha i[va] prajānām ārttiharaḥ paramādityabhaktaḥ paramabhaṭṭāraka mahārājātirāja-śri-Prabhākaravard-dhanaḥ [‖*]tasya putras tatpā­dānudhyātaḥ sitayaśaḥpratānavi[c]churita sakala bhuva maṇḍalaḥ parigṛhītaDhanada-Varuṇendra prabhṛtiloka-pālatejāḥ satpathopārjjitānekadraviṇabhūmiprad āna­sam­­prīṇithārthihṛda-yotiśayita-pūrvvarājacaritaḥ devyām amalayaśomatyām śriYaśomatyām utpannaḥ paramasaugataḥ Sugata iva parahitaikarataḥ paramabhaṭṭāraka mahārājādhirāja śri Rājyavarddhanaḥ [‖*] rājāno yudhi [du]ṣṭavājina iva śri-Deva­ guptādayaḥ kṛtvā kaśāprahāra vimukhaḥ sarvve samaṃ saṃyatāḥ [‖*] utkhāya dviṣato vijitya vasu-dhāṃ kṛtvā prajānāṃ priyaṃ prāṇānujjhitavānarātibhavane satyānurodhena yaḥ [‖*] Tasyānujas tat-pādānudhyātaḥ paramamaeśvaro maheśvara iva sarvva satvānu­ kampī paramabhaṭṭāraka mahārājādhirāja śri-Harṣa … (p. 223 f.). Identical or similar in the other inscriptions like the one from Madhuban from the year 22. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

120

Deeg

I would suggest here that it is not good enough to point out the differences between the Chinese and the Indian sources. Instead, one must explain why these differences exist. Any explanation has to start from the immediate historical context of the sources and look for possible reasons for a change of the official dynastic “history”, as it is reflected in Harṣa’s inscriptions, which is, of course, information that Xuanzang definitely had access to. First of all, it should be emphasized that it is very unlikely that Xuanzang received much more information about the Puṣpabhūti dynasty in India than the official narrative that is given in the inscriptions and is reflected in the Harṣacarita; this was, after all, the official “historiographic” blueprint meant to legitimize the dynasty. It is also clear from the Indian sources that the dynasty at the time of Harṣa’s rule had a much longer history than just two generations of kings, as is suggested in the Xiyu ji. In the light of Xuanzang’s attempt to depict Harṣa as an ideal (Buddhist) ruler without offending the strong but fragile self-esteem of the Tang emperor, Taizong, who was the second ruler of the dynasty, the Chinese monk obviously deliberately shortened the history of the dynasty to the same succession-length as that of the Tang. The description of an Indian dynasty, which so far, according to the Xuyu ji, had had only three rulers over two generations is very likely a proiectio sinica by Xuanzang, who did not want to suggest any superiority on the basis of dynastic lineage on the part of the North Indian ruling house. A similar motivation may have been behind the complete silence on the matter of the royal lineage of the other important king of northern India, Kumāra Bhāskaravarman of Kāmarūpa / Assam, about whom Xuanzang only has to report that he was an offspring of the god Nārāyaṇa (see below), and that the dynasty was of brāhmaṇa origin—a category that had no parallel on the Chinese side. The even longer dynastic lineage of the Varman-dynasty, as reflected in Bhāskaravarman’s inscriptions,100 is suspiciously generalized and anonymized (i.e., no individual names of preceding kings are given) in the Xiyu ji. This may reflect an attempt by Xuanzang to counterbalance the fact that Kumāra Bhāskaravarman,101 at the time of Xuanzang’s presence in North­ east India, was a long-standing vassal of Harṣa,102 but still had to be given some 100

101 102

In Bhāskaravarman’s inscriptions the continuous lineage, without the mythical and semimythical ancestors, comprises 12 generations and 13 kings, see: R.C. Majumdar, “Northern India After the Break-up of the Gupta Empire (Sixth Century ad),” in: The History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume Three: The Classical Age, fourth edition, ed. R.C. Majumdar (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1988), 89. Xuanzang transliterates this name as Posaijieluofamo 婆塞羯羅伐摩 / ba-sək-kɨat-labuat-ma, and as meaning Rizhou 日胄, “Sun-Helmet (or Armour)” (see below). The alliance was established, according to Bāṇa, in both king’s, Harṣa’s and Kumāra Bhāskaravarman’s, fight against Śaśāṅka, i.e. at a time shortly after Harṣa’s ascent to the throne. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

121

royal pedigree because of the high esteem which Xuanzang had for the ruler of Assam. To give more information about Kumāra’s dynastic lineage would have run the risk of jeopardizing Xuanzang’s balancing act in his description of the history of Harṣa’s house.103 The attempt to project a parallel history, as it were, keeping the Indian dynasty on equal footing with the Tang, was probably also the reason for emphasizing the vaiśya origin of the Indian royal house, since despite their claim of coming from an unbroken aristocratic background and the wellknown attempt to link themselves with the semi-mythical figure of Laozi 老子, the deified “founder” of Daoism, as well as the Han dynasty, the Li clan or the Tang emperors could be associated with a non-Chinese (non-Han), Xianbei 鮮 卑 (or even Turkish), origin.104 When the Xiyu ji was drafted, the Tang court certainly still had in mind the strange behavior of Taizong’s first son and original heir apparent, Li Chengqian 李承乾 (619–644, crown prince 635–643), who had mingled with inferior people, had rejected his Chinese heritage, had behaved and acted like a Turk, and was degraded to the status of a commoner in 643 after having been accused of an attempted coup d’état against his father.105 103

104 105

As far as I can see, no one has recognized the striking parallels between the Puṣpabhūti and the Varman dynasty. They both claim Śaiva affiliation of their original ancestor— in Puṣpabhūti’s case not in the inscriptions but in the Harṣacarita—, and in both cases the present ruler, Harṣa / Kumāra, followed their elder brothers, Prabhākaravardhana / Supras­thita­varman (or Susthiravarman), on the throne after these died prematurely (were murdered by the king of Gauḍa, Śaśāṅka). In principle Xuanzang could have mentioned a lineage for Kumāra, similarly abridged as Harṣa’s. Denis Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China. Volume 3: Sui and T’ang, 589–906, Part I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 151. D. Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China, 236 ff.; D. Twitchett, “The T’ang Imperial Family,” Asia Maior, 3rd series, 7 (1994), 20; Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” in: Perspectives on the T’ang, ed. Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), 253. Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒, juan 196: “The crown prince made a copper stove of eight feet melting [for this] six big [antique] tripods, summoned folks [like] fugitive slaves [or] robbers, horses and cattle, personally cooked [the latter] and ate them together with servants who had the luck [to be selected]. [He] also was very fond of the Turkic language and [Turkic] attire, selected as his entourage five men looking like Turks, set up a camp; [they] braided [their] hair [in Turkic style, [wore] a coat [made] of sheep fur and tended sheep, made banners and flags with [an emblem of] five wolf heads, set up a yurt in which the crown prince himself resided, [they] herded sheep together and cooked it, [he] drew [his] sword, cut the meat and fed it to the others. [He] also once said to [his] fellows: “I will pretend to be a dead khagan; you serve at his funeral.” Thus [he] lay down on the ground, the crowd all wailed, mounted [their] horses and rode around [him], [and when they] approached [his] body [they] cut their faces. After a long time the crown prince suddenly stood up and said: “One day [I] will have the realm and will be in command of ten thousands of hunters west of the Golden City (i.e. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

122

Deeg

These incidents must still have been fresh in the court's memory when Xuanzang came back to China and immediately started writing his Xiyu ji. All this does not, however, invalidate the Xiyu ji as a source for historical information. A good example of the historical reliability of Xuanzang are his details of the killing of Harṣa’s elder brother Rājyavardhana by the Bengal ruler Śāśaṅka. Harṣa’s inscriptions reflect a constant awareness of the fact that his brother “gave up his life in the house of the enemy” (prāṇānujjhitavān arātibhavane), and this is also supported by the Harṣacarita: “From the man (a messenger) he (Harṣa) learnt that his brother (Rājyavardhana), though he had routed the Mālwa army with ridiculous ease, had been instilled with confidence by false civilities on the part of the King of Gauḍa, and then weaponless, confiding, and alone, dispatched in his own quarters.”106 In the Harṣacarita, however, the elder brother Rājyavardhana had already abdicated in favor of his younger brother Harṣa,107 which sounds a little bit obscure. This is explained by Devahuti and others as a possible cover-up of a plot that Harṣa had launched to take the throne from his brother.108 The logic behind such a description may have been, in an Indian context, the necessity of having Harṣa take revenge for his brother’s assassination as a fully consecrated king. Xuanzang’s version

106

107

108

Chang’an); then [I] will let down my hair and become a Turk, will devote myself to [Li] Simo as if [we] had the same plans, and will not reside [just] as an offspring [of my father].”” 太子作八尺銅爐、六隔大鼎，募亡奴盜民間馬牛，親臨烹者，與所幸 廝役共食之。又好效突厥語及其服飾，選左右貌類突厥者五人為一落，辮發 羊裘而牧羊，作五狼頭纛及幡旗，設穹廬，太子自處其中，斂羊而烹之，抽 佩刀割肉相啖。又嘗謂左右曰： “我試作可汗死，汝曹效其喪儀。” 因僵臥於 地，眾悉號哭，跨馬環走，臨其身，剺面。良久，太 [add: 子] 欻起，曰：“一 朝有天下，當帥數萬騎獵於金城西，然後解發為突厥，委身思摩，若當一 設，不居人後矣。” The name “Simo” refers to the East Turkic leader Ashina Simo 阿 史那思摩, who had been captured in 630 after the defeat of Xieli / Illig khagan 頡利可 汗 and turned into a loyal servant of the Tang. The crown prince probably refers to him as a representative of a fierce Turkic warrior, but at that time he could still have been considered by the crown prince as an outstanding example of Turkic warriorship and fierceness. The event is described in a similar way but with some omissions in Xin Tangshu, juan 80. Translation E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 178. P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 98, line 21ff: tasmāc ca helānirjitamālavānīkam api gauḍādhi­ pena mithyopacāropacitaviśvāsaṃ muktaśastram ekākinaṃ viśrabdhaṃ svabhavena eva bhrātaraṃ vyāpaditam aśrauṣīt. E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 169 f.; P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 93, line 16 ff.; see D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study, 81 ff., on the contradictory points of Bāṇa’s description. D. Devahuti, Harsha: A Political Study, 79 ff. The different positions, the most extreme assuming that Harṣa was involved in the killing of his brother, are presented by S. Goyal, Harsha, 66 ff., 154 ff.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

123

turns this into an accession to the throne that was prompted by religious vocation in a situation of imminently threatening chaos. The detailed description of the scruples of Harṣa and his reluctance to ascend the throne, even after the death of his brother, although, at least in part, reflected in the Harṣacarita (where it is stated that a reluctant Harṣa was urged by a goddess (Rājalakṣmī = Śrī?) to ascend the throne109), certainly had to convey a message in a Chinese context. Denis Twitchett reminds us: “T’ai-tsung himself was very conscious of his public image, and the way in which he would be presented in history for posteriority.”110 The emperor therefore was both vul109

110

E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 57: “He was embraced by the goddess of the Royal Prosperity, who took him in her arms and, seizing him by all the royal marks on all his limbs, forced him, however reluctant, to mount the throne,—and this though he had taken a vow of austerity and did not swerve from his vow, hard like grasping the edge of a sword; …” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 32, line 8 f.: … anicchan­tam api balād āropitayitum iva siṃhāsanaṃ sarvāvayaveṣu sarvalakṣaṇair gṛhītam, gṛhītabrahma-caryam āliṅgitaṃ rājalakṣmyā, pratipannāsidhārādhāraṇavratam avasaṃvādinaṃ rājarṣim, … This is narratively linking to the prophecy of Harṣa’s rulership which Lakṣmī made to the king’s ancestor Puṣpabhūti just before he subdued the regional nāga Śrīkaṇṭha and took ownership of Sthāṇeśvara: E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 97: “[Lakṣmī said:] “Because of this magnanimity of thine (i.e. Puṣpabhūti) and because of thy superlative devotion to the holy Lord Çiva thou, like a third added to the Sun and Moon, shalt be the founder of a mighty line of kings persisting unbroken upon earth, daily increasing in greatness, full of matchless heroes elate with purity, high-fortune, truth, munificence, and fortitude. Wherein shall arise an emperor named Harṣa, governor like Hariçcandra of all the continents, world-conquering like a second Māndhātṛi, whose chowrie this hand, spontaneously abandoning the lotus, shall grasp.”” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 53 f., line 37 ff.: anena sattvotkarṣeṇa bhagavacchivabhaṭṭāraka-bhaktyā cāsādhāraṇayā bhavān bhuvi sūryacandramasos tritī-ya ivāvicchinnasya pratidinam upacīyamanavṛddheḥ śucisubhagasatyatyāgadhairya śauṇḍapuruṣaprakāṇḍa-prāyasya mahato rājavaṃśasya kartā bhaviṣyati. Yasminn utpatsyate sarvadvīpānāṃ bhoktā hariścandra iva harṣanāmā cakravartī tribhuvanavijigīṣur dvitīyo māndhāteva. Yasyāyaṃ karaḥ svayam eva kamalam apahāya grahīṣyati cāmaram. On the goddess Lakṣmī’s different, more recent forms and aspects linked to strength, power and rulership, such as Vīralakṣmī, “Lakṣmī of heroic strength”, Dhairyalakṣmī, “Lakṣmī of courage”, and Rājyalakṣmī, “Lakṣmī of rulership,” see: H. Daniel Smith, “A Contemporary Iconic Tradition: Lakṣmī, Gaṇeśa, Sarasvatī—An Emerging “New” Hindu Trimūrti,” in: Studies in Hindu and Buddhist Art, ed. P.K. Mishra (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1999), 34; on Rājyalakṣmī in general, see: Pratapaditya Pal, Indian Sculpture, Volume I: circa 500 bc–ad 700 (Los Angeles, Berkeley, etc.: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, University of California Press), 79, and Constantina Rhodes, Invoking Lakshmi. The Goddess of Wealth in Song and Ceremony (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010), 27. Denis Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor: T’ang T’ai-tsung’s Vision of His Role,” Asia Maior, 3rd series, 9 (1996), 4; see also Denis Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China. Volume 3:

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

124

Deeg

nerable to criticism of his own behavior as a member of the imperial family and as a ruler, and irritable on the basis of such criticism or advice. It had to be presented in an indirect and balanced way, and Xuanzang seems to have been quite successful in doing this to a ruler111 whose support he wanted to gain and of whose moods he must have been quite aware. But he was not the only one to do so: Taizong’s advisor, Wei Zheng 魏徵 (580–643), acted in a similar way112 and even more directly.113 He and others seem to have directed indirect criticism towards an increasingly despotic and self-centered Taizong114 in their

111

112 113

114

Sui and T’ang, 589–906, Part I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 216: “The T’ang was the first dynasty to compile Veritable Records (Shih-lu [實錄]) of each reign, again largely at the urging of T’ai-tsung, obsessed as he was with the historical image which he himself would leave to posteriority. … in T’ai-tsung’s own reign there were clashes of will between the emperor and his historians over the content of the record.” It is generally assumed that Taizong, in order to legitimate his rule and to leave a positive image of himself and his rule, had manipulated the historical records to his own favour and downplayed the role of his father, see: Howard J. Wechsler, Mirror to the Son of Heaven. Wei Cheng at the Court of T’ang T’ai-tsung (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), 8 ff., Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-Tsung: The Man and the Persona,” in: Essays on T’ang Society. The Interplay of Social, Political and Economic Forms, ed. John Curtis Perry and Bardwell L. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 27 f., and Denis Twitchett, The Writing of Official History Under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 41. On Taizong’s concern with the establishment of the right imperial rituals, see: Howard J. Wechsler, Offerings of Jade and Silk. Ritual and Symbol in the Legitimation of the T’ang Dynasty (New Haven: Yale ­University Press, 1985), 42 f. A.F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-Tsung,” 31, calls this increasing “pathology of supreme power” of Taizong the “Han-Wu syndrome,” after the Han-emperor Wudi 漢武帝 (r.156–187 BC). Xuanzang had to deal with an emperor who was, with the words of Arthur F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” in: Perspectives on the T’ang, ed. Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973), 246, “both a fratricide and defender of faith”. See H.J. Wechsler, Mirror to the Son of Heaven. See Wei Zheng’s direct reproach in the year 638, paraphrased in A.F. Wright, “T’ang T’aitsung and Buddhism,” 249; A.F. Wright, “T’ang T’ai-Tsung,” 26: “Long ago, when the empire had not yet been pacified, you always made righteousness and virtue your central concern. Now, thinking that the empire is without troubles, you have gradually become increasingly arrogant, wasteful, and self-satisfied.” Zizhi tongjian, juan 195: 陛下往以未 治為憂，故德義日新；今以既治為安，故不逮。 (“[When] formerly your majesty was still troubled that [your] power was not [stable] virtue and righteousness were [applied] anew every day; now that [your] power is stable this is no longer the case.”) On the change from Taizong’s earlier, discussion-based ruling style which became the model for an ideal imperial rule and the overwriting of the emperor’s later, more autocratic years of ruling, see: D. Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor,” 5 ff.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

125

compilation of the official histories of the earlier dynasties.115 Taizong certainly had a high degree of sensitiveness to such criticism, since he himself had set such a high standard of good rulership in his own work, the “Golden Mirror,” Jinjing 金鏡 (628).116 The indirect admonitions and reminders of his own earlier ideals through the works of Xuanzang, Wei Zheng, and others may well have contributed to Taizong’s late realization of his own shortcomings117 and his fear that the reluctantly appointed heir apparent, Li Zhi, could fail (see below), which induced the emperor to write another work on ideal imperial rule, which was entitled the “Plan for the Emperor,” Difan 帝範 (648), in which he pleads for his son to act as an “enlightened ruler” (mingjun 明君).118 I think that the narrative of Harṣa’s royal lineage and ascension to the throne is directed towards the ruling emperor Taizong—and maybe also towards the ambitious crown prince, and later emperor, Gaozong—as a reminder of the pious and correct behavior of an ideal ruler. This becomes very likely in the light of the circumstances of Taizong’s own ascent to the throne: in the year 626 he, the second son of the first Tang emperor Gaozu 高祖 (*566–635, r. 618– 625), had killed his brothers, the heir apparent, Li Jiancheng 李建成 (589–626; heir apparent 618–626) and his supporter, Li Yuanji 李元吉 (603–626), in the so-called Xuanwumen 玄武門 incident and forced his father to abdicate the throne in his favor.119 Because of his violent take-over of power, the new emperor could have had some doubts about the legality of his claim to the “Mandate of Heaven” (tianming 天命).120 115 116 117 118 119

120

D. Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor,” 5. On a discussion of the broader context and a translation of this work, see: D. Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor,” 11 ff. See the reference to his own reckless seizure of the throne: D. Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor,” 54. See D. Twitchett, “How to Be an Emperor,” 33 ff. See H.J. Wechsler, Mirror to the Son of Heaven, 67 ff.; Andrew Eisenberg, “Kingship, Power and the Hsüan-wu men Incident of the T’ang,” T’oung Pao 80 (1994): 223–259; D. Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China, 182 ff. Sima Guang 司馬光 has Taizong’s father Taizu express this quite clearly and already in the seventh month of the year 624 (Zizhi tongjian 191): “The emperor was hunting south of the capital; the crown prince, the dukes of Qin (Taizong) [and] Qi (Li Yuanji) came with [him], [and] the emperor asked [his] three sons to ride and hunt in competition [with each other]. [The heir adherent] Jiancheng had a barbarian horse; [he] gave it to Shimin with the words: “This horse is really fast, [it] can [jump] across ravines of several zhang. [My] younger brother is a good horseman—test it!” Shimin mounted [the horse] and pursued a deer, the horse fell, Shimin jumped and stood several feet away from it; the horse rose, [and Shimin] mounted it again—and so it went three [times]; thereupon the scholar Gu Weiyu said: “He (Jiancheng) will soon be killed by him (Shimin)—[but

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

126

Deeg

And there may be more behind the presentation of the Indian dynasty and the narrative of Harṣa’s ascent to the throne: in the year of writing the Xiyu ji after his return from India, between 645 and 646, Xuanzang had to witness another power-struggle around the question of who should be crown prince between Taizong and his chief ministers, in which the emperor displayed quite a volatile approach to the extremely important question of appointment of an heir apparent and thus the ensuring of imperial succession and continuity, which was seen as so important during the Tang period.121 The choice was, after Li Chengqian had already been demoted (see above), between the Tang princes, Li Tai 李泰 (620–653), and Li Zhi 李治 (628–683), the fourth and ninth sons of Taizong. Finally, Li Zhi was made crown prince in 643, and he succeeded his father in 649, as Emperor Gaozong 高宗 (628–683, r. from 649).122 Different influential factions at court had tried, and were still trying, to influence the ailing and ever more indecisive Taizong in his choice; the emperor was, in fact, doubtful to the very end whether or not he had made the right choice by selecting Li Zhi as his heir. As in some other cases in the Xiyu ji, the story of Harṣa’s pious and reluctant ascension to the throne, presented an idealized Indian Buddhist narrative as it were, which stands as a moral reminder and educational tool, which was used by Xuanzang to encourage the emperor, his direct family, and possible heirs into proper conduct with regard to the imperial succession. That he wedded these concerns, at the same time, to Buddhist ideals and values is quite understandable. A clearly Buddhist embellishment in Xuanzang’s story is the episode of Avalokiteśvara’s advice to Harṣa to take up the royal or imperial duties without assuming the “lion throne” (shizi zhi zuo 師子之座, Skt. siṃhāsana) and the title “great king” (dawang 大王, Skt. mahārāja, or mahārājādhirāja) which

121 122

matters] of life and death are predestined [anyway], why should one be sad?” [When] Jiancheng heard this [he] caused the imperial consort to slander [Shimin] in front of the emperor: “The duke of Qin has said: ‘I possess the Mandate of Heaven, [and] therefore [I] will be ruler of the realm—how could [I] die just like that?’” The emperor became very angry, first summoned Jiancheng and Yuanji, [and] after that [he] sent for Shimin and blamed him: “The Son of Heaven has the Mandate of Heaven by virtue; no wisdom or power can get it; why are you so eager to get it?”” 上校獵城南，太子、秦、齊王皆 從，上命三子馳射角勝。建成有胡馬，肥壯而喜蹶，以授世民曰： “ 此馬甚 駿，能超數丈澗。弟善騎，試乘之。 ” 世民乘以逐鹿，馬蹶，世民躍立於數 步之外，馬起，復乘之，如是者三，顧謂宇文士及曰： “ 彼欲以此見殺，死 生有命，庸何傷乎！ ” 建成聞之，因令妃嬪譖之於上曰： “ 秦王自言﹕‘我有 天命，方為天下主，豈有浪死！ ’” 上大怒，先召建成、元吉，然後召世民 入，責之曰： “ 天子自有天命，非智力可求；汝求之，一何急邪！ ” See Denis Twitchett, “The T’ang Imperial Family,” Asia Maior, 3rd series, 7 (1994): 1–61. D. Twitchett, The Cambridge History of China, 238 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

127

does not have any direct correspondence in any of the other sources on Harṣa. For Taizong the episode must have been a reminder—with a taste of indirect rebuke—of his own violent claiming of the throne, which was exactly the opposite of how Xuanzang describes Harṣa’s claim to rule (Taizong vs. Harṣa): – murder of two brothers, one of them the crown prince—to take up the task of rule reluctantly, and then justified, not as revenge for his brother’s murder, but as a defense of the religion, the dharma, against the destructive actions of Śaśāṅka (although Harṣa himself then speaks of punishment for his brother’s murder). – ideologically based doubts about the rightfulness of the claim of power (tianming 天命)—the admonition by a divine being to accept rulership (Avalokiteśvara). – ongoing power struggle inside (regional power groups, court factions, Tai­ zong’s advisors) and outside (Eastern and Western Turks, Tibetans, Korea)— (claimed) complete pacification of the realm. This episode is, to a certain degree, in conflict with the Indian evidence. In his inscriptions, Harṣa labels himself a stout adherent of Śiva-Maheśvara (parama­māheśvara), the bull in the king’s seal being the god’s emblematic animal Nandin. This is also supported by the fact that Xuanzang himself, in the Xiyu ji, describes the heartland of the dynasty (Sthāneśvara / Kurukṣetra) as having a high degree of heretic deva (tian 天) veneration,123 although Xuanzang does not, as usual, specify which deva is prominent or particularly venerated in the region. Yet the focus in the inscriptions on Maheśvara as the central deity is not to be seen as completely contradictory of Xuanzang’s Avalokiteśvara story: a statue of, or a story about, Maheśvara as the benevolent form of Śiva (for instance as Umā-Maheśvara), if there was really a historical or legendary basis for Xuanzang’s story,124 could easily be turned via interpretatio buddhica into the bodhisattva of compassion, Avalokiteśvara.125 The 123 124

125

See above. One is reminded of Bāṇa’s story of Puṣpabhūti’s conquest of Sthāṇeśvara which the king achieves with the help the Śaiva ascetic Bhairavācārya who gave him the divine sword Aṭṭihāsa with which Puṣpabhūti subdued the nāga of the region, Śrīkaṇṭha, but also of Lakṣmī’s prophecy of Harṣa’s future rulership as a world-ruler, a cakravartin (see above). See e.g. Fussman, commenting on the religious situation in the first centuries of the common era in Gandhāra which also can be applied more generally to the North Indian situation at a later time, in Gérard Fussman, Anna-Maria Quagliotti, The Early Iconography of Avalokiteśvara / L’iconographie ancienne d’Avalokiteśvara (Paris: Collège de France, 2012), 19: “There was no clear-cut distinction nor avowed opposition, in the lay people at least, between Hinduism and Buddhism.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

128

Deeg

Chinese name forms, Guanzizai 觀自在 for Avalokiteśvara, and Dazizai 大自 在 for Maheśvara, were close enough to lead to an identification, especially when the deity, with all its similar iconographic features, was venerated as a statue in the story Xuanzang reports.126 The link between the bodhisattva and the Hindu deity seems to be deep-rooted: well-known is the creation story found in the Kāraṇḍa­vyūha-sūtra, in which Avalokiteśvara creates Maheśvara from his brows and explains to him that he is to be the venerated deity of the Kāliyuga.127 Xuanzang’s story therefore may not necessarily be completely his own invention (see Bāṇa’s description of Harṣa’s reluctant acceptance of the throne and the interference of a deity), but its roots must be looked for in the context of Sthāṇeśvara, since the integration of Kanyākubja in the Puṣpabhūti territory happens after Harṣa’s coronation, something people at the time of 126

127

There are other passages in the Xiyu ji describing an Avalokiteśvara cult—e.g. in the Northwest (Kāpīśi)—where the basis could have been a confusion between or blending of the two deities, the Buddhist and the Hindu one. A discussion of these examples, however, will have to be left to another occasion. See also the summary of this cosmogony in Alexander Studholme, The Origins of Oṃ Maṇipadme Hūṃ. A Study of the Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), 123 f. For the metrical version of the myth, see: Lokesh Chandra, Kāraṇḍa-vyūha-sūtra, or The Supernatural Virtues of Avalokiteśvara (Sanskrit text of the Metrical Version edited for the first time from original manuscripts) (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan, 1999), 39 ff., line 28 ff. For the Chinese translation, see: Tianxizai’s 天息災 (fl. 980–1000) Dasheng zhuangyanbao wang jing 大乘莊嚴寶王經: “The World-Honored One said: “The bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara emitted sun and moon from [his] eyes, emitted the god Maheśvara from [his] eyebrows, emitted the god king Brahmā from [his] shoulders, emitted the god Nārāyaṇa from [his] mind, emitted the great goddess Sarasvatī from [his] teeth, the god Vāyu from [his] mouth, the goddess Pṛthivī from [his] navel, the god of the water (Varuṇa) from [his] belly; from the body of Avalokiteśvara all these gods were born. Then the bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara said to the devaputra Maheśvara: “As for you, in the future, at the time of the end of the dharma, there will be living beings in the realm of feelings [who] cling to false views and all say that you have been the Great Lord from the beginningless [time] and had the power to create all sentient beings. At that time the living beings will have abandoned the bodhisattva path, will be stupid and missed and will say: “This great body [dwelling in the air] makes the great earth his seat and the world and the sentient beings all come forth from this body.”””” 世尊告言﹕ “觀自在菩薩於其眼中而出日月，額 中出大自在天，肩出梵王天，心出那羅延天，牙出大辯才天，口出風天，臍 出地天，腹出水天；觀自在身出生如是諸天。時觀自在菩薩告大自在天子 言﹕ “汝於未來末法世時，有情界中而有眾生執著邪見，皆謂汝於無始已來為 大主宰而能出生一切有情。是時眾生失菩提道，愚癡迷惑作如是言﹕ “此虛空 大身大地以為座， 境界及有情皆從是身出。” ” ” T 1050, p. 49, c12–22. Note that the Chinese text replaces Skt. liṅga with dashen 大身, “great body.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

129

Xuanzang’s residency in India definitely remembered very well. Xuanzang’s localization of the statue and the event at the shores of the Gaṅgā somewhere in the vicinity of Kanyākubja is therefore clearly his own invention, but one which is in accordance with his attempt to conceal the links between Harṣa and his ruling house and Sthāṇeśvara. To the Chinese ear, the story of Harṣa having been asked to assume the throne by a divine being must have sounded like the bestowal of an Indian “Mandate of Heaven” on the Indian king. Harṣa’s self-declared veneration of Maheśvara stands, prima facie, in some contrast to the religious affiliation ascribed to his elder brother and predecessor, Prabhākaravardhana, who is, in the inscriptions, portrayed as a venerator of the Buddha (paramasaugata). One should also remember that his father, Prabhākaravardhana, and grandfather, Ādityavardhana (who has the god’s name in his name!), are described in the inscriptions as venerating the sun god Sūrya / Āditya (paramādityabhakta); this fits nicely with the Mahābhārata, where the region around Sthāṇeśvara, identified as Dhar­makṣetra, is called a pilgrimage place, a tīrtha, for an important solstice festival.128 All this does, however, not mean that Harṣa had no sympathy for, or was not a follower of, Buddhism; this clearly was the case in the later period of his reign, when he wrote his famous play Nāgānanda with its strong Mahāyāna-Buddhist undertones. That Harṣa was indeed drawn towards Buddhism is also indirectly shown by the fact that even the stern Śaiva and Harṣa biographer, Bāṇa, used Buddhist elements when he describes the king.129 The sympathy for Buddhism, however, must have been present even at an early period of Harṣa’s rule since, in the last and eighth chapter of the Harṣacarita, the king, during his search for his sister Rājyaśrī, meets the 128 129

See McCarter, Kurukṣetra, 44 f., and 144 ff. See, for example B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 58: “[Harṣa] displayed an avatāra of all the gods united in one, as he had the lost delicate feet or Aruṇa, the slow-moving tighs of Buddha, the brawny forearm of the Thunderer (Indra), the shoulder of Justice, the round lip of the sun, the mild look of Avalokita, the face of the moon and the hair of Kṛṣṇa.” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 32, line 31ff.: aruṇapādapallavena sugatamantharoruṇā vajrāyudhaniṣṭuraprakoṣṭha-pṛṣṭhena vṛṣas­ kan­dhena bhāsvadbimbā-dhareṇa prasannāvalokitena candramukhena kṛṣṇakeśena vapuṣā sarvadevatāvatāram ivaikatra darśayantam; B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 66: “But now-a-days, when your highness,—calm in mind like Buddha (Sugata; MD) himself, one who carries out all the rules for the castes and orders like Manu, and bears the rod of punishment as visibly as Yama,—governs the whole earth girdled by the seven oceans, …” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 36, line 19ff.: idānīṃ tu sugata iva śāntamanasi manāv iva kartari varṇāśra-mavyava-sthānāṃ sama­ vartinīva ca sākṣād daṇḍabhṛti deve śāsati saptāmburāśiraśanām aśeṣadvīpamālinīṃ mahīṃ …

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

130

Deeg

Buddhist saint (bhadanta) Divākaramitra and asks him to be the teacher of his sister and even suggests he might take the monastic robes (kāṣāya) together with his sister (sic!) after having taken revenge for the murder of his brother.130 It is striking that Xuanzang is completely silent about this episode—or rather about what may have been the underlying historical reality of Bāṇa’s story –, despite its strong Buddhist content, which could have served his purpose quite well. Although the younger sister (Rājyaśrī) is not mentioned in the Xiyu ji in the context of the monk’s meeting with king Harṣa, it can be assumed that Xuanzang knew about Rājyaśrī since she is mentioned twice in the Biography.131 It was even known in Chinese circles that she was widowed and had strong ties with her brother.132 130

131

132

E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 258: “At the end, when I have accomplished my design, she and I will assume the red garments together.” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 140, line 29 f.: iyaṃ tu grahīṣyati mayaiva samaṃ samā­ ptakṛtyena kāṣāyāṇi. “[King] Harṣa had a younger sister [who] was intelligent and had a sharp understanding of the meaning [of the teaching] of the Samṃatīya-nikāya [and] was sitting behind the king. [When she] heard the dharma master’s systematic [explanation] of the depth and extension of the Mahāyāna’s religious path [and] the restriction and shallowness of the Small Teaching (Hīnayāna), [she] became rejoiced calmly [and] could not praise [the master enough].” T 2053, p. 247, b4–6 王有妹聰慧利根善正量部義，坐於王後。聞 法師序大乘宗塗奧曠，小教局淺，夷然歡喜，稱讚不能已。 ” The second passage is found in the description of Harṣa’s celebrated pañcavārṣika ceremony during which he distributes, following the legendary example of Aśoka, all his wealth to the saṃgha, see: Max Deeg, “Origins and Development of the Buddhist Pañcavārṣika—Part I: India and Central Asia,” Nagoya Studies in Indian Culture and Buddhism—Saṃbhāṣā 16 (1995): 67–90. “After the whole [pañcavārṣika] was over, [Harṣa] asked for a simple and coarse garment from [his] younger sister, venerated the Buddhas of the ten directions, leaped with joy, put [his] palms together and said: “I have recently heaped up [so much] treasure, [that I] always feared that [I could] not store [it] in a firm treasure house. Today [I] have stored [it] in a field of merit (puṇyakṣetra) which can be called storing [it] in a treasure house. [I] take a vow that [I] will in each existence achieve wealth and the dharma to distribute it to living beings, to achieve the ten freedoms (i.e. pāramitās), and fulfill the two adornments (i.e. the two truths).”” T 2053, p. 248c, 25–p. 249a, 1 一切盡 已，從其妹 索麁 弊衣著，禮十方佛，踊躍歡喜，合掌言曰： “ 某比來 積集財 寶，常懼不入堅牢之藏。今得貯福田中，可謂入藏矣。願某生生常具財法等 施 眾 生，成十自在，滿二莊嚴。 ” See Daoxuan’s Shijia fangzhi: “… [Śīlāditya] also attended the state affairs together with his widowed younger sister.” T 2088, p. 957, c23 … 乃與寡妹共知國事。 This passage was already referred to by T. Watters, On Yuan Chwang’s Travels in India: vol.1, 345. This information could have been conveyed by one of the embassies going forth and back between the two capitals, Chang’an and Kanyākubja, maybe by the famous ambassador

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

131

In this context it is important to remember again that dynastic religious expression (e.g. epigraphic or numismatic) is not to be confused with personal preference or occasional support for other religious groups.133 The Assamese king Kumāra and his kingdom, Kāmarūpa (Jiamoloubo 迦摩縷波 / *kɨa-maləw-pa), for instance, is described by Xuanzang as stern Hindu, and the king even as a descendent of the god Nārāyaṇa,134 the former information being

133

134

Wang Xuance 王玄策, or by his superior on his first mission, Li Yibiao 李義表, who is mentioned some lines later in this passage (p.958, a18). This whole passage on Kanyākubja and Harṣa is mostly taken over from Xuanzang, but has alterations coming from this kind of sources. Thus, exactly before the inserted sentence about the younger sister, the description for punishing meat eaters and those who killed animals is given: c22–23 “Furthermore [Śīlāditya] issued strict order that [people] who ate meat had [their] tongue cut out, and [those] who killed living beings had [their] hands cut off.” … 又約嚴令，有噉 肉者當截舌，殺生當斬手。 Keeping up Harṣa’s image as a just but moderate king, the Xiyu ji however has punishment for murder only: “[Śīlāditya] made [people] in the Five Indias to abstain from eating meat, [and] when [someone] took a life [he] was executed without pardon.” T 2087, p. 894, b28–29 … 令五印度不得噉 肉，若斷生命，有 誅無赦。 On the general “popularity” of Śaivism with the North-Indian royal houses and dynasties in the 6th century, see: S. Goyal, Harsha, 110 ff. Although this is highly speculative, in the light of the fact that according to the inscriptions none of Harṣa’s direct predecessors was claimed to be Śaiva, one could make a case that Harṣa took on an official Śaiva religiosity after ascending the throne of Kanyābubja for reasons of legitimizing continuity of the Maukhari dynasty which was, according to the sources, exclusively Śaiva, see: S. Goyal, Harsha, 111 f. Again, the approach to only allow one historical source to be valid—either the inscriptions, Bāṇa or the Xiyu ji—and to not accept double or multiple religious affiliations (or change over time) caused G. Bühler, “The Madhuban Copper Plate,” 71, to dismiss Xuanzang’s record completely. This seems to be influenced by the Western eurocentric idea of mono-religious normality, while in a lot of cases a multiple religious belonging or praxis was rather the normality than the exception. Some of the Tang emperors seem to have had multiple religious identities similar to some of the South Asian kings or to some rulers of the Kuṣānas or the Guptas. “[The people of Kāmarūpa] venerate the gods [and] do not believe in the dharma of the Buddha. Therefore since the Buddha prospered [in the world] until nowadays no monasteries have been erected to summon the monks. There are followers of pure faith, but [they] only secretly recite [the Buddhist texts]. [There are] several hundreds of devatemples and several ten thousands of heretics. The present king originally an offspring of Nārāyaṇa and from a brāhmaṇa-clan with the dynastic name Bhāskaravarman (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Sun-Armour”) and the personal name Kumāra (in the language of the Tang [this means] “Child”). From seizing the territory, the continuous lineage of rulership until the present king runs already up to one thousand generations. His majesty is fond of learning, and the common people follow [him]; [men] of high talents, admiring [his] righteousness, come as [his] guests from afar. Although [he has]

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

132

Deeg

in accordance with what we know from his inscriptions135 and from the Harṣacarita.136 All this, however, does not prevent Kumāra from assisting Harṣa in the grandiose Buddhist ceremony of bathing the golden Buddha image in Kanyākubja, also reported by Xuanzang.137 Multireligious agency amongst

135

136

137

not pure faith in the dharma of the Buddha [he] still respects highly learned śramaṇas.” T 2087, p. 927, b11–18 宗事天神，不信佛法。故自佛興以迄于今，尚未建立伽 藍，招集僧侶。其有淨信之徒，但竊念而已。天祠數百，異道數萬。今王本 那羅延天之祚胤，婆羅門之種也，字婆塞羯羅伐摩 (唐言日胄) ，號拘摩羅 (唐言童子) 。自據畺土，奕葉君臨，逮於今王，歷千世矣。君上好學，眾庶 從化，遠方高才，慕義客遊，雖不淳信佛法，然敬高學沙門。 The inscriptions of Bhāska­ra­varman (Kumāra) clearly identify him as a Śaiva, while Xuanzang calls him an offspring of Nārāyaṇa (Viṣṇu), and Bhāskaravarman’s inscriptions mention a mythical ancestor (daitya) Naraka but show no trace of a claim of divine descendency. It may be that Xuanzang here misunderstood the dynastic history and interpreted the fact that one of Bhāskaravarman’s predecessors (grandfather fourth generation) was called Nārāyaṇa­varman as divine origin from the god Nārāyaṇa; this seems not unlikely since Nārāyaṇa­varman must have been a pivotal figure in the dynastic history: he performed an Aśvamedha sacrifice twice and may have achieved (quasi-)independency from the later Guptas around the first half of the sixth century, see: R.C. Majumdar, “Northern India After the Break-up of the Gupta Empire,” 91. See Mukunda Madhava Sharman, Inscriptions of Ancient Assam (Assam: Department of Publication, Gauhati University, 1978), 10 ff., in the long Dubi and Nidhanpur copper plate inscriptions. E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa, 211 ff.; P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 115 ff., line 3 ff. This is an extensive description of Harṣa’s envoy Haṃsavega’s arrival at Harṣa’s royal camp and the conversation between the two during which Haṃsavega explains some of his king’s “family history”; he stresses the fact that Kumāra personally venerated Śiva alone: E.B. Cowell and F.W. Thomas, The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa: “Now from childhood upwards it was this prince’s [Kumāra’s, MD] firm resolution never to do homage to any being except the lotus feet of Çiva (Sthāṇu, MD).” P.V. Kane, The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa, 118, line 26 f.: ayam asya ca śaiśavād ārabhya saṅkalpaḥ stheyān sthāṇu­pādāravindadvayādṛte nāham anyaṃ namaskuryām iti. On the other hand Haṃ­ savega also refers to a Vaiṣṇava lineage (119, line 26 f.: vaiṣṇavo vaṃśaḥ). If we take the source evidence seriously we could assume veneration of both Viṣṇu and Śiva for Kumāra. “At that time is was the second month of spring, and from the first day to the twenty first day he fed all śramaṇas and brāhmaṇas with rare delicacies, and he made pavilions on the sides of the road which links [his] residence on tour with the monastery, lavishly [embellished] with jade adornment, stationed with musicians [who] successively performed refined sounds. The king brought the golden statue out of his residence on tour, held it high into the air [with its] height of three feet and loaded it on a big elephant and spread it with bejewelled curtains. King Śīlāditya acted as the ruler Śakra, holding a bejewelled canopy in his left; king Kumāra was dressed as king Brahmā, holding a white whisk in his right. Each was completely protected by five hundred elephant troops in

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

133

rulers (and others) was obviously the norm rather than the exception in premodern South-Asian (and other) societies. From all this it is at least clear that the strong and exclusive support for Buddhism which Xuanzang claims for, and ascribes to, Harṣa—not mentioning any Śaiva inclinations at all—is rather a means of influencing his own emperor Taizong by showing him a proper and ideal Indian Buddhist ruler. The example of the construction of the imperial lineage of the North-Indian rulers of Kanauj / Kanyākubja and the story of Harṣa’s reluctant ascension to the throne after the death of his brother by Xuanzang in the Xiyu ji is just one example of how the famous Buddhist monk attempted to exert political influence on, and convey didactic messages to, Taizong—and probably also on his heir, Gaozong. It points to the different layers and dimensions of meaning found in the Xiyu ji and suggests a new interpretation of, and a new approach to the text; one that seriously addresses the political situation and context of the reign of emperor Taizong around the time the Xiyu ji was compiled. This is by far the more interesting approach to the text and must come to replace those orientations to the text that view it, almost exclusively, as a monolithic description of India at the time of Xuanzang’s sojourn there. A conflation of specific passages in the Xiyu ji with the depiction of events in the Biography, as has so often been done, both in the past and present, does not help us to unravel the complex agenda of Xuanzang's work. The accumulating analyses of this paper require a reading of the Xiyu ji as, at least in part, a “Fürstenspiegel” (“mirror for princes”). Such a reading will reveal the skillful way in which the famous monk was able to steer himself through the narrow gap between the Scylla of court politics and obligatory loyalty to, and respect for, the emperor and the Charybdis of tacit advice for, and even criticism of, his ruler.

armour. There were one hundred big elephants in front and [one hundred] behind the Buddha statue, mounted by musicians [who] performed music [with their] drums. King Śīlāditya with each step and in all directions donated pearls, all kinds of jewels, gold, silver and flowers to the Three Jewels. He first arrived at the bejewelled pedestal and washed the statue with scented water. The king himself put [the statue] on his shoulders and brought it to the platform in the west and donated several ten, hundreds or thousands of precious jewels and kauśeya[-silk].” T 2087, p. 895, b2–10 從初一日，以珍味饌諸沙門、婆羅 門，至二十一日。自行宮屬伽藍，夾道為閣，窮諸瑩飾，樂人不移，雅聲遞 奏。王於 行宮出一金像， 虛中隱起，高餘三尺，載以大象，張以寶幰。戒日 王為帝釋之服，執寶蓋以左侍，拘摩羅王作梵王之儀，執白拂而右侍。各五 百象軍，被鎧周衛，佛像前後各百大象，樂人以乘，鼓奏音樂。戒日王以真 珠雜寶及金銀諸花，隨步四散，供養三寶。先就寶壇，香水浴像，王躬負 荷，送上西臺，以諸珍寶、憍奢耶衣數 十 百 千，而 為供養。

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

134

Deeg



Abbreviations

HDC T

Hanyu-dacidian 漢語大辭典 Taishō-shinshū-daizōkyō 大昭新修大藏經 (quoted according the digitized CBETA version)



Bibliography



Primary Sources

Datang xiyuji xiaozhu 大唐西域記校注. Ji Xianlin 季羨林, et.al. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985). Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan xiaozhu 南海寄歸內法傳校注. Wang Bangwei 王邦維 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1995). Secondary Sources Agrawal, Ashvini. “A New Copper-Plate Grant of Harṣavardhana from the Punjab, Year 8,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 66, no. 2 (2003): 220–28. Bae, Bak Kun. Śrī Harṣa’s Plays. Translated into English with Full Sanskrit Text (Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1964). Bakker, Hans. “Thanesar, the Pāśupata Order and the Skandapurāṇa. Studies in the Skandapurāṇa IX,” Journal of Indological Studies 19 (2007): 1–16. Barrett, Timothy H. Taoism under the T’ang. Religion & Empire During the Golden Age of Chinese History (London: WellSweep, 1996). Beal, Samuel. Si-yu-ki. Buddhist Records of the Western World, translated from the Chinese of Hiuen-Tsiang (ad 629), 2 vols. (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., 1884; Indian reprint Delhi 1983). Bhatt, G.H. The Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa (Critically edited for the first time), Fascicule 1: The Bālakāṇḍa, The First Book of the Vālmīki-Rāmāyaṇa, The National Epic of India (Baroda: Oriental Institute, 1982). Bühler, Georg. “The Madhuban Copper Plate of Harsha, Dated Samvat 25,” Epigraphia Indica 1 (1892): 67–75. Bühler, Georg. “Banskhêra plate of Harsha, the year 22,” Epigraphia Indica 4 (1896–97): 208–11. Chandra, Lokesh. Kāraṇḍa-vyūha-sūtra, or The Supernatural Virtues of Avalokiteśvara (Sanskrit text of the Metrical Version edited for the first time from original manuscripts) (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan, 1999). Chen, Jinhua. “Śarīra and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, 1–2 (2002): 33–150. Chen, Jinhua. Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (643–712) (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

135

Cowell, E.B.; Thomas, F.W. The Harṣa-Carita of Bāṇa (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1897). Deeg, Max. “Writing for the Emperor—Xuanzang Between Piety, Religious Propaganda, Intelligence, and Modern Imagination,” in: Pāsādikadānaṃ. Festschrift für Bhikkhu Pāsādika, ed. Martin Straube, Roland Steiner, Jayandra Soni, Michael Hahn, Mitsuyo Demoto (Marburg: Indica et Tibetica Verlag, 2009): 30–60. Deeg, Max. “Origins and Development of the Buddhist Pañcavārṣika—Part I: India and Central Asia,” Nagoya Studies in Indian Culture and Buddhism—Saṃbhāṣā 16 (1995): 67–90. Deeg, Max. “‘Show Me the Land Where the Buddha Dwelled …’—Xuanzang’s ‘Record of the Western Regions’ (Xiyu ji): A Misunderstood Text?,” China Report 48 (2012): 89–113. Devahuti, D. Harsha: A Political Study (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998). Dubey, D.P.; Dubey, A.K.; Mishra, Neelima. “Important Epigraphic Discoveries in U.P. During the Last 25 Years,” Journal of History & Social Sciences 2.2 (July–December 2011), ). Eisenberg, Andrew. “Kingship, Power and the Hsüan-wu men Incident of the T’ang,” T’oung Pao 80 (1994): 223–259. Ettinghausen, Maurice Léon. Harṣa Vardhana, empereur et poète de l’Inde Septentrionale (606–648). Étude de sa vie et son temps (Londres, Paris, Louvain: Luzac & Co., Ernest Leroux, J.-B. Istas, 1906). Fleet, John Faithful. Inscriptions of the Early Gupta Kings and Their Successors (London: Superintendent of Government Printing, 1888) (Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Volume 3). Forte, Antonino. Mingtang and Buddhist Utopias in the History of the Astronomical Clock. The Tower, Statue and Armillary Sphere Constructed by Empress Wu (Rome, Paris: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1988) (Serie Orientale Roma 59; Publications d’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 145). Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century. Inquiry into the Nature, Authors and Function of the Tunhuang Document S. 6502, Followed by an Annotated Translation (Napoli: Istituto Universitario Orientale 2005, second edition, first published 1976). Fussman, Gérard; Quagliotti, Anna-Maria. The Early Iconography of Avalokiteśvara / L’iconographie ancienne d’Avalokiteśvara (Paris: Collège de France, 2012) (Publications de l’Institut de Civilisation Indienne, Fascicule 80). Goldman, Robert P.; Sutherland, Sally J. The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki. An Epic of Ancient India, Volume I: Bālakāṇḍa (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004). Goyal, Shankar. Harsha: A Multidisciplinary Political Study (Jodpur: Kusumanjali Book World, 2006).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

136

Deeg

Hara, Minoru. “A Note on the Phrase dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre,” Journal of Indian Philosophy 27 (1999): 49–66. Indrajī, Bhagwānlāl. “A New Gurjara Copper-Plate Grant,” Indian Antiquary 13 (1884): 70–81. Jayaswal, K.P. An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text [c. 700 bc–c. 770 ad] With a Special Commentary on Later Gupta Period (With the Sanskrit Text Revised by Ven. Rāhula Sāṅkṛityāyana) (Lahore: The Punjab Sanskrit Book Depot, 1934). Jülch, Thomas. Bodhisattva der Apologetik: Die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin, 3 vols. (München: Utz, 2014). Julien, Stanislas. Mémoires sur les contrées occidentales, traduits du Sanscrit en Chinois, en l’an 648, par Hiouen-Thsang, et du Chinois en Français, 2 tômes (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1857–58). Kane, P.V. The Harshacarita of Bāṇabhaṭṭa. Text of Uchchvāsas I-VIII (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1997). Karashima, Seishi 辛嶋靜志. “Hokke-kyō no bunkengaku-teki-kenkyū (2)—Kannon Avalokitasvara no goi-kaishaku” 法華經の文獻的研究〔二〕— 觀音 Avalo­kitasvara 語義の解釋, Sōka-daigaku-kokusai-bukkyōgaku-kōtō-kenkyūjo-nenpō 1998 創價大學 國際佛教學高等研究所年報平成 10 年度 / Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 1998 (1999): 39–66. Kielhorn, Franz. “Aihole Inscription of Pulakêśin II.; Śaka-Saṁvat 556,” Epigraphia Indica 6 (1900–01): 1–12. Kuwayama, Shōshin. “How Xuanzang Learned About Nālandā,” in: Tang China and Beyond. Studies on East Asia from the Seventh to the Tenth Century, ed. Antonino Forte (Kyoto: Istituto Italiano di Cultura, Scuola di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 1988): 1–33 (Italian School of East Asian Studies, Essays, Volume 1). Li, Rongxi. A Biography of the Tripiṭaka Master of the Great Ci’en Monastery of the Great Tang Dynasty (Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1995) (BDK English Tripiṭaka 77). Li, Rongxi. The Great Tang Dynasty Record of the Western Regions. Translated by the Tripiṭaka-Master Xuanzang under Imperial Order, Composed by Śramaṇa Bianji of the Great Zhongchi Monastery (Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1996) (BDK English Tripiṭaka 79). Liu, Shufen 劉淑芬. “Xuanzang zuihou shinian (655–664): Jianlun zongzhang ernian (669) gaizangshi” 玄奘最後十年 (655-664): 兼論總章二年 (669) 改葬事, Zhon­ghua wenshi luncong 中華文史論叢 95 (2009.3): 1–97. Majumdar, R.C. “Northern India After the Break-up of the Gupta Empire (Sixth Century ad),” in: The History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume Three: The Classical Age, fourth edition, ed. R.C. Majumdar (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1988): 60–95.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

137

Majumdar, R.C. “Harsha-Vardhana and His Time,” in: The History and Culture of the Indian People, Volume Three: The Classical Age, fourth edition, ed. R.C. Majumdar (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1988): 96–128. Mather, Richard. “Chinese and Indian Perceptions of Each Other Between the First and Seventh Centuries,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 112, vol.1 (1992): 1–8. Mayer, Alexander Leonhard. Xuanzangs Leben und Werk, Teil 1: Xuanzang, Übersetzer und Heiliger (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1992) (Veröffentlichungen der Societas Uralo-Altaica, Bd. 34). McCarter, Elliott. Kurukshetra. Bending the Narrative Into Place (PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2013). Mookerji, Radha Kumud. Harsha (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1926). Mylius, Klaus. Geschichte der altindischen Literatur. Die 3000-jährige Entwicklung der religiös-philosophischen, belletristischen und wissenschaftlichen Literatur Indiens von den Veden bis zur Etablierung des Islam, 2., überarbeitete und ergänzte Auflage (Wies­ baden: Harrassowitz, 2003) (Beiträge zur Kenntnis südasiatischer Sprachen und Literaturen 11). Olivelle, Patrick. Dharmasūtras. The Law Codes of Āpastamba, Gautama, Baudhāyana, and Vasiṣṭha (Annotated Text and Translation) (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2000). Olivelle, Patrick. Manu’s Code of Law. A Critical Edition and Translation of the MānavaDharmaśāstra (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006). Pal, Pratapaditya. Indian Sculpture, Volume I: circa 500 bc–ad 700 (Los Angeles, Berkeley, etc.: Los Angeles County Museum of Art, University of California Press). Panikkar, K.M. Sri Harsha of Kanauj. A monograph on the history of India in the first half of the 7th century ad (Bombay: D.B. Taradorevala Sons & Co., 1922). Pulleyblank, Edwin G. Lexicon of Reconstructed Pronunciation in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1991). Rhodes, Constantina. Invoking Lakshmi. The Goddess of Wealth in Song and Ceremony (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2010). Roy, Kumkum. “Poetic Pasts: Patrons, Poets and Lesser Mortals in Bāṇa’s ‘Biography’,” Religions of South Asia 5, no. 1/2 (2011): 303–17. Sastri, H. “The clay seals of Nālandā: The seals of Harsha or Harshavardhana,” Epigraphia Indica 21 (1931–32): 74–77. Sen, Tansen. Buddhism, Trade, and Diplomacy in the Realignment of Sino-Indian Relations, 600–1400 (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002). Sen, Tansen. “The Travel Records of Chinese Pilgrims Faxian, Xuanzang and Yijing,” Education About Asia 11, no. 3 (2006): 24–32. Shankar Pāṇḍurang Paṇḍit, The Gaüdavāho, A Historical Poem in Prākṛit by Vākpati (Bombay: Government Central Book Depot, 1887). Sharma, Baijnath. Harṣa and His Times (Varanasi: Sushma Prakashan, 1970).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

138

Deeg

Sharma, Neeta. Bāṇabhaṭṭa, A Literary Study (Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1968). Sharman, Mukunda Madhava. Inscriptions of Ancient Assam (Assam: Department of Publication, Gauhati University, 1978). Shinjō, Mizutani 水谷真成. Daitō-saiiki-ki 大唐西域記 (Tokyo: Tōyō bunko 東洋文庫, 1999, vols. 653, 655, 657). Shulman, David. “Terror of Symbols and Symbols of Terror: Notes on the Myth of Śiva as Sthāṇu,” History of Religions 26, No. 2 (1986): 101–24. Skilton, Andrew. “How the Nāgas Were Pleased” by Harṣa & “The Shattered Thighs” by Bhāsa (New York: New York University Press, 2009) (The Clay Sanskrit Library). Smith, H. Daniel. “A Contemporary Iconic Tradition: Lakṣmī, Gaṇeśa, Sarasvatī—An Emerging “New” Hindu Trimūrti,” in: Studies in Hindu and Buddhist Art, ed. P.K. Mishra (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1999): 11–48. Stein, Marc Aurel. Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. A Chronicle of the Kings of Kaśmīr, Vol.I: Introduction. Books I-VII (1900; Indian reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1989). Stein, Marc Aurel. Kalhaṇa’s Rājataraṅgiṇī. A Chronicle of the Kings of Kaśmīr, Vol.III: Sanskrit Text With Critical Notes (1892; Indian reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988). Steiner, Roland. Untersuchungen zu Harṣadevas Nāgānanda und zum indischen Schau­ spiel (Swisttal-Odendorf: Indica et Tibetica, 1997) (Indica et Tibetica 31). Studholme, Alexander. The Origins of Oṃ Maṇipadme Hūṃ. A Study of the Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002). Thalpyal, Kiran Kumar. Inscriptions of the Maukharīs, Later Guptas, Puṣpabhūtis and Yaśovarman of Kanauj (New Delhi: Agam Prakash, 1985) (Indian Council of Historical Research). Twitchett, Denis ed. The Cambridge History of China. Volume 3: Sui and T’ang, 589–906, Part I (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). Twitchett, Denis. The Writing of Official History Under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Twitchett, Denis. “The T’ang Imperial Family,” Asia Maior, 3rd series, 7 (1994): 1–61. Twitchett, Denis. “How to Be an Emperor: T’ang T’ai-tsung’s Vision of His Role,” Asia Maior, 3rd series, 9 (1996): 1–102. Thomas, Watters. On Yuan Chwang’s Travels in India, 2 vols. (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1904–05, Indian reprint Delhi 1973). Wechsler, Howard J. Mirror to the Son of Heaven. Wei Cheng at the Court of T’ang T’ai-tsung (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974). Wechsler, Howard J. Offerings of Jade and Silk. Ritual and Symbol in the Legitimation of the T’ang Dynasty (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985). Weinstein, Stanley. Buddhism Under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Didactic Creation of an Indian Dynasty in the Xiyu ji

139

Wright, Arthur F. “T’ang T’ai-tsung and Buddhism,” in: Perspectives on the T’ang, ed. Arthur F. Wright and Denis Twitchett (New Haven: Yale University Press 1973): 239–63. Wright, Arthur F. “T’ang T’ai-Tsung: The Man and the Persona,” in: Essays on T’ang Society. The Interplay of Social, Political and Economic Forms, ed. John Curtis Perry and Bardwell L. Smith (Leiden: Brill, 1976): 17–32. Zhang, Yuan 张远. “‘Qinwang pochen yue’ shifou chuanru Yindu ji qita—jianyu Ning Fanfu jiaoshou shangque” 《秦王破陈乐》是否传入印度及其他—兼与宁梵夫教授 商榷, Nanya yanjiu 南亚研究 104 (2013.2): 140–156.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

140

Chen

A Complicated Figure with Complex Relationships: The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions Chen Jinhua

The ten-year period from 704 to 713 was perhaps one of the bloodiest and most eventful decades in the history of imperial China. Going into 704, the Great Zhou empress, Wu Zetian 武則天 (better known as “Empress Wu”; 623–705), who had once been so energetic and active, was turning eighty-two and found herself increasingly feeble (at least physically). This decline obliged her to retire into seclusion by shutting herself in the isolated “Longevity” basilica (Changsheng-dian 長生殿) of her palace compound in Chang’an. Meanwhile, to the unease and dismay of her chief ministers, the aging empress was also becoming excessively reliant on two of her favorites, the brothers Zhang Yizhi 張易之 (676?–705) and Zhang Changzong 張昌宗 (676?–705), who were believed to have served her for years as her health consultants and probably also as her secret lovers. On the other hand, some court officials felt encouraged by these signs of the empress’s decline. They were loyal to the former Tang dynasty, which Empress Wu had abrogated fourteen years earlier, when after ruling China for almost half a century (655–690), first as the empress of the third Tang emperor Gaozong (r. 649–83) (655–83), then as the regent of her emperor-son Ruizong (r. 684–90, 710–12) (684–90), she had decided to ascend the throne on October 16, 690 (Tianshou 1.9.9 [renwu]) in her own name by proclaiming herself the founding emperor of a new dynasty, the Great Zhou (690–705). Pro-Tang officials and generals instinctively sensed that the time was ripe to restore the defunct dynasty. Headed by the capable minister Zhang Jianzhi 張柬之 (625– 706) and joined by the seemingly reluctant Zhongzong (r. 684, 705–10), who was then ranked only as “Heir Apparent” by his mother, these Tang loyalists staged a coup d’état on February 20, 705 (Shenlong 1.1.22 [guimao]). Although the coup was nominally directed against the Zhang brothers, who were executed that day, the true target was the empress herself. On February 23, 705 (Shenlong 1.1.25 [jiachen]), Zhongzong proclaimed that he was “superintending” the country (jianguo 監國) and on the same day Empress Wu, after “handing over” the throne to Zhongzong, was moved to the Shangyang palace

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_005

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

141

上陽宮, where she died less than ten months later, on December 16, 705

(Shenlong 1.11.26 [renyin]). One day after announcing his assumption of supreme power, that is, on February 24, 705, Zhongzong proclaimed the restoration of the Great Tang dynasty. The political clout of the Wu clan, however, did not vanish following the retirement and subsequent demise of its matriarch. Empress Wu’s nephew Wu Sansi 武三思 (?–707) wasted no time in finding a new patroness for himself and his clan. Ironically, she was none other than Zhongzong’s own wife, Empress Wei 韋后 (?–710). It was then gradually revealed that this unexpected alliance was brought about through the liaison of an erstwhile confidante of Empress Wu, Shangguan Waner 上官婉兒 (?–713), a talented author and a quick-witted strategist who had been a lover of Wu Sansi for years, but who also served as a low-ranking consort of Zhongzong following his re-enthronement in 705. After ensuring his own security under the protection of his lover and ally, Wu Sansi quickly moved to avenge the enemies of his clan—Zhang Jianzhi and the other four major conspirators of the 705 coup. Thus, on July 20, 706 (Shenlong 2.6.6 [xuyin]), at Wu Sansi’s instigation, Zhongzong demoted Zhang Jianzhi and his associates to the ranks of local officials and they were subsequently murdered by Wu Sansi’s underlings. With the wily Wu Sansi and the assertive Empress Wei working hand-inhand, court affairs were gradually dominated by the pair, leading to the reinstallation of many political and religious institutions originally introduced by Empress Wu. However, Wu Sansi’s aggressiveness was to prove his downfall. On June 8, 707 (Shenlong 3.7.5 [gengzi]), Zhongzong’s crown prince Li Chongjun 李重俊 (?–707) finally lost patience with Wu Sansi; and with the assistance of General Li Duozhuo 李多祚 (?–707), he staged a military attack, which killed both Wu Sansi and his son, Wu Chongxun 武崇訓 (?–707), husband of Zhongzong and Empress Wei’s most beloved daughter, Princess Anluo 安樂 (684?–710). After Shangguan Waner convinced him that the attack was actually aimed at him, Zhongzong ordered retaliation. Although the crown prince managed to flee, he was subsequently killed by his subordinates. Rather than being frustrated by the loss of her lover and political partner, Empress Wei’s ambition of becoming another female sovereign was only strengthened. She appears to have been so eager to make her dream come true that she could not wait till her husband’s death. On July 3, 710 (Jinglong 4.6.2 [renwu]), she had her husband poisoned—at least as she was accused by her rivals. On July 5, 710 (Jinglong 4.6.4 [jiashen]), she put the sixteen year old Prince Wen 溫王 (Li Chongmao 李重茂 [695–714]; posthumously known as Shangdi 殤帝) on the throne as a puppet and announced herself Regent. On the night of July 20, 710 (Tanglong 4.6.20 [gengzi]), Li Longji 李隆基 (685–762),

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

142

Chen

a son of Zhongzong’s younger brother Ruizong, attacked Empress Wei and her clique with the assistance of his aunt, Princess Taiping 太平 (665?–713), Empress Wu’s daughter and a younger sister of Zhongzong and Ruizong. Declaring them traitors and murderers, Li Longji had the chief members of Empress Wei’s group (including the empress herself) killed. On July 18, 710 (Jinglong 4.6.17 [jiachen]), coerced by Li Longji and Taiping, Shangdi abdicated in favor of Ruizong, who appointed Li Longji as his crown prince on July 28, 710 (Tanglong 1.6.27 [jisi]). Ruizong, his son and his sister had not long celebrated their victory before they realized that the two of them (the crown prince and princess), both strong-willed and power-hungry, were starting to clash. Probably as a gesture of support for his own son, on February 23, 711 (Jingyun 2.2.2 [dingchou]), Ruizong ordered Li Longji to “superintend the state,” before finally handing over the throne to Longji on August 31, 712 (Xiantian 1.7.25 [renchen]). Longji “reluctantly” took it on September 3, 712 (Xiantian 1.8.9 [gengzi]) after repeated declining, and thus became the new emperor, to be posthumously known as Xuanzong (r. 712–56). Ruizong, however, reserved for himself essential parts of supreme power in his capacity as emeritus emperor (Taishanghuang 太上皇). Partly exasperated by Ruizong’s favoritism toward Li Longji and partly encouraged by the widespread support that she was then able to command among a majority of key ministers, Taiping allegedly plotted a coup d’état aimed at deposing Xuanzong. She did not realize that her nephew the emperor would act even more speedily. When her plot was pre-empted on July 29, 713 (Xiantian 2.7.3 [jiazi]), the princess fled to a mountain temple. The princess came back a few days later. Xuanzong graciously granted her permission to take her own life. The whole decade-long saga of coups and counter-coups was thus brought to an end.1 Scholars have spent much energy in reconstructing the complicated political infighting during this ten-year period and interpreting their far-reaching and profound implications. Their diligent work has shed a great deal of light on this period, which is of particular importance to understanding the Tang and later periods.2 However, to the best of my knowledge, one aspect of this semi1 The foregoing survey is based on Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976; hereafter ZZTJ), juan 207–11. 2 For several major studies, see: Cen Zhongmian 岑仲勉, Sui Tang shi 隋唐史, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1957 (1982 rpt); Chen Yinke 陳寅恪, “Ji Tangdai zhi Li Wu Wei Yang hunyin jituan” 記唐代之李武韋楊婚姻集團, Lishi yanjiu 歷史研究 1 (1954): 35–51; idem, Tangdai zhengzhi shishu lungao 唐代政治史述論稿 (Beijing: Sanlian shudian, 1957); Huang Yongnian 黄永年, Tangdai shishi kaoshi 唐代史事考釋 (Taibei: Lianjing chuban shiye gongsi, 1998); Nunome Chōfū 布目潮渢, Zui Tō shi kenkyū: Tōchō seiken no keisei 隋唐史研究 : 唐朝政權

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

143

nal decade has so far been left unexplored—that is, the roles played by Buddhist monks and Daoist priests in court politics and economic activities. The scholarly oversight in this regard is especially conspicuous in the light of the relatively ample documentation of this issue. As early as 705, after Wei Yuanzhong 魏元忠 (640?–710?), who had been exiled by Empress Wu for his outspoken criticisms of the two Zhang brothers, was called back to his position. A low-ranking official Yuan Chuke 袁楚客 (?–714+), wrote him to blame him for ten faults. Two of them, listed as the third and tenth respectively, were: “those who wear black robes (i.e. Buddhist monks) have been tolerated and encouraged to associate with the powerful, taking in bribes by virtue of their influence”; and “people of ‘left-hand path’ have confused the imperial judgment and stolen state offerings and positions.”3 Thus, it seems that the aggressive presence of some Buddhist and Daoist priests had already been bitterly felt almost immediately following Zhongzong’s re-coronation at the beginning of 705. In addition to this general remark, let me amplify it by providing several individual examples. Fazang 法藏 (643–712), an Avataṃsaka master and one of the greatest Buddhist philosophers, was reported to have made a key contribution to the strike against the two Zhang brothers, for which he was afterwards rewarded by Zhongzong.4 To give another example, on the list of those who were declared Empress Wei’s major accomplices and executed during the 710 coup, was a Daoist priest, Ye Jingneng 葉靜能 (?–710).5 On the other hand, another Buddhist monk, Purun 普潤 (655?–710+), was reported to have given such valuable assistance to Li Longji in eliminating the Empress Wei clique that he was later rewarded with a third-ranked title.6 On the side of Taiping, two religious figures, one Daoist, Shi Chongxuan 史崇玄 (?–713), and the other

3

4 5 6

の形成 (Tōkyō: Tōyōshi Kenkyūkai, 1968); Denis Twitchett and Howard J. Wechsler, “Kaotsung and the Empress Wu: The Inheritor and the Usurper,” in Cambridge History of China, ed. Denis C. Twitchett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979, vol. 3, part 1): 242–289. ZZTJ 208.6601: 崇長緇衣, 使遊走權門, 借勢納賂, 三失也. … 左道之人, 熒惑主聽, 盜竊 祿位, 十失也. Sima Guang here only makes a summary of Yuan Chuke’s extended letter, the whole of which is preserved in Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1994; hereafter CFYG), 832.9878a-81b. Another summary of Yuan Chuke’s letter, which is longer than Sima Guang’s, is found in Wei Yuanzhong’s biography in Xin Tangshu 新唐書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975; hereafter XTS), 122.4345–48. See Chen Jinhua, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (643–712) (Series Sinica Leidensia 75; Leiden: Brill, 2007), Chapt 6.1.3. See the edict that the emperor Shangdi issued right after the coup in July, 710, included in Quan Tangwen 全唐文 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987; hereafter QTW), 99.1020b. Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975; hereafter JTS), 106.3249.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

144

Chen

Buddhist, Huifan 惠範 (also written as 慧範; ?–713), were notably listed as chief conspirators who had closely worked with the princess in the plot against Xuanzong.7 Their role in the conspiracy was so serious that Xuanzong felt compelled to order their execution. A closer look at Tang history will reveal that the last mentioned Buddhist monk had actually enjoyed a long stay in the political limelight and remained in the center of a political storm. He was deeply trusted by the first three of the four Chinese sovereigns in this period (704–13)—Empress Wu and her two emperor-sons, Zhongzong and Ruizong, and her grandson Xuanzong—along with several of the most powerful figures around the throne: the two Zhang brothers, Empress Wei and Princess Taiping. However, although some Tang scholars made occasional references to him,8 Huifan had remained unstudied until the Japanese scholar Hamada Naoya 濱田直也 devoted a short article to him twenty six years prior.9 It is to Hamada’s credit that he put together some basic sources on Huifan and advanced some thought-provoking points. How­ ever, his study left too many major issues unaddressed. In addition to his failure to take into account some major records on Huifan, Hamada also rarely attempted to investigate the complicated ties between the sources he quoted, some of which diverge or even flatly contradict each other. Moreover, Hamada fell short of reconstructing the major historical facts relevant to Huifan as much as the material available to him would have allowed him to do. This study aims at a more comprehensive investigation of this extraordinary and fascinating monk, whose significance for Tang politics and religions we can no longer afford to ignore. It will unfold in three sections. The first two sections will address, respectively, the monastic and secular sources concerning Huifan. On the basis of these sources discussed in the first two sections, a 7 For Huifan, see the rest of this article; for Shi Chongxun, see Chaoye qianzai 朝野僉載 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1979), 5.114. 8 See, for examples, Zhang Qun 章群, “Tangdai zhi huseng” 唐代之胡僧, in Di erjie guoji Tangdai xueshu huiyi lunwen ji 第二屆國際唐代學術會議論文集 (2 vols.) (ed. Zhongguo Tangdai xuehui 中國唐代學會, Taibei: Wenjin, 1993), 2: 812–13; Guo Peng 郭朋, Zhongguo fojiao sixiang shi 中國佛教思想史 2 (Sui Tang fojiao sixiang 隋唐佛教思想; Fujian: Fujian renmin chubanshe, 1994), 271; Kamata Shigeo 鐮田茂雄, Chūgoku bukkyō shi 中國仏教史, vol. 5 (Zui-Tō no bukkyō [jō] 隋唐の佛教 [ 上]) (Tokyo: Tōkyō daigaku shuppankai 東京 大學出版會, 1994), 87–88; Jacques Gernet (trans. Franciscus Verellen), Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995), 286. 9 Hamada Naoya 濱田直也, “Tō no juwa to Gosō Eihan” 唐の女禍と胡僧惠範 (“The ‘Ju-wa’ [sic] and Priest Hui-fan in the T’ang”), Tōhōgaku 東方學 (Eastern Studies) 78 (1989), 68–81.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

145

reconstruction will be attempted in the third section for the eventful life of this complicated monk. The article ends with some brief concluding remarks on the significance of this biographical and historical reconstruction. 1

Buddhist Sources about Huifan

Both the relatively straightforward nature and limited material in Buddhist sources make these works a natural point of embarkment for constructing Huifan’s status as a Buddhist monk. These monastic sources present some basic information about this mysterious figure, although they leave many questions unanswered. Fortunately, some of these obscurities and gaps are filled in secular sources, as we will see in the second section. 1.1 Evidence from Zanning As far as the Buddhist sources are concerned, the earliest and most detailed account of Huifan comes from Zanning’s Da Song seng shi lüe 大宋僧史略, com­pleted around 982: In the second year of the Shenlong era of Tang Zhongzong (January 19, 706–February 6, 707), when the construction of Shengshansi 聖善寺 was completed, nine people including Huifan 慧範, Huizhen 慧珍, Fazang 法 藏, Daxing 大行, Huiji 會寂, Yuanbi 元璧, Renfang 仁方, Chongxian 崇先 and Jinguo 進國 were [each] granted a fifth-ranked title, chaosan daifu 朝 散大夫 (grand master for closing court), and subprefectural dukedom. Their mansions, utensils, salaries, and other materials were provided by the government as they were for other officials. 唐中宗神龍二年, 造聖善 寺成. 慧範, 慧珍, 法藏, 大行, 會寂, 元璧, 仁方, 崇先, 進國九人, 加五品, 並朝散大夫, 縣公. 房室器用料物, 一如正員官給.

 Shortly afterwards, because of their merits in constructing the Great [Buddha-]statue, Huifan was promoted to be zhengyi daifu 正議大夫 (grand master for proper consultation), Prefectural Duke of Shangyong 上庸 (in present-day Shanyang 山陽, Shaanxi), and the Abbot of Sheng­ shansi. He was [eventually] promoted to be a yinqing guanglu daifu (grand master of imperial entertainments with silver seal and blue ribbon). His salary and accommodation were provided by the government by the standard for an official of the same rank. Further, the abbot of Anluosi Wansui was promoted to be a chaosan daifu, appointed as a sub-

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

146

Chen

prefectural duke and the (or an) administrator of Shengshansi.10 His salary and other privileges were also provided by the government in accordance with the standard for officials of the same rank. 以修大像之 功也, 尋加慧範正儀 11 大夫, 上庸郡公, 聖善寺主. 至銀青光祿大夫. 俸料 房閤一事 12 已上同職官給. 又安樂寺主僧萬歲, 加朝散大夫, 封縣公, 聖 善寺都維那, 俸祿亦同職官給.

 [Further,] due to the construction of the statue, the śramaṇa Kuoqing was appointed the gongdeshi (commissioner of the merits and virtue), while concurrently acting (jianjiao 撿挍) as the dianzhong jian 殿中監 (director of the Palace Administration).13 以營像成也, 又沙門廓清充修 功德使, 撿挍殿中監.14 All “prestige titles” (sanguan 散官), the chaosan daifu, zhengyi daifu, and yin­ qing guanglu daifu, were, respectively, “rank five, first class, grade two” (5a2) 10

11 12

13

14

Usually there was one administrator (duweina 都維那) for each temple/monastery. However, if a monastery happened to be big or important, it might have more than one administrator. I have shown elsewhere the existence of such a monastery. See Chen Jinhua, Monks and Monarchs, Kinship and Kingship: Tanqian in Sui Buddhism and Politics (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2002), 214 ff. Yi 儀 is obviously an error for yi 議. 事 does not make sense in this context. I suspect that 事 was an error for 同, not only in view of the similarity in form between 同 and 事, but also because in narrating the same event, Zhipan has 一同正員 (see below, 1.2). Dianzhong jian was the director of the Dianzhongsheng 殿中省 (Palace Administration). In charge of the emperor’s clothes and chariots, the dianzhong jian controlled six bureaus: Shangshi 尚食, Shangyao 尚藥, Shangyi 尚衣, Shangshe 尚舍, Shangsheng 尚乘, and Shanglian 尚輦. See JTS 44.1863–64. By the Tang, the term jianjiao was used very commonly in three ways: 1. sometime in the ordinary verbal sense (to inspect, compare and verify, etc.); 2. sometime in the sense that an official holding post A also acted (still with some connotation of special or irregular status) with all the authority of post B; and 3. sometime to indicate that an official was acting in an honorary status, without any real authority. See Charles Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University, 1985), 146 (no. 804). We are not clear as to whether the dianzhong jian was no more than an honorary post for Kuoqing, or it bore some real authority. Given that Zhongzong once appointed the Daoist priest Ye Jingneng to ­supervise a bureau (Shangyi ju) of his Dianzhongsheng (Ye Jingneng was therefore called Shangyi fengyu 尚衣奉御 [Chief Steward of the Clothing Service], see ZZTJ 208.6589), it is possible that Kuoqing might have been asked to take charge of the Dianzhong­sheng, not only in name, but also in fact. Da Song seng shi lüe, as printed in Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經, eds. Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎 and Watanabe Kaigyoku 渡邊海旭 (Tokyo: Taishō issaikyō kankōkai, 1924–1932; hereafter T), vol. 52, 3.250b3–11.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

147

(cong wupin xia 正五品下), “rank four, first class, grade one” (4a1) (zheng sipin shang 正四品上), and “rank three, second class” (3b) (cong sanpin 從三品) in the Tang official hierarchy.15 Thus, according to Zanning, Huifan was promoted through three successively higher ranks: first rank five (chaosan daifu), then rank four (zhengyi daifu), and eventually rank three (yinqing guanglu daifu). In the same Da Song seng shi lüe, Zanning made two additional references to one of these nine monks, Huifan. In one, he tells us that it was through the recommendation of Taiping that Huifan, whom he identifies as a “barbarian monk” (huseng 胡僧) (that is, a monk from India or Central Asia), was appoint­ed the abbot of Shengshansi, with a third-rank title and the principality of duke (gongjue 公爵).16 Afterwards, Zanning notes that in contrast with Empress Wu, who once awarded purple robes to some Buddhist monks, this practice was not implemented (buxing zifu 不行紫服) when Huifan was enfeoffed because of his merits in constructing a monastery (i.e. Shengshansi).17 1.2 Evidence from Zhipan After Da Song seng shi lüe, Fozu tongji, completed in 1269, also mentions Huifan’s titular elevation: In the second month [of Shenlong 2] (March 19, 706–April 16, 707), [Zhong­zong] ordered the construction of Shengshansi. The śramaṇa Huifan was appointed zhengyi daifu, enfeoffed Duke of Shangyong. Fazang, Huizhen and others (in total nine monks) were all appointed chao[san] daifu and enfeoffed subprefectural dukes. Their privileges and salaries were the same as those for officials with the same ranks. [ 神龍二 年] 二月, 敕造聖善寺. 沙門慧範補正議大夫, 封上庸郡公. 法藏, 慧珍九 人, 並朝 [ 散]18 大夫, 封縣公. 官給奉祿, 一同正員.19

As noted above, Zanning states explicitly that sometime after being granted a fifth-rank position and enfoeffed as a subprefectural duke along with other eight monks, Huifan was promoted once again. In contrast, Zhipan tells us that Huifan’s appointment of zhengyi daifu and enfeoffment as prefectural duke 15

16 17 18 19

See JTS 42.1785, XTS 46.1186–87. Cf. Ji Yun 紀昀 (1724–1805), et al, Lidai zhiguan biao 歷 代職官表 (72 juan, completed 1789) (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1989), 6.339– 40; Hucker, Official Titles, 119, 123, 581. Da Song seng shi lüe, T 52: 2.244c24–25: 唐太平公主奏胡僧慧範為聖善寺主, 仍加三 品, 封公爵. Ibid, 3.248c16–17: 則天之後, 中宗朝, 以胡僧慧範修寺之功, 封縣公. 不行紫服. The character san 散 is missing from the original text. Fozu tongji, T 49: 40.372b21–23.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

148

Chen

was actually simultaneous with the other nine (not eight) monks’ appointment to a lower rank (chaosan daifu) and their enfeoffment to a less prestigious level of dukedom (subprefectural). This difference is corroborated by Zhipan’s subsequent report of the event, found only several lines afterwards and under the same year (without the specific month noted, but put after the fifth month): With the completion of Shengshan monastery, [the emperor] decreed that Duke of Shangyong Huifan be promoted to yinqing guanglu daifu, and assigned to serve as abbot of the monastery; that śramaṇa Wansui be promoted as a chaosan daifu, a subprefectural duke, and serve as the administrator [of the monastery]; and that śramaṇa Guangqing serve as the gongdeshi, and concurrently the dianzhong jian. 聖善寺成, 敕上庸公 慧範如 20 銀青光祿大夫, 充寺主. 沙門萬歲, 加朝散大夫, 封縣公, 充都維 那. 沙門廣清, 檢校殿中監, 充功德使.21 This means that according to Zhipan, when the monastery was successfully completed some time between the fifth and twelfth month of Shenlong 2 (June 15, 706–February 6, 707), Huifan, in the capacity of prefectural duke of Shangyong, was promoted to be a yinqing guanglu daifu and the abbot of the new monastery. Two more monks, Wansui and Guangqing (who must have been Kuoqing in Zanning’s account), were rewarded and promoted along with Huifan. On another occasion, in Zhipan’s review of official titles granted to Buddhist monks by secular authorities, the chronicler combines these two passages into one. At the beginning of the passage, he adds the important information that before this event Zhongzong had already appointed another monk, Wanhui 萬 回 (a.k.a. Wanhui 萬迴, 632–711), as Duke Fayun 法雲.22 Zhongzong enfeoffed Wanhui Duke Fayun. 中宗封萬回法雲公.  [Zhongzong] ordered Huifan to be appointed zhengyi daifu, and enfeoffed Prefectural Duke of Shangyong. Huizhen, and another (totally) nine persons, were all appointed chaosan daifu and enfeoffed as subpre-

20 21 22

如 has been emended to 加 on the basis of another edition (40.372, footnote 3). Fozu tongji, T 49: 40.372b28-c2. In principle, the expression Fayun-gong 法雲公 can also be understood as Master (or Venerable) Fayun (Dharma-clouds), a kind of honorific title. However, the context suggests that the title actually indicated an investiture, like the prefectural or subprefectural dukedoms granted to Huifan and his colleagues.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

149

fectural dukes. 敕慧範封正議大夫, 上庸郡公. 惠珍九人, 並朝散大夫, 封 縣公.

 [Zhongzong further] ordered that the title of yinqing guanglu daifu be added to Huifan, that of chaosan daifu added to Wansui, who was enfeoffed subprefectural duke; [he also appointed] Guangqing dianzhong jian, concurrently serving as gongde shi. 敕惠範加銀青光祿大夫. 萬歲朝散大夫, 封縣公. 廣清殿中監, 充功德使.23 Zanning and Zhipan: A Comparative Reading 1.3 We are now in a position to summarize the differences between Zanning and Zhipan’s accounts of Zhongzong’s extraordinary bestowal of ranks and titles upon a handful of Buddhist monks. Although the two accounts both divide the event into two phases, the division has been made in quite different ways. For Zanning, the initial phase of the construction of Shengshansi (zao Shengshansi cheng 造聖善寺成) is followed by the casting of great statue(s) (xiu daxiang zhi gong 修大像之功), both happening sometime in Shenlong 2 (January 19, 706-February 6, 707). Alternatively, Zhipan’s two phases—the initiation (chizao Shengshansi 敕造聖善寺) and completion of the monastery (Sheng­shansi cheng 聖善寺成)—happened, respectively, in the second month of Shenlong 2 (March 19–April 16, 706), and some time between the fifth and twelfth month of the same year (June 15, 706–February 6, 707). Regarding the contents of the two phases, Zanning and Zhipan also differed from each other quite drastically. For Zanning, in the first phase, nine monks (including Huifan) were appointed to a fifth-rank position (i.e. chaosan daifu) and enfeoffed as subprefectural dukes; and in the second phase, Huifan alone got further promoted (zhengyi daifu, the Shengshansi abbot, till yinqing guanglu daifu) and enfoeffed (as prefectural duke of Shangyong), joined by Wansui and Kuoqing but not the other eight monks. For Zhipan, the first phase witnessed Huifan’s promotion to the position of zhengyi daifu and being enfoeffed prefectural duke of Shangyong on the one hand, and on the other, nine more monks’ (including Fazang and Huizhen) being promoted to be chaosan daifu and enfoeffed Subprefectural dukes, while the second phase marked Huifan’s further promotion (yinqing guanglu daifu and the Shengshansi abbot), along with Wansui and Guangqing/Kuoqing’s promotion. Zanning and Huifan’s different ways of defining the two phases of this event have caused some important variations between them: Whereas Zanning explicitly confirms that Huifan was among the nine monks who were appointed chaosan daifu and enfeoffed as subprefectural dukes, Zhipan does not include him. According to Zhipan, on this 23

Fozu tongji, T 49: 51.453c11–14.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

150

Chen

occasion, Huifan was separately awarded more prestigious honors—the title of zhengyi daifu. For Zanning, however, both of these honors, the abbot of the Shengshansi and yinqing guanglu daifu, were not granted to Huifan until the successful construction of a Buddha-statue, which happened after the issuing of imperial decree ordering the construction of the monastery. Second, according to Zhipan, there were, in total, ten (Huifan in addition to nine more monks including Fazang and Huizhen)—rather than nine— Buddhist monks who were involved in the first phase of the event. Third, while Zanning tells us that the Buddha-statue brought Huifan four more honorific titles/positions, Zhipan attributes Huifan’s further appointment (to the position of yinqing guanglu daifu and the Shengshansi abbotship) to the completion of Shengshansi. This raises the problem of how to understand the relationship between the statue and the monastery; that is, whether or not the statue was so important to the monastery that the latter was not considered complete without the former. Finally, we should note one piece of information that is found in Zhipan’s account but not Zanning’s—before honoring Huifan and his colleagues, another monk renowned for his thaumaturgy, Wanhui, had already been invested with dukedom (bearing the name of Fayun). Thus, although apparently based on Zanning’s work, Zhipan’s account has noteworthy divergences. Were all these discrepancies no more than Zhipan’s reckless copying or careless summarizing of Zanning’s account? Or was Zhipan’s account actually based on different sources? No satisfactory answer can be expected until we carefully review all the relevant sources, both monastic and non-monastic. Evidence from Xizhong 1.4 Another Buddhist biographico-historical compendium, roughly contemporary to Zhipan’s Fozu tongji, Lidai biannian Shishi tongjian 歷代編年釋氏通鑑 (better known as “Shishi tongjian” 釋氏通鑑),24 only contains a passing note on this event, to the effect that Huifan and other monks received a fifth-rank position [in Shenlong 2].25

24

25

Compiled by the monk Benjue 本覺 (fl. ca.1270) sometime between 1084 (the year ZZTJ, on which it was based, was completed), and 1270 (when the earliest of its prefaces was dated). Shishi tongjian, in Shinsan Dai Nihon Zoku zōkyō 新纂大日本續藏經 (Tōkyō: Kokusho Kankōkai, 1975–1989; hereafter X), vol. 76: 8.93b24: 僧慧範等加五品階. It also puts this event after Wanhui’s award of the title of Duke Fayun.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

151

The passages in Da Song seng shi lüe are repeated, with a few sentences omitted, in a Buddhist chronicle compiled seventy-five years after Fozu tongji, Fozu lidai tongzai 佛祖歷代通載, which was completed by Nianchang 念常 (1282–1344+) in 1344.26 Except for these omissions, Nianchang introduces no new elements. The same cannot be said, however, of another Buddhist historical collection compiled almost at the same time, Lichao Shishi zijian 歷朝釋氏 資鑑 (better known as “Shishi zijian” 釋氏資鑑), by Xizhong 凞仲 (?–1336+) in 1336,27 sixty-seven years after Fozu tongji and 354 years after Da Song seng shi lüe: [In the cyclical year of] dingwei, [which fell in] the first year of the Jinglong era (October 1, 707-January 27, 708), [the emperor] bestowed [the title of] yinqing guanglu daifu, subprefectural duke of Shangyong28 to the monk Huifan. All the other nine persons were [each] simultaneously granted a title of the fifth rank, and all bestowed prefectural or subprefectural dukedom.29 Huifan made a great statue at the Changluo slope 長樂坂, and constructed Shengshansi in the Eastern Capital (i.e. Luoyang). He concurrently acted as the abbot of three monasteries, Zhongtian[si], Ximing[si] [in addition to Shengshansi]. The emperor (i.e. Zhongzong) and Empress Wei both highly esteemed him. For some time, his power became overwhelming both inside and outside [the court], and nobody dared to blame him (lit. “point a finger to him or look at him”). 丁未 景龍元年, 加僧慧範銀青光錄大夫, 上庸縣公. 餘僧九人, 並 加五品階, 賜爵郡縣公. 慧範造大像於長樂坂, 造聖善寺於東都. 兼中天 西明三寺主. 上及韋后皆重之, 一時權傾內外, 無敢指目者矣.30 26

27

28 29

30

Fozu lidai tongzai, T 49: 22.729b1–6 ： 唐中宗神龍二年，造聖善寺成. 惠範, 惠珍, 法藏, 大行, 會寂, 元壁, 仁方, 崇先, 進國九人, 加五品, 並朝散大夫. 蓋以營像修造之功也, 尋加惠範正議大夫, 上 庸郡公, 寺主. 至銀青光祿大夫. 俸料房閣, 已上同職官給. For Xizhong and his Shishi zijian, see Cao Shibang 曹仕邦, “Aiguo sengren Shi Xizhong he tade fojiao binanshi Shishi zijian” 愛國僧人釋熙仲和他的佛教編年史 >. Zhonghua foxue xuebao 中華佛學學報 16 (2003): 133–46, available online: (accessed February 13, 2015). Here, Shangyong xiangong 上庸縣公 is very likely a mistake for Shangyong jungong 上 庸郡公 (prefectural duke of Shangyong). It should be noted that according to Zanning, the nine monks were only enfoeffed subprefectural dukes (xiangong 縣公), and not prefectural dukes (jungong 郡公), although Huifan was later further enfeoffed as such. Shishi zijian, X 76: 6.192b13–16.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

152

Chen

Changluo ban 長樂坂 must be Changluopo 長樂坡, both meaning a sloped land named “Changluo.” This slope is located in the east of Chang’an, on the western side of the Chan river 滻水.31 At the end of this passage, the author adds a two-character interlinear note, tongqian 同前, which literally means “same as the above[-quoted source].” It turns out that this “above-quoted source” is a text called “Tongjian” 通鑒,32 obviously the textual source from which Xizhong has quoted this passage (or on the basis of which he made this summary). Then, what does this “tongjian” stand for? Could the famous chronicle, Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒, which, completed and presented to the throne in 1084 (about two and half centuries before the compilation of Shishi zijian), have obviously inspired the compilation of Shishi zijian even if only to judge by its title? Like the discrepancies between Zanning and Zhipan’s accounts, we must postpone the treatment of this possibility to the third section. For the time being, we should compare and appraise the differences between Xizhong’s account and the two accounts already discussed. Compared with the other two accounts, the most striking part of Xizhong’s version is that it dates the event (to be accurate, the first phase of the event [as presented in Zhipan’s account]) one year later; that is, in Jinglong 1 (October 1, 707–January 27, 708). Second, also differing from Zanning and Zhipan as well, both of whom describe the event in terms of two phases, Xizhong only presents one phase of the event: that is, Huifan’s promotion to the position of yinqing guanglu daifu and enfoefment as prefectural duke of Shangyong, along with the other nine monks’ being granted a fifth-rank position and subprefectural dukedom. Thirdly, related to this, we find that Xizhong agrees with Zhipan in believing that this event involved ten, rather than nine, monks. Finally, Xizhong here provides quite a bit of information about Huifan that is not given by Zanning, nor Zhipan, including (1) Huifan’s construction of a great statue at the Changluo slope, (2) the location of Shengshansi (in Luoyang, not in Chang’an), (3) Huifan’s concurrent abbotship of three monasteries, and (4) the unusual esteem that he managed to command from the royal couple, which helped turn him into a formidable figure within both the political and religious worlds. This suggests that the source from which Xizhong drew this account, the text he refers to as “Tongjian,” might contain further important information about Huifan.

31 32

For the location of this slope, see note 89. Shishi zijian, X 76: 6.192b16.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

153

1.5 Buddhist Sources: A Preliminary Overall Assessment So far we have examined all the known Buddhist sources regarding the remarkable case of how Zhongzong’s unconventional granting of honors and rewards to a group of Buddhist monks in quite an unconventional way. In addition to Da Song seng shi lüe, the earliest Buddhist source regarding this event, we have also closely examined four relevant later sources in the hope that this might yield a more complete picture. Contrary to what one might expect, rather than help clarify some points that remain unclear in Zanning’s account, these later sources tend to turn water even murkier by presenting new elements which appear incompatible with or even contradictory to Zanning’s account. We are first confronted with two major issues. First, when did the event happen—in 706 or 707? Second, how many monks were involved, eleven (nine monks plus Wansui and Kuoqing/Guangqing), or twelve (nine monks in addition to Huifan, plus Wansui and Kuoqing)? In other words, was Huifan one of the nine monks who were appointed to a fifth-rank position (chaosan daifu) and enfoeffed as subprefectural dukes, or was he not among the nine monks, but appointed to a position one or two rank(s) higher (zhengyi daifu [as Zhipan indicates] or yinqing guanglu daifu [as is affirmed by Xizhong]) and enfeoffed as a prefectural duke? For the first issue, we are fortunate to have some aid from a biographical source on the Avataṃsaka master Fazang.33 According to Fazang’s biographer, Korean Choe Chiwon (Ch. Cui Zhiyuan 崔致遠, 857–904+), due to his role in quelling the “rebellion” of Zhang Yizhi,34 Fazang was awarded a third-rank position in Shenlong 1 (January 30, 705–January 18, 706). Although Fazang kept declining this honor, the emperor insisted that his merits be properly recognized. As a compromise, Fazang suggested that this award be transferred to his younger brother, Kang Baozang 康寶藏 (?–706+), who was then serving as a chaoyi lang 朝議郎 (gentleman for court discussion) and the vice director 33

34

Kamata Shigeo (Chūgoku bukkyō shi 5: 88) suggests that this Fazang be identified as the Jingyusi 淨域寺 Fazang (638–715), who was renowned for his ties with the Sanjiejiao 三 階教 Cult, rather than the Avataṃsaka Fazang. Kamata offers no reason for this claim. As we will see later, that the Avataṃsaka Fazang was awarded by Zhongzong in this period is verified by one of his biographical sources (although this source makes a mistake in giving the rank conferred on him). The edition of Dang Dae Cheonboksa go saju beongyeong daedeok Beopjang hwasang jeon (Ch. Tang Da Jianfusi gu sizhu fanjing dade Fazang heshang zhuan) 唐大薦福寺故 寺主翻經大德法藏和尚傳 (hereafter Beopjang jeon) printed in the Taishō version has Zhang Yizhi as Zhang Jianzhi. For this error and the complicated issues caused by it, see Chen, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician, Appendix K.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

154

Chen

(fujian 副監) of the Directorate (jian 監) in Tongwan 統萬 City.35 This proposal was accepted and in the following year Zhongzong issued an edict to the effect that Baozang be appointed a youji jiangjun 游擊將軍 (mobile corpse commander) and a Zuo Guoyi[fu] duowei 左果毅 [ 府] 都尉 (left commandant of the Left Courageous Garrison) [belonging to] the Weiwei 威衛 (Awesome Guard) based in the Commandery (fu 府) of Longping 隆平.36 Thus, according to Choe, as early as 705, Fazang had already been honored with a third-rank title. This does not seem compatible with what Zanning’s contention in Da Song seng shi lüe, that in Shenlong 2, Fazang was awarded a fifth-rank position. If Fazang had already received a position two ranks higher one year earlier, this award would not be possible. Thus, either Choe or Zanning must have made a mistake here regarding the rank of the positions offered to Fazang, in 705 and 706. The high quality of Choe’s biography as a whole37 and Zanning’s reputation as a poor historian might incline one to reject Zanning. However, after scrutinizing both texts, I have turned to the opposite: on this matter, it is Choe who has slipped. First of all, as noted above (1.1), the chaosan daifu was indeed a title of the fifth rank. On the other hand, youji jiangjun— the position that was awarded to Kang Baozang in lieu of the position originally bestowed on Fazang—was of the fifth rank too.38 Given that it was on behalf of his brother that Kang Baozang received the new position, we may assume that the position initially offered to Fazang was also of the fifth rank. It is hard to believe that after offering Fazang a title of third rank in 705, Zhongzong, one year later, could have bestowed on him a title two ranks lower (especially if Fazang had repeatedly declined the third rank), which would have been an insult on the intended recipient. Thus, if the position that Fazang was offered in 705 was of the same rank as that which he and another eight monks were officially awarded in 706, we can believe that it was also a title of the same rank that Fazang was granted in 705 (that is, chaosan daifu). In other words, the 35

36 37 38

Tongwan probably referred to the city of Tongwang, the capital of Helian Bobo 赫連勃 勃 (a.k.a. Helian Qugai 赫連屈丐, r. 407–25), who ordered to build it in 413 and was completed five years later. The credibility of this reading is borne out by the fact that as of 680 (or, which seems more likely, 690) Fazang’s parents were still staying in Xiazhou 夏州, in which Tongwan City was located. See Beopjang jeon, T 50: 283b17–18. Fazang’s hometown is a rather tricky issue discussed in Chen, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician, Chapter 3.2. Beopjang jeon, T 50: 283b18-c1. See Chen, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician, Chapt 2, for the high quality of Choe Chiwon’s biography for Fazang. Like the chaosan daifu, the youji jiangjun was also of “rank five, grade two, class two” (5b2) (cong wupin xia 從五品下). See XTS 46.1197.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

155

process of rewarding Fazang had already been initiated in 705, although the edict announcing it was not issued until one year later. The edict awarding Kang Baozang as quoted by Choe might have been issued sometime after the edict awarding Fazang (and the other eight monks), when the government became assured of Fazang’s determination to decline the honor. Thus, in addition to strengthening the veracity of the account that Zhongzong rewarded some monks with an official title and dukedom, this record in Fazang’s biography, despite a certain degree of inaccuracy, also supports the assumption that the event happened in 706, not 707. Not only does Fazang’s case help us decide the date of the event, but it also clarifies a mystery surrounding this unusual event—why did Zhongzong, barely one year after he was re-enthroned, feel the necessity to reward these monks in such an exceptional way? Taken at face value, the Buddhist sources under examination, from those stemming from Zanning to Xizhong, might give one the impression that all these things were done in recognition of their contributions to construction, first of a monastery called Shengshansi, and then of a Buddha-statue. Fazang’s case shows, however, that this was not the whole picture, since he was rewarded mainly because of his role in the 705 coup. Given that the title “subprefectural duke” (xiangong 縣公) actually stood for the more explicit title “subprefectural duke of state-founding” (kaiguo xiangong 開國縣公),39 it seems that in 690 and 706 as well, these two groups of nine monks were both recognized as “state-founding merit-officials” for bot hthe Great Zhou and the Great Tang, the latter of which was actually newly restored after being overthrown by the former for just one and half decades. We can therefore assume that at least some of the nine monks were also rewarded in 706 due to their service to Zhongzong and his supporters in the 705 coup.  Regarding the number of monks involved in this event, an important clue comes from a similar case involving Empress Wu and some monks, on which Zhongzong here might have modeled himself. On December 4 or 5, 690,40 about seven weeks after she was declared the founding emperor of the Great Zhou dynasty (on October 16, 690), the empress conferred a subprefectural dukedom, a purple kaṣāya (zijisha 紫袈裟) and a “silver bag for the tortoise”

39

40

Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Author, and Function of the Tunhuang Document S. 6502. Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2005), 112n77. Tianshou 1.10.29 (renshen), recorded in ZZTJ 204.6469.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

156

Chen

(yinguidai 銀龜袋) on each of the nine or ten monks who on August 16, 690,41 presented to the throne a commentary which served well the ideological agenda set for the unprecedented female rule of the Chinese empire.42 It is interesting to note that different sources disagree on the number of the monks who received these honors from Empress Wu on that day. Whereas the Zizhi tongjian gives it as nine, others say that the number should be ten (nine monks plus a tenth, Huaiyi 懷義 [better known as Xue Huaiyi 薛懷義; ?–694], who was their leader).43 Antonino Forte has presented some evidence for why there were only nine monks involved here; in other words, why Huaiyi actually did not receive these honors at the time. This was simply because, according to Forte, on February 7, 690, ten months before this honoring ceremony, Huaiyi had already received the title of the Duke of E 鄂國公, a title of the first degree second class which was far superior to the subprefectural dukedom that was offered to nine of his colleagues on December 4 or 5, 690.44 Following this precedent, Huifan’s exclusion from the nine monks who were enfeoffed as subprefectural dukes became more comprehensible: for he had been granted more prestigious ranks and titles. Is this assumption supported by any evidence? Unfortunately, we are not able to extract any further information from the Buddhist sources that we have dealt with so far. On the contrary, the fact that Zanning was able to list all of the nine monks, which other Buddhist authors (including Zhipan and Xizhong) were incapable of doing, suggests that Zanning had access to some primary material related to the event and therefore that his testimony should not be dismissed lightly. Thus, at the present stage of our research, the limited existence is too sparse to say anything certain on this tricky issue. It might therefore be wise to put it aside and revisit it when and if we become better informed as our exploration evolves. No matter whether Huifan was among the nine monks or not, it remains certain that in 706 Zhongzong conferred subprefectural dukedom on nine 41 42 43

44

Zaichu 1.7.7 (xinsi), recorded in ZZTJ 204.6464. Forte, Political Propaganda, Chapt 1. ZZTJ 204.6469; cf. Fozu tongji, T 49: 51.453c9–10. For the sources in support of ten monks, see JTS (6.121), Da Song seng shi lüe (T 54: 3.248c7–12), and Longxing fojiao biannian tonglun 隆興佛教編年通論 (X 75: 14.178). For the names of these nine monks, see Forte, Political Propaganda, 87–95. Forte, Political Propaganda, 96. Huaiyi’s being enfeoffed Principality of E is recorded in his JTS biography (183.4742). Forte has examined more evidence in Forte, “On the Origin of the Purple Kaṣāya in China,” eds. Giovanni Verardi & Silvio Vita, Buddhist Asia 1: Papers from the First Conference of Buddhist Studies Held in Naples in May 2001 (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2003), 145–66.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

157

monks, an act echoing his mother’s important move sixteen years earlier. Zhongzong, however, did not simply copy his mother’s ceremonial gesture. In fact, except for the subprefectural dukedom, these two groups of monks received quite different honors and privileges. The nine monks in 706 did not receive the “silver bag for the tortoise” and purple kaṣāya that their counterparts did sixteen years earlier, the latter part of which has already been pointed out by Zhipan.45 Instead, they each received an official title, chaosan daifu, and a matching salary. Furthermore, although in the remaining years of her reign Empress Wu is not known to have extended this singular honor to other Buddhist monks,46 Zhongzong was more generous: not only did he promote Huifan further, but he also added another name (Wansui) to the list of monks. Two more sources, one monastic and the other secular, also inform us that some time around February 2, 707 (Shenlong 2.12.25), Zhongzong proposed to bestow a fifth rank title on a monk and appoint him as the administrator of Jianfusi 薦福寺 on the condition that he caused snow to fall, and that a fifth rank title was awarded to a woman whose body was covered with auspicious images.47 45 46

47



See note 17. It should be noted, however, that sometime later, Empress Wu was said to have bestowed a purple kaṣāya on another person—a three year old boy who was able to recite Dayun jing 大雲經. The purple kaṣāya was awarded to the boy as a token of her pleasure and appreciation for his precociousness and her wish that he would become a monk in due time. It seems that this boy did not let her down, becoming as he did an eminent monk with the dharma-name of “Huijing” 慧警 (687?-?) when he grew up (he eventually became the Abbot of Chongfusi 崇福寺 in Taiyuan 太原, which was his hometown and which was not far from the empress’s native place). See Song gaoseng zhuan, T 50: 24.862c-863a. This Buddhist monk was called Qingxu 清虛 (active 696–712), from Huiyisi 惠義寺 in Zhizhou 梓州 (in present-day Santai 三台, Sichuan). According to a miracle collection compiled in 718, he succeeded in bringing down more and more snow with his spiritual prowess and through his self-immolation acts (he cut off two of his fingers in the course of praying for snow). However, Meng Xianzhong 孟獻忠 (?–718+), the compiler of this miracle collection, does not tell us whether or not Zhongzong eventually honored his promise to the monk (probably not given that his self-immolation caused controversies among both lay people and Buddhist monks, with the later represented by the famous scholar-monk Yijing 義淨 [635–713]). See Jin’gang boruo jing jiyan ji 金剛般若經集驗 記, X 87: 2.460b13–461a2.  A native of Yingzhou 瀛州, the woman’s body was said to have been covered in pictures of stūpas and temples. During the Jinglong era (707–10), after catching the attention of the imperially commissioned inspector (anchashi 按察使) in her prefecture, she was presented to Zhongzong, who kept her in one of his palace chapels. Zhang

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

158

Chen

Finally, it is noteworthy that according to Zanning, one more monk (Kuoqing/Guoqing), although not known to have received a dukedom, was directly appointed to two positions with real power, one religious (gongde shi), the other secular (dianzhong jian). This reminds one that Empress Wu also once (i.e. in 694) appointed her favorite monk, Huaiyi, as a grand general (da jiangjun 大將軍).48 However, it turns out that this record of Kuoqing/ Guangqing might have resulted from a misconception on the part of Zanning. Bukong had a disciple named Daji 大濟, who was appointed “missionary of constantly cultivating merits” (changxiu gongdeshi 常修功德使), and “acting director of Palace Administration” (jianjiao dianzhong jian 撿校殿中監).49 Daji is similarly identified in Zanning’s biography for Huizhong 慧忠 (682–769).50 Wang Qinruo 王欽若 (962–1025), on the other hand, tells us that Daji, whose dharma name was actually Kuoqing, was appointed acting director of Palace Administration in the first month of Dali 4 (February 11-March 12, 769): In this month (i.e. the first month of the fourth year of the Dali era), [the emperor Daizong] appointed Meditation Master Daji 大濟 (that is,) Kuoqing, who was a “missionary of cultivating merits,” to be “acting director of Palace Administration.” Kuoqing was a monk of Xingtangsi in the capital. Because of his effort to cultivate merits [for the state], he received favor [from the emperor], who made an exception by bestowing on him a robe and a horse from the [imperial] corral. He entered the forbidden inner palaces freely. Previously, he was awarded the tile of “Daji.” Now, he

48

49

50

Zhuo 張鷟 (660?–740) ends his report by observing that no one knows what happened to the woman after Empress Wei was executed. See Chaoye qianzai 朝野僉載 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1979), 5.114; quoted in Taiping guangji 太平廣記 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1961), 288.2293. Edward Schafer mentions this as an example of “human tribute” during the Tang; see Schafer, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand: A Study of T'ang Exotics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963), 50. My thanks to James Benn for calling my attention to this reference. While JTS (183.4742) places this appointment to the Yongchang era (January 27, 689– December 17, 689), ZZTJ (205.6493–94) dates it March 17, 694 (Changshou 3.2.16 [gengwu]). Cf. Wang Wenjin 王文锦, et al (punctuated and annotated), Tongdian 通典 (5 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1988), 198.5435, which also places it in Changshou 3 (December 2, 693–June 8, 694). See Bukong’s funeral epitaph composed by his disciple Feixi 飛錫 (fl. 742–805) in 774, Da Tang gu dade Kaifu yitong sansi shi Hongluqing Suguogong Daxingshansi Da Guangzhi sanzang heshang zhibei 大唐故大德開府儀同三司試鴻臚卿肅國公大興善寺 大廣智三藏和上之碑, Bukong biaozhi ji 不空表制集, T 52: 4.849, b20–21: 勅常修功 德使撿校殿中監大興善寺沙門大濟. Song gaoseng zhuan, T 50: 9.763b13–14: 勅常修功德使, 檢校殿中監興唐寺沙門大 濟.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

159

was further honored with an official rank. Monks in the capital were all awestruck by him. 是月 (= 大歷四年正月), 以修功德使大濟禪師廓清檢 校殿中監. 廓清京城興唐寺僧也. 以修功德承恩, 特賜袈裟及廐馬. 出入 禁中無時. 初賜號大濟, 至是又寵以班秩. 京師諸僧咸憚之.51

It thus becomes clear that Kuoqing was actually a monk under the reign of Daizong (r. 762–79) who, in the capacity of missionary of cultivating merits, was made acting director of Palace Administration in 769. In other words, either there were two Kuoqings, one in Daizong’s (r. 762–79) reign and the other in Zhongzong’s (r. 705–10), or Zanning has here simply mistaken Kuoqing as a monk active under the reign of Zhongzong. A later source, Fozu tongji of Zhipan, renamed this monk Guangqing 廣清. This has inclined some scholars to assume that Guangqing was the correct name of the monk who acted as the missionary of cultivating merits and acting director of the Palace Administration under the reign of Zhongzong.52 This said, given that the monk named Guangqing is unknown otherwise and the similarity in form between 廣 and 廓, I suspect that Zhipan either miscopied Kuoqing as Guangqing, or he, realizing the unlikelihood that two homonymous monks could have assumed two completely identical positions under the reigns of two Tang emperors separated by more than half a century, deliberately changed Kuoqing to Guangqing to mislead the reader to assume that besides Kuoqing there existed another monk named Guangqing. However, we shall note that Zanning has identified the so-called Kuoqing under Zhongzong in terms of exactly the same two identical titles ([ 常] 修功德使 and 檢校殿中監) that Kuoqing under Daizong was introduced to us by three other sources: Bukong’s funeral epitaph, Cefu yuangui, and Song gaoseng zhuan, a work compiled by Zanning himself. This fact strongly suggests that Zanning has here simply mistakenly located Kuoqing (i.e. Daji) under the reign of Zhongzong, under which there was actually no monk named this way and bearing these titles.53 This remarkable event is indeed of interest to scholars of Sui-Tang religions and politics for several reasons. Not only were Buddhist monks awarded dukedoms, salaries, and other privileges that were generally reserved to secular 51 52 53

CFYG 52.577a. See Tang Yijie 湯一介, “Tangdai gongdeshi kao: Du Zizhi tongjian daji” 唐代功德使 考 : 讀《資治通鑒》劄記, Wenxian 文獻 2 (1985): 60–65. For clarification and the importance of Daji/Kuoqing in Tang Esoteric Buddhism, see Chen Jinhua, Crossfire: Shingon-Tendai Strife as Seen in Two Twelfth-century Polemics, with Special References to Their Background in Tang China (Studia Philologica Buddhica Monograph Series no. 25; Tōkyō: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies in Tōkyō. 2010), 194–95.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

160

Chen

officials, but also a considerable number of monks were involved. Although so far we have made some progress in dealing with several major issues related to this event (i.e. its date, the number of monks it involved, and its causes and purposes, etc.), many further aspects remain enshrouded in mist. In addition to the major issues that we have attempted to solve in vain (i.e. the number of monks involved), we still have to address the following problems. First, it is easy to discover that at the epicenter/nexus of these issues is a monastery, Shengshansi. One cannot help but wonder what kind of monastery it was: from what historical circumstances did it spring, and what political and religious purposes was it supposed to serve, at least under the reign of Zhongzong? Second, related to the mysterious Shengshansi, we are also intrigued by the statue which was likewise deeply implicated in this event. We cannot even be certain as to whether only one statue or two were involved. In analyzing the differences between Zannning and Zhipan’s accounts, I have already noted the relationship between the monastery and the statue. The fact, as reported by Zanning, that Huifan and Wansui were appointed the abbot, and the (or an) administrator of Shengshansi after the completion of the statue strongly suggests that the statue was very likely erected within the monastery. However, Shishi tongjian mentions a statue that Huifan built at the Changluo slope in Chang’an. This brings further uncertainties to understanding the relationship between the monastery and the statue. Was the statue mentioned in Zanning’s account identical with or different from the Changluo statue? To this point, nothing certain can be said. First of all, while Zanning repeatedly assures us that the statue was com­ pleted,54 Shishi tongjian uses an ambiguous expression (zao 造), which could mean “had something successfully built” or “attempted to build something futilely,” to describe the Changluo statue. Thus, considering both Zanning and Xizhong’s accounts, we have to be, for now at least, content with a disturbing ambiguity about these two statues that appear in Zanning and Xizhong’s accounts: Huifan was engaged in building two statues, one completed but at an uncertain location (either Shengshansi, or elsewhere like the Changluo slope), and the other with an uncertain result (completed or not) but a certain location, the Changluo slope. If we suppose that these two statues were one and 54

The character xiang (image or statue) appears twice in Zanning’s account. First, in the sentence “[due to] their merits of casting (or repairing) the Great Statue” (xiu daxiang zhi gong ye 修大像之功也); second, in another similar sentence “because of the success of building the statue” (yi yinxiang cheng ye 以營像成也). In both cases, Zanning seems absolutely certain of the statue’s completed status.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

161

the same, then it must have been built successfully at the Changluo slope. If we assume that they were different, we have to then consider two possibilities for each of them. For the first statue:



1.1 1.2

It could have been located within Shengshansi, or in a third location which was neither Shengshansi nor the Changluo slope.

For the second statue (i.e. the Changluo statue): 2.1 It could have been completed, or 2.2 left unfinished. At this moment, we are still not prepared to decide whether or not we are faced with one single statue, or two distinct ones; or supposing the existence of two separate statues, where the first statue was located and what happened to the second. Much less are we prepared to address the relationship between Shengshansi and the statue(s), and the two statues’ interrelationship.  Finally and probably most puzzlingly, except for the monk Fazang—suppose he could be identified with the renowned Avataṃsaka master so named, a fact which, fortunately for us, seems to have been verified by Fazang’s Korean biographer—and probably also a couple of other monks,55 all of them mentioned in these Buddhist sources along with Huifan are little known or otherwise unknown historical actors. Huifan is the most visible figure involved in the construction of the statue(s). Not only does he stand at the very top of the list of the nine recipients in the Zanning account, but he was also soon further honored—promoted to a more eminent rank, bestowed a more prestigious dukedom, and nominated as the head of the remarkable monastery. The prominence of this monk encourages one to assume that he was a Buddhist leader in his day and accordingly, that he must have left some traces somewhere in Buddhist historiography. However, to my disappointment and surprise, except for the above-examined sources, I have discerned no other 55

As I have suggested elsewhere, the monk Daxing might have been a prominent Pure Land leader, while Wansui was very likely engaged in a mammoth project of building a great statue of the Buddha in the last few years of Empress Wu’s reign. See Chapter Two of my forthcoming book, Collusion and Collison: Buddhism and Daoism’s Political and Economic Roles in the Eighth Century (704–713); and Chen Jinhua, “The Statues and Monks of Shengshan Monastery: Money and Maitreyan Buddhism in Tang China,” Asia Major 19.1–2 (2006): 111–60.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

162

Chen

trace of him in Buddhist sources. This creates an even greater puzzle about this mysterious man: who was he, and how may we reconcile the apparent contradiction between his prominence in Zhongzong’s court and his conspicuous absence in Chinese Buddhist sources? 2

Huifan as Presented in Secular Sources

The pursuit of solutions to these issues in Buddhist texts proved to be quite frustrating. Unexpectedly, when I looked beyond the Buddhist literature, I found some intriguing clues to the puzzles surrounding Huifan. In marked contrast to his scanty presence in Buddhist texts, Huifan is one of the most amply documented Buddhist monks in secular sources. The secular sources about Huifan can be divided into two types, one official and the other non-official. The former mainly consists of the two officially compiled histories for the Tang dynasty (Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書 and Xin Tangshu 新唐書, completed in 945 and 1060, respectively), a chronicle (Zizhi tongjian, completed in 1084), and two compendiums of historical sources drawing from earlier sources, mostly no longer extant: Tang huiyao 唐會要 (completed and presented to the throne in 961), which is exclusively about the Tang history, and Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜 (compiled between 1005 and 1013), which covers various pre-Song periods. All of these five officially sposnsored historical works were compiled during the Five Dynasties period (907–79) (Jiu Tangshu) and the Northern Song dynasty (960–1127) (the remaining four), while the five nonofficial sources, all originating from the Tang, include epigraphic sources, miscellanea, the literati genre known as biji 筆記 (“casual notes”), and so on. For the sake of clarity, I will discuss the relevant accounts from these sources in chronological order of the events that involved Huifan. An important exception to this general rule shall be made, however, for a relatively lengthy account (and assessment) of Huifan which turns out to be the earliest of its likes. 2.1 The Image of a “Villain Monk” Presented by Chaoye Qianzai The earliest report of this extraordinary monk is provided by Chaoye qianzai 朝 野僉載, written by the Tang scholar Zhang Zhuo 張鷟 (660?–740), who died twenty-seven years after the monk’s death (as to be seen soon). This suggests that his report might have been at least partly an eye-witness one: Under the [Great] Zhou dynasty, there was a Brahmanic (Indian) monk Huifan, who was treacherous, false, and skillful in alluring people like a fox. By means of his evil skills, he seduced and confused people. Ruthless,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

163

he was alert and resourceful like a rat. He used the “left-hand paths” to manipulate political power. Considering him a “Sage-monk,” [Empress] Zetian bestowed on him an abundance of gifts and awards. Princess Taiping regarded him as a “Brahminic king” and was even more generous in treating and flattering him. She helped him to grow his entourage (literally “wings”), and enhance his prestige. After Emperor Xiaohe (i.e. Zhongzong)56 came to throne, he often entered and left the “Side Palaces” (for imperial consorts) on an imperial chariot. After the Taishang[huang] 太上 [ 皇] (Emperor Emeritus; i.e. Ruizong) mounted the throne, he was provided with [imperial] attendants (i.e. eunuchs) and was free to come in and go out of the “Forbidden Gates” [of the imperial palaces]. Whenever he entered the palace, he was awarded different kinds of silk, various utensils of gold and silver. He was quite lofty in temperament, and his manners and air quite elegant and exaggerated. The jewels and rare treasures in the Inner Treasury were [gradually] [shifted to and] accumulated in the monk’s residence. He forced the interpretation of the abnormal and auspicious, and arbitrarily judged between the disastrous and the fortunate. Emperor Shenwu (i.e. Xuanzong) had him executed, and [people in] the capital (i.e. Chang’an) applauded. 周有婆羅門僧惠 範, 姦矯狐魅, 挾邪作蠱, 咨趄鼠黠, 左道弄權. 則天以為聖僧, 賞賚甚重. 太平以為梵王, 接納彌優. 生其羽翼, 長其光價. 孝和臨朝, 常乘官馬, 往 還宮掖. 太上登極, 從以給使, 出入禁門. 每入, 即賜綾羅、金銀器物. 氣 岸甚高, 風神傲誕. 內府珍寶, 積在僧家. 矯說妖祥, 妄陳禍福. 神武斬之, 京師稱快.57

A few words are needed on the date of this seminal account. Two things are noteworthy. One, while Zhongzong was referred to by his posthumous title (shihao 謐號) Xiaohe, Ruizong is here merely mentioned in terms of his status as the emeritus emperor (Taishang[huang]), rather than the posthumous title—Dasheng zhen huangdi 大聖貞皇帝— appeneded to honor his spirit when he died on July 13, 716 (Kaiyuan 4.6.20 [jiazi]).58 This implies that Ruizong was probably still alive when Zhang Zhuo wrote this general account on 56

57 58

Xiaohe was Zhongzong’s posthumous title, which was proposed by his officials to honor his spirit on October 16, 710 (Jingyun 1.9.19 [dingmao]). See JTS 7.180; cf. XTS 4.112 and ZZTJ 207.6578. Chaoye qianzai 5.114; quoted in Taiping guangji 288.2292, with a few slight variances. See JTS 7.162, XTS 5.120, ZZTJ 206.6639/211.6718–19, for the date of Ruizong’s death and his posthumous title. While JTS has the posthumous title as Dasheng zhen huangdi 大聖貞 皇帝, both XTS and ZZTJ have it as Dasheng zhen huangdi 大聖真皇帝.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

164

Chen

Huifan. Second, Zhang Zhuo refers to Xuanzong by “Shenwu;” that is, Kaiyuan Shenwu Huangdi 開元神武皇帝 (Emperor Shenwu of the Kaiyuan Era), a title the emperor assumed on December 20, 713 (Kaiyuan 1.11.28 [xuzi]), at the recommendation of his officials.59 We therefore can assume that this account was written sometime between December 20, 713 and July 13, 716—within three years of Huifan’s death. Zhang Zhuo depicts Huifan as greedy, unscrupulous, and politically aggressive, a schemer who enjoyed the patronage and esteem of three successive sovereigns—Empress Wu of the Zhou, as well as Zhongzong and Ruizong of the Tang (along with Princess Taiping). We are also told that he relied on his “left-hand paths,” which in the literate Chinese circles indicates some esoteric, shamanic tricks, or simply black magic. All of the sources underscore the avarice of this monk, who succeeded in amassing a fortune by means of the exceptional favor that he received from the emperors. One aspect of this account in particular might strike the reader; that is, by mentioning that this monk was allowed to enter the side palaces for imperial consorts, Zhang Zhuo hints that this monk had a special appeal to the female royal family members, including Empress Wei and Princess Taiping. Combining this information with a comment Zhang Zhuo makes on Huifan at the very beginning: “he was treacherous, false, and skillful at alluring people like a fox. By means of his evil skills, he seduced and confused people” (奸矯狐魅, 挾邪作 蠱), one gets the impression that this monk seems to have been sexually associated with some members of the royal families—either directly (through maintaining illicit sexual relationships with them), or indirectly (perhaps by initiating them in some exotic Indian sexual techniques, not unlike what some official historians accused the fifth century monk Tanmochen 曇摩讖 [var. Damochen 達摩讖; Skt. Dharmakṣema, 385–433] of doing60). 2.2 Huifan in 705–06: Honors and Accusations Before the abrupt end of female ruler Empress Wu’s watershed reign and the Tang restoration in 705, there are few records of Huifan’s life. Not unexpectedly, even these reports of the earlier phases of this unusual monk’s character were already laden with controversies.

59 60

JTS 8.171, XTS 5.122, ZZTJ 210.6691. For this kind of accusation against Dharmakṣema, see Wei shu 魏書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974), 99.2208–09, discussed in Chen Jinhua, “The Indian Buddhist Missionary Dharmaksema (385–433): A New Dating of His Arrival in Guzang and of His Translations,” T’oung-p’ao: Revue internationale de sinologie 90.4–5 (2004): 215–63.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

165

2.2.1 Impeachment from Huan Yanfan in 705 In a Tang anecdotal collection, Da Tang xinyu 大唐新語, compiled about one century after Huifan’s death, the author Liu Su 劉肅 (fl. 820) includes Huifan, a “barbarian monk,”61 along with several “mountain-men” (shanren 山人) (i.e. recluses) including Zheng Pusi 鄭普思 (?–706?) and Ye Jingneng 葉靜能 (?–710), in a group of “evil-doers” who, by virtue of their “left-hand paths,” obtained free access to the forbidden palaces.62 Court official Huan Yanfan 桓彥範 (653–706) vehementy objected to the Brahmianic monk’s free access to the inner corridors of power. He submitted a strongly-worded memorial to the emperor on the necessity of putting an end to the improper imperial favoritism extended to these “wielders of evil arts.” The memorial was unheeded. Liu Su’s account is brief, providing little detail of the confrontation between this Huan Yanfan and a group of religious figures including Huifan. All these details shall be sought from this fighter’s official biographies and other relevant sources. According to his earlier (and more detailed) official biography, some time between February 28 and March 28, 705, shortly after helping Zhang Jianzhi stage the court coup in 705, Huan Yanfan63 submitted to Zhongzong a memorial that targeted Huifan but went unnoticed by the emperor: There are profuse rumors and gossip among people in the capital that the barbarian monk Huifan has wrongly used the teachings of the Buddha, misleading the empress and [other] imperial consorts with his tricks. He is allowed to enter and leave the forbidden hidden recesses (i.e. inner palaces) [freely], besmirching and intervening in the court affairs. Your Majesty went incognito to his residence several times. With the norms regulating the relationship between the superior and subordinate recklessly disregarded, the dignity and solemnity [of the sovereign] has been damaged. [I,] Your Majesty’s servant, also heard that in order to promote the [moral] transformation and bring about good rule, one must encourage people of virtue; and that in order to make the state prosperous and pacify the people, the utmost priority must be the removal of evil persons. Therefore Confucius said, “Those who wield the ‘left-hand paths’ to 61 62

63

The original has guseng 故 僧 , an obvious error for huseng 胡僧. Da Tang xinyu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1984), 2.34: 又有故僧惠範、山人   鄭普 思 、 葉 靜 能 等 , 並 挾 左 道 , 出 入 宮 禁 . 彥 範 等切諫, 並不從. 後彥範等反及 禍. His biographies at JTS 91.2927ff, XTS 120.4309 ff. His works were once collected into a three-fascicle collection (recorded in XTS 60.1601), which is not extant now.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

166

Chen

intervene in the court affairs should be executed; those who endanger others by resorting to [the power] of ghosts and deities should be executed.”64 Now, the crimes of Huifan are not different from what [was condemned by Confucius]. Should he not be executed immediately, turmoil in country will be unavoidable. The evil must be eradicated from the root, and one should not hesitate to get rid of the depraved. It is the wish of Your Majesty’s servant that Your Majesty, with heavenly intelligence, have him quickly punished and demoted! 京師喧喧, 道路籍籍, 皆云胡僧 慧範矯託佛教, 詭惑后妃, 故得出入禁闈, 撓亂時政. 陛下又輕騎微行, 數 幸其室. 上下媟黷, 有虧尊嚴. 臣抑嘗聞興化致理, 必由進善；康國寧人, 莫大棄惡. 故孔子曰 : “ 執左道以亂政者殺; 假鬼神以危人者殺.” 今慧範 之罪, 不殊於此也. 若不急誅, 必生變亂. 除惡務本, 去邪勿疑. 實願天聰, 早加裁貶 !65

Here Huan Yanfan makes a strong testimony to the intimate relationship that Huifan kept with both Zhongzong and his consorts, which was, according to him, built and maintained thanks to the “left-hand arts” that the monk employed. Huan Yanfan sternly admonishes the ruler that the nature of the monk’s skill would cause severe consequences for the state. Huan Yanfan’s remonstration is repeated, in less length and with some slight variations, in his Xin Tangshu biography.66 Neither of the two Tang histories bothers to tell us when the memorial was submitted. Zizhi tongjian also mentions this part of the memorial and dates it to Shenlong 1 (January 30, 705-January 18, 706) (and sometime before the fourth month [April 28–May 26, 705]).67 Cefu yuangui, which also preserves this memorial as completely as 64

65 66 67

These two sentences were derived from the chapter of “Wangzhi” 王制, Liji 禮記 : Based on these Splitting words so as to break (the force of) the laws; confounding names so as to change what had been definitely settled; practicing corrupt ways so as to throw government into confusion: all guilty of these things were put to death. …. Those who gave false reports about (appearances of ) spirits, about seasons and days, about consultings of the tortoise-shell and stalks, so as to perplex the multitudes: these were put to death. 析言破律, 乱名改作, 执左道以乱政, 杀; … 假于鬼神、时日、卜筮 以疑众, 杀. (Duanju shisan jing jingwen 斷句十三經經文 [Taibei: Taiwan Kaiming shudian 臺灣開明書店, 1965], 26; James Legge [trans.], The Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Confucianism [The Li Ki, Part III & IV, vol. xxvii & xxviii; Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1966], III: 237; italics mine) JTS 91.2929–2930. XTS 120.4311 (see Appendix 2.B). ZZTJ 208.6585, in which Sima Guang doesn't quote the part in Huan Yanfan’s memorial particularly targeted at Huifan, but confines himself to such a brief remark: “[Huan]

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

167

does Jiu Tangshu, dates its submission in early of Shenlong 1 (706).68 Wang Pu 王溥 (922–82), the Tang huiyao compiler, provides a relatively accurate date: the second month of Shenlong 1, which lasted from February 28 to March 28, 705.69 Before referring to this memorial, Sima Guang makes a general comment on the favoritism Zhongzong and his empress extended to Huifan: Previously, the “barbarian monk” Huifan associated with the dignities by means of his evil and preposterous schemes. He maintained an intimate relationship with Zhang Yizhi and his brother(s). Empress Wei (of Zhongzong) was also in good terms with him. After Yizhi was killed, Empress Wei claimed that Huifan participated in the plot [against the Zhang brothers]. Because of his merits, he was promoted to be a yinqing guanglu daifu and enfeoffed Subprefectural70 Duke of Shangyong. He was free to enter the palaces and the emperor visited his place incognito several times. 先是, 胡僧慧範以妖妄遊權貴之門. 與張易之兄弟善. 韋后 亦重之. 及易之誅, 復稱慧範預其謀. 以功加銀青光祿大夫, 賜爵上庸縣 公. 出入宮掖, 上數微行, 幸其舍.71

While part of this passage was clearly derived from Huan Yanfan’s memorial,72 the rest of it seems to have been based on an interlinear note in Cefu yuangui, or an earlier source from which the compliers of Cefu yuangui lifted the note.73

68 69 70 71 72 73



Yanfan further submitted a memorial contending that Huifan, who manipulated lefthand arts and meddled with court affairs, should be executed.” 彥範復表言慧範執 左 道 以 亂 政 , 請 誅 之 . See Appendix 2.B. CFYG 328.3875a-b; the memorial preserved there is completely identical with that in JTS, except for a few slight variations. Tang huiyao (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1955; hereafter THY), 61.907–08. The THY version looks closer to the XTS one. See Appendix 2.B. It is important to note that the principality here is denoted as a subprefectural one (xiangong 縣公), rather than prefectural (jungong 郡公). ZZTJ 208.6585. The last two lines in this ZZTJ passage < 上數微行, 幸其舍 >, for example, are based on these two lines in the memorial: 陛下又輕騎微行, 數幸其室. See these lines in an interlinear note Wang Qinruo and his assistants added to Huifan after he is introduced as the subject of Wei Chuangong’s accusation (for this accusation, see below, 2.3.1): 惠 範者 , 長 安 胡 僧 也 . 嘗 好 游 權 門 , 與 易 之兄弟相善. 後張易之等伏誅, 又 妄 稱 預 謀 . 遂 賜 爵 上 庸 郡 公 , 加 銀 青 光 祿大夫. 俸祿同于職事. ( CFYG 515.6160a)

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

168

Chen

Three main points may be gleaned from this passage from Zizhi tongjian. First, Huifan used his sorcery (yaowan 妖妄) to associate himself with persons in power, including the Zhang brothers and Empress Wei. Second, after the Zhang brothers were killed, Huifan was credited for participating in the plot against them and therefore was awarded honorific and official titles. The official and honorific titles Zhongzong bestowed, yinqing guanglu daifu and [sub-] prefectural duke of Shangyong, which Zanning has noted as a result of his merit in constructing Shengshansi, are here presented as recognition of his role in the 705 coup. This echoes the case of Fazang as is described by his Korean biographer. Finally, with free access to the imperial seraglio and other hidden palaces, Huifan attracted Zhongzong to visit him frequently and incognito at his private residence. Of these three points, the third has been high­lighted in Huan Yanfan’s memorial, although Huan does not specify that Huifan was closely associated with the Zhang brothers, against whom he later turned, of which Sima Guang sounded skeptical. Further, Huan Yanfan’s memorial does not say either that Huifan was honored with the two titles due to his reputed contribution to the fall of the Zhang brothers. Let us try to determine how plausible it could be to assume Huifan’s role in the 705 coup, and further to correlate it with his recognition by the government in 706. Given the close relationship that Empress Wu maintained with Huifan and with the two Zhang brothers, it is plausible that the Buddhist monk befriended the Zhang brothers. What about his alleged betrayal of the Zhang brothers at the last moment? In discussing Fazang’s case, I have already observed how Fazang, originally a confidant to Empress Wu and a likely friend of the Zhang brothers,74 sensing the shifting political tides, eventually chose to side with Zhongzong’s supporters in removing the two Zhangs and edging the empress out of the political arena. In the edict that Zhongzong issued in 706 on the occasion of rewarding Fazang, the emperor acknowledges the Avataṃsaka



74

A similar passage can be found in XTS (83.3651 [cf. Appendix 2.B]; to be translated and discussed below, 2.3.1), in which Huifan’s promotion to a third-rank position is attributed to Princess Taiping, and not Zhongzong and/or his empress, as is hinted in the corresponding passages in CFYG and JTS. Fazang’s relationship with the Zhang brothers could be traced back to at least 687, when he collaborated with one of their uncles, Zhang Luke 張魯客 (?–687+), who was then the magistrate of the Chang’an District, in their effort to alleviate people’s anxieties caused by a serious drought that struck the capital area. See Chen, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician, 130.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

169

master’s crucial role in thwarting the Zhang brothers’ conspiracy.75 This shows that Fazang assumed a very delicate cognizance of the power dynamics of the current two rival political cliques: one headed by the two Zhangs, who were backed by the aged empress, and the other by Zhang Jianzhi and his accomplices, who were loyal to the Tang and conspired towards its restoration. The example of Fazang strongly suggests that Huifan might have walked a similarly tenuous tightrope at this pivotal moment. Equally noteworthy in this account by Sima Guang is his suggestion that Huifan was awarded this title and dukedom sometime between February 20, 705 (Shenlong 1.1.22 [guimao]), when the two Zhangs were killed, and the fourth month of the same year (April 28–May 26, 705), when this memorial was presented. This squarely contradicts Zanning, who explicitly informs us that none of these were offered before Shenlong 2 (706). Who is right, the Buddhist chronicler or the Confucian historiographer? Let us proceed to examine other sources. 2.2.2 Honors and Rewards in 706 First, let us look at how Jiu Tangshu reports the conferment of official titles and rank on Huifan and other monks: On the bingshen (twenty-second) day [of the second month of Shenlong 2 (i.e. April 9, 706)],76 the Buddhist monk Huifan and Daoist priest Shi Chongxuan 史崇玄 (?–713) and others—more than ten in total—were bestowed some official titles and enfeoffed dukes, as a reward of their merits in constructing Shengshansi. [ 神龍二年二月] 丙申, 僧會範、道 士史崇玄等十餘人授官封公. 以賞造聖善寺功也.77 Obviously, the Jiu Tangshu compilers here miscopied Huifan 惠 / 慧範 as Huifan 會範, a mistake Sima Guang corrected when he repeats the same event under the same day in his chronicle: 75

76 77

Beopjang jeon, 283b23–24 (see Chen, Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician, 153): When fierce and malicious people [i.e. Zhang Yizhi and his group] were plotting rebellion, Fazang, who saw through their conspiracy and who possessed in the bottom of his heart the utmost sincerity [toward the government], repeatedly sent memorials to us (warning of the planned treason). 凶徒叛逆, 預識機兆. 誠懇自 衷, 每有陳奏. This date, containing so many twos, must have been chosen with some particular meanings that are now unfortunately unknown to us. JTS 7.141.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

170

Chen

On the bingshen day [of the second month of the second year of the Shenlong era] (i.e. Shenlong 2.2.22 [April 9, 706]), Buddhist monks Huifan and others, nine in total, were promoted to the fifth rank, and granted the investiture of prefectural or subprefectural dukes. Daoist priests, Shi Chongen 史崇恩 (a mistake for Shi Chongxuan 史崇玄) and others[, a total of three,] were also awarded a fifth rank title, were appointed guozi jijiu 國子祭酒 (chancellor of the National University, or chancellor of the Directorate of Education), and treated as formal officials. Ye Jingneng was promoted to be a jinzi guanglu daifu. 丙申, 僧慧範等九人並加五品階, 賜 爵郡縣公；道士史崇恩等 [ 三人]78 加五品階, 除國子祭酒, 同正；葉靜 能加金紫光祿大夫.79 From this, we know that the edict honoring the nine Buddhist monks and others was issued on April 9, 706. It also shows that Huifan, like the other eight monks, were granted a fifth-rank honor. This report of Sima Guang does not then seem compatible with the previous one that Huifan had been made a yinqing guanglu daifu, which was a title of the third rank, over ten months earlier—as noted above, it is not likely that Zhongzong could have rewarded Huifan with a rank lower than one previously granted to him. I postpone to venture a decision on these two contradictory accounts by Sima Guang to the third section. For the time being, I will confine myself to a simple note that the second Zizhi tongjian account also reveals that in addition to Buddhist monks, three Daoist priests headed by Shi Chongxuan were also awarded, in addition to Ye Jingneng, an even more prominent Daoist priest, who received a higher rank.80 It is noteworthy that while Jiu Tangshu explicitly observes that the awards were made to Buddhist monks and Daoist priests as a recognition of their contribution to the successful construction of Shengshansi, Zizhi tongjian avoids saying so, probably due to Sima Guang’s skepticism that Daoist clerics could have been so significantly involved in building a Buddhist monastery. Sima Guang must have opined that although they were rewarded along with the Buddhist monks on the same day, the four Daoist priests received recognition for a reason (or reasons) that had nothing to do with Shengshansi.

78 79 80

An interlinear note here indicating that in another two editions the character jia 加 is preceded by two characters: sanren 三人. ZZTJ 208.6598. The jinzi guanglu daifu was of “rank three, grade one” (3a) (zheng sanpin 正三品); see JTS 42.1785, XTS 46.1186.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

171

In the biography of Taiping in the Jiu Tangshu, Liu Xu offers a general comment on Huifan’s special relationship with her and his exceptional success as a merchant: There was a “barbarian monk” named Huifan, whose residence was full of wealth and treasures. Skillful in associating with the powerful and noble, he had an “intimate”81 relationship with the princess, who sent a memorial to the throne recommending him as the abbot of Shengshansi. He was [subsequently] awarded a third rank [title], and dukedom. His commercial activities extended to the Changjiang 長江 and Jian’ge 劍閣 (Sichuan) areas. 有胡僧惠範, 家富於財寶, 善事權貴. 公主與之私, 奏為 聖善寺主, 加三品, 封公. 殖貨流於江劍.82 The Jiu Tangshu authors unambiguously alleged that Huifan had an illicit relationship with Taiping and that it was thanks to her that he obtained the abbotship of Shengshansi, a dukedom, and other honors. They also underscore his wealth and the extent to which he, as a monk, was engaged in profitable businesses. In this passage, particularly noteworthy is the fact that Huifan was granted a third rank title and enfoeffed as a duke either at the same time as, or directly following, his appointment as the Shengshansi abbot. Given that the latter definitely happened after April 9, 706, this account implies that Huifan received a third-rank title after that date. The significance of this point will be revealed later. 2.3 Huifan in 707: Further Assaults Although Zhongzong never implemented the severe punishment that Huan Yanfan so forcefully advocated for Huifan, the tide of events turned against the monk once again in 707, when another court official launched a new attack. This new impeachment targeted Huifan’s heinous embezzlement, which had allegedly enriched the monk immensely, who was expected to live a humble and simple life. Relevant records of this series of confrontations also bring us into other roles played by this monk.

81 82

Si 私, usually denoting an intimate relationship of a sexual nature. JTS 183.4739. A large part of this passage echoes two passages in CFYG and XTS (quoted in note 72). The last sentence featuring Huifan’s success as a merchant (殖貨流於江 劍) is found, however, in none.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

172

Chen

2.3.1 Impeachment from Wei Chuangong Let us first address the severe accusations against Huifan, this time raised by another censor-in-chief: The Chang’an83 monk Huifan accumulated property in the value of ten million strings of cash. He kept good terms with powerful figures and those close [to the emperors]. Initially, he befriended Zhang Yizhi. After [Zhang] Yizhi was executed, someone alleged that he participated in the plan [to kill Zhang]. Therefore he was enfeoffed the Prefectural Duke of Shangyong, with a monthly stipend. Princess Taiping’s wet nurse fostered an illicit relationship with him. [The princess] recommended to the emperor that [Huifan] be promoted to the third rank.84 Wei Chuangong 魏傳弓 (?–707+), a yushi daifu 御史大夫 (censor-in-chief), impeached him for accumulating illegal income worth four hundred strings of cash and proposed that he be put to death. Zhongzong wished to pardon him. Wei Chuangong advanced to remonstrate, “Penalty and reward are state matters of great consequence. Having already wrongly heaped rewards on him, now Your Majesty wants to avoid applying the [necessary] penalty? How will people under the heavens think about this?” The emperor had no choice but deprive [Huifan] of the rank of yinqing [guanglu daifu]. 長安浮屠慧範畜貲千萬, 諧結權近, 本善張易之. 及易之誅, 或言 其豫謀者, 於是封上庸郡公, 月給奉稍. 主乳媼與通, 奏擢三品. 御史大夫 [ 御史]85 魏傳弓劾其姦贓四十萬, 請論死. 中宗欲赦之, 進曰 : “ 刑賞, 國 83

84

85

This means that Huifan used to stay in Chang’an for some time. Ximingsi, which Huifan once supervised, and the Changluo slope, on which he attempted to build a great Buddha-statue, were both in Chang’an. It seems that he followed Zhongzong back to Chang’an after the emperor moved his court there from Luoyang on December 7, 706 (Shenlong 2.10.28 [wuxu]) (he left Luoyang on November 18, 706 [Shenlong 2.10.9]). See JTS 7.142; XTS 4.109; ZZTJ 208.6606. A similar passage also appears in ZZTJ, preceding the report of Huan Yanfan’s impeachment of Huifan, although in the ZZTJ passage it was thanks to Empress Wei that Huifan received the honorific and official titles, in contrast to what is said in this XTS passage— Taiping, whose wet nurse committed adultery with Huifan, recommended him to receive the titles and salaries. As I will suggest below, Huifan’s adultery with the princess’s wet nurse might have been a roundabout way of accusing the monk of having an illicit relationship with the princess herself. The text here < 奏擢三品御史大夫御史魏傳弓劾其姦贓四十萬 > seems corrupt. This part of the text, as it stands now, can only be punctuated this way: 奏擢三品御史 大夫. 御史魏傳弓劾其姦贓四十萬 ([The princess] recommended to the emperor that [Huifan] be promoted to [the position of] the censor-in-chief which was of the third rank. Wei Chuangong, a censor, impeached him for accumulating illegal income

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

173

之大事, 陛下賞已妄加矣, 又欲廢刑, 天下其謂何?” 帝不得已, 削銀青 階.86

Consulting Zizhi tongjian and Tang huiyao, one may find that this impeachment was filed on the xushen (twelfth) day of the ninth month, Jinglong 1 (October 12, 707).87 Right before relating this impeachment, Sima Guang provides this brief account for its background: Huifan, who was then a yinqing guanglu daifu, Duke of Shangyong,88 and the [concurrent] abbot of Shengshan[si], Zhongtian[si] and Ximing[si], built Shengshansi at the Eastern Capital (i.e. Luoyang). He also built the great statue on the Changluo slope.89 The state revenues were drained [by these two projects].90 The emperor and empress all thought highly of him. His power was overwhelming both inside and outside the court and none dared to blame him. 銀青光祿大夫、上庸公、聖善、中天、西明 三寺主慧範, 於東都作聖善寺, 長樂坡作大像, 府庫為之虛耗. 上及韋后 皆重之, 勢傾內外, 無敢指目者.91

86 87 88 89

90 91

worth four hundred strings of cashes). This account is particularly noteworthy in that it identifies the position that Huifan was once promoted to be a yushi daifu, which is not found in other accounts concerning Huifan that we have reviewed so far. However, this does not make sense, not only because the position of censor-in-chief was mostly unlikely to have been conferred to a Buddhist monk, but also because this position was far above the third rank. Furthermore, it sounds quite unlikely that a censor impeached the censor-in-chief. I have therefore suggested that the second 御史 be read as redundant and that the text be emended to: 奏擢三品. 御史大夫魏傳弓劾其姦贓四十萬. XTS 83.3651. This story does not make its way into JTS. THY 61.1260, ZZTJ 208.6616–17. Sima Guang here doesn’t indicate whether this dukedom was at the prefectural or subprefectural level. Here, Hu Sanxing 胡三省 (1230–1302), the commentator on ZZTJ, adds an interlinear note to the effect that the Changluo slope, also called “Chanpo” 滻坡, was in the east of the Chang’an city (長樂坡 在 長 安 城 東 , 亦 謂 之 滻 坡). On the other hand, Cheng Dachang 程大昌 (1123–95), the author of a geographical work on Chang’an (i.e. Yonglu 雍 錄), attributes the renaming to Emperor Wen of the Sui (Sui Wendi 隋文帝 [r. 581–604]). Cheng also informs us that the slope is located on the western side of the Chan river 滻 水 . See Huang Yongnian 黃永年 (punctuated & collated), Yonglu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2002), 6.129. Xizhong, who quotes this passage in his account, has chosen not to include this sentence. ZZTJ 208.6616–17.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

174

Chen

This passage seems to have been based on a part of a lengthy interlinear note that Wang Qinruo and his collaborators added on the occasion of referring to the severe impeachment Wei Chuangong raised against Huifan, or an earlier source consulted by Sima Guang’s team and Wang Qinruo’s: Further, [Huifan] once submitted a memorial, claiming, “The merit and virtue of the previous sages have been left to [me,] this humble pursuer of the Way.” Strongly, he entreated the construction of the Buddhist temple called Shengshan in the Eastern Capital (i.e. Luoyang). When the emperor (i.e. Zhongzong) arrived in Chang’an, he further requested the casting of a great statue on the Changluo slope. The costs [of these two projects] must be counted by ten thousands, or even hundreds of millions [of cashes], which drained the state treasury, and generated complains from all over the country. Shortly afterwards, it was decreed that [Huifan] be appointed the acting head of three monasteries, including the Shengshan and Zhongtian monasteries, and the Ximing [monastery] in the Upper Capital (i.e. Chang’an). The emperor also once walked to see him off in person. The power of Huifan could be felt alarmingly from inside and outside of the court, no people of his day dared to speak [negatively of him]. When, all of a sudden, he was impeached by [Wei] Chuangong, none of the people, no matter serving or not, could refrain from celebrating this. 又嘗表稱, “ 先聖功德, 留 付貧道. ” 固請於東都創造聖善佛寺. 及帝幸長安, 又勸請於長樂坡 造大像. 凡所縻費, 巨億萬計. 府為之虛竭. 海內冤之. 俄又制授簡 較聖善, 中天, 及上都西明三寺主. 帝又御行, 親送之. 惠範權震外 內, 當時莫敢言者. 一朝遽為傳弓所奏, 朝野莫不稱慶. 92

Although these two passages in Zizhi tongjian and Cefu yuangui do not resemble each other in wordings, almost all the major points correspond. This Zizhi tongjian passage is particularly noteworthy in identifying Huifan in terms of his capacity as the concurrent abbot of three major monasteries in Luoyang and Chang’an. By referring to Cefu yuangui, we know that such an extraordinary appointment was decreed after the project of the Changluo statue was commenced, sometime after Zhongzong moved his court back to Chang’an on December 7, 706.93 Furthermore, Cefu yuangui provides the additional infor-

92 93

This is the latter half of an interlinear note found in CFYG (515.6160a) (the former half has been quoted before, see note 73). For the date of this court switch, see note 83.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

175

mation that Huifan was ordered to be “acting“ (jianjiao 簡較＝ jianjiao 檢較) 94 abbot of these three monasteries. In other words, his leadership of at least one of these three monasteries was understood to be temporary and/or nominal, at least when this arrangement was first made. The other three main points Sima Guang has raised here are, first, that Shengshansi and the great statue at the Changluo slope were made on Huifan’s prompting; second, that these two projects were so costly that they exhausted the government funding; and finally, that Huifan was so venerated by Zhongzong and his empress that none dared point a finger at him. All of these three points can be found in the Cefu yuangui passage, too. More than that, commenting on the two tremendous projects, Wang Qinruo even quotes two lines from a memorial submitted by Huifan on the occasion of urging the construction of Shengshansi. Terse and ambiguous as they may be, these two lines still attest to Huifan’s arrogance, which emboldened his self comparison with various Buddhas and bodhisattvas (先聖) .Needless to say, such an image is bolstered by other relevant evidence about Huifan that we have examined so far. Right after the above-quoted passage of background information, Sima Guang makes such a report of Wei Chuangong’s accusation of Huifan and its result: On the xushen day [of the ninth month of the first year of the Jinglong era] (Jinglong 1.9.12 [xushen] [= October 12, 707]), Censor-in-chief Wei Chuangong, by exposing over four hundred thousand [cashes] of embezzlement [Huifan committed], urged that he be put to extreme penalty (that is, that of death). The emperor wanted to pardon him. Chuangong said, “Penalty and reward are state matters of great consequence. Your Majesty have already wrongly heaped rewards on him, now how could the [necessary] penalty be waived?” The emperor then deprived Huifan [of his rank] and demoted him, confining him to his own house (i.e. placed him under house arrest). [ 景龍元年九月] 戊申, 侍御史魏傳弓發其姦贓四十餘萬, 請寘極法. 上欲宥之, 傳弓曰 : “ 刑賞, 國之大事. 陛下賞已妄加, 豈宜刑所不及 ?” 上乃削黜慧範, 放于家. 95

94 95

For the usages of this term, see note 13. ZZTJ 208.6617.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

176

Chen

This report is largely identical with that included in Xin Tangshu, as was just translated and discussed above.96 From a brief record in Cefu yuangui we know that two months before Huifan was charged, that is, on August 3, 707 (Shenlong 3.7.3 [dingyou]), the Changluo project had already been stopped because of its over-consumption of labor.97 The closeness in time between Huifan’s being charged with embezzlement and the termination of that project suggests that the investigation must have been started shortly after, if not before, the formal suspension of the project. Given that Zhongzong died less than three years later, this also suggests that the Great Statue on the Changluo slope might never have been completed. Xin Tangshu does not tell us how Huifan was able to embezzle such an enormous amount of money. According to Sima Guang, the crime was committed through two construction projects—the construction of Shengshansi in Luoyang, a great statue on the Changluo slope in Chang’an. In this, Sima Guang’s account might have been based, at least partly, on a report in a nonofficial anecdotal collection of the Tang, the ninth century Shangshu gushi 尚 書故實, by a little-known author Li Chuo 李綽 (?–880+). Li Chuo provides an account of the confiscation of Huifan’s astonishing hoard of wealth: When the monk Huifan, who constructed the “Buddha-hall” at the Shengshansi, had his property confiscated because of crimes, [the property] was estimated to be worth thirteen million strings of cash! 搆聖善 寺佛殿僧惠範, 以罪沒入其財, 得一千三百萬貫.98 Although this number estimates the amount of wealth Huifan was believed to have amassed by the time he was executed, and not by the time he was impeached by Wei Chuangong, Li Chuo does suggest that a major source of Huifan’s illegal income was the Shengshansi project, particularly the Buddhahall within the monastery; or to be more specific, the project of casting an 96

97 98

Cf. THY 61.1070; see aloso two versions in CFYG (515.6160a, 520A.6213a). All these versions (in ZZTJ, XTS, THY and two in CFYG) are listed in Appendix 2.D. A comparison of these five versions reveals a high degree of similarities in wordings, so high that either Sima Guang directly quoted from one of the other four, or five of them were all based on one identical source. CFYG 51.575a: [ 神龍] 三年七月丁酉, 以所造 長樂坡大像工役稍廣, 百姓多怨嗟, 制罢之. Shangshu gushi, printed in Jingyin Wenyuange Siku quanshu 景印文淵閣四庫全書 (Taibei: Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan, 1983–1986; hereafter SKQS), vol. 1889: 3a4–5. Almost nothing for certain is known about Li Chuo except for his authorship of Qinzhong suishi ji 秦中歲時記 in addition to Shangshu gushi.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

177

immense statue and installing it within this hall. Obviously, Sima Guang agrees on identifying Shengshansi as a major source for Huifan’s criminal earnings, although he does not accept, as we will see below, the tremendous amount of money that Huifan allegedly took illegally.99 2.3.2

One Monk, Three Monasteries: Huifan as the Concurrent Abbot of Three Cosmopolitan Monasteries I have not found another case in which a Buddhist monk acted as the concurrent abbot of three major monasteries. Such cases—even if there were any more—must have been rare. Putting aside Shengshangsi, whose complicated history entails a separate study, let me here briefly discuss Ximingsi and Zhongtiansi. Ximingsi has been widely considered to be one of the most magnificent monasteries in the world at the time.100 Its construction was officially decreed by Gaozong on September 13, 656101 to celebrate heir apparent Li Hong’s 李弘 (652–75) successful recovery from illness. Its completion was announced on July 17, 658.102 Part of the monastery was converted from a mansion (located in the Yankang 延康 ward in Chang’an) that was originally owned by Sui general and statesman Yang Su 楊素 (?–606). During the Tang, the mansion was successively occupied by Gaozu’s nineteenth daughter, Princess Wanchun 萬春 (a.k.a. Changsha 長沙) (d.u.) (married to Doulu Huairang 豆盧懷讓) and Prince

99 100

101 102

See 2.5. In addition to the earliest source on this monastery provided by Daoxuan’s Ji gujin fodao lunheng 集古今佛道論衡 (completed 661) 4.388c-389c, the following two primary sources also contain important information: Yancong’s 彥悰 (?–688+) and Huili’s 慧立 (615–?), Da Tang Da Ciensi sanzang fashi zhuan 大唐大慈恩寺三藏法師傳 (completed by Yancong in 688 on the basis of a draft left by Huili) 10.275b-c; and Su Ting’s “Tang Chang’an Ximingsi tabei” 唐長安西明寺塔碑, Wenyuan yinghua 文苑英 華 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1966; hereafter WYYH), 855.2597a-2598b/QTW 257.1b-4b. See also brief notes in Tang huiyao (completed 961) 48.990, and Tang liangjing chengfang kao 唐兩京城坊考 (published by Xu Song 徐松 [1781–1841] in 1848) (edited and annotated by Fang Yan 方嚴, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985), 4.109. For modern studies, see Ono Katsutoshi 小野勝年, “Chōan no Saimyōji to waga Nyūtō-sō” 長安の西明寺 とわが入唐僧, Bukkyō geijutsu 仏教芸術 29 (1956), 28–45; idem, Chūgoku Zui Tō Chōan jiin shiryō shūsei 中國隋唐長安寺院史料集成 (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 1989), 147–56; and Yang Hongnian 楊鴻年, Sui Tang liangjing fangli pu 隋唐兩京坊里譜 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1999), 126–27. Xianqing 1.8.19, provided in Da Tang Da Ciensi sanzang fashi zhuan 10.275b23. Xianqing 3.6.12, provided in Ji gujing fodao lunheng 4.388c23.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

178

Chen

Pu 濮, Li Tai 李泰 (618–52), a favorite son of Taizong.103 Fifty bhadanta monks, including the great Buddhist pilgrim-cum-translator Xuanzang 玄奘 (602–64) and the erudite monk-scholar Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667) (himself appointed as its founding Rector [Skt. sthavira, Ch. shangzuo 上座]), were assigned to the monastery as soon as it was completed. Allegedly modeled on the Jetavana, the monastery long functioned as a Buddhist center in East Asia, attracting a number of Korean and Japanese monks, most notably Wŏnch'uk 圓測 (613–96) and Kūkai 空海 (774–835).104 In contrast to the celebrity of Ximingsi, Zhongtiansi was such an obscure monastery that we even do not know whether it was actually called “Zhongtiansi” 中天寺 or “Tianzhongsi” 天中寺. Tang Da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令 集 records an edict by Empress Wu, in which she refers to a ceremony of burying relics performed by some Tianzhongsi monks.105 Further, from two Tang poems which are still preserved in Quan Tangshi 全唐詩, we know that a Buddhist monk called Fuli 復禮 (?–706?) used to be affiliated with a temple of the same name, where he was once visited by Empress Wu’s nephew Wu Sansi and his friend Su Weidao 蘇味道 (648–706).106 This Fuli was likely the monk 103

104

105

106

Wang Pu (THY 48.990) suggests that the mansion was subsequently converted into a temple after Li Tai’s death (i.e. in 652). This is contradicted by earlier sources like Su Ting’s inscription and Huili and Yancong’s biography of Xuanzang, which are unanimous in stating that the conversion was not planned until 656. Doulu Huairang is noteworthy in that while his nephew Doulu Qinwang 豆盧欽望 (630?–709) was one of Empress Wu’s prime minister, his great grandson Doulu Jian 豆盧建, who married Xuanzong’s daughter Weiguo 衛國. An excavation project conducted in 1985 on the old site of the monastery yielded some findings, which were greeted by archaeologists and historians with both excitement and disappointment. Although the project succeeded in uncovering the foundations for some central parts of the monastery, including its Buddha-hall and corridors, the physical objects that were excavated fell short of the high expectations for a monastery with such a brilliant history. The project is surveyed by Ma Dezhi 馬得志, “Tang Chang’an cheng fajue xin shouhuo” 唐長安城發掘新收穫, Kaogu 4 (1987): 329–36. Tang Da zhaoling ji (Shanghai: Shanghai yinshuguan, 1957), 113.587, QTW 95.984b; translated and discussed in Chen Jinhua, “Śarīra and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25.1–2 (2002), 84–85. Quan Tangshi (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1960; hereafter QTS), 80.867: Wu Sansi, “Qiuri yu Tianzhongsi xun Fuli shangren” 秋日於天中寺尋復禮上人; QTS 65.755: Su Weidao, “He Wu Sansi yu Tianzhongsi xun Fuli shangren zhi zuo.” The two poems are also preserved in WYYH 219.1093b, in which the temple name in the title of Su Weidao’s poem is given as Zhongtiansi instead of Tianzhongsi. See my discussion in Chen, “Śarīra and Scepter,” 84n121.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

179

with the same name who was very active under the reigns of Empress Wu and Zhongzong, mainly as a Buddhist translator and major ideologue for the empress.107 Since Tianzhongsi was obviously on Mount Song 嵩, it is intriguing to speculate whether the name of this monastery had anything to do with the practice of renaming Songshan “Shengyue” 神嶽 and calling its god “King among the Deities” (Tianzhong wang 天中王).108 Interestingly, in addition to Tianzhongsi, Zhongtiansi also appears as a monastery name in an alternate title of a poem written by another renowned Tang poet.109 This might suggest that Tianzhongsi and Zhongtiansi actually indicated the same monastery, with one written by mistake for the other. Is this true? And if so, can we decide, with any certainty, which was the right name for the monastery once under Huifan’s supervision? A clue comes, ironically, from the very Tang poem which verifies the existence of a monastery called Zhongtiansi: 東林初結構 Though the Temple of Eastern Forest110 was just

constructed,

已有晚鐘聲 The sounds of evening bells already audible. 窗戶背流水 A river runs behind the windows,

107 108

109

110

See Appendix 3 of my above-quoted forthcoming book (Collusion and Collision) for more about this monk. Chuigong 4.7.1 (dingsi). See THY 47.833–34; JTS 24.925, XTS 4.87; ZZTJ 204.6449. That Tianzhongsi was probably located on Mount Song is inferred from the assumption that the Tang Da zhaoling ji edict quoted above shows that the relic-burying ceremony was conducted by some Tianzhongsi monks, while, on the other hand, the ceremony was executed on Mount Song according to Sima Guang (see ZZTJ 206.6546). Huangfu Ran 皇甫冉 (716–69, or 717–70) has left a poem titled “Chou Pei Buque Wusi jianxun” 酬裴補闕吳寺見尋, which, according to another source, bore an alternate title “Chou Yuan Buque Zhongtiansi jianji” 酬袁補闕中天寺見寄. See WYYH 235.1185a and QTS 250.2831, the latter of which provides the alternate title containing the temple name “Zhongtiansi.” Compared with Wusi 吳寺, Zhongtiansi 中天寺 looks more like a temple name. Given the likelihood of miscopying 中天 as 吳 (note that in medieval China the Chinese scripts were written vertically, rather than horizontally as now they are in mainland China), it seems that Wusi was a mistake for Zhongtiansi. This then could be counted as proof for the existence of a monastery called “Zhongtian” 中天. Donglingsi (Temple of the Eastern Forest) was one of the twin temples (the other being Xilinsi 西林寺 [Temple of the Western Forest]) that Huiyuan 慧遠 (334–416) and his supporters built on the western (i.e. Silinsi) and eastern (i.e. Donglinsi) sides of Mount Lu 廬山 respectively. See Huiyuan’s biography in Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳, T 50: 6.358a28-b3.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

180

Chen 房廊半架城 Its rooms and corridors almost constitute an erected 遠山重疊見 芳草淺深生 每與君攜手 多煩長老迎

castle. Mountains upon mountains are visible from afar, Fragrant grass grows from shallow and deep [water]. Whenever I [come here] hand in hand with Your Eminence, We often bother the Elder to greet us.111

The first line of this poem makes it clear that Zhongtiansi had not been built too long before the poem was written. Both the title and content of the poem suggest that the author dedicated the poem to one of his colleagues, which means that he had already begun his own political career by the time (the author could not, then, have been younger than twenty at the time). When we further take into account the dates of its author (Huangfu Ran, 716–69, or 717– 70), we can easily conclude that it could not have been written before 736. This means that Zhongtiansi had not been built long before that year. It also establishes that Zhongtiansi and Tianzhongsi must have been two different temples, with one built not before 736, and the other not after 706, when Su Weidao, who dedicated a poem to it, died. Given that Huifan died in 713, he obviously could not have supervised a monastery that had not been built by 736. In other words, the right name for Huifan’s monastery must have been Tianzhongsi, rather than Zhongtiansi. If this is correct, Zhongtiansi that appears in Zizhi tongjian as one of the three monasteries in Huifan’s charge must be corrected to Tianzhongsi. Be that as it may, we should consider the possibility that Huifan was the “barbarian monk” (huseng 胡僧) who in 700 attempted to persuade Empress Wu to attend a campaign of burying relics on Songshan, which was mainly raised by some Tianzhongsi monks.112 Although we are not completely certain as to whether Tianzhongsi or Zhongtiansi was the right name for this monastery Huifan supervised, its association with such political and religious luminaries as Wu Sansi, Su Weidao, and Fuli seems sufficient to establish its close connections with Empress Wu (and therefore its importance in the contemporary world). 111 112

“Chou Pei Buque Wusi jianxun,” or “Chou Yuan Buque Zhongtiansi jianxun,” WYYH 235.1185a/QTS 250.2831. See Chen, “Śarīra and Scepter,” 80–86. When I attempted to identify the unspecified “bar­barian” monk thirteen years ago (in 2002), I took Śikṣānanda to be the only candidate, since at the time I was unaware of the eminence of Huifan in the contemporary political and religious worlds, especially his close relation with Empress Wu. Now, without completely ruling out the possible candidacy of Śikṣānanda, I am willing to include Huifan as another candidate for being the unnamed “Barbarian monk.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

181

2.4 Huifan in 710–12: Yet More Assaults After being stripped of his honorific title in October, 707, Huifan seems to have withdrawn from the limelight of the current political world, judging by his absence from the annals of the latter half of Zhongzong’s reign, from October,707, until July 3, 710, when Zhongzong suffered a sudden and violent death. While it might be far from truth to assume that this energetic man entered a complete political hibernation during this period, the fact that he did not fall victim to the political purge following the coup against Empress Wei does suggest that either he shrewdly kept a distance from Empress Wei’s group or he fostered a good relationship with Taiping. The likelihood of this assumption is partly verified by the fact that shortly after the political storms in 710, Huifan made a rapid return to the center of the political stage as a confidant of the princess. Impeachment from Liu Ze 2.4.1 Strongly backed by Taiping, Huifan had gradually become so aggressive in manipulating court power that in 711 a court official angrily singled him out as the person who instigated Taiping to appoint their henchmen to government posts, as well as virtually anyone else who was willing and able to pay a meager commission. Starting from the middle of the Jinglong era (707–10), Princesses Taiping, Anluo, Changning 長寧, Yicheng 宜城, two sisters of Empress Wei (Madams Chengguo 郕國 and Chongguo 崇國), Shangguan Waner and her mother Madam Peiguo 沛國, two shanggong 尚宮 (matrons),113 née Cai 柴 and née Helou 賀婁, and the sorceress née Zhao 趙 (Madame Longxi 隴西夫人) appointed their acquaintances and relatives to government posts. Some of them were servants or maidens, others butchers or merchants. They used bribery to get their positions. Put in “inked document” (mochi 墨敕), their names were sent to the Zhongshu sheng 中書省 (Secretariat) through underground mail (xiefeng 斜封), in contrast to the official documents transacted between government bureaus of human resources. Those who took their appointments in this way were called “xiefeng” officials (xiefengguan 斜封 官, which can also be understood as officials appointed [feng 封] in an abnormal [xie 斜] way).114 On September 12, 710, Ruizong ordered the dismissal of 113

114

The two heads of the Shanggongju 尚宮局 (General Palace Service), one of the six major agencies among which palace women were distributed; see Hucker, Official Titles, 409 (no. 5013). Tongdian 19.472–73. Cf. JTS 51.2173, XTS 4.111, 45.1176, 76.3487, 83.3654, 112.4173, 129.4479; ZZTJ 209.6623, 6625.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

182

Chen

all xiefeng officials, who allegedly numbered several thousand.115 However, under the influence of Taiping and two court officials, the emperor changed his mind and ordered their reinstatement barely five months after they were dismissed.116 Thus, sometime between February 25, 711 (Jingyun 2.2.4), and March 23, 711 (Jingyun 2.2.30),117 Liu Ze 柳澤 (d. 734), who was then serving as a canjun 參軍 (adjutant) at the Armor Section (Kaicao 鎧曹) of the front right Guard Command (Shuaifu 率府) [subordinated to the Establishment of heir apparent], submitted a strongly worded memorial to protest this decision of Ruizong. He concluded his memorial with the following stern warning: Now, people within the [Four] Seas (i.e. all over the empire) all claim that Princess Taiping orders the “barbarian monk” Huifan to work in collusion with his likes, who will mislead Your Majesty. Criticisms [of them] are filling people’s ears,,with sighs and complains spreading through all the streets. Thus say people, “Whereas the evil were not the equals of the righteous when Yao [Yuanzhi] 姚 [ 元之] (a.k.a. Yao Yuanchong 姚元崇, Yao Chong 姚崇, 650–721) and Song [Jing] 宋 [ 璟] (663–738) acted as the prime ministers, the righteous were not the equals of the evil when the 115 116



117

I.e. Jingyun 1.8.15 (kuisi); see JTS 7.155, XTS 5.117, ZZTJ 210.6655. See JTS 7.156, which gives March 6, 711 (Jingyun 2.13 [xuzi]), as the day of issuing the edict ordering the re-installment of the xiefeng officials; XTS 5.118, which gives March 4, 711 (Jingyun 2.11 [bingxu]); and finally ZZTJ 210.6663, which gives February 24, 711 (Jingyun 2.2.3 [xuyin]). I have followed ZZTJ, which, compared with the two Tang histories, is generally more accurate in dating events. The two officials who helped Taiping to persuade Ruizong into reinstalling the xiefeng officials are the dianzhong shiyushi Cui Li 崔蒞 and the taizi zhongyun Xue Zhao 薛昭 (not Xue Zhaoxi 薛昭希 as suggested by the editors of the Zhonghua shuju version of ZZTJ, who made this emendation probably out of his misreading of this sentence in XTS 45.1176: 殿中侍御史崔涖、太子中允薛 昭希太平公主意. Here 希 shall be read together with 太平公主意 [ 希太平公主意 =catering to the wishes of Princess Taiping], and cannot be read as a part of a name [昭希]). A well known example of this usage of the expression xiyi 希意 or xi… yi 希 … 意 is provided in the Chapter of “Yufu” 魚父 in Zhuangzi:  To lead men on by speeches made to please them is called sycophancy. To praise men without regard to right or wrong is called flattery. 希意道言謂之諂，不擇是非而言 谓之諛. (Guo Qingfan 郭慶藩 (1844–96), Zhuangzi jishi 莊子集釋, punctuated and collated by Wang Xiaoyu 王孝魚 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2006 (2nd edition)], 447; English translation by James Legge, The Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Taoism [New York: Dover Publications, 1962], II: 196). I assume that the memorial was submitted by the end of Jingyun 2.2 (February 22, 711– March 23, 711) by the fact that Sima Guang, without specifying the day on which Liu Ze submitted his memorial, placed the event at the very end of the entry on this month.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

183

Princess Taiping is in power.”118 今海內咸稱, 太平公主令胡僧慧範曲引 此輩, 將有誤於陛下矣. 謗議盈耳, 咨嗟滿衢. 故語曰 : “ 姚、宋為相, 邪不 如正；太平用事, 正不如邪.” Says [Shang] shu 尚書 : 書曰 無偏無陂 Without deflection, without unevenness, 遵王之義 Pursue the royal righteousness. …… 無反無側 Avoid deflection, avoid partiality; / 王道正直 Broad and long is the royal way.119 It is your servant’s fear that without putting the situation under control, a river will flow to a far distance from nearby, a tiny thing will develop into something big, and something high will rise from its base. Please do not think that they will hurt nobody, as the disasters [caused by them] will last a long time; and please do not doubt what harm they will cause, as the disasters [caused by them] will be severe. 臣恐因循, 流近致遠, 積小 為大, 累微起高. 勿謂何傷, 其禍將長；勿謂何害, 其禍將大.120 Liu Ze was related not only to the Tang founding emperor Gaozu, but also to Gaozong’s first Empress, née Wang, who was replaced by Empress Wu in 655 before being physically removed by the formidable woman four years later.121 Both relationships were established through his great grandfather Liu Heng 柳 亨 (?–655). Liu Heng married one of Gaozu’s granddaughters, Née Dou, while his younger brother, Liu Ze 柳則, was Empress Wang’s maternal grandfather.122 Née Dou was a daughter of Gaozu’s daughter Princess Xiangyang 襄陽 (d.u.) 118

119

120

121 122

Given that xie 斜 and xie 邪 were sometimes interchangeable in Classical Chinese, this sentence can also be understood as: “Whereas the unconventionally appointed officials were not the equals of the properly appointed officials when Yao [Yuanzhi] and Song [Jing] acted as the prime ministers, the properly appointed officials were not the equals of the unconventionally appointed officials when the Princess Taiping was in power.” These four lines are from the Chapter on “Hongfan” 洪範 of Shangshu 尚書. Translation by James Legge, The Chinese Classics (Vol. I-V) (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960), III: 331–32. JTS 77.2683–84. The whole of the memorial is included in QTW 277.9b-11a (the quoted passage found at 10a7-b3). Cf. XTS (112.4174) and ZZTJ (210.6664), each containing an abbreviated version (ZZTJ is even briefer). See also two versions presented by THY (67.1179) and CFYG (545.6542a), which are similar to each other, but differ significantly from those in JTS and XTS. All these different versions of the story about the Liu ZeHuifan confrontation are listed in Appendix 2.E. See her official biography at XTS 76.3473–74. Liu Ze’s funeral epitaph has recently been brought to light. See “Tang Liu Ze muzhi bing gai” 唐柳澤墓誌並蓋, Zhao Junping 趙君平 and Zhao Wencheng 趙文成

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

184

Chen

and Dou Dang 竇誕 (?–627?), who turned out to be none other than Xuanzong’s maternal great-grandparents.123 While we cannot decide how much this family feud might have affected Liu Ze’s opinions of Taiping and Huifan, his memorial does show that the alignment between Taiping and Huifan became an open secret at the time, which people like Liu Ze believed to have undermined state security and stability. A Joint Impeachment from Xue Deng and Murong Xun 2.4.2 Fortunately for Huifan, it seems that Liu Ze’s protest met deaf ears in Ruizong. Unfortunately for him, Liu Ze was not alone in opposing him. Twenty three years after Huifan’s dishonored death, either Cui Mian 崔沔 (673–740)124 or







123

124

(comps.), Heluo muke shiling 河洛墓刻拾零 (Beijing: Beijing tushuguan chubanshe, 2007), 291.  We know that Empress Wang was a granddaughter of Liu Heng’s brother since her maternal uncle Liu Shi 柳奭 (?–659) is identified as a son of his older brother (xiongzi 兄子) in Liu Heng’s JTS biography (77.2669). For Liu Shi’s relationship with Empress Wang, see ZZTJ 199.6273 (XTS [112.4177] is wrong in identifying Empress Wang as a grandniece [waisun 外孫] of Liu Shi). Further, XTS’s “Zaixiang shixi” (73A.2836–42) not only tells us that Liu Shi’s father was Liu Ze 柳則, but it also clarifies the interrelationship between Liu Heng, Liu Ze 柳則, Liu Shi and Liu Ze 柳澤. The relationships between Liu Heng, Liu Shi and Liu Ze 柳澤 are also clearly indicated in their biographies in the two Tang histories (JTS 77.2680–88, XTS 112.4173–78).  Liu Heng’s marriage with the woman née Dou is reported in his JTS biography (77.2681) and Liu Ze’s 柳澤 XTS biography (112.4173).  For Dou Dan’s marriage with Princess Xiangyang and Xiangyang’s being a daughter of Gaozu, see JTS 61.2370; XTS 83.3642, 95.3849. In addition to being Gaozu’s son-in-law, Dou Dan was related to Gaozu in two more ways. First, his father Dou Kang 竇抗 was a cousin of Gaozu’s Empress Taimu 太穆 (566?–610?) (Dou Kang’s grandfather Dou Shan 竇善 [d.u.] was a brother of Dou Yue 竇岳 [d.u.], Empress Taimu’s grandfather). Second, as noted above, he became the maternal grandfather of one of Gaozu’s great grandsons (i.e. Ruizong) and married one of his granddaughters (i.e. Consort Dou).  Dou Dan’s relationship with the Sui royal family is also noteworthy: his grandfather Dou Rongding 竇榮定 (530–86) married Sui Wendi’s (r. 581–604) older sister Ancheng 安成 (?–583+). These lineage relationships are recorded in XTS 71C.2290–2331; see also Taimu’s biography in JTS 51.2163 ff. Dou Dan and Xianyang’s son Dou Xiaochen 竇孝諶 (d. 697) was the father of Consort De (Dou Defei 竇德妃 [d.693]), Xuanzong’s mother, which makes Xuanzong’s father (Ruizong, a great grandson of Gaozu) and mother (Consort De, a great granddaughter of Gaozu) two remote cousins. We shall also note that Liu Heng, who married a sister of Xuanzong’s mother, was actually a brother-in-law of Ruizong. Cui Mian’s dates are generally given as 674–739. This is not accurate. While Cui Mian’s JTS biographer limits himself to noting that he died in Kaiyuan 27 (February 13,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

185

one of his kinsmen who also served in the capacity of taizi binke 太子賓 客 (advisor to the heir apparent) as he did, mentioned an “evil monk” in a funeral epitaph that he wrote for the late court official Murong Xun 慕容珣 (669–736):125 There was a monk Huifan, who was [then] the chief culprit of “Lefthanded paths.” Accumulating wealth, he gave himself up to a licentious lifestyle. He bribed his way into [the affections of] both the noble princess and the court officials in royal favor. He committed crimes publicly and none dared constrain him. Our Master reported his crimes [to the emperor] in the court. Squeezed out by [Huifan’s] evil coterie, he was ousted from the court and demoted to be a supernumerary (yuanwai 員 外) executive prefect (sima 司馬) of Mizhou 密州 (in present-day Zhucheng 諸城). 有僧惠梵者, 左道之魁渠也. 崇聚貨財, 交接 [ 婬]126 習.

125

126



739–February 1, 740) at the age of sixty seven, on another occasion (9.212), he dates the death to the twelfth month of Kaiyuan 27 (XTS biography of Cui Mian only gives his age, not the year of his death). Since Kaiyuan 27.12 lasted from January 4 to February 1, 740, Cui Mian’s death must be dated to 740, rather than 739, in which most of Kaiyuan 27 fell. Murong Xun is not accorded a biography in either of the two official histories. His funeral epitaph therefore becomes the only source of featuring his life. He was from a Xianbei 鮮卑 (a Proto-Turkic ethnic) family. His distinguished family background is highlighted in Yuanhe xingzuan 元和姓纂 (3 vols., collated and edited by Cen Zhongmian 岑仲勉 and reedited by Yu Xianhao 鬱賢浩 and Tao Min 陶敏 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1994]), 8.1228–32. More information about him is culled together in Tang Shangshusheng langguan shizhu timing kao 唐尚書省郎官石柱題名考 (punctuated and collated by Xu Minxia 徐敏霞 and Wang Guizhen 王桂珍 [Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1992]), 3.113–14. This character is not cognizable on the excavated stele. The character 婬 is here suggested on the basis of the following passage in Da foding rulai miyin xiuzheng liaoyi zhu pusa wanxing shourenyan jing 大佛頂如來密因修證了義諸菩薩萬行首楞嚴經 (T 945, 19: 8.143c4–9; bold mine): Ānanda! These kinds [of things] are stimulated by all sentient beings’ own karmas, which have made them generate ten habituated causes and receive six kinds of mutual retribution. What are these ten causes? Ānanda! The first is the mutual contacts of habituated sexual desires. This originates from mutual rubbing. Incessant rubbing may set in motion inside [one’ s heart] a strong glaring fire, just as the sign of heat may appear in front [of one’ eyes] when one keeps rubbing two hands. When two habituated desires keep igniting each other, there will appear various phenomena associated with iron beds and copper pillars [used to torture people reborn in hells]. Therefore all the Tathāgatas of ten directions sternly look at sexual behaviors, unanimously calling them “fire of desire.” When bodhisattvas see desires, they avoid them [as carefully] as [they avoid] a fire-pit. 阿難 ! 此等皆是彼諸眾生自業所感,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

186

Chen 賄通貴主, 賂入寵臣. 公肆奸回, 莫之禁禦. 公廷奏其罪. 為凶黨所斥, 出 為密州員外司馬.127

This monk was here condemned to be a chief master of “Left-hand paths,” a greedy hoarder, and a conspirator of the “noble princess” and other influential figures. This image, in combination with his name (Huifan 惠梵), strongly suggests that he was none other than the subject of our study. This is confirmed by the author of Da Tang xinyu 大唐新語, Liu Su 劉肅 (fl. 820), about one century after Huifan’s death: Relying on his power and influence, the monk Huifan seized the wife of someone who was still alive. The local prefectural and subprefectural authorities dared not deal with the case. Her husband went to the central court to complain of the injustices. The zhongcheng 中丞 (i.e. yushi zhongcheng 御史中丞) (palace aide to the censor-in-chief) Xue Deng and shiyushi 侍御史 (attendant censor) Murong Xun were about to report this case [to the throne]. Afraid of not being able to win [the suit], the taizhong 臺中 (censor-in-chief) proposed to suspend the case. [Xue] Deng said, “The legal officials should deal with the wronged and delayed. How can we avoid this? I shall accept it even though I may make the impeachment in the morning and be demoted by evening.” Because of

127

造十習因, 受六交報. 云何十因 ? 阿難 ! 一者婬習交接. 發於相磨, 研磨不休. 如是故有大猛火光於中發動. 如人以手自相磨觸, 暖相現前. 二習相然, 故有 鐵床銅柱諸事. 是故十方一切如來, 色目行婬, 同名欲火. 菩薩見欲, 如避火 坑. “Tang Zhongsan daifu shou Mishujian zhishi Shangzhuguo Murong gong muzhi ming” 唐中散大夫守秘書監致仕上柱國慕容公墓誌銘, in Chen Chang’an 陳長安 (ed.), Sui Tang Wudai muzhi huibian 隋唐五代墓誌匯編, Luoyang juan 洛陽卷 (Tianjin: Tianjin guji chubanshe 天津古籍出版社, 1991), 10: 126; transcribed in Zhou Shaoliang and others (compiled), Tangdai muzhi huibian xuji 唐代墓誌匯編續集 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2001), 556. In the excavated epitaph, the place where the name of the inscription’s author was indicated has been unfortunately damaged. We can only read his official title taizi binke and the name of his clan, Boling Cui 博陵崔. XTS’s “Zaixiang shixi” 宰相世系 (Lineages of the [Tang] Prime Ministers) (72C.2799–2800) records two members of the Boling Cui clan who once served as taizi binke: Cui Zheng 崔証 and Cui Mian 崔沔. Nothing else is known about Cui Zheng. Cui Mian, on the other hand, who is accorded biographies in the two Tang dynastic histories (JTS 188.4927ff; XTS 129.4475ff), died in the twelfth month of Kaiyuan 27 (January 4-February 1, 740), three to four years after Murong Xun, rendering his authorship of this inscription possible. The author of Murong Xun’s funeral epitaph was a kinsman of his wife, who was also a member of the Boling Cui clan, as is noted in the epitaph. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

187

this, [Xue] Deng was ousted from the court and demoted as the governor of Qizhou 歧州 (in present-day Fengxiang 鳳翔). One contemporary comment had it that the benevolent should be possessed of courage. Wasn’t this referring to Master Xue? 僧惠範恃權勢, 逼奪生人妻. 州縣不 能理. 其夫詣臺訴冤. 中丞薛登, 侍御史慕容珣, 將奏之. 臺中懼其不捷, 請寢其議. 登曰 : “ 憲司理冤滯, 何所迴避 ? 朝彈暮黜, 亦可矣. ” 登坐此出 為歧州刺史. 時議曰 : “ 仁者必有勇, 其薛公之謂歟 ? ”128

Liu Su not only confirms that Huifan was the subject of Murong Xun’s accusation, but he specifies the details of Huifan’s crime as seizing a man’s wife. Liu Su also introduced another official similarly outraged by Huifan’s bruteness, a palace aide to the censor-in-chief, Xue Deng. At this juncture, it seems appropriate to refer to a decree that the renowned Tang author Su Ting 蘇頲 (670–727) drafted in the name of Xuanzong shortly after the 713 court coup, on the occasion of promoting Murong Xun to a key position at court.129 Although this decree makes no explicit mention of Huifan, it clearly refers to Murong Xun’s heroic confrontation with him and the powerful woman behind him: Murong Xun, a chaoyilang (gentleman for court discussion) acting as a supernumerary (treated as a regular appointment) Executive Prefect of Mizhou 密州, … with an overwhelming air of awe, once impeached an evil man at court, without avoiding [standing in the way of] those who were in power. That the upright has been vilified130 and the innocent wronged131 has been long deplored by the past worthies. Now that the 128 129

130



131

Da Tang xinyu 4.61. For Su Ting, see Yu Xianhao 鬱賢皓, “Su Ting nianpu” 蘇頲年譜, Zhongguo dianji yu wenhua luncong 中國典籍與文化論叢 2 (1995); republished in Yu Xianhao, Li Bai yu Tangdai wenshi lunkao 李白與唐代文史考論, vol. 3, Tangdai wenshi lunkao 唐代文史 考論 (Nanjing: Nanjing shifan daxue chubanshe), 800–39. 醜正, referring to this passage in “Year 28 of Duke Zhao” (Zhaogong ershiba nian 昭公 二十八年), Zuozhuan 左傳, in Duanju shisan jingwen 斷句十三經文 (Taibei: Kaiming shuju, 1991), 226: Consulting, however, the marshal Shuyou on the subject, that officer said, “We read in a book of Zheng, that those who hate what is right and dislike what is correct are very many.” 叔游曰 : “> 有之, ‘ 惡直醜正，實蕃有徒.’ 無道立矣, 子懼不免.” (trans. by James Legge, The Chinese Classics [vol. i-v] [Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960 [rpt], vol. 5: 724) 非罪. This refers to the following story in the Chapter of Gongye Chang 公冶長, Lunyu 論語, in Duanju shisan jingwen, 4: The Master said of Gong Ye Chang that he might be wived; although he was put in bonds, he had not been guilty of any crime. Accordingly, he gave him his own daughter Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

188

Chen

Leviathan has been killed, and the falcons have been shot in the autumn.132 We should have his name graciously entered on the roll of honor, have him embrace the pure laws. He is to be promoted as a chaosan daifu and serve as an attendant censor of the Censorate. 朝議郎行 密州司馬員外置同正員慕容珣, … 廷奏姦人, 凜然生風, 不避當道. 醜 正非罪, 遺賢久 133 嘆. 長鯨已戮, 擊隼方秋. 宜賁寵章, 復膺清憲. 可朝 散 134 大夫, 行御史臺侍御史.135 Murong Xun’s impeachment of Huifan is supported by yet another Tang historical work. Though no longer extant now, this originally massive work was quoted in some later sources, including Zizhi tongjian: Says Tongji, “The investigating censor Murong Xun impeached the Ximingsi monk Huifan for his adultery with the palace maiden née Zhang—the wet nurse of Princess Taiping, and his robbery of commoners. The emperor (i.e. Ruizong) believed that a censor should not avoid confronting with the powerful and noble, [but Murong Xun] dared to impeach the princess when she was exiled to Puzhou and dared not to do so while she was in [the capital]. Also, [the emperor suspected that] Murong Xun had the intention to alienate his blood tie [with the princess]. [The emperor] therefore demoted him to be the supernumerary executive prefect of Mizhou.” 統紀曰, “ 監察御史慕容珣奏彈西明寺僧慧 範，以其通宮人張氏 (張即太平公主乳母也)136 ，侵奪百姓. 上以為御 史當不避豪貴; 見公主出居蒲州, 乃敢彈射，在日不言，狀涉脽間 137 骨 肉, 遂貶為密州員外司馬.”138 Tongji 統紀 refers to Tang tongji 唐統紀. Also known as “Da Tang tongji” 大唐 統紀 and “Da Tang tongli ji” 大唐統歷紀 (originally of one hundred or one

132 133 134 135 136 137 138

to wife. 子謂公冶長, “ 可妻也. 雖在縲絏之中, 非其罪也.” 以其子妻之. (trans. by Legge, The Chinese Classics [vol. i-v], vol. 1: 172) 擊 隼方 秋 . My reading of this elusive sentence is tentative. The WYYH compilers note here that another edition has jiu 久 for you 攸. This reading has been adopted in QTW. The WYYH compilers note here that another edition has chaoyi 朝議 for chaosan 朝散. Su Ting, “Shou Murong Xun Shiyushi zhi” 授 慕容珣侍御史制, WYYH 394.2004a (cf. QTW 251.2539a). This sentence seems to have been inserted as an interlinear note on the “palace maiden née Zhang” 宮人張氏. 脽間 seems to be an error for 離間. ZZTJ 210.6665.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

189

hundred and twenty juan), it was compiled by the late Tang historian Chen Yue 陳岳 (?–900?), allegedly on the basis of various “veritable records” (shilu 實錄) of successive Tang emperors. In addition to the crime of “robbery,” which could mean robbing people of their properties and/or women, Murong Xun, as reported by Chen Yue, accused Huifan of one more crime—committing adultery with someone close to Taiping, definitely an offense for an ordained monk. Given that Murong Xun has been accorded an official biography in neither of the two Tang histories, we cannot check how official historiograhers have understood his role in combating Huifan directly and Princess Taiping indirectly. Murong Xun’s ally in this conflict, Xue Deng, has his biography in each of the two Tang histories. The Jiu Tangshu describes the collaborative attack of these two officials on Huifan: During the Jingyun era (710–12), [Xue Deng] was promoted to be the yushi daifu (censor-in-chief). At the time, the monk Huifan relied on the power and influence of Princess Taiping to take illegal possession of shops owned by commoners. The local prefuctural and subprefectural authorities dared not deal with the cases. When Xue Qianguang was about to send a memorial to the court to impeach [Huifan], someone asked him to stop. [Xue] Qianguang (i.e. Xue Deng)139 said, “The legal officials should deal with the wronged and blocked. How should I avoid this? I won’t mind even though I may make the impeachment in the morning and get demoted by evening.” Therefore, along with Murong Xun, a dianzhong 殿中 (i.e. dianzhong shiyushi 殿中侍御史) (palace censor), he impeached Huifan. It ended up that he was framed by Princess Taiping and was demoted to be the governor of Qizhou.140 景雲中, 擢拜 御史大夫. 時僧惠範恃太平公主權勢, 逼奪百姓店肆, 州縣不能理. 謙光 將加彈奏, 或請寢之, 謙光曰 : “ 憲臺理冤滯, 何所迴避 ? 朝彈暮黜, 亦可 矣.” 遂與殿中慕容珣奏彈之, 反為太平公主所構, 出為岐州刺史.141

139 140

141

Qianguang was Xue Deng’s original name. See his biography JTS 101.3136. The Da Tang xinyu version of this story (see above) presents the official functions of Xue Deng and Murong Xun in a different way: palace aide to the censor-in-chief, rather than censor-in-chief (for Xue Deng), and attendant censor, rather than palace censor (for Murong Xun). JTS 101:3141. Cf. XTS 112.4171, and two versions of the same story in CFYG 515.6160b, 520B.6214b, the former of which contains an almost identical account with the JTS one, while the latter slightly differs This event is briefly mentioned, too, in Taiping’s XTS biography (XTS 83.3651), right after the account of Wei Chuangong’s partly successful

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

190

Chen

Xue Deng’s Jiu Tangshu and Xin Tangshu biographers confine themselves to giving a general timeframe for this event: the Jingyun era, which lasted from July 31, 710, to February 11, 712. We do not know whether or not the accusation against Huifan had something to do with a renovation project for Shengshansi in Jinglong 3 (February 15, 709–February 3, 710), which reportedly caused several dozen residents to lose their houses.142 It seems that Sima Guang did not think so. He places this accusation to sometime between the fifth and the seventh month of Jingyun 2 (May 22-September 16, 711). Meanwhile, he also compares the differences between the two accounts of this event in Jiu Tangshu and Tang tongji. He finally informs us, without giving his reasons, that he has adopted the Jiu Tangshu account.143

142 143









impeachment. All these different versions, in addition to one more provided by Da Tang xinyu and several more, are all listed in Appendix 2.F. See Chapter Three of my above-quoted forthcoming book, Collision and Collision. ZZTJ 210.6665. Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (1007–73), on the other hand, has followed the Tang tongji account in placing Murong Xun’s impeachment in some time after Taiping was exiled to 濮州 on February 22, 711 (see below). See XTS 83.3651: 監察御史慕容珣復 劾慧範事, 帝疑珣離間骨肉, 貶密州司馬.  The Tang tongji account has been translated before (2.4.2). In relating this political standoff, Tang tongji differs from JTS (and also XTS, which is mainly based on JTS in this) on four points. First, while Tang tongji, according to Sima Guang’s quote, depicted the impeachment as a single-handed heroic act by Murong Xun, JTS has it as a joint move of Murong Xun and Xue Deng.  Second, regarding the timing of the impeachment, Tang tongji placed the conflict during Taiping’s absence from the capital due to her brief semi-exile in 711. Given that Taiping was ordered to move to Puzhou on February 22, 711 (Jingyun 2.2.1 [bingzi]) and was allowed to return to the capital sometime in the fifth month of Jingyun 2 (May 22–June 20, 711) (ZZTJ 210.6663, 6665), the impeachment, according to Tang Tongji, happened sometime after February 22, 711, but before June 20, 711, in contrast to JTS and XTS, which would have us believe that it happened while the princess was still in the capital, enabling her to give Huifan prompt and timely assistance.  Thirdly, as for the allegations against Huifan, JTS specifies it as infringement of property (illegal possession of people’s stores [diansi 店肆]), while Tang tongji provided one more, an illicit relationship with Taiping’s wet nurse (née Zhang), an accusation that was probably attempted as a circumlocution for Huifan’s adultery with the princess herself. It is interesting to note that in Murong Xun’s epitaph, the monk is charged with a very different crime: robbing a man of his wife.  Finally, while Tang tongji tells us that Murong Xun was demoted since Ruizong, who was unhappy with him as he took advantage of the princess’s absence to attack her, suspected that he was intent on alienating him and his sister, JTS ascribes Murong Xun and Xue Deng’s failure to move towards Taiping’s defense of Huifan.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

191

2.4.3 Impeachment from Cui Yinfu Huifan’s trouble did not end here. Ouyang Xiu reports that when Huifan, by relying on Taiping, coerced other people’s sons and daughters, Cui Yinfu 崔隱 甫 (?–739) impeached him. As a result, Cui Yingfu was squeezed out of his position and demoted to a remote place.144 Ouyang Xiu does not tell us the details of Huifan’s crimes. Nor does he provide a timeframe for this event, merely ambiguously observing that this happened before Xuanzong came to the throne,145 which could mean when Ruizong handed over the throne to him in 712, or after he completely seized on supreme power by eradicating Taiping’s group and driving Ruizong into complete retirement in 713. It therefore seems that Cui Yinfu’s impeachment of Huifan might have been synchronous with that raised by Xue Deng and Murong Xun. Although the force with which Taiping defended the accused monk might lend some support to suspicions about an affair, we should also recognize that their relationship was not merely personal, but also highly politically informed, as is shown by the fact that he was singled out as her collaborator in fixing government appointments. A Violent Death 2.5 The political nature of this relationship can be further corroborated by Huifan’s being named as a chief accomplice of Taiping, both on the occasion of the princess plotting against Xuanzong, and of executing her conspirators and subsequently the princess’s own suicide following the foiling of their plot. The “Basic Annals” (benji 本紀) of Xuanzong in the Jiu Tangshu records that on July 29, 713, Xuanzong executed Huifan along with other accomplices of Taiping in a conspiracy aimed at dethroning the recently installed young emperor. In addition to Huifan, these accomplices included: 1. Dou Huaizhen 竇懷貞 (?–713), 2. Cen Xi 岑羲 (?–713), 3. Xiao Zhizhong 蕭至忠 (?–713), 4. Chang Yuankai 常元楷 (?–713), 5. Xue Ji 薛稷 (?–713), 6. Jia Yingfu 賈膺福 (?–713), 7. Li Ci 李慈 (?–713), 8. Li Qin 李欽 (?–713), 9. Li You 李猷 (?–713),



144

145

 Bypassing Tang tongji, Sima Guang has opted for the account in JTS, which, according to his interpretation, dates the impeachment to some time after Taiping was called back from Puzhou. See Cui Yinfu’s biography at XTS 130.4497: 浮 屠 惠 範倚太平公主脅人子女, 隱甫 劾 狀 , 反 為 所 擠 , 貶 邛 州 司 馬 . His JTS biography, however, makes no mention of this story. XTS 130.4497: 玄 宗 立 .

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

192

Chen

10. Cui Shi 崔湜 (?–713), 11. Lu Cangyong 盧藏用 (?–713), and 12. Fu Xiaozhong 傅孝忠 (?–713).146 Furthermore, Taiping’s Jiu Tangshu biography reports that after she was ordered to commit suicide following the frustration of her conspiracy, her property was confiscated. When the same was done with Huifan’s, it was estimated to be worth “several hundreds thousand strings (guan 貫, a string of one thousand ‘dollars’) (數十萬貫) of cash.”147 The same source reports that the princess, her sons, and her accomplices, totaling several dozen, were all executed.148 Sima Guang counts Huifan as a major conspirator for Taping, along with 1. Dou Huaizhen, 2. Cen Xi, 3. Xiao Zhizhong, 4. Cui Shi, 5. Xue Ji, 6. Li Jin 李晉 (?–713),149 7. Chang Yuankai, 8. Li Ci, 9. Li Qin, 10. Li You, 11. Jia Yingfu, 12. Tang Qun 唐晙 (Taiping’s son-in-law) (?–713), and 13. a palace maiden née Yuan 元, who was accused of attempting to poison Xuanzong.150 Then, after reporting the Xuanzong-led campaign to purge Taiping’s clique, Sima Guang, following the lead of Jiu Tangshu, narrates her forced suicide and the confiscation of her immense fortune and properties along with those of Huifan’s, creating the impression that the monk might have been executed at the same time.151

146



147

148 149

150 151

JTS 7.161–62. When JTS reports this military conflict on another occasion (in Xuanzong’s own Basic Annals) (JTS 8.169), it does not mention Huifan. XTS only mentions this conflict in Xuanzong’s Basic Annals (XTS 5.122), and very briefly, omitting the names of all of Taiping’s accomplices except for Cen Xi, Xiao Zhizhong, and Dou Huaizhen.  Dou Huaizhen, Xiao Zhizhong, Cen Xi, Xue Ji, Jia Yingfu, Cui Shi, and Lu Cangyong have biographies in both of the two Tang dynastic histories: JTS 92.2971, 70.2540, 73.2591, 185A.4789, 74.2623, 94.3000; XTS 123.4371, 102.3967, 23.3893, 197.5623, 99.3921, 123.4374. (It is noteworthy that Dou Huaizhen’s great grandfather Dou Zhao was an older brother of Empress Taimu [of Gaozu].) Tang Qun’s official biography is at JTS 58.2307, 60.2346. Fu Xiaozhong was highly respected by his contemporaries as a talented astrologer (JTS 185B.4817). JTS here has 數 十 萬 緡 / 貫, while ZZTJ (210.6686) has 數十萬緡, both meaning the same amount— several hundred millions, which still far pales before the amount given by Li Chuo: thirteen million strings 一千三百萬貫 (that is, 1.3 billion!) (Li Chuo’s astonishing report is quoted and discussed in 2.3.1). XTS, on the other hand, is close to accepting this amount given by Li Chuo. See XTS 83.3651, discussed in 2.3.1. JTS 183.4740. Cf. ZZTJ 210.6685. A member of the royal Li family (carrying a princely title Xinxing 新興), Li Jin was then the zhangshi 長史 (Executive Governor) of Yongzhou 雍州. His official biography is at JTS 60.2346. ZZTJ 210.6681. ZZTJ 210.6684.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

193

The Xin Tangshu, on the other hand, appears more ambiguous in reporting Huifan’s death. Although it lists the monk as a key strategist in Taiping’s clique in the conspirary to dethrone, or even murder, Xuanzong. It fails to specify if Huifan was among the “several dozen of Taiping’s followers and sons who were killed” (諸子及黨與死者數十人) following the military attack staged in the night of July 29, 713. In addition to Huifan, the Xin Tangshu identifies the following as Taiping’s major supporters: 1. Dou Huaizhen, 2. Cen Xi, 3. Xiao Zhizhong, 4. Cui Shi, 5. Xue Ji, 6. Li Jin, 7. Jia Yingfu, 8. Chang Yuankai, and 9. Li Ci.152 Given that the other members listed above were all executed either the evening of the military action or shortly afterwards, the Xin Tangshu compilers must have believed that Huifan was also killed at the time, although they did not explicitly state so. It seems that in reporting Taiping’s accomplices, the authors of the Jiu Tangshu, the Xin Tangshu, and Sima Guang were all based on an edict that Ruizong issued on the very day of the court coup to denounce the “traitors.” Although mentioned in Jiu Tangshu and Zizhi tongjian, neither source quotes this edict.153 Fortunately, the whole of the document is preserved in Cefu yuangui and Quan Tangwen, the latter of which probably simply was copied from the former.154 This edict lists Taiping’s allies: We did not anticipate that the villains secretly conspired, raising military attack within the palace walls. The traitors 1. Dou Huaizhen, 2. Xiao Zhizhong, 3. Cen Xi, 4. Xue Ji, 5. Li Ci, 6. Li You, 7. Chang Yuankai, 8. Tang Qun, 9. Tang Xin 唐昕 (?–713) (an older brother of Tang Qun), 10. Li Jin, 11. Li Qin, 12. Jia Yingfu, 13. Fu Xiaozhong, 14. the monk Huifan, and others, wrongly received the grace and favoritism [from the government] in spite of their mediocrity and triviality. Without making any contribution even as tiny as a tip of hair, they gave rise to a mind [as evil as those of] owls and roebucks. Together, they [intended to] lead the Northern Army to enter the inner forbidden palaces, in order to depose Us and the Emperor (i.e. Xuanzong), and to usurp supreme power. We ordered the emperor to lead soldiers to attack and eradicate them—and immediately, they were completely ridden of. … 不謂姦宄潛謀, 蕭牆作 釁.逆賊竇懷貞、蕭至忠、岑羲、薛稷、李慈、李猷、常元楷、唐

152 153 154

XTS 83.3651–52. JTS 7.161, ZZTJ 210.6683. CFYG 84.998b-999a/QTW 19.226b-227a.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

194

Chen 晙、唐昕、李晉、李欽、賈應 155 福、傅孝忠、僧惠範等, 咸以庸微, 謬承恩辛. 未伸毫發之效, 遂興梟獐之心. 共舉北軍, 突入中禁, 將欲廢 朕及皇帝, 以行篡逆. 朕令皇帝, 率眾討除, 應時殄盡. …156

If we may consider this edict as authentic (so far there is no evidence for the opposite), this is the earliest available document about Huifan. A comparison of this list with the two in Jiu Tangshu and Zizhi tongjian reveals that they are largely identical. Although Huifan is the last conspirator listed, his crucial role in Taiping’s clique cannot be doubted.157 Interestingly, as an aftermath of Huifan’s life, the Jiu Tangshu records the following significant anecdote: When Xuanzong was first enthroned, the head of a Buddha-statue at the Baimasi in the Eastern Capital (i.e. Luoyang) fell [onto the ground] outside the gate of the [Buddha-]hall for no reason. Later, when Yao Chong started to supervise the administration of the national affairs, in view of the monk Huifan’s meddling with politics by associating himself with Taiping, he sought to regulate monks and nuns, ordering them to prostrate in front of their parents and not to leave their halls after noon. His policies [of controlling Buddhism] were rather harsh. 玄宗初即位, 東都 白馬寺铁像頭, 無故自落於殿門外. 後姚崇秉政, 以僧惠範附太平亂政, 謀汰僧尼, 令拜父母, 午後不出院, 其法頗峻.158

Thus, according to some accounts, Huifan was blamed for the anti-Buddhist policies that Xuanzong and one of his most capable prime ministers had assumed after 713. 155 156

157 158

CFYG has 應 , which was obviously an error for 膺. The QTW edition is correct in having 膺. CFYG 84.998b-999a; cf. QTW 19. 226b-227a, in which Li Ci’s name is dropped. The day following Xuanzong’s successful attack on Taiping’s group, Ruizong abdicated all the power to him. In recognition of this, Xuanzong issued an edict, which contains several sentences echoing those in Ruizong’s edict: 不謂姦慝潛謀, 蕭牆竊發. 逆賊竇懷貞 等並以庸妄, 權齒朝廷, 毫髮之效未申, 丘山之釁仍積. 共成梟獍, 將肆姦回… (JTS 8.169–70 [bold mine]; cf. QTW 20.236b-237a, in which the edict is preserved with several slight variances). I am willing to assume that his name was put at the end of the list probably only due to his status as a monk. JTS 37.1374. XTS (35.925) reports a similar accident at the same Baimasi, but as happening during the Shenlong era (705–07). We are not certain as to whether it was another accident, or the same one that was recast to fit a different historical context.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

3

195

Huifan’s Life: A Preliminary Reconstruction

Following a discussion of a limited amount of Buddhist sources, we have proceeded to investigate the relatively rich extant information on Huifan provided in secular sources. We have examined ten secular sources in total. Five of them (#1. Chaoye qianzai, #2. Murong Xun’s epitaph, #3. Da Tang xinyu, #4. Shangshu gushi, and #5. Tang tongji), all non-official, belonged to the Tang period, while the other five, all official, to the period of Five Dynasties (#6. Jiu Tangshu) or the Song dynasty (i.e. #7. Tang huiyao, #8. Cefu yuangui, #9. Xin Tangshu, and #10. Zizhi tongjian). In order to bring these secular sources to bear on the relevant Buddhist sources, we need, first of all, to compare these secular sources themselves closely and see how they complement and/or contradict each other. After that, I will, by following the work that Denis Twitchett has done on investigating the sources of the official histories of the Tang (Jiu Tangshu and Xin Tangshu),159 compare these secular sources with their monastic counterparts, for the purpose of gauging the degree to which not only how “non-official” sources informed the writing of the “official” histories, but also how secular and monastic sources might have used each other. Secular Sources: A General Survey 3.1 Chaoye qianzai (#1) provides a general survey on the life of Huifan under the reigns of Empress Wu, Zhongzong, Ruizong, and Xuanzong, emphasizing some of his most characteristic features as a horrendous “villain-monk,” including his obsession with and arbitrary use of sorcery, his insatiable voraciousness, and his blatant attempt to manipulate secular power. In addition to characterizating the monk’s personality and political stances, “Murong Xun’s funeral epitaph” (#2) features the minister’s attempt to convict Huifan. This theme is repeated, albeit with different details, in Da Tang xinyu (#3), which briefly refers to Huan Yanfan’s impeachment of Huifan. Shangshu gushi (#4) connects Huifan’s atrocious embezzlement with the project of building a “Buddha-hall” at Shengshansi, while Tang tongji (#5) relates Murong Xun’s impeachment of Huifan for his adultery with Taiping’s wetnurse and his seizure of commoners’ property. Although Tang tongji, non-extant now, this is only explicitly quoted by Sima Guang and his assistants once, when they mention Huifan, there is reason to believe that a considerable amount of the information available to them about Huifan, like that related to other Tang events and people, might have come from this work. 159

Twitchett, The Writing of Official History Under the Tang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

196

Chen

Of these five non-official sources, the account provided by Chaoye qianzai is most complete and valuable, although the main body of this reportage is generalized and obviously biased. Still it ptovides very few details about Huifan’s life. Fortunately, the other four non-official sources contain some description. Jiu Tangshu (#6) mentions Huifan eight times: (1) his impeachment by Huan Yanfan, (2) his receiving rewards in 706, (3) his affair with Taiping, (4) Liu Ze’s memorial against him, (5) his being impeached by Xue Deng and Murong Xun, (6) and (7) his conspiracy and execution along with Taiping as one of her accomplices (two times: one in Xuanzong’s “Basic Annals” and the other in Taiping’s biography), and (8) an aftermath of his death (regulation of Buddhism by Yao Chong).160 Tang huiyao (#7), which records the impeachments launched by Huan Yanfan, Wei Chuangong and Liu Ze, is useful for dating those attacks (particularly the latter). Cefu yuangui (#8) is the earliest known source for the whole of Ruizong’s edict in 713 condemning Taiping’s accomplices, including Huifan.161 This Song dynasty compendium also preserves evidence that, though not directly concerning Huifan, brings to light the fate of the Changluo statue.162 Further, Cefu yuangui contains accounts on confrontations between Huifan and court officials including Huan Yanfan, Wei Chuangong, Liu Ze, and Xue Deng and Murong Xun (note that Cefu yuangui mentions twice the case of Wei Chuangong and that of Xue Qianguang/Murong Xun!).163 The account of Wei Chuangong’s impeachment of Huifan is added a long and valuable interlinear note which touches on the ascendancy of this ambitious monk in both the political and religious worlds, highlighting his relationship with several of the most powerful men and women in his day (the two Zhang brothers, Zhongzong, his empress and his sister, Princess Taiping), and his roles in the two tremendous religious projects at the time.164 Xin Tangshu (#9) repeats three impeachments of Huifan already mentioned in Jiu Tangshu (i.e. by Huan Yanfan, Liu Ze, and Xue Deng/Murong Xun)165 and highlights the favoritism extended to him from the royal house166 (from Zhongzong and his empress, whom the Jiu Tangshu emphasized as Huifan’s 160 161 162 163 164 165 166

See, respectively, JTS 99.2929 (1), 7.141 (2), 183.4740 (3), 77.2683 (4), 101.3141 (5), 7.162 (6), 183.4740 (7), and 37.1374 (8). CFYG 84.575a. Ibid. See CFYG 328.3875a-b (Huan Yanfan), 515.6160a/520A.6213a (Wei Chuangong), 545.6542a (Liu Ze), and 515.6160b/520B.6214b ( Xue Deng/Murong Xun). CFYG 515.6160a. XTS 120.4311 (Huan Yanfan), 112.4174 (Liu Ze), 83.3651 (Murong Xun). XTS 83.3651.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

197

patrons, the focus is now switched to Taiping). It also features Huifan’s role in Taiping’s conspiracy against Xuanzong, although it refrains from an explicit statement that he was executed along with other accomplices of Taiping.167 Although omitting two Jiu Tangshu accounts (i.e. 706 award [2], and an aftermath of his death [8]), Xin Tangshu contains two stories unknown in Jiu Tangshu: the impeachment of Huifan by Wei Chuangong, and that by Cui Yinfu.168 Zizhi tongjian (#10) incorporates all the accounts shared by the two Tang histories (i.e. the impeachments by Huan Yanfan, Liu Ze, Xue Deng/Murong Xun; and Huifan’s conspiracy with Taiping),169 and one more from Jiu Tangshu but omitted by Xin Tangshu (i.e. 706 awarding). It was also elaborated on in an account featuring Zhongzong and Empress Wei’s favoritism towards Huifan by using the abovementioned interlinear note in Cefu yuangui and a part of Huan Yanfan’s memorial,170 in addition to introducing one account seen in neither of the two Tang histories: Huifan’s involvement in building the Changluo statue.171 Likewise, for this information, Sima Guang must have been indebted to the Cefu yuangui, or an earlier source on which Cefu yuangui was based as well. Although Zizhi tongjian includes one impeachment (that by Wei Chuangong) found in Xin Tangshu but not in Jiu Tangshu,172 it does not mention Cui Yinfu’s impeachment either, leaving Xin Tangshu as the only known source for this impeachment. Regarding Zizhi tongjian, we should also note that for almost all the accounts on Huifan found in the previous sources, some of which are without specific timeframes, Sima Guang and his collaborators, with their charac­teristic meticulousness and accuracy, provide quite specific time-frames (some of them even contain days). Although our reconstruction of Huifan’s eventful life has been undertaken on the basis of the chronological order laid out by the two official Tang histories (Jiu Tangshu and Xin Tangshu), and arguably the best chronicle of Chinese history (Zizhi tongjian), cross references are made as often as possible, to two immense historical compendia (also officially sponsored), Tang huiyao and Cefu yuangui. Such an approach has proven rewarding, given that these two compendia collect sources which originated from the Tang and only some of which were used by the two official histories of the Tang and the renowned 167 168 169 170 171 172

XTS 83.3651–52. XTS 83.3651, 130.4497. ZZTJ 208.6585 (Huan Yanfan), 210.6664 (Liu Ze), 210.6665 (Xue Deng & Murong Xun), 210.6681–86 (conspiracy). ZZTJ 208.6585. ZZTJ 208.6616–17. Ibid.,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

198

Chen

chronicle. The sources preserved in Cefu yuangui are worth particular attention in view of the fact that the sources were generally taken with very few or even completely with no changes. With this brief observation on the interrelationship between these nonBuddhist sources, let us now try to see what progress this combination of secular and monastic sources yields. Secular and Monastic Sources: Compared and Contrasted 3.2 Before comparing monastic and secular sources on Huifan, let us here reiterate the main points made by the major monastic sources, the three principal ones being Zanning’s Da Song seng shi lüe, Zhipan’s Fozu tongji, and Xizhong’s Shishi zijian. Zanning’s narrative is composed of three parts: first, when Shengshansi was “founded” in 706, Huifan, and eight more monks, were each bestowed a fifth-rank title and the position of chaosan daifu; second, when a “great statue” was cast, Huifan was promoted to be a zhengyi daifu, the duke of Shangyong and the Shengshansi abbot; and finally, he was promoted to be a yinqing guanglu daifu. Zhipan, on the other hand, talks about Huifan’s promotional process in terms of two phases: first, when the foundation of Shengshansi was decreed in 706, Huifan alone was promoted to be a zhengyi daifu and the duke of Shan­ gyong, while each of the nine other monks were appointed to lesser positions (chaosan daifu and subprefectural duke); second, when Shengshansi was constructed, Huifan was made a yinqing guanglu daifu and the Shengshansi abbot. Xizhong, who based his work on a source called “Tongjian,” informs us that in 707 or early 708, Huifan was promoted to yinqing guanglu daifu, and duke of Shangyong, while each of the nine other monks were bestowed a fifth-rank title and appointed as dukes, either at the prefectural or subprefectural level. Based on the same source, Xizhong claims that Huifan, who was responsible for the construction of Shengshansi in Luoyang and a great statue on the Changluo slope, was so highly esteemed by Zhongzong and Empress Wei that none dared to challenge him. First and foremost, there is a major discrepancy between Zanning and Zhipan’s accounts: whereas the former tells us that nine Buddhist monks, including Huifan, each received a fifth-rank title and were each enfeoffed a subprefectural dukedom in the second month of Shenlong 2 (March 19–April 16, 706), the latter insists that Huifan was on that occasion made a zhengyi daifu (which belonged to the fourth rank), while the other nine monks (including Fazang and Huizhen) received a fifth rank (chaosan daifu) and were enfoeffed as subprefectural dukes. Due to lack of decisive evidence, I left this

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

199

issue unsolved before (see [1.3]). Now, let us see what (if any) new light these non-Buddhist sources may shed on this intriguing discrepancy. We noted in (2.2.2) that regarding this issue, Sima Guang has two contradictory accounts. He once suggests that Huifan received a third rank (yinqing guanglu daifu) in 705 (between February 20, 705 and May 26, 705 [i.e. the very end of the fourth month of Shenlong 1]). While on another occasion, he explicitly states that on April 9, 706, Huifan received a fifth rank (chaosan daifu). Had Huifan been granted a third-rank in 705, he must have received a higher one on April 9, 706; or if he received a fifth rank on April 9, 706, then in 705 he could not have received a third rank title, but rather a fifth rank one (as eight or nine other monks did).173 Which possibility looks more likely? At this juncture, we should elaborate on the implications of a Jiu Tangshu passage according to which Huifan received a third rank title after April 9, 706.174 This means that Huifan did not receive a third rank title in 705. Accordingly, of the two contradictory accounts in Zizhi tongjian (that Huifan received a third rank title in 705, and that he received a fifth rank title on April 9, 706), the latter seems better founded. In other words, it seems safer to assume that Huifan was among the nine monks who received a fifth rank on April 9, 706. In this regard, this account of Zizhi tongjian is compatible with the Zanning account. That being said, we should also note one significant variation between them: while Zanning tells us that in Shenlong 2 (706) all nine monks received subprefectural dukedom, Sima Guang observes that at least one of them received a prefectural dukedom by saying that “[the nine monks] were bestowed prefectural and subprefectural dukedom” (cijue jun xian gong 賜爵郡、縣公).175 This is repeated by Xizhong.176 Concerning this point, we have to return once again to the same Jiu Tangshu passage that just provided corroborative evidence. This passage suggests that Huifan was “enfeoffed a duke” either when or after he was appointed the Shengshansi abbot and promoted to the third rank. We have already shown that this happened after he was granted a fifth rank on April 9, 706. In other words, sometime after April 9, 706, he was “enfeoffed” as a [prefectural] duke. It seems that he could not have been enfoeffed as a 173

174 175 176

Here one might wonder why Huifan received the same rank title twice, once in 705 and the other time in 706. We might need to recall the case of Fazang, who seems to have also received a fifth rank title twice (in 705 and 706). It is also possible that, like Fazang, Huifan declined the fifth rank when it was granted to him in 705 and then it was reawarded to him one year later (supposing that he was indeed offered a fifth, rather than third-rank title). JTS 183.4739, discussed in 2.2.1. ZZTJ 208.6598, quoted and translated in 2.2.1. Shishi zijian, X 76: 6.192b13–16, quoted and translated in 1.4.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

200

Chen

prefectural duke on April 9, 706; otherwise, he would not have been in need of being once again (sometime after April 9, 706) enfoeffed to the same level of dukedom.177 Another significant discrepancy between Zanning and the other two major Buddhist sources is that while the former clearly notes that Huifan was among the nine monks who were rewarded equally in 706, Zhipan and Xizhong explicitly placed Huifan in a higher position than this group of nine monks—in other words, according to Zhipan and Xizhong, in 706 there were ten monks involved. Commenting on this difference in (1.5), I have observed that the fact that Zanning was able to name these nine monks implies that he might have had access to a primary source in giving this number and therefore is perhaps more trustworthy as a source. From the reports Jiu Tangshu and Zizhi tongjian made of this event, we know that in 706 there were indeed only nine Buddhist monks awarded, in addition to several Daoist priests. Taking Buddhist and Daoist priests together, the Jiu Tangshu authors have given a rough number of shiyu 十餘 (“more than ten”).178 Very likely, this might have given Zhipan and Xizhong the mistaken meaning that there were totally ten monks awarded; that is, Huifan plus nine more. One more major issue created by the Buddhist sources on Huifan is the relationship between the two statues attributed to Huifan. In this respect, a secular source also provides decisive proof for their separateness. On the one hand, we know for certain that the first statue was brought to successful completion; on the other hand, we have noted the high likelihood, as supported by the record in Cefu yuangui, that the Changluo statue was unfinished. This then establishes that the two statues were different and the first one could not have been at the Changluo slope. Where could the statue have been built then? We should note that Huifan was known to have built a “Buddha-hall” within Shengshansi, a project through which he allegedly embezzled a huge volume of money.179 The amount of this embezzlement reflected the size of the project. Further, a Buddha-hall was (and still is) built for housing a Buddha-statue(s) or image(s). We can thus speculate that the Shengshansi Buddha-hall was built for a great statue, which suggests that the statue that had brought further honors to Huifan was probably located within the monastery. Can this be further 177

178 179

There were three levels of dukes, subprefectural (xiangong 縣公), prefectural (jungong 郡公), and state (guogong 國公). Given that Huifan is not known to have been enfeoffed a state-duke, if he was enfeoffed twice, the first dukedom was very likely subprefectural, rather than prefectural. JTS 7.141 and ZZTJ 208.6598, both translated and discussed in 2.2.2. Shangshu gushi, SKQS 1889: 3a4–5, quoted and translated in 2.3.1.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

201

verified? I have suggested elsewhere that this is true.180 For now, we are in a position to address the relationship, if any, between the three major Buddhist sources and a number of secular ones that have been discussed. First of all, it is rather clear that Xizhong’s account is primarily based on Zizhi tongjian, as this is expressly acknolwdged by Xizhong himself. To be specific, it was constructed on the basis of the two passages in Zizhi tongjian about Huifan’s being rewarded in 706 and his being impeached by Wei Chuangong on October 12, 707. A quick comparison of Xizhong’s account and these two passages in Zizhi tongjian shows that his dating of Zhongzong’s honoring and enfoeffing Huifan and other monks to Jinglong 1 (October 1, 707-January 27, 708) turns out to be a misreading of one of these two Zizhi tongjian passages, in which Jinglong 1 is given as the date for Wei Chuangong’s attack on Huifan, rather than Huifan’s being honored and enfoeffed, which the other Zizhi tongjian passage explicitly dates April 9, 706.181 Regarding Zhipan’s account in Fozu tongji, it seems almost certain to have been primarily derived from Zanning’s report, although a misreading of a relevant passage in Jiu Tangshu182 led Zhipan to assume that ten monks were involved in the 706 awardings and furthermore, Zanning was obviously mistaken in separating Huifan from the other “nine” monks by a difference in the titles they received. Finally, in comparing Zanning’s report with secular sources, one may find that it is largely compatible with Sima Guang’s account that each of the nine monks, including Huifan, received a fifth-rank title. However, while Sima Guang and his collaborators remain content with such an general expression like “the Buddhist monk Huifan and others, nine in total” (seng Huifan deng jiuren 僧惠範等九人), Zanning meticulously lists nine individual monks. 180 181



182

Chen, “The Statues and Monks of Shengshan Monastery.” Compare Xizhong’s account (quoted and discussed in 1.4) with the following two ZZTJ passages translated and discussed in 2.2.2 and 2.3.1, respectively: Shishi zijian, X 76: 6.92b113–16: 丁未 景龍元年, 加僧慧範銀青光錄大夫, 上庸縣 公. 餘僧九人, 並加五品階, 賜爵郡縣公. 慧範造大像於長樂坂, 造聖善寺於東 都. 兼中天西明三寺主. 上及韋后皆重之, 一時權傾內外, 無敢指目者矣. ZZTJ 208.6598: [ 神龍二年二月] 丙申, 僧慧範等九人並加五品階, 賜爵郡縣公； 道士史崇恩等 [ 三人] 加五品階, 除國子祭酒, 同正；葉靜能加金紫光祿大夫. ZZTJ 208.6616–17: 銀青光祿大夫、上庸公、聖善、中天、西明三寺主慧範, 於 東都作聖善寺, 長樂坡作大像, 府庫為之虛耗. 上及韋后皆重之, 勢傾內外, 無 敢指目者. [ 景龍元年九月] 戊 申 , 侍 御 史 魏 傳弓發其姦贓四十餘萬, 請寘 極 法 . 上 欲 宥 之 , 傳 弓 曰 : “ 刑 賞 國 之 大 事, 陛下賞已妄加, 豈宜刑所不 及 !” 上乃削黜慧範, 放于家. JTS 7.141.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

202

Chen

These two facts, in combination, suggest that Zanning and Sima Guang’s accounts might have stemmed from one and the same source, to which Zanning’s version is perhaps more faithful given that he was patient enough to enumerate these nine monks. What was, then, this primary source first used by Zanning in 977 and then again, one hundred and seven years later (in 1084), by Sima Guang and his collaborators? At the present stage of my limited research, I can say nothing certain about this intriguing issue, although it seems that one likely candidate could be Chen Yue’s Tang tongji. Given that Zizhi tongji was completed more than one hundred years after Zanning compiled his Da Song seng shi lüe, there was no chance that Zanning ever consulted Zizhi tongjian. How about, then, the possibility of Zanning’s using other secular sources like Jiu Tangshu, which was completed a mere thirty-seven years before his Da Song seng shi lüe? This seems likely. At least Zanning appears to be indebted to Jiu Tangshu in his account about Huifan’s relationship with Princess Taiping.183 3.3 Huifan’s Image: A Preliminary Reconstruction On the basis of all the material presented and discussed above, we now have a relatively coherent understanding of some aspects of the eventful life of this extraordinary man. Huifan distinguished himself under the reign of Empress Wu, who took him as a “sacred monk.” His association with Tianzhongsi was traceable to the reign of Empress Wu. If Tianzhongsi mentioned in an edict that Empress Wu issued in 700 (sometime after the Ullambana festival in that year; i.e. on June 6, 700 [Jiushi 1.7.15]) turns out to be Zhongtiansi, as I suggest, Huifan was very likely the “barbarian monk” who invited Empress Wu to attend a relic-burying ceremony on Songshan. Unfortunately for this “barbarian monk” and his friends, Di Renjie’s 狄仁傑 (607–700) remonstration eventually prevented Empress Wu from attending the ceremony. Originally a close friend of the two Zhang brothers, Huifan turned against them during the 705 coup, which led to their execution and Empress Wu’s abdication. He then became a confidant of Zhongzong and especially his empress, née Wei, to whose “hidden palaces” he had free access. Taking advantage of his special relationship with the royal family, Huifan exerted his 183

This is made evident by even a cursory comparison of this account in Da Song seng shi lüe with a short JTS passage: Da Song seng shi lüe, T 52: 2.244c24–25: 唐太平公主奏胡僧慧範為聖善寺主, 仍 加三品, 封公爵. JTS 183.4739: 有胡僧惠範, 家富於財寶, 善事權貴. 公主與之私, 奏為聖善寺主, 加三品, 封公. 殖貨流於江劍.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

203

influence on court politics, which soon aroused strong protest from Huan Yanfan, a crucial member in the military attack on the Zhang brothers. Sometime between February 28 and March 28, 705 (Shenlong 1.2), Huan submitted a memorial to Zhongzong, urging him to impose the death penalty on Huifan on the grounds that he meddled with court affairs by means of sorcery. Huan’s proposal was ignored, and Huifan, along with eight more monks, were instead awarded by Zhongzong on April 9, 706 (Shenlong 2.2.22, a date with apparently unique symbolism) with both honorific titles and salaries. Although most of the monastic and secular sources agree in telling us that the awards were due to these monks’ meritorious service in building Shengshansi, some sources foster the impression that at least two of them, Huifan and Fazang, were also awarded for their role in the 705 coup. Shortly afterward, for his contribution to the successful construction of an unspecified Great Buddha-statue, which might be dated to some time between April 9, 706 and March 29, 707,184 Huifan was awarded an even higher official title, granted a more prestigious dukedom, and appointed the Shengshansi abbot. For the same reason, another monk, Wansui, then the Anluosi abbot, was also awarded and appointed as an (if not the) administrator of Shengshansi. However, only several months later, Huifan was accused of embezzling four hundred thousand strings of public funds in the course of supervising the construction of Shengshansi and that of the Changluo statue. Defying Zhongzong’s intent to protect Huifan, Wei Chuangong, the staunch impeacher, succeeded in forcing Zhongzong to defrock Huifan and put him under house arrest. I have found no documentation of Huifan’s role in the political strife following his dismissal from the center of power, which climaxed with the murder of Zhongzong on July 3, 710, and the subsequent victimization of his empress and her inner circle only twenty-five days later. We only know that Huifan quickly gained the favoritism of Princess Taiping, who was then emerging as perforce the most powerful woman in the empire thanks to her decisive role in overthrowing the Wei clique. The monk’s close relationship with the princess and its unusual nature are demonstrated by the three successive impeachments against him in 711. Sometime between February 25 and March 23, 711, in his memorial sent to Ruizong protesting the emperor’s inconsistencies respecting xiefeng officials, Liu Ze attacks Huifan as Taiping’s henchman, who helped her muster her followers by reinstating the dismissed xiefeng officials. A couple of months later, the monk was under a barrage of fire once again, from a joint impeachment filed by two censors, Xue Deng and Murong Xun, who accused him of even 184

For this dating, see Chen, “The Statues and Monks of Shengshan Monastery,” 133–36.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

204

Chen

more heinous crimes—embezzlement and an illicit relationship with the princess. It is very likely also around this time that a third case was raised against Huifan, from a court official called Cui Yinfu, who was to become a key figure under the reign of Xuanzong. With the protection of Taiping, Huifan got out of these charges intact, while his trio of impeachers were demoted or exiled. It is therefore quite natural that we find the two Tang histories and Zizhi tongjian as well list Huifan as one of the chief accomplices of Taiping in her attempt to depose Xuanzong when she and her nephew-emperor headed into an irreversible conflict. Now, we begin to have a portrait of this monk, though it is still far from complete. We have reason to congratulate ourselves that we now know quite a bit about him compared with what we did when we started reading Zanning’s report and other later Buddhist sources which are by and large based on Zanning’s account. However, some crucial questions remain unsolved. Through this examination, we have noted the central importance of Shengshansi in Huifan’s career. How did this come about? What kind of monastery was it? Related to this question, what was the relationship, if any, between Sheng­ shansi and the Great statue for which Huifan was rewarded once again shortly after the reward on April 9, 706? Another problem presents a similar puzzle: if we assume that the Changluo statue was different from the one which was responsible, according to Zanning, for Huifan’s promotion to the Shengshansi abbotship, how did they relate to each other (other than the fact that they were both Huifan’s brainchildren, although one of them was obviously aborted)? As we look into these problems, we will enter deeper layers of the politicoreligious dynamism at the turn of the eighth century, when the religious and political forces colluded and collided with each other with an intensity rarely witnessed in other periods of medieval China. It is against this politico-religious background that we must consider the importance of this “villain monk.”185 4

Concluding Remarks

The ten-year period between 704 and 713 has been widely recognized as a watershed in one of the greatest dynasties in imperial China. This period witnessed the restoration of the Great Tang, ending the reign of the only female ruler in medieval China, and the beginning of Tang solidification under one of the most capable rulers in Chinese history. The import of this period has, therefore, been hotly debated in recent decades. The roles played by religious 185

Chen, “The Statues and Monks of Shengshan Monastery.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

205

figures in this period have, however, remained largely unexplored. This article addresses several long-obscured aspects of the sociopolitical and religious reality of the period by integrating the perspectives of a key player within contemporary religious and political institutions. It aims at shedding new light on the Byzantine world of court intrigues, factional strife, political ambition, and shady business deals that filled the days of powerful monks, officials, and emperors alike at the dawn of the eighth century. Distinct from the limited information in Chinese Buddhist sources, which appear neutral in reporting the honors heaped upon Huifan and other monks, secular sources unanimously condemn Huifan as a greedy and lustful “evil monk.” Their writers, whether official historians or private authors, describe in detail how he violated the norms of a Buddhist monk, especially the monastic imperative to remain aloof from secular (and material) entanglements. Evi­dence from different sources, however, shows his unusual importance in the contem­porary political and religious worlds. Already highly respected by Empress Wu, Huifan developed his powerbase and influence under the reigns of Zhongzong and Ruizong. He was eagerly courted by these two sovereigns, imperial family members including Zhongzong’s empress née Wei and Princess Taiping, who both engaged in sexual and strategic relationships with him, and a number of courtiers. He was appointed the concurrent abbot of three major cosmopolitan monasteries, two of which (Great Shengshansi and Ximingsi) were major cultural centers in East Asia throughout the Great Tang. This study brings to light certain important patterns of the complicated interactions between the lay people and saṃgha in one of the most volatile periods in the Tang dynasty (and maybe also in the whole of imperial China). This period introduced changes that reshaped the political, religious, and intellectual landscapes in the coming two centuries under the Tang dynasty and redirected to a certain degree the historical development in the rest of medieval China. Buddhism seems to have played a crucial role in these radical and speedy changes. We have seen that the state and saṃgha implicated each other with such an intensity that a wide-ranging market was formed in which a variety of different political and religious forces were at stake. Huifan was the mastermind behind a series of politico-religious projects that became a special trading platform in which different groups of people with varying (sometimes even conflicting) agendas could obtain what they sought. Huifan managed to stay in the center of this platform, no matter how precarious, and maintained balance between these different forces. However, as soon as this subtle balance collapsed, the trading and arbitrating of these political and religious powers immediately became too big a game, which easily claimed the life of this “barbarian” and “villainous” monk.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

206

Chen

Appendix 1: A Chronicle of Huifan’s 惠/慧範 (?–713) Life

§1. On June 6, 700: Huifan was probably the “barbarian monk” affiliated with Tianzhongsi 天中寺 on Mount Song 嵩山 who invited Empress Wu 武后 (623–705; r. 690–705) to attend a ceremony of “burying the Buddha’s relic,” an effort which was foiled by Di Renjie 狄仁傑 (607–700); §2. Between 704–705: Originally a close friend of the two Zhang brothers (Zhang Yizhi 張易之 [676?–705] and Zhang Changzong 張昌宗 [676?–705]), Huifan turned against them during the 705 coup, which led to their execution and Empress Wu’s abdication; §3. In 705 and beyond: Huifan became a confidant of Zhongzong and especially his empress, née Wei 韋后 (?–710), to whose “hidden palaces” he had free access; §4. Sometime between February 28 and March 28, 705: Huan Yanfan sent a memorial to Zhongzong, urging Huifan’s execution on the accusation that he meddled with court affairs by means of sorcery. The proposal was ignored; §5. On April 9, 706: On the occasion of ordering the construction of Shengshansi 聖善寺 in Luoyang, which was believed to have been instigated by Huifan, Zhongzong decreed that Huifan, along with eight more monks, be rewarded by Zhongzong with both honorific titles and salaries; §6. Sometime between April 9, 706 and March 29, 707: Due to his contribution to the successful casting of a great Buddha-statue and its installment at Shengshansi, Huifan was, once again, rewarded, with an even higher official title (of third rank), granted a more prestigious dukedom (prefectural), and appointed as the Shengshansi abbot; §7. In late 706 or early 707: Huifan, then acting as the concurrent abbot of three major monasteries—Ximingsi 西明寺, Zhongtiansi 中天寺 (probably an error for Tianzhongsi 天中寺) in addition to Shengshansi—was ordered by Zhongzong to supervise the construction of a statue at the Changle Slope 長樂坡, close to Chang’an; §8. On December 7, 706: Zhongzong ordered the termination of the Changle project due to its drain on labor; §9. On October 12, 707: The censor Wei Chuangong 魏傳弓 (?–707+) accused Huifan of embezzling public funds (some parts of which were earmarked for the Changle project) and requested his execution. Zhongzong, who did not wish to punish Huifan, stripped him of his official title,s and put him under house arrest; §10. Sometime between February 25 and March 23, 711: another court official, Liu Ze 柳澤 (d. 734), launched another attack on Huifan for his inappropriate involvement in government appointments; §11. Sometime between May 22 and September 16, 711: Two more censors, Xue Deng 薛登 (a.k.a. Xue Qianguang 薛謙光; 647–719) and Murong Xun 慕容詢 (669–736),

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004271494_000

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

207

filed a joint case against Huifan, charging him with infringing upon people’s properties, and having a clandestine affair with Taiping; §12. Probably also in 711: Huifan was impeached by the court official Cui Yinfu 崔隱 甫 (?–739); §13. In 712: Huifan and others began conspiring with Taiping to depose Xuanzong; §14. On July 29, 713: Huifan was executed along with other conspirators when their alleged coup was preempted.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

208

Chen

Appendix 2: Secular Sources on Huifan—A Thematic Analysis

朝野佥載 5.114 周有婆羅門僧惠範, 姦矯狐魅, 挾邪作蠱, 咨 趄鼠黠, 左道弄權. 則天以為聖僧, 往還宮掖. 太上登極, 從以給使, 出入禁門. 每入, 即賜綾羅、金銀器物. 氣岸甚高,

舊 唐 書

A. 聖寵 Imperial Favoritism

B. 桓彥範之彈 Attack from Huan Yanfan

C. 封官晉爵 Rewards

183.4739 有胡僧惠範, 家富於財 寶, 善事權貴. 公主與 之私, 奏為聖善寺主, 加三品, 封公. 殖貨流 於江劍.

91.2929–2930 臣 聞京師喧喧, 道路籍籍, 皆云胡僧慧範矯託佛教, 詭惑后妃. 故得出入禁闈, 撓亂時政. 陛下又輕騎微 行, 數幸其室. 上下媟黷, 有虧尊嚴. 臣抑嘗聞興化 致理, 必由進善；康國寧 人, 莫大棄惡. 故孔子曰 : “執左道以亂政者殺; 假鬼 神以危人者殺.” 今慧範之 罪, 不殊於此也. 若不急 誅, 必生變亂. 除惡務本, 去邪勿疑. 實願天聰, 早加 裁貶 !

7.141 [ 神龍二年二 月] 丙申, 僧會 範、道士史崇 玄等十餘人授 官封公. 以賞 造聖善寺功也.

D. 魏傳弓之彈 Attack from Wei Chuangong

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

209

賞賚甚重. 太平以為梵王, 接納彌優. 生其羽翼, 長其光價. 孝和臨朝, 常乘官馬, 風神傲誕. 內府珍寶, 積在僧家. 矯說妖祥, 妄陳禍福. 神武斬之, 京師稱快 E. 柳澤之彈 Attack from Liu Ze

F. 薛登慕容詢之彈 Attack from Xue Deng & Murong Xun

77.2683–84 今海內咸稱, 太平公主令 胡僧慧範曲引此輩, 將有 誤於陛下矣. 謗議盈耳, 咨嗟滿衢. 故語曰 : “ 姚、 宋為相, 邪不如正；太平 用事, 正不如邪.” 書曰 : “無偏無陂, 遵王之義。… 無反無側， 王道正直.” 臣恐因循, 流近致遠, 積 小為大, 累微起高. 勿謂 何傷, 其禍將長；勿謂何 害, 其禍將大.

101.3141 景雲中, 擢拜御史大夫. 時僧惠範恃太平公主 權勢, 逼奪百姓店肆, 州 縣不能理. 謙光將加彈 奏, 或請寢之, 謙光曰 : “憲臺理冤滯, 何所迴 避 ? 朝彈暮黜, 亦可矣.” 遂與殿中慕容珣奏彈 之, 反為太平公主所構, 出為岐州刺史.

G. 崔隱甫之彈 Attack from Cui Yinfu

H. 謀反致死 Conspiracy & Death

7.161–62 秋七月甲子, 太平公主與僕 射竇懷貞, 侍中岑羲, 中書 令蕭至忠, 左羽林大將軍常 元楷 等謀逆. 事覺, 皇帝率 兵誅之. 窮其黨與, 太子少 保薛稷, 左散騎常侍賈膺 福, 右羽林將軍李慈李欽, 中書舍人李猷, 中書令崔 湜, 尚書左丞盧藏用, 太史 令傅孝忠, 僧惠範等皆誅 之. 183.4739–40 公主懼玄宗英武, 乃連結將 相, 專謀異計. 其時宰相七 人, 五 出公主門, 常元楷、 李慈掌禁兵, 常私謁公主. 先天二年七月, 玄宗在武 德殿, 事漸危逼, 乃勒兵誅 其黨竇懷貞, 蕭至忠, 岑羲 等. 公 主遽入山寺, 數日方 出, 賜死于家. 公主諸子及 黨與死者數十人. 籍其家, 財貨山積, 珍奇寶物, 侔於 御府, 馬牧羊牧田園質庫, 數年徵斂不盡. 惠範家產亦 數十萬貫.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

210 A. 聖寵 Imperial Favoritism

唐 會 要

冊 府 元 龜

515.6160a 惠 範 者, 長 安胡僧也. 嘗好游權 門, 與 易 之 兄 弟 相 善 . 後 張 易 之 等 伏 誅, 又 妄稱預謀. 遂賜爵上 庸 郡 公, 加 銀 青 光 祿 大夫. 俸祿同于職 事. 又嘗表稱, “先 聖功德, 留付貧 道.” 固請於東都創 造聖善佛寺. 及帝幸 長安, 又勸請於長樂 坡造大像. 凡所縻 費, 巨億萬計. 府為 之虛竭. 海內冤之. 俄又制授簡較聖善, 中天, 及上都西明三 寺主. 帝又御行, 親 送之. 惠範權震外 內, 當時莫敢言者. 一朝遽為傳弓所奏, 朝野莫不稱慶.

Chen B. 桓彥範之彈 Attack from Huan Yanfan

C. 封官晉爵 Rewards

D. 魏傳弓之彈 Attack from Wei Chuangong

61.907–08 神龍元年二月, 侍中桓 彥範上疏曰 : “… 又道 路藉藉, 皆云胡僧惠範 矯託佛教, 詭惑后妃, 出 入禁闈, 撓亂國政. 陛下 又微行, 數幸其私第. 上 下媟黷, 有虧尊嚴. 又聞 興化致治, 必由進善; 康 國 寧 人 , 莫 大 棄 惡 . 故孔 子曰 : ‘執左道以亂政者 殺; 假 鬼 神 以 疑 衆 者 殺 .’ 今惠範之罪, 甚於此也. 若不急誅, 必生變亂. 除 惡務本, 去邪勿疑. 實賴 天 聰 , 早 加 裁 貶 !”

61.1070 景龍元年九月十二 日, 又劾奏銀青光祿 大夫西明寺主惠範 奸贓四十萬, 請寘於 極法. 上召之, 有寬 惠範之色. 傳弓進 曰 : “ 刑賞者, 國家大 事. 陛下賞已妄加, 豈宜刑所不及 ?” 削 惠範官, 放歸於第.

328.3875a-b 臣 聞 京 師 喧 喧, 道路籍 籍, 皆 云 胡 僧 慧 範 矯 託 佛 教, 詭 惑 后 妃. 故 得 出 入 禁 圍, 撓 亂 時 政. 陛 下 又 輕 騎 微 行 , 數 幸 其 室. 上 下 媟 黯 , 有 虧 尊 嚴. 臣 嘗聞興化致理, 必繇進 善; 康國寕人, 莫大棄 惡. 故 孔 子 曰 : “ 執 左 道 以亂政者殺; 假鬼神以 危人者殺!” 今範之罪, 不 殊 於 此 也. 若 不 急 誅 , 必 生 變 亂. 除 惡 務 本 , 去 邪 勿 疑. 伏 願 天 聰 , 早 加 裁貶 !

515.6160a 傳弓又劾奏銀青光 祿大夫西明寺主惠 範姦贓四十餘萬, 請 寘于極法. 帝召傳 弓. 傳弓進曰: 刑賞 者, 國之大事. 陛下 賞已妄加, 豈宜刑所 不及?” 帝乃削惠範 銀青光祿大夫寺主, 放歸于家.  

520A.6213a 又劾奏銀青光祿大 夫西明棄主惠範姦 贓四十萬, 請寘於極 法.  中宗 召傳弓, 有 寬惠範之色.  傳弓 進 曰: “刑賞者, 國家 之大事.   陛 下賞已 妄加, 豈宜刑所不 Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM 及?”削惠範官,放歸 via free access 于第. 

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions E. 柳澤之彈 Attack from Liu Ze

F. 薛登慕容詢之彈 Attack from Xue Deng & Murong Xun

G. 崔隱甫之彈 Attack from Cui Yinfu

211

H. 謀反致死 Conspiracy & Death

67.1179 今海內 咸 稱 , 太 平 公 主 令胡僧 惠 範 曲 引 此 輩 , 將有誤 於 陛 下 ．故語 曰: “姚、宋為相, 邪不如 正；太平用事, 正不如 邪.” 陛下 豈 不 徵 覆 車 之 誡, 而欲 遵 覆 車 之 軌 ． 惟陛下熟 思 之 .

545.6542a 今海內 咸 稱, 太 平 公 主 令胡僧 [ 惠 ] 範 曲 引 此 軰, 將有 誤 於 陛 下 矣 ． 談議盈 耳, 咨 嗟 滿 衢 ． 故語曰: “姚、宋為相, 邪不如正；太平 用事, 正 不如邪.”

515.6160b 薛謙光景雲中擢拜御 史大夫時僧惠範恃太 平公主權勢, 逼奪百 姓店肆, 州縣不能理. 謙光錄狀彈奏, 或請 寢 之 . 謙 光 曰 : “憲臺 理冤滯 , 何 所 廻 避 ? 朝彈暮黜, 可矣.”遂 與侍御史慕容珣奏彈 之. 反為太平公主所 搆, 出為岐州刺 史 . 惠 範 既 誅 , 遷 太 子 賓客, 轉刑部尚書, 加金紫光祿大夫, 昭 文舘學士. 520B. 6214b 薛謙光拜御史大夫 時, 僧 惠 範 恃 太 平 公 主 權 势, 逼 奪 百 姓 肆 店. 州 縣 不 能 理. 謙 光 時 加 彈 奏, 或 請 寢 之. 謙光曰: “憲臺理冤 滯, 何 所 廻 避 ? 朝 彈 暮 黜 亦 可 矣.” 遂 與 殿中慕容 珣奏彈之.

84.575a … 不謂姦宄潛謀, 蕭牆作 釁. 逆賊竇懷貞, 蕭至忠, 岑羲, 薛稷, 李慈, 李猷, 常元楷, 唐晙, 唐昕, 李晉, 李欽, 賈應福, 傅孝忠, 僧 惠範等, 咸以庸微, 謬承恩 辛. 未伸毫發之效, 遂興梟 獐之心. 共舉北軍, 突入中 禁, 將欲廢朕及皇帝, 以行 篡逆. 朕令 皇帝, 率眾討除, 應時殄盡. …

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

212 A. 聖寵 Imperial Favoritism

Chen B. 桓彥範之彈 Attack from Huan Yanfan

C. 封官晉爵 Rewards

D. 魏傳弓之彈 Attack from Wei Chuangong

520A.6213a 又劾奏銀青光祿大 夫西明棄主惠範姦 贓四十萬, 請寘於極 法.  中宗 召傳弓, 有 寬惠範之色.  傳弓 進 曰: “刑賞者, 國家 之大事.   陛 下賞已 妄加, 豈宜刑所不 及?”削惠範官,放歸 于第. 

新 唐 書

83.3651 長安浮屠慧範畜貲千 萬, 諧結權近. 本善張 易之. 及易之誅, 或言 其豫謀者. 於是封上庸 郡公, 月給奉稍. 主乳 媼與通, 奏擢三品.

120.4311 又道路籍籍, 皆云胡僧 慧範託浮屠法, 詭惑后 妃, 出入禁奧, 瀆撓朝 政. 陛下嘗輕騎微服, 數幸其居, 上下汙慢, 君臣虧替.臣謂興化致 治以康乂國家者, 繇進 善而棄惡. 孔子曰： “執 左 道 以 亂 政 者 殺 ; 假 鬼神以危人者殺!” 今 慧範亂政危人者也, 不 急誅, 且有變. 除惡務 本, 願早裁之!

83.3651 御史大夫魏傳弓劾其 姦贓四十萬, 請論死. 中宗欲赦之, 進曰: “刑賞, 國大事, 陛下賞 已妄加矣, 又欲廢刑, 天下其謂何?” 帝不 得已, 削銀青階.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions E. 柳澤之彈 Attack from Liu Ze

F. 薛登慕容詢之彈 Attack from Xue Deng & Murong Xun

G. 崔隱甫之彈 Attack from Cui Yinfu

213

H. 謀反致死 Conspiracy & Death

520B.6214b 薛謙光拜御史大夫 時, 僧 惠 範 恃 太 平 公 主 權 势, 逼 奪 百 姓 肆 店. 州 縣 不 能 理. 謙 光 時 加 彈 奏, 或 請 寢 之. 謙光曰: “憲臺理冤 滯, 何 所 廻 避 ? 朝 彈 暮 黜 亦 可 矣.” 遂 與 殿中慕容 珣奏彈之.

112.4174 今天下咸 稱 太 平 公 主 與胡僧慧 範 以 此 誤 陛 下. 故語 曰 : “ 姚 、 宋 為相, 邪 不 如 正 ; 太 平 用事, 正 不 如 邪 . ” 臣 恐流遁致 遠 , 積 小 為 大, 累微 成 高 . 勿 謂 何 傷, 其禍 將 長 ; 勿 謂 何 害, 其禍 將 大 .

83.3651 監察御史慕容珣復劾 慧範事, 帝疑珣離間 骨肉, 貶密州司馬.

130.4497 浮屠 惠 範 倚太平公 主 脅 人子女, 隱 甫 劾狀, 反 為 所 擠, 貶邛 州 司 馬.

83.3651–52 主內忌太子明, 又宰相皆其 黨, 乃有逆謀. 先天二年, 與 尚書左僕射竇懷貞, 侍中岑 羲, 中書令蕭至忠崔湜, 太 子少保薛稷, 雍州長史李 晉, 右散騎常侍昭文館學士 賈膺福, 鴻臚卿唐晙及元 楷, 慈, 慧範等謀廢太子, 使 元楷, 慈舉羽林兵入武德殿 殺太子; 懷貞, 羲, 至忠舉兵 南衙為應. 既有日矣, 太子 得其姦, 召岐王, 薛王, 兵部 尚書郭元振, 將軍王毛仲, 殿中少監姜衞, 中書侍郎王 琚, 吏部侍郎崔日用定策. 前一日, 因毛仲取內閑馬三 百, 率太僕少卿李令問王 守一, 內侍高力士, 果毅李 守德叩虔化門, 梟元楷, 慈 於北闕下; 縛膺福內客省; 執羲, 至忠 至朝堂 : 斬之. 因大赦天下. 主聞變, 亡入 南山. 三日乃出, 賜死于第. 諸子及黨與死者數十人. 簿 其田貲, 衞寶若山, 督子貸, 凡三年不能盡.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

214 A. 聖寵 Imperial Favoritism

資 治 通 鑒

Chen B. 桓彥範之彈 Attack from Huan Yanfan

208.6585 208.6585 先是, 胡僧慧範以妖妄 彥 範 復 表 言 慧 範 執 左 道 遊權貴之門. 與張易之 以 亂 政 , 請 誅 之 . 兄弟善. 韋后亦重之. 及易之誅, 復稱慧範預 其謀. 以功加銀青光祿 大夫, 賜爵上庸縣公. 出入宮掖, 上數微行, 幸其舍.

C. 封官晉爵 Rewards

D. 魏傳弓之彈 Attack from Wei Chuangong

208.6598 丙申, 僧慧範 等九人並加五 品階, 賜爵郡 縣公；道士史 崇恩等 [ 三人] 加五品階, 除 國子祭酒, 同 正；葉靜能加 金紫光祿大夫.

208.6616–17 銀青光祿大夫、上庸 公、聖善、中天、西 明三寺主慧範, 於東都 作聖善寺, 長樂坡作大 像, 府庫為之虛耗. 上 及韋后皆重之, 勢傾內 外, 無敢指目者. [景龍 元年九月]戊申, 侍御 史魏傳弓發其姦贓 四十餘萬, 請寘極法. 上欲宥之, 傳弓曰: “刑賞, 國之大事. 陛下賞已妄加, 豈宜 刑所不及!”上乃削 黜慧範, 放于家.

大唐新語 又有故僧惠範, 山人鄭 普思, 葉靜能等, 並挾左 道, 出入宮禁. 彥範等切 諫, 並不從. 後彥範等反 及禍.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions G. 崔隱甫之彈 Attack from Cui Yinfu

215

H. 謀反致死 Conspiracy & Death

E. 柳澤之彈 Attack from Liu Ze

F. 薛登慕容詢之彈 Attack from Xue Deng & Murong Xun

210.6664 議者咸 稱 太 平 公 主 令 胡僧慧 範 曲 引 此 曹 , 誑 誤陛下 . 臣 恐 積 小 成 大 , 為禍不 細 .

210. 6665 僧慧範恃太平公主 勢，逼奪民產，御史 大夫薛謙光與殿中侍 御史慕容珣奏彈之。 公主 訴於上，出謙 光為岐州刺史。

210.6681–86 [ 太平公主] 與竇懷貞, 岑 羲, 蕭至忠, 崔湜及 太子少保薛稷, 雍州長 史新興王晉, 左羽林大 將軍常元楷, 知右羽林 將軍事李慈, 左金吾將 軍李欽, 中書舍人李猷, 右 散騎常侍賈膺福, 鴻 臚卿唐晙, 及僧慧範等 謀廢立. 又與宮人元氏 謀於赤箭粉中置毒進於 上. 甲子, 上因王毛仲取 閑廄馬及兵三百餘人, 自武德殿入虔化門, 召 元楷, 慈, 先斬之; 擒膺 福, 猷於內客省以出; 執 至忠, 羲於朝堂: 皆斬 之. 懷貞逃入溝中,自縊 死, 戮 其尸, 改姓曰 毒。 … 薛稷賜死於萬 年獄. … 太平公主逃入 山寺, 三日乃出, 賜死于 家, 公主諸子及黨與死 者數十人. … 籍公主家, 財貨山積, 珍物侔於御 府, 廄牧羊馬, 田園息 錢, 收之數年不盡. 慧範 家亦數十萬緡.

授慕容珣侍御史制

尚書故實

朝議郎行密州司馬員 外置同正員慕容珣, 廷 奏奸人, 不避當道. 醜正 作罪, 遺賢久嘆. 長鯨已 戮, 宜賁寵章. 可朝散大 夫, 行御史臺侍御史.

搆聖善寺佛殿僧惠範, 以罪 沒入其財, 得一千三百萬 貫.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

216 A. 聖寵 Imperial Favoritism

Chen B. 桓彥範之彈 Attack from Huan Yanfan

C. 封官晉爵 Rewards

D. 魏傳弓之彈 Attack from Wei Chuangong

其 他

I 餘波 Aftermath 舊唐書 37.1374 玄宗初即位, 東都白馬寺 铁 像頭, 無故自落於殿門外. 後姚崇秉政, 以僧惠範附 太平亂政, 謀汰僧尼, 令拜父母, 午後不出院, 其法頗峻.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions E. 柳澤之彈 Attack from Liu Ze

F. 薛登慕容詢之彈 Attack from Xue Deng & Murong Xun

G. 崔隱甫之彈 Attack from Cui Yinfu

217

H. 謀反致死 Conspiracy & Death

唐中散大夫守秘書 監致仕上柱國慕容 公墓誌銘 有僧惠梵者, 左道之魁 渠也. 崇聚貨財, 交接 [ 婬] 習. 賄通貴主, 賂入 寵臣. 公肆奸回, 莫之禁 禦. 公廷奏其罪, 為凶黨 所斥, 出為密州員外司 馬.

大唐新語 僧惠範恃權勢, 逼奪生 人妻. 州縣不能理. 其 夫詣臺訴冤. 中丞薛登, 侍御史慕容珣, 將奏之. 臺中懼其不捷, 請寢其 議. 登曰: “憲司理冤 滯, 何所迴避? 朝彈暮 黜, 亦可矣. ”登坐此 出為歧州刺史. 時議曰: “仁者必有勇, 其 薛公 之謂歟 ? ”

大唐統紀 監察御史慕容珣奏彈 西明寺僧慧範，以其 通宮人張氏 (張即太平 公主乳母也) ，侵奪百 姓. 上以為御史當不避 豪貴; 見公主出居蒲州, 乃敢彈射，在日不 言，狀涉脽間骨肉, 遂 貶為密州員外司馬.”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

218 CFYG JTS QTS QTW SKQS T  THY WYYH X XTS ZZTJ

Chen

Abbreviations Cefu yuangui 冊府元龜 Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書 Quan Tangshi 全唐詩 (i.e. Qinding Quan Tangshi 欽定全唐詩) Quan Tangwen 全唐文 (i.e. Qinding Quan Tangwen 欽定全唐文) Jingyin Wenyuange Siku quanshu 景印文淵閣四庫全書 Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經 Tang huiyao 唐會要 Wenyuan yinghua 文苑英華 Shinsan Dai Nihon Zoku Zōkyō 新纂大日本續藏經 Xin Tangshu 新唐書 Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒



Bibliography



Primary Sources

Chaoye qianzai 朝野僉載, 6 juan. By Zhang Zhuo 張鷟 (660–733). Edited and printed in Cheng and Zhao, coll. and annot., 1979 (see Secondary Sources). Lidai zhiguan biao 歷代職官表. Compiled by Ji Yun 紀昀, et al, in 1789. 72 juan. Edition of Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1989. Taiping guangji 太平廣記. 500 juan. Compiled by Li Fang 李昉 (925–996) between 977 and 978. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1961. Tang Da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集. 130 juan. Compiled by Song Minqiu 宋敏求 (1019–1079) in 1070 on the basis of a draft left by his father Song Shou 宋綬 (?–1040). Shanghai: Shanghai yinshuguan 上海印書館, 1957). Tang liangjing chengfang kao 唐兩京城坊考. 5 juan. By Xu Song 徐松 (1781–1848), published in 1848. References made to Fang （ coll. and annot.), 1985 (see Secondary Studies). Tang Shangshusheng langguan shizhu 唐尚書省郎官石柱. Anonymously prepared. References made to Xu and Wang (punctuated and collated), 1992 (see Secondary Studies). “Tang Zhongsan daifu shou Mishujian zhishi Shangzhuguo Murong gong muzhi ming” 唐中散大夫守秘書監致仕上柱國慕容公墓誌銘. Composed by a Cui 崔 in 736. Collected in Chen (ed.), 1991 (see Secondary Studies). Yuanhe xingzuan 元和姓纂. 10 juan. Compiled by Lin Bao 林寶 (dates unknown) in 812. References made to Cen, et al (eds.), 1994 (see Secondary Studies). Zhuangzi jishi 莊子集釋. 10 juan. By Guo Qingfan 郭慶藩 （ 1844–1896). References made to Wang (punctuated and collated), 2006 (see Secondary Studies).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

219

Zuozhuan 左傳. Attributed to Zuo Qiuming 左丘明 (556BC-452BC). References made to Duanju shisan jingwen 斷句十三經文 (Taibei: Kaiming shuju, 1991).



Secondary Sources

Cao, Shibang 曹仕邦. “Aiguo sengren Shi Xizhong he tade fojiao binanshi Shishi zijian” 愛國僧人釋熙仲和他的佛教編年史 > Zhonghua foxue xuebao 中華佛 學學報 16 (2003): 133–46, available online: (accessed February 13, 2011). Cen, Zhongmian 岑仲勉. Sui Tang shi 隋唐史 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1957) (1982 rpt). Cen, Zhongmian 岑仲勉 (ed.), Yu Xianhao 鬱賢浩 and Tao Min 陶敏 (re-edited). Yuanhe xingzuan 元和姓纂, 3 vols. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1994). Chen, Chang’an 陳長安 (ed.). Sui Tang Wudai muzhi huibian 隋唐五代墓誌匯編, Luoyang juan 洛陽卷 (Tianjin: Tianjin guji chubanshe, 1991). Chen, Jinhua. Monks and Monarchs, Kinship and Kingship: Tanqian in Sui Buddhism and Politics (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2002). Chen, Jinhua. “Śarīra and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25.1–2 (2002): 33–150. Chen, Jinhua. “The Indian Buddhist Missionary Dharmaksema (385–433): A New Dating of His Arrival in Guzang and of His Translations,” T’oung-p’ao: Revue internationale de sinologie 90.4–5 (2004): 215–63. Chen, Jinhua. “The Statues and Monks of Shengshan Monastery: Money and Maitreyan Buddhism in Tang China,” Asia Major 19.1–2 (2006): 111–60. Chen, Jinhua. Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang (643–712) (Leiden: Brill, 2007). Chen, Jinhua. Crossfire: Shingon-Tendai Strife as Seen in Two Twelfth-century Polemics, with Special References to Their Background in Tang China (Tōkyō: The International Institute for Buddhist Studies in Tōkyō. 2010). Chen, Yinke 陳寅恪. “Ji Tangdai zhi Li Wu Wei Yang hunyin jituan” 記唐代之李武韋楊 婚姻集團, Lishi yanjiu 歷史研究 1 (1954): 35–51. Chen, Yinke 陳寅恪. Tangdai zhengzhi shishu lungao 唐代政治史述論稿 (Beijing: Sanlian shudian, 1957). Cheng, Yizhong 程毅中, Zhao Shouyan 趙守儼, coll. and annot. Sui Tang jiahua Chaoye qianzai 隋唐嘉華朝野僉載. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1979. Fang Yan 方嚴, coll. and annot. Tang liangjing chengfang kao 唐兩京城坊考 (with revisions and additions by Zhang Mu 張穆). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985. Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: Inquiry into the Nature, Author, and Function of the Tunhuang Document S. 6502. Followed by an Annotated Translation (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2005).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

220

Chen

Gernet, Jacques (trans. Franciscus Verellen). Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995). Guo, Peng 郭朋. Zhongguo fojiao sixiang shi 中國佛教思想史 2 (Sui Tang fojiao sixiang 隋唐佛教思想; Fujian: Fujian renmin chubanshe, 1994). Hamada, Naoya 濱田直也. “Tō no juwa to Gosō Eihan” 唐の女禍と胡僧惠範 (“The ‘Juwa’ [sic] and Priest Hui-fan in the T’ang”), Tōhōgaku 東方學 (Eastern Studies) 78 (1989): 68–81. Huang, Yongnian 黄永年. Tangdai shishi kaoshi 唐代史事考釋 (Taibei: Lianjing chuban shiye gongsi, 1998). Hucker, Charles. A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University, 1985). Kamata, Shigeo 鐮田茂雄. Chūgoku bukkyō shi 中國仏教史, vol. 5 (Zui-Tō no bukkyō [jō] 隋唐の佛教 [ 上]) (Tokyo: Tōkkyō daigaku shuppankai, 1994): 87–88. Legge, James. The Chinese Classics (Vol. I-V) (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960). Legge, James. The Sacred Books of China: The Texts of Taoism (New York: Dover Publi­ cations, 1962). Ma, Dezhi 馬得志. “Tang Chang’an cheng fajue xin shouhuo” 唐長安城發掘新收穫, Kaogu 4 (1987): 329–36. Nunome, Chōfū 布目潮渢. Zui Tō shi kenkyū: Tōchō seiken no keisei 隋唐史研究 : 唐朝 政權の形成 (Tōkyō: Tōyōshi Kenkyūkai, 1968). Ono, Katsutoshi 小野勝年. “Chōan no Saimyōji to waga Nyūtō-sō” 長安の西明寺とわ が入唐僧 (“Saimyōji at Chōan and Japanese monks in Tang China”), Bukkyō geijutsu 仏教芸術 29 (1956), 28–45; Ono, Katsutoshi 小野勝年. Chūgoku Zui Tō Chōan jiin shiryō shūsei 中國隋唐長安寺院 史料集成 (Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 1989). Schafer, Edward. The Golden Peaches of Samarkand: A Study of T'ang Exotics (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963). Tang, Yijie 湯一介. “Tangdai gongdeshi kao: Du Zizhi tongjian daji” 唐代功德使考 : 讀 資治通鑒劄記, Wenxian 文獻 2 (1985): 60–65. Twitchett, Denis. The Writing of Official History Under the Tang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Twitchett, Denis; Wechsler, Howard J. “Kao-tsung and the Empress Wu: The Inheritor and the Usurper,” in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 3, part 1, ed. Denis Twitchett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979): 242–89. Wang, Xiaoyu 王孝魚 (punctuated and collated). Zhuangzi jishi 莊子集釋 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2006).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

The Monk Huifan and Early Tang Saṃgha-state Interactions

221

Xu, Minxia 徐敏霞; Wang, Guizhen 王桂珍 (punctuated and collated). Tang Shang­ shusheng langguan shizhu timing kao 唐尚書省郎官石柱題名考 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1992). Yang, Hongnian 楊鴻年. Sui Tang liangjing fangli pu 隋唐兩京坊里譜 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1999). Yu, Xianhao 鬱賢皓. “Su Ting nianpu” 蘇頲年譜, in Zhongguo dianji yu wenhua luncong 中國典籍與文化論叢, vol. 2 (1995): 60–81; republished in Yu, Xianhao. Li Bai yu Tangdai wenshi lunkao 李白與唐代文史考論, vol. 3, Tangdai wenshi lunkao 唐代文 史考論 (Nanjing: Nanjing shifan daxue chubanshe, 2008): 800–39. Zhang, Qun 章群. “Tangdai zhi huseng” 唐代之胡僧, in Di erjie guoji Tangdai xueshu huiyi lunwen ji 第二屆國際唐代學術會議論文集 (2 vols.), ed. Zhongguo Tangdai ­xuehui 中國唐代學會 (Taibei: Wenjin, 1993), 2: 812–13 (the article itself in pp. 807–39). Zhao, Junping 趙君平; Zhao, Wencheng 趙文成, comps. “Tang Liu Ze muzhi bing gai” 唐柳澤墓誌並蓋, Heluo muke shiling 河洛墓刻拾零 (Beijing: Beijing tushuguan chubanshe, 2007). Zhou, Shaoliang 周紹良 et al., compiled. Tangdai muzhi huibian xuji 唐代墓誌匯編 續集 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 2001).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

222

Welter

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi: Zanning’s Topical Compendium of the Buddhist Clergy (Da Song seng shi lüe 大宋僧史略) and the Politics of Buddhist Accommodation at the Song Court Albert Welter I

Introduction and Context1

The fall of the Tang dynasty and rise of the Song precipitated momentous challenges regarding the role of Buddhism in China. Prior to the Song dynasty (960–1279), Buddhism in China had gone through periods of advance and decline, largely at the prerogative of the emperor and his bureaucratic administration.2 Throughout this ebb and flow, Buddhism endured vicissitudes of imperial politics, courting favor of emperors and well-placed members of the cultural elite, on the one hand, while inviting the wrath of its detractors, on the other. While policies toward Buddhism generally followed a consistent pattern, as determined by the emperor’s disposition, inconsistencies could also be detected during the course of a single imperial reign owing to changing personal and public circumstances.3

1 The current study builds upon my previous work on Zanning and the Seng shi lüe, particularly “From the Cakravartin Ideal to Realpolitik: Buddhism and Confucianism in the Pre-modern Chinese Context and its Implications for Contemporary Chinese Secular Policy toward Religion,” in Arvind Sharma and Madhu Khanna, eds., Asian Perspectives on the World’s Religions after September 11 (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2013): 49–67; “From Cakravartin Ideal to Realpolitik: Zanning and the Accommodation of Buddhism to Neo-Confucianism,” Yugyo sasang yeongu 儒教思想研究 44 (2011): 105–128; and “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival: Tsan-ning and the Debate Over Wen in the Early Sung,” Peter N. Gregory and Daniel Getz, eds. Buddhism in the Sung (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999): 21–61. The author would also like to thank the Humanities and Social Sciences Research Council of Canada, for support upon which the current research is based. 2 General reviews of the history of Buddhism prior to the Song dynasty are available in works such as Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1964); for the Tang dynasty, see Stanley Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). 3 As an example, see Weinstein’s account of Buddhist policies during the reign of Xuanzong (r. 712–756) (Buddhism under the T’ang, 51–57).

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_006

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

223

Motivations for Buddhist policies were complex. A pro-Buddhist emperor might, for example, patronize Buddhism purely for political expediency, to appease domestic or diplomatic interests, as well as for reasons of personal faith and sympathy with Buddhist teachings. An anti-Buddhist emperor, by the same token, could adopt pro-Buddhist policies to placate certain influential constituencies, enact minor policies aimed at curbing mild Buddhist excesses, or mount a full-scale campaign of suppression aimed at exterminating the Buddhist presence in China. In these circumstances, the imperial relationship with Buddhism in China, given ideological-theological differences between the emperor as the Son of Heaven, on the one hand, and as incarnate Buddha or high level Bodhisattva, on the other, was always potentially tempestuous. As the political head of state, the emperor administered the government through bureaucratic agencies. However, the Chinese emperor was also a quasi-religious figure, the Son of Heaven, who ruled in accordance with Heaven’s mandate. An important part of the emperor’s religious duties in­volved rituals that acknowledged the emperor’s relationship with Heaven and the incumbent duties that accompanied it. The presence of Buddhism in China’s imperially based theocracy added complications. The presence of the Buddha and Buddhist activities “muddied the water,” so to speak, and challenged China’s theocratically oriented assumptions. What, for example, was the emperor’s relationship with the Buddha, and what was the proper way for an emperor to acknowledge the Buddha’s existence as a divine figure? Several options were available, but in principle, these can be reduced to possible ways that Buddhism generally may be accommodated: 1. 2. 3.

4.

Buddhists may cite aloofness from society and secular affairs, in a “separate and different” model. While generally unproblematic, it is still up to the emperor the extent to which he might tolerate such aloofness. The emperor may regard himself as the Buddha, usually proclaiming himself an incarnation of Maitreya. The emperor could acknowledge the Buddha’s spiritual superiority and pay homage to the Buddha, albeit as a high level practitioner, a kind of Bodhi­sattva-in-waiting, or a cakravartin charged with initiating the rule of Buddhist righteousness on earth, after the model of Aśoka; The emperor could regard the Buddha in his own right while making no claims regarding his own superiority or inferiority, in a kind of “separate but equal” fashion, acknowledging the existence of two cooperative spheres of influence: the secular realm of the emperor (albeit with religious overtones) and the spiritual realm of the Buddha;

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

224 5. 6.

Welter

The emperor could stand aloof from the Buddha, tolerating the presence of Buddhist teaching, but subjugating it to his own imperial aims, i.e., using Buddhism as a pragmatic tool in the imperial arsenal; he emperor could regard the Buddha as a masquerading imposter, who had no business on Chinese soil, a figment of some foreign fantasy that had a debilitating effect on the national spirit and native (i.e., Confucian or Daoist) values.

In a word, imperial policy could be pro-Buddhist, neutral, or anti-Buddhist, with varying degrees in between. To underscore the point that policies toward Buddhism in China vacillated, at times widely, we can look to the history of major Buddhist suppressions in China. Given the structural difficulties Buddhism presented as potential competition to the imperial model, anti-Buddhist policies in China are not hard to find. History speaks of four major Buddhist suppressions in Chinese history, in the Northern Wei, Northern Zhou, Tang, and Later Zhou (Five Dynasties). To underscore the vacillation, each of these suppressions is followed by a revival and restoration of Buddhism, so that the effects of the anti-Buddhist policies are short-lived. Following the anti-Buddhist suppression by Emperor Wu of Northern Wei (446), for example, we find the pro-Buddhist restoration of Emperor Wencheng (454). Following the suppression by Emperor Wu of Northern Zhou (574–577), we see the restoration by Emperor Yang and the Sui dynasty Buddhist revival (581–618). After the suppression by Emperor Wuzong of the Tang (845), there was the restoration by Emperor Xuanzong (846). The period that I am most concerned with as being of relevance to Zanning is the period following the anti-Buddhist suppression of Emperor Shizong in the Later Zhou conducted in 955. The pattern of earlier suppressions, where anti-Buddhist repression was followed by pro-Buddhist restoration, would suggest that Emperor Shizong’s suppression was followed by a Buddhist restoration in the Song dynasty. In some respects, this is true, and Buddhism did enjoy a revival, of sorts, supported by Emperor Taizu and the early Song emperors. But in other respects, something had changed and the situation of Buddhism in Chinese society was altered. After Shizong, no further anti-Buddhist suppressions occurred. As Confucianism resurfaced in China in a new and revitalized form, it affected how Buddhism came to be regarded. No further major suppression of Buddhism was deemed necessary. This study explores a Buddhist response to these challenges through an exami­nation of the Buddhist literati-monk Zanning’s (919–1001) Topical Compendium of the Buddhist Clergy (sometimes translated as Brief History of the Saṃgha) compiled in the Great Song dynasty (Da Song seng shi lüe 大宋僧

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

225

史略), written at the request of Song emperor Taizong (r. 976–997). One would

expect a work covering a millennium or more of Buddhist history in China (assuming a date where astrological signs of the Buddha’s birth were witnessed in China) to be massive in scope. The Da Song seng shi lüe is indeed that, but we should be reminded here that this is a “topical compendium,” or more literally an “outline history” (shi lüe 史略), and an otherwise massive scale has been reduced to the size of a handbook. The purpose of this handbook is to inform the emperor and his officials of pertinent facts regarding Buddhism in China useful for the administration of the saṃgha. It is divided into fifty-nine sections (not including sub-sections) spread over three fascicles. An examination of the contents reveals that fascicle one is concerned primarily with the propagation of the Buddhist faith in China, fascicle two with the institutional history of Buddhism in China, and fascicle three with the social history of Buddhism in China.4 The study details Zanning’s argument for accepting Buddhism as a Chinese (rather than foreign) religion, as reflecting and enhancing native Chinese values rather than conflicting with them (as its detractors claimed). A number of subjects addressed in the Topical Compendium are addressed—the performance of Buddhist rituals at state ceremonies, the inclusion of Buddhist writings in Chinese wen 文 (letters or literature), proper Buddhist customs and practices and their contributions to the aims of the Chinese state, the idea of Buddhist junzi 君子, and so on. Zanning’s careful attention to administrative practices reveals that although Chinese administration of the saṃgha vacillated between marginalizing Buddhism as a foreign religion and acceptance of Buddhism as a domesticated Chinese teaching, through agencies such as the Court for Foreign Dependencies and the Bureau of National Sacrifices, Zanning argues for instrumental Buddhist participation in the essential ritual memorial functions of the Chinese state. Ultimately, the paper examines Zanning’s arguments for Buddhism’s role in Chinese society against the reality of court 4 It can be noted that this division also coincides with the assess­ment of the Seng shi lüe by Katsumura Tetsuya in Yves Hervouet, ed. (initiated by Etienne Balazs), A Sung Bibliography, 356b (as Seng shih-lue). All extant versions of the Seng shi lüe are based on the Southern Song edition printed in 1144. While the text entered in Taishō shinshū daizōkyō [hereafter abbreviated as T] (Tokyo, 1928), no. 2126, vol. 54, is generally considered the most critical edition available, I have found the Japanese translation and annotation, the Sō shiryaku by Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮 in Kokuyaku issaikyō 國譯一切經, shiden bu 史伝部 vol. 13, 293–375, to be most useful. While Makita left many key terms untranslated as kanbun 漢文 style renderings following Japanese syntax, Makita’s version is extremely helpful on two counts: in correcting punctuation mistakes in the Taishō version, and in providing references to pertinent sources in his annotations.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

226

Welter

politics in the Song, where anti-Buddhist sentiments ran high. While Zanning’s call for active support and inclusion of Buddhist institutions in Chinese bureaucratic procedures may not have been adhered to in all cases, the notion that Chinese administrative policies provide for direct oversight of Buddhist institutions was. The implementation of this practice prevented further clashes between Buddhism and the state on a magnitude that characterized previous anti-Buddhist repressions. This may be Zanning’s greatest contribution—providing a rationale for the Chinese administration of Buddhism that obviated the need for future conflict. In a word, Chinese policy toward Buddhism “normalized,” although not necessarily in the favorable terms toward Buddhism that Zanning envisioned. The study is divided into two main parts, with sub-sections for each. The first part discusses the background context for which Zanning’s Topical Com­ pen­dium of the Buddhist Clergy was written. It includes sections on “NeoCon­fucian Critiques of Buddhism,” “Buddhist Kingdoms and Confucian States: the Cakravartin Ideal vs. Realpolitik,” “The Confucian Revival in China and the Buddhist Revival in Wuyue,” “Yongming Yanshou and the Cakravartin Model in Wuyue,” and “Zanning and the Early Song Intellectual Terrain.” The second part provides an extensive discussion of “Zanning and Buddhist Realpolitik in the Song,” with a detailed account of Zanning’s proposals for the role of Buddhism in the Chinese state, drawn primarily from his Topical Compendium. II

Neo-Confucian Critiques of Buddhism

Following Han Yu’s 韓愈 (768–824) diatribes against imperial favor shown toward Buddhism in the late Tang dynasty, specifically against the emperor’s participation in public celebrations of the Buddha’s bone relic,5 Neo-Confucian critiques of Buddhism from the Song dynasty onwards sounded a common refrain built around a similar litany of complaints based on moral, social, economic, and political criteria.6 The domestication of Buddhism in the Chinese 5 Han Yu’s diatribe is succinctly displayed in his famous “Memorial on the Bone of the Buddha” (Jian ying fogu biao 諫迎佛骨表), translated in various anthologies of Chinese sources (see, for example, William Theodore De Bary and Irene Bloom, eds., Sources of Chinese Tradition [New York: Columbia University Press, 2000], vol. 1, 583–584. On Han Yu generally, see Charles Hartman, Han Yu and the T'ang Search for Unity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986). 6 A noteworthy contributor to Confucian critiques of Buddhism in the early Song is that by Wang Yucheng 王禹偁, a friend and colleague of Zanning’s (see Welter, “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival: Tsan-ning and the Debate Over Wen in the Early Sung”). Confucian

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

227

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

context may be read as a concentrated effort to adapt Buddhism to Confucian principles. As successful as Buddhist adaptation was, in the eyes of many NeoConfucians there was no room for tolerating Buddhism’s alleged excesses. With its emphasis on monasticism, Buddhism allegedly disrupted family relations and caused unfilial behavior. Sons and daughters who chose celibacy over marriage could not fulfill the mandatory Confucian obligations of looking after parents in old age, preserving the family lineage through (male) offspring, or performing the required rites for honoring ancestors. Moreover, the Buddhist goal of a personal, otherworldly nirvāna conflicted with Confucian notions regarding the proper exercise of one’s mandate through positive contributions to family and society. One way of looking at the differences between Confucian and Buddhist aims is a comparison between the Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path and the Neo-Confucian agenda outlined in the Great Learning. Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path Proper Understanding 正見 1. 2. Proper Intention 正思惟 ________________________ 3. Proper Speech 正語 4. Proper Action 正業 Proper Livelihood 5. 正命 _______________________ 6. Proper Effort 正精進 7. Proper Mindfulness 正念 8. Proper Concentration 正定

Wisdom/Gnosis (prajñā) Ethical/Moral Conduct (śila) Contemplation/Mental Discipline (samādhi)

Confucian Program “The Great Learning” (大學) 1.  Investigation of things 格物 2.  Extension of knowledge 致知 3.  Make thoughts sincere 誠意 4.  Rectify the mind 正心 5.  Develop the self 脩身 6.  Manage the family 齊家 7.  Govern the state 治國 8.  Peace throughout the world 天下平

critiques of Buddhism in the Song reached full maturity in the work of Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, particularly his Essay on Fundamentals (Ben lun 本論) (translated in De Bary and Bloom, eds., Sources of Chinese Tradition, vol. 1, 593–595).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

228

Welter

While both agendas are predicated on acquiring wisdom or knowledge and place a premium on moral development, they diverge regarding the public vs. private dimensions of their activity. Because Buddhists focus on internal mental cultivation aimed at producing advanced stages of consciousness and ultimately the extinction of consciousness itself in nirvāna, Confucians criticize them as self-obsessed (and selfish) pursuers of a fantasy existence. Confucians never question the reality of this world, and the samsāric existence of Buddhism is for them the only possible arena for human endeavor. It is only through human effort in this world that renders it a humane and harmonious place to live. Social activity is the true human pursuit, not the passive retreat from the world that Buddhists advocate. Confucians also criticized Buddhists for economic and political reasons. From a Confucian perspective, Buddhist monastics represented an unproductive class that placed added strains on the economy. In addition, the monastic institution was seen as hoarding national wealth through its elaborate buildings, gilded halls, and use of precious metals and other valuable materials for making and adorning Buddha images and other utensils used in Buddhist rituals. As a result of these concerns, government proscriptions against Buddhism often called for monastics to be laicized and returned to productive labor, and for Buddhist statues to be scrapped and melted down to recover the precious metal they were made of and redeemed for “useful” purposes. Buddhist monastery lands and estates enjoyed tax-free status and were thus viewed as a strain on the economy. In times of economic crises in particular, Buddhist monasteries were singled out as major sources of a financial drain on the economy, with effective remedies proposed, ranging from the closure of monasteries and limits on the numbers of monasteries allowed, to the confiscation of land and valuable materials in their possession, to restrictions on the numbers of monastics allowed at individual institutions, to the forced return of monastics to lay life. From a political standpoint, Buddhist monasteries were viewed as havens for criminal elements and licentious behavior. Monastery residents enjoyed freedom from military service and the forced labor required for government works projects. Confucians resented the private, individualized reasons that led people to opt for the monastic lifestyle as a way to avoid public, civic duties. To counter this, Confucians often accused monastery residents of unsavory activities and licentious behaviors. Undoubtedly there was some truth to Confucian accusations, as monasteries could hardly be free of transgressions, but in many cases these were largely propaganda claims to sway public (or, in this case, imperial) opinion against Buddhism.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

III

229

Buddhist Kingdoms and Confucian States: the Cakravartin Ideal vs. Realpolitik

As background to the current study it is useful to consider the assumptions implicit in two distinct approaches to Buddhism by governing regimes: one represented by the ruler who espouses Buddhist ideals and sees his regime as an extension of them (cakravartin);7 the other by the ruler who implements Buddhist (or anti-Buddhist) policies from non-ideological, practical concerns (realpolitik).8 Zanning experienced both approaches, from the proBuddhist, self-espoused cakravartin rulers of Wuyue 吳越, where Zanning hailed from, to the realpolitik approach to Buddhism based on its utility for gaining “practical” advantages, an approach espoused by Zanning to emperors and bureaucrats in the more hostile environment toward Buddhism at the Song court. The Buddhist scholastic monk Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (904– 975) represented the pro-Buddhist, cakravartin approach of Wuyue. Yanshou and Zanning were natives of this same Wuyue region, and separated by only a generation the circumstances of these two Buddhists differed dramatically and resulted in drastically dissimilar recommendations regarding Buddhism’s role in state and government affairs. While Yanshou’s approach typifies that found in pro-Buddhist regimes whose identities are framed around Buddhist ideals (the cakravartin model), Zanning faced potentially hostile anti-Buddhist 7 The term cakravartin refers the ancient Indian conception of the world ruler, derived from the Sanskrit cakra, “wheel,” and vartin, “one who turns.” Thus, a cakravartin may be understood as a ruler “whose chariot wheels roll everywhere,” or “whose movements are unobstructed.” In Chinese, the term translates as zhuan falun wang 轉法輪王 (“King/Ruler who turns the Dharma-wheel”). In Buddhism, the cakravartin ideal embodied the principles of ideal rulership based on Buddhist notions of righteousness, wisdom, and compassion, etc. 8 The term realpolitik refers to politics based on practical objectives rather than on ideals, a politics of adaptation to things as they are rather than on moral or ethical criteria. Realpolitik thus suggests a pragmatic, no-nonsense view, and a disregard for ethical considerations. In diplomacy it is often associated with relentless, though realistic, pursuit of national interests. The term realpolitik was coined by Ludwig von Rochau, a German writer and politician in the 19th century, who, in his 1853 book Grundsätze der Realpolitik angewendet auf die staatlichen Zustände Deutschlands describes the meaning of the term: The study of the powers that shape, maintain, and alter the state is the basis of all political insight and leads to the understanding that the law of power governs the world of states just as the law of gravity governs the physical world. (Jonathan Haslam, No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002], 168.) While the term is of modern coinage, it seems appropriate to apply it in the pre-modern Chinese context.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

230

Welter

sentiments that caused him to recommend Buddhism for its practical utility, devoid of ideological concerns (the realpolitik model). IV

The Confucian Revival in China and the Buddhist Revival in Wuyue

The origins of the cakravartin model in Wuyue lie in the complicated legacy of Buddhism from the end of the Tang 唐 (618–906) to the Wudai 五代, or Five Dynasties period (907–959). Often heralded as a “golden age” of Buddhism in China, the Tang legacy was complicated by rising anti-Buddhist sentiments that culminated in a major suppression of Buddhism during the Huichang 會 昌 era (841–846).9 While many Tang emperors favored Buddhism and saw in its teachings a force for good that could pacify the realm, others viewed it as a threat and attempted to curb its influence. From the mid-Tang period, central authorities suffered a serious blow when the military warlord governor (jiedu shi 節度使) An Lushan 安禄山, charged with guarding the northern frontier, usurped his authority, and marched his loyal troops into the capital of Chang’an 長安 (contemporary Xi’an 西安) in 755. Emperor Xuanzong 玄宗 and his court were forced to flee, and although the rebellion was suppressed, the fortunes of the dynasty never recovered. Successive attempts to restore dynastic unity and the power of the central authority resulted in excessive tax burdens on the peasantry, and eventually to growing patterns of disorder and banditry, and garrison insurrections. The final decades of Tang rule saw a popular rebellion of great magnitude and the central government reduced to surrendering large areas of its domain to independent and quasi-independent military warlord rulers (jiedu shi).10 The declining state of Tang society, political authority, and the economy brought forth calls for reform. Among the strident critics of this period was Han Yu 韓愈 (768–824), whose spirited anti-Buddhist rhetoric helped spawn a Confucian revival.11 While it is not the case that Confucianism during the Tang was as lethargic as often supposed,12 it is true that many of the brightest minds of the period were captivated by Buddhism and spent their careers enraptured 9 10

11 12

See Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang, 114–136. On this, see Robert M. Somers, “The End of the T’ang,” in Denis Twitchett, ed., The Cambridge History of China, volume 3: Sui and T’ang China, 589–906 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). See Hartman, Han Yu and the T'ang Search for Unity. See David McMullen, State and Scholars in T’ang China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

231

by the more rarified air that Buddhism led them to. The message of Confu­ cianism was uninspiring for many, and seemed to have little to offer on fundamental questions regarding the human condition and the fundamental meaning and purpose of life. Implicated in the fall of the Eastern Han dynasty (25–220), confidence in Confucianism as a sole pretext for ruling authority had been seriously undermined, and successive generations of Chinese elites were reluctant to rely on it exclusively. Instead, they preferred to acknowledge its utility as a social ethic but circumscribe its authority to the realm of practical affairs, relying on Buddhism (or Daoism) for serious matters relating to metaphysics and epistemology. All of this began to change with Han Yu, who launched a broadside campaign against Buddhism as an alien, non-Chinese religion, based on evil, socially damaging superstitions subversive of public morality and “true” Chinese (i.e., Confucian) values.13 Through Han Yu, the Confucian trained Chinese elite began to awaken to the possibilities of renewing China as a “Confucian” state. The teachings of Confucius 孔子 and Mencius 孟子, previously subordinated to the “old” canon of the five Confucian authoritative texts (Li ji 禮記 or Book of Rites, Shu jing 書 經 of Book of Documents, Shi jing 詩經 or Book of Poetry, Yi jing 易經 or Book of Changes, and Chunqiu 春秋 or Spring and Autumn [Annals]), were elevated to a new status as “classics.” Their words, previously relegated to secondary status, acquired a new meaning and a new sense of relevancy, pointing to a direct and penetrating insight into the workings of the Way as applied to pressing moral, social, and political issues. As Han Yu breathed new life into Confucius’ and Mencius’ words, he created a new model of the sage as an active participant in the affairs of the world for the Chinese literati to follow.14 As Confucian confidence in this new approach grew, Confucian scholars began to challenge the assumptions that pervaded Buddhist teaching. While Zanning was forced to confront this new, virulent form of Confu­ cianism head-on in the Song, Yanshou was shielded from it by the dictates of state policy in Wuyue. Even as Tang authority deteriorated, the southern principality of Wuyue was able to carve out a quasi-independent, politically stable, and economically vibrant regime centered in the regional capital of Qiantang (which later became the Southern Song capital of Hangzhou). Like other southern based regimes of the late Tang and Five Dynasties periods (e.g., 13 14

De Bary and Bloom, eds., Sources of Chinese Tradition, vol. 1, 583–585. Regarding the effect of the more direct and engaging style of exegesis employed by NeoConfucians, and pioneered by the likes of Han Yu, see Daniel Gardner, “Modes of Thinking and Modes of Discourse in the Sung: Some Thoughts on the Yu-lu (‘Recorded Conversations’) Texts,” Journal of Asian Studies 50, no. 3 (1991): 574–603.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

232

Welter

Southern Tang, Min, and Southern Han), Wuyue was built on a revision of the past glories of the Tang dynasty, predicated on a revival of Tang Buddhist culture, based on a Buddhist vision of society and culture. The founder of an independent Wuyue, Qian Liu 錢鏐 (King Wusu 武肅王, r. 893–932), assumed an imperial title, Taizu 太祖 (Great Ancestor), revealing his pretensions for the Wuyue regime. While Qian Liu was early on persuaded to follow Daoism, under the influence of the noteworthy Daoist Luo Yin 羅隱,15 he eventually turned to Buddhism as the hallmark of his regime. Qian Liu showed his support for Buddhism by beginning a campaign to construct monasteries throughout the region, including the Taiping Cloister 太平院 (for housing the famous Tiantai prelate Zhiyi’s 智顗 remains), the Huiri Monastery 慧日寺, and the Jiuming Monastery on Mt. Tiantai 天台山.16 Monks from various regions sought refuge under the protection of the Buddhist monasteries that Qian Liu supported, including representatives of the Northern and Southern Factions of Chan. A key spiritual center of the Wuyue region was undoubtedly Mt. Tiantai, the cradle of the Tiantai school, founded by Zhiyi (538–597). After the death of Zhiyi and his disciple Guanding 灌頂 (561–632), Tiantai was absorbed into the Buddhism of the capital, Chang’an, and lost its independent status and vitality. It was revived for a time in the eighth century by the sixth patriarch of the school, Zhanran 湛然 (711–782), but fell into decline after his death.17 Through the support of Wuyue rulers, the school was revived. Zanning (919–1001) claimed that Haorui 皓端 (889–961), whom the Wuyue ruler Qian Chu 錢俶 (King Zhongyi 忠懿王) honored with a purple robe and named “Great Virtuous Exaltor of Dharma” (dade songfa 大德崇法), was the successor of the tenth Tiantai patriarch Xuanzhu 玄燭.18 The campaign to revive Buddhism in Wuyue culminated in the personal connections and political fortunes of Tiantai Deshao 天台德紹 (891–972) and

15 16

17 18

On Luo Yin, see Jan de Meyer, “Confucianism and Daoism in the Political Thought of Luo Yin,” T’ang Studies 10–11 (1992–93): 67–80. Hatanaka Jōen 畑中浄園, “Goetsu no bukkyō—toku ni Tendai Tokushō to sono shi Eimei Enju ni tsuite” 呉越の仏教 -- 特に天台徳韶とその嗣永明延寿に ついて (Buddhism in Wuyue: With Special Reference to Tiantai Deshao and his heir, Yongming Yanshou). Ōtani daigaku kenkyu nenpō 大谷大学けん研究年報 7 (1954): 309. On Buddhism during Qian Liu’s reign, see Abe Jôichi 阿部肇一, Chūgoku zenshūshi no kenkyū 中国禅 宗史の研究 (A History of Chinese Zen) [Revised edition, Tokyo: Seishin shobō, 1987], 129–174. Hatanaka, “Goetsu no bukkyō,” 309. Song Gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳, juan 7: T 2061, p.750, c27–p.751, a2.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

233

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

Qian Chu (King Zhongyi, r. 948–978).19 Nearly forty years his junior, Qian Chu naturally relied on Deshao for advice, practicing Buddhism under him in a manner more akin to a master-disciple relationship than the natural pattern pertaining between a ruler and his spiritual advisor. Deshao’s stature in the region was such that he was praised as the re-embodiment of Zhiyi.20 His influence over Qian Chu resulted in favored treatment for Deshao’s students in Wuyue, many of who studied alongside Qian Chu in Deshao’s congregation.21 Most prominent among them were Zanning, who succeeded Deshao in the role of Wuyue’s political advisor, and Yongming Yanshou (904–975), who assumed the role of spiritual leader in Wuyue. Yanshou’s career culminated with his role as abbot at the Yongming Monastery, a newly established institution in the Wuyue capital that symbolized the central role of Buddhism in the region. V

Yongming Yanshou and the Cakravartin Model in Wuyue

The Buddhist revival in Wuyue was a reaction against the chaos of the late Tang and Five Dynasties. In the wake of roughly a century and a half of turmoil, the independent states of southern China, and especially Wuyue, carved out regions of relative peace and prosperity that endured for decades. The promotion of Buddhism was a major factor in each of these states rise and prosperity. In the states of Min, Nan (Southern) Tang, Nan (Southern) Han, and Wuyue, prosperity was greatly enhanced through a prince-patron/ monk-subject relationship, whereby the ruler’s power was enhanced through the prestige accorded to leading Buddhist monks in their realms. In general terms, these relationships are summarized in the following table.22 19

20 21

22

On the relation between Qian Chu (King Zhongyi) and Tiantai Desaho, see Hatanaka, “Goetsu no bukkyō”; Abe, Chûgoku zenshûshi no kenkyû, 186–210; and Welter, Monks, Rulers and Literati: The Political Ascendancy of Chan Buddhism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 118–119. Wu Renchen 吳任臣, Shiguo qunchiu 十國春秋 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), p. 89, 4b. For a discussion and list of the monks supported by Qian Chu (King Zhongyi), see Abe, Chūgoku zenshūshi no kenkyū, 186–210; a list of the important monks who studied with Qian Chu under Deshao and whose biographies appear in fascicle 26 of the Jingde Chuandeng lu 景德傳燈錄 is given by Ishii Shūdō 石井修道, Sōdai zenshūshi no kenkyū 宋代 禅宗史の研究 (A History of Zen in the Song Dynasty) [Tokyo: Daito Shuppansha, 1987], 82–83. The table is adapted from Welter, Monks, Rulers and Literati, 13. For more information on the patronage accorded to Buddhist monks in these kingdoms, see ibid, 3–23.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

234

Welter

­­Patterns of Buddhist Patronage in Southern Kingdoms during the Five Dynasties Kingdom

Ruling Family Buddhist Leaders

Min 閩 Nan Tang 南唐 Nan Han 南漢 Wuyue 吳越

Wang 王 Li 李 Liu 劉 Qian 錢

– Xuefeng Yicun 雪峰依存 (822–908) – Zhaoqing Wendeng 招慶文僜 (884–972; to 945) – Fayan Wenyi 法眼文義 (885–949) – Zhaoqing Wendeng 招慶文僜 (884–972; after 945) – Yunmen Wenyan 雲門文偃 (864–949) – Tiantai Deshao 天台德紹 (891–972) – Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (904–975) – Zanning 贊寧 (919–1001; to 978)

As a result, in addition to its strictly spiritual role, Buddhism in these regions was linked to social and political stability. This is especially true in the case of Wuyue. Through the promotion of Buddhism, Wuyue rulers envisioned a revival of the old glory of the Tang, where Buddhism served as a central feature in the definition of civilization and culture. Of all the regions of the south, Wuyue was economically and politically the strongest during the Five Dynasties period. Among the southern states, Wuyue also provided the strongest support for Buddhism, and Buddhism served as the strongest cornerstone of Wuyue cultural policy. It is noteworthy, however, that Wuyue support for Buddhism was driven by conservative forces seeking in Buddhism the recovery of a former glory. While Wuyue Buddhism was embodied largely through support for Chan masters and institutions, it sought to weld these to precedents founded in the doctrinal traditions of Buddhist scholasticism. The style of Chan promoted in Wuyue fostered such arrangements. As a result, although the Wuyue Buddhist revival was carried out largely under the Chan banner, Chan in Wuyue had its own distinct character that identified Chan with former Tang Buddhist traditions, and this identification with the larger Buddhist tradition became a defining feature of Wuyue Chan. The major protagonist of Wuyue Chan was Yongming Yanshou, whose Chan syncretism redefined the contributions of the doctrinal schools of Buddhism and their textual traditions in terms of Chan principles. Yanshou’s notion of zong 宗 is articulated extensively in his major work on Chan scholasticism, the Zongjing lu 宗鏡錄 (Records of the Source-Mirror).23 23

On Yanshou’s scholastic style Chan in the Zongjing lu, see Welter, Yongming Yanshou’s

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

235

Rather than an architect of the Wuyue cakravartin model, Yanshou’s writings reflect prevailing assumptions regarding orthodox Buddhism inherited in Wuyue. Although Yanshou identifies himself in his writings as a Chan master, his brand of Chan should not be confused with Linji faction teachings that became dominant in the Song.24 Yanshou is quite critical of the tenets associated with Linji Chan teaching, whether it be the rejection of Buddhist scriptures as a meaningful guide, or the dismissal of Buddhist piety, seated meditation, and other conventional Buddhist practices as impediments to direct apprehension and sudden awakening (wu 悟). Yanshou’s Chan, true to the orientation toward Buddhism prevalent in Wuyue, reflects broad assumptions in Chinese Mahayana teaching and incorporates the full range of practices that this teaching offers. While Yanshou agrees that these teachings are preparatory, in some sense, and do not reflect the complete awakening experience that Chan affords, these teachings are also part and parcel of true bodhisattva practice, and no true Buddhist would reject them. The myriad good deeds (wanshan 萬善) that Yanshou advocates in his Wanshan tonggui ji 萬善同歸集 (Collected Writings on the Common End of Myriad Good Deeds) are thus a reflection of the panMahayana universalism promoted by Wuyue policy.25 The architects of Wuyue policy were the aforementioned ruler, Qian Chu (King Zhongyi), and his spiritual and political advisor, the Buddhist monk Tiantai Deshao 天台德紹. Qian Chu was a self-espoused cakravartin. Although the revival of Mt. Tiantai as a spiritual center in Wuyue, at Deshao’s urgings was a strong priority, as a ruler Qian Chu identified with the stūpa reliquary on Mt. Ayuwang 阿育王山 (King Aśoka). According to Buddhist traditions in China, when the famed pro-Buddhist Indian monarch dictated that stūpas containing relics of Śākyamuni be erected throughout his kingdom, some—like the one on Mt. Ayuwang in Wuyue—were erected in China.26 The presumption that

24

25

26

Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu: A Special Transmission within the Scriptures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). Welter, “The problem with orthodoxy in Zen Buddhism: Yongming Yanshou’s notion of zong in the Zongjing lu (Records of the Source Mirror)” Studies in Religion/ Sciences Religieuses 31, no. 1 (2002): 3–18. On Yanshou and the Wanshan tonggui ji, see Welter, The Meaning of Myriad Good Deeds: A Study of Yung-ming Yen-shou and the Wan-shan t’ung-kuei chi (New York: Peter Lang, 1993). According to legend, the dispersion of the Buddha’s relics to China was facilitated by an episode in which King Aśoka miraculously erects eighty-four thousand stūpas at the same time, each containing a relic of the Buddha—with the elder abbot Yaśas covering the sun with his hand to signal the completion of the work (see Lokesh Chandra, Life of Lord Buddha from Chinese Sutras Illustrated in Ming Woodcuts [New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan, Sata-Pitaka Series, Indo-Asian Literatures

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

236

Welter

Aśoka’s stūpas were erected in China symbolically represents the inclusion of China in the larger Asian Buddhist world. The Aśokan model in Wuyue was more than symbolic. In imitation of Aśoka’s pro-Buddhist program, Qian Chu mounted a massive construction campaign aimed at physically imprinting Buddhism on the Wuyue landscape. The number and scale of construction activities carried out by Wuyue monarchs has been well documented.27 Indicative of this activity was the aforementioned reconstruction of Mt. Tiantai—including its numerous monasteries and shrines—as a spiritual center, affirmation of the Śākyamuni stūpa on Mt. Ayuwang as a leading symbol, and the prominent construction of Aśoka inspired stūpas throughout the realm. In addition, countless Buddhist monasteries and shrines were either constructed or refurbished throughout the Wuyue region during this period. This was particularly true in the capital, Qiantang 錢塘. Yanshou, for example, received his first posting, at the request of Qian Chu, to assume abbotship of the newly refurbished Lingyin Chan monastery 靈隱禪寺 located on the outskirts of the capital. After a brief tenure there, Yanshou was again asked by Qian Chu to assume abbotship of a large, newly constructed Yongming monastery 永明寺 on the southern shores of the famed West Lake. Yongming monastery functioned as a leading Buddhist institution in Wuyue, the beacon from which Wuyue’s leading spiritual advisor, Yanshou, disseminated state authorized Buddhist teachings throughout the region. A number of Aśoka inspired pagodas (ta 塔) erected by Qian Chu survived into the modern period.28 Qian Chu’s own writings leave no doubt regarding the supreme role accorded to Buddhism in Wuyue. In a preface penned for Yanshou’s Zongjing lu, Qian Chu makes clear the relative status granted to each of China’s “three teachings” (san jiao 三教).29 There are three teachings within the boundaries of our territory. To rectify [behavior between] rulers and ministers, for affection between fathers and sons, and for cordial human relations—Confucianism—it is my teacher. 域中之教者三。正君臣。親父子。厚人倫。儒。吾之師也。

27 28 29

Volume 627, 2010], 426–427 [Episode 193], with accompanying text referencing the Ayuwang zhuan 阿育王傳 [T 2042]). Abe, Chūgoku zenshūshi no kenkyū, 125–216. Edouard Chavannes, “Le Royaume de Wou et de Yue,” T’oung Pao 17 (1916): 129–264. T 2016, p. 415, b10–15; Welter, Yongming Yanshou’s Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu, 226.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

237

In moments of quiet and solitude, look and listen for the unobtainable. From the infinitesimally subtle, one soars to vacuous non-existence. How one rides the wind, directing the world as if it were a play. If the ruler obtains this [kind of understanding], what is well established will not end in ruin. If the people obtain it, they will be granted gifts beyond measure. Daoism—the teacher of Confucianism. 寂兮寥兮。視聽無得。自微妙。升虛無。以止乎乘風馭景。君得之則 善建不拔。人得之則延貺無窮。道。儒之師也。

The four noble truths, the twelve-linked chain of causation, the three miraculous powers, and the eight liberations—practice these regularly without neglect. Cultivate daily in order to obtain them. As soon as you realize nirvāṇa, you will forever understand what is true and eternal. Buddhism—the source (zong) of Daoism. 四諦十二因緣。三明八解脫。時習不忘。日修以得。一登果地。永達 真常。釋。道之宗也。

Ultimately, Wuyue left a defining imprint on Song Buddhism. Its legacy of cultural production included major works that left a lasting impact on Buddhism in the Song dynasty. These include major Buddhist print works: the aforementioned Zongjing lu 宗鏡錄 (Records of the Source-Mirror) by Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽, a defining work that influenced Buddhist doctrine/teaching (jiao 教); the Jingde Chuandeng lu 景德傳燈錄 (Jingde era Record of the Transmission of the Lamp) by Daoyuan 道源, the classical text of the Chan school (chan 禪); and two works on monks and vinaya administration (lü 律) by Zanning 贊寧, the Song Gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳 (Song Biographies of Eminent Monks) and Seng shi lüe 僧史略 (Topical Compendium of the Buddhist Clergy). Wuyue Buddhism thus provided a template for post-Tang Buddhism that extended over the three major areas of Buddhism: teaching/doctrine (jiao 教), meditation (chan 禪), and vinaya (lü 律). Zanning’s writings in the latter area marked a major contribution in this regard. V

The Early Song Intellectual Terrain: A Typology of Confucian and Buddhist Participants

Scholars who have begun to wade into the subject of Buddhist and NeoConfucian interactions with an eye toward expanding our understanding beyond the pious apologetics and strident polemics that post-Tang BuddhistConfucian discourse had often been reduced, no longer rely on once seemingly

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

238

Welter

irrefutably rigid categories like “Confucian” and “Buddhist.” Lixue 理學 antiBuddhist polemics left no doubt regarding the respective positions of the two camps and the divisions separating them. The strength of these polemics has been overwhelming. According to official lixue orthodoxy, all literati shared in denouncing Buddhism, and any Buddhist inspired compromise lacked legitimacy. It was also inconceivable that Buddhists, given their ideological preferences, would join in the “Confucian” cause. By ceding the power to define what constitutes “Confucianism” and to delimit sharp boundaries between “Confucians” and “Buddhists” to lixue proponents, our ability to understand the wide-ranging views that constituted actual literati ideology was circumscribed. When we speak of literati, we are not speaking, in the first place, about an ideological perspective determined as “Confucian,” “Buddhist,” or “Daoist.” Rather, we are speaking about a shared commitment to the tradition of ru 儒, not as it is often understood in the restricted sense of a tradition initiated by Confucius and confined to his followers, but as in the broader tradition of Chinese belles lettres. In this sense, the ru in China are best understood not as “Confucians,” but as belletrists with shared values, who may also exhibit propensities toward Confucian, Buddhist, and Daoist teachings, or some com­bination thereof. Defining ru not by a particular tradition, but as a shared perspective that cut across formal allegiances, is useful throughout the Chinese tradition. It is particularly so in the Song dynasty, especially in the early Song where the search for ideological underpinnings encouraged boundary crossing fluidity As an application of this approach, I have remapped the intellectual terrain occupied by a wide variety of ru in the early Song period in an attempt to give greater recognition to the broad range of intellectual positions possible, beyond rather static categories.30 The following typology is based on representative figures within the intellectual world of the early Song dynasty. The typology introduced here is intended to be representative, rather than comprehensive. Typologies by their nature are reductive and prone to simplification of complex issues. The types introduced here are intended as representative of a range of possibilities that characterized the Song intellectual environment. 30

One great oversight I must admit from the outset is my neglect of any Daoist inclined ru from consideration. Daoist activity, it seems, was relatively minor in the early decades of the Song that I am concerned with here, but it became more significant with the rise of Quanzhen jiao 全真教 faction later in the Song. According to Oda Ryūmyō 小田龍明, “Sōdai no dōkyō—toku ni hokusō shotei no dōkyō shinkō to shūkyō taisaku” 宋代の道 教—特に北宋諸帝の道教信仰と宗教対策 (Daoism in the Song Dynasty—Especially the Daoist Beliefs and Religious Policies of Northern Song Emperors), Daoism was promoted as a national religion by Wang Qinruo 王欽若 in the early Song, during the reign of Zhenzong (r. 998–1022).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

239

The literary (wen 文) movement of the early Song produced a variety of perspectives. Differences between perspectives were muted by the common goal of creating a new social order based on literary values widely conceived. This literary venture was sponsored by the early Song emperors, Taizu (r. 960–976), Taizong (r. 976–997) and Zhenzong (r. 998–1022), who consciously espoused wen 文 over wu 武 (martial spirit) in an attempt to reverse the tide of war and chaos that had plagued China since the late Tang.31 Regardless of the common purpose that united them, certain fault lines can be detected that divide individual proponents of wen according to the type of wen they espoused and the parameters of what wen included. In the following, I group the differences in early Song interpretations of wen into six types, including Confucians and Buddhists. The discussion is not random, but proceeds along a spectrum starting with more conservative and restrictive interpreters of wen to liberal and open perspectives. The first group represents one end of the spectrum, where we find figures like Liu Kai 柳開 (954–1000).32 Liu Kai linked the wen revival in the Song to the wen of antiquity (guwen 古文), and saw himself as in a line of sages that extended from Mencius to himself, through Han Yu. Although Han Yu was well regarded in the early Song by wen proponents, Liu Kai distinguished himself by proclaiming the exclusivity of Han Yu’s guwen for inculcating true values. According to Liu, the mind and wen are united: the mind represents the internal structure of wen as external appearance. As a result the mind inside one is master of external manifestations, suggesting a role for wen as an instrument for rectifying the mind and attaining sagehood. To affect this, proper wen models must be selected. For Liu Kai, only the writings of Confucius, Mencius, Yang Xiong 揚雄, and Han Yu are to be included; the classics, histories, and writings of the “hundred schools” are not open for consideration as true wen.33 In the context of early Song tolerance to different perspectives, Liu Kai’s positions branded him as a strident moralist and exclusivist. Group two includes literary figures at the Song court that represented more moderate positions, combining a firm moralism with wide literary and cultural interests. In contrast to Liu Kai, Wang Yucheng 王禹偁 (954–1001) demonstrated how the moral resolve typical of guwen advocates did not necessarily 31 32 33

The opening lines of the section on the collected biographies of literary masters (Wenyuan 文苑) in the Song shi 宋史, juan 439, p. 12,997) characterizes this view. On Liu Kai, see Song shi, juan 440, pp. 13,023–13,028; and Peter Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 162–165. Liu Kai, Hedong xiansheng chi 河東先生集 (Literary Collection of Liu Kai), Sibu congkan 四部叢刊, juan 1, p. 11b & juan 5, p. 8a–p. 9b; cited in Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 164.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

240

Welter

lead to a wholesale rejection of other types of wen.34 Wang maintained that only writings modeled after the classics and five constants deserved to be regarded as wen, but believed that a broad appreciation of writings that fell outside of the definition of wen were not necessarily harmful.35 Similarly, Xu Xuan 徐鉉 (917–992) was a stern and conservative Confucian by nature, but displayed a wide range of interests, including painting and calligraphy.36 In spite of their tolerance, literati in this group shared with their staunch guwen allies in group one a general antipathy toward Buddhism, seeing the Buddhist clergy as an idle and unproductive class, a burden to the Chinese economy, and as promoting false spiritual claims.37 Group three comprises Buddhists with a serious interest in guwen, sometimes referred to as “Confucian monks” (ruseng 儒僧).38 The most prominent representative of this group in the early Song was the literati monk Zanning 贊 寧 (919–1001), but it also included monks like Zhiyuan 智圓 (976–1022). These were monks who established strong reputations among secular literati for their literary abilities, including an acknowledged expertise over Confucian classics. The likes of Zanning and Zhiyuan openly accepted the Confucian premises of Chinese society, even going so far as to teach guwen principles to members of the Buddhist clergy.39 While acknowledging the fundamental 34 35 36

37 38

39

On Wang Yucheng, see Song shi, juan 293, pp. 9793–9800; Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 165– 166. Wang Yucheng, Xiao chu ji 小畜集 (Literary Collection of Wang Yucheng), Sibu congkan 四部叢刊, juan 19, pp. 266–267); Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 165. On Xu Xuan, see Song shi, juan 441, p. 13,044–13,049; Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 156–157; and Xu Xuan, Xu qisheng ji 徐騎省集 (Literary Collection of Xu Xuan), Guoxue jiben congshu 國學基本叢書. Along with his brother, Xu Xuan completed the redaction of the Shuowen jiezi 說文解字 (Etymological Dictionary of the Chinese Language). See Wang Yucheng’s anti-Buddhist memorial to the throne, recorded in Song shi, juan 293, p. 9797. A term used by Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮, “Sannei to sono jidai” 賛寧とその時代, in Chūgoku kinsei bukkyōshi kenkyū 中國近世仏教史研究 (Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, 1957), 105. Zhiyuan, for example, believed the Three Teachings were essentially compatible and particularly favored the Doctrine of the Mean; he maintained that some Buddhists even “attacked their own teaching and honored ru” (Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 408, n. 92; citing Jiang Yibin [Chiang I-pin] 蔣義斌, Songdai rushi tiaohelun ji paifolun zhi yanjin 宋代儒 釋調和論及排佛論之演進 [The Evolution of the Confucian-Buddhist Synthesis and Anti-Buddhism in the Song Dynasty] [Taibei: Shangwu, 1988], 10–12). On Zhiyuan, also see Koichi Shinohara, “Zhiyuan’s Autobiographical Essay: ‘The Master of the Mean,’” in Phyllis Granoff and Koichi Shinohara, eds., Other Selves: Autobiography and Biography in Cross-Cultural Perspective (Oakville, Ontario: Mosaic Press, 1994), 35–72.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

241

precepts of Confucianism as necessary to anyone who aspired to “this culture” (siwen 斯文), they also maintained a need to change with the times while continuing these ancient traditions.40 Essentially, this served as a pretext for a Three Teaching syncretism that acknowledged the valid contributions of each to China’s wen tradition. Ru learning 儒學, in effect, was not circumscribed by narrowly defined Confucian interpretation that excluded others, but incorporated and validated the legitimate contributions of Buddhism (and Daoism) to China’s ru 儒, or literary, heritage. In the early Song, Zanning proposed a concrete plan for managing China’s multi-ideological tradition. Zanning illustrates his plan through a three-legged sacrificial ding 鼎 vessel, an analogy found in the work of Zhiyuan as well, where each leg represents one of the three teachings (sanjiao 三教). If one leg is missing, the vessel will fall over. Zanning's position is summarized in his conclusion to the Seng shi lüe, where he speaks of the "grand strategy of the three teachings” 三教之大猷.41 The "grand strategy" is Zanning's own way of speaking about the "great plan" (hongfan 弘範), a euphemism for the emperor’s stratagem for governing the empire. Zanning's "grand strategy" posits the emperor as the undisputed head of the Chinese state and leader of Chinese society and the legitimate supervisor of the Buddhist religion. As each of China's three teachings—Buddhism, Confu­cianism, and Daoism—have a legitimate position in the function of the state, it is the duty of the emperor to supervise their activities and direct them in accordance with the aims of the state. As a mark of Buddhism’s accession to full status as a participant in China’s wen tradition, Zanning cedes absolute authority to the emperor and by implication, to his secular establishment. Group four includes Buddhists who maintained a traditional approach to Buddhist teaching, were on familiar terms with secular literati, and were ill disposed toward guwen. While members of this group worked closely with literati supporters, they maintained their integrity as traditional Buddhist masters providing teachings and ritual occasions to followers in order to enhance their religious cultivation. The Wuyue Chan master Yongming Yanshou (904–975), though he did not live long enough to experience life at the Song court (Wuyue territory was incorporated into the Song domain in 978, after Yanshou’s 40

41

See Bol, “This Culture of Ours”, 166; Zhiyuan’s farewell preface to Shuji 庶幾, in Tao Qiu­ ying (T’ao Ch’iu-ying) 陶秋英 and Yu Xing (Yu Hsing) 虞行, Song Jin Yuan wenlun xuan 宋金元文論選 (Selected Song, Jin, and Yuan Discussions of Literature; Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1984), 16–18. T 2126, p. 254, c–p. 255, a. For a fuller treatment of Zanning’s position regarding wen, see Welter, “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival,” esp. 36–47.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

242

Welter

passing), provided a model for the preservation of traditional Buddhist practices in the Song. The programs of the Tiantai school monks Shengchang 省 常 (959–1020) and Zhili 知禮 (960–1028) aimed at furthering Buddhist piety undoubtedly owe a debt to Yanshou. Yanshou’s views are evident from his two major works, Records of the SourceMirror and The Common End of Myriad Good Deeds. Yanshou essentially follows Zhiyi and Zongmi’s lead by incorporating Confucianism and Daoism as preparatory teachings to Buddhism, but unlike Zongmi, Yanshou is not interested in creating a divisive scheme of Buddhist teachings. Nonetheless, it would be short sighted to suggest that Yanshou did not have preferences regarding the superiority of the Buddhist teachings he discusses. Since the mirror (jing 鏡) is a metaphor for the mind (xin 心), the Zongjing lu is really an exposition of Buddhist mind teaching (xinjiao 心教). Buddhist mind teaching, according to Yanshou, culminates with Chan, but not the aggressive and self-destructive rhetoric of “classic” Chan, epitomized by the Linji faction. For Yanshou, Chan incorporates the different doctrines and practices associated with Buddhist mind teaching developed throughout the history of Buddhism. In terms of scriptural sources, Yanshou shows preference for the Lotus sūtra and Tiantai scriptures, but also exhibits fondness for other classic Mahāyāna sources: Huayan, Sanlun/ Madhyamaka, and Faxiang/ Yogācāra. In a word, Yanshou’s schema is less divisive and more compliant. All good deeds (wanshan 萬善), according to Yanshou, propel one toward a common end (tonggui 同歸), nīrvāna 涅槃, the comprehensive and inclusive source (zong 宗) of all truth. Group five comprises secular literati who maintained positions contrary to guwen principles, and included literati who openly espoused a new kind of wen built around freeing wen (and the individuals who championed it) from artificial constraints. Yang Yi 楊億 (974–1020) was an advocate of wen as literary refinement and individual creativity, and saw Chan literature as a vehicle for true wen expression. Yang Yi is well known for his editorial directorship of the classic Chan transmission record, the Jingde Chuandeng lu. As editor, Yang Yi reconceived the Chuandeng lu in terms of the dictates of Linji Chan principles, in particular as demonstrating the Chan claim as “a special practice outside the teaching” (jiaowai biexing 教外別行), a variant of the Chan slogan “a special transmission outside the teaching” (jiaowai biechuan 教外別傳) which came into vogue in the early Song. In doing so, Yang Yi reinterpreted a work originally compiled by Fayan faction Chan monk Daoyuan 道原 (d.u.) titled Fozu tongcan ji 佛祖同參集 (Anthology of the Common Practice of Buddhas and Patriarchs; the original compilation is no longer extant), intended to signal just the opposite—the commonality between the practice (and

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

243

teaching) of the Buddhas and Chan patriarchs.42 Daoyuan’s approach to the compatibility between Chan and Buddhist teachings made him a likely fit with the group four monks mentioned above. Yang Yi’s ambitions for Chan were exhibited in the Tiansheng Guangdeng lu 天聖廣燈錄 (Tiansheng era Expanded Lamp Record), compiled by Li Zunxu 李遵勗 (988–1038) expressly to document the achievements of Linji faction monks in the early Song, treated below in group six.43 Yang Yi and Li Zunxu also both took up positions as Chan students and assumed status within the Chan lineage. Through their compilation of Chan literary records, Yang Yi and Li Zunxu strove to achieve a unique literary identity for the Song, fulfilling the ambitions of Song emperors Zhenzong (r. 997–1022) and Renzong (r. 1022–1063) to distinguish the Song dynasty’s cultural accomplishments. While Taizu and Taizong emulated the Tang dynasty through massive literary projects aimed at enshrining the legacy of the past, Zhenzong and Renzong sought to establish a new and distinctly Song literary identity.44 Group six are comprised of the Linji faction Chan monks that Yang Yi and his compatriots championed. The main expositors (in fact, the virtual creators) of Linji Chan in the early Song were Shoushan Shengnian 首山省念 (926–993) and his disciples. As mentioned above, the Linji faction was memorialized by Li Zunxu in the Tiansheng Guangdeng lu.45 These monks, along with their literati supporters, were responsible for establishing the classic image of Chan memorialized in the “records of sayings” (yulu 語錄) literature, especially through what have come to be known as “encounter dialogues” (jiyuan wenda 42 43 44 45

See Welter, Monks, Rulers, and Literati, 174f. Zokuzōkyō 1553, p. 501, b16–17. Welter, Monks, Rulers, and Literati, 170–172. Shengnian produced twelve heirs with records in the Tiansheng Guangdeng lu 天聖廣燈 錄, juan 16 & juan 17 (Zokuzōkyō 1553, p. 495, a24–p. 502, c8): (1) Huaizhi of the Ganming Cloister on Mt. Shou in Ruzhou 汝州首山乾明院懷志 (2) Guisheng of the Guangjiao Cloister in Yexuan, Ruzhou 汝州葉縣廣教院賜紫歸省 (3) Zhisong of the Tiefo Cloister in Xizhou 析州鐵佛院智嵩 (4) Shanzhao of the Taizi Cloister of Dazhong Monastery in Fenzhou 汾州大中寺太子 院善昭 (5) Yuncong of Mt. Guyin in Xiangzhou 襄州谷隱山蘊聰 (6) Zhisong of the Sanjiao Chengtian Cloister in Bingzhou 并州三交承天院智嵩 (7) Zhenhui Yuanlian of the Guanghui Cloister in Ruzhou 汝州廣慧院真惠元璉 (8) Chan Master Mi of Mt. Huangbo in Jianmen 劍門黃檗謐禪師 (9) Jenwang Chuping from Chizhou 池州仁王處評 (10) Zhimen Huihan from Suizhou 隋州智門迴罕 (11) Nantai Qikuang from Tanzhou 潭州南臺契曠 (12) Huizhao of Lumen in Xiangzhou 襄州鹿門惠昭

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

244

Welter

機緣問答). This literature, largely compiled in the early Song, established Chan

as a new species of spirituality utilizing a novel literary form that emphasized witty and paradoxical episodes, profound and insightful dialogue, nonsensical utterances, iconoclastic behavior, beating and shouting, and other odd features. The point of these exercises was not aimed at acquiring merit or understanding, the raison d’etre of conventional Buddhist practice, but to precipitate a sudden awakening (dunwu 頓悟) into the truth and to realize Buddhahood for oneself. Based on the above discussion, literati groups in the early Song are briefly categorized in the following table. Typology of Daoxue 道學 Confucians and Literati Monks 文僧 in the early Song46 Group 1

Group 2

Tolerant Intolerant Guwen Guwen 不寬容古文 寬容古文 (Han Yu) 韓愈 Liu Kai 柳開

Wang Yucheng 王禹偁 Xu Xuan 徐鉉

Group 3

Group 4

Confucian Doctrinal Buddhists Monks 教理僧 儒僧 Zanning 贊寧 Zhiyuan 智圓

Yanshou 延壽 Shengchang 省常 Zhili 知禮

Group 5

Group 6

Chan Literati 禪文人

Linji Chan 臨濟禪

Yang Yi 楊億 Li Zunxu 李遵勗

(Yixuan) 義玄 Shengnian 省念

As mentioned at the outset, the six groups included here do not exhaust the possibilities or combinations available to literati in the Song period, but only provide some indication of the range of possibilities. Groups one and two are united in their staunch devotion to guwen principles, and constitute a basis out of which the Daoxue movement and Neo-Confucian orthodoxy would later be derived. Groups three and four are both committed to traditional Mahayana Buddhist principles. Even if they count themselves as members of the Chan school (as did members of the so-called Fayan Chan faction), they renounce Chan exclusivism in favor of advocating a principled validation of traditional practices and teachings. Groups five and six both honor the exclusivist position of Linji Chan rhetoric as “a special transmission outside the teaching.” The individual groups are not always as rigid as my analysis would have them 46

Names in brackets () are actually Tang figures, but whose views were prominent among early Song Confucians and Literati Monks. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

245

appear, and one can detect some movement across the boundaries, and not just between natural allies as outlined above. Already, we have noted how Confucian monks of group three attempted to ally themselves with the tolerant guwen of group two. In addition, Chan literati of group five also engaged with the doctrinal Buddhists of group four. Group six is of particular note for the influences it exerted upon NeoConfucianism. In spite of the gulf that separates Chan from Neo-Confucianism in terms of their basic principles, Neo-Confucianism is hardly conceivable except as a reaction to notions precipitated by Chan and Buddhist teaching.47 47









See, for example, the summary of Diana Chen-Lin: & (consulted in August, 2007). Zhu Xi followed Zhou Dunyi 周敦頤 and incorporated the Daoist idea of a primordial state of nature. Unlike Daoists, who envision the primordial state as pristine and quiescent, Zhu Xi conceived it as active and constantly self-generating (the Great Ultimate, taiji 太極, has an active, yang 陽, and quiescent, yin 隱, component). In effect, Zhu Xi placed Daoist metaphysics and Confucian ethics on a continuum, arguing that Confucian principles, li 理, existed inherently within the primordial chaos, and that they in turn generated the yang force leading to the creation of the myriad things and the development of civilization.  Regarding Zhu Xi’s relation to Buddhism, the issue is far more complex. As is wellknown, Buddhism (Chan) affected a broad range of Zhu Xi’s concepts, e.g. principle, mind, and human-nature. In truth, however, Zhu grafted these to a Mencian Confucian framework, so it is better to say that Buddhist notions inspired Zhu to revitalize the Mencian interpretation of Confucianism.  As examples of Buddhist influences on Zhu’s thought, Diana Chen-Lin provides a convenient and insightful summary emphasizing three areas. (1) Emphasis on being one with nature. In Zhu Xi’s definition of the “investigation of things” (gewu 格物), and “knowing” (zhi 知), he continued an emphasis on the Neo-Confucian equation between the physical universe and moral universe. The ultimate stage of knowledge, according to Zhu Xi, was the elimination of all opposition between things, self, and others. This is reminiscent of the Chan Buddhist emphasis on awakening precipitated by the ultimate breakdown of artificial barriers separating humans and the objective world. As Zhu Xi stipulates, After exerting himself for a long time, he will one day experience a breakthrough to integral comprehension. Then the qualities of all things, whether internal or external, refined or coarse, will all be apprehended and the mind, in its whole substance and great functioning, will all be clearly manifested. This is "things [having been] investigated." This is the ultimate knowing.” (2) Emphasis on the subjective. According to Diana Chen-Lin, the importance of “sincerity of intentions” for Zhu Xi was to render the cultivated nature identical with the natural, affective nature (human nature that experiences the outside world). Since Neo-Confucians share with Buddhists a belief that the world is how one perceives it, perception and intention are crucial. Because of the influence of Buddhism, which differentiated between Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

246

Welter

Linji Chan assumed dominance within Buddhism in the Song dynasty and beyond, and when orthodox Neo-Confucians adopt a critical tone toward Buddhism, it is usually in reference specifically to the Linji Chan school. While I do not dispute the dominant position of the Linji faction within Chan and the larger tradition of Buddhism from the Song on, this assumption has frequently been overstated. There are two interrelated reasons for this. On the one hand, the overstatement is attributable to a failure to acknowledge the activities of non-Linji Chan groups and non-Chan Buddhist groups during the Song. More problematic, however, have been assumptions by Chan and Buddhist historians regarding the virtual monopoly of all things Buddhist by the Linji faction in the Song, a presumption that has allowed Neo-Confucian scholars, quite naturally, to assume the same. Neo-Confucian scholars have been unwittingly abetted by the likes of Zhu Xi and Neo-Confucian orthodoxy itself, which tends to conflate traditional Buddhism and Linji Chan rhetoric to its advantage, as the situation warrants. In other words, as Chan rhetoric tends to validate NeoConfucian criticisms of Buddhism, it is advantageous for Neo-Confucians to ignore distinctions within Buddhism that might serve to undermine their position. Forms of Buddhism grounded on moral principle do not square with the picture of Buddhism (i.e., Chan) that Neo-Confucian critics like to paint. Applying this typology to the early Song suggests the inadequate and biased ways in which Daoxue Neo-Confucians tend to reduce all Buddhism to the iconoclastic and anti-moralist rhetoric of Chan teaching, as stated above. This made Buddhism, in the eyes of its Daoxue critics, the antithesis of its own principled moralism. The principled Buddhism advocated by groups three and four was also ethically based, albeit in Buddhist, not Confucian, moral rules. While the acknowledgement of a morally based Buddhism would not have likely won over the likes of Zhu Xi, it would have forced them to approach their criticisms



reality and human subjectivity, the Neo-Confucians paid special attention to human subjectivity and affirmed its validity as a repository of truth. The Mean, a central concept for Neo-Confucians, also calls for a focus on the subjective. In his annotations to the Mean, Zhu Xi, differentiates between a pure mind rooted in one’s innate nature and moral imperative, and a mind contaminated by one’s individual physical form, in a way reminiscent of Chan Buddhism. (3) Human nature as heavenly principles. Following Chen-Lin’s analysis, Zhu Xi argued that human nature was constituted with heavenly principles; and self-cultivation meant adapting these principles to individual psycho-physical beings. These principles are manifested in the mind and the heart, and exhibited through balanced expressions of human emotion. Those of nobility do not let themselves express excessive emotion. This is reminiscent of the state of equanimity achieved through Buddhist meditation.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

247

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

with more finesse, allowing for greater tolerance among the different kinds of Buddhist teachings. The typology introduced here also allows for a greater array of approaches in dealing with Buddhist-Confucian relations. Rather than reducing the debate simply to pro- and anti-Buddhist polemics, the early Song suggests that there were a variety of attitudes, and that “Buddhists” could participate in the debate along with “Confucians,” if it is even appropriate to reduce identities to these essentialist terms.48 My study suggests that reliance on such categories can be problematic, as participants in debates blur easily definable lines, as for example, in the case of “Confucian monks” or “Chan literati.” This blurring is not simply a by-product of this period, but an ongoing phenomenon, and is made evident in the frequent engagement between Confucians and Buddhists in the Song and Ming, and the persistent efforts of Neo-Confucians to define and redefine the boundaries between them. The current study’s reference to “Confucian monks” and “Buddhist Junzi” draws implicitly from the boundary blurring perspectives that characterized Zanning and the early Song era. VII

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi: Zanning and Buddhist Realpolitik in the Song49

While Wuyue monarchs were occupied with reconstructing a self-avowed Buddhist kingdom, the Later Zhou dynasty emperor Shizong 世宗 mounted a massive campaign of persecution against Buddhism in 955, which was regarded as the last of the four great anti-Buddhist persecutions in China. Zanning belongs to the generation of Wuyue Buddhist prelates following Yanshou, and while he was raised in the same pro-Buddhist environment in Wuyue as Yanshou, the circumstances of his career took a drastically different turn. When Wuyue was amalgamated with the recently formed Song dynasty in 978, two years after Yanshou’s death, Zanning accompanied Qian Chu to the Song

48

49

On the problems with reducing Chinese Buddhism in this way, see Robert Sharf, Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002). Much of this section is from an edited version of my previous work, “From the Cakravartin Ideal to Realpolitik: Buddhism and Confucianism in the Pre-modern Chinese Context and its Implications for Contemporary Chinese Secular Policy toward Religion,” in Arvind Sharma and Madhu Khanna, eds., Asian Perspectives on the World’s Religions after September 11 (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2013), 49–67.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

248

Welter

capital to oversee the tense transfer of power.50 With the Song consolidation of former independent territories all but complete, Wuyue faced certain annihilation and economic destruction at the hands of invading northern forces. Even with the transfer completed a specter of uncertainty surrounded Zanning and the fate of Buddhism in the new regime. The relationship between the Buddha and the Chinese emperor, the status of the Buddhist clergy vis. a vis. Chinese secular authority, had been an issue in China since the introduction of Buddhism. Prior to the Song, the imperial government periodically mounted campaigns to curb and restrict Buddhist influence on Chinese society. Yet Buddhists were constantly able to claim their independence and intellectual superiority in ways that were largely unchallenged, and even supported by the government and nobility.51 At the beginning of the Song, questions regarding the proper role of Buddhism were raised once again. The resolutions arrived at became a key feature of Song Neo-Buddhism.52 In theoretical terms, the question was simple: how would the emperor be regarded vis. a vis. the Buddha. Zanning’s attempts to influence imperial policy 50

51



52

While Qian Chu remained on good personal terms with Emperor Taizong of Song, he died under mysterious circumstances in 988, falling violently ill after drinking wine given to him as a gift from the Emperor (Frederick Mote, Imperial China (900–1800) [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999], 15). Jacques Gernet, Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries, translated by Franciscus Verellen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995); originally published as Les aspects êconomiques du bouddhisme dans la sociêtê chinoise du Ve au Xe siècle (Saigon: Êcole Francaise d’Extrême-Orient, 1956), 4, discusses divisions among Buddhist monasteries in China according to status and type. Some monasteries are official places of worship and are recognized as such. They have received their name (e 額) by imperial bestowal as well as gifts of land, funds, servants, allotments of local families, and certain privileges. They are entitled to annual subventions from the court. Their monks have been selected and ordained by the emperor and are supervised by officially appointed clergy who are held accountable for their conduct. The other kind[s] of establishments are merely tolerated and are always the first to fall victim to repressions. These are private places of worship, serving the great families as well as the people. The use of the term “Neo-Buddhism” recognizes significant changes in Chinese Buddhism commencing with the Song. Continuities notwithstanding, Song Buddhism marks a significant turning point for Buddhism in China, including the following characteristics: 1) the advent of more consistent administrative policies and controls governing the activities of Buddhist institutions, monks, and nuns; 2) a more conciliatory and submissive Buddhist approach toward secular authorities; 3) a decline in emphasis on scholasticism and a change in the exegetical style of interpreting Buddhist texts; and 4) the rise of Chan Buddhism and its new textual forms—denglu 燈錄, yulu 語錄, and gong’an 公案.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

249

are vividly represented in two episodes regarding him and the emperor’s relationship with the Buddha. The first episode reads as follows: The monk Zanning accompanied the King of Wuyue (Qian Chu) to the [Song] court. The Emperor [Taizong] conferred on him (Zanning) the honorific title “Great Master, Expert in Wisdom,” ordered him to dwell at the Tianshou Monastery 天壽寺 in the Eastern Precincts [of the capital], and commanded him to write a history of the saṃgha 僧史. The following year, [the emperor] ordered Zanning to go as an official courier to the [stūpa containing] relics (śarīra 舍利) of the true body of Śākyamuni Buddha on Mt. Ayuwang 阿育王山 (King Aśoka) in Mingzhou. He entered the inner sanctum, made offerings, obtained a portion of the relics [and returned to the capital]. With these, an eleven-storied pagoda was built on a site at the northwest tower of Kaibao Monastery 開寶寺, at the base of which was built an imperial shrine (tiangong 天宮) to inter the relics.53 As we have seen, the Śākyamuni stūpa on Mt. Ayuwang (King Aśoka) in Mingzhou, reputedly containing the Buddha’s own relics, served as the center of Aśoka emulation in Wuyue and the symbol of how Buddhist-state relations were intertwined in a common goal framed by a Buddhist agenda. In the above episode, we see Zanning invoking the Aśokan model of Buddhist kingship, and by literally transplanting relics from the Aśoka stūpa to the capital, suggesting it be adopted by the Song emperor, Taizong. In this context, the relics offered by Zanning at the court of Song emperor Taizong can be construed as Zanning’s attempt to suggest the Wuyue model of Buddhist-state relations for the Song ruler. Buddhist records (as cited above) attempt to validate the pro-Buddhist strategy by claiming the emperor specifically built the eleven-storied pagoda on the site of Kaibao Monastery with an imperial shrine at the base to house the relics. In point of fact, the early Song emperors, like Taizong, were interested in promoting Buddhism as part of an effort to build a dynasty based on wen (culture or letters) as opposed to wu (military power). For the Song emperors, these were practical concerns. For nearly two centuries, dynasties and central governments in China had suffered from lack of sound authority and a mandate for effective rule. The Song, which, like its predecessors, relied on military means to seize power, reversed course and called for a new basis for 53

Shishi jigu lüe 釋氏稽古略, juan 4 (T 2037, p. 860, c17–21).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

250

Welter

their mandate that deviated from the recent past, elevating wen instead of wu. This proved an effective strategy and in the early decades of the Song, Buddhism proved to be a beneficiary of the new Song policy. As concrete manifestation of early Song commitment to Buddhism, one can point to two developments. Early Song emperors invested heavily in the translation and publication of Buddhist texts as an integral part of the literary learning that they strove to establish. The early Song dynasty Buddhist historian Zanning underscored the significance of the resumption of Buddhist translation bureaus under imperial sponsorship, noting that no translations of Buddhist texts had been completed in China for one hundred and sixty years.54 There is also indication that early Song emperors were committed to promoting Buddhist institutions through building projects.55 The large, twenty-one meter bronze statue of Guanyin 觀音 at Longxing Monastery 隆興寺 in Zhenzhou 真州 (contemporary Zhengding, Hebei province), for example, was erected during the kaibao era (963–976). While the original building housing the Guanyin statue, the Pavilion of Great Mercy (Dabei ge 大悲閣), does not exist, the existing one is a massive structure over thirty meters in height, reputedly designed based on the Song model.56 The building of such large statues and structures, and the commitment to the translation and publication of Buddhist texts, exhibits the early Song commitment to Buddhism. In this context, one can easily imagine that Zanning held out some hope, in spite of other indicators to the contrary, that Song emperors could be persuaded to adopt the Aśokan model of a cakravartin. In actual fact, Song emperors were interested in Buddhism, but for markedly different reasons than Wuyue rulers had been. Taizong had no illusions about creating a state validated by Buddhist principles. Rather, he was interested in appeasing Buddhist interests in an attempt to minimize factionalism at the Song court. The second episode, a story related to Zanning’s recommendation on how the emperor should regard the Buddha, suggests how complicated the situa­tion 54

55 56

T 2126, p. 240, b19–21. In addition to translation bureaus, early Song emperors called for the compiling of Buddhist histories and biographies as part of their overall campaign to mark the Song as a regime of letters. See Sen Tansen, “The Revival and Failure of Buddhist Translations During the Song Dynasty,” T’oung Pao 88, no. 1/2 (2002): 27–80; and Johannes L. Kurz, “The Politics of Collecting Knowledge: Song Taizong’s Compilations Project,” T’oung Pao 87 (2001): 289–316. Liu Changdong 劉長東, Songdai Fojiao Zhengce lungao 宋代佛教政策論稿 (Buddhist Policy in the Song Dynasty) (Chengdu: Sichuan chuban jiduan, 2005). Local records detail the seven-stage process in the construction of the image, a testament to contemporary artistry, and the hundreds of workers commissioned for the project.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

251

was for Buddhism at the Song court. The story involves an imperial procession to Xiangguo Monastery 相國寺 (Monastery for Assisting the Country) to worship the Buddha. When the emperor went before the image of the Buddha to burn incense he asked Zanning, “Should I perform prostrations or not?” to which Zanning responded, “The Buddha of the present does not need to perform prostrations to the Buddhas of the past.” Zanning being widely learned, eloquent, and unsurpassed in rhetorical skill, enticed the emperor to concur with his opinion, and with a smile nod in agreement. As a result, it became the policy of the Song government from then on to offer incense but not perform prostrations (to the Buddha).57 This story of the emperor asking Zanning about worshipping the Buddha dramatizes a markedly different role for Buddhism in the Song. Rather than an emperor as a Buddhist cakravartin, this episode suggests the emperor as the Buddha’s equal. Offering incense serves as a sign of respect; performing prostrations indicates subservience. In this case, Zanning advocates the former, but not the latter. The context for Zanning’s alleged change in attitude can be explained in terms of the emerging dynamic of the Song court. Reemerging interest in Confucianism at the Song court provoked a reevaluation of the role of Buddhism in Chinese society, including the role it should play in government affairs. Zanning, as the leading official at the Song court in charge of Buddhist affairs, was caught in the middle of this reevaluation. What role should Buddhism play—one in which the status of the emperor was acknowledged as equal to that of the Buddha, or one in which the superiority of the Buddha's status was openly accepted? Zanning’s proposals for Song policy toward Buddhism reflect the emerging realities facing Buddhism at the Song court, particularly the hostility expressed by increasingly vocal anti-Buddhist officials. Zanning’s response to this situation is couched in his own idea of harmony between the three teachings in China—Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism. While the three teachings syncretism in China is hardly new (it was a staple of Buddhists for promoting integration), previous proponents championed models that presumed the superiority of Buddhist teaching while acknowledging Confucian and Daoist contributions (as outlined by Qian Chu, above). Zanning invoked the three teachings model for a different effect, one that recognized the new realities for Buddhism in the Song. Zanning illustrated this model through the analogy of the three-legged sacrificial ding 鼎 vessel, discussed previously, to suggest how the three teachings, operating in concert, 57

Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, Guitian lu 歸田錄, juan 1 (Sibu jiyao 四部紀要, p. 1); see also Shimen zhengtong 釋門正統 (Zokuzōkyō 1513, p. 451, a); Fozu tongji 佛祖統紀, juan 44 (T 2035, p. 405, a24-b4).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

252

Welter

contributed to the “grand strategy” (dayou 大猷) or imperial mission. Zanning’s recommended strategy rested on four propositions:58 1. 2. 3. 4.

The emperor, as the undisputed head of the Chinese state and leader of Chinese society, is the legitimate supervisor of the Buddhist religion; Buddhism is useful to the emperor for conducting affairs of state; Each of China's three teachings—Buddhism, Confucianism, and Daoism—have a legitimate position in the function of the state; and It is the duty of the emperor to supervise the activities of the three teachings, and direct them in accordance with the aims of the state.

The first proposition is an admission of the reality that Buddhism faced in the Song. The survival of Buddhism depended on imperial sanctions and support for its activities. The second proposition is a reminder of the strong hold that Buddhist concepts have over the populace. This influence is a strong tool in the imperial arsenal and can be used to a beneficial effect. The third proposition is a cornerstone of Zaning's proposal for the role of Buddhism. For Zanning the three teachings represent but three aspects of a single imperial ideology. Zanning’s concept places the emperor alone at the top as the sole authority, with the three teachings in tripod-like harmony underneath. Within this ideology, each teaching occupies a legitimate place acknowledged by the others. As a result, the fourth proposition assumes that the emperor has sole authority over the three aspects (i.e., teachings) of his imperial ideology. The three teachings are the emperor's implements: he may direct them as best suits his “grand strategy.” In this manner, Zanning likens the three teachings to the possessions of a single family, the Chinese nation, with the emperor as the head of this family. While conceding the emperor's authority over Buddhism, as one of the three teachings, Zanning asserts that Buddhism, as a member of the Chinese family, has a legitimate place in Chinese society. Elsewhere in the Seng shi lüe, Zanning argues for the inclusion of Buddhism in China’s wen 文, or literary tradition, noting that reference to Buddhism as a foreign teaching (waijiao 外教) began when Ruan Xiaoxu 阮孝緒 wrote a tract called the Seven Records (Qi lu 七錄).59 As the title indicates, the work was organized into “seven records,” classifying existing written materials into seven 58 59

Discussed previously in Welter, “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival: Tsan-ning and the Debate Over Wen in the Early Sung.” The biography of Ruan Xiaoxu is contained in Nan shi 南史, juan 76, and Liang shu 梁書, juan 51. Although the Qi lu 七錄 does not survive, the preface is recorded in Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集, juan 3 (T 2103, p. 108, c–111, c). See also, A. Berkowitz, “Hidden Spoor,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

253

categories or sections. Five of these were designated as “internal” or “intrinsic” (nei 內) (i.e., orthodox), and two were designated as “external” or “extraneous” (wai 外) (i.e., unorthodox). The internal or intrinsic sections begin with (1) Confucian canonical works, and include (2) historical and biographical records, (3) works by philosophers and those dealing with military tactics, etc., (4) collections of literary essays, and (5) works on astrology, divination, law, medicine, and so on. The external or extraneous sections are those devoted to Buddhist and Daoist writings, which constituted categories six and seven,60 relegating the principles of Buddhism (foli 佛理) to the sections devoted to teachings from Buddhist or non-secular sources (fangwai 方外). Noting that Daoist teachings were also relegated to this category, Zanning requests that the evaluation of a teaching’s merits in the Chinese context be assessed in neutral terms that do not presume Confucian normative criteria. Instead, Zanning proposes an evaluation predicated on non-Confucian terms—that they be discerned with the “eye of wisdom” (zhiyan 智眼). Although Zanning suggests that this new criterion is free of ideological bias toward any particular religious or intellectual tradition, the “eye of wisdom” has strong Buddhist overtones. According to Zanning, when assessed by the eye of wisdom, the superiority or inferiority of a teaching will be naturally apparent (rather than artificially determined). Without the eye of wisdom, jade and stone are burned together (the good and the bad, the worthy and unworthy, the valuable and worthless are indiscriminately placed in the same category), and fragrant and foul odors are grouped together.61

60

61

Ruan Xiaoxu, And His Treatise On Reclusion” Journal Of The American Oriental Society 111, no. 4 (1991): 704–711. Ruan’s section on Buddhism allegedly recorded works in five categories: (1) disciplinary rules (qielü 戒侓), (2) meditation (chanding 禪定), (3) wisdom (zhihui 智慧), (4) forgeries (yisi 疑似), and (5) treatises and chronicles (lunji 論記). On Ruan Xiaoxu’s Qi lu, see David R. Knechtges and Taiping Chang, eds., Ancient and Early Medieval Chinese Literature (vol. 1): A Reference Guide (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 773–774. Zanning’s discussion appears in the commentary to SSL section 38 “The Relative Ranking of Buddhists and Daoists” 僧道班位 (T 2126, p. 247, a22–27). The phrase yushi jufen 玉石 俱焚, “jade and stone are burned together,” refers to indiscriminately grouping the good with the bad, worthy with unworthy, valuable with worthless, etc. It is an idea which can be traced to Shu jing 書經, Yincheng fascicle, where the Marquis of Yin states: “When the fire blazes over the ridge of Kuan, gems and stones are burned together; but if a minister of Heaven exceed in doing his duty, the consequences will be fiercer than blazing fire. While I destroy, (therefore), the chief criminals, I will not punish those who have been forced to follow them; and those who have long been stained by their filthy manners will be allowed to renovate themselves” (Legge, trans., ; italics mine).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

254

Welter

The issue of Buddhist inclusion in the apparatuses of the Chinese bureaucracy was also joined by Zanning in the “Administrative Jurisdiction of Buddhist Monks and Nuns” (Guanzhu sengni 管屬僧尼) section of the Seng shi lüe.62 In this section, Zanning concedes that Buddhism was initially treated as a foreign religion in China, and that the Buddhist clergy was administered through the Court for Dependencies (honglu si 鴻臚寺).63 The Honglu si 鴻臚寺 was “a central government agency responsible for managing the reception at court of tribute bearing envoys, continuing the tradition of the Han era Chamberlain for Dependencies (da honglu 大鴻臚),”64 in other words, the organ of the government responsible for matters pertaining to foreigners. By the Latter or Northern Wei dynasty, the office of the Superintendency of Buddhist Happiness (jianfu cao 監福曹) was established in order to supervise Buddhist monks. The Jianfu cao 監福曹 in the Northern Wei was a bureaucratic unit subordinate to the Chamberlain for Dependencies (da honglu 大鴻臚) that catered to the needs of foreign Buddhist priests during visits to China.65 Essentially, it was a special bureaucratic unit created to supervise Buddhist monks, resulting from their increased numbers and activities. Jurisdiction was subsequently transferred to the Office for the Clarification of Buddhist Profundities (zhaoxuan si 昭玄寺).66 At the beginning of the Tang dynasty, the situation of Buddhism worsened, and Buddhist monks and nuns were attached to the Bureau of

62

63

64 65 66

T 2126, p. 245, b23–p. 246, a24. Zanning’s concern in this section is charting changes in the Chinese bureaucracy throughout history that affected the administration of the Buddhist clergy. In this regard, he depends largely on information also recorded in Tang huiyao 唐 會要, juan 49 (the Tang huiyao was compiled in 961 by Wang Pu 王溥; see the notice by M. Cartier in Balazs and Hervouet, ed., A Sung Bibliography, 176–177). The evolution is also briefly, but succinctly charted in Tong dian 通典, juan 25, p. 150, b (Zongzheng qing 宗正 卿 entry on the Chongyuan shu 崇元署 [Bureau of Receptions]). This is the pre-Tang translation. From the Tang onwards, Honglu si 鴻臚寺 is best translated as Court of State Ceremonial (Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China [Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985 (hereafter abbreviated as Hucker)] no. 2906). A succinct evaluation of this institution can be seen in Tong dian, juan 26 (Honglu qing 鴻臚卿 entry). Hucker no. 2906. Hucker no. 823. Regarding this, see also the Shilao zhi 釋老志 (Wei shu 魏書 114.3040). The Zhaoxuan si 昭玄寺 (Hucker, no. 285) was “an agency of the Court for Dependencies (honglu si 鴻臚 寺) responsible for monitoring the teaching of Buddhism throughout the state; headed by a Controller-in-chief (datong 大統) with the assistance of a Controller (tong 統) and a Chief Buddhist Deacon (du weina 都維那).”

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

255

Guests (sibin 司賓).67 This was the result of the well-known Daoist preferences of the early Tang emperors. The really momentous change, according to Zanning, occurred when Empress Wu Zetian decreed that the Buddhist monks and nuns of the realm be attached to the Bureau of National Sacrifices (cibu 祠 部) in the first year of the yanzai era (694).68 With this act, Buddhism was allowed into the inner sanctums, so to speak, of Chinese culture, and given a place of privilege as an integral component in the execution of China’s most sacred rituals, the imperial sacrifices and ceremonies of the Chinese state. In the vicissitudes that followed, most especially the persecution policies toward Buddhism enacted in the huichang era (841–845), Buddhism was again subjected to outsider status and relegated to a “foreign” religion. Yet, as the effects of the persecution wore off, Buddhism was reinstated to its place of privilege, and jurisdiction over Buddhist monks and nuns again fell to the Bureau of National Sacrifices. For Zanning, the positioning of Buddhism at the center of Chinese state ritual was a natural development stemming from the role that Buddhism had assumed during its long tenure in China. Zanning clearly embraced a “domestication model,” suggesting that Buddhism had over the course of time assumed the role of a Chinese, rather than foreign religion within the broader context of Chinese culture and society. In Zanning’s view, it followed naturally that Buddhist literature and Buddhist ritual would assume a leading role in the exercise of Chinese culture, and that this should be reflected in the government’s bureaucratic mechanisms as well. In support of his domestication model for Buddhism, Zanning draws on the analogy of evolving preferences for food flavoring and clothing attire in China: spicy pepper, once thought of as foreign and exotic, eventually became produced in China and became an accepted part of the Chinese diet; leather boots, once associated with exotic wear, came to be regarded as standard Chinese attire. Likewise, Buddhism, initially regarded as a foreign religion and administered through bureaucratic institutions charged with managing outsiders, came to be administered through the Bureau of National Sacrifices and accepted into the inner sanc-

67

68

According to Tong dian 26, at the beginning of the guangzhai era (684), the Honglu si 鴻 臚寺 was changed to the Sibin 司賓, but reverted back again to the Honglu si at the beginning of the shenlong era (705). Hucker (no. 7566) renders Cibu 祠部 simply as “Bureau of Sacrifices,” but I have drawn out the implicit meaning of it as “national” sacrifices in my translation. It is one of four bureaus in the Ministry of Rites (libu 禮部) (regarding which, see Hucker, no. 3631).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

256

Welter

tums charged with executing the central rituals of Chinese culture and society.69 Zanning’s proposal that Buddhism be accepted as part of China’s cultural heritage was based on a perspective of Chinese traditions as dynamic and evolving. Rather than accepting some hypothetical “golden age” which located China’s core values in remote antiquity, Zanning argued that Chinese culture was dynamic and its values evolved over time. No single age held exclusive access to the truth; truth advances along with the changing dynamics of history and civilization, as viewed through the lens of contemporary perspective. As Zanning observed: [The meanings of] things differ according to the group [determining it], and [the meaning of] events change in accordance with the times. The one who regards the sage-kings of antiquity [as his model] (i.e., the current emperor) does not overlook the deceptions of the past. The one who controls myriad lands (i.e., the current emperor) has the prerogative to reinterpret the meaning [of the model].70 Where secular ideologies are established, basing society exclusively on religious and spiritual principles is an idle fancy. This does not mean, however, that religious and spiritual principles cannot have influence in secular societies. Clearly, they may, but in order to do so, they must coincide, and not conflict with state policy. To determine how Buddhist interests coincide with national self-interest, Buddhists must ask themselves how Buddhism contributes to national self-interest. Equally, they must understand how Buddhism might be considered a threat, or dangerous to national self-interest. This raises further questions as to when and how Buddhism should contest state policy as anathema to Buddhist principles, and when it should support state policy as an ally in its own cause. Yet, as Zanning implies, it is necessary for Buddhism to be granted legitimacy within the broader government structure if it is to exert influence on state policy. In his recognition of the realities facing Buddhism in the Song dynasty, Zanning suggested ways for the inclusion of Buddhism within Chinese culture (i.e., not as a foreign religion) and ways in which Buddhism could be considered an asset to the emperor and secular establishment in the conduct of state policy.

69 70

For Zanning’s discussion in this regard, see Seng shi lüe (T 2126, p. 246, a14–19). Seng shi lüe, T 2126, p. 246, c19–20.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

257

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

VIII

Saṃgha Administration in the Imperial Bureaucracy

According to Zanning, the arrival of the first Buddhist monks Jiashe Moteng 迦 葉摩騰 (Kāśyapa Mātaṅga) and Zhu Falan 竺法蘭 (Dharmaraksha) represented an important turning point in the fortunes of Buddhism in China. The presence of Buddhist monks, and their scriptures and images, necessitated means to deal with them, and the emperor erected monasteries and dwellings to house them. Following commonly cited evidence from Chinese Buddhist sources, Zanning describes how Emperor Ming initially entertained and received Shemoteng and Falan in the Court for Dependencies (honglu si 鴻臚 寺), the residence for formally receiving foreigners from beyond China’s borders.71 Eventually, however, the emperor selected a special location outside the Xiyong Gate 西雍門 (Gate of Western Harmony) in Luoyang for the construction of a “pure dwelling” (i.e., monastery) for them to live in. Because of the tradition that a white horse was used to transport Buddhist scriptures there, it became known as the “White Horse Monastery” (baima si 白馬寺).72 For Zanning, the significance of erecting residences for Buddhist monks is not associated with establishing their institutional independence, as one might expect, but with subordinating Buddhism to the administrative structure of Chinese bureaucracy. The Chinese logograph si 寺, translated as “court” in the Court for Dependencies (honglu si) and “monastery” in the case of the White Horse Monastery (baima si), is the same in each case. As Zanning notes, si 寺 (“court” or “monastery”) was originally the name for a government office (si 司), and when monks first arrived in China they were housed in public (i.e., government) offices (gongsi 公司) under the jurisdiction of the Court for Dependencies (honglu si 鴻臚寺). Even after they were transferred to lodgings specially constructed for them, the new lodging retained the designation si 寺 as indication of their foreign origins.73 In other words, the Baima si or “White Horse Monastery” was regarded as a special branch of the Honglu si, the “Court for Dependencies,” specifically designed for visiting Buddhists. While the form of the Buddhist monastery may change, Zanning makes clear that the same administrative jurisdiction applies to other types of monastery establishments, designated either as “caves” (ku 窟), “cloisters” (yuan 院), “groves” (lin 林), 71

72 73

T 2126, p. 236, c15–17. According to Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (no. 2906), the Court for Dependencies was instituted later, in the Northern Qi, as “a central government agency responsible for managing reception at court of tributary envoys, continuing the tradition of the Han era Chamberlain for Dependencies (da honglu 大鴻臚).” T 2126, p. 236, c17–19. T 2126, p. 236, c19–21.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

258

Welter

“shrines” (miao 廟), “forest retreats” (aranya, C. jiaran 伽藍), or “reliquaries” (putong 普通).74 While erecting Buddhist institutions under official auspices established administrative recognition for the Buddhist presence in China, the placing of Buddhist monasteries under the Court for Dependencies also affirmed Buddhism’s status as a foreign religion. This was a natural designation for Buddhism during its early history in China when it functioned primarily for the needs of expatriate communities. As Buddhism adapted and became domesticated, the validity of this designation was continually reevaluated and debated. In order to discuss how Buddhist monasteries are administered internally, Zanning relies on a different understanding of the word si provided in a very early work in China, the Shiming (Explanation of Words) 釋名 attributed to Liu Xi 劉熙 (fl. 200 CE).75 According to this source, the term si 寺 is explained in terms of a homonym, the word si 嗣 meaning “succession” or “to inherit,” so that “those who administer the affairs [of a monastery] succeed one another and maintain it internally.”76 Zanning’s aim here is to show that even though 74 75



76

T 2126, p. 237, a7–11. The reading of putong follows Hajime Nakamura, Bukkyōgo daijiten, p. 1181, a (entry on futsū tō 普通塔). The Shiming 釋名 is a work in 8 fascicles and 27 sections. According to Miller, the Shiming is a Chinese dictionary that employed phonological glosses, and “is believed to date from c. 200 CE” (Roy Andrew Miller, “Shih ming,” Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, ed. Michael Loewe [New Haven: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993], 424–428). It contains 1502 definitions that, as with the case of si here, attempts to establish semantic connections based upon puns between the word being defined and the word defining it, which is often followed with an explanation. For instance (chapter 12: 愛哀也愛乃思念 之也), “Love (ài 愛 ‘love; like; be fond of’) is sorrow (āi 哀 ‘sorrow; grief; lament’). If you love, then you remember fondly.” In Chinese, these are referred to as paronomastic glosses yinxun (音訓; ‘sound teaching’), meaning “to use the pronunciation of a word to explain its meaning.” This semantic association of like-sounding words goes back to the “Rectification of Names” (zhengming 正名), which hypothesized a connection between names and reality. The Shiming preface explains this ancient Chinese theory of language. In the correspondence of name with reality, there is in each instance that which is right and proper. The common people use names every day, but they do not know the reasons why names are what they are. Therefore I have chosen to record names for heaven and earth, yin and yang, the four seasons, states, cities, vehicles, clothing and mourning ceremonies, up to and including the vessels commonly used by the people, and have discussed these terms with a view to explaining their origin. (tr. Miller 1993: 424) There is controversy whether this dictionary's author was Liu Xi or the more-famous Liu Zhen 劉珍 (d. 126 CE). Cited by Zanning in sec. 4 (T 2126, p. 236, c19–20) and sec. 27 (T 2126, p. 242, b25). The line appears in Shiming, juan 5, sec. 17 (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1936), 166.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

259

the Buddhist “monastery” adopts the name for a government agency, this does not diminish the Buddhist work carried out inside it.77 In other words, in spite of the fact that Buddhism is legitimized through subordination within the Chinese imperial bureaucratic structure, the integrity of its activities as a Buddhist institution remain intact. Chinese administrative practices do not impede (but rather, enhance) Buddhist institutional functions. Elsewhere, as noted above, Zanning affirms that imperial authority over Buddhism enhances, rather than detracts from Buddhism as a religion; it is the responsibility of the emperor to oversee saṃgha affairs.78 The motif of succession and lineage is a prominent theme in Chinese Buddhism, adopted from the importance it assumes throughout Chinese society. “Just as sons succeed their fathers and students follow in the footsteps of their teachers,” Zanning contends, “these [monastery administrators] succeed one another and are associated with the legacy [of the monastery], working hard to insure its success.”79 The Chinese monastery is administratively modeled after the Chinese family and predicated on the succession from father to son. Just as father-son succession is necessary to preserve and enhance the legacy of the family, so is the master-disciple succession at Buddhist monasteries requisite to the perpetuation and enrichment of the monastery. Accordingly, the internal administration of the monastery was a Buddhist matter, but how was it organized and carried out? Who was responsible for monastery administration, and how did responsibility for monastery administration change over time? In the western regions, according to Zanning, the monk in charge of monastery administration, the Saṃgha Administrator (zhishi seng 知事僧), was referred to as Karmadāna, translated into Chinese either as zhishi 知事, “administrator,” or yuezhong 悅眾, “[the one who] Brings Joy to the Assembly,” as he delighted the assembly through administering its affairs.80 The term zhishi 知事 was also used for appointments to the imperial bureaucracy. Hucker (no. 1050) translates the term as “Administrative Clerk,” referring to a low ranking official found throughout many agencies. In this case, the meaning has a more specific connotation, similar to the comments given by 77 78 79 80

T 2126, p. 242, b25–26. See my previous article on Zanning, “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival.” T 2126, p. 242, b26–27. T 2126, p. 242, b28–29. As examples of saṃgha administrators at the time of the Buddha, Zanning mentions Yinguang 銀光 (Mahākāśyapa), who governed the clergy on Vulture Peak, Shenzi 身子 (Śariputra), who governed saṃgha activities in the Bamboo Grove, as well as Tapo Moluo 沓婆摩羅 (Dravya Mallaputra), who was granted the position by the Buddha himself and was reputedly responsible for establishing the order in which monks begged for food.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

260

Welter

Hucker for the term zhi…shi (Hucker, no. 934), referring to an administrator of a specific agency, suggesting “a specially authorized appointment of someone with nominally different status to serve in a normally more prestigious post as administrator of an agency.” It is also sometimes rendered as charge d’affaires. While the appointment and selection of saṃgha administrators was an internal matter for the Buddhist order in India, the case was different in China where the emperor, rather than the Buddha or any Buddhist representative, initiated (at least officially) the appointment of saṃgha officials. Zanning had no problem with imperial control over Buddhism. It is the imperial prerogative for an emperor, after consolidating power over the empire, to make reforms in what influences affect the people; some emperors reform the rites and music (liyue 禮樂) of the empire;81 some make changes in the official bureaucracy (guansi 官司).82 In other words, each emperor has the right to establish the parameters of his rule, including the organization of his administration: “Some use [the title of] Advisor (nayan 納言) instead of Imperial Secretary (shangshu 尚書), and [some], use [the title of] Minister of War (sima 司馬) instead of Defender-in-Chief (taiwei 太尉).”83 There was frequently no consistency from one dynasty to the next in the way in which titles were designated for particular responsibilities, and the same applies, according to Zanning, to the titles used for the administration of Buddhism. Prior to the arrival in China of Kumarajīva, Zanning claims, monks at monasteries in China were few, and there was no need to appoint saṃgha administrators. After Kumarajīva, there was a dramatic upsurge of inhabitants at monasteries in the capital, Chang’an, so that the Later Qin dynasty ruler, Emperor Wenxuan (Yao Xing 姚興, r. 394–416 CE), issued an imperial decree selecting Dharma Master Daolüe 道䂮 (a.k.a. Senglüe 僧䂮) to serve as the Buddhist Rector (sengzheng 僧正), Zhiyuan 志遠 84 to serve as “[the one who] brings joy to the assembly” (yuezhong 悅眾), and Faqin 法欽 and Huibin 慧斌 to serve as Buddhist Registrars (senglu 僧錄).85 The emperor granted them carriages and official powers. The salary of the Buddhist Rector, the highest ranking of the three positions, was the same as that of Palace Attendant (shi-

81 82 83 84 85

This is a similar sentiment to Zanning’s claim that “the rites and music issue from the Son of Heaven” 禮樂自天子也 (T 2126, p. 244, a18). T 2126, p. 243, a20–21. T 2126, p. 243, a21. For detailed descriptions of these offices, consult Hucker, nos. 4079, 5042, 5713, and 6260. The text mistakenly has Huiyuan 慧遠 rather than Zhiyuan 志遠. This is confirmed in Senglüe’s biography in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 2 (T 2059, p. 363, b).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

261

zhong 侍中).86 The other two positions, the “[the one who] brings joy to the assembly” and the Buddhist Registrar, were ranked in descending order after the Buddhist Rector. This, according to Zanning, constitutes the beginning of the institution of saṃgha officials (sengguan 僧官) in China.87 While saṃgha officials were ordained as monks, they were appointed to their positions and awarded ranks and salaries by the emperor, like any other member of the civil bureaucracy. From the outset, saṃgha monk-administrators were incorporated into the structure of the imperial bureaucracy as civil servants. Among the various administrative positions held by Buddhists, two stand out in terms of their importance for administrating the saṃgha in the Chinese context: Buddhist Rectors (sengzheng 僧正) and Buddhist Registrars (senglu 僧錄). Buddhist Rectors (sengzheng 僧正) As noted above, Zanning recognized Daolüe 道䂮 (a.k.a. Senglüe 僧䂮) as the first to hold the position of Buddhist Rector (sengzheng) in China.88 The rationale for implementing such a position is outlined by Zanning as follows: “After a Buddhist Section (sengcao 僧曹) [of the government bureaucracy] was established, the “pure assembly” (jingzhong 淨眾; i.e., Buddhist clergy)89 was said to be regulated. The administrative methods (guanfang 官方)90 that were instituted ultimately made [members of the Buddhist clergy] comply with Buddhist teaching.”91 For Zanning, Buddhist administrative offices are, by definition, good institutions. In China, the Buddhist clergy was often criticized by the government for employing illegal or idiosyncratic practices as a means to escape taxation, military service, criminal punishment, or simply as a somewhat legitimate escape for idlers, and so on. Institutionalization meant regulation, serving to rid the clergy of excesses, real or perceived, and make its 86 87 88

89

90

91

Palace Attendants (Hucker, no. 5229) were officials chosen by the emperor as his confidential advisors, a high rank awarded 2.000 bushels. T 2126, p. 242, c6–12. Hucker, no. 4942, translates sengzheng as “Buddhist Chief.” I have chosen to stay with the more literal meaning, “head or rectifier of Buddhists” in light of Zanning’s own explanation for the position. The Taishô ed. punctuation is incorrect here, and I follow Makita. For the meaning of jingzhong 淨眾 (pure assembly), see Oda Tokunō, Bukkyō daijiten 佛教大辭典 (Tokyo: Daizō shuppan, 1975 [originally published 1945]), p. 966, b. According to Morohashi Tetsuji (Dai kan-wa jiten 大漢和辭典 vol. 3, p. 970, c), guanfang 官方 refer to the methods through which officials administer their duties. Its use here and elsewhere in the SSL (see T 2126, p. 243, c and T 2126, p. 245, a) is connected to this meaning. T 2126, p. 242, c14.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

262

Welter

members follow Buddhist teaching more devoutly. This view is justified, moreover, by Zanning’s comments that follow regarding the office of the Buddhist Rector:92 To rectify (zheng 正) is to administer (zheng 政).93 By rectifying oneself, one rectifies others. [The Buddhist Rector] is referred to as such because he successfully implements administrative directives (zhengling 政令) [aimed at rectifying the clergy]. In all likelihood, [this institution] is based on [the fact that] if bhiksus were free of the law, they would be like horses without bridles and bits, or like oxen without restraining ropes. As they gradually become tainted by secular customs (sufeng 俗風), they inevitably contravene the rules of refinement (yaze 雅則).94 That is why [the government] appointed [members of the Buddhist clergy] famed for their virtue (dewang 德望) to restrain them on the basis of laws, and ensure their devotion to rectitude (zheng 正). It is why they are called Buddhist Rectors. During the Later Qin dynasty (384–417), when the office was first instituted, the Buddhist Rector was “a state designated monk responsible for the whole Buddhist clergy... under the supervision of the Chamberlain for Dependencies (dahong lu),” a responsibility maintained possibly through the Northern Dynasties until the Northern Wei (386–534).95 As such, the Buddhist Rector was the highest-ranking Buddhist authority at the time. The Chamberlain for Dependencies was one of the Nine Chamberlains, the heads of the top-echelon service agencies known as the Nine Courts, in the imperial government administration.96 With the fall of Luoyang (311) and Chang’an (316) at the hands of the Xiongnu 匈奴, or Huns, the elite classes of Chinese culture began an exodus to the south, where thy established a new capital at Jiankang, near present day Nanjing. This marked the beginning of the Eastern Jin Dynasty (317–420). Nothing is known, according to Zanning, about the office of Buddhist Rector 92 93

94

95 96

T 2126, p. 242, c15–18. This is a play on the Chinese homophones zheng 正 (“to rectify”) and zheng 政 (“to administer”), combining the moral and political functions that conform to the Confucian vision of society. On yaze 雅則 (rules of refinement), see Morohashi (Dai kan-wa jiten 11, p. 992, b-c). The clear inference made by Zanning here is that the less the Buddhist clergy abides by their “rules of purity” (qinggui 清規) the more secularized they become. Hucker no. 4942. See Hucker nos. 1296 and 1317.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

263

there. However, the Liu Song dynasty (420–479), which followed the Eastern Jin, again established the system of saṃgha administration (shamen du 沙門 都).97 The nun Baoxian 寶賢 served as Buddhist Rector there, and it is interesting to consider that a nun had such wide-ranging authority over the entire saṃgha.98 According to her biography in the Bijiuni zhuan 比丘尼傳,99 Baoxian was appointed in the second year of taishi (466), during the reign of Mingdi (r. 465–472). Her authority over both monks and nuns is confirmed by Zanning in the appendix to Seng shi lüe section 28 (Rectors for Buddhist Nuns), where it states explicitly that the nun Baoxian was made Rector of Nuns and Monks (niseng zheng 尼僧正) by imperial decree.100 Otherwise, the position of Buddhist Rector was held by monks.101 The Liang dynasty (502–557) also relied heavily on the institution of the Buddhist Rector. Zanning notes that the founder of the Liang, Emperor Wudi (r. 502–549), was devoted to Buddhist teaching, and was deeply absorbed in the profundity of its truths; he carefully selected men of virtue and appointed them as Buddhist leaders (sengshou 僧首).102 Fachao 法超 served as Buddhist Rector in the capital.103 Wudi appointed Fayun 法雲 to serve as the Great Buddhist Rector (da sengzheng 大僧正), endowing him with official authority (lili 吏力); Wudi also appointed Huiling 慧令 to this office.104 Zanning concludes that many rulers throughout various dynasties instituted the office of Buddhist Rector, sanctioning the current practice of the

97

98 99 100 101

102 103 104

T 2126, p. 242, c19–20. Śrāmana Supervisors (shamen dutong 沙門都統) are discussed in section no. 30 of the SSL, but no mention of the Liu Song dynasty instituting these offices is found there. As a result, I have translated shamen du here as a general reference to śrāmana, or saṃgha administration, but some questions still remain. T 2126, p. 242c20. Bijiuni zhuan 比丘尼傳, juan 2 (T 2063, p. 941, a). T 2126, p. 243, a15. T 2126, p. 242, c25–26. Fozu tongji, juan 36 (T. 49.346c) follows Zanning here in claiming a monk by the name Fachi 法持 was appointed Buddhist Rector in the first year of ximing (477). In addition, Zanning stipulates Daowen 道溫 served as Buddhist Rector in the capital during the daming era (457–464), confirmed in Daowen’s biography in Gaoseng zhuan, juan 7 (T 2059, p. 372, c). Buddhist leaders (sengshou) is here a general term for positions in the government administration responsible for dealing with Buddhism. This is confirmed in Fachao’s biography in Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 21 (T 2060, p.607, a). T 2126, p. 242c29–243a3. Fayun’s appointment is verified in his biography in Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 5 (T 2061, p. 464, c). Huiling appears with the title Buddhist Rector in Xu Gaoseng zhuan, juan 7 (T 2061, p. 478, c).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

264

Welter

Song administration of placing one person in this office in every prefecture throughout the empire, selected on the basis of virtue and talent.105 Buddhist Registrars (senglu 僧錄) While the Buddhist Rector was the designated leader of the Buddhist religion in many instances, it was not always the case. With the start of the Wei dynasty (386–534) in north China, command over the Buddhist clergy was given to a Buddhist Controller (sengtong 僧統).106 While the Buddhist Controller was instituted in intervening dynasties, during the Tang it was abolished in favor of the Buddhist Registrar (senglu), which was instituted as the leading Buddhist administrative position in the Chinese empire. This, according to Zanning, reflects the Song dynasty’s preference for administering Buddhism as well.107 Within the Tang administrative structure, the duties of the Buddhist Registrar were clearly defined. The function of the Buddhist Registrar, as with previous Buddhist administrative leaders, was to maintain supervision over Buddhist affairs. As the head of the Central Buddhist Registry (senglu si 僧錄 司), the Buddhist Registrar oversaw “…a central government agency responsible for monitoring the number, qualifications, and conduct of Buddhist monks and nuns, normally staffed with senior monks of the capital monasteries recognized by the state as leaders of the empire-wide Buddhist clergy….”108 The full title held by Buddhist Registrars in the Tang was “Buddhist Registrar for [Monasteries Situated in] the Left (or Right) Precincts [of the Capital]” (zuojie senglu 左街僧錄 or youjie senglu 右街僧錄). In some cases, the same person held responsibility for both the left and right precincts, and was so designated (zuoyoujie senglu 左右街僧錄). The Tang Chinese capital, Chang’an, had six main streets in total, three on the left and three on the right of the principle avenue leading up to the imperial residence, the so-called “imperial way.” The directions indicated by left and right, as determined from the position of the emperor, situated to the north, are east and west, respectively. Thus, offices pertaining to the capital were normally paired, Left Offices of the…, and Right Offices of the…, with seniority being granted to the appointee to the Left (east) position.109 This was also the case with the office of Buddhist Registrar. According to Zanning, 105 106 107 108 109

T 2126, p. 243, a9–11. T 2126, p. 243, a23. Zanning notes that ‘even though they issued a new title, the duties handled remained as before.” T 2126, p. 243, b11–12. Hucker, no 4948. See Hucker, no. 6949.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

265

When the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital were established, [Buddhist monasteries] were placed under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Merit and Virtue (gongde shi 功德使). After Buddhist Registrars (senglu 僧錄) were appointed, they administered [the Buddhist establishments of] the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital instead. A Buddhist monk was appointed Registrar in order to [officially] register the members of the clergy. The Com­mis­sioner of Merit and Virtue, as a result, was hereby distinguished as a separate institution.110 The Commissioner of Merit and Virtue was first appointed in the period from 788 to 807, to supervise the Buddhist establishments in the two Tang dynastic capitals, Chang’an and Luoyang. Over time, the position incorporated broader responsibilities. The Commissioner of Merit and Virtue became a supervisory controller for adherents of other “foreign” religions in China besides Buddhism, principally Islam and Manichaeism, and was loosely subordinated to the Court of State Ceremonial (honglu si), an arrangement that continued into the Song.111 Zanning probably has in mind here the Grand Commissioners for Merit and Virtue (da gongde shi 大功德使) who were appointed in pairs to supervise Buddhist establishments in the eastern (left) or western (right) precincts of the capital, respectively.112 As Zanning indicates, the function of the Commissioners for Merit and Virtue in supervising the Buddhist saṃgha was eventually superceded by Buddhist Registrars. Although the position of Buddhist Registrar was first established in the Latter Qi dynasty (479–502),113 the holders of this position did not have leading positions in saṃgha administration until well into the Tang. The factors leading to its institution are closely tied to the vicissitudes Buddhism experienced under Tang rule. Initially, Buddhism suffered a setback in the Tang. At the outset of the regime, precedence was given by Chinese emperors to Daoism on the pretext that the imperial clan name, Li 李, was the same as that of Laozi 老子. 110

111 112

113

T 2126, p. 243, c9–10. According to Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang, 85, Commissioners of Merit and Virtue (referred to by Weinstein as “commissioners of good works”) made their debut in the Buddhist monasteries and Daoist temples of the capital by the year 774. Hucker, no. 3485. See Hucker, no. 5976. Xin Tangshu 新唐書, juan 48 (Baiguan zhi 百官志) says that “Grand Commissioners for Merit and Virtue of the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital (zuoyoujie dagongde shi 左右街大功德使) were appointed in the zhenyuan era (785–805) to supervise the registration of Buddhist monks and nuns.” During the Latter Qi, the monks Faqin 法欽 and Huibin 慧斌 were appointed Buddhist Registrars (senglu); see SSL 2 (T 2126, p. 242c10–11) and Fozu tongji, juan 41 (T 2035, p. 380, b).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

266

Welter

Daoist protagonists like Fu Yi 傅奕 (554–639) challenged the Buddhist presence in China, charging that Buddhist teaching was subversive to traditional Chinese values, and attacking Buddhism on nationalistic, intellectual, and economic grounds.114 An edict by Emperor Taizong (r. 626–649) ordered Daoists to be given precedence over Buddhist monks and nuns at imperial processions.115 When Emperor Gaozong (r. 649–683) assumed the throne, he issued an edict commanding Buddhist monks and nuns and Taoist priests and priestesses to bow to the emperor and his close associates.116 The situation of Buddhism in the Tang improved dramatically with the policies implemented by Empress Wu Zetian (r. 684–704). As a devotee of Buddhism, Empress Wu again ordered Buddhist monks to be grouped ahead of Daoists at official ceremonies.117 The favor accorded Buddhism was short-lived. Empress Wu’s policies were rescinded by emperors Zhongzong (r. 705–710) and Ruizong (r. 710–712), and the court of Emperor Xuanzong (r. 712–756) was exclusively devoted to Daoism.118 The positions for Buddhist Controller (sengtong) and Buddhist Rector (sengzheng) in the Office for the Clarification of 114

115

116

117

118

Fu Yi issued a memorial in 624 (according to some sources, 621) attacking Buddhism. His biography is found in Jiu Tangshu, juan 79 and Xin Tangshu, juan 107 (where words from his memorial are cited); see also Guang Hongming ji, juan 7 (T 52.133, a–134, b). For modern studies see Ogasawara Senshū, “Tō no haibutsu ronsha Fu Eki ni tsuite” 唐の廃仏論 者傅奕について, Shina Bukkyō shigaku 1, no. 3 (1937): 83–93; Arthur F. Wright, “Fu I and the Rejection of Buddhism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 12 (1951): 33–47; and Thomas Jülch, Bodhisattva der Apologetik: die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin (München: Utz, 2014), vol. 1, 6 f., 59 f., 61 f., 202–215. This decree was ordered in the eleventh year of the zhenguan era (637). A copy of Taizong’s decree is found in Xu Guangming ji, juan 25 (T 52.283c-284a). Regarding Fu Yi’s memorial and Emperor Gaozu’s reaction to it, see Ch’en, Buddhism in China, 215–216; and Weinstein, Buddhism under the T’ang, 7–8. More detailed information can be found in Tang Yongtong, “Tang Taizong yu fojiao” 唐太宗與佛教, Xueheng 75 (1931): 1–7. This information is reviewed by Zanning in T 2126, p. 243, c11–14. There is a copy of Gaozong’s decree in Guang Hongming ji, juan 25 (T 52.284, a). This decree was issued on the fifteenth day of the fourth month of the second year of the longshuo era (662). T 2126, p. 243, c14–15. See Fozu tongji, juan 39 (T 2035, p. 369, c). The decree is dated the second year of the zaiqu era (691); see also Jiu Tangshu 6, 121. For a general assessment of Empress Wu’s support of Buddhism, see Ch’en, Buddhism in China, 219–222; for more detailed studies of Empress Wu, see Richard Guisso, Wu Tse-T’ien and the Politics of Legitimation in T’ang China; and Chen Jinhua, “Sarira and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics.” T 2126, p. 243, c15–16. According to the Tang dazhaoling ji 唐大詔令集 (Collected Grand Edicts and Decrees of the Tang dynasty), juan 113, in 711 Ruizong decreed that Buddhism and Daoism be treated on an equal basis at court ceremonies.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

267

Buddhist Profundities, the leading saṃgha officials of the state, were rendered obsolete and lapsed into disuse; administrative offices pertaining to Buddhist affairs (sengwu guanfang 僧務官方) were neglected and not promoted.119 Admin­istrative officials were allowed only at individual monasteries. There was no governing saṃgha administration beyond the monastery level.120 This situation prevailed for a long period according to Zanning. There was an abortive attempt to establish a position of Buddhist Controller of Both Precincts of the Capital (liangjie sengtong 兩街僧統), when the monk Weiying 惟英 of Longxing Monastery 龍興寺 was appointed to the position by Emperor Xianzong (r. 806–819) at the beginning of the yuanhe era in 806.121 Weiying was well connected to those within the palace and received an appointment as Academician Awaiting Orders (hanlin daizhao 翰林待詔) as well.122 He allegedly used divination to beguile people, and was subsequently dismissed on account of his impropriety.123 Xianzong also instituted the office of Buddhist Registrar (senglu), with much greater success. Dharma Master Duanfu 端甫 became a favored presence at the imperial court under Emperor Dezong (r. 779–804), who summoned him to the Imperial Palace to debate with Confucians and Daoists in 797, granted him a purple robe, and commanded him to serve the crown prince in the Eastern Court.124

119

120

121

122

123 124

T 2126, p. 243, c16–17. Zanning also notes that as a consequence of such policies, illustrious masters such as Daoxuan 道宣 were ordered to serve as Elder (shangzuo 上座) at Ximing Monastery 西明寺 instead of being awarded a higher position. The three administrative positions allowed at Buddhist monasteries were: Elder (shangzuo 上座), Abbot (sizhu 寺主), and Chief Buddhist Deacon (duweina 都維那) [or its equivalent, the one who Brings Joy to the Assembly (yuezhong 悅眾)]. This is verified in Datang liudian 大唐六典 4 (Cibu 祠部), 125. T 2126, p. 243, c1–3. Although the SSL text inserts Emperor Muzong here instead of Emperor Xianzong, Muzong’s reign did not actually begin until the fifteenth year of yuanhe (820), and it was Emperor Xianzong’s reign that began in 806. To complicate matters, Fozu tongji, juan 42 (T 2035, p. 3846) places the appointment in the first year of the zhangjing (821), the year that Muzong officially began his reign. Makita, Kokuyaku issaikyô 國譯一切經, shiden bu 史伝部, vol. 13, p. 333, n. 129, contends that the SSL text is in error here, and that Xianzong is intended. Unfortunately, nothing else is known of Weiying. Hucker (no. 2150) explains the position as “a duty assignment in the Tang Institute of Academicians (xueshi yuan 學士院) for officials of literary talent holding substantive posts elsewhere in the central government.” T 2126, p. 243, c3–4. T 2126, p. 243, c20–21. According to Fozu tongji, juan 41 (T 2035, p. 380, a), these events occurred in the thirteenth year of the zhenyuan (797). Throughout Chinese history, the

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

268

Welter

The crown prince, future Emperor Shunzong (r. 805), esteemed him as a brother; they went to bed and got up together; [the emperor’s] gratitude and respect toward him were especially deep.125 Having cultivated such close personal relations with the imperial family, Xianzong on several occasions made imperial visits to his monastery, the Anguo si 安國寺 (Monastery for Pacifying the Country), and waited on him as a guest and friend. Duanfu conducted Buddhist ceremonies within the Imperial Palace.126 In the first year of yuanhe (806), the same year that Weiying was appointed Buddhist Controller of Both Precincts of the Capital, Duanfu was charged with registering the Buddhist affairs of the Left Precincts of the Capital; a monk by the name of Lingsui 靈邃 was appointed to register the Buddhist affairs of the Right Precincts.127 Once every decade, they publicly proclaimed the rules to be observed by members of the Buddhist clergy (jingzhong 淨眾).128 Just prior to his death in 836, Duanfu was appointed Buddhist Registrar [for monasteries situated along] the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital (zuoyoujie senglu) by Emperor Wenzong (r. 826–840), and according to Zanning was the first to be appointed to serve both precincts simultaneously.129 Subsequent events, the massive restrictions placed on the saṃgha, and the suppression of Buddhist institutions during the huichang era (841–846), put the Buddhist Registrar in an awkward position. Duanfu’s successor, Yunduan 雲端, received an imperial order aiming to decimate Buddhism.130 Buddhist Registrars were commanded to investigate the history of imperial support and suppression of Buddhism, and “to make records itemizing their

125 126 127

128 129 130

Eastern Court is the residence of either the Heir Apparent or the mother of the Emperor (see Hucker, no 7422). T 2126, p. 243, c21–22. T 2126, p. 243, c22–23. According to Fozu tongji, juan 41 (T 2035, p. 380, b), Duanfu was appointed in this capacity in the first year of the yuanhe era (806), while Lingsui was at the same time appointed to register the Buddhist Affairs of the Right Precinct. T 2126, p. 243, c23. T 2126, p. 243, c18–19. Yunduan has no biography in Song Gaoseng zhuan, but in the tomb inscription of Jigong 基公 of the Da Ci’en Monastery 大慈恩寺 recorded in Jinshi cuibian 金石萃編 113 (dated the fourth year of the kaicheng era [839]), one of Yunduan’s titles given there is Buddhist Registrar of the Right Precincts of the Capital (p. 38, a3; cited in Makita, Kokuyaku issaikyô, p. 334, n. 142). In Fozu tongji, juan 42 (T 2035, p. 385, b), however, it is said that Yunduan was appointed Buddhist Registrar of the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital in the first year of the kaicheng era (836), following the death of Duanfu.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

269

affairs, and present them to the throne.”131 As a result, the Great Master of the Dharma Treasure, Xuanchang 玄暢, was persuaded to arrange the relevant prefaces and writings in sequential order, and subsequently compiled the Sanbao wuyun tu 三寶五運圖 (Depiction of the Five Fates of the Three Treasures).132 After imperial support for Buddhism was re-instituted, Buddhist Registrars continued to function as leading saṃgha administrators in the Tang government. Lingyan 靈宴 and Bianzhang 辯章 served as Buddhist Registrars in the court of Emperor Xuanzong II (r. 847–859).133 Bianzhang was reaffirmed as Buddhist Registrar of the Left Precincts of the Capital, and Sengche 僧徹 was appointed Buddhist Registrar of the Right Precincts of the Capital.134 During the reign of Emperor Yizong (r. 860–873) Yanchu 彥楚 served as Buddhist Registrar of the Right Precincts of the Capital, and Qinglan 清蘭 was Buddhist Registrar of the Left Precincts of the Capital. Juehui 覺暉 served as Buddhist Registrar at the court of Emperor Xizong (r. 874–887).135

131

132

133

134

135

T 2126, p. 243, c26–28. The imperial order is also recorded in Fozu tongji, juan 42 (T 2035, p. 385, c), in an entry for the third year of the Huichang eera (843). The source of the proclamation is unknown. According to the biography of Xuanchang in Song Gaoseng zhuan, juan 17 (T 2061, p. 818, a-b), Lingyan 靈宴 and Bianzhang 辯章, not Yunduan, were the Buddhist Registrars who persuaded Xuanchang to compile his record. According to Zanning (T 2126, p. 244, a2), they were Registrars at the court of Xuanzong (r. 847–859). The Sanbao wuyun tu is no longer extant. According to Xuanchang’s biography (T 2061, p. 818, b), the title of the text was Lidai diwang lu 歷代帝王錄 (Record of Emperors through the Ages). Makita (Sō kōsoden translation, Kokuyaku issaikyô vol. 13, Xuanchang’s biography, p. 366, n. 5) characterizes the text as quoted materials regarding the relative strengths and weaknesses of the three teachings, arranged historically by imperial reign. It was modeled after The Records of the Three Treasures [compiled in the] Kaihuang Era (581–600), otherwise known as the Lidai sanbao ji (T 2034). The confusion between Xuanzong 玄宗 and Xuanzong 宣宗 by designating the latter as Xuanzong II is avoided in Chinese by the different characters used to render each emperor’s name, although they have the same pinyin pronunciations. The appointments of Lingyan and Bianzhong are noted in the biography of Xuanchang (T 2061, p. 818, b). Fozu tongji, juan 42 (T 2035, p. 387, a) records Lingyan’s appointment as Buddhist Registrar of the Left and Right Precincts of the Capital for the third year of the dazhong era (849). This is also mentioned in Fozu tongji, juan 42 (T 2035, p. 387, c). The appointment of Sengche is mentioned in the biography of Zhixuan 知玄 in Song Gaoseng zhuan, juan 6 (T 2061, p.744, b). See T 2126, p. 244, a3–10. In the biography of Zhixuan (T 2061, p. 744, c), Juehui is mentioned as the Buddhist Registrar of eh Right Precincts of the Capital.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

270

Welter

The authority ceded to Buddhist Registrars prevailed after the fall of the Tang. Through the Five Dynasties (907–959), the Later Liang, Tang, Qin, Han, and Zhou, down through the current Song dynasty, Zanning relates, all dynasties employed Registrars (lu 錄), but not Controllers (tong 統).136 Independent regional commanders from various districts, Zanning concedes, sometimes made appointments privately, using the designation Buddhist Controller instead of Buddhist Registrar, but as these regimes became subordinate to Song control, they “were made to refrain from granting titles that were no longer in keeping with their illegitimate status.”137 IX

Concluding Remarks: Confucian Monks as Buddhist Junzi

One consequence of the successful embedding of Buddhism within Chinese bureaucratic structures was tighter control. As Buddhist institutions and the Buddhist clergy became arms of the administrative system, they were compelled to abide by the bureaucratic rules and structures determined by that system. And as membership in the Buddhist clergy acquired prestige, procuring ordination certificates that legitimized one’s status as an officially sanctioned monk (or nun) became increasingly desirable. As clergy bore the responsibilities and privileges of civil servants, they were administered in similar ways. In the Song dynasty, the examination system became firmly entrenched as the primary means for admission into the ranks of officialdom, and the means for entrance into the Buddhist clergy mimicked this system. The Buddhist system entailed moving through five ranks (wupin 五品):138 136 137

138

T 2126, p. 243, c4–5. T 2126, p. 243, c5–8. This is a reference to the rulers of quasi-independent principalities that flourished in China during the Five Dynasties period, particularly in the south. In other words, after the regional commanders lost their independence and capitulated to the Song, they had to cease granting titles that no longer accorded with their newly subordinate status. To continue to grant titles would have been deemed as usurping Song authority. As an example, Zanning points out how the rulers of Wuyue appointed Lingyin 令因 as Buddhist Controller (sengtong). The title given in Lingyin’s tomb inscription recorded in Liangzhe jinshi ji 兩浙金石志, juan 4, confirms his role as Buddhist Controller in Wuyue (see Makita, p. 333, n. 132). My description here follows Zanning’s comments in SSL II, section 37A (T 2126, vol. 54, p. 246, a25-b4). Officials in the Chinese bureaucracy were categorized into a total of nine ranks for purposes of determining prestige, compensation, priority in court audience, etc. Each rank was commonly divided into two classes (first and second) or grades (upper and lower). The lower five ranks (5 through 9) were eligible to Buddhist officials. However,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

271

“Clergy Appointment” (sengxuan 僧選),139 when one meets the required standards for scripture recitation (songjing 誦經) and obtains a passing grade in the administered test; “Removing Ordinary Clothing [to assume official duties]” (shihe 釋褐),140 when one receives tonsure and dons the kasâya;141 “Official Rank” (guanwei 官位), when one is granted the formal and formless precepts by official decree;142 “Tathâgata Representative” (rulai shi 如來使), when one lectures on the teachings of the tripitaka; and “Instructor of the People” (limin 理民), when one instructs people at both Buddhist and non-Buddhist assemblies.

Not every monk who enters the clergy will aspire to the last two ranks, Tathāgata Representative and Instructor of the People. These are clearly elite positions within the Buddhist clergy, restricted to the most successful monks. Normally, aspiring clergy would aim to acquire “Official Rank,” the bureaucratic equivalent of full acceptance into the cleric ranks, symbolized by tonsure and the donning of monastic robes. Elite Buddhists form a special category of Buddhist nobility, whose designation in Chinese as Buddhist junzi (famen junzi 法門君 子) reveals their association with the Confucian model of gentlemanly nobility, the junzi 君子, and moral exemplar par excellence. As in the case of Confucian officials and nobility, Buddhists are unwavering in their support for “king and country,” and are resolved in carrying out the imperial will. The imperatives of the Buddhist clergy are to practice the Way for the sake of the

139 140

141 142

judged by Zanning’s comments, the reference here is to an alternate, quasi or unofficial ranking system specifically for Buddhist monks, and not part of the normal official ranking system. Following Zanning’s description of the Buddhist ranks, he calls on the emperor to “confer clear dictates authorizing an array of specific offices (guan 官) and specific ranks (pin 品) [for the Buddhist clergy].” The term xuan 選 (Hucker no. 2653) indicates the process used by the Ministry of Personnel (libu 吏部) to choose men for appointment in the bureaucracy. The term shihe 釋褐 (Morohashi 40129–10) normally refers to the act of putting aside one’s ordinary clothing and donning the robes of an official on the occasion of first assuming duties. Here the meaning is adapted to a Buddhist context. The monk’s robe donned here, the kasayâ (jiasha 袈裟) or Buddhist surplice, indicates official entry into the clergy. Receiving the formal and formless precepts indicate full admission into the Buddhist order. The first three ranks indicated here may be taken as: admission into the Buddhist order; acceptance as novice in training; and status as a fully ordained monk.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

272

Welter

country, to protect the people and alleviate disasters,143 and in these ways, contribute to the execution of the imperial mandate. Officially ordained monks, as Buddhist “bureaucrats” at officially designated monasteries (i.e., government institutions), were charged with fulfilling these tasks, and government monasteries carried out routines that were determined by the imperial agenda. As Buddhism faced its greatest period of crises in the early Song dynasty (960–1278), Zanning’s proposals epitomized the strategy for survival in the face of mounting criticisms from a confident, resurgent Confucianism. While some Buddhists were wary of the degree to which official Buddhist monks and institutions were co-opted into the Confucian system of imperial protocols, Zanning vindicated imperial control over Buddhist affairs, believing that increased imperial oversight was beneficial to the Buddhist clergy as well.144 Finally, I address the fate of Zanning’s proposals for Buddhism in Song China. In terms of the wen 文 revival, which the Song dynasty staked its mandate on, Zanning argued against the exclusion of Buddhist wen from the category of Chinese wen. As a Chinese tradition, China’s Buddhist literature deserved to be included. In the early Song, aided by the strong charismatic authority of Song emperors, support for wen was more uniform, and it was feasible to argue for the expansion of wen categories to include Buddhist wen. As views on wen became polarized, promoters of guwen 古文 (classical wen, i.e., Confucianism) defined wen in highly exclusive terms and restricted it to the Confucian literary tradition of antiquity predating the arrival of Buddhism in China and the development of Buddhist literary traditions. In this new climate, Zanning’s views seemed anachronistic and fell out of fashion. As the dynasty progressed, officials advocating guwen made significant inroads at the Song court. Allies headed by Fan Zhongyan 范仲淹 (989–1052) succeeded in promoting active (youwei 有為) governing based on guwen policies, denouncing Buddhist and Daoist sanction of quietistic, non-active (wuwei 無為) governing. They refused to accept Buddhism or Daoism as ethical teachings and strove to reform the examination system to promote those whose ethical behavior and political idealism conformed to guwen principles. Shi Jie 石介 (1005–1045) set out to combat the pernicious effect of Buddhism and Daoism on “true” morality. Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (1007–1072) made guwen criteria the pretext for passing the imperial exams when he was appointed director of examinations in 1057. To the extent that the guwen agenda gripped official opinion, Buddhism was excluded from positive consideration.

143 144

T 2126, p. 246, b2. T 2126, p. 246, a24.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi



Bibliography



Primary Sources

273

Bijiuni zhuan 比丘尼傳. Baochang 寶唱 (T 2063). Datang liudian 大唐六典 (Compendium of Administrative Law of the Six Divisions of the Tang bureaucracy). Li Linfu 李林甫 (Taibei: Wenhai chubanshe, 1962). Fozu tongji 佛祖統紀. Zhipan 志磐 (T 2035). Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳. Huijiao 慧皎 (T 2059). Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2103). Guitian lu 歸田錄. Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 (Sibu jiyao 四部紀要 ed.). Hedong xiansheng chi 河東先生集 (Literary Collection of Liu Kai). Liu Kai 柳開 (Sibu congkan 四部叢刊 ed.). Jinshi cuibian 金石萃編. Wang Chang 王昶 (). Jiu Tangshu 舊唐書. Xue Juzheng 薛居正 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976; ). Liang shu 梁書. Yao Silian 姚思廉 (). Nan shi 南史. Li Yanshou 李延壽 (). Seng shi lüe 僧史略 (Da Song seng shi lüe 大宋僧史略). Zanning 贊寧 (T 2126). Shiguo qunchiu 十國春秋. Wu Renchen 吳任臣 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983). Shilao zhi 釋老志. In Wei shu 魏書 114. Shimen zhengtong 釋門正統. Zongjian 宗鑑 (Zokuzōkyō 130). Shiming 釋名. Liu Xi 劉熙 (?) (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1936). Shishi jigu lüe 釋氏稽古略. Juean 覺岸 (T 2037). Song Gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳. Zanning 贊寧 (T 2061). Song Jin Yuan wenlun xuan 宋金元文論選 (Selected Song, Jin, and Yuan Discussions of Literature) (Beijing: Renmin wenxue, 1984). Song shi 宋史. Tuotuo 脫脫 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1985; ). Tiansheng Guangdeng lu 天聖廣燈錄. Li Zunxu 李遵勗 (Zokuzōkyō 1553). Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新脩大藏經, 85 volumes. Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎, ed., 85 volumes (Tokyo: Daizō shuppan kai, 1922–1933). Tang dazhaoling ji 唐大詔令集 (Collected Grand Edicts and Decrees of the Tang dynasty). Song Minqiu 宋敏求 (Shanghai: Xuelin chubanshe, 1992). Tang huiyao 唐會要, 2 volumes. (Institutional History of the Tang Dynasty). Wang Pu 王溥 (Kyoto: Zhongwen chubanshe, 1978). Tong dian 通典 (Comprehensive Statutes). Du You 杜佑 (Taibei: Xinxing shuju, 1965). Wanshan tonggui ji 萬善同歸集. Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (T 2017). Wei shu 魏書. Wei Shou 魏收 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974; ). Xiao chu ji 小畜集 (Literary Collection of Wang Yucheng). Wang Yucheng 王禹偁 (Sibu congkan 四部叢刊 ed.).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

274

Welter

Xin Tangshu 新唐書. Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修 and Song Qi 宋祁 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975). Xu Gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳. Daoxuan 道宣 (T 2060). Xu qisheng ji 徐騎省集 (Literary Collection of Xu Xuan). Xu Xuan 徐鉉 (Guoxue jiben congshu 國學基本叢書 ed.). Xuzang jing 續藏經. Reprint of Dainihon zokuzōkyō (Taibei: Xinwenfeng, 1968–1970). Zokuzōkyō, see Xuzang jing 續藏經. Zongjing lu 宗鏡録, Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (T 2016).



Secondary Sources

Abe, Jôichi 阿部肇一. Chūgoku zenshūshi no kenkyū 中国禅宗史の研究 (A History of Chinese Zen), Revised edition (Tokyo: Seishin shobō, 1987). Balazs, Etienne; Hervouet, Yves, eds. A Sung Bibliography (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 1978). Bol, Peter K. “This Culture of Ours”: Intellectual Transitions in T’ang and Sung China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992). Chandra, Lokesh. Life of Lord Buddha from Chinese Sutras Illustrated in Ming Woodcuts (New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture and Aditya Prakashan, SataPitaka Series, Indo-Asian Literatures Volume 627, 2010). Chen, Jinhua. “Sarira and Scepter: Empress Wu’s Political Use of Buddhist Relics,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 25, no. 1–2 (2002): 33–150. Chavannes, Edouard. “Le Royaume de Wou et de Yue,” T’oung Pao 17 (1916): 129–264. Ch’en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1964). De Bary, William Theodore; Bloom, Irene, eds., Sources of Chinese Tradition, vol. 1, Second edition (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000). De Meyer, Jan. “Confucianism and Daoism in the Political Thought of Luo Yin.” T’ang Studies 10–11 (1992–93): 67–80. Gardner, Daniel. “Modes of Thinking and Modes of Discourse in the Sung: Some Thoughts on the Yu-lu (‘Recorded Conversations’) Texts,” Journal of Asian Studies 50, no. 3 (1991): 574–603. Gernet, Jacques. Buddhism in Chinese Society: An Economic History from the Fifth to the Tenth Centuries, translated by Franciscus Verellen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995); originally published as Les aspects êconomiques du bouddhisme dans la sociêtê chinoise du Ve au Xe siècle (Saigon: Êcole Francaise d’Extrême-Orient, 1956). Gregory, Peter N.; Getz, Daniel A., eds., Buddhism in the Sung (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999). Guisso, Richard. Wu Tse-T’ien and the Politics of Legitimation in T’ang China (Bellingham: Western Washington University Center, 1978).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

275

Hartman, Charles. Han Yu and the T’ang Search for Unity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986). Haslam, Jonathan. No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002). Hatanaka, Jōen 畑中浄園. “Goetsu no bukkyō—toku ni Tendai Tokushō to sono shi Eimei Enju ni tsuite” 呉越の仏教 -- 特に天台徳韶とその嗣永明延寿に ついて (Buddhism in Wuyue: With Special Reference to Tiantai Deshao and his heir, Yongming Yanshou). Ōtani daigaku kenkyu nenpō 大谷大学けん研究年報 7 (1954): 305–365. Hucker, Charles O. A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985). Huang, Chi-Chiang. “Imperial Rulership and Buddhism in the Early Northern Sung,” in Frederick P. Brandauer and Chun-chieh Huang, eds., Imperial Rulership and Cultural Change in Traditional China (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1994). Ishii, Shūdō 石井修道. Sōdai zenshūshi no kenkyū 宋代禅宗史の研究 (A History of Zen in the Song Dynasty) (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha, 1987). Jiang Yibin [Chiang I-pin] 蔣義斌. Songdai rushi tiaohelun ji paifolun zhi yanjin 宋代儒 釋調和論及排佛論之演進 (The Evolution of the Confucian-Buddhist Synthesis and Anti-Buddhism in the Song Dynasty) (Taibei: Shangwu, 1988). Jülch, Thomas. Bodhisattva der Apologetik: die Mission des buddhistischen Tang-Mönchs Falin (München: Utz, 2014). Kurz, Johannes L. “The Politics of Collecting Knowledge: Song Taizong’s Compilations Project,” T’oung Pao 87 (2001): 289–316. Legge, James, trans. Shu jing 書經 (). Liu, Changdong 劉長東. Songdai Fojiao Zhengce lungao 宋代佛教政策論稿 (Buddhist Policy in the Song Dynasty) (Chengdu: Sichuan chuban jiduan, 2005). Makita, Tairyō 牧田諦亮. “Sannei to sono jidai” 賛寧とその時代, in Chūgoku kinse bukkyōshi kenkyū 中國近世仏教史研究 (Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, 1957). Makita, Tairyō 牧田諦亮, trans. Sō kōsoden 宋高僧傳, Shibu 史部, vol. 13. Kokuyaku issaikyō 国訳一切經 (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha, 1959). Makita, Tairyō 牧田諦亮, trans. Sō shiryaku 僧史略. Shibu 史部, vol. 13. Kokuyaku issaikyō 国訳一切經 (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha, 1959). McMullen, David. State and Scholars in T’ang China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). Miller, Roy Andrew. “Shih ming,” Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, ed. Michael Loewe (New Haven: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1993), 424–428. Morohashi, Tetsuji 諸橋轍次. Dai kanwa jiten 大漢和辞典 (Encyclopedic Dictionary of Sino-Japanese), 13 volumes (Tokyo: Taishūkan shoten, 1955–1960). Mote, Frederick. Imperial China (900–1800) (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

276

Welter

Nakamura, Hajime 中村元. Bukkyōgo daijiten 仏教語大辭典 (Great Dictionary of Buddhist Terms), 3 volumes (Tokyo: Tokyo shoseki, 1975). Oda, Ryūmyō 小田龍明. “Sōdai no dōkyō—toku ni hokusō shotei no dōkyō shinkō to shūkyō taisaku” 宋代の道教—特に北宋諸帝の道教信仰と宗教対策 (Daoism in the Song Dynasty—Especially the Daoist Beliefs and Religious Policies of Northern Song Emperors), Mantetsu chōsha geppō 満鉄調査月報 22, no. 8 (1942). Ogasawara, Senshū 小笠原宣秀. “Tō no haibutsu ronsha Fu Eki ni tsuite” 唐の廃仏論 者傅奕について (The Tang Anti-Buddhist Protagonist Fu Yi), Shina Bukkyō shigaku 支那仏教史学 1, no. 3 (1937): 83–93. Orita, Tokunō 織田得能. Bukkyō daijiten 佛教大辭典 (Tokyo: Daizō shuppan, 1975; originally published 1945). Schlütter, Morten. “Vinaya monasteries, public abbacies, and state control of Buddhism under the Northern Song (960–1127),” in William Bodiford, ed., Going Forth: Visions of Buddhist Vinaya (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2005). Shinohara, Koichi. “Zhiyuan’s Autobiographical Essay: ‘The Master of the Mean,’” in Phyllis Granoff and Koichi Shinohara, eds., Other Selves: Autobiography and Biography in Cross-Cultural Perspective (Oakville, Ontario: Mosaic Press, 1994). Somers, Robert M. “The End of the T’ang,” in Denis Twitchett, ed., The Cambridge History of China, volume 3: Sui and T’ang China, 589–906 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Sen, Tansen, “The Revival and Failure of Buddhist Translations During the Song Dynasty,” T’oung Pao 88, no. 1/2 (2002): 27–80. Sharf, Robert. Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2002). Tang, Yongtong 湯用彤. “Tang Taizong yu fojiao” 唐太宗與佛教 (Tang Taizong and Buddhism), Xueheng 學恆 75 (1931): 1–7. Weinstein, Stanley. Buddhism under the T’ang (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Welter, Albert. “A Buddhist Response to the Confucian Revival: Tsan-ning and the Debate Over Wen in the Early Sung,” in: Daniel A. Getz and Peter N. Gregory, eds., Buddhism in the Sung (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1999). Welter, Albert. “From Cakravartin Ideal to Realpolitik: Zanning and the Accommodation of Buddhism to Neo-Confucianism,” Yugyo sasang yeongu 儒教思想研究 44 (2011): 105–128. Welter, Albert. “From the Cakravartin Ideal to Realpolitik: Buddhism and Confucianism in the Pre-modern Chinese Context and its Implications for Contemporary Chinese Secular Policy toward Religion,” in: Arvind Sharma and Madhu Khanna. eds., Asian Perspectives on the World’s Religions after September 11 (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2013).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Confucian Monks and Buddhist Junzi

277

Welter, Albert. Monks, Rulers and Literati: the Political Ascendancy of Chan Buddhism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). Welter, Albert. The Meaning of Myriad Good Deeds: A Study of Yung-ming Yen-shou and the Wan-shan t’ung-kuei chi (New York: Peter Lang, 1993). Welter, Albert. “The problem with orthodoxy in Zen Buddhism: Yongming Yanshou’s notion of zong in the Zongjing lu (Records of the Source Mirror)” Studies in Religion/ Sciences Religieuses 31, no. 1 (2002): 3–18. Welter, Albert. Yongming Yanshou’s Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu: A Special Transmission within the Scriptures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). Worthy, Edmund H. Jr. “Diplomacy for Survival: Domestic and Foreign Relations of Wu Yüeh, 907–978,” in China Among Equals: The Middle Kingdom and Its Neighbors, 10th14th Centuries, ed. Morris Rossabi (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983). Wright, Arthur F. “Fu I and the Rejection of Buddhism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 12 (1951): 33–47.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

278

Atwood

Buddhists as Natives: Changing Positions in the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty Christopher P. Atwood In his seminal study of ethnicity and borders, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, the anthropologist Fredrik Barth observed that an ethnic group’s distinctive traits depend on the overall “ecology” of the ethnic group. By “ecology” he meant not adaption to a particular natural environment, but rather a particular constellation of other ethnic groups in contact with a given ethnic group in a given place: “Overt cultural forms which can be itemized as traits … reflect the external circumstances to which actors must accommodate themselves.”1 Members of a single ethnic group will accentuate different aspects of their “overt institutionalized behavior” when placed within different ethnic contexts, and yet may still be recognized as the same ethnic group. In the same way, I would like to suggest, Buddhist institutional behavior changed over the course of Chinese history when placed in different dynastic or geographic contexts. This insight into the contextual nature of even “overt institutionalized behavior” recalls as well the emphasis of sociologists of religion such as Rodney Stark, Bill Bainbridge, and Roger Finke who see religions and their clergies as players in a “religious marketplace” in which the overall ensemble of players shapes the behavior of any one player.2 This situational nature of ethnic and religious positioning suggests several important revisions to the widely repeated idea advanced by Kenneth Ch’en that Buddhism always “was the most acceptable religion for alien peoples ruling over China.”3 This linkage of Buddhism to foreign dynasties, which he goes so far as to call a “truism” is only the obverse of his claim that “alien rulers … could not embrace Confucianism and Taoism, for in these indigenous systems, the concept of Chinese versus barbarian was deep and fundamental.”4

1 Fredrik Barth, Ethnic Groups and Boundaries (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1969): 12–13. 2 Rodney Stark, William Sims Bainbridge, The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival, and Cult Formation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Roger Finke, “Demographics of Religious Participation: An Ecological Approach, 1850–1980,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 28, no. 1 (1989): 45–58. 3 Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), 425. 4 Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey, 426.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_007

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

279

In reality, however, Barth’s concept of ethnic ecology and Stark’s concept of religious marketplace explain more accurately the vicissitudes of Buddhism in Mongol China than does rigid and un-dialectical emphasis on the foreignness of Buddhism and the indigeneity of, say, Daoism. Thus, the Mongol Yuan court in 1280 suppressed the notorious Daoist polemic Laozi huahu jing 老子化胡經, or “Sūtra on Laozi Converting the Barbarians,” but only after Chinggis Khan granted unprecedented favor to the Daoist Quanzhen 全真 Patriarch Changchun 長春 (1148–1227). Moreover, as John Dardess showed, the Yuan rulers found Confucian valorization of tradition and the relativity of customs to be a vital common ground between themselves and the Chinese literati.5 As we might expect, then, the peculiar religious ecology or marketplace of the Mongol Yuan dynasty deeply influenced relations between the saṃgha and the state. Perhaps most fundamental was that the Buddhists appeared in the Mongol Yuan dynasty not as exponents of the one of “three teachings” (san jiao 三教) alongside Daoists and Classicists (ru 儒),6 but rather as one of four bodies of clergies, alongside Christian, Daoist, and Muslim clergies. Within this Mongol context, these clerical bodies were not primarily teachers of ethical behavior but suppliers of specialized services to the khan, in particular, prayers to Heaven for the khan’s longevity. Clergies were thus a subset of a category that included other populations defined by their skills such as artisans, actors, and geomancers. Such populations were, moreover, by definition foreign to the Mongol ruling family—Mongol shamans and shamanesses (bö’e and idughan) were, as far as known, never treated as part of this category of “foreign experts.”7 Buddhist, Christian, Daoist, and Muslim clergies were thus all alike part of the conquered who were expected to serve the empire and receive in return exemptions from other, less specialized, services in military and fiscal fields.

5 John W. Dardess, Conquerors and Confucians: Aspects of Political Change in Late Yüan China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1973); Christopher P. Atwood, “Explaining Rituals and Writing History: Tactics against the Intermediate Class,” in Representing Power in Ancient Inner Asia: Legitimacy, Transmission and the Sacred, eds. Isabelle Charleux, Gregory Delaplace, Roberte Hamayon, and Scott Pearce (Bellingham: Western Washington University, 2010): 95–129. 6 Following Michael Nylan and others, I prefer this designation to the usual “Confucian” (Michael Nylan, The Five ‘Confucian’ Classics [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001], 3). 7 Christopher P. Atwood, “Validated by Holiness or Sovereignty: Religious Toleration as Political Theology in the Mongol World Empire of the Thirteenth Century,” International History Review 26, no. 2 (June, 2004): 237–256; Peter Jackson, “The Mongols and the Faith of the Conquered,” in Mongols, Turks, and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, eds. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Leiden: Brill, 2005): 245–78.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

280

Atwood

Over the course of the dynastic history, however, the position of the various clergies within the empire and its successor states changed. These changes were not governed by an absolute and invariant view of Buddhism as “barbarian” and hence “pro-Mongol” or by Daoism as “Chinese” and hence “anti-Mongol.” Rather, both Buddhism and Daoism drew closer to each other, particularly after the death of Qubilai Qa’an in 1294, and advanced arguments against Islamic and Christian clergies that highlighted the different economic bases. As Thomas Jülch has emphasizes in the introduction to the present volume, the issue of Buddhist land-holding was a critical issue for many dynasties. In the Mongol Yuan dynasty, however, this issue was deeply inflected by the imperial policies which also granted exemptions to “partner” (ortoq) merchants, particularly those doing large-scale international commerce. Many of those merchants either were Muslim and Christian clerics, or asserted such clerical privileges to avoid taxation. Moreover, as newcomers, Muslims and Christians lacked the landed wealth and stable position of the Buddhist and Daoist clergies. As the state began to feel fiscal pressure and attempted to limit exemptions, the established Buddhist and Daoist clergies argued strenuously that it was the Muslim and Christian clergies who were abusing their privileges and who should bear the bulk of the state’s need for revenue. Far from contrasting themselves with Daoists, then, in the post-1294 religious ecology, Buddhists and Daoists worked together as landed, native, and well-established clergies to promote a view of the Muslims and Christians as commercially-minded interlopers building up new institutions solely by appealing to greed. Thus in the Yuan, despite the new role of Tibetan Buddhists, Buddhists as a whole argued from a position of indigeneity and tradition against the “Westerners” and their new religions. Such a position illustrates how Buddhism’s supposed alterity in a Chinese context is by no means absolute. In the religious ecology created by the Mongol empire, Buddhist clergy found it easy and advantageous to “go native.” I

The Mongol Yuan Context

Although many dynasties in China have been formed by non-Han peoples, the Mongol empire was unique in that its initial conquests included as many areas within the Islamic and Middle Eastern ecumenes as it did within the East Asian ecumene dominated by the Chinese script. Symbolizing this unprecedented situation, the Mongol Yuan was the first non-ethnic Chinese to use a script (actually two, the Uyghur-Mongolian and the Square or ‘Phags-pa script)

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

281

that was not created on the basis of Chinese characters.8 Beyond symbolism, moreover, this situation gave the Mongol rulers autonomy from the Chinese classical and religious traditions unprecedented in the history of Chinese dynasties. In the process of transition from military to civilian administration and the attendant institutional elaboration that occupied the early reigns of all Chinese dynasties founded on conquest, the Mongol rulers were unique in having access to not just one, but two or more traditions of proven administrative expertise backed by scriptural learning and historical models. Against the traditions of the previous dynasties—Han, Tang, Song, and Jin—and the Confucian classics, Mongol rulers and administrators could and did pit the tradition of Islamic and Central Asian dynasties—the Uyghur Iduqut, the Seljuks, and Khorazm—and the Turco-Islamic wisdom tradition found in the Kutadgu Bilig, the Alexander Romance, and the Oghuz Nameh. As a result, the Mongol Yuan institutions presented a unique hybrid character which still presents great difficulties to scholarly understanding. Perhaps the most characteristic area in which this unique hybrid of Mongol, East Asian, and Western (in the sense of Chinese Xiyu 西域, translating Mongolian Sarta’ul) institutions can be seen is in religious policy, famously, if somewhat misleadingly, summarized under the rubric of “Mongol tolerance.” As I have discussed in a previous article,9 this policy is found concretely in the format of particular “darqan jarliqs” or exemption decrees10 declaring the holder to be exempt from taxes, corvee, and other duties, in exchange for regularly offering prayers for the life of the khan. Scores of these decrees carved in stone have been preserved by religious institutions in China, both in Yuan-era colloquial Chinese, as well as Uyghur-Mongolian-script and Square Script Mongolian. These inscriptions contain a preface listing the persons addressed, and then refer to the origin of this policy of exemption in return for prayers to Chinggis Khan, reinforced by the succeeding rulers, who are listed by name. This specific type of exemption decree has been found in a wide variety of religious contexts: Russian Orthodox, the Islamic Sufi houses of Ardabil, Tibetan Buddhist, Uyghur Buddhist, as well as Chinese Buddhist monasteries and Daoist temples. Those found in Chinese contexts are unique 8 9 10

Previous examples of Chinese-derived scripts include the now lost Tabghach script and the extant Kitan, Tangut, and Jurchen scripts. Christopher P. Atwood, “Validated by Holiness or Sovereignty:” 237–256. On this term and genre in Turco-Mongolian political history, see: William A. Wood, A Collection of Tarkhan Yarliqs from the Khanate of Khiva (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1993); Christopher P. Atwood, Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2004), s.v. jarliq.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

282

Atwood

however in giving a list of exempt clergies, a list which is canonically as follows: 1) Toyid or Buddhist monks, 2) Erke’üd or Christian priests, 3) Sinshing or Daoist priests, and 4) Dashmad11 or Muslim clergy.12 In this form, this list can also be found widely in Yuan-era sources of administrative origin, such as the Yuanshi, the Yuan dianzhang, and the Tongzhi tiaoge. Depending on the context other clergies or professions may be added, such as Classicists (ru 儒), clerics of the Dhūta 頭陀 and Baiyun 白雲 religions, doctors, yin-yang specialists, or astrologers.13 Conversely, in many inscriptions, the Dashmad (Muslim clergy) are subtracted, for reasons I will discuss in chapter 5. While this canonical listing of multiple religions is found only in such inscriptions from China, the policy and the specific terms for the clergy associated with them are widely attested throughout the empire. In areas where states were expected to be confessional (Russia, Iran, Tibet), the equal availability of state exemptions to multiple religions was discretely hidden by omitting the list, although versions of it can be found in Syriac Christian and Persian Muslim histories.14 To a certain degree, one can say that the Mongol 11

12

13

14

Dashmad is the plural form of singular dashman, the usual Middle Mongolian word for Muslim clergy (from Persian dānishmand “learned man”). In Mongolian the name often appears in the plural, but the Chinese sources, however, use dashiman 答失蠻, a transcription of the singular form, exclusively. Similarly Mongolian toyid “Buddhist monk” and erke’üd “Christian clergy” are also plural forms, but erke’üd was transcribed into Chinese exclusively as yelikewen 也里可溫, from the Mongolian singular form erke’ün. In Chinese administrative documents, this canonical order is frequently altered with the traditional binome Seng dao 僧道 “[Buddhist] monks and [Daoist] priests” coming first, following by the Erke’üd and the Dashmad. Note, however, that the seng dao 僧道 of the Yuan shi and other sources rewritten according to classical canons of style is as a rule a rewrite of Heshang 和尚 and Xiansheng 先生, the usual terms in Yuan vernacular (Baihua 白話) administrative language for Buddhist monks and Daoist priests, respectively. E.g. Baiyun and Dhūta, YDZ 33.1127, 53.1758, YS 24.542; physicians and Classicists, YS 4.70; Classicists, physicians, diviners, YS 6.179; physicians, yin-yang specialists, Classicists, 8.169; Classicists: 98.2513. On the Baiyun (White Cloud) and Dhūta sects, see: Daniel L. Overmyer, “The White Cloud Sect in Sung and Yuan China,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 42, no. 2 (1982): 615–642, and Valentina Boretti, “The Quasi-Genderless Heresy: The Dhūtaists and Master Jizhao,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 67, no. 3 (2004): 349–368. On yin-yang specialists and diviners, see: Elizabeth Endicott-West, “Notes on Shamans, Fortune-Tellers and Yin-Yang Practitioners and Civil Administration in Yuan China,” in The Mongol Empire and Its Legacy, eds. Reuven Amitai and David O.Morgan (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 224–39. On Confucian households, see: John W. Dardess, Confucianism and Autocracy: Professional Elites in the Founding of the Ming Dynasty (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983): 14–16. Religions which expected sole patronage hid the multi-confessional nature of the policy even when they were not on their native ground. Thus the darqan jarliqs given to the

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

283

policy of “tolerance” was congruent with the East Asian tradition of imperial patronage of the “three teachings” (san jiao 三教) of the saṃgha, Daoists, and Classicists. Yet this Yuan-era administrative tradition was also alien to the East Asian tradition, as it omitted the Classicists, while it included on equal footing the clergies of two non-East Asian religions, Christianity and Islam. The level of tax exemption and autonomy granted the clergy as a whole was also far above that ever endorsed by earlier or later East Asian dynasties. Finally, in terms of political theology, the demand that the clergy pray to Heaven (Uyghur tngri, Mongolian tenggeri) for the life of the emperor was alien both to the nontheistic nature of Buddhism as well as to the tenet of East Asian Classicism that only the emperor himself can pray to Heaven.15 Thus while the Mongol religious policy was obviously contrary to the existing religious practice of the West (such as Tibet, Iran, Russia), where con­fes­sional states were the norm, it was also, although in more subtle ways, contrary to that of East Asia. As a result, these decrees and other similar administrative documents where multiple religions are listed represents an ideal site for examining how the peculiar inter-ecumenical legacy of the Mongol empire was retained and modified by the successor states, above all the Mongol Yuan dynasty. I will thus begin with the presentation of certain key variations within these decrees and then explore how they reflect and were reflected in controversies within the Yuan dynasty on the treatment of both religions in general and of specific religions.

15

Franciscans in the Golden Horde omit the list, even though the ruler from whom they received the exemptions was actually a Muslim, Uzbeg Khan (Hautala 2014). In one exemption text preserved for a Uyghur Buddhist monastery, the demand of prayers to Heaven has been slightly altered to be a demand of dedication of merit: “let them give merit and blessings for us elder and younger brothers” (bida bürün aqa nar degür-ün emüne buyan iregör ögün atughai; see Herbert Franke, “Additional Remarks on the Mongolian Turfan Fragment TM 92,” The Canada-Mongolia Review/La Revue Canada-Mongolie 3, no. 1 (1977), 34). The alteration to respect the actual nature of what Buddhist clergy can be expected to provide only makes more striking the retention of the demand for prayer to Heaven in exemption decrees given to Chinese temples such as the Shaolin si (e.g. D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script (XIII-XVI Centuries): Introduction, Transcription and Bibliography [Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, 2006]: 10–14; D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script: Introduction, Transliteration, Transcription and Bibliography [Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, 2010], §14) or to Tibetan monasteries (e.g. D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§10, 27, 28).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

284 II

Atwood

Limited or Full Tax Exemptions?

The basic format of these religious exemption decrees goes back to those of Qubilai Sechen Qa’an. The earliest attested example, given to the Shaolin Monastery (Shaolin si 少林寺) in 1261, has already the features I have highlighted: 1) the initial formula; 2) the listed of the ones addressed, first secular officials, then the religious themselves, and finally ordinary persons; 3) the statement that Chinggis Khan had previously decreed that Buddhist monks, Christian priests, Daoist priests, and Muslim clergy would not have to pay any taxes in return for their prayers for blessings on the khan; 4) a confirmation of that; further specification of the exemption and the clerical duties; 5) a concluding statement that the clergy must follow their appropriate duties and if delinquent will be punished by the authorities.16 In this initial example, the clergy are given exemption from “any duties or imposts whatsoever” (aliba alba qubchiri ülü üjen …). Within a few years, however, the issue was revisited and the legacy of Chinggis Khan redefined. In Zhongtong 4 (1263–64), the Central Shing 省 17 memorialized: Previously in the time of Emperor Chinggis, any type of person whatsoever, as long as they farm fields, paid the land tax according to the rate. But as an exception, while monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman do pay the land tax when they farm fields and pay the commercial tax when the buy or sell, they have been exempt from all other taxes and corvee. After­ wards things were done the same way in the imperial decrees of Emperor Qa’an [i.e. Öködei]. But from Emperor Güyüg to the present, the monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman have not paid the land tax or the commercial tax, and for some reason the taxes were not levied as of old (YDZ 24.944; TZTG 29, §631). On Zhongtong 4, XII, jia/xu (January 28, 1264), this memorial was approved by imperial decree. The Shing’s implementing orders issued the next month added Classicists ru 儒 as well and specified the tax rates at three sheng 升 per mu 畝 of dry land or five per mu of irrigated land. This rate was to be enforced on any Mongols, Westerners (Huihui 回回), Tanguts, Han, artisans, powerful 16 17

D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script, 12–13 and references. Mongols in the Yuan referred to the three main branches of government as the Shing (from Sheng 省 Secretariat), the Ön (from Yuan 院 or the Bureau of Military Affairs), and the Tai (from Tai 臺 or Censorate). I have followed these convenient designations.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

285

officials, or members of ayimaqs (touxia 投下 princely appanages) who were otherwise tax exempt, but with the tax-exempt Mongol and Han military and post-road households paying half that rate. This demand for land and commercial taxes from the clergy and all other traditionally exempt classes was explicitly designated as following the custom of Chinggis Khan (and Öködei Qa’an in the TZTG version).18 As a result, the next extant version of the Shaolin Monastery exemption decree changed its phrasing: It was stated in the decrees of both Chinggis Qan and Qa’an that Buddhist monks (toyid), erke’üd, Daoist priests (sinshing), and dashmad shall pay no tax or corvee whatsoever except for the land and commercial tax (sui tamgha) but shall pray to Heaven and bless Us.19 This clause eliminated the exemption from the commercial tax (tamgha) and the land tax (at first sui, from Chinese shui 稅, but later translated as tsang from Chinese cang 倉). In the Chinese version, this change is as follows: the 1261 inscription reads: 不揀甚麽差發稞程休着, while the 1268 reads: 除地稅商稅外 不揀甚麽差發休着.20 Land taxes (dishui 地稅) and commercial taxes (shang­ shui 商稅) are explicitly removed from the exemption, and the general term for taxes is simplified from chaifa kecheng 差發稞程 to just chaifa.21 A similar clause is found in several Mongolian exemption decrees from the era of Qubilai Sechen Qa’an.22 But even where the land and commercial taxes are not specifi18 19 20

21 22

See also two citations in YS 5.95–96 which add information not in the YDZ and TZTG entries. That in YS 93.2558 is an abbreviation of the fuller quotation in YDZ. D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script, 13, emphasis added. Daobu 道布 [Dobu] and Zhaonasitu 照那斯图 [Jūnast]. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu de Huihe shi Mengguwen he Basiba zi shengzhi bei kaoshi (xuyi)” 河南登封少林 寺出土的回鹘式蒙古文和八思巴字圣旨考释 (续一),” Minzu yuwen 民族语文 (1993.6): 59–71; Daobu 道布 [Dobu] and Zhaonasitu 照那斯图 [Jūnast]. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu de Huihe shi Mengguwen he Basiba zi shengzhi bei kaoshi (xu’er) 河 南登封少林寺出土的回鹘式蒙古文和八思巴字圣旨考释 (续二),” Minzu yuwen 民 族语文 (1994.1): 32–41; Nakamura Jun 中村淳; Matsukawa Takashi 松川節. “Shin hatsugen no Mō-Kan gōheki Shōrinji seishi hi 新発現の蒙漢合璧少林寺聖旨碑,” Nairiku Ajia gengo no kenkyū 内陸アジア言語の研究 8 (1993), 39, 46. This kecheng 稞程 is an alternate form of kecheng 課程, designating commercial and monopoly taxes. See Schurmann 1956, 367. In addition to the above cited decree, for the Shaolin Monastery, see: D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§1 and 4.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

286

Atwood

cally mentioned, the positive exemption statement mentioned only the qubchiri or chaifa 差發, the household tax under the Mongol empire. When the South was conquered, however, Sechen Qa’an allowed many if not all of the monasteries to receive exemptions from the land tax. His first step was to confirm the Song-era land tax rates for all the existing monasteries and temples (e.g. the order of Zhiyuan 16, IV, or May-July, 1279, in YS 7.211 for Quanzhou). Under Song policy “land grants and tax exemptions were limited to the largest, most famous monasteries and to the monasteries which served the royal family directly.”23 Qubilai followed that policy by personally granting land and tax exemptions to many monasteries.24 This mixture of decisions began a policy headache that was to last to the end of the Yuan dynasty. It appears that the version of history taught by the Central Shing was not shared by either the religious institutions themselves or the lower level officials. In reality, all the evidence indicates that tax exemptions for favored categories of persons in the Mongol system were intended to be total, and that the idea of not including land and commercial taxes in the exemptions was an innovation of Qubilai Qa’an, one of the many ways in which he proved one of the least beholden to Mongol tradition of any Mongol successor khan. Presumably due to the innovatory nature of this decree, collecting taxes from religious institutions proved very difficult to enforce. In Jiangnan, for example, the populace was soon turning to the temples and monasteries for relief from taxation and requisitions, selling, giving as alms, or mortgaging their fields to them, or shaving their heads and joining the monasteries with their families. During the last years of Qubilai’s life, in Zhiyuan 29–30 (1292– 93), the issue came up again. In face of what he saw as obfuscation by officials handling the issue, the emperor repeated with irritation the principle as he saw it—“In the edict of Emperor Chinggis, as long as one farms the fields, then one pays some land tax”—and ordered officials to enforce it with clearly formulated edicts. He confirmed the tax exemption of land granted by imperial edict, but other land was to be taxed, and those married found in the monasteries were to be dealt with presumably by laicization (TZTG 29.719; YDZ 24.957).25 23 24 25

Liu Xinru, “Buddhist Institutions in the Lower Yangtze Region during the Sung Dynasty,” Bulletin of Sung and Yüan Studies 21 (1989), 37. I have not yet turned up the original decrees, but they are referenced as precedents in YDZ 24.957, and YS 28.621, and 29.653. Unfortunately the text in YDZ has a lacuna, so the text on the handling of married persons living in temples is lost.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

287

Likewise the regulations for overseas shipping took new cognizance of clerical tax evasion. In the overseas shipping regulations issued in Zhiyuan 30 (1293), it was noted “The monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman are mostly laymen incognito going abroad to trade and hoping to sneak by without paying customs duties.” (YDZ 22.877) After a discussion, in which the Shing was still uncomfortable with the idea of taxing clergy, it was ordered that, rather than try to distinguish true clergy from false, all clergy would be taxed (YDZ 22.877– 78).26 Although no invidious distinctions were made in these regulations, still the rest of the evidence makes it clear that it was the Western clergies, the erke’ün and dashman, who were the main ones engaging in overseas trade (or were being impersonated by merchants, depending on one’s point of view). After Qubilai Sechen Qa’an’s death, the idea that the old and original Mongol policy was not to collect any taxes from religious establishments at all, not even on their land holdings or commercial activities, was rapidly reestablished and acknowledged in official documents.27 In Yuanzhen 1, IV (April-May, 1295), a full-scale discussion among central and local organs, including the Shing, the Ön (Bureau of Military Affairs), the Tai (Censorate), and the Xuanzheng Yuan or Court of Buddhist Affairs, reverted to what the Central Shing under Qubilai had disparagingly treated as an innovation of the barely legitimate Emperor Güyüg, but which was in reality much closer to the broad consensus about the true Mongol Yuan policy. The assembled officials, led by the Chingsang28 Öljei of the Kereyid, Dashman for the Xuanzheng Yuan, and the Imperial preceptor Kiragsba-Odzer,29 concluded that, If we do not debate this again clearly, we fear that the lower level officials, when they ought to collect taxes will irresponsibly give exemptions, and

26

27

28 29

A similar, but broader prohibition specifying princes, imperial in-laws, and powerful men as others who must pay customs duties, was written into the Yanyou 1 (1314) version; see TZTG 18, 533–34, and ZZTG duan, §408. The company the clerics found themselves in in this provision testifies to their perceived ability to pull rank and avoid taxes. On this ensuing discussion, see: Cho Wonhee, Beyond Tolerance: The Mongols’ Religious Policies in Yuan-dynasty China and Il-khanate Iran, 1200–1368. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2014. Mongolian Chingsang, from Chinese Chengxiang 丞相 “ grand councilor.” This list of decision makers comes from TZTG 29.725. The transcription of the Imperial Preceptor’s name 吃剌思八斡即兒 represents Kiragsba-Odzer, a Mongolian version of Tibetan Gragspa-‘Odzer. Despite his name, Dashman’s ethnic or religious origin is by no means necessarily Muslim. Dashman was one of the officials whose ambiguous response to the issue of clerical taxation evasion irritated Qubilai Sechen Qa’an (TZTG 29.719).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

288

Atwood

when they ought not to collect taxes will demand them, to a point that the monks, priests, and so on will find hard to bear (YDZ 24.958). In the resulting policy, all clergy—Buddhist, Christian, Daoist, and Muslim— in Tibetan, Han, Uyghur, and Yunnanese lands would be exempt from land taxes on any land that had been exempt before New Year’s Day, Yuanzhen 1. In Jiangnan, all land held by religious establishments under the Song and confirmed by Qubilai was tax exempt, but any land donated or mortgaged after the advent of Mongol rule would pay taxes. All clergy were also exempt from the commercial taxes, but were enjoined not to fraudulently do business with other peoples’ goods. This decision of Yuanzhen 1 (1295) was later referred to as the “Sheep Year Statute” (Yang’er nian tili 羊兒年體例)30 and became the default framework for tax policy on clergy. From this time on, the formulas used in some Sechen Qa’an era inscriptions, openly excluding the land and commercial taxes from the exemptions disappear, never to return. The positive exemption refers only to the qubchiri or chaifa, leaving the status of other taxes unmentioned. In practice, under Temür Öljeitü Qa’an and most of his successors, the new policy in effect made clergy of all religions mostly exempt from land and commercial taxes. The situation which the assembled officials wished to avoid, of officials exempting or not exempting territory based on arbitrary criteria was avoided in practice by exempting all of their land and commercial transactions from any duties. That this was the result can be understood by implication from an edict issued by Tuq-Temür Jaya’atu Qa’an in Tianli 2, XII, yi/wei (January 2, 1330), in which the emperor stated, “The cultivated fields of the saṃgha which have existed from the Jin and Song times and which have been bestowed in Our successive reigns shall all be freed of the land tax (zu 租), and let those which should pay the tax continue to be exempt from their corvee duties (yi 役)” (YS 33.746). The division into ecclesiastical lands which had inherited tax exemption and those which had not is the same as that envisioned in the regulations of the “Sheep Year Statute.” But the reference here to the Jin dynasty is completely new and certainly had no basis in any ancestral understanding of the scope of ecclesiastical tax exemptions. Evidently, the Sheep Year Statute had in practice been understood as confirming land-tax exemption to any religious institution that could demonstrate its exemption at any time prior to Yuanzhen 1. This understanding would thus not only preserve the existing exemptions under the Song (as was explicitly authorized by Qubilai and the Sheep Year 30

E.g. TZTG, 29.713, 725.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

289

Statute), but also under the Jin (which had never been explicitly authorized before). This preservation of documented exemptions would also have to include those granted land tax exemptions under emperors Güyüg, Möngke, and Qubilai himself before the Zhongtong 4 change in policy—but that included all recognized religious institutions. In other words, the practical effect of the Sheep Year Statute was to annul the Zhongtong 4 decision in all the territory which had been under Mongol rule in the time of Möngke Qa’an; that is, the Tibetan, Han, Uyghur, and Yunnanese lands mentioned in the text of the Sheep Year Statute. Only the land of newer monasteries, or ones whose new acquisitions were too large or recent to be plausibly presented as inherited would then have to pay the land tax. This new reality was the grounds for the various expedients which officials facing tax shortfalls adopted or proposed. The simplest one—albeit applicable only in old Song territory—was to enforce the distinction of taxable and nontaxable ecclesiastical land. In Jiangnan, the rules that the court would approve tax exemption on land which the monasteries and temples had inherited from the Song and/or been confirmed in position of under Sechen Qa’an, but would have to pay taxes on any additional land acquired had to be reiterated three times, once under Haishan Külüg Qa’an in Dade 11 (1308), once under in Shudibala Gege’en Qa’an in Zhizhi 2 (1322), and once under Yisün-Temür in Taiding 2 (1325) (YS 22.493, 28.621, 29.653). But if it proved impossible in practice to keep all ecclesiastical land from becoming tax exempt, then another expedient was to prohibit the purchase of taxable land by monasteries and temples (YS 30.681). Likewise if it was impossible to prevent the clergy from trading with goods gotten on commission from the laity, then one could simply prohibit the clergy from acting as merchants, thus limiting the scale of any such trading (YS 21.459, 33.732). The practical dilemmas were summed up in a policy exchange initiated by the Henan, Jiangzhe, and Shaanxi shings in Dade 4 (1300): The monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman make a large investment and open a store and conduct business, but still do not pay the commercial tax. Others among them engage in smuggling, and it is very hard to distinguish between these different ones conducting business; it brings great loss to the tax revenues. The Central Shing discussed this and memorialized, When monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman buy their own clothes, food, and necessities, and sell goods that the monastery or temple produces,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

290

Atwood

and do not pay commercial taxes—they are also involved in this. It is not right when they make a large investment and open a store and do largescale trade without paying commercial taxes, yet they are also not people who are mixed up with smugglers. It seems that this type should pay taxes according to the rates, what do you think? (TZTG 29.723–24) The implication was that there were three categories—clergy just trying to make a living (not to be taxed), clergy becoming big businessmen (to be taxed), and clergy involved with smugglers (to be punished). This implication was made explicit by Tuq-Temür Jaya’atu Qa’an when asked by the Central Shing to tax monks and priests acting as merchants, to make up a shortfall in the budgeted amount of revenue from the commercial tax. The emperor replied, “If they are sincerely acting as monks, let them still be exempt” (YS 35.779). Following the same logic, officials could go further and argue that to engage in commerce was, like marriage, an activity inconsistent with the clerical state and hence those who performed such activities should be laicized. In one case, the emperor Temür Öljeitü Qa’an asked them to draft a memorial and submit, but nothing was heard of this again (YS 19.415). Such a resolution was difficult to approve since laicization was a fate much worse than merely being returned to one’s previous family. Laicized clerics joined the ranks of scattered families (xiju 析居), emancipated slaves (fangliang 放良), unregistered peoples (loujihu 漏籍戶), and boralqi (“lost and found”) people (bolanxi hu 孛 (~ 不) 蘭奚人戶) as an unfree class subject to seizure and deportation as ger-ün kö’üd or “houseboy” artisans or settlers in military farms at the whim of the government or princes of the ayimaqs.31 In practice the punishment proved too severe to impose ecclesiastical tax evasion. And if even the watered-down Sheep Year Statute was enforced strictly, it could bite hard enough to provoke the common officials working in the religious bureaucracy into claiming openly that full exemption was the true Mongol system. By Dade 8, the budgetary shortfall was a serious issue and Temür Öljeitü Qa’an had to reverse his previous indulgence. He approved the policy of the Central Shing that “according to the previous decrees of Emperor Chinggis, Emperor Qa’an, Emperor Möngke, Emperor Shizu, and the Emperor” all clergy be subject to the commercial tax (TZTG 29.724; YS 24.459). In his announcement of the Zhida 至大 era, Temür’s successor Haishan Külüg Qa’an had endorsed this view, proclaiming that “monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman shall all pay commercial taxes (shui 稅) according to the old system” (YS 22.493). Pushback was not long in coming, however: 31

See the regulations in YS 89.2254, 2258, 2262, 100.2565, 101.2599, and 103.2639

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

291

On yi/hai [of Zhida 2, VI, i.e. July 31, 1309], vassals of the Central Shing memorialized, ‘Henan and Jiangzhe shing say, that the Xuanzheng Yuan has memorialized to exempt the monks, priests, erke’ün, and dashman from the land and commercial taxes (zushui 租稅). We vassals believe that land has its land tax (zu 租) and commerce has its commercial tax (shui 稅); such was settled law of the [dynastic] founders (zuzong 祖宗). Now the Xuanzheng Yuan with one voice memorializes to exempt them—this is not our system.’ A decree was issued that they shall be taxed according to the old system (YS 23.512). The language about the “founders” bears the marks of the reign of the heir apparent Ayurbarwada, under whose reign a renewal movement focused on the congruence of Confucian teachings with the tradition of the Mongol dynasty’s founders, and who in the same month had cited the precedents of the dynasty’s early traditions to argue against the Xuanzheng Yuan’s savage punishments meted out to those who abused Tibetan monks. When he became Buyantu Qa’an, Ayurbarwada would abolish much of the bureaucratic organization of clerical autonomy (more on this in the next chapter on communal autonomy). But although the memorial of the Xuanzheng Yuan which sparked the response just quoted above has not been preserved, the Xuanzheng Yuan could have made their own argument that on the tax question they were indeed speaking for the dynastic system. The claim of the Shing in Dade 8 that all the previous emperors including Möngke had approved of subject clergy to the commercial tax was flatly contradictory to the version of history that Qubilai himself had approved in Zhongtong 4. Moreover at the same time Buyantu Qa’an was pursuing a tough line on the communal autonomy of the monasteries as well. In the end, however, this experiment in regulations tougher even than Qubilai’s provoked a backlash under the reign of Yisün-Temür. III

Communal Autonomy?

Another implication of the developed form of Mongol religious policy was communal autonomy of each recognized religion. As I have argued previously,32 this autonomy for each confession was only fully institutionalized under Öködei Qa’an, as a result of the Buddhist-Daoist controversies that wracked the clerics of North China from the time of Chinggis Khan’s meeting with the Daoist patriarch Changchun. This “good fences make good neighbors” policy 32

Christopher P. Atwood, “Validated by Holiness or Sovereignty:” 237–256.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

292

Atwood

was reiterated when Möngke Qa’an in xin/hai, VI (June-July, 1251) put the Buddhist saṃgha under Haiyun 海雲 and the Daoist priesthood under Li Zhichang 李志常 33 (YS 3.45). Haiyun died in 1257, and the Yuan shi states that a Kashmiri monk Namo 那摩 was at one point named to administer the monks of the civilized world (tianxia 天下) (YS 125.3075). Underneath this supreme level organization, it appears that there was a subordinate regional hierarchy. In an inscription of gui/chou, XII, 7 (December 28, 1253), Möngke Qa’an informs the monks of Shaolin Monastery that the elder of Shaolin (Shaolin zhanglao 少林長老) has been named as the Shing (Secretariat) Supervising the Saṃgha (Dusengsheng 都僧省), in charge not just of Han (Jauqud-un/Han’er 漢兒) monks, but of those Uyghur, Tibetan (Töbün/ Xifan 西番), and Tangut (Tangghu/Hexi 河西) origin as well.34 The Dusengsheng 都僧省 is probably an otherwise unattested official name of the office of heading all the Buddhist monks within the Shing of Yanjing and Vicinity (Yanjingdeng chu xingshangshu sheng 燕京等處行尚書省). In his first attested exemption decree, Qubilai likewise announces to the Shaolin Mon­astery that “the monks (toyid) throughout Han lands (Jauqud/Han’er tiandi 漢兒田地) shall be under Master Baqisba as their abbot (ötögelejü/guanling 管領) and in accordance with the ways of Śākyamuni shall pray to Heaven and give Us blessings.”35 Subsequent inscriptions do not include such announcements, but the central organization for administering the Buddhist and Daoist clergies certainly continued, indeed grew more elaborate. Eventually a panoply of three different government bureaucracies was created: the Xuanzheng Yuan 宣政院 for

33

34

35

In fact the passage has Li Zhenchang, but I follow Oda in seeing this as an error for Li Zhichang 李志常 (Junten Oda, “On the Uigur Colophon of the Buddhavataṃsaka-sutra in Forty-Volumes,” Bulletin of Toyohashi Junior College (1985.2), 123). The error demonstrates that the source for this passage in YS must be a later Chinese translation of a Mongolian-language list of Möngke’s officials, since it can be explained only as an error in filling in the correct characters of a name transcribed in Mongolian. Written as Li Či-čang (for Li Zhichang 李志常), the name must have been mistakenly written at first by the Chinese translator as Li Zhichang 李直常, which was then corrupted or emended to Li Zhenchang 李真常. The terms for “Tibetan” and “Tangut” here are in the very rarely attested singular forms (Daobu; Zhaonasitu. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu (xuyi),” 59–71; Nakamura Jun; Matsukawa Takashi. “Shin hatsugen no Mō-Kan gōheki Shōrinji seishi hi,” 32–34). Daobu; Zhaonasitu. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu (xuyi),” 59–71; Nakamura Jun; Matsukawa Takashi. “Shin hatsugen no Mō-Kan gōheki Shōrinji seishi hi,” 35, 39. Master ­Baqisba is Mongolian for ’Phags-ba Lama.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

293

Buddhism,36 the Jixian Yuan 集賢院 for Daoism,37 and the Chongfu Si 崇福司 for Christianity.38 (But no central Muslim organization was ever founded, a point to which I shall return in chapter 5) These added a powerful voice on behalf of the religious institutions to that of the “elders” (ötögüs/toumu 頭目) who actually administered the religious institutions. Yet while the bureaucratic officials mostly stemmed from the ranks of monks and priests, they had a bad reputation. Emperor Ayurbarwada Buyantu Qa’an would quote the famous Tibetan lama, Damba Baqshi as saying “What good monk would ever want to be a monastic official?” (TZTG 29.709). One of the concomitants of this separate organization was a version of communal autonomy, within which religious establishments would be judged only by their own except in the most serious cases. Where religious communities came in conflict with other communities, Joint Courts (yuehui 約會) representing each community would be convened to settle the matter. As Wonhee Cho has recently shown,39 the Joint Courts became quite controversial due to the ability of the communities to stymie their operations by refusing to appoint representatives. Moreover, he also shows that sometime between 1288 and 1303, the remit of the Joint Courts was dramatically ex­panded—this expansion I would speculatively link to the revision in the tax policies toward religious institutions made in the Sheep Year Statute of 1295 that I discussed above. This new era proclaimed by Temür Öljeitü Qa’an after his grandfather’s death marked a palpable sense of relief and relaxation of central control, as well as an abnegation of more costly foreign adventures. The old strictures against Daoism were abrogated and the religious institutions were to be trusted. As Cho illustrates, this trust was abused, and already in Dade 7 (1303) the jurisdiction of the Joint Courts over serious cases of robbery, lies, and illicit sex was removed once again. When Ayurbarwada ascended the throne as Buyantu Qa’an, he had a history of opposition to the Xuanzheng Yuan, and in Zhida 4, IV, ding/mao (May 14, 1311), the local offices of the various religions—Buddhism, Daoism, Christianity, Islam, Baiyun, and Dhūta were all abolished, leaving only the Xuanzheng Yuan and the Chongfusi as purely religious organizations (YDZ 36 37 38 39

Date of original establishment unclear, but some time in “early Zhiyuan” (i.e. after 1264). Renamed the Xuanzheng Yuan (Mongolian Sönjing Ön) in Zhiyuan 25 (1288). Originally established in Zhiyuan 18 (1281) but first assumed bureaucratic governance of Daoists in Zhiyuan 22 (1285). Established Zhiyuan 26 (1289). Cho Wonhee, Beyond Tolerance: The Mongols’ Religious Policies in Yuan-dynasty China and Il-khanate Iran, 1200–1368. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2014.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

294

Atwood

33.1127–28; YS 24.542). Since only the Xuanzheng Yuan had a national network, at first it seems to have been assumed that the Xuanzheng Yuan would have to take over representation of Daoist and Christian interests. In a discussion of the issue held in Zhida 4, X, 14 (November 24, 1311), representatives of those two clergies cleverly quoted previous Buddhist complaints of frequent Christian and Daoist misconduct to imply that the Buddhist-oriented Xuanzheng Yuan would not be able to handle the volume of their issues. But the emperor cited his own negative experience with ambitious clerics (Buddhist in this case) and let the order stand (TZTG 29.708–10). Two years later, the Daoists were reduced to proposing that the Buddhist organs handled their affairs rather than the local civil administration, and were rebuffed (TZTG 29.712). As I described earlier, from Dade 8 (1307) financial shortfalls had pushed an increasingly tough policy towards the clergy on taxes as well. Justified in terms of the dynastic founders’ institutions, in fact they reflect, as Cho has pointed out, the thinking of figures like Ayurbarwada’s tutor Li Meng 李孟. In Huangqing 1, IV (April, 1312), the Central Shing recalled both what it pictured as the reasonable decision of Sheep Year Statute, and the repeated and unreasonable resistance of the Xuanzheng Yuan, which lamented that monasteries were presenting the Xuanzheng Yuan with imperial edicts and decrees from the empress dowagers granting them full tax exemption. So how were the officials supposed to tax them in that case? The response, again justified in terms of the legacy of Chinggis Khan, was to recall all tax exemption decrees except those issued immediately by Qubilai after the conquest of the Song (TZTG 29.725–26). But the simultaneous attack on two fronts was generating too much turmoil to be sustained. In Huangqing 2, VI (July, 1313), the court capitulated to the most powerful resisters, restoring at least for the Buddhists the Joint Courts and the tax policies of the Sheep Year Statute, with explicit reference also to Qubilai’s granting of tax exempt land in Jiangnan. In an evident reference to the turmoil generated by the strict policy now being abandoned, monasteries were enjoined not to replace their presiding lecturers (jiangzhu 講主) and elders (zhanglao 長老) and and to reestablish a stable and respected hierarchy in their monasteries (TZTG 29.713). But the Joint Courts were restored only for Buddhists, and while previously the Xuanzheng Yuan had played a role as advocates for other religions as well as Buddhism, the religious bureaucracy was now cut out of this role in local affairs and monasteries had to be represented each by their own elders. As Cho has shown, this new situation is reflected in at least one individual case, where before 1311 the Buddhist monastery of which he made a case study was represented by a local religious office in the Joint Courts, while after 1313 it was represented by its abbot.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

295

But restoring Joint Courts only for Buddhists established a distinction in their favor that seems to contradict the notional Mongol ideal of equal treatment of all recognized religions. How to explain this deviation from Mongol tradition? IV

Invidious Distinctions Among the Four Religions

Although the Mongol religious policy has often been defined in terms of its equal treatment of all religions, in reality, “tolerance” or “equality” were never treated by themselves as an imperative. Rather, the central concept was the autonomy of the empire from any legal or ideological commitment represented by a clerical religion.40 Yet where the imperial system and its Mongol tradition conflicted with religious teachings, the religions were expected to bend, and those that did not faced direct sanctions. As a result, the history of the Mongol religious policy was wracked with conflicts between religions and the empire. Within the East Asian territories that formed the heartland of the Yuan dynasty, invidious distinctions fell in three dimensions: The first, the rivalry between Buddhism and Daoism, was one with already centuries of tradition in China.41 It was, however, recast in the Mongol empire due to the early conflicts between Quanzhen Daoism and Buddhism, the controversy over the Daoist Laozi huahu jing, and the devotion which from Möngke Qa’an’s time on Mongol emperors felt for Tibetan Buddhism. Within the Mongol empire, this rivalry ended up consistently to the disadvantage of Daoism, although expressed with a greater or lesser degree of severity. Qubilai Qa’an’s edict of Zhiyuan 18, X (November, 1281) to burn all Daoist scriptures apart from the Daodejing 道德 經 as forgeries (YS 11.234) marked the nadir of Daoist fortunes—reversing it was one of the first decisions of the Öljeitü Qa’an reign. What followed was less discrimination against Daoism, but rather discrimination specifically for Buddhism. Setting aside specific patronage of religious rituals, decrees that singled the Buddhist out for favor in lastingly institutionalized ways can be found occasionally in the middle and late Yuan. One such decree was that of Huanqing 2 (1313) reviving communal autonomy for Buddhist clergy alone. Another came in Tianli 2, XII, yi/wei (January 2, 1329) in a decree of Tuq-Temür Jaya’atu Qa’an that reiterated for the Buddhists alone the exemption from 40 41

See Christopher P. Atwood, “Validated by Holiness or Sovereignty:” 237–256 and “Explaining Rituals and Writing History:” 95–129. On this matter, see the article by Thomas Jülch in the present volume.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

296

Atwood

land-taxes allowed in the Sheep Year Statute and allowing previously laicized monks alone (and not Daoist priests) to return to their clerical status (YS 33.746).42 The two other dimensions of invidious distinction related to religions whose high status in East Asia was new to the Mongol empire: Christianity and Islam. In certain times and contexts under the Mongol empire, Islam (and Judaism as a religion often treated in Mongol East Asia as part of it) was singled out as contradicting certain general principles of morality, related to either food rules or to the practice of patrilateral cousin marriage. This treatment of Islam as the odd man out related to practices carried on by the whole population, rather than just the clergy. But this singling out of Islam for criticism would seem to be related in some way to the somewhat different status and administrative system applied to the Muslim clergy as well. Unfortunately the data do not allow us to currently tease out the precise links between criticism of Muslim food rules and marriage practices and the lack of a court-level organ for administering Muslim clergy, for example. Eventually in the middle Yuan, however, conflicts between Buddhism and Daoism or between Islam and other religions were gradually superseded by a distinction of what were (in the Chinese context) the native, established religions, i.e. Buddhism and Daoism, and new, foreign religions, Christianity and Islam. Of course, this distinction is blurred by the presence of very highstatus, and very foreign, Tibetan Buddhist clergy. Yet the Mongol Yuan-era’s consistent policy of placing Sinophone (Han and Southern) and immigrant or semuren (Uyghur, Tangut, Kashmiri, Tibetan) Buddhism in one category meant that institutionally semuren Buddhists could use the native Buddhist monasteries and native Buddhists could use the patronage of high-status immigrant Buddhist clerics. This distinction between native and foreign religions became salient only after Qubilai Qa’an’s reign, with the attempts to distinguish between tax exempt and non-tax exempt lands and between tax-exempt small-scale commerce and large-scale commerce that should be taxed. In practice strict enforcement of these rules would severely disadvantage the new, foreign religions. Lacking Song-era large, landed estates, they would have to fund their religious establishments either with newly purchased land (which would be taxed according to the Sheep Year Statute) or with large-scale trading, often in 42

The only other reference I have found to laicized clergy being allowed to return to their clerical status is also restricted to Buddhist monks; see the brief reference to a decree of Toghan-Temür in Zhiyuan 1 or 1335 (YS 38.831). Given the unfree status of laicized monks and priests, to allow escape from it only for monks was a major sign of unique favor.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

297

alliance with the ortoq, which fall under the taxable clerical commerce according to the preferred interpretation of the regulations. At the same time, the Christians and Muslims, as purely immigrant (semuren) communities, possessed as a body economic resources, such as access to overseas economic networks, and legal privileges, such as preferential access to offices and the right to bear arms, that the vast majority of Buddhist and Daoist laity did not have. In this context it is not surprising that at times the Christians and Muslims felt common interests. What is actually more surprising is why those clear economic commonalities did not create a common feeling sooner. V

Dashmad as the Odd Men Out

The sense of the Muslim clergy, the dashmad, as the odd man out had as its converse a social linkage between East Syriac Christians and Uyghur Buddhists that dates back to the early years of the empire, if not before. In the early empire, the Uyghuristan was a Buddhist kingdom under the rule of the Iduqut, while the Öng’üt of Inner Mongolia were a Turkic-speaking Christian realm. The two shared a common language, albeit with dialectal differences. There was, moreover, a Christian minority among the Uyghurs, the Mekrit,43 who occupied the highlands of the kingdom. The Uyghurs lay on the eastern frontier of Central Asian Islam, and the Muslim Turkic lexicographer Maḥmūd al-Kāshgharī records songs celebrating military victories over the Uyghurs and desecration of their temples.44 Conversely, the Persian historian of the Mongol empire, Juwaynī, said a propos the Uyghurs, many of whom he knew personally as colleagues in Mongol governance, that “there are none more bigoted than the idolaters of the East, and none more hostile to Islam.”45 In this situation, the Turcophone Buddhists and Christians of the East generally worked together at the Mongol court. This alliance reached its peak under Güyüg 43

44 45

This name is found in the sources in several forms. The original singular was Mekrin, with a plural as Mekrit. Many Turkic dialects have no initial nasals, however, so Mekrin became Bekrin. The form as Mekrit (Turkic transcription) or Mekrid (Mongolian transcription) is not to be confused with the Merkit~Merkid. See Thomas T. Allsen, “Population Movements in Mongol Eurasia,” in Nomads as Agents of Cultural Change: The Mongols and Their Eurasian Predecessors, ed. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2015), 123, 137. Dankoff, Robert. “Three Turkic Verse Cycles Relating to Inner Asian Warfare,” Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3/4, no. 1 (1979–89): 151–165. Juvaini, ‘Ala-ad-Din ‘Ata-Malik. The History of the World Conqueror, trans. John Andrew Boyle (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1958), 60.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

298

Atwood

Qa’an (reigned 1246–48), who is excoriated by Muslim authors as being hostile to Muslims due to the influence of the toyin (the Uyghur word for Buddhist monks) and Christian officials of Turkic origin, such as Qadaq and Chinqai.46 Möngke Qa’an’s overthrow of Güyüg’s descendants in 1251 was accompanied both by a considerable amount of pro-Muslim, anti-toyin propaganda47 as well as a failed attempt to resist among the Uyghurs, which was to begin with a pogrom against the Uyghuristan’s Muslim sojourners.48 Under Qubilai Sechen Qa’an, the issue of food and (as we will see) marriage temporarily went into abeyance. The differences between Islam and the other three religions in these respects were not lost on the Mongol Yuan officialdom, however. Thus in Zhiyuan 7, IX (September, 1270), an edict was issued ordering that “monks, priests, and erke’ün who keep households and do not practice the fasts and regulations shall be registered as civilians” (YS 7.131). Prominent by their absence are the dashmad or Muslim clergy. The author of the edict (whether Qubilai himself or some other official) was evidently aware that Muslim clergy were married and that Muslims are not ever required to abstain from meat as clergies of the other three religions are, whether periodically or permanently. This same difference was noted in a distorted description given by a Jin envoy to Chinggis Khan: “The Mosulman 沒速魯蠻 Huihu are cruel by nature; they must slaughter the meat by their own hand when they eat and even when they fast they drink liquor and eat meat as they wish.” By contrast the Christian Huihu are characterized saying that they “do not like killing” and “when fasts occur do not eat meat.”49 While the exclusion of dashmad from the rules common to the other three clerical bodies was sensitive to their religious

46

47

48 49

Juvaini, ‘Ala-ad-Din ‘Ata-Malik. The History of the World Conqueror, 258; [Jūzjānī], Abū’Ūmar-i-’Uṩmān Siraj Minhāj-ud-Dīn, trans. Major H.G. Raverty. Ṭabaḳāt-i-Nāṣirī: A General History of the Muhammadan Dynasties of Asia, Including Hindustan; from ah 194 (810 ad) to ah 658 (1260 ad) and the Irruption of the Infidel Mughals into Islam. 1881 (rpt. Calcutta: Asiatic Society, 1995), 1148–64. An example may be found in the story recorded by both Juwaynī and Jūzjānī (Juvaini, The History of the World Conqueror, 225; Jūzjānī, Ṭabaḳāt-i-Nāṣirī: A General History of the Muhammadan Dynasties of Asia, 1110–15). As I have argued, this story seems to be part of set of biligs (wise sayings) of Öködei Qa’an collected with a specific anti-Chaghadayid slant and translated into Persian as part of the propaganda war against the enemies of Möngke Qa’an (Christopher P. Atwood, “Informants and Sources for the Secret History of the Mongols,” Mongolian Studies 29 [2007], 35–36). Juvaini, ‘Ala-ad-Din ‘Ata-Malik. The History of the World Conqueror, 48–53. Liu Qi 劉祁, Guiqian zhi 歸潛志, ed. Cui Wenyin 崔文印 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), 168.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

299

specificity, this exclusion was probably not a reflection of entirely positive sentiment. Other issues came up periodically. Muslims and Christians kept their own calendars—but to proclaim the correct calendar was a jealously guarded imperial privilege in the Chinese tradition. So the private sale of Huihui (Western) calendars was prohibited (YS 7.142). To be sure, it is not absolutely certain if this calendar was the Julian calendar of the Syriac Christians or the Islamic lunar calendar, although the latter is much more likely. And by 1330, taxes on the sale of an official Huihui calendar was a revenue item, so the sale and use of such calendars was licit (YS 94.2404). But still, the necessity to issue such an edict could not have made a good impression on the qa’an. But these irritants did not crystallize into an open attitude of hostility until Zhiyuan 16 (1279–80), in a famous episode reported by Marco Polo50 and Rashīd al-Dīn,51 as well as in the Yuan shi (10.217–18) and the Yuan dianzhang (57.1893–94). When some Muslim merchants refused to eat the non-ḥalāl food at qa’an’s table, Qubilai exploded with a rage that can still be felt in the decree he had issued. Calling the Huihui 回回 (translating Mongolian Sarta’ul) “our slaves” he recounted all the ways in which Muslim vassals had subverted and betrayed their Mongol rulers: from the Bukharan sieve-maker Maḥmūd Tarābī who rebelled in the time of Öködei, through the scholar Ḥusām al-Dīn who tried to dissuade Hüle’ü from attacking the Caliph by warning of heavenly disasters, to the Parwānah, a fiscal official executed by the Ilkhan Abagha on charges of conspiring with the Mamluks. Claiming that from the time of Güyüg on, the rulers had been “born unequal to our ancestors and became slothful,” he vowed to rectify this by prohibiting all Huihui, whether Musulman or Juqud (Jewish), from slaughtering sheep in their accustomed way and, for good measure, prohibiting the sunat (Middle Mongolian for circumcision, from Persian sunnat) as well.52

50

51 52

Marco Polo, The Description of the World, trans. A.C. Moule and Paul Pelliot (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1938), (§85), 216. This is in a passage found only in the Ramusio text of Marco Polo and constitutes part of the evidence that the Ramusio editions stem (as Stephen Haw has surmised) from annotations Polo made personally to the original text of his Description of the World (Stephen G. Haw, Marco Polo’s China: A Venetian in the Realm of Khubilai Khan [Abingdon: Routledge, 2006], 43–44). Rashid ad-Din, Successors of Genghis Khan, trans. John Andrew Boyle (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), 293–94. Cleaves translates all the relevant sources (Francis Woodman Cleaves, “The Rescript of Qubilai Prohibiting the Slaughtering of Animals by Slitting the Throat,” Journal of Turkish Studies 16 [1992]: 67–89). See also Elverskog for a discussion of this incident (Johan Elver-

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

300

Atwood

Western writers, such as Polo and Rashīd al-Dīn, placed this outburst in the context of the usual West Eurasian antipathies. Marco Polo said that these rules were issued as a result of Qubilai Qa’an’s outrage at the treachery of his Muslim vassal Aḥmad—but the edict is dated to Zhiyuan 16, XII, ding/you (January 27, 1280) and Ahmad did not lose favor until after his death in Zhiyuan 19, III, 1 (April 10, 1282). Rashīd al-Dīn attributed the measures to the malign influence of bigoted Christians, but there is no evidence of Christian ideas or concerns in the language of the edict. Indeed what stands out from the edict is Qubilai’s personal voice. Once again we see the claim (even more dubious in this case than it was in that of the tax exemption decree of Zhongtong 4) that Qubilai’s new restrictive measures were merely restoring what had been decreed by Emperor Chinggis Khan and his son (Öködei) Qa’an, only to be neglected by weak successors from Güyüg on. The range of examples of Muslim malfeasance shows a remarkably detailed, if rather slanted, familiarity with the details of western Mongol political history. Evidently the frequent embassies between Daidu and the western khanates kept the great khan well-informed. The main driver of this prohibition was undoubtedly Qubilai himself. Qubilai’s new edict did not amount to banning Islam or expelling Muslim officials. In his decree, he even suggested—how seriously is hard to say—that Muslims and Jews could make up for not following their food laws by doubling up on their namas (from Arabic namāz) or required prayers. Ahmad continued to hold a leading position until for reasons entirely unrelated to the edict he fell and his family was destroyed. In Zhiyuan 27, VII (August, 1290), the pingzhang 平章 of the Jiang-Huai Branch Shing proposed to follow Song precedent and cut off the hands of officials embezzling tax grains. But the official’s name, Shabudin 沙不丁, was a Muslim one (from Arabic Shihāb al-Dīn) and Qubilai snapped back in reply “That’s Huihui law,” and refused (YS 16.339). But Shabudin was not dismissed and his career did not suffer. Along with the insistence that Huihui not “cut the throats of animals” but rather “cut them in the belly” Marco Polo mentions another site of contention: “they must take wives according to the law of the Tartars.”53 Polo’s testimony shows that another cultural issue was already in play that would not reach the law courts until the reign of Buyantu Qa’an. This was the Islamic preference for marriage with patrilateral cousins (whether first or second). Such marriages fell directly afoul of the Chinese prohibition on marriages within the same ­surname; they had also been highlighted along with beef-eating and other

53

skog, Buddhism and Islam on the Silk Road [Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2010], 227–41). Marco Polo, The Description of the World, (§85), 216.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

301

unclean practices by Indian Buddhist polemics against Islam in the Kālacakra Tantra.54 Tao Zongyi 陶宗儀, in his Nancun chuogenglu 南村輟耕錄 tells the story of a crowd of Chinese gawkers that gathered to jeer a Huihui marriage uniting patrilateral cousins. The crowd was so big they went on to the roofs to observe and the building collapsed killing the bride, groom, and the master of ceremonies.55 Just as Ayurbarwada Buyantu Qa’an took Qubilai Sechen Qa’an’s policies toward the clergy and made them even tighter, so too he was the first to legally prohibit Huihuis, again whether Musulman or Juqud (Muslim or Jewish), from practicing patrilateral cousin marriage. Unfortunately the relevant degree does not survive, but it is cited as a precedent in a later document on the same topic. “In the time of Emperor Buyantu, dashman (Muslim clergy), Huihui (Middle Easterners), Ju’ud (Jews), and so on were not allowed to contract marriages with paternal uncles (shubo 叔伯)” (ZZTG, Duanli §246, II, 243–44). In the absence of a decree or any reference within the YS Basic Annals, one wonders whether this practice was explicitly prohibited at the time, or whether the censor demanding a renewed prohibition was simply remembering the reign of Buyantu as an agreeably strict era before the laxity that followed under YisünTemür (reigned 1323–28). But it is also noteworthy that Sechen Qa’an’s edict of prohibition on ḥalāl/kosher slaughtering and circumcision found its way unedited into the Yuan Dianzhang, whose main body of documents was completed in Yanyou 7 (1320) and was published with an appendix of further documents in Zhizhi 2 or 1322 (YDZ, preface, 1). Although Rashīd al-Dīn says that the saṃgha convinced Sechen Qa’an to revoke the decree after seven years because it was driving off Muslim merchants and thus damaged the commercial tax revenues,56 it is presented in the legal compilation of the Buyantu and Gege’en Qa’an eras as still in force. Had it been simply unenforced? Was it being enforced again under Buyantu? Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell. The prohibition on paternal cousin marriage among Huihuis was reiterated again in Zhiyuan 6, XI (November 24, 1340), at the initiative of a censor. As 54

55

56

John Newman, “Islam in the Kālacakra Tantra,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 21, no. 2 (1998), 319; cf. Johan Elverskog, Buddhism and Islam on the Silk Road (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010), 98–103. Tao Zongyi 陶宗儀, Nancun chuogenglu 南村輟耕錄 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997), 348; Paul J. Smith, “Fear of Gynarchy in an Age of Chaos: Kong Qi’s Reflections on Life in South China under Mongol Rule,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 41, no. 1 (1998), 7; Tsai Wei-chieh, “Ethnic Riots and Violence in the Mongol Empire: A Comparative Perspective,” Mongolian Studies 33 (2011), 91. Rashid ad-Din, Successors of Genghis Khan, trans. John Andrew Boyle (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), 294.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

302

Atwood

mentioned, he complained that Buyantu’s agreeable strictness on this topic had lapsed, “In recent years, dashman, Huihui, Ju’ud, and so on are still contracting marriages with their paternal uncles, which should be prohibited.” The Bureau of Punishments suggested that the practice be treated on analogy with marriage within the surname, but with two grades of aggravation, thus being punished with 67 blows for the principals, instead of the 47 strokes applied to same-surname marriages. Ominously, they also proposed rewarding informers with 20 ding of Zhongtong cash (ZZTG, Duanli §246, II, 243–44; YS 40.858).57 The proposal was approved, but it is impossible to know how widely it might have been implemented. The stipulation on rewarding informers, not present in the same surname prohibition for ordinary Han and Southern cases, reflected the need of the law to penetrate the wall of silence that would surround the custom among the Huihui in an alien land. Rashīd al-Dīn refers to the use of informers to ferret out ḥalāl slaughtering under Qubilai’s decree, but the main effect was to make Huihuis pay hush money to their servants. The same scenario likely played out in this case. The dashmad as the odd men out is reflected in the striking deletion of dashmad from exemption decrees issued after the horse year or Zhiyuan 19 (1282). Before then all exemption decrees have all four clergies listed; the inscriptions after that date (the earliest extant one of which is a cow year, probably Zhiyuan 26 or 1289) list only Buddhist, Daoist, and Christians as exempt clergy.58 While it is clear from administrative documents that the elimination 57 58

Compare to the regulations on same-surname marriage in ZZTG, Duanli §244, II, 243. The securely datable Qubilai-era inscriptions with all four clergies listed are in Chinese, dated to 1261, 1268, and 1280 (Cai Meibiao 蔡美彪, Yuandai baihua beiji lu 元代白話碑 集錄 [Beijing: Academic Press, 1955], §§21, 22, 25), in the Uyghur-Mongolian script, dated to 1261 and 1268 (D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script, 12–14), and in the Mongolian Square Script, dated 1276, 1280, and 1282 (D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§1, 5, 6). There is only one Qubilai-era inscription with only three clergies listed that can be exactly dated, to 1293 (see: Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §33). All exemption decrees from the reigns of Temür Öljeitü Qa’an (reigned 1294–1307) and Haishan Külüg Qa’an (reigned 1307–1311) have only three clergies, Buddhist, Daoist, and Christian (see: Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §§34–39, 41–45, 48–49, 53–57, and D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§7–12). There are three Qubilai-era Square Script inscriptions all issued in the year of the cow which from the context can be dated to either 1277 or 1289. Two have all four clergy listed and one does not. Given the clear pattern in the securely dated exemption decrees of deletion of dashmad after 1282, the simplest assumption would be that the two ones with dashmad date to 1277, and the one without dates to 1289. This awaits confirmation, however.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

303

of dashmad did not actually cancel the exemption of Muslim clergy from the household tax or qubchiri/chaifa, their deletion from the prominently displayed exemption decrees very much marked a fall from favor, coincident (with a slight delay) with Qubilai’s decree insulting them as ignorant and rebellious slaves and banning their food practices. They joined the Baiyun and Dhuta clergy in a sort of second-tier group, entitled to exemptions, but not to high-level public recognition. Although it is virtually impossible to explain conclusively why something did not happen in the Yuan, given the sparse documentary record, the dashmad’s fall from favor late in Qubilai’s reign seems hardly separable from the fact that a religious bureaucracy was never created for them, the way it was for the Buddhist, Christian, and Daoist clergies. At the beginning of Qubilai’s reign, each religion exercised its communal autonomy through its network of “elders” (Mongolian ötögüs, Chinese toumu 頭目 or “leader”). Such elders among the Muslim clergy were designated as qadi (Chinese hedi 合的 ~ hadi 哈的), from Arabic qāḍī “Islamic judge,” glossed in Chinese as dashi 大師 “ great master.” The qadi’s remit, however, differed significantly from those of the other three clergies, who administered communities of men who were, at least in theory and in Yuan law, strictly celibate. When the qadis’ civil jurisdiction was abolished, the affairs which they were enjoined to handle no longer had a wide scope: “The qadi grand masters shall only be allowed administer teachings and recite scriptures; criminal, household, tax, civil suits, and all great and small legal affairs pertaining to the Huihui people shall all be overseen by the local authorities according to the statutes” (TZTG 29.712; via the Jingshi dadian 經世大典 this passage became the source for YS 102.2620). Implicitly this passage defines the potential ambit of the qadi as including virtually the whole range of law pertaining to the Huihui population. One might identify this overlap with regular civilian jurisdiction as the reason why a centralized Muslim religious bureaucracy was never created. In reality, however, many noncelibate populations were granted communal autonomy in the Yuan under bureaucracies with court-level reach: Tibetans in the Xuanzheng Yuan, ­military households, personnel in the mews, appanage communities, and so on. That no court-level religious bureaucracy was ever created for Muslim clergy seems only explicable as a function of the suspicion under which they were held in the later part of Qubilai Qa’an’s reign when the major institutions were created. Thus when the institutions of religious autonomy were cancelled under Ayurbarwada Buyantu Qa’an, the qadis were handled separately. Muslim qadi offices (hedi si 合的司) were abolished simultaneously or shortly after the local

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

304

Atwood

offices of the other religions (YS 24.542; TZTG 29.712).59 Muslims also must have reacted separately. Lacking the court-level bureaucratic organizations, there is no record of Islamic clerical bureaucrats defending dashmad interests the way officials in the Xuanzheng Yuan, the Jixian Yuan, or the Chongfu Si represented the interests of their religious communities at court. But they did not simply bow to the decree. A year later in Huanqing 1, XII (January, 1313), Buyantu Qa’an had to reiterate his edict: “Huihui qadis should make entreaties for blessing as of old, but all civil suits are to be directed to the correct authorities. Moreover all previously issued stamped decrees60 should be returned” (YS 24.554). Individual Muslims were powerful in the Yuan dynasty and their communal solidarity gave them an ability to conduct grass roots passive resistance, but their clerical leaders operate under significant handicaps. VI

Landed Religions vs. Commercial Religions

While Islamic clergy operated under disadvantages, Muslims and Christian civilians shared significant privileges as immigrants (semuren) in the Yuan system. Their role as an “intermediate class”61 standing between the ruling Mongol class above and the mass of Han and Southern subjects below came with considerable privileges. However much mutual antagonism they and their scholars and clerics may have carried with them from the West, Muslims and Christians in Yuan East Asia occupied quite similar occupational and economic niches that gave them a substantial common interest.62 59

60 61 62

The date of these two versions of the decree abolishing qadi offices is different. That in the Yuan shi is Zhida 4, IV, ding/mao (May 14, 1311) or the same day as the abolition of the other religions’ offices. That in the Tongzhi tiaoge is Zhida 4, X, 4 or (November 14, 1311). Xishu 璽書 : this refers to a stamped paper version of the exemption decrees I have been discussing. Christopher P. Atwood, “Explaining Rituals and Writing History:” 95–129. One of the reasons this common interest has not been recognized by scholars is a mistaken belief that Huihui 回回, a term frequently found in the Yuan sources, means solely “Muslim.” In reality, however, the semantic field of this word in Yuan documents closely maps that of Mongolian Sarta’ul, which can alternatively be translated into Chinese as Xiyu ren 西域人 or “Westerners.” Rashid al-Din defines Sarta’ul not as Muslim, but as Tajik, that is settled Iranian as opposed to nomad Turk. But while properly indicating an ethnic, rather than religious, meaning, “Tajik” is also too narrow. As observant readers may have noticed, Huihui are sometimes divided into Muslims (Mongolian dashmad or Musulman) and Jews (Juqud~Ju’ud). And in other instances of Mongol-influenced Chinese usage, the Huihe 回紇 (a precursor of Huihui 回回) are described as being divided into Musulman Huihe, Ili-Chui Huihe (the East Syriac Christian communities on the

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

305

As I have mentioned, decrees that disarmed the Han, Southern, and Korean communities (YS 2.83, 12.240, 40.852) were never extended to the Semuren or Mongols.63 A more striking example of their privileges, albeit one that was withdrawn in stages, was to be tax free. In Dade 1, V (June, 1308), the Westerners of North China were made subject to the commercial tax (YS 19.411). Twelve years later, at the beginning of the reign of Shudibala Gege’en Qa’an, the Westerners of the South were also made subject to the full range of taxes in Yanyou 7, IV, 21 (May 31, 1320). Fortunately in this case the decision is recorded in the Yuan Dianzhang and some of the details can be observed. First the Westerners in question were defined broadly as Erke’ün, Juqud, and Dashmad, i.e. Christians, Jews, and Muslims,64 together with their emancipated slaves (of Chinese origin) who served as interpreters (fangliang tongshi 放良通事). Only those actually reciting scriptures and saying prayers were to be exempt from the silver household tax (baoyin 包銀).65 The rest would all be entered into the local tax registers and those owning land would pay the land tax, those engaging in commerce would pay the commercial tax, and all would pay the silver tax at a rate of two taels per household, commutable to ten guan of Zhiyuan cash.66 Two points in this record deserve emphasis. First of all the record speaks of “such a crowd of people” (nen zhong ren 恁衆人) discussing the issue and

63

64

65 66

Ili-Chui River), and Hindu Huihe. Finally, in legal cases I will discuss below, Huihui are defined as dashmad, erke’üd, and Ju’ud, again Muslims, Christians, and Jews. Ese 愛薛 (from Arabic ‘Isā), one of the most famous Christian officials in Yuan history, is described as “Huihui Ese” in YS 8.147. In other words, while most Huihui in Yuan East Asia happen to have been Muslim, Huihui is very emphatically not a religious term in itself. Rather it includes anyone from the West regardless of religion. As a result, documents and historical passages that have been assumed to be solely about “Muslims” should, unless otherwise indicated, be understood to include all Westerners without any distinction of religion. The one exception is Tibetan clerics (YS 9.181). This is undoubtedly due to their clerical status—according to the Vinaya Buddhist monks are not to even look at weapons. But Tibetan clerics were bearing arms presumably because all of their non-clerical Tibetan and other semuren compatriots were. In their proper sense, Erke’ün and Dashman do not mean “Christian” and “Muslim” but rather “Christian priest” and “Muslim clergyman.” This usage is clear from passages, for example, ordering those erke’ün who have families or do not fast properly to be laicized. But in this passage, clearly the officials are using these familiar terms for the clergy to designate the religious communities they shepherded as a whole. Military and post-road households were also mentioned as exempt, but from the wording they are obviously not the focus of the discussion. YDZ xin, 2112–13, repeated in ZZTG, §142; cf. YS 27.601.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

306

Atwood

emphasizes that offices of the censorate had been collecting many documents on this issue. Evidently this was a long-standing demand of Southern officials, which implies that the resistance to the new policy must have been quite tenacious. Secondly, the proposed distinction between those Westerners who prayed and chanted scriptures and those who did not may not have been so easy to draw in practice. The Islamic clergy lacked a distinguishing mark like celibacy or canonical hours of prayer not also incumbent on the laity, and both William of Rubruck and Marco Polo say that virtually all the male Syriac Christians of the East were ordained as priests (Rubruck xxvi.12).67 In other words, this change of policy must have marked a major change in their Westerners’ economic life and its implementation would have been difficult and ripe for abuse.68 William of Rubruck also notes the East Syriac Christian priests were all “usurers” (Rubruck xxvi.12).69 If by “usurer” merchants were meant, this observation would agree with that made by Chinese officials. In the discussion over how to handle commercial taxes on clergy conducted in Dade 5 (1301), officials in the Xuanzheng Yuan consulted with lamas and proposed: The erke’ün and the dashman take tana pearls and other jewels and do trade. But the Buddhist monasteries have one or two small shops that do small-scale business to pay for repairs on their temple and the vegetarian food for priests who are saying prayers for those in high places. If the monks and priests do not pay commercial taxes according to the statutes in the imperial decrees, while the erke’ün and dashman, are made to pay the commercial taxes according to the memorial submitted by the Shing, how would that be? (TZTG 29.724)

67

68

69

Peter Jackson, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–1255, David Morgan trans. and ed. (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, [1990] rpt. 2009), 163–64; Marco Polo, The Description of the World, 2 vols., trans. A.C. Moule and Paul Pelliot (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1938), 181–82. The comment in Marco Polo that “all the Christians of those parts are made [priests]” is found in the Toledo ms. With regard to this ms, I follow Haw, Marco Polo’s China, pp. 43–45, in seeing the new material in it as based directly or indirectly on Polo’s own annotations. A few Huihui communities still remained tax exempt. In Zhizhi 2, XII (January, 1323), the Huihui households garrisoning the Tangut kingdom (Hexi 河西) were exempted from the silver tax (YS 28.626). The phrasing seems to indicate a population serving a sort of militia function. Han settlers in the Tangut kingdom along the Tibetan ethnic frontier were likewise allowed to bear arms (junqi 軍器), a similar deviation from normal policy. Peter Jackson, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck, 163.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

307

Although the picture of Christian and Muslim clergymen as being all fabulously wealthy international businessmen while Buddhist monks were merely running small shops to make ends meet was obviously exaggerated by the Buddhist religious bureaucrats for self-interested purposes, the difference in economic orientation between the native (Buddhist and Daoist) and foreign (Christian and Muslim) clergies was undoubtedly real. And this real difference made the Western clergy much less sympathetic figures from the point of view of decision makers suspicious of commercial values, whether Mongol or Han.70 Thus, as I have stressed before, the interpretation of the Sheep Year Statute that came to dominate bit into religious establishments funded with new money and large scale commerce far more deeply than it did into those based on long-standing landed property. The difficulty new religions had fitting into the established religious economy is illustrated in a complaint which the Daoist priests made against the Erke’ün in Wenzhou 溫州 in Dade 8 (1304). Speaking through their bureaucratic representatives in the Jixian Yuan the Daoists observed that “in Jiangnan from before until now, there had only existed the two religions, Buddhism and Daoism, exercising authority, and there had never been any Erke’ün institutions.” They then accused the Christians of soliciting civilians hoping to evade taxes to become their flock and so set up yamens, or local administrative offices, to muscle the Daoists out of their authority. At the ceremonies of prayer for the authorities, the Erke’ün demanded the first place, ahead of the Daoists and Buddhists, a demand which the Daoists said they enforced with blows.71 The decision taken was that the Erke’ün would certainly not be allowed to make civilian households into their followers, and in joint prayer sessions would have to take third place after the two native religions (YDZ 33.1143–44).72 Here the native religions successfully painted the immigrant faiths as pushy newcomers, seducing the more established flocks with material benefits. As in the previous passage, the native religions endeavored to portray the Western faiths as more about greed and ambition than about religion. Disdain for the Huihui commercial activities was endemic in the officialdom and was gaining currency among emperors. Under Haishan Külüg Qa’an, 70 71

72

Atwood, Christopher P. “Explaining Rituals and Writing History:” 95–129. In fact, as William of Rubruck (xxix.15) observed in Qara-Qorum, during similar ecumenical prayer services, the ranking was Syriac Christians first, Muslims second, and “idolaters” (Buddhists and/or Daoists) third (Peter Jackson, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck, 187). So the Erke’ün claim to the first rank did have old Mongol precedent in its favor. cf. Tsai Wei-chieh, “Ethnic Riots and Violence in the Mongol Empire,” 93.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

308

Atwood

the Central Shing asked to discuss the privileges of the Westerners in the Yuan order: Huihui merchants carry stamped documents (xishu 璽書), wear tiger tallies, and ride the post horses. In name they search for rarities yet might just find one cheetah and present it to court, for which they solicit gifts in return—there are very many such. We vassals submit that the tiger tallies are the guarantors of the state and the post horses are the necessities of the ambassadors. To confer them on merchants is truly inappropriate. We entreat the throne for permission to investigate along these lines. (YS 22.505) The “stamped documents” here are precisely paper versions of the darqan jarliqs or exemption decrees that I have been discussing. While some may have had them as ortoq merchants, others would have had them in their capacity as clerics of the Christian or Muslim religions.73 Buyantu Qa’an expressed his disdain for the Huihui businessmen more elegantly: Huihui use precious jewels to sell to the state. But We have wondered, how can these things be considered jewels? Only good men can truly be considered jewels. If good men are employed then the people will be at peace—that would be the most appropriate jewel of the empire (YS 24.55). His listeners would undoubtedly have recalled sentiments like those of Li Ye 李 冶, that it was precisely good men that were hard to find among the Westerners, and conclude that the Westerners were mostly bad men coming from afar to bring the emperor mostly useless things. Yet despite this disdain for their economic basis, emperors like Buyantu Qa’an were not hostile to foreign religions in any consistent sense. Buyantu Qa’an created a new Directorate of Western Education (Huihui Guozijian 回回 國子監) and elevated the ranks and attendant salaries of the Chongfu Si and the Western astronomy and medical offices. But later in his reign and that of 73

Use of the post-road was a traditional privilege of the clergy, but one which the government periodically withdrew. In Yanyou 7, V (June, 1320), Buddhist monks were prohibited from using the post-roads and also had their darqan jarliqs recalled (YS 27.602). A few years later, in Taiding 3, V (June, 1326), this prohibition was specifically extended to Tibetan clerics who had been “harassing the people” (YS 30.669).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

309

his successor Shudibala Gege’en Qa’an, all of these promotions were reversed, while the economic interests of the Christian and Muslim clergies remained under sustained attack. Actions like razing a mosque in Shangdu to build a new hall for the Buddhist Imperial Preceptor (YS 27.611) only rubbed salt in the wounds. VII

The Yisün-Temür Reign and Its Aftermath

The brief reign of Shudibala Gege’en Qa’an (1320–1323) did not resolve the tensions within the religious policy of the Yuan government. The available data, drawn mostly from the Basic Annals, paints a picture of a government lurching from one position to another in its effort to stabilize the conflicted legacy left by its predecessors. On one hand, the provisions of the Sheep Year Statute were reiterated (YS 28.621). Officials in the Tai (censorate) raised quixotic demands to abolish the remaining Buddhist and Daoist religious bureaucracy entirely (YS 27.602). But at the same time, the court had to reiterate that monks were exempt from corvee, something that had previously never been in question (YS 27.603). Baiyun and Buddhist leaders who had been “gathering gangs” and “deceiving the people” sparked crack-downs, which at one point extended to a temporary moratorium on all Buddhist ordination certificates.74 By the time the emperor was assassinated, a major change in direction was in the offing. Unfortunately with this period, the invaluable records of the Yuan legal collections fade out, making it much more difficult to understand the reasoning behind the political events. The Tongzhi tiaoge stops its coverage in Yanyou 2 (1315) and the Yuan dianzhang stops its coverage in Yanyou 7 (1320), with an extension that goes to Zhizhi 2 (1322). The newly discovered Zhizheng tiaoge goes up to Zhizheng 4 (1344), but the sole extant copy has unfortunately lost the sections dealing with religious institutions. Information on subsequent policy changes is thus largely restricted to the telegraphic entries in the Basic Annals of the Yuan shi, as well as epigraphic material. Certain issues are quite clearly stated, but others are less explicit. Yisün-Temür’s grand councillors apparently reversed many of the policies of the Buyantu Qa’an era, but some of these reversals are known only from the reiteration of the previous policy when the Yisün-Temür regime was overthrown. What follows is thus some-

74

On the Baiyun leader Shen Mingren 沈明仁 and the following crackdown, see YS 25.571, 26.579, 591, 593 and YS 27.598. On the Buddhist monk Yuanming 圓明 see 27.613, 614. On Wang Daoming 王道明, see YS 28.621. The moratorium on ordinations is in YS 28.629.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

310

Atwood

what more speculative than the previous account, although the broad lines are clear. The plotters who assassinated Shudibala eventually invited to the throne the Jinong Yisün-Temür, descendant of Qubilai’s eldest son Chingim by a different line. As Jinong (a title derived from Chinese Jinwang 晉王), Yisün-Temür had been living on the Kherlen River in Mongolia, and guarding the sacrifices to Chinggis Khan’s shrine.75 As with him a new branch of the imperial family had ascended the throne, it could be expected that his policy would mark a new direction. The main policy-maker during his reign, and the one excoriated after his fall as the ringleader, was his administrator (neishi 内史) DawlatSha 倒剌沙.76 After Yisün-Temür’s coronation, Dawlat-Sha became the left Chingsang and his confederate Ubaidula 烏伯都剌 77 became the Pingzhang 平章. Their influence far exceeded that of the Mongol Hümekei 旭邁傑 ~ 旭 滅傑, even though Hümekei, as the right Chingsang, was their nominal superior.78 Dawlat-Sha and Ubaidula were Muslims and they became notorious for favoritism towards the Huihui and the Xiyuren “Westerners,” but their policy was not narrowly sectarian. While Muslims by dint of numbers undoubtedly received the greatest benefit from their policies, Christian clergy shared in the favor during the reign. Thus Dawlat-Sha and Ubaidula were able to finally overcome the Christian-Buddhist alliance that dated back to the Uyghurs and form a Christian-Muslim political alliance based on a common social and economic position in China. One might imagine that such an alliance may have also been justified by a common monotheism—indeed the Muslims at QaraQorum had long ago preferred to ally with Christians against the “idolators” according to William of Rubruck (xxxii.8, xxxiii.21).79 But such theological factors did not overcome socially-based communal antagonisms until the Muslim and Christian communities found themselves in a new socio-political environment in mid-Yuan China. Yisün-Temür’s reign was the high-point of the dominance of commercial wealth, in the form of ortoq merchants, over landed wealth.80 A Han official’s 75 76 77 78

79 80

Hangin Gombojab, “The Mongolian Titles Jinong and Sigeǰin,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 100, no. 3 (1980): 255–266. This Mongolian form of his name derives from Perso-Arabic Dawlat-Shāh. This Mongolian form of his name derives from Perso-Arabic ‘Ubayd-Allah. In the Yuan system, unlike other Chinese dynasties, the right was ranked above the left. See Charles O. Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985), p. 60 and §8033. Peter Jackson, The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck, 225, 234. Elizabeth Endicott-West, “Merchant Associations in Yüan China: The ‘Ortoγ,’” Asia Major, third series, 2, no. 2 (1989), 149–52.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

311

biography, after noting that Dawlat-Sha and Ubaidula “were both Westerners (Xiyu ren 西域人),” describes how “rich merchants from the West would come with a gemstone from their country called lan 瓓 to present, whose value they would estimate at scores of thousands, but sometimes they could not recoup their value.” In the winter of Taiding 3 (1326–27), Ubaidula called a meeting to, among other things, order the Shing to review the history of prices paid for such gems. The Han official is said to have burst out, ‘’Now we are all disturbed by natural disasters, but you are afraid of someone complaining that they cannot recoup their value on tribute goods! To call together the lords of the kingdom to discuss such a petty issue has definitely made us the laughing stock of the civilized world” (YS 182.4205). Dawlat-Sha encouraged such commerce by protecting merchants from prosecution. After he fell, his enemies claimed that Dawlat-Sha, “because he personally was of the same race (zhong 種),” prevented the prosecution of a Huihui Haqq-Hādi 哈哈的 who borrowed cash from the treasury and against policy went to the Ilkhanate to buy immense amounts of peals (YS 32.707). Internally, Dawlat-Sha sought to diminish reliance on Han and Southern officials and built a strong cadre of Mongol and immigrant officials. Another biography shows us how Dawlat-Sha sought out Western talent. A Tajik official named Shams 贍思 had done well in the renewed exams under Buyantu Qa’an, but refused office. Summoned to Shangdu 上都, he had an imperial audience with Yisün-Timür. “At that time, Dawlat-Sha ruled the state, and Westerners (Xiyu ren 西域人) flocked around him in great numbers. Shams alone did not go to him for an audience. Dawlat-Sha sent messengers several times to recruit him, but he made excuses about family responsibilities and went home.” (YS 190.4351) The specific policies that Dawlat-Sha implemented appear to be as follows: 1.

The dashman or Muslim clergy was restored to the usual format of exemption inscriptions. This change was not entirely unprecedented— there was one inscription from 1318 that adds Dashman to the list—but it became much more common.81

81

There are four extant inscriptions from the reign of Yisün-Temür, of which three list all four clergy. See Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §§76, 77, and D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§27, 28. By contrast, of the 28 inscriptions from the reigns of Buyantu and Gege’en qa’ans, only 1, dated to 1318, adds dashman to the list of historically exempt clergy. See Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §§58–67, 69, 72–74, and D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§13–26.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

312 2.

3.

4. 5.

6.

7.

82

Atwood

 Erke’ün and dashman were specifically exempted from all personal taxes and corvees (chaiyi 差役) (YS 29.652). Although such exemptions for clergy should not have been controversial according to Mongol practice, in light of the fiscal pressure on clerical exemptions, imposition of such duties on clergy appears to have become common. Shudibala made sure monks were still exempt; the new regime made sure the Western clergy were still exempt. It is, moreover, not unlikely that in practice Erke’ün and dashman were interpreted as meaning Christians and Muslims in general, just as it did in the Yanyou 7 decree (see YDZ xin, 2112–13, repeated in ZZTG, §142).82 The exemption of lay Huihui from corvee, cancelled in Yanyou 7 (1320), was restored, judging from its reiteration in Tianli 2, I (February, 1229) that “Households of the Huihui must do corvee just like civilians” (YS 33.728). This broad exemption of lay Westerners may well not have been directly permitted, but rather occurred through a process of extending clerical exemptions to the Western population at large.  Qadi offices, abolished in 1311, were restored, judging from their abolition again in Tianli 1, VIII (September, 1228) (YS 32.707).  Erke’ün were all exhorted by imperial proclamation to practice the fasts according to their teachings (YS 29.644). This might be seen as a potentially punitive measure, since failure to observe fasts had previously been treated as ground for laicization. But compared to an edict or decree, a proclamation (xuanyu 宣諭) would not have specified punishments. More likely this proclamation was intended to justify ahead of time the fact that in practice they would certainly be exempted from all taxes. The purchase of civilian land by Buddhist monks and Daoist priests was prohibited; violators would be punished (YS 30.681). This indicates that, since in practice it was difficult to make Buddhist monasteries and Daoist temples pay the land tax, the expedient of limiting their land holdings was adopted instead. A censor proposed that grain stored by monks and priests be taken and used for famine relief, but the government made no response (YS 30.686).

Endicott-West treats Erke’ün and Dashman here as meaning simply “Christians” and “Muslims” (Elizabeth Endicott-West, “Merchant Associations in Yüan China: The ‘Ortoγ,’” 151). In practice it does sometimes mean that and may in this case, but it is important to remember that this is, strictly speaking, a deviation from the original meaning in Middle Mongolian.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

313

In sum, it appears that the legal situation for the Western clergy reverted to that in place under the reign of Temür: complete tax exemption for all clergy without any overly strict inquiry into who was clergy and who was not, amounting in practice to tax exemption for the whole Western community and at least partial restoration of communal autonomy implemented for Muslims by qadis given semi-official status. But for the native religions, the situation was neither so tight as under Buyantu Qa’an, nor as favorable as it had been under Öljeitü Qa’an. The contrast with the treatment of Westerners was striking. With the unexpected death of Yisün-Temür, there followed a conflicted period of three rulers, until the family of Haishan Külüg Qa’an won out and Tuq-Temür Jaya’atu Qa’an ascended the throne, after his entourage had quietly dispatched his brother Qoshila Qutuqtu Qa’an. When Tuq-Temür finally secured the throne in Tianli 2 (1330), he began a thorough repudiation of the legacy of Yisün-Temür. In some ways, the ensuing laws resembled those of Ilkhanate in 1295, when rulers restored what they saw as the legitimate line and used the opportunity also to demonstrate that the native religions were back in charge and the laxity of the illegitimate rulers would be replaced with careful and active governance. In the Ilkhanate, this took the form of official conversion to Islam accompanied at first by pogroms and plunder directed first and foremost at the Buddhists, but also at Christians. In Yuan China, there was no such popular action, nor any systematic exclusion or looting of the immigrant religions, but there was a directed effort to clip their wings legally. The tone of the court at this time was menacing enough. In an imperial proclamation of Tianli 1, IX, wu/yin (October 22, 1328), Tuq-Temür warned: Recently the treacherous vassals Dawlat-Sha and Ubaidula made a secret league to pursue illicit plots and change the settled constitution of the Founders. Now that their crimes have been revealed, all those of the Huihui race (Huihuizhong ren 回回種人) who have not participated in their affairs may peacefully go about their business without fear. But on the other hand if there are any who have deluded others, then they will be brought to justice (YS 32.711). Action backed up the tough words. Dawlat-Sha and Ubaidula were both executed. Not only that, but a Christian dignitary, Ilya, the son of Ese and the head of the Chongfu Si, was also executed, albeit on separate charges (YS 40.856– 57).83 As I pointed out, the qadi offices were once again abolished and the 83

Ilya’s death is mentioned only in a bitter proclamation of Tuq-Temür’s nephew, ToghanTemür. He claims that the execution was really intended to cover up Ilya’s role, together

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

314

Atwood

Western civilians were ordered to be once again subject to corvee and taxes (YS 32.707, 33.728). The resulting legal situation is represented in the description of the Joint Courts given in Zhao Shiyan 趙世延 and Yu Ji’s 虞集 famous Jingshi dadian, reflecting the situation in Zhishun 1 (1330). As cited in Yuan shi, chapter 102 (YS 102.2620), the institutional framework cobbled together the prohibition of qadis interfering in legal affairs taken from the regulations of Zhida 4 (TZTG 29, 712), the reestablishment of Joint Courts, but for Buddhists only and with them being represented by elders, not religious bureaucrats (TZTG 29.713), and a reiteration of the Sheep Year Statute specifying that only land in clerical possession under the Song or granted by Qubilai Qa’an was exempt from the land tax (YDZ 24.958).84 The Christian clergy was not mentioned in this passage, but the description of the Chongfu Si given in Yuan shi, juan 89, from the same source mentions only its supervision of bishops (mar-qasis), teachers (reban), priests (erke’ün), and worship in the “churches of the cross” (YS 89.2273)—communal autonomy was likely obsolete for Christians as well as for Muslims. The most striking feature of the legal landscape recorded by Yu Ji and Zhao Shiyan was the addition of Classicists (ru 儒) to the list of religions exercising a comparatively low-grade, but real, autonomy: “If the monks, priests, or classicists have conflicts, the local authorities are not to investigate, but only to convene a meeting of the three communities (sanjiasuo 三家所) to investigate” (YS 102.2620). Under the original Mongol framework as codified by Qubilai, the Classicists were not really clergy, since they did not pray to Heaven, and had only weak privileges. But now China’s three teachings (sanjiao 三教) are for the first time in the Yuan dynasty given a shared privilege, one which was not extended to the clergies of the immigrant religions. But it would be wrong to conclude that religious policy had come full circle and completely lost the unique features of the Mongol Yuan settlement. At the central bureaucratic level the three organs, being the Xuanzheng Yuan, the Jixian Yuan, and the Chongfu Si, still remained. The Joint Court system still existed, albeit in weakened form, and clerical tax exemptions remained far more generous than in most Chinese dynasties. Perhaps most important, exemption decrees in a more or less unaltered format were still being issued. In the exemption decrees from the final period of the Yuan, the three or four reli-

84

with three other vassals, in excluding Toghan-Temür from power. In fact the circumstances of his death are unclear. The Zhizheng tiaoge, duanli, §232, preserves another iteration of the prohibition on Buddhist monks and Daoist priests buying civilian land.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

315

gions are proclaimed about equally.85 Such decrees played an important part in shaping grass roots perceptions of Mongol policy among interested parties. Their continuation in the old form guaranteed that Western clergy, Christian and Muslim, would continue to be seen as having a recognized and roughly equal role in the empire, up to the final flight of the Yuan court to Mongolia in 1368. VIII

Conclusions

In the story presented here, the Mongol “religious policy” emerges not as a settled policy, but as a century and a half of debate. Within the legal literature of the Yuan, the presentation of issues in terms of citations and the frequent call to “discuss this” (shangliangzhe 商量者) afford chances for different voices, individual and institutional, to be heard clearly. This debate was constituted by certain definitions, the most foundational of which was the definition of what the clergy was: persons who prayed to Heaven for blessings on the emperor. Yet even these definitions could be debated. Celibacy and fasting were often added implicitly to these definitions, although it would exclude many who would dispute their exclusion. This debate was engaged in by parties of very uneven background and influence. At the highest level, some emperors, such as Qubilai Sechen Qa’an and Ayurbarwada Buyantu Qa’an emerge as distinctive voices, speaking for themselves and reshaping the debate especially by proposing new definitions what the “settled constitution of the Founders” really was. Other high officials had probably similarly distinctive interventions in the debate—that of DawlatSha, had any of his works survived, would likely have been very individual and charismatic. Other voices are less institutional, representing interests and the conclusions of long-standing institutional sub-debate. Some of the voices draw only on the terms of the Mongol “Founders” as set up by the authoritative imperial voices. Some drew on non-Mongol texts or traditions to say, for example, that these newcomers should not be placed above “us.” Others draw on 85

Of nineteen surviving exemption decree inscriptions, ten list all four clergies (Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §§78, 81, 84, 86, 88, 89, 91, 93; D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§31, 35), eight subtract the Dashmad (Cai Meibiao, Yuandai baihua beiji lu, §§83, 85, 87, 90, and appendix §8; D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §§30, 34, 35), and one is too fragmentary to be sure (D. Tumurtogoo, G. Cecegdari, Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script, §32).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

316

Atwood

more widely shared distinctions, such as that between sincere prayers (good) and making profit or interfering in government (bad). Yet there were also other positions and voices which, while certainly active, were too contradictory to authoritative imperial interventions to be quoted explicitly. Those calling to make the clergy exempt from all taxes, or viewing the demand as reasonable that those presenting gems receive a proper return—we can see the effects of these voices, and hear distorted quotations of them, but they were not allowed to speak in their own voice in the extant legal literature. Within this debate, the clergy was simultaneously treated both as one group, and as separate groups, and these treatments were usually linked. Emperors who were strict on clergy exemptions as a whole generally also singled out one body of clergy (usually the dashmad) for invidious treatment. Those who were lenient were usually lenient with all. At the same time, this category of clergy was linked to other categories. Thus they were often treated as a subset of a more general category of specialist servants with technical skills; others included physicians, astronomers, artisans, actors, musicians, and so on. Also closely linked to that of clergy was a similarly hard to define, but very real, category which I have termed the “intermediate class.” This was a class which could be defined as people out of place: immigrants, semuren, Huihui, “Western monks,” Uyghurs, and so on. This “out of place” identity could be spun in either positive or negative ways. Negatively, they could be interpreted as persons unsatisfied with their status and pushing in where they were not wanted, as the Daoist clergy in Wenzhou charged against the Erke’üd. Positively, they were people with valuable skills who for that reason had been moved by the Mongols to be where they were needed.86 Voluntary immigration spurred by fiscal incentives such as tax exemption or guaranteed return on investment in tangsuqs (precious goods) presented to the court, was thus a continuation of the conquest process of moving persons to where they could be used by the Mongol ruling families. Such movement was thus a key imperative of rule, even though it was often stigmatized as resulting from greed. Beyond incentives, if immigrants were seen as persons of special talent, then just like the artisans and other specialists spared from massacres and distributed among the princes, they should be tax-exempt. Within this debate one can discern two broadly different modes of discourse. In one, particularly favored by strong emperors seeking to remove what they saw as corruptions, memories of the dynastic founders’ institutions were asserted, often in conjunction with respected “wisdom traditions” particularly 86

On migration and population movement in the Mongol empire, see Allsen, “Population Movements in Mongol Eurasia:” 119–51.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

317

the Classicist tradition. In the mouth of an authoritative figure such as an emperor, these assertions did not need to be backed by any specific citation of a text. The emperor, as a Mongol and a descendant of the dynastic ancestors, had a “direct line” to their intentions and many were not shy about making use of that direct line. Thus assertions of getting back to the way things were at the founding were particularly common precisely when controversial revisions in that legacy were being made. This rapid revision bears the hallmarks of an oral culture, but it is an oral culture socially placed at the pinnacle of social privilege, not at the folk or demotic level. The other mode of discourse was one of written decrees, which established specific rights and expectations. Far from being a channel for innovation, this written culture was profoundly conservative, producing darqan jarliqs or exemption decrees, for example, on a virtually unchanging template from the early years of Qubilai Qa’an to the end of the empire. Because these written words had the very names of emperors, empresses, and princes subscribed on them, they could be directly asserted even in the face of imperial pronouncements about the “settled constitution of the [dynastic] founders.” Such written words were also specific and placed in the hands of figures who were interested in continuity, not continuing intuitive recastings of the founding institutions. So when the Sheep Year Statute came down, the Erke’ün Mar-Sirgis came from Jiangnan to appeal. His appeal that the land he had purchased remain tax exempt was based on the names of Sechen Qa’an, Chingim, and the Empress found on his decree, as well as the effort he put in to build a church in Jiangnan, and the incense and candles within the church (TZTG 29.710–11). This particular appeal was fruitless but it was difficult to effectively contend with vast numbers of such specific, urgent appeals. The text of the decrees to particular persons and institutions established expectations which severely limited the ability of any central authority, whether the shing or the court, to impose more stringent general policies. In such a situation, the emperor’s recourse was to recall all these written words, thus making a silent space for his own intuitive pronouncement from on high. Yet this pronouncement would have to be written as well, and the conservatism of the scribes prevented any emperor after Qubilai from making more than incremental changes in the text of these exemption decrees. Ultimately it was this diffuse, conservative scribal tradition which preserved the essential features of the Mongol religious discourse all the way up to the final reign of Toghan-Temür Uqa’atu Qa’an.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

318

Atwood



Bibliography



Primary Sources Referred to with Abbreviations



Further Primary Sources and Translations

TZTG: Tongzhi tiaoge jiaozhu 通制條格校注, ed. Fang Linggui 方齡貴. 2001. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. YDZ: Yuan dianzhang (Dayuan shengzheng guochao dianzhang) 元典章 (大元聖政國朝 典章), ed. Chen Gaohua 陳高華, Zhang Fan 張帆, Liu Xiao 劉曉, and Dang Baohai 党寶海. 2011. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. YS: Yuan shi 元史, comp. Song Lian 宋濂. 1976. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. ZZTG: Zhizheng tiaoge, ed. Hanguoxue Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan 韓國學中央研究院. 2006. Seoul. Vol. 1, Yingyinben 影印本; vol. 2, Jiaozhu ben 校註本.

Cai Meibiao 蔡美彪. Yuandai baihua beiji lu 元代白話碑集錄 (Beijing: Academic Press, 1955). Cleaves, Francis Woodman. “The Rescript of Qubilai Prohibiting the Slaughtering of Animals by Slitting the Throat,” Journal of Turkish Studies 16 (1992): 67–89. Daobu 道布 [Dobu] and Zhaonasitu 照那斯图 [Jūnast]. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu de Huihe shi Mengguwen he Basiba zi shengzhi bei kaoshi (xuyi)” 河南登封 少林寺出土的回鹘式蒙古文和八思巴字圣旨考释 (续一),” Minzu yuwen 民族语文 (1993.6): 59–71. Daobu 道布 [Dobu] and Zhaonasitu 照那斯图 [Jūnast]. “Henan dengfeng Shaolin si chutu de Huihe shi Mengguwen he Basiba zi shengzhi bei kaoshi (xu’er) 河南登封 少林寺出土的回鹘式蒙古文和八思巴字圣旨考释 (续二),” Minzu yuwen 民族语文 (1994.1): 32–41. Hautala, Roman. “Jarlyk Chana Uzbeka Franciskancam Zolotoj Ordy 1314 goda: Latinskij tekst, Russkij perevod i kommentarii,” Zolotoordynskoe obozrenie/Golden Horde Review 3, no. 5, (2014): 31–48. Jackson, Peter. The Mission of Friar William of Rubruck: His Journey to the Court of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253–1255, David Morgan trans. and ed. (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, [1990] rpt. 2009). Juvaini, ‘Ala-ad-Din ‘Ata-Malik. The History of the World Conqueror, trans. John Andrew Boyle (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1958). [Jūzjānī], Abū-’Ūmar-i-’Uṩmān Siraj Minhāj-ud-Dīn, trans. Major H.G. Raverty. Ṭabaḳāti-Nāṣirī: A General History of the Muhammadan Dynasties of Asia, Including Hindustan; from ah 194 (810 ad) to ah 658 (1260 ad) and the Irruption of the Infidel Mughals into Islam. 1881 (rpt. Calcutta: Asiatic Society, 1995). Liu, Qi 劉祁. Guiqian zhi 歸潛志, ed. Cui Wenyin 崔文印 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

319

Nakamura Jun 中村淳; Matsukawa Takashi 松川節. “Shin hatsugen no Mō-Kan gōheki Shōrinji seishi hi 新発現の蒙漢合璧少林寺聖旨碑,” Nairiku Ajia gengo no kenkyū 内 陸アジア言語の研究 8 (1993): 1–92. Polo, Marco. The Description of the World, 2 vols., trans. A.C. Moule and Paul Pelliot (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1938). Rashid ad-Din, Successors of Genghis Khan, trans. John Andrew Boyle (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971). Tao, Zongyi 陶宗儀. Nancun chuogenglu 南村輟耕錄 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1997). Tumurtogoo, D.; Cecegdari, G. Mongolian Monuments in Uighur-Mongolian Script (XIIIXVI Centuries): Introduction, Transcription and Bibliography (Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, 2006). Tumurtogoo, D.; Cecegdari, G. Mongolian Monuments in ’Phags-pa Script: Introduction, Transliteration, Transcription and Bibliography (Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica, 2010). Wood, William A. A Collection of Tarkhan Yarliqs from the Khanate of Khiva (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1993).



Secondary Sources

Allsen, Thomas T. “Population Movements in Mongol Eurasia,” in Nomads as Agents of Cultural Change: The Mongols and Their Eurasian Predecessors, ed. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2015): 119–51. Atwood, Christopher P. “Validated by Holiness or Sovereignty: Religious Toleration as Political Theology in the Mongol World Empire of the Thirteenth Century,” International History Review 26, no. 2 (June, 2004): 237–256. Atwood, Christopher P. Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire (New York: Facts on File, 2004). Atwood, Christopher P. “Informants and Sources for the Secret History of the Mongols,” Mongolian Studies 29 (2007): 27–39. Atwood, Christopher P. “Explaining Rituals and Writing History: Tactics against the Intermediate Class,” in Representing Power in Ancient Inner Asia: Legitimacy, Transmission and the Sacred, eds. Isabelle Charleux, Gregory Delaplace, Roberte Hamayon, and Scott Pearce (Bellingham: Western Washington University, 2010): 95–129. Barth, Fredrik. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1969). Boretti, Valentina. “The Quasi-Genderless Heresy: The Dhūtaists and Master Jizhao,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 67, no. 3 (2004): 349–368. Ch’en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

320

Atwood

Cho, Wonhee. Beyond Tolerance: The Mongols’ Religious Policies in Yuan-dynasty China and Il-khanate Iran, 1200–1368. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2014. Dankoff, Robert. “Three Turkic Verse Cycles Relating to Inner Asian Warfare,” Harvard Ukrainian Studies 3/4, no. 1 (1979–89): 151–165. Dardess, John W. Confucianism and Autocracy: Professional Elites in the Founding of the Ming Dynasty (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983). Dardess, John W. Conquerors and Confucians: Aspects of Political Change in Late Yüan China (New York: Columbia University Press, 1973). Elverskog, Johan. Buddhism and Islam on the Silk Road (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010). Endicott-West, Elizabeth. “Merchant Associations in Yüan China: The ‘Ortoγ,’” Asia Major, third series, 2, no. 2 (1989): 127–154. Endicott-West, Elizabeth. “Notes on Shamans, Fortune-Tellers and Yin-Yang Practitioners and Civil Administration in Yuan China,” in The Mongol Empire and Its Legacy, eds. Reuven Amitai and David O.Morgan (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 224–39. Finke, Roger. “Demographics of Religious Participation: An Ecological Approach, 1850– 1980,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 28, no. 1 (1989): 45–58. Franke, Herbert. “Additional Remarks on the Mongolian Turfan Fragment TM 92,” The Canada-Mongolia Review/La Revue Canada-Mongolie 3, no. 1 (1977): 33–39. Hangin, Gombojab. “The Mongolian Titles Jinong and Sigeǰin,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 100, no. 3 (1980): 255–266. Haw, Stephen G. Marco Polo’s China: A Venetian in the Realm of Khubilai Khan (Abingdon: Routledge, 2006). Hucker, Charles O. A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985). Jackson, Peter. “The Mongols and the Faith of the Conquered,” in Mongols, Turks, and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, eds. Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Leiden: Brill, 2005): 245–78. Liu, Xinru. “Buddhist Institutions in the Lower Yangtze Region during the Sung Dynasty,” Bulletin of Sung and Yüan Studies 21 (1989): 31–51. Newman, John. “Islam in the Kālacakra Tantra,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 21, no. 2 (1998): 311–71. Nylan, Michael. The Five ‘Confucian’ Classics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001). Oda, Junten. “On the Uigur Colophon of the Buddhavataṃsaka-sutra in Forty-Volumes,” Bulletin of Toyohashi Junior College (1985.2): 121–127. Overmyer, Daniel L. “The White Cloud sect in Sung and Yuan China,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 42, no. 2 (1982): 615–642. Schurmann, H. F. “Mongolian Tributary Practices of the Thirteenth Century,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 19, no. 3/4 (1956): 304–389.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

the Religious Ecology of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty

321

Smith, Paul J. “Fear of Gynarchy in an Age of Chaos: Kong Qi’s Reflections on Life in South China under Mongol Rule,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 41, no. 1 (1998): 1–95. Stark, Rodney; Bainbridge, William Sims. The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival, and Cult Formation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985). Tsai, Wei-chieh. “Ethnic Riots and Violence in the Mongol Empire: A Comparative Perspective,” Mongolian Studies 33 (2011): 83–107.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

322

Zhang

Engaged but not Entangled: Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court Zhang Dewei Late Ming China saw a dynamic Buddhist movement, coined by scholars in recent years as the “late Ming Buddhist revival,” which profoundly affected the contours of East Asian Buddhism. In order to understand this significant religious phenomenon, scholars have so far focused on the relationship between the saṃgha and society,1 and paid little effort to examine events from a political perspective. Yü Chün-fang, a leading scholar of Ming Buddhism, argued that “imperial patronage in the Wan-li era, as had been the case in earlier periods, played a rather insignificant role in the internal development of Buddhism. In fact, such lavish patronage often produced negative and debilitating effects on the saṃgha.”2 She of course has good reasons to make such a claim. For example, Hanshan Deqing 憨山德清 (1546–1623) and Zibo Zhenke 紫柏真可 (1543–1603), two central Buddhist figures, both paid an extremely high price

1 For a survey of Buddhism in late Ming China, see Yü Chün-fang, “Ming Buddhism,” in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 8, The Ming dynasty, 1368–1644. Part 2, ed. Denis Twitchett and Frederick W. Mote (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 927–52. In the past thirty years, the late Ming Buddhist revival has attracted much scholarly attention. For most important studies in the field, see Yü Chün-fang, The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York: Colombia University Press, 1981); Timothy Brook, Praying for Power: Buddhism and the Formation of Gentry Society in Late-Ming China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993); and Jiang Canteng 江燦騰, Wan Ming fojiao gaige shi 晚明佛教改革史 (Guilin: Guangxi shifan daxue chubanshe, 2006). Also see Chen Yunü, Mingdai de fojiao yu shehui 明代的佛教與社會 (Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 2011); idem., “Mindai bukkyō shakai no chiiki teki kenkyū” 明代仏教社會の地域的研 究 — 嘉靖・萬曆年間 (1522–1620) を中心として. Ph.D. diss., Kyushu University, 1995; Zhang Dewei, “A Fragile Revival: Chinese Buddhism under Political Shadow, 1522–1620”. Ph.D. diss., the University of British Columbia (UBC), 2010; Shengyan 聖嚴, Mingmo fojiao yanjiu 明末佛教研究 (Taibei: Dongchu chubanshe, 1993); Hasebe Yūkei 長谷部幽蹊, Min Shin Bukkyō kyōdanshi kenkyū 明清佛敎教團史研究 (Kyoto: Dohosha Shuppan, 1993); Wu Jiang, Enlightenment in Dispute: the Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). 2 Yü, “Ming Buddhism,” 928.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_008

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

323

for their involvement with the inner court, with Deqing being exiled for eleven years and Zhenke dying behind bars.3 However, it is not hard to find some significant cases that could pose a meaningful challenge to this picture. Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612), an eminent master who occupied a paramount position in the saṃgha during the Wanli period (1573–1620), offers one such example. Fudeng was a close friend of both Deqing and Zhenke. In particular, his friendship with Deqing lasted for more than forty years, and was finally revered even “as a master” in the heart of the latter (心則師之). Fudeng forged ties with the royal house at the same time as Deqing and Zhenke did, and received much more imperial patronage than that bestowed on Deqing, let alone Zhenke. Nonetheless, in sharp contrast to the tragedies the two friends experienced, no evidence shows that Fudeng ever encountered any trouble because of his close connection with the inner court. These friends each vowed to complete a major task, but Fudeng was the only one who fulfilled it. Before his death, the emperor granted Fudeng the title, “the Genuine Son of Buddha” (zhenzheng fozi 真正佛子). So, how did this extraordinary success come about? When mentioning Fudeng in passing, Yü Chün-fang actually confused this master with Fuzheng 福徵 (1590–1665; jinshi, 1628), a major disciple of Deqing.4 This slip, sadly, reveals just how overlooked this master has been, but the result is not that surprising.5 As we shall see, although Fudeng was much revered by 3 Deqing’s biography can be found in Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368–1644, ed. Luther Carrington Goodrich and Chaoying Fang (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976), 1272– 75. For important studies on Deqing, see Jiang, Wan Ming fojiao gaige shi, 69–190; Lynn Struve, “Deqing’s Dreams: Signs in a Reinterpretation of His Autobiography,” Journal of Chinese Religions 40 (2012): 1–44; Hsu Sung-peng, A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: the Life and Thought of Han-shan Te-ch`ing (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979). For Zibo Zhenke, see Guoxiang 果祥, Zibo dashi yanjiu 紫柏大師研究 (Taibei: Dongchu chubanshe, 1987); Jonathan Christopher Cleary, “Zibo Zhenke: A Buddhist Leader in Late Ming China” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1985); Wang Qiyuan 王啟元, “Zibo dashi wanjie yu Wanli jian fojiao de shengcun kongjian” 紫柏大師晚節與萬曆間佛教的生存空間, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究 1 (2005): 28–41. 4 Fuzheng, whose secular name was Tan Zhenmo 譚貞默, became Deqing’s disciple at the age of twenty seven. But his belief in Buddhism can be traced back to the influence of his mother, a devout Buddhist who has a brief biography in Huayan jing chiyan ji 華嚴經持驗記 (in Wanzi xuzang jing 卍續藏經 [Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai]; hereafter cited as XZJ; vol. 77, no. 1534), 654c. 5 For studies on Fudeng, see Hibino Takeo 日比野丈夫, “Myōhō Fukutō no jiseki nitsuite” 妙 峰福登の事蹟について, in Tsukamoto Hakushi shōju kinen Bukkyō Shigaku ronshū 塚本博 士頌壽記念佛教史學論集 (Kyoto: Tsukamoto Hakushi shōju kinenkai, 1961), 583–95; Ho Puay-peng, “Building for Glitter and Eternity: The Works of the Late Ming Master Builder

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

324

Zhang

his contemporaries, a major misunderstanding regarding him started while he was still alive. For modern scholars, it is the striking paucity of available material, seriously disproportional to his historical weight, which has prevented us from obtaining a clear view of this master. Deqing was an extremely prolific writer who left us with a collection of fifty-four fascicles. In sharp contrast, the written texts by Fudeng we now have, when counted together, amount to fewer than two hundred characters. This is not to say that Fudeng was illiterate, like Huineng 慧能 (638–713), the famous sixth patriarch of Chan Buddhism; rather, as we shall see, his lack of interest in literary composition seems to reflect his preference for action as the way of cultivating Buddhahood. Unlike other studies whose main interest is to describe Fudeng’s activities by simply following his biographies, this paper aims to offer a comprehensive study of this master by taking into consideration several distinct but closely interrelated issues: What did Fudeng do in his life and religious career? Why did he act as such? How did he choose his way of living, which proved extraordinary successful? And how should we understand the significance of specific activities in his life and religious career? To address these questions, this paper has four sections, respectively investigating Fudeng’s life, his thought, his service to society, and his success. It begins with an examination of Fudeng’s early life and training. Two biographies by his contemporaries are heavily used,6 Miaofeng on Wutai Shan,” Orientations 27, no. 5 (1996): 67–73. Fudeng’s modern biography can be found in Goodrich and Fang, eds. Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368–1644, 1: 462–66. Also there is a brief description of his stories in James Hargett, Stairway to Heaven (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006), 170–75. For Yü’s confusion, see “Ming Buddhism,” 937. 6 One biography was written by Su Weilin 蘇惟霖 (jinshi, 1598), entitled “Yuci Zhenzheng fozi Miaofeng zushi xingshi beiji” 禦賜真正佛子妙峰祖師行實碑記, in Zhao Lin’en 趙林恩, Ming Qing shanxi beike zhiliao xuan 明清山西碑刻資料選 (Taiyuan: Shanxi renmin chubanshe, 2005), 339–41; and the other by Hanshan Deqing, entitled “Chijian Wutai shan Dahuguo shengguang si Miaofengdeng chanshi zhuan” 勅建五臺山大護國聖光寺妙峰登 禪師傳, in Hanshan laoren mengyou ji 憨山老人夢游集 (cited as Mengyou ji in this paper) (in Shinsan Dai Nihon Zoku Zōkyō 新纂大日本續藏經, ed. Giyū Nishi 西義雄, Kōshirō Tamaki 玉城康四郎, and Kōshō Kawamura 河村孝照 [Tōkyō: Kokusho Kankōkai, 1975– 1989]; 90 vols; cited as X hereafter), juan 30, X1456, p. 674, c8-p. 676, c11. Deqing’s version is much more important than Su’s. It has served as a standard biography for Fudeng and, with some modifications, is taken into Minghe 明河, Bu Xu Gaoseng zhuan 補續高僧傳 (juan 22, X 1524, p. 514, c8–p. 515, c11), and monastic gazetteers, such as the Qinliang shanzhi 清涼山志 ([Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980], 3.152–55) and E’mei shanzhi 峨嵋山志 ([Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980], 5.220–24).  Fudeng’s biography that is now included in the Baohua shan zhi 寶華山志 ([Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980], 12.475–501) deserves particular attention. This is basically the same as

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

325

with frequent references to Deqing’s other writings. Then, it proceeds to explore Fudeng’s thought as represented in textual and material resources. The third section turns from Fudeng’s spiritual life to his extensive involvement with the material world, both sacred and secular. Fudeng was well-known as one of the greatest architects in Chinese history, who participated in great numbers of large-scale projects. These projects extended into both local society and the inner court, and special attention is given here to the composition of the groups of people involved and their different agendas. The last section, based on these other discussions, aims to make sense of Fudeng’s activities from both religious and non-religious perspectives and from there to draw appropriate conclusions. This paper continuously compares Fudeng with Deqing from start to end. As it finally reveals the secret of Fudeng’s incredible success, it highlights a distinct mode of the saṃgha-state relationship. In a broad view, given Fudeng’s status within the saṃgha and beyond at the time, this study will enrich our understanding of the late-Ming Buddhist revival. Moreover, Fudeng represents a type of Chinese eminent monk who was most influential during his lifetime, but who is now mostly, if not completely, ignored. So, from fluctuations in how he was treated over the past centuries, we can learn more about the real situation of Buddhism in late imperial China in general.

the one by Deqing, but a close reading of it reveals that it is an earlier version of the received text in the Mengyou ji. To be specific, it is about 1,000 characters longer than the received edition, and includes some important parts that were later deleted or modified. In addition to the textual evidence, this conclusion can be also supported by the history of these two books. The Baohua shan zhi we now use was compiled by Liu Mingfang 劉名芳 (?–1759) and printed by Shengxin 聖性 (d.u.) sometime between 1785 and 1795. But the fact that it is based on an earlier version of 12 fascicles, compiled by Ding’an Deji 定菴德基 (1634–1700) in Kangxi 29 (1690), increases the possibility that it takes in the early version of the biography. On the other hand, the current Mengyou ji was compiled by Qian Qianyi 錢謙益 (1582–1664), who unambiguously admitted that he had made changes to the texts, deleting details he thought to be too wordy and even rewriting some sentences. For the compilation of the Mengyou ji, see Luo Shaofeng 雒少鋒, “Sishi juan Hanshan laoren mengyou quanji bianzuan xushuo” 四十 卷《憨山老人夢游全集》編纂敘說. Xuedeng 學燈 no. 28. (accessed on March 25, 2014) I will provide a note when using the Baohua edition of the biography.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

326 I

Zhang

Life: An Orphan, Earthquakes, and a Prince

The focus of this section is on Fudeng’s life as well as his training as a monk in his early years. These are the typical areas of inquiry in studies on eminent monks, and they are particularly important and essential when examining a historical figure that has never been seriously dealt with. Such an inquiry must attempt to answer a variety of questions: Why did Fudeng choose to become a monk? How was he trained, and by whom? How effective was his training? As we undertake this inquiry we will be reminded of the importance of timing, region, and the catastrophic earthquakes that contributed to Fudeng’s later prominence as a Buddhist master. Fudeng was nothing in his youth. Not unlike many other eminent Buddhist masters, not enough is known about Fudeng’s early life. He was born to a poor family in Pingyang 平陽, Shanxi, but we do not even know his surname, which could be Xu 續 or Xu 徐.7 His parents died during a famine, with no means to afford their own coffins. The orphan they left behind, then seven years old, experienced many difficulties surviving the following decade. He first tended sheep for a wealthy family and then, four years later, entered a nearby temple. Nobody cared about him, which may have been exacerbated by his extremely ugly appearance. Five years later, forced out by the unbearable mistreatment he received there, Fudeng escaped from the temple to Pucheng 蒲城, where he relied on begging for his living. Master Lang 朗公 (d. u.), an otherwise unknown Chan monk, out of compassion, gave him a place to sleep at night. Master Lang was affiliated with Wangu si 萬固寺 at Mount Zhongtiao 中條, and was then in charge of the Wenchang pavilion 文昌閣 that was built by Zhu Junshan 朱俊柵 (?–1603), the Prince of Shanyin 山陰. One day, the prince caught sight of Fudeng during a visit to the monk. It is said that Fudeng’s extraordinary potential was immediately detected by the prince, who in turn asked Master Lang to take care of him. In response, Master Lang took Fudeng as his disciple.8 Zhu Junshan’s discovery of Fudeng may not have been accidental, for this prince was a devout Buddhist. Zhu Junshan was the offspring of the Prince of Dai 代, the thirteenth son of Zhu Yuanzhang 朱元璋 (r. 1368–1398), who was 7 As for Fudeng’s surname, it was Xu 徐 according to Su Weilin but Xu 續 according to Deqing. Deqing’s record should be more reliable because he wrote an epitaph for Fudeng’s parents at Fudeng’s request in Wanli 3 (1575). 8 According to an epitaph erected at Wangu si in Jiajing 42 (1563), the monks in the temple belonged to the Linji lineage of Chan Buddhism. See Zhou Dongzhen 鄒冬珍, “Chong lidai beike yichun kan Wangu si de xinshuai fazhan” 從歷代碑刻遺存看萬固寺的興衰發展. Wenwu shijie 文物世界 5 (2005): 80.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

327

posted to Shanxi by his father as a means of stabilizing the newly-established empire.9 Zhu Junshan established a good reputation in Wanli 20 (1594): at that time there was unrest on the northwest frontier, and he presented eight poems to the court as a way to remonstrate with the emperor.10 But he spent most of his time in Shanxi, and Buddhism was a significant part of his life there. From the age of fifteen, he studied Buddhist texts diligently and cherished Chan Buddhism in particular.11 His strong interest in Buddhism can be attested by the books carved and printed under his auspices. According to a recent survey, twenty-six known titles were printed by the Prince of Dai and his offspring. Among them, nineteen are related to Buddhism, with a preference for Buddhist doctrinal texts over Chan literature.12 It was not uncommon for the princes of the Ming to sponsor the printing of books,13 but such a disproportional stress on Buddhist texts still makes the lineage of the Dai stand out. In fact, the Buddhist texts carved by the Prince of Dai are much higher in number than those produced by the Prince of Shen and the Prince of Jin, both of whom were enfeoffed in Shanxi as well. It was Zhu Junshan who carved most of the Buddhist texts among the Dai lineage.14 His support for the religion attracted some Buddhist masters around him. In addition to Master Lang, there was also Chan master Faguang 法光 (fl. 1574) from Mount Funiu 伏牛山 in Henan.15 Hanshan Deqing was another. As we shall see, their relationship was maintained for more than two decades since their first meeting in the early Wanli period. A turning point in Fudeng’s life came unexpectedly. On the morning of the twelfth day of the twelfth month of Jiajing 34 (1556/1/23), a catastrophic event, 9 10

11 12 13

14 15

For a brief overview of Ming princes, see Richard Wang, The Ming Princes and Daoism: Institutional Patronage of an Elite (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), Chap 1. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 et al., Mingshi 明史 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974), 117.3584: 山 陰王俊柵奏詩八章，寓規諷之旨。代處塞上，諸宗洊經禍亂，其言皆憂深思 遠，有中朝士大夫所不及者。 See Zhu Junshan’s preface to the Dafoding shoulengyan jing zhengmai shu 大佛頂首楞 嚴經正脈疏 (Taibei: Fotuo jiaoyu jijinghui, 2013), 6. The two Chan texts are the Chanzong Yongming ji 禪宗永明集 and the Zongjing lu 宗鏡 錄. For the advantages that local princes of the Ming enjoyed when they sponsored book printing, see Ma Huaiyun 馬懷雲, “Mingdai Henan fanwang keshu de tedian jiqi jiazhi” 明代河南藩王刻書的特點及其價值. Henan tushuguan xuekan 河南圖書館學刊, 30.6 (2010): 129–34. Chen Qinhui 陳清慧, “Mingdai fanfu keshu yanjiu” 明代藩府刻書研究 (Ph.D. Diss., Nanjing University, 2011), 163–64. For detail of the carved books, see ibid, 72–73. Mengyou ji, juan 53, X 1456, p. 834, c22–p. 835, a18.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

328

Zhang

to be known as the Jiajing earthquake (Jiajing da dizhen 嘉靖大地震), occurred in the intersecting parts of Shaanxi and Shanxi. To this day, this earthquake remains the deadliest on record, not just in China but in the world, killing approximately 830,000 people.16 More than 97 counties in the provinces of Shaanxi, Shanxi, Henan, Gansu, Hebei, Shandong, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu and Anhui were affected. An 840-kilometre-wide (520 mi) area was destroyed, and sixty percent of the population in some counties was killed. During the next three years aftershocks occurred three to five times each month.17 Contemporary records report the earthquake as follows: With regard to the people suffering the disaster, seven out of ten died in the Tong[guan] and Pu[zhou] counties, six out of ten in the Tong[zhou] and Hua[yin], five out of ten in Weinan, four out of ten in Lintong county, and three out of ten in the provincial capital. 受禍人數，潼、蒲之死者 什七，同、華之死者什六，渭南之死者什五，臨潼之死者什四，省城 之死者什三。18

In Xia county of Pingyang prefecture, the four city gates collapsed, and water surged out of the wells. The houses of officials and commoners tumbled down and crushed numerous people. The earth in the city rose about one zhang,19 and water came out from the flat ground.… In Puzhou, the palaces of the two princes, city walls, and official and civilian houses all collapsed. In addition, several places were on fire.… Numerous people were crushed to death and died in the fires. The earthquake continued for four days. 平陽府夏縣，四門陷塌，井水沸溢，官民房屋傾頹，壓死男 16

17

18

19

These 830,000 people were those whose names were known and who were reported to the court. There were more whose names were unknown or whose deaths were not reported. See Jiajing shilu 嘉靖實錄 (Rpt. Taibei: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo, 1962–68), 430.3. For this earthquake, see Xu Hong 徐泓, “Jiajing da dizhen: Zhongguo lishi shang shiwang renshu zuiduo de dezhen” 嘉靖大地震：中國歷史上死亡人數最多的地震 (accessed on March 25, 2014) A collection of original records related to this earthquake can be found in Xie Yushou 謝毓壽 and Cai Meibiao 蔡美彪, eds., Zhongguo dizhen lishi ziliao huibian 中國地震歷史資料匯編 (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe, 1985), vol. 2, 402–68. Qin Keda 秦可大,“Dizhen ji” 地震記. This paragraph is quoted from Song Lisheng 宋立 勝 et al., Shanxi shengzhi, dezhen zhi 陝西省志. 地震志 (Beijing: Dizhen chubanshe, 1989), 177. One zhang in the Ming is about 3.2 meters.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

329

婦數多。城內土長約高丈餘，平地出水。…莆州兩王宗室、城牆、官 民房屋盡行倒塌，又兼數處火起。…軍民燒壓死無數。連震四日。20

Puzhou was among the places suffering the greatest loss, with an estimated 80,000 people dying in this disaster,21 and this event essentially changed Fudeng’s life. That night, when the fatal earthquake occurred, Fudeng was sleeping and was pinned under a beam in the rubble. But three days later, when he was finally saved, he was found completely unscathed. All people present were shocked, for they did not have the least hope that he would survive. The prince survived as well, but his palaces all collapsed; more importantly, though, it appeared that the severe traumas caused by the earthquake encouraged him to further consider the impermanence of life. So, amazed by Fudeng’s mysterious escape from death, the prince urged him, “You have survived such a great disaster, which is surely unusual. Why do you not deeply consider the affair of life and death?” (子臨大難不死，此非尋常，何不痛念生死大事乎?) This was the moment that the prince decided to take responsibility for training Fudeng, which may have literally saved Fudeng’s life.22 In the following few years, this prince steered Fudeng through several crucial stages, thereby essentially shaping his religious life. As the first step, Fudeng was directed by the prince to practice meditation, although it seemed clear that they would be unable to find a master qualified to instruct him. Fudeng intended to travel in search of instruction when he turned twenty-two, but this plan was rejected by the prince, who instead arranged for him to practice meditation in Zantan si 贊嘆寺 at Mount

20

21

22

“Dizhen ji” 地震記 by an anonymous author, quoted from Yuan Tinghong 袁廷宏 et al, 1556 nian Huaxian teda dizhen 一五五六年華縣特大地震 (Beijing: Dizhen chubanshe, 2010), 176. In the 1970s, more than twenty contemporary steles recording this earthquake were discovered, among which seventeen came from Shaanxi. See 杜保仁, “Shanxi sheng dizhen beishi diaocha shouhuo” 陝西省地震碑石調查收穫, Kaogu yu wenwu 考古與 文物 4 (1980): 62–66. This earthquake was traditionally called the Huaxian earthquake 華縣地震, implying that Huaxian in Shaanxi was the center of it. Modern research, however, reveals that the center was in the Puzhou 蒲州 -Chaoyi 朝邑 -Tongguan 潼關 -Huayin 華陰 area. See Xu, “Jiajing da dizhen,” 3. For the number of the Puzhou people who died in this earthquake, see ibid, 4. According to Xu, “Jiajing da dizhen,” 3–4, the Jiajing court was then experiencing a serious economic crisis and gave only 40,000 taels of silver for relief in so vast an area. Without the help of the prince, it is hard to say if Fudeng could survive the famine following the earthquake.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

330

Zhang

Zhongtiao.23 At first, Fudeng appears to have had little idea about meditation, and only later when he received a book from a Dharma master nearby did he start practicing the contemplation of the Dharma realm (fajie guan 法界觀). The Dharma realm (Skt. dharmadhātu) is the worldview advocated by the Huayan school, which we shall discuss in detail in section two. In order to overcome drowsiness, he removed the bed and chairs from the hut in which he lived, attached thorns on its four walls, and stood upright day and night. He practiced meditation without sleeping for three years. According to another story, also recorded during this period, one day Fudeng presented a poem to the prince in hope of showing the progress he had made in meditation. The poem impressed the prince deeply, but the latter, though pleased with his progress, recognized that it would probably make Fudeng big-headed. So, instead of being praised, Fudeng received a sole cut from a court lady’s shoe. A poem accompanying the sole read: “This piece of stinking sole/ [I] am sealing and sending it to you. / This is for nothing but to slap the mouth which composed the poems.” (者片臭鞋底， 封將寄與汝。並不為別事，專 打作詩嘴) In response, Fudeng said nothing but only hung the sole around his neck after paying homage to the Buddha. After that, he seldom composed any poems. The prince was evidently pleased with Fudeng’s reaction, probably because it reflected not only his efforts for perfection (jingjin 精進) but, more importantly, his detachment from the illusory self. This story demonstrates that the prince was alert to the progress that Fudeng had made. The austerities (kuxing 苦行) shown in Fudeng’s practice would continue to appear, in various forms, in his life again and again. In addition to meditative contemplation, Fudeng was required to understand Buddhist teachings through reading sutras, thereby practicing meditation and wisdom (Skt. samādhi-prajñā) more or less in parallel. When Fudeng appeared again before the prince after finishing the three years of meditation, the prince was very pleased to see some promising marks of his great potential in Buddhism. The prince proclaimed, “Now you have known the single great matter (benfen shi 本分事) of a Chan monk, but you have not learned Buddhist teachings. You risk falling into the wrong path.” He thus directed Fudeng to Mount Mian 綿山 in Jiexiu 介休 to study the Lengyan jing 楞嚴經 (Skt. Śūraṃgama-sūtra). Fudeng went there and received the full ordination, but he spent more time practicing meditation than listening to the lecture, and

23

Zantan si 讚歎寺 was the upper temple (上寺) of Qiyan si 棲岩寺, which had three major temples.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

331

returned to Puzhou before long. Nonetheless, it is believed that he had a good command of Buddhist teachings through meditative practice.24 Fudeng was finally sent out to a wider world at age 27, when the prince arranged for him to search for further instruction. The prince warned Fudeng that a monk would be like a frog in a well if confining himself to a single monastery. Fudeng’s destination was south China, where the prince believed there were many good Buddhist masters. Before his departure, according to Deqing’s vivid record, the prince even took off the clothes he was wearing and gave them to Fudeng to keep him warm. Like many other monks, Fudeng made a pilgrimage to Putuo Island. Two events on the trip proved crucial to Fudeng’s religious life. First, when Fudeng returned from the island to Ningbo, he fell ill. One night, he was very thirsty but had nothing to drink, and finally took some water from a bathing barrel. The next day, however, he discovered that the water was very dirty. He could not help but vomit. Suddenly, he realized, “The water tasted good when I drank it, but it is very dirty when I see it. Whether it is clean or dirty depends on my mind.” (飲之甚甘，視之甚濁，淨穢由心耳) From this experience he obtained a deeper understanding of the doctrine that the three realms are fabricated, and are only a manifestation of our mind (三界虛偽，唯心所造), a representative doctrine of the Huayan jing. This appeared to be one of the critical moments in his Buddhist training. This awakening made him sweat heavily, and illness left him. Fudeng’s meeting with Hanshan Deqing during this trip was a highly memorable event and it would prove significant for both of them. Fudeng continued to travel after his bout of illness, and arrived at Bao’en si 報恩寺 in Nanjing in Longqing 1(1567), where he had the chance to listen to lectures on the Lotus sutra by Wuji Mingxing 無極明信 (1512–1574). Deqing, then aged twenty two, was serving as the deputy lecturer (fujiang 副講). One day, Deqing was surprised to observe that the toilet was unusually clean, and decided to find out who the toilet-cleaner (jingtou 淨頭) was. It had been Fudeng, who had temporarily taken the job while listening to the lectures. But when they met, what Deqing encountered was a sick monk who was confined to his bed and whose body was covered with ulcers. Asked how he was feeling, Fudeng’s answer was that he was not able to resist the temptation of Chinese steamed buns. Aware that Fudeng was indeed hungry, Deqing visited Fudeng again the following day and brought with him cakes and fruit. Fudeng swallowed the food quickly and shamelessly before Deqing, which the latter praised with clear satisfaction as 24

Zhou Jinggui 周景貴 et al., Puzhou fuzhi 蒲州府志 (the 1754 edition) (Nangjing: Fenghuang chubanshe, 2005), 14.21b.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

332

Zhang

“the real act of people cultivating the Way.” This praise is not as simple as it may appear. Eating when hungry and going to sleep when sleepy is an ideal state cherished by Chan Buddhism on the grounds that they represent the transformation from peculiarity into normality. Moreover, maintaining non-duality between the realm of enlightened (聖境) and that of unenlightened (凡境) is also what is strongly advocated by such important sutras as the Huayan jing (Skt. Avataṃsaka-sūtra) and the Yuanjue jing 圓覺經 (Sūtra of Perfect Enlightenment).25 Fudeng’s wholehearted service in the toilet and his shameless exposure of his hunger before a stranger are both meaningful in light of Chan practice. They demonstrated how earnest he was in doing things, as we have witnessed in his three years of meditative practice at Zantan si. Probably they also reflected the fact that he was devoid of selfness and was able to act naturally in accordance to conditions, an advanced state highly valued by Chan masters. At this stage, Fudeng showed interest in different ways of cultivation. According to Su Weilin 苏惟霖, Fudeng mentioned Shouxin 守信 (1514?–1584+) and the Li 李 brothers when asked by the prince for praiseworthy people he had met in the trip. Little is known about the Li brothers except that, as mentioned by Su, they were cultivating the field of merit. Master Shouxin was more influential at the time.26 Native to Shaanxi, Shouxin left home only in mid- life, after getting married. He established his reputation quickly, and received imperial gifts from the inner court. He was very strict in following the precepts, and at the same time stressed that “the Way exists in the awakening of the mind.” (道在心悟) It is said that he invited Gongqian Renjing 恭乾仁敬 (1541– 1591), who had a strong interest in philosophical contemplation, to practice meditation in isolation instead. Fudeng’s appreciation of this master, however, was because of his practice of pure land Buddhism.27

25

26

27

The Yuanjue jing was probably written in the early eighth century. It discusses a group of issues related to meditation practice, such as the meaning and origin of ignorance, sudden and gradual enlightenment, original Buddhahood, etc. This sūtra was popular in Chan Buddhism during the Song period, as evidenced by its extensive citation in Chan anthologies. For example, Zhenke had a poem in memory of this Chan master. See Zibo Zhenke, Zibo zunzhe quanji 紫柏尊者全集, juan 27, X 1452, p. 377, a19–21. We should not confuse this master with another Chan master called Shouxin. This master, surnamed Chen, was a native of Lu’an prefecture 潞安府 in Shanxi. For his biography by Zibo, see ibid. juan 22, X 1452, p. 338, c2-p. 339, a21. Fudeng was not the only person who was impressed by Master Shouxin’s practice of Pure Land Buddhism. For other evidence, see Gu Qiyuan 顧起元, Kezuo zhuiyu 客座贅語

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

333

Nonetheless, clearly Fudeng’s emphasis was on meditation. After his return from south China, once again Fudeng isolated himself on Mount Zhongtiao to practice meditation for a further three years. Nobody around was able to give him instruction in meditation. It is said, notably, that he used the Zongjing lu 宗鏡錄 (Record of the Principle that Mirrors [the Ten Thousand Dharmas]) by the tenth-century master Yongming Yanshou 永明延壽 (904–976) to verify the nature of the mind, thereby understanding even more deeply that the three realms are only a manifestation of the mind. It seems that Fudeng had finished his apprenticeship by the early Wanli period, but his close relationship with the Prince of Shanyin did not come to an end as a consequence; rather, it continued and over time took on new importance. When sending Fudeng off to south China, the prince already told Fudeng, “When [you] return, you can perform circumambulation in my place.” (他日歸來, 可當老夫行腳也) Later, when the prince built a temple at the Southern Mount, he also asked Fudeng to supervise it. All of these things indicated a recognition of Fudeng’s religious achievement, showing that he was actually taken by the prince as a family monk. Naturally, this status brought Fudeng into the social network that the prince had created and that involved elite figures in local society. This set the initial stage for Fudeng’s later career. As will be discussed below, some successes that Fudeng enjoyed in his early life had much to do with this network. Later, when Fudeng was active on the national stage, the support from the prince and his fellows continued, thereby helping to make Shanxi the base for Fudeng’s enterprises, which, as we will see, was extremely beneficial. Nonetheless, some significant changes did occur in their relationship over the course of time. Seven letters Deqing wrote to the prince, covering a period from Wanli 11 (1583) to sometime after Wanli 25 (1597), are preserved. In five of them Fudeng was mentioned together with the prince.28 In particular, shortly after Wanli 23 (1595) Deqing wrote to the prince, “Master Miao built a seamless pagoda and presented you with the blueprint of it. [I] believe that it must have been taken in your storage. When [I] come to borrow it someday, I wonder how you would draw it out.”29 (妙師造無縫塔，已呈其樣，必收檀越祕密 藏中。他日儻至借觀，不識如何拈出?) This allusion to the Seamless Pagoda was repeated in another letter and deserves more explanation.30 It refers to a story involving Chan master Huizhong 慧忠 (675–775) and Tang Daizong

28 29 30

(Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987), 9. 282: 就法堂右荼毘之時，西風方勁，青煙一 縷，逆風而西，或謂此守心往生安養之驗也。 Mengyou ji, juan 14, X 1456, p. 557, b12-p. 558, c24. Ibid, juan 14, p. 558, a1–2. Ibid, juan 14, p. 558, c19–21.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

334

Zhang

(r. 762–779). Huizhong was a major disciple of Huineng, and served as the state preceptor who was highly esteemed by three emperors. Huizhong bade farewell to Tang Daizong before his death. The latter sadly asked what he should donate after Huizhong’s death. The master hence asked for a seamless pagoda. The emperor then wanted a blueprint for the pagoda, in response to which the master, after keeping silent for a long while, asked, “Do you understand?” The answer was negative. The master then let the emperor ask his disciple after his death.31 Given that Master Huizhong was the state preceptor deeply trusted by the emperor, not only did Deqing’s allusion to the Seamless Pagoda reveal a very close relationship between Fudeng and the prince, but it strongly implied the profound respect that Fudeng, as a Buddhist master, received from the latter. II

Thought: Chan, the Huayan jing, and Deqing

Fudeng was a Buddhist master who was admired for his religious cultivation even by a figure as great as Deqing, but his thought and religious life have not yet been thoroughly researched. The biggest obstacle, of course, is the paucity of textual material available. Nonetheless, from other sources we can still find that Chan, Huayan, and austerity were principal elements in his thought and religious life. This discovery is not only important in its own right; it will help to make sense of Fudeng’s extensive involvement with the secular world, which will be discussed in section three. Although Fudeng frequently stayed in the mountains for meditation retreats, he did not totally isolate himself from society. In Longqing 6 (1572), by order of Prince of Shanyin, Fudeng went to Beijing in an attempt to bring back a copy of the Yongle Northern Buddhist canon (Yongle beizang 永樂北藏), which was granted exclusively as an imperial gift but had rarely been bestowed in the recent past. This was Fudeng’s first visit to the imperial capital, where he would spend one year before returning home. While in Beijing Fudeng lived in Longhua si 龍華寺 for some time. Whether it was deliberate or accidental, living in this temple was of great help to Fudeng, then an obscure monk mostly confined to southern Shanxi, in establishing his reputation in the most important city within the empire. Longhua si was not that great in scale, but it occupied a special position in Beijing’s Buddhist communities during the mid- and late Ming period. For one thing, it was a chief base for monks and 31

For the story of the seamless pagoda, see Yiyu Tongrun 一雨通潤, Fahua jing dakuan 法 華經大窾, juan 4, X 614, p. 769, a14–21.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

335

scholar-officials coming from the Jiangnan region. Since Fudeng was already a mature master before arriving in Beijing, he quickly caught the attention of Rui’an Guangzhen 瑞庵廣楨 (1528–1589), then the abbot of the temple, and, with a strong recommendation from the latter, gained influence among scholar-officials. Wang Daokun 汪道昆 (1525–1593; jinshi, 1547) was one such celebrity who thought highly of him.32 It was also at this time that Fudeng met Li Weizhen 李維楨 (1547–1626; jinshi, 1568); their friendship would be maintained for the following forty years, enabling Li to leave us with detailed records of several building projects, to be discussed, that Fudeng engaged in. Meanwhile, Fudeng started to expand his influence within the saṃgha by forging a large network of eminent monks.33 Ten years later, therefore, when a Dharma assembly was organized at Mount Wutai, he was able to invite as many as five hundred monks to Mount Wutai from Beijing, many of whom were established masters or would prove to be important figures in late-Ming Buddhist society. That Fudeng resumed his friendship with Deqing during this trip to Beijing is of great significance. In the eleventh month of Longqing 6, Fudeng came across Deqing in a market but was not recognized by the latter. So he had a messenger tell Deqing that a salt merchant would come to visit. Then, Deqing saw a person in brown clothing, with long hair and beard, who asked him, “Do you still remember me?” Surprised, Deqing looked at the visitor carefully and suddenly, from his eyes, recognized that he was the sick monk in Tianjie si. He then responded positively. Fudeng continued, “My appearance has changed.” (改頭換面了也) Deqing responded, “Your original appearance is still there unaltered.” (本來面目自在) After this Chan-style exchange, they both laughed. The following night, Deqing visited Fudeng at Longhua si, where they enjoyed a long talk. Their friendship was renewed as a result, and they decided to seek Buddhahood together.34 When learning of the news, Wang Daokun gladly promised to cover their travel costs. Wang esteemed both Fudeng and Deqing highly, and once warned Deqing that “nobody can be your teacher, and without Fudeng you would not even have a friend.” So, in Wanli 2 (1574) when Fudeng was about to return to Shanxi with the imperially-bestowed canon but Deqing’s pride prevented him from following Fudeng, Wang managed to persuade him to carry out their plan.35 From then on, the friendship between

32 33 34 35

Mengyou ji, juan 53, X 1456, p. 834, b12–20. Ibid, juan 29, X 1456, p. 668, c24-p. 669, a2. Ibid., juan 53, X 1456, p. 833, c20-p. 834, a8. Ibid, juan 53, p. 834, b12-c3.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

336

Zhang

Fudeng and Deqing would last throughout their lives, enabling Deqing to record with most vivid detail Fudeng’s life. From a broad perspective, these changes in the time and place of their meeting may not have been accidental: With Wanli’s succession to the throne several months before, Empress Dowager Cisheng 慈聖 (1545–1614), Wanli’s birth mother who was well known as a devout Buddhist, had started supporting Buddhism on a large scale.36 This background sets the stage for the subject of our study. During the following eight years, Fudeng spent most of his time together with Deqing at Mount Wutai. This was an ideal period of cooperation that allowed each to benefit from the other. In meditative practice, Fudeng was clearly on a higher level than Deqing and thus gave him directions time and time again. Deqing began to practice Chan meditation in the winter of Jiajing 44 (1565). Surprisingly, not unlike Fudeng, he found no companions and no masters for instruction, although he was then in Nanjing, a long-established Buddhist center.37 After that, he did make progress but his achievement was still limited. So, on the way back to Shanxi from Beijing, at Deqing’s request, Fudeng explained the meaning of “turning around the Dharma wheel in a single particle of dust.”38 According to the Lengyan jing, it is possible to “show the realm of the Precious King at the tip of a very fine hair, and turn the dharma wheel in a single particle of dust.” (於一毫端現寶王剎，坐微塵裡轉大法輪)39 This reveals the highest state of [Chan] Buddhism, in which one may see eternity in a moment and the entire world in one flower. Deqing was not able to understand it and felt frustrated. Later, the two friends took up residence in Longmen 龍門 of Northern Wutai and, once inquired how to deal with the noise caused by the gales that blew from time to time, Fudeng responded, “Objects (jing 境) are created by the mind rather than coming from outside. The ancient [master] says, ‘If you hear the sound of water for thirty years but 36

37

38 39

As a devout Buddhist, Cisheng was likely the most generous and influential patron of Buddhism in the entire Ming dynasty. For her biography, see Mingshi, 114.3534–3536; Goodrich & Fang, eds., Dictionary of Ming Biography, 856–59. For current studies on her, see Susan Naquin, Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400–1900 (Berkeley: California University Press, 2000), 156–161; Chen, Mingdai de fojiao yu shehui, 96–146. I devoted Chapter three of my UBC dissertation to this woman. For Deqing’s practice of meditation during his early life, see Mengyou ji, juan 53, X 1456, p. 832, c8–23: 初不知用心之訣，甚苦之。…江南從來不知禪，而開創禪道，自 雲谷大師始。少年僧之習禪者，獨予一人。 Baohua shan zhi 12. 485. Shoulengyan jing 首楞嚴經, juan 4, T 945, p. 121, a6–7: 於一毛端現寶王剎，坐微塵裏 轉大法輪。

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

337

do not let it move the faculty of thought (意根), you will realize the perfect understanding of the ear (耳根圓通) of Bodhisattva Avalokiteśvara.” (境自心 生，非從外來。古人云：三十年聞水聲，不轉意根，當證觀音耳根圓通)

The ancient master here is also a reference to the Lengyan jing.40 After that, Deqing sat on a bridge over a brook. At first the sound he heard was clear, and then, one day, he found that whether or not he heard the sound depended on whether he thought of it. Finally, he suddenly forgot himself, and the sounds all disappeared. Since then, all sounds became silent, no longer being able to bother him.41 Fudeng had a strong interest in Huayan thought, especially its typical idea of perfect interpenetration without hindrance (圓融), and it was in this respect that he might have been affected by Deqing in one way or another. The Huayan jing pervaded Fudeng’s religious life. When Fudeng isolated himself in mountains for meditation for the first time, he contemplated nothing but the dharma realm proposed by the sutra. Later he practiced meditation in Mount Zhongtiao and, after three years, achieved awakening and realized that “all phenomena are nothing but the creation of the mind.” Over the course of these years, what he used to verify his mind was the Zongjing lu complied by Yongming Yanshou. Yanshou did not identify himself with a particular Chan house of his day, but he has been esteemed by modern scholars as the third patriarch of the Fayan lineage 法眼宗 which, among all branches of Chan Buddhism, most emphasizes Buddhist doctrine, especially those of the Huayan jing.42 Around Wanli 6, it was the Huayan jing that Fudeng chose to copy in his own blood.43 In Wanli 14 when he built a monastery at Mount Luya 廬芽, he named it Huayan si 華嚴 40

41 42

43

Fudeng’s familiarity with the Lengyan jing may not be by accident. Although some modern scholars claim that the Lengyan jing is an apocryphal text actually written in Tang China, but in Ming and Qing China this scripture was highly praised and enjoyed great popularity. Currently, dozens of works by Ming authors studying the Lengyan jing are still extant. Fudeng personally supported the carving and printing of the Dafoding shoulengyan jing zhengmai shu. See Zhenjian, Dafoding shoulengyan jing zhengmai shu, p.1213. Mengyou ji, juan 55, X 1456, p. 853, a6–11. The Zongjing lu was compiled by Yongming Yanshou in Jianlong 2 (961). For our purposes, it is important to know that the Zongjing lu asserts that Chan is identical to the teachings embedded in the canonical texts and that the teachings serve as precedents legitimizing Chan. James Benn has a reflection on Yanshou’s image shaped by modern scholars. See his Burning for the Buddha: Self-Immolation in Chinese Buddhism (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2007), chap. 4, esp. p.109. For an extensive study on Yanshou, see Albert Welter,Yongming Yanshou's Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu: A Special Transmission within the Scriptures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). For the practice of copying Buddhist sutras in one’s own blood in Chinese Buddhism, see John Kieschnick, “Blood Writing in Chinese Buddhism.” Journal of the International Asso-

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

338

Zhang

寺. In Wanli 34 (1606) he expanded Xiantong si 顯通寺 at Mount Wutai, and

the blueprint of his project was a story told in the Huayan jing regarding the nine assemblies held in seven places (qichu jiuhui 七處九會).44 In the following year, at his invitation, ten masters expounded the Huayan jing in the monastery in the way described in the sutra.45 Wanfo cave 萬佛洞 (ten-thousand Buddha cave), located about 50 kilometers southwest of the seat of Lingwu 靈武 county, may best represent the strong influence that the Huayan jing placed on Fudeng. Fudeng started to excavate the stone cave in Wanli 19 (1591) after passing by a high cliff as flat as a palm, and completed the project four years later. The cave, a 12-meter cube, was made on the model of stone cave-temples that appeared in sixth-century China, and had doors, windows, and a painted ceiling (zaojing 藻井) among its components. Outside the cave, a couplet carved on the two sides of the main gate reads, “Perfect and full, the wisdom ocean embraces myriad things without neglecting even the least” (智海圓充合萬象而不遺纖芥); “Correct and extensive, the true emptiness manifests numberless things in existence without obscuring even the slightest.” (真空方廣現森羅而不隱微毫) Obviously, this couplet was inspired by the Huayan jing. Inside the cave, more than ten thousand small Buddhist statues, each about 20 cm high, were embedded in the ceiling and the four walls. Two murals at the base of two of the walls depict Pure Lands and hells. Also there are two poems that Fudeng composed after the project was completed. They represent Fudeng’s longest pieces of writing that are still extant and are the only surviving examples of his calligraphy. The first, on the south wall, says, The stone terrace has been created by the nature since [the sky] rose up and [the earth] was opened up (i.e. the universe came into being), and [it is] the Dharma body completely mixed with the sky and the earth without distinction. The marvelous marks [of the Buddha] are full in green mountains, and sacred light is hidden deeply in red cliffs. With apt workers and miraculous fingers, countless merciful [Buddha] images are chiseled out.

44 45

ciation of Buddhist Studies 23, no. 2 (2000): 177–94. Given that the Huayan jing is a very long sutra, it is questionable if Fudeng copied the entire sutra this time. According to the eighty-fascicle Huayan jing, the Buddha expounded the thirty-nine chapters (pin 品) of it in nine assemblies held in seven places. Mengyou ji, juan 30, X 1456, p. 676, a12–14.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

339

Once learning that the curl of white hairs is present everywhere,46 [you will know that] nowhere in the universe is not unlike this. 岩龕天設自升辟，天壤渾然一法體。妙相圓充碧障間，靈光深隱丹崖 裡。施能工，運奇指，鑿出慈容無數已。識得白毫處處彰，乾坤何 所不如此 ?

The other, on the north wall, read as follows: By nature, it is void and interpenetrating without parallel; perfect, full, and universal, it pervades the field of odor. Flying dust and tiered mountains contain the lotus-store world, and sentient beings and molded forms [i.e. things] display the Dharma body. The sound of Wonderful Head (i.e. Mañjuśrī) is much louder than that of brook water, and marks of thusness are seen on rocks in bluish clouds. The ocean of Vairocana’s nature is vast and without boundaries. Why would those who have the eyes (to see through the ultimate meaning of all things) bother to use mouths and tongues? 本自虛融絕等倫，圓充圓遍徹香塵。飛埃列障含華藏，秉識陶形顯法 身。妙首音聳溪澗水, 真如相覩碧雲嶙。毗盧性海渾無際，具眼何 勞動口舌 ?

The arrangement of the cave is clearly dominated by ideas closely associated with the Huayan jing, with the Buddha fields of ten directions in the lotusstore world (華藏世界) as its major subject.47 In particular, the ideas about the dharma realm disclose the ultimate ideal that Fudeng pursued through his life and, to be discussed below, that provided the religious foundation for Fudeng’s intensive engagement in the secular world. The lotus-store world is actually used to represent the dharma-realm of the one reality (一真法界), where the inherent nature of things and their phenomenal marks interpenetrate (性相 相融). In Huayan philosophy, there are four Dharma-realms of reality: that of phenomena (事法界), that of principle (理法界), that of non-obstruction between principle and phenomena (理事無礙法界), and that of non-obstruc46

47

Baihao refers to the curl between Śākyamuni’s eyebrows, from which he sent out a ray of light that revealed all worlds. It is one of the thirty-two auspicious marks (相) of a great personage. According to Chapter 8 of the Huayan jing, the world was created through the vows and practices of Vairocana Buddha and rests on a great lotus-flower.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

340

Zhang

tion between phenomena (事事無礙法界). The realm of phenomena is the view of ordinary people wherein phenomena exist as individual entities. In the dharma-realm of principle, all things in the universe are perceived as true thusness. In the third realm, no obstruction exists between principle and phenomenon. The fourth realm is most profound, in which no obstruction exists, even among individual phenomena.48 Accordingly, people will experience three levels when practicing the contemplation of the Dharma realm. The first is contemplation of emptiness in nature, the second of no obstruction between the principle and the phenomena, and the third of universal inclusion, in which one is all and all is one. To realize these states, the most effective, if not the only, way is to cultivate the mind, transforming the ordinary mind into the mind of the Buddha, and only after that can a secular world become a Buddha realm. So, the Huayan jing states, “If one wants to fully understand all Buddhas in the past, present, and future, he should contemplate the nature of the Dharma realm: all things are created by the mind alone.” (若人欲了知，三 世一切佛，應觀法界性，一切唯心造)49 Although Fudeng had started the contemplation of the Dharma realm even before their meeting, he might have been influenced by Deqing’s extensive expertise in Buddhist doctrines. In particular, Deqing admired Chengguan 澄觀 (737–838 or 738–839), honored as the fourth patriarch of the Huayan school, and this preference seems to have had a direct influence on Fudeng. Chengguan was well-known for his devotion to expounding the Huayan jing, but in his early years he widely studied under Chan masters, Northern and Southern Chan alike. As a result, his thought is characterized by the unity of Chan and doctrinal teachings, which would profoundly influence the direction of Chinese Buddhism after the mid-Tang period. Chengguan placed emphasis on the mind, stating that “what embraces the myriad things is the mind, and the mind, once merged with the myriad things, is the four Dharma-realms.” (總該萬有，即是一心；心融萬有，便成四種法界)50 How closely Fudeng was related to Chengguan, at least in Deqing’s eyes, can be suggested from a dream Deqing had in Wanli 6 (1578) while he was copying the Huayan jing in his own blood. In the dream, one night, Deqing entered the Jinggang grotto 48

49 50

For more discussion of the four Dharma realms, see Thomas F. Cleary, Entry into the Inconceivable: An Introduction to Hua-yen Buddhism (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1983), 24–42. Dafangguanfo huayan jing 大方廣佛華嚴經, juan 19, T 279, p. 102, a29-b1. For a study of Chengguan, see Imre Hamar, A religious leader in the Tang: Chengguan’s biography. Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies, 2002.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

341

金剛窟, finding that it was extraordinarily spacious and magnificent. In the

center of the main hall was one bed, on which Master Chengguan slept on one side, with Fudeng attending on the left. Deqing rushed in, paid homage to the master, and then stood on the right listening to him expounding the Huayan jing. Over time, Deqing claimed that he entered the state of perfect interpenetration of the Dharma realm, in which no obstruction existed between subject and object. For our purposes, the presence of Fudeng in this dream was meaningful: in a graphic way, it shows that Fudeng had already dengtang rushi 登堂 入室 (ascending the hall and entering the chamber) in mastering Chengguan’s teachings.51 This was high recognition of Fudeng’s achievement in Buddhism. Meanwhile, it reflected the close relationship between Chengguan, Fudeng, and Deqing. Despite his heavy reliance on the Huayan jing, Fudeng was a Chan master and stressed the efficaciousness of meditation in transforming thoughts and actions. Chan masters all emphasize the importance of working on the mind directly, but they differ from each other in their views about how to realize the original mind and what to do after that. Judging from the stages Fudeng experienced in his meditative practice, the way he adopted seems to be “sudden awakening followed by gradual cultivation” (xianwu houxiu 先悟後修). That is to say, one needs to have a sudden awakening in order to practice; yet if no practice follows, the full benefits of the awakening will never be realized. Given that Chengguan had vigorously preached this method, Fudeng’s choice in this respect may not be coincidental.52 In fact, this was also the way preferred by Deqing, who stated: As for “sudden awakening followed by gradual cultivation,” it means that one has attained a complete awakening but still has some habitual tendencies that have not been purified at once. Thus, for everything on the phenomenal level, [he] exerts the power of contemplation by virtue of the principle he has mastered, and verifies the [state of the] mind case by case. Once he blends with [the six defiled] fields even a fraction, [to the same extent] he has realized the dharma body; once he wipes off illusory 51

52

Tang 堂 means a guest room while shi 室 a bedroom, which is more intimate in degree to the master. This idiom means that a disciple has mastered the core content of his master’s teachings. For Chengguan’s adoption of this method, Peter N. Gregory, “Sudden Enlightenment Followed by Gradual cultivation: Tsung-mi’s Analysis of Mind,” in Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese Thought, ed. Peter N. Gregory (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1987): 279–321.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

342

Zhang

ideas even a fraction, and [to the same extent] he has manifested his original wisdom. This is all dependent on careful and continuous efforts that are made in the phenomenal world, and [the results] would thus be more reliable. 所言頓悟漸修者，乃先悟已徹，但有習氣，未能頓淨，就於 一切境緣上，以所悟之理，起觀照之力，歷境驗心。融得一分境界， 證得一分法身; 消得一分妄想，顯得一分本智。是又全在綿密工夫， 於境界上做出，更為得力。 53

Obviously, the emphasis of this approach is on the efficaciousness of meditation. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that Fudeng also used such Buddhist texts as the Zongjing lu to verify his progress in meditation. In addition to the rhetoric that Chan and doctrinal Buddhism are identical, which can be traced back to Guifeng Zongmi 圭峰宗密 (780–841) and Yongming Yanshou, this reliance on Buddhist texts might also be because of actual needs caused by the lack of qualified Chan masters for instruction during the mid- and early late Ming period. There were precedents for mediation practices being revived from texts when a lineage of masters in a certain tradition was no longer available.54 In the same vein, Deqing warned that “[One] cannot obtain the correct view without verifying it with Buddha’s teachings.” (不向教上印證，不得正知見)55 Fudeng maintained diligence in Buddhist practice, as suggested by Deqing’s report that he did not even touch his bed for forty years, and his efforts seem to have left clear marks on his personality. For example, one night in Wanli 15 (1587), he and Zhenke read a story told by Fayan 法演 (1025?–1104), a renowned Chan monk of the Linji lineage: A thief had only one son. Before his death, the father wanted to test if his son was able to survive alone without his assistance. One night, the father brought the son to a big house, where they broke in, and, after the son entered a trunk to steal clothes, locked him in and left. In order to escape, the son had to try many tricks. When he finally returned home, his father ignored his anger and only asked how he had escaped. After learning of his experience, the father nodded, pronouncing that his son was able to live on thieving and would survive without him.56 After reading this story, Fudeng laughed out loud, with his hands clutching his belly and tears running down 53 54

55 56

Mengyou ji, juan 2, X 1456, p. 469, b8-c3. It is notable that Yungu Fahui 雲谷法會 (1500–1579), Deqing’s master, also greatly benefited from the Zongjing lu when understanding the notion that all phenomena are nothing but the manifestation of mind. See Mengyou ji, juan 30, X 1456, p. 673, b16–17. Ibid., juan 46, X 1456, p. 776, c7–8. This story can be found in Suzuki Daisetz Teitaro 鈴木大佐, Essays in Zen Buddhism (first series) (London: Luzac and Co., 1927), 296–97.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

343

his face. Zhenke was surprised. Fudeng explained that his laughter was mixed with pain. When pressed, he further explained that “I feel pain because only after forgetting the natural feelings between father and son are they able to become thieves.”(痛他父子情忘, 始做得賊) Fayan told the story as an illustration of Chan’s transmission of the teachings, while Zhenke recorded Fudeng’s reaction to show the latter’s insight into the truth.57 But what is most appealing in this story is the way in which Fudeng laughed—it was simple, direct, and wholehearted. Fudeng was then forty-seven years old and already ranked among the most influential monks in the country, but nothing had changed since he had eaten eagerly before Deqing. Fudeng did not pretend, and managed to avoid setting himself apart from other people. These things may reflect as much his personality as the achievement of his religious cultivation, and would be helpful in enhancing his accessibility and charisma.58 Interestingly, more than ten years later, Deqing wrote to Fudeng, reporting that he was experiencing a similar change, which he described as becoming “a real ordinary man.” (真正俗人) He did not forget to admit that this transformation was due to the inspiration he drew from Fudeng. So, from these portraits of Deqing we can find what Fudeng himself looked like. III

Service: Architect, Local Society, and the Inner Court

Beginning in Wanli 9 (1581) when Fudeng was forty-one years old, there was a drastic shift in his life. Before that year, as examined above, he spent much time practicing meditation in isolation in mountains; after that, most strikingly, we will find that Fudeng was very active in the world, both sacred and secular. In particular, he proved to be among the best architects in Chinese history,59 and the major projects he designed and completed are still among the greatest even by modern standards. But a basic question arises: why did this radical change happen? This is the key to making sense of Fudeng’s activities in the second half of his life. This section examines these projects, which 57 58

59

Zhenke, Zibo zunzhe quanji, juan 22, X 1452, p. 334, c1–13. This impression seems to be confirmed by Su Weilin who, judging from the poems he wrote, met Fudeng frequently before the death of the latter. See Zhao Lin’en 趙林恩, ed., Wutai shan shige zongji 五臺山詩歌總集 (Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe, 2002), 360: 相逢只說平常話，及到無言見肺肝。 For the history of the engineering of bridge-building in China, see Joseph Needham et al., Civil Engineering and Nautics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971), part 3 of vol. 4, Physics and Physical Technology, 145–210; Tang Huancheng 唐寰澄, Zhonguo gudai qiaoliang 中國古代橋梁 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1957).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

344

Zhang

extended into local societies and the inner court and took various forms. At the center of them we find a key word: service. Fudeng engaged in a variety of major construction projects, especially bridges and monastery buildings, throughout his life. In his early years, he already built a stone road of three hundred li to Mount Wutai, with bridges across the rivers along the way.60 In Wanli 17 (1589), at the request of Li Zhen 李楨 (?–1613; jinshi, 1571), then the Grand Coordinator in Huguang, he spent two years constructing a bridge across the Wei 渭 river in Shaanxi. Sometime between Wanli 21 to 30 (1593–1602), he was invited by Wei Yunzhen 魏允貞 (1542–1606; jinshi, 1557), then the Grand Coordinator of Shanxi, to build a bridge over the Hutuo river 滹沱河 in Guo 崞 county (today’s Yuanping).61 In the final years of his life, Fudeng built a bridge that spanned ten li in Taiyuan, the provincial capital of Shanxi, but had not finished it before his death. In fact, there were even more cases. Deqing summarized his achievements as follows: “At the start he obtained assistance from minor princes, and finally he had both the emperor and the Holy Mother (i.e. Cisheng) as dānapati (patrons). Whatever he intended to build, the almsgiving for the Buddha-truth would surge up immediately after [he] caught the idea. Wherever [his] feet stepped, the place would naturally become a precious abode (i.e. temple).” (始以小王助 道, 終至聖天子聖母諸王為檀越。凡所營建, 法施應念雲湧; 投足所至, 遂成 寶坊) Two points stand out here: Fudeng was able to garner enormous

resources with ease, and his patrons came from across the full spectrum of society. But why was Fudeng invited to run these projects, and how could he carry them through? To answer these questions, let us examine three other projects, with special attention to the social composition of his patronage network and the nature of the projects. Starting in Wanli 19 (1591), in response to an invitation, Fudeng spent three years in charge of the reconstruction of Wangu si, the monastery where he had spent five years as a novice monk. Wangu si was a famous monastery, originally founded in 522, that had experienced ups and downs. Starting in the early Ming, it rose to be the biggest Chan monastery in south Shanxi as a result of its amalgamation of five nearby temples under imperial orders. The Jiajing earthquake destroyed this monastery, causing its central hall and the relic pagoda—its landmark building—to collapse.

60 61

Mengyou ji, juan 30, p. 676, a14–15. Guo country was a strategic area since ancient times. Geographically, it was a plain with mountain ranges along the east and west sides, and was cut through by the Hutuo River from north to south.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

345

A close examination of the project reveals a complex social network that provided tremendous support to the monastery and was at work behind the scenes of the project. The Wang 王 and the Zhang 張 families in Puzhou, the people who extended the invitation to Fudeng, deserve particular attention. At the time, these two lineages were enjoying privileges both as high-ranking officials and as successful merchants. This success had a direct relationship with the wealth amassed there. During the Ming, south Shanxi produced some merchant families that were among the wealthiest in the country, and they would not be replaced by merchants from the central Shanxi until the Qing dynasty.62 These families first made their fortune from the very lucrative salt trade, and then invested it in education. As a consequence, Pucheng saw an unusually high success-rate for its sons in the civil service examinations. High-ranking officials were produced in some families for generations, the most renowned of which were the Wang, the Yang 楊, and the Zhang families.63 In Fudeng’s time, two figures from these families reached the highest levels of the political hierarchy. One was Wang Chonggu 王崇古 (1515–1588; Jinshi, 1541), who was first the Supreme Commander (zhongdu 總督) in charge of the Shanxi—Xuanhua 宣化—Datong 大同 area, and then became the Minster of War in Wanli 5 (1577).64 The other was Zhang Siwei 張四維 (1525–1586; jinshi, 1553), who served as the senior Grand Secretary starting in Wanli 10.65 Zhang was the son of Wang’s sister. Unsurprisingly, their status at court in turn helped their families to earn still more money by controlling the source of salt. Contemporary people pointed out that, “The salt of Siwei’s father came from the Changlu (salt-bed), thereby amassing millions in wealth. Chonggu’s salt came from the Hedong [salt-beds]. Together they controlled the profits from both [salt-beds].” (四維父鹽長蘆，累資數十百萬; 崇古鹽在河東，相互控制二方利)66 The salt62 63 64

65

66

For studies on Shanxi merchants, see Zhang Zhengming 張正明, Jinshang yu jinyin wenhua 晉商與經營文化. Taiyuan: Shanxi guji chubanshe, 1995. Zhou, Puzhou fuzhi, 24.85. For Wang Chonggu, see Mingshi 222. 5838–44; for Zhang Siwei, see Mingshi 220, 5769–71. It is worth noting that Zhang Siwei had a good relationship with the Earl of Wuqing, Li Wei 武清伯李偉, Cisheng’s father, as well as Feng Bao 馮保 (?–1583), the most powerful eunuch in the early Wanli period. See Mingshi, 219.5770. Liu Jiansheng 劉建生 and Li Yu 李宇, “Jin Hui shang zidi keju jiaoyu Chengdu bijiao fenxi: yi Puzhou, Taiyuan yu Huizhou jinshi shu weili” 晉徽商子弟科舉教育程度比較 分析—以蒲州、太原與徽州進士數為例. Jinzhong xueyuan xuebao 晉中學院學報 27, no. 2 (2010): 33–36, 92. Wang Shizhen 王世貞, Jiajing yilai neige shoufu zhuan 嘉靖以來內閣首輔傳. This citation is quoted from Gu Min 古敏, Zhongguo di yi shangdao 中囯第一商道 (Beijing: Jincheng chubanshe, 2004), 246.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

346

Zhang

beds involved were the two most important salt-producing sites in Ming China. One Censor thus launched an attack against the two families on the grounds that the merchants were in collusion with officials to make money at the cost of the state.67 The support of these families for Wangu si can be traced back to an even earlier period. Three years after the Jiajing earthquake, their names already appeared as patrons who sponsored its rebuilding. Around Wanli 13 (1585), they attempted to rebuild the pagoda, a project which seems to have ceased later due to Wang’s and Zhang’s deaths. In addition to the two great ministers, in the list of the patrons we can see two local princes, including Shanyin, two Prefects, other officials, and the local gentry. In other words, a complex network linked the monastery with elites in the areas, including princes, officials, and members of powerful lineages. As a family monk to the Prince of Shanyin, Fudeng was by no means unfamiliar with these people. In his early life, Fudeng had already exchanged poems with members of the two families.68 When he visited Beijing in pursuit of the Buddhist canon, his final success was partly due to Wang Chonggu, who introduced him to the eunuch in charge of the canon.69 In this sense, therefore, in the rebuilding project, Fudeng was working with support of a large network consisting of powerful and wealthy figures. With their financial and political support, the project progressed well, and, when it was finally finished ten years later, Wangu si enjoyed the most successful period in its history.70 Notably, it was on the same scale, if not even greater, that Fudeng engaged in non-Buddhist projects. In the same year that he rebuilt Wangu si, he also began to build the Dragon Bridge 龍橋 in Sanyuan 三原, Shaanxi. This bridge, 110-meters long, 11-meters wide, and 25-meters high, is still extant after experiencing major recorded floods in Wanli 44 (1617), Kangxi 1 (1662), and 1932. 67

68

69 70

Mingshi, 219.5769. In a memorial submitted by Censor Gao Yongchun 郜永春 (1532–1609; jinshi, 1562), it is said that “[the management of] the Hedong salt has been destroyed because people in power act against the law and great merchants monopolize the profits.”(河東鹽法之壞由勢要橫行，大商專利) The powerful figures refer to Zhang Siwei and Wang Chonggu, and great merchants are Zhang’s father and Wang’s younger brother. Li Ronghe 李榮河 et al. Yongji xianzhi 永濟縣誌 (the 1886 edition) (Rpt. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan chubanshe, 2002), 15.17a, says that in his early years Fudeng exchanged poems with members of the Wang and the Zhang families. The collection was printed, but it no longer survives. See Fudeng’s biography in the Baohua shanzhi, 12.485. Zhou, “Chong lidai beike yichun kan Wangu si de xinshuai fazhan”, 80. According to the chart on page 82, nine epigraphs were erected in the years from Wanli 23 (1595) to 28 (1600), six of which were related to Fudeng in one way or the other.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

347

Fudeng’s engagement in this project was at the request of Gao Jinxiao 高進 孝 (jinshi, 1589), then the magistrate, and Wen Chun 溫純 (1539–1607; jin-

shi, 1565),71 a Shanyuan native who was then the Minister of Works. The seat of Sanyuan County was divided by the Qing river 清河, which was wide and deep.72 Two cities were thus built on the two banks, with the southern one mainly occupied by various shops and workshops and the northern by government offices and commoner households. To reduce the inconvenience caused by the river, wooden bridges had been built since the Song dynasty, but they were too susceptible to damage from the water. After taking up the office of magistrate, Gao Jinxiao sought a permanent solution to the problem by building a stone bridge. He first followed Wen Chun’s suggestion of rebuilding the northern city, and then proposed building the bridge in hope of protecting the dwellers from possible attack from the north. However, it was estimated that this project would cost at least thirty thousand taels of silver,73 a figure that would have been unaffordable for a county. Gao was criticized for being too ambitious and unpractical, and the plan was derided as “filling up the Mengjin 孟津 ferry with a cup of earth.” In spite of the criticism, Gao obtained full support from Wen Chun, who first donated one thousand taels of silver and then wrote one essay to solicit additional money for the construction. In Wanli 19 (1591), the project started. As the construction progressed, Gao was dismissed from office because of rumors that he was wasting government funds. Fortunately for the locals, the project was continued by the succeeding three magistrates of the county and was finally brought to an end twelve years later in Wanli 31 (1603). In memory of Wen and Gao, two shrines dedicated to them were built at the two ends of the bridge. Later, as news came that Gao would assume a new post in Qingyang 慶陽 (today’s Qingyang in Gansu), hundreds people rushed from Sanyuan to Xi’an, where Gao would pass by, to welcome him back. Upon his arrival, on the Dragon Bridge, Gao found more than ten thousand people eagerly waiting to meet him. He insisted upon the dismantling of the shrine built for him, but the request was immediately denied by the locals, who in turn insisted that “the statue can be destroyed only if you think the bridge can be destroyed as well.” 71

72 73

The Dragon Bridge does not appear in the two biographies of Fudeng. But judging from the time, location, and people involved, it was very likely the Zeasi Bridge 澤阿寺橋 that is mentioned by Su Weilin. If so, the project also involved Wang Chonggu, a figure who, as we shall discuss below, played an important role in Fudeng’s life. The Qing River was also called Qingyu river 清峪河. When Jiao Yunlong 焦雲龍 and He Ruilin 賀瑞麟, Sanyuan xian xinzhi 三原縣新志 (Taibei: Chengwen chubanshe, 1968), 2.89, cite Li Weizhen’s essay, it says that the cost was fifty to seventy thousands taels of silver (五、七萬金).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

348

Zhang

The esteem that the locals held for the magistrate reflects the importance of the bridge, which cannot be fully appreciated without reference to the position of Sanyuan in the economic life of the region. From the mid- Ming dynasty, Sanyuan rose to be a significant nexus on the economic map of not only Shaanxi but of all of northwest China. “Merchants converged from the four directions, and conducted trade from morning till night.” (集四方商賈重貨， 昏曉貿易)74 Among other goods, salt, tea, horses, and silk were particularly important, and cloth coming from Jiangnan was redistributed from here to the whole of northwest China. The status of the city, in turn, had much to do with the role of Shaanxi as the western frontier safeguarding the empire. To support the armies stationed in Shaanxi, estimated more than two hundred thousand in number, the Ming court designed a special policy called kaizhong 開中. According to it, anybody transferring a certain amount of grain to armies there would be given a government license (yanyin 鹽引), which allowed them to purchase so-called Huai salt (淮鹽) in Jiangsu, and then sell it elsewhere.75 Salt remained the most important avenue of income throughout imperial China, taking up one-third to one-half of the annual revenue of the empire since the Tang period (618–907). Trade associated with salt was hence always monopolized by the government, and the Ming was not an exception. The enforcement of the kaizhong policy, however, offered an unprecedented opportunity for merchants to get in on the action. Consequently, it is recorded that “wealthy families in the ‘Three Jin’ (i.e. Shanxi), each having millions of shi of grain, stored them in granaries. When the policy was carried out, they all went for [the licenses] as if flocking to market.” (三晉富家，藏粟數百萬石，皆窯而封 之；及開，市者紛至，如趕集然)76 Shaanxi merchants, when compared to their Shanxi counterparts, were no less active. In fact, they even had particular advantages in competition. For one thing, Shaanxi was closer to the frontiers, which reduced transportation costs. Moreover, agriculture had been welldeveloped in Shaanxi by then, and counties in the eastern part of the province were particularly famous for producing grain in great quantities. Taking advantage of the policy, therefore, Shaanxi generated quite a few very powerful salt merchants, with the majority living in eastern Shaanxi.77 Sanyuan was such a 74 75 76 77

Ma Li 馬理, “Chongxiu hebei xincheng ji” 重修河北新城記, in Sanyuan xianzhi 三原縣 誌, ed. Zhang Xiangwei 張象魏 (the 1766 edition), 20.23–24. For the kaizhong policy, see Mingshi, 80.1935. Xie Zhaozhe 謝肇淛, Wu zazu 五雜俎 (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 2001), 4.71. For Shaanxi merchants in the Ming dynasty, see Fu Yiling 傅衣淩, Ming Qing shidai shangren ji shangye zhiben 明清時代商人及商業資本 (Beijing: Renming chubanshe, 1956), 161–75.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

349

county in eastern Shaanxi. A contemporary account describing its prosperity asserts: “It has fertile fields of thousands of square li, and has produced numerous merchants who have amassed massive wealth through the salt trade.… It is a major city in the ‘Three Qin’ (i.e. central Shaanxi plain).” (沃野千里，多鹽筴 高貲賈人。…蓋三秦大都會也)78 Seen in this larger perspective, the importance of the Dragon Bridge was much beyond helping local residents cross the river. What was divided by the Qing River was not only the city but, more importantly, social and economic life both in the city itself and in the greater region. Building a stone bridge would greatly facilitate the development of the commercial economy. So, it comes as no surprise to see that Gao Jinxiao’s appeal for donations received an enthusiastic response from officials and locals, two of whom donated two hundred taels of silver each. Qiao Yinfu 喬因阜 (fl. 1609), a contemporary writer, sees the significance of this bridge in larger geographic and economic terms, stating that “it links the Basu region in the west and Luyan, Gan[zhou], and Liang[zhou] in the north. The carriages and horses cross [the river as safely and easily] as passing by a pillow and a mat. It is also the case with local carriers who, with things [on their backs] and baskets in [their hands], walk on the road or go to market.” (西連巴蜀，北走鄜延、甘、涼。往來之輿馬，及若鄰 近之負擔提攜之出於塗，趨於市，皆從枕席上過矣)79 The importance of this bridge was also attested by the formation of a particular market. With the reunion of the two parts of the city and connection of the city with other regions, the bridge itself quickly became a focus for local socio-economic life. Consequently, a commercial market exactly located on the bridge came into being; a square ci 尺 of retail space went for one hundred taels of silver. A painting, still extant, depicts scenes of when the bridge was completed, and presents in vivid and realistic detail how lively and flourishing the bridge-market was in its early stage during the Wanli period. In the painting, small shops and workshops were lined up on both sides of the bridge, as well as along the road from its two ends to the main gates of the two separate cities. A Bustling crowd is shown, some people driving carriages, some riding horses, some carrying sedan chairs, some watching the scenes, some simply walking, and others

78

79

Li Weizhen 李維楨, “Sanyuan xian Longqiao ji” 三原縣龍橋記. This paragraph is quoted from Yang Guozhen 楊國楨 et al., Mingshi xinbian 明史新編 (Taibei: Yunlong chuban, 2002), 378. Qiao Yinfu 喬因阜, “Sanyuan xian Qinghe qiaoji” 三原縣清河橋記. These sentences are quoted from Li Gang 李剛, Ming Qing shiqi Shanxi shangpin jingji yu shichang wangluo 明清時期陝西商品經濟與市場網路 (Xi’an: Shanxi renmin chubanshe, 2006), 420.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

350

Zhang

bargaining in front of shops.80 From Its beginnings, this market continued for centuries during the Ming-Qing period, and was revived even after it was destroyed by fire.81 The role that Fudeng played in the project was not well-documented, but we can still detect how crucial it was based on some fragmentary materials. One account tells that it was Fudeng who designed and coordinated the project. Besides, very likely Fudeng played an additional role within the project. Wen Chun had a poem celebrating the completion of the bridge, in which he noted, “Previously, the eminent monk Fudeng, while striving to build the Wanfo pagoda, completed this bridge by soliciting donations. [People], far and near, all rely on it.” (先是，以髙僧福登力建萬佛塔，募縁致畢此工，逺近頼 之)82 The Wanfo pagoda may refer to the “Ten thousand Buddhas” cave discussed above. This note testifies that not only did Fudeng design the bridge, but he also financially supported it by collecting donations. This point seems to have been further substantiated by the fact that a monk was singled out as a fundraiser in the account mentioned above. Not only did Fudeng assist on projects aimed to benefit ordinary people, but he also took charge of projects that had clear military significance. From the fifth month of Wanli 27 to the tenth month of the following year, Fudeng constructed one bridge called Guanghui 廣惠 across the Yang River 洋河 in Xuanhua 宣化. This time, Fudeng was invited by military officials in charge of the frontier areas in Shanxi and Shaanxi. The Yang River, about 1,000 meters wide, was very hard to cross. When it flooded in the Spring, many people and animals drowned. There was a local saying: “Once one steps in the Yang River, one is left in the jaws of death. The water is piercing cold, and people shiver with cold and fear. Should one step on the moving sands, there is not the least chance of survival.”83 As Xuanhua became a crucial site in defense against Mongolian cavalry during the Ming, the ability to guarantee that Ming forces could cross the river in a safe, quick, and reliable way became a problem with additional military significance. A wooden bridge was built in the Longqing period but, due to soft sands in the riverbed and eddies in the river, it needed frequent repair. 80 81 82 83

The drawing, called “Longqiao jungong tu” 龍橋落成工竣圖, is still preserved in the National Palace Museum 國立故宮博物院 in Taibei. Jiao and He, Sanyuan xian xinzhi, 2.89. Wen Chun 溫純, Wen Gongyi ji 溫恭毅集, in Wenyuange yingyin Siku quanshu 文淵閣 影印四庫全書 (Taibei: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1983), 22. 22. For the local saying, see Miao Yuquan 苗玉泉 and Li Zhizhi 李智志, “Xuanhua Yanghe daqiao shihua” 宣化洋河大橋史話. Zhangjiakou wanbao 張家口晚報, December 6, 2013.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

351

In his military actions, Wang Xiangqian 王象乾 (1546–1630; jinshi, 1562), then the Grand Coordinator (xunfu 巡撫) of Xuan Prefecture 宣府, was repeatedly reminded of the frailty of the situation. On one occasion he himself was even stranded in the middle of the river. Wang was thus determined to build a stone bridge, but many people believed that the project was too difficult to be completed. Fortunately, “it happened that Master Fudeng, who observed the precepts strictly, came from General Dong at the Lingwu pass. [He] said, ‘[Whether or not] you engage in a significant matter should be [decided by] your heart, and [the appearance of] an opportunity is not accidental. Just do it if you want to build the bridge, and don’t act like common people.’” (會妙上人 福登，有戒行，從甯武董將軍所來，曰：大事在心，勝緣非偶。欲橋而 橋，勿與俗同)84 “General Dong” named here should refer to Dong Yikui 董一 奎 (?–1595+), then the Regional Commander (zongbing 總兵) of Ningwu, who, along with his brother Dong Yiyuan 董一元 (?–1599+), then the Regional

Commander in Liaodong, would later be listed as contributors to the project.85 Wang Xiangqian decided to entrust Fudeng with the task of building the bridge, and gave him full support. A huge amount of human and material resources were thus mobilized very quickly. According to one record, “[It required] three hundred thousand laborers, seven hundred thousand soldiers, one hundred thousand trees, and three hundred thousand zhang of stone. [It cost] eleven thousand taels of silver, among which two-tenths came from the government while eight-tenths was donated by common people.” (匠之工三十 萬，卒之工七十萬，樁之株十萬，石之丈三萬。金之兩萬有一千，常平子 錢十之二，士民捐助十之八)86 Given that the river was wide and the sand

deep, before designing the bridge, Fudeng personally jumped into the river so as to obtain first-hand data. Records show that this project involved high-ranking officials, particularly military officials, local officials, and local gentry. They dredged silt from the river bed, dug deeply, and finally built firm stone foundations for the bridge. By the tenth month of Wanli 28 (1600), only seventeen months after the start of the project, with incredible speed, a stone arched bridge was completed. It was a beautiful bridge with twenty-three spans, with

84

85

86

Guo Zhenyu 郭正域, “Yanghe jian Guanghui qiao beiji” 洋河建廣惠橋碑記, in Xuanhua xian xinzhi 宣化縣新志, ed. Chen Jizeng 陳繼曾 and Guo Weicheng 郭維城 (Taibei: Chenwen shuju, 1968), 16.45a. Dong Yikui succeeded to the post of his father Dong Yang 董暘 (d. u.), a general who died in a battle against the Mongol army. The Dong brothers served in different strategic areas of North China, including Shanxi and Shaanxi. For the Dong family, see Li Lifeng 李利鋒, “Dong Yiyuan jiashi” 董一元家史. (accessed on March 25, 2014) Guo, “Yanghe jian Guanghui qiao beiji,” 16.45b.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

352

Zhang

all of its stonework knitted tightly with iron chains. The bridge was still there by Kangxi 19 (1680), and was abandoned only after that because, as the frontier moved northwards, it lost strategic importance. So far the cases we have examined were all in Shanxi and Shaanxi but, like other eminent monks at the time including Deqing and Zhenke, Fudeng did not circumvent Beijing, the imperial capital, and the inner court in particular. In fact, Fudeng was arguably the Buddhist master who did the most on the behalf of the court throughout the Ming. Compared to his activities in local society, Fudeng’s services to the inner court were more oriented towards religion rather than being aimed at solving certain practical difficulties. It was on the same occasion as Deqing that Fudeng first forged links with the imperial house. From Wanli 2 to Wanli 10, Fudeng spent much time with Deqing at Mount Wutai. Starting in Wanli 6 (1578), they each started copying the Huayan jing in blood drawn from their bodies, and planned to hold a Nondiscriminating Dharma Assembly to expound the sutra. In preparation for the assembly, Fudeng invited five hundred eminent monks from Beijing and collected sufficient money and provisions within one year, demonstrating his extraordinary capability to mobilize human and material resources, with which we are now familiar. When everything was ready for the Dharma assembly, it happened that a Buddhist service was commissioned at the same mountain by the inner court to pray for the birth of the imperial heir. Deqing proposed that these two events be incorporated, but Fudeng allegedly objected to the plan. Finally, matters unfolded in the winter of Wanli 9 (1581) as Deqing had suggested. This incorporation has since taken the credit for the birth of Zhu Changluo 朱常洛, Wanli’s first son and the future Taichang emperor (r. 1620), but as I have argued elsewhere, this was not the truth.87 Since this beginning, Fudeng maintained ties by continually serving the royal house, especially Cisheng, in diverse ways throughout his life. Fudeng and Deqing said goodbye to each other after the Wutai assembly, and would never meet again. Fudeng went to Mount Luya, about one hundred kilometers west of Mount Wutai, but still in Shanxi, while Deqing went to Mount Lao 嶗 87

For the roles Fudeng and Deqing played respectively in the Dharma assembly and the involvement of the Dharma assembly in court strife, see Zhang Dewei, “Challenging the Reigning Emperor for Success: Hanshan Deqing 憨山德清 (1546–1623) and Late Ming Court Politics,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 134, no. 2 (2014): 263–85. It is worth noting that Deqing’s insistence on the incorporation of the ceremonies was a strategy aimed to secure imperial support to restore Bao’en si in Nanjing, a project he had vowed to fulfill before leaving for Beijing. For the vow, see the Jiajing 45 entry of the Hanshan dashi nianpu shuzhu 憨山大師年譜疏註, in the Beijing tushuguan cang zhenben nianpu congkan 北京圖書館藏珍本年譜叢刊 (Beijing: Beijing chubanshe, 1990), 1.631.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

353

山, in Shandong. Two years later, Fudeng visited Beijing in response to Cisheng’s

summon, an invitation which Deqing deliberately shunned. In the following few years, at Cisheng’s orders, Fudeng left his footprints all over the country, including Henan, Shanxi, Sichuan, and Yunnan, to feed monks, to renovate and construct temples, and to distribute copies of the Buddhist canon. Later, he took charge of more construction projects on behalf of members of the imperial House. For example, he built Ciyou yuanming si 慈佑圓明寺 (the Mother-blessing Perfectly Luminous Monastery) in Fuping 阜平, which was sponsored by Cisheng. The monastery had halls of seven layers, one magnificent Amitâbha statue, and several qing of land. In 1608, at the request of Zhu Minchun 朱敏淳 (?–1610), the Prince of Jin 晉, Fudeng took charge of the rebuilding of Yongzuo si 永祚寺 in Taiyuan, a project co-sponsored by Cisheng. IV

Success: the “Genuine Buddhist,” Politics, and the saṃgha

Buddhist master or architect: which one was Fudeng’s real identity? What relationship existed among these projects in which Fudeng was so engaged? What did they mean to the spiritual cultivation of Fudeng as a monk and to the development of the saṃgha to which he belonged? This section explores these questions, with the intention of making sense of seemingly contradictory elements in Fudeng’s life, and finally presents a distinct mode of interaction between saṃgha and state, as represented by Fudeng but opposed to that of Deqing and Zhenke. An obvious line of inquiry is to connect Fudeng’s activism, especially his engagement in monastery- and bridge-construction in local societies, with well-established Buddhist traditions. From very early on, notions of merit appeared in mainstream Buddhist scriptures,88 and building bridges was seen by Buddhists as work that could bring merit to those involved. For example, the Foshuo zhude futian jing 佛說諸德福田經 (Scripture of the Field of Blessings and Merit), translated into Chinese at the end of the third century, states: The Buddha announced to Indra, “There are seven types of great donations that are termed ‘fields of blessings,’ and those who enact them obtain blessings and are reborn in Brahama Heaven. What are these seven? The first is to construct stupas, monastic quarters, halls, and 88

For scriptural authority for the merit that accrues from bridge building, see John Kieschnick, The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), 200–202.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

354

Zhang

buildings. The second is to provide gardens, orchards, pools, woods, and cool places. The third is to donate medicine and treat the infirm. The fourth is to maintain boats to help the people cross rivers. The fifth is to establish bridges so that the ill and the weak can cross rivers. The sixth is to dig wells close to roads so that the thirsty may drink. And the seventh is to make latrines and places of convenience. Through these seven acts one obtains the blessings required for [rebirth in] Brahama Heaven.” 佛 告天帝：復有七法廣施，名曰福田，行者得福，即生梵天。何謂為 七？一者、興立佛圖、僧房、堂閣；二者、園果、浴池、樹木清涼； 三者、常施醫藥，療救眾病；四者、作牢堅船，濟度人民；五者、安 設橋梁，過度羸弱；六者、近道作井，渴乏得飲；七者、造作圊廁， 施便利處。是為七事得梵天福。 89

Over time, the idea that merit could be gained through the construction of bridges and monasteries became well-entrenched in the public’s psyche. Fudeng’s involvement took place within this context. It confirms two functions that monks played when engaging in bridge construction: as technical specialists who had mastered the knowledge of how to build large, durable bridges, and as specialists in the art of fundraising.90 More importantly, the notion of merit helps to make sense of Fudeng’s activities, especially those projects sponsored by Cisheng. In this sense, it is not unfounded that “people view Master Miao[feng] as a good man cultivating the field of merit.” (人以妙峰師 為福田善知識)

The counter-arguments made by the two authors of Fudeng’s biographies to this common view of him, however, direct us to a deeper level. Su Weilin points out that viewing Fudeng as a master of cultivating the field of merit fails to recognize his superior awakening. Deqing echoes this claim by lamenting that 89

90

Foshuo zhude futian jing 佛說諸德福田經, juan 1, T 683, p. 777, b2–8. The translation of this paragraph is quoted from Kieschnick, The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture, 201. For more studies on the field of merit in Chinese Buddhism, see Tokiwa Daijō 常盤大定, Zoku Shina bukkyō no kenkyū 續支那仏教の研究 (Tōkyō: Shunjūsha Shōhakukan, 1941), 473–98; Michihata Ryōshū 道端良秀, Chūgoku Bukkyō to shakai fukushi jigyō 中國仏敎と社會福祉事業 (Kyōto: Hōzōkan, 1967), 6–9; Liu Shufen 劉淑芬, “Cibei xishe: zhonggu shiqi fojiaotu de shehui fuli shiye” 慈悲喜捨 : 中古時期佛教徒的 社會福利事業, Beixian wenhua 北縣文化 40 (1994): 17–20. Kieschnick, The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture, 204. Fudeng was of course not the earliest monk to devote himself to projects of this kind. For example, Huang Minzhi 黃敏枝, Songdai fojiao shehui jingjishi lunji 宋代佛教社會經濟史論 (Taibei: Xuesheng shuju, 1989), 135, has collected records for the construction of close to a hundred bridges in which monks were involved during the Song dynasty in Fujian alone.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

355

“the way is obscured by cause and effect (Skt. nidāna). Therefore, there are many [people with] physical eyes (Skt. māṃsacakṣus) in the world who take the Master as the field of merit and neglect his esoteric achievements.” (以因緣 障道, 世多肉眼, 槩以福田視師, 而不知其密造) Evidently, they agreed that Fudeng was not just a talented fund-raiser but an advanced Chan master. Based on this identification of Fudeng, Deqing further linked Fudeng’s activism with his religious cultivation, pointing out that “Master Miaofeng, my friend, entered the way in his early years from the contemplation of the Dharma realm. Thus, what he did throughout his life was all out of the mind that cultivated the practices of [the Bodhisattva] Puxian (Skt. Samantabhadra).” ( 予友妙峰師，早從法界觀入道，故生平建立，皆從普賢行願法界心中流 出)91 The dharma realm has been discussed in Section Two. As for the practices of Puxian, the Huayan jing says the following: If a Bodhisattva accords with living beings, then he accords with and makes offerings to all Buddhas. If he can honor and serve living beings then he honors and serves the Buddha’s. If he makes living beings happy, he is making all Buddhas happy. Why is this? It is because all Buddhas take the mind of great compassion as their substance. Because of living beings, they develop great compassion. From great compassion the Bodhi mind is born; and because of the Bodhi mind, they accomplish supreme, perfect awakening (Buddhahood).…Therefore, Bodhi belongs to living beings. Without living beings, no Bodhisattva could achieve supreme, perfect awakening. Even when the realms of empty space are exhausted, the realms of living beings are exhausted, the karmas of living beings are exhausted, and when the afflictions of living beings are exhausted, I will still accord endlessly, continuously, in thought after thought, without cease. My body, speech, and mind never weary of these deeds. 菩薩若能 隨順眾生，則為隨順供養諸佛。若於眾生尊重承事，則為尊重承事如 來。若令眾生生歡喜者，則令一切如來歡喜。何以故？諸佛如來以大 悲心而為體故。因於眾生，而起大悲：因於大悲，生菩提心；因菩提 心，成等正覺。…是故菩提屬於眾生。若無眾生，一切菩薩終不能成 無上正覺。…虛空界盡，眾生界盡，眾生業盡，眾生煩惱盡，我此隨 順無有窮盡。念念相續，無有間斷，身語意業，無有疲厭。 92 91 92

Mengyou ji, juan 32, X 1456, p. 698, c17–18. Dafangguangfo Huayan jing, juan 40, T 293, p. 846, a10–28. The translation is quoted from S. P. Talukdar, Genesis of Indigenous Chakma Buddhists and their Pulverization Worldwide (Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, 2010), 171–72.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

356

Zhang

Fundamentally Buddhism believes that there is no ultimate existence in the self, dharmas, or other beings. Nonetheless, in Mahāyāna Buddhism, as encapsulated in the paragraph above, the Bodhisattva path is always directed towards beings and the secular world, thereby establishing the strongest link between this earthly realm and the spiritual one. In this sense, Hirakawa Akira is correct in concluding that Mahāyāna is a kind of Buddhism interested in both selfbenefit and altruism, and a kind of Buddhism where a continuity exists between laity and monks.93 It is this spirit of service to others, which Mahāyāna Buddhism emphasizes, that may better explain Fudeng’s unusual devotion to civilian and military projects. Fudeng never pocketed any of the funds for himself, and this wellattested fact helped him to win respect from both the religious and laity. Deqing noted that “beyond his robe he owned nothing, and he never had any followers. He carried out all of his construction works with singleness of mind, and never so much as touched financial contributions.” Another author also confirmed: Fudeng traveled around the country, and completed numerous projects. [He] spent millions in cash [on them], but did not take even one single coin [for himself]. People respected and trusted him, making donations like clouds massing together. Having known about him very well, the emperor and the Holy mother (i.e. Cisheng) allowed him to use the money they donated at his discretion, without checking how it was spent. 福登周行天下，所繕造工非一，費數百萬，錙銖無染，人尊信之，檀 施雲集。上與母后稔知其人，捐金恣所使，不問出入。94

Other evidence demonstrated Fudeng’s selfless devotion to serving others as well. For example, when he was assigned by the court almost simultaneously the abbots of no fewer than three leading monasteries, located at Mount E’mei, Baohua, and Wutai, respectively, he immediately arranged for other capable monks to take up the posts. Towards the end of his life, he dismissed all his disciples and turned more than ten temples he had constructed into public monasteries. These acts were highly praised by Deqing, who took them as indi-

93 94

Akira Hirakawa 平川彰, Hirakawa Akira chosakushū 平川彰著作集 (Tōkyō: Shunjusha, 1997), vol. 5, 3–5. Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲, Ming wenhai 明文海 (Beijing: Zhonghu shuju, 1987), 373.3852.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

357

cators of his modesty, self-restriction, and an expression of the more generalized Buddhist ideal of being detached from the deluded notion of a self.95 In particular, Fudeng was acting in response to the desperate needs caused by the catastrophic Jiajing earthquake and the increasingly-felt military pressure coming from the northwest frontier. With the huge number of bridges, buildings, and roads destroyed by the earthquake and its subsequent aftershocks, there was an urgent need for the rebuilding of infrastructure. Shanyuan and Puzhou, for example, were both places affected in this way after the earthquake. Another reason, similarly important but long ignored, was closely related to the Yellow River, the most important river crossing throughout the entirety of North China. When flowing from north to south between Shanxi and Shaanxi, the Yellow River cut through a vast plain without mountains confining it. After the earthquake the course of the river frequently changed, swinging in an area of one hundred kilometers from west to east. Since this river received water from all of other rivers in the vast region, its frequent and massive shifts greatly disturbed the courses of other rivers, the Wei River included, and thus caused more flooding. To further compound the situation, recent studies reveal that the earthquake elevated the riverbed of the Yellow River at Tongguan 潼關, the only pass through which the river made its way downstream. The outflow of water was checked and flowed backward as a consequence, resulting in frequent flooding which would last four hundred years, and thus created a still greater need for bridges and river management.96 Fudeng’s projects, all located at critical sites, were obviously intended to meet these needs. After examining the motivations behind Fudeng’s engagement in the construction projects, a more important but also more complicated problem surfaces: how could he have been so successful in carrying out those projects? There is no single and simple answer to the question. An examination of an example may give us some clues.

95 96

E’mei shanzhi, 5.222–23: 唯知爲法爲人，了無自私之念。非乘願再來，振興法道 者，能如是乎？ Wang Yuanlin 王元林, “Mingdai Huanghe xiao beiganliou hedao bianqian” 明代黃河小 北幹流河道變遷, Zhongguo lishi dili luncong 中國歷史地理論叢, no. 3 (1999): 188– 200; Wang Rudiao 王汝雕, “Shanxi Huaxian da dizhen yinfa shijie hanjian de dezhen cisheng zaihailian: cong Shanxi Ronghe Puzhou Shanxi Chaoyi sancheng de gongcheng changdi tiaojian tanqi” 陜西華縣大地震引發世界罕見的地震次生災害鏈：從山 西榮河蒲州陜西朝邑三城的工程場地條件談起, Shanxi dizhen 山西地震 2 (2006): 4–6, 18.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

358

Zhang

Fudeng vowed to build three bronze halls on the way back to Beijing from Yunnan in Wanli 19, but he did not carry out the plan until Wanli 27 (1599).97 The first hall was exclusively sponsored by Zhu Liyao 朱理堯 (d. u.), the Prince of Shen 瀋 in Shanxi,98 who donated ten thousand taels of silver. In casting the hall, Fudeng obtained support from Wang Xiangqian who, then as the Grand Coordinator of Sichuan, supervised military operations in the SichuanHuguang-Guizhou region. He quickly finished the casting in Jinzhou 荊州, Hubei. This was a gold-mixed (shenjin 滲金) hall, eight meters high and more than four meters wide and deep, with a statue of Puxian inside surrounded by ten thousand smaller Buddhas. After the hall was erected at Mount E’mei, the patrons for the second hall appeared immediately. This time it was Wang Xiangqian and a eunuch called Qiu Chenyun 邱嵊雲 (d. u.) who backed the enterprise. Without delay, this hall was finished in Jinzhou as well. In Wanli 33 (1605), instead of going to the designated destination on Putuo Island,99 the hall was placed in Longchang si 隆昌寺 at Mount Baohua 寶華. Cisheng and Wanli each bestowed a copy of the Buddhist canon to the monastery. Soon after, the third hall was finished in Wanli 34 (1606). This hall, “dedicated to Mañjuśrī, the visual culmination of Xiantong Monastery and the only of Fudeng’s three bronze halls to survive, is an exquisite integration of architecture, sculpture, and pictorial art.”100 Notably, this time the cost of casting was defrayed by the donations of ten thousand households scattered all over the empire.101 When Fudeng sent the hall to Xiantong si 顯通寺 at Mount Wutai in 97

98

99

100

101

From the Yuan through the Qing, ten bronze halls were recorded as having been built in China, six of which are still extant. See Zhang Jianwei 張劍葳, “Zhongguo gudai tongdian yanjiu” 中國古代銅殿研究 (M.A. thesis, Dongnan university, 2007), 11–12. The Prince of Shen was also a major patron of Buddhism. Like the Prince of Shanyin, he was particularly interested in Huayan doctrines, and became the disciple of Master Langmu Benzhi 朗目本智 (1555–1606). See Huang Xianian 黃夏年, “Fushan Huayan si Langmu Benzhi chanshi pingzhuan” 浮山華嚴寺朗目本智禪師評傳, Jianghuai luntan 江淮論壇 2 (2008): 165–66. The bronze hall was shipped down along the Yangtze River. When it arrived in Nanjing, the gift was declined by the monks from Putuo for fear that it would attract Japanese pirates. Marsha Weidner has a detailed description of the bronze hall. See her “Imperial Engagements with Buddhist Art and Architecture: Ming Variations on an Old Theme”, in Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism, ed. Marsha Weidner (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2001), 130–32. According to texts engraved inside the bronze hall and epigraphs erected in the monastery, the money spent on the casting of the third bronze hall came from the donations of people in the two capitals of Beijing and Nanjing, as well as from more than nine provinces, including Huguang, Shandong, Henan, Fujian, Jiangxi, Shaanxi, Shanxi,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

359

Wanli 36 (1608), both Wanli and Cisheng came to support it, with the former bestowing on him three hundred taels of silver and 150,000 cash (qian 錢), and the latter several times those amounts.102 Fudeng was the only one who fulfilled his vow when compared with Deqing and Zhenke. From his early years Deqing had already taken a vow to restore Bao’en si, the estimated expense of which was 100,000 taels of silver. Zhenke planned to finish compiling and carving the Jiaxing canon within ten years, which required about 30,000 taels.103 The expenses of Fudeng’s project seemed to be lower than those of Deqing’s but higher than those of Zhenke’s. In contrast to his success, however, both Deqing and Zhenke failed in following through with their plans. What can we learn from the ease with which Fudeng fulfilled his vow? Clearly there was a large-scale convergence of resources, coming from the inner court and from local society. But how could events have unfolded as they did? This question concerns the secret of Fudeng’s success, but it cannot be easily answered without further exploration of the forces involved. Let us first examine local society, from which Fudeng drew most of his resources. When studying bridge-building in imperial China, Kieschnick rightly pointed out that “in China, the bridge was a symbol of charity, compassion, and good governance, ideas that weighed heavily on the minds of various figures on the local scene, including monks, officials, and prominent members of the community, when the need for a bridge became apparent.”104 He also suggested that “Buddhist notions of the merit of bridge-building contributed to a curious figuration involving monks, local officials, and local inhabitants…

102 103

104

and Sichuan. See Lian Kaowen 廉考文, “Mingdai gaoseng, jianzhu jia Miaofeng” 明代 高僧、建築家妙峰. Wutaishan yanjiu 五臺山研究 4 (1986), 24; Cui Zhengsen 崔正 森, “Wutai shan yu Putuo shan fojiao wenhua jiaoliu” 五臺山與普陀山佛教文化交流. Wutaishan yanjiu 五臺山研究 3 (1998): 44–45. Mengyou ji, 30.675c20- 676a14. Qin Peiheng 秦佩珩 claims that 1,000,000 jin of bronze was used for this hall and its accompanying Buddhaimages (並共用一百萬斤). See his “Qingliang tongdian zakao” 清涼銅殿雜考. Zhenzhou daxue xuebao 3(1984), 79. On the basis of this figure, Chen, Mingdai de fojiao yu shehui, 239, estimates that it cost 140,000 taels of silver. However, Cui, “Wutai shan yu Putuo shan fojiao wenhua jiaoliu,” 45, says that only 100,000 jin of bronze, one-tenth of the figure offered by Qin, was used. In that case, the expense was about 14,000 taels of silver, which seems to be more acceptable given the cost of the first two bronze halls. In her paper, Chen understood the term jin 金 in the material she quoted as gold and then converted it into silver. This seems not unlikely. In Ming China, when used to as a unit, the term jin usually referred to silver while the term qian 錢 applied to paper cash. Kieschnick, The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture, 203.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

360

Zhang

that consistently provided the impetus for constructing countless bridges from at least as early as the sixth century to as late as the twentieth.”105 But he did not raise and address a similar significant question: How did the completion of a project affect the relationship of the monks involved in particular, and Buddhism in general, with other people? In Fudeng’s case, the majority of the people who invited him to supervise projects were well-known not as devout Buddhists but rather as capable officials with good reputations.106 With the smooth completion of their cooperation, some positive changes did happen. Let us look back to two cases we have examined above. Wen Chun could not help but express in a poem how pleased he was to see the completion of the Dragon Bridge,107 from which we can detect a subtle and meaningful contrast with his former attitudes. Previously in the essay he wrote to appeal for donations, Wen Chun compared Buddhism and Confucianism in terms of their philanthropic philosophy and practices. He first pointed out that building roads and bridges was a long valued tradition in China, and then he continued: “For people seeking blessings from the realm that is unseen and unknown, even if they build Buddhist temples and Daoist abbeys, what [benefits] are they expecting [to gain]? They will have good rewards only if they contribute to a road, which is visible and present, no matter how little the wealth they donate and how little the effort they make.” (彼希福利於冥冥無知之域，即建 梵宇、築玄宮，亦奚以為？惟積功行於昭昭見在之途，雖蠲一財，出一 力，終有善報)108 Whether or not “Buddhist temples” here refers to the Wanfo

cave that Fudeng was constructing is hard to know, but apparently Wen saw Buddhist projects as competitors for resources against his Confucian ones. With the completion of the bridge, however, the great credit Wen gave to Fudeng, as cited in the preceding section, suggests that Wen’s discrimination against him as a monk was somewhat softened. Wen represented a staunch group in defense of Confucianism among the participants of the project consisting of magistrates, merchants, monks, court officials, local elites, and common people. Given that Fudeng’s efforts even improved his standing in the most resistant social group, it seems safe to assume that he, as the leading fig-

105 106

107 108

Ibid., 202. For Wei Yunzhen, see his biography in Mingshi 232.6055–59. Wei served in Shanxi for ten years, and after he left, the locals built shrines in memory of him. For Wen Chun, see his biography in Mingshi 220.5800–5802. Li Zhen was also praised for being upright and skillful in dealing with state affairs. See his biography in Mingshi 221.5827–29. For the poem, see Wen, Wen Gongyi ji, 22.22: 懸空飛渡俯清流，爲倚慈航在上頭。題 柱不勞歌蜀道，吹簫似已到揚州。 Wen, Wen Gongyi ji, 15.1–2.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

361

ure of the project, would win the loyalty of the masses, who built shrines for Wen and Gao because of their contributions to the bridge. In the Guanghui bridge case we fortunately have evidence showing how appreciative Wang Xiangqian and other military officials were of Fudeng’s assistance. In a letter to Wang Xiangqian, Bi Zhiyan 畢自嚴 (1569–1638; jinshi, 1592) says: Master Miaofeng excelled in Buddhist teachings, and spread compassion widely. As for [building] a bridge cross the Fen River, for several hundred years [its difficulties] have made people tremble with fear and dared not to discuss it. Now the master has generously taken up the responsibility, expecting to finish it with perseverance. Such unwavering judgments and acts are rarely seen, even among Confucians. Every time I meet and talk to him, [I] feel my desires quenched and I find myself calm. The two successive provincial governors both wanted to make use of the advantageous conditions he provided to do good for the local society. Thus, the master requests nothing from the world, while the world has to rely on the master. In order to protect [his projects], how can I spare my strength? I have received your instruction, and will follow it mindfully and respectfully. 上 人妙峯精通法乗，廣布慈航。惟是汾河之橋，數百年來，寒心咋舌而 不敢議。今上人慨然任之，總而期之於有恆。此等定見定力，雖儒者 猶或難焉。每一晤對，不覺令人欲心平而躁心釋矣。緣先後兩撫臺咸 欲借重上人福緣，為地方永賴計。是上人無求於世，而世不能無求於 上人也。諸所護持，寧顧問哉。伏承鼎命，敬鏤心膂。 109

Obviously, Fudeng met Bi on certain occasions and was held by the latter in high esteem. Nevertheless, as has been revealed by the intention of the two provincial governors, what made him appreciated most was not only his religious achievements but, more importantly, his efforts to assist the world without considering his personal interest. During the project, these people came together with distinct backgrounds and agendas, but finally they were all moved by Fudeng’s action. Just imagine a sixty-year-old monk jumping into a turbulent river just for the benefit of other people. How convincing and commendable that scene must have been! The three bronze halls, unlike the other works that he was invited to undertake, were Fudeng’s own projects and from them we can see the mechanism 109

Bi Zhiyan 畢自嚴, Shiyin yuan canggao 石隱園藏稿 (in Wenyuange yingyin Siku quanshu 文淵閣影印四庫全書 [Taibei: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1983], jibu 集部, no. 1293), 8.8a.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

362

Zhang

through which Fudeng naturally translated his service to local societies into support for his religious enterprises. The generosity shown in Wang Xiangqian’s support for this Buddhist project was rarely seen among Ming officials. Mentioned above, besides the 10,000 taels of silver donated for the second hall, he supported the first and the third ones in one way or another. Moreover, the wide spectrum of supporters involved was unusual in Ming China; we find local princes, (salt) merchants, eunuchs, commoners, local gentry, as well as civil and military officials all donating to the same cause. If the list of the patrons were extant, very likely we would find some names overlapping with the donor lists of Fudeng’s other projects. In particular, a closer look reveals that, in varying degrees, these three halls were all related to Shanxi or Shaanxi,110 indicating that the vast area of northwest China served as the base from which Fudeng carried out his plans. In summary, therefore, these projects showed how the saṃgha and local societies were mutually reinforced in a practical and tangible way. Let us next examine the imperial patronage Fudeng received. Two types are easily discernible in his cooperation with the royal house. In most cases, as listed briefly in the third section, Fudeng coordinated or supervised projects on behalf of members of the imperial family. In a few cases, probably only three, imperial patronage came only after Fudeng had carried out a certain plan. The second type is Fudeng’s own projects in the strict sense. For our purposes, it deserves particular attention, especially the way in which imperial patronage was realized. After having been initiated by Fudeng, some projects received direct support from Cisheng and other royal members, which Fudeng of course welcomed. In Wanli 12 (1584), for instance, Fudeng started constructing Huayan si 華嚴寺 at Mount Luya. According to his modern biographer Else Glahn, “From that moment the imperial treasury was open to any temple building that [Fudeng] might propose.”111 Notably, however, the project was actually first backed by Li Benyi 李本義 (d. u.), a layperson otherwise unknown, and other locals. Upon learning of the news, Cisheng lent her support. She granted him the imperial Purple Robe (ziyi 紫衣) and appointed him abbot of the mon110

111

The fief-city of Prince of the Jin was in Shanxi, and Wang Xiangqian initially forged ties with Fudeng not in Sichuan but in Shanxi and Shaanxi. As for the third hall, Lian, “Mingdai gaoseng, jianzhu jia Miaofeng,” 24, says that it was cast by Liu Yuanchun 劉元春 (d. u.) in Jinyin county 涇陰, Shaanxi. Jinyin was very close to Sanyuan. So it is tempting to speculate if the choice of this place had something to do with Fudeng’s contribution to the Dragon Bridge, although I am unable to find evidence to substantiate it. See Fudeng’s bibliography in the Dictionary of Ming Biography.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

363

astery.112 Later, she sent a statue of Amitâbha and a copy of the Buddhist canon to the temple.113 A seven-story iron pagoda was also constructed under her auspices. Compared to direct imperial patronage,114 Fudeng seems to have reaped more rewards for his whole-hearted service to the imperial house in indirect ways. Mount Luya, for example, located in a remote frontier area, was by no means a popular site, but the presence of imperial favor attracted immediate attention within the saṃgha and beyond. In Spring of Wanli 15 (1587), Zhu Liyao, the Prince of Shen, ordered a master to visit the mountain and hold vegetarian feasts for monks there.115 A more revealing case is related to Zhenke. When the news about the building of the stupa came, Zhenke was in Jingtan 金 壇 in Jiangnan copying the Lotus Sutra for the posthumous blessings of his parents.116 He first sent a disciple to Mount Luya in Wanli 14 (1586) to explore the possibility of worshipping the copy there in the pagoda, and then personally visited Fudeng the following year. Zhenke once explained his miraculous ties with Mount Luya: while at Lengyan si 楞嚴寺 in Jiaxing 嘉興, in a dream he climbed up a mountain, finding many peaks surrounding him and thousands of pine trees beautifully coated with snow. Upon his arrival, he identified 112

113 114

115 116

The purple robe was against Buddhist regulations regarding monks’ clothes, but after it was first used in 690 by Empress Wu (r. 690–705) to honor monks whom she favored, it gradually became a conventional imperial gift in imperial China in subsequent times. Monks received the robe in recognition of their great achievement and contribution, but some of them could also be disgusted by common people because it might have revealed their close ties with the inner court. See Kieschnick, The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture, 100–103. Huang, Songdai fojiao shehui jingjishi lunji, 444–60; Wang Xiulin 王秀林 and Zhang Junmei 張君梅, “‘Ai seng buai ziyi seng’ xiaokao” ‘愛僧不愛紫衣僧’ 小考, Renwen zazhi 人文雜誌 6 (2002): 108–111. Wendi L. Adamek, “Robes Purple and Gold: Transmission of the Robe in the ‘Lidai Fabao ji’ (Record of the Dharma-Jewel through the Ages).” History of Religions 40, no. 1 (2000): 58–81. Antonio Forte, “On the Origin of the Purple Kasaya in China,” in Buddhist Asia 1: Papers from the First Conference of Buddhist Studies in Naples in May 2001, ed. Giovanni Verardi and Silvio Vita (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2003): 145–166. Huang, Ming wenhai, 73.685. In most cases, it was several hundred taels of silver plus honorary gifts like the Buddhist canon, the imperial Purple Robe, or Buddha images. To the best of my knowledge, the greatest amount of money that Cisheng and Wanli bestowed on Fudeng on a single occasion was 13,000 taels of silver around Wanli 35 to renovate Gantong si on Mount Wutai. See Zang Maoxun 臧懋循, Fubao tang wenxuan 負苞堂文選, in Siku quanshu cunmu congshu 四庫全書存目叢書 (Jinan: Qilu shushe, 1996), jibu 集部, no.168, 4.116b. Lengyan jing zhengmai shu xuanshi 楞嚴經正脈疏懸示, juan 1, X 274, p. 163, b5–10. For Zhenke’s copying of the sutras, see Zibo zunzhe bieji, juan 3, X 1453, p. 424, a4–10.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

364

Zhang

Mount Luya as the mountain in his dream. With this dream Zhenke intended to indicate his karmic ties with the mountain and the temple. Given that he had never set foot in northwest China before that, it is quite questionable whether he would have had any knowledge of the monastery and the pagoda had Fudeng not received enormous imperial support. During the few months Zhenke stayed in the mountains, Fudeng made friends with him, and many of their talks were about contemporary outstanding people.117 Given that Zhenke was then a master whose reputation was rising quickly, such a close connection with him may have helped the expansion of Fudeng’s influence to south China. Fudeng was a magnet for imperial largesse, and the strategy he used was rather simple and straightforward: he did not discriminate against Wanli, the reigning emperor. Wanli was well known for filial piety in his early years, but his relationship with his mother in subsequent years was profoundly affected by the succession issue, the political event that dominated the Wanli court. The emperor married Empress Wang (1565–1620) in Wanli 6 (1578). According to the regulations that were established by early Ming emperors and remained effective in the subsequent years, the oldest son by an empress had the indisputable prerogative to succeed to the throne. If an emperor had no son by his empress, his oldest son by another women would have the priority.118 In Wanli’s case, Empress Wang gave birth only to a girl. Therefore, Zhu Changluo, Wanli’s first son by a courtesan, automatically became the candidate for crown prince due to his seniority among his brothers. However, Wanli’s preference was given to Zhu Changxun 朱常洵 (1586–1641), his third son born to his favorite courtesan. Wanli lacked the courage to resolve the dilemma by challenging the established rules as well as the officials standing for them, but he was stubborn enough to postpone the solution of the problem with diverse excuses. As a consequence, during a period of about three decades starting in Wanli 14 (1586), two groups formed around the succession issue. Factionalism thrived at the court, a series of serious political crises was engendered, and government operations were paralyzed and ultimately sealed the fate of the dynasty.119 In 117 118

119

Zhenke, Zibo zunzhe quanji, juan 26, X 1452, p. 368, b15–18: 燈前盃茗論英雄，情關未 破寧無失 ? 世路相遭豈易公? Some rules regarding the imperial succession in the Ming dynasty can be seen in Huang Ming zuxun 皇明祖訓, in Zhongguo zhenxi falü dianji xubian 中國珍稀法律典籍續編, ed. Yang Yifan 楊一凡 and Tian Tao 田濤 (Rpt. Harbin: Heilongjiang renming chubanshe, 2002), 496; Long Wenbin 龍文彬, Ming Huiyao 明會要 (Rpt. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1998), 13.211. For the succession issue during the Wanli period, see Gu Yingtai 谷應泰, Mingshi jishi benmo 明史紀事本末 (Rpt. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1958), 67.1061–1076; Ray Huang,

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

365

the inner court, accordingly, the mother-and-son relationship became worse due to the succession issue, reached its lowest point around Wanli 22 (1594), and only recovered to a moderate degree after Wanli 30 (1602).120 Looking back, we see that Fudeng’s response to Cisheng’s summons in Wanli 12 took place during the few years when a monk could safely link himself simultaneously with the mother and the son. Later, unlike Deqing who made a moral judgment on Wanli and completely sided with Cisheng, no evidence shows that Fudeng ever turned his back on the emperor. This stance of viewing a morally flawed person with equanimity may have had something to do with the contemplation of the Dharma realm Fudeng had practiced for so many years. This is not to say that Fudeng lacked political sensitivity; instead, very likely he had a better understanding of the political realities than his friends, and as a consequence maintained independence from both Cisheng and Wanli by taking local society as his base. During the years when the tension between the mother and the son increased, no evidence shows that he was ever present in Beijing. Instead, he was overwhelmed with civilian and military projects in Shanxi and Shaanxi. This choice forms a sharp contrast to what Deqing did during the same time. Deqing did not visit Beijing regularly until Wanli 17 (1592) when the tension between the mother and son had increased alarmingly. In the following years, he frequented Beijing and performed Buddhist services in Cishou si 慈壽寺, a private temple Cisheng had built for herself, for the benefit of Zhu Changluo. This unambiguously signaled his alliance with Cisheng. Accordingly, the more he was appreciated by Cisheng, the more he infuriated the emperor. For these reasons, it comes as no surprise that Deqing was arrested by the emperor in early Wanli 23 (1595), immediately after Cisheng formally took him as her master.121 Therefore, it was not by accident that in his sixties, almost simultaneously, Fudeng was assigned by the emperor to be the abbot of three imperially-sponsored monasteries on Mount Wutai, E’mei, and Baohua. A few months prior to his death, he was granted the title zhenzheng fozi 真正佛子 (Genuine Son of the Buddha) by the emperor, who had Deqing and Zhenke punished severely. After his death, the emperor, together with Cisheng, bestowed money to take care of his funeral.

120 121

1587, A Year of No Significance: The Ming Dynasty in Decline (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981), 75–103. I have traced fluctuations in the relationship between Cisheng and Wanli in my UBC dissertation, chapter 3. Hanshan dashi nianpu shuzhu, 1.723.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

366

Zhang

In retrospect, only after these necessary conditions were all satisfied did it become possible for so many resources to converge in Fudeng’s projects, and in this system every act obtained additional significance due to its relations with others. First, through his well-qualified services on various occasions, Fudeng established networks linking him with people who were in power and had good reputations. Second, imperial patronage in local society was rare political, religious, and cultural capital. With his receiving of imperial favor with strikingly high frequency, his profile was presumably enhanced, as did his attraction in local society. Besides, Fudeng’s simultaneous association with Cisheng and Wanli may have relieved some potential patrons from worries about being “politically incorrect.” These factors, taken together, increased the efficaciousness of Fudeng’s appeal to donation, as evidenced by the ease with which he mobilized resources from all over the country for the third bronze hall. On the other hand, with the extraordinarily strong backing he received from the local level, the need for Fudeng to seek large amounts of material and human resources from the court was effectively minimized. This result helped Fudeng to maintain independence from the inner court, and at the same time provided the ruler with a comfortable position of enjoying Fudeng’s services without paying a high price. Consequently, the dangers caused by approaching the inner court, which we have seen in his friends’ cases, were effectively avoided and Fudeng enjoyed incredible success safely throughout his life. It is time for us to go back to the general topic of this volume: the relationship between the saṃgha and state. In the context of the late Ming Buddhist renewal, Fudeng’s contribution to the saṃgha was outstanding. Deqing thought highly of him, claiming that “over the two hundred years plus in our Ming dynasty, in terms of the achievements and virtue established within the Dharma gate, Master [Fudeng] was the only one [deserving to be mentioned].” (我明二百餘年, 其在法門建立之功行, 亦唯師一人而已)122 Clearly, the (re)building and renovation of those monasteries, numbering more than ten, mostly on such important sites as Mount E’mei, Wutai, and Baohua, are significant contributions that Fudeng made to the saṃgha. Besides, there are even more important aspects which are still waiting for further exploration. Suffice it to mention a few: 1) Longchang si was dilapidated before Fudeng’s arrival. With the construction of the bronze hall and the acceptance of other bestowed gifts from the inner court, a turning point came in its history. After that, with support from the inner court and local society, this monastery quickly rose to

122

Mengyou ji, juan 30, X 1456, p. 676, c2–4.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

367

be the most important Vinaya monastery in China.123 2) Fudeng facilitated the distribution of the Buddhist canon, a huge collection of Buddhist literature that essentially shaped the contours of Chinese Buddhism and East Asian Buddhism as a whole.124 3) His activities encouraged the rise of such Buddhist sacred sites as Putuo Island in Zhejiang, Mount Jizu 雞足山 in Yunnan, and Mount Luya in Shanxi. Unfortunately Fudeng’s achievements were not fully appreciated within the saṃgha. Deqing, who arguably understood him best, was a case in point. On the one hand, Deqing confessed that “I have benefited very much from our discussions. Although in name we are friends sharing the same Way, at heart [I] deem him as my master. We have parted for thirty years. But surprisingly [he] was constantly present before me, and [I treated him] as if facing a master.” (予深感切磋之力，名雖道友，其實心師之也。雖別三十餘年，時時居然在 目，如臨師保)125 In a poem, he even implied that Fudeng was the manifestation of Mañjuśrī in this world.126 On the other hand, Deqing expressed some very different feelings about Fudeng: “If the master could use the resources he obtained … to build a monastery like Nālandā Vihāra,127 in which the Dharmanature School and that of Characteristics (i.e., the Faxiang School) are studied and Chan and Pure Land Buddhism are both practiced. During a period of forty years plus, his feet did not move outside the shadow [of his shape] (i.e. staying in the monastery without travelling around), but the contribution he could make to the saṃgha would be comparable with that of Donglin (i.e. Huiyuan 慧遠 [334–416]) and of Qinliang (i.e. Chengguan). [In this way,] everywhere his eyes looked would be the pure land of the lotus world, which is better than the building of the ten monasteries at three mountains.” (假能 123

124 125 126

127

Fudeng arranged a copy of the canon sent to Haiyin si 海印寺, a small temple Deqing had built in Shangdong, and thus helped him to reconnect with the inner court. See Mengyou ji, juan 13, X 1456, p. 547, a14-b14; Mizang Daikai 密藏道開, Mizang Kai chanshi yigao 密 藏開禪師遺稿, juan 1, in Mingban Jiaxing da zangjing 明版嘉興大藏經 (Rpt. Taibei: Xing wenfeng chuban gongsi, 1987) vol. 23, no. B118, p. 13, a5–12. From the very start, Fudeng participated in the Jiaxing canon project. See Jingshan zhi 徑 山志 (Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980), 5.483; Zibo zunzhe quanji, juan 1, X 1452, p. 140, b2–6. Mengyouji, juan 30, X 1456, p. 676, b22–24. In a poem written to Fudeng, Deqing rhetorically asked “who can recognize the final body of Mañjuśrī in the world?” (誰識曼殊最後身) It implies that Fudeng was an embodiment of the Bodhisattva. See Mengyou ji, juan 37, X 1456, p. 736, c02–10. Nālandā Vihāra was a renowned Indian center of Buddhist learning, where both Xuanzang 玄奘 (602–664) and Yijing 義淨 (635–713) studied. Located seven miles north of Rājagṛha at the present-day Baragaon, it was reportedly built in the fifth century and destroyed in the fourteenth century.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

368

Zhang

以似師之緣…建刹如那蘭陀，性相並樹，禪淨雙修，則四十餘年，足不離 影，而於法門之功，當與清涼東林比靈斯矣！觸目華藏淨土莊嚴，又不止 三山十刹而已也 !) In this way, Deqing expressed regret that Fudeng had not

spent more time preaching Buddhist sutras, composing writings, and instructing people for cultivation. This insufficiency, in his opinion, prevented Fudeng from transforming his influence into something more solid and more sustain­able. Deqing’s criticism, though implicit, reflects the ideal state of Buddhism as viewed by a learned Buddhist doctor. In this sense, what Fudeng did and what Deqing expected of him represented two distinct paths within the saṃgha. Deqing’s remarks touched on a real problem: as an advanced Buddhist master, was it possible for Fudeng to obtain enormous support if he had not first served other people so intensively and devotedly? Based on the discussion above, the answer would seem to be negative: We should not say that this was always a direct and equal exchange of interest, but, in varied degrees, a mechanism of this kind should have worked behind the scenes. In fact, Deqing himself provided a perfect contrasting case: Although living in Shanxi for eight years, for all the suffering that the Shanxi people were experiencing as the result of the catastrophic earthquake, he kept surprisingly silent and never mentioned it in his voluminous writings. This indifference to local interests constituted a sharp contrast with his enthusiasm for happenings in the inner court.128 Similarly, in sharp contrast to Fudeng, who was able to depend on all elements of society to mobilize vast human and material resources easily, Deqing had to rely only on Cisheng for the 100,000 taels of silver needed for his Bao’ensi project. And finally, largely because of that, he was bitterly exiled while Fudeng was enjoying growing popularity. The contrast between Deqing’s implicit criticism of Fudeng and Wanli’s full appreciation of him is shockingly revealing in the context of late imperial China. The title “zhenzheng fozi” was a rare recognition that a Buddhist master could secure from the court, and served to define how an ideal monk should be in the eyes of a secular ruler. However, the saṃgha, as represented by Deqing who insisted on defying the emperor, seems to have failed to get the message. As I have argued elsewhere, in Ming and Qing China, the evolution of Chinese 128

Deqing’s indifference of this kind was rather typical among contemporary monks, although after his exile to south China in Wanli 23 he actually showed a stronger interest in the benefit of ordinary people. See Shi Jianye 釋見曄, “Yi Hanshan weili tanjiu Wanming fojiao zhi ‘fuxing’ neihan” 以憨山為例探究晚明佛教之 “復興” 內涵. Zhonghua foxue yanjiu 中華佛學研究 2 (1998): 231–249.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

369

Buddhism was essentially conditioned by contemporary politics.129 Without understanding so important a message sent from the highest political figures, the fate of the late-Ming Buddhist revival, though still promising and vital at the time, began to look gloomy. In a broad view, the ideal Mahāyāna Buddhism emphasizes is to “perpetuate the Dharma and save sentient beings.” Deqing confessed that he had an attachment to the Dharma for several decades, and only after his exile in Wanli 23 did he declare that he “entered the Buddhist way because of the imperial law.” (因 王法而入佛法)130 In his case we see a clear tension between the saṃgha and the state. In contrast, Fudeng fulfilled the two principal tasks facing Buddhists in a seemingly paradoxical but perfect way: perpetuating the Dharma through forgetting it and serving sentient beings. Ideally, this represented a balanced mode whereby the saṃgha and state mutually reinforce each other. That Fudeng was quickly forgotten in history while Deqing rose to be one of the “Four Buddhist Masters in Late Ming China” suggests that this harmonious relationship did not exist in China from the late Ming period, although neither of the two sides deserves full responsibility for the failure. V

Concluding Remarks

This paper has presented the dual legend Fudeng created: his remarkable rise from an orphan to the most influential master of his time; and his quick disappearance from history. His life, thought, service to society, and incredible success are all examined and explained from both religious and non-religious perspectives in the context of late Ming China. Finally, in his life we find a distinct saṃgha-state mode as opposed to that represented by other eminent monks like Deqing and Zhenke. Fudeng, whom we have constantly examined hand in hand with Deqing, demonstrates strong initiatives within the late Ming saṃgha. Fudeng’s early 129 130

This is the main point I have made in my UBC dissertation. Mengyou ji, juan 14, X 1456, p. 554, a14. In Wanli 25 (1597), in a letter to Fudeng, Deqing explained in more detail about his attachment to the dharma and its negative influence on him. See Mengyou ji, juan 13, X 1456, p. 547, b20-c7: 爰自離析以來，忽十五年。實 已臥薪嘗膽，痛自策勵，未敢少惰。第以幻瞖未消，猶沈幻網。心知被縛， 力不自由。良以慧劒不利，不能頓裂。此知痛處，敢欺吾師？及幸以法為 緣，知報佛恩，即以幻網為佛事。其荷負之心，實持九鼎。而法執之病，益 增七重。將謂不負所生，敢追先哲，此實狂愚，非謂慧也。幸亦心知非正， 如夢渡河。念蒙聖主隆恩，惠以金剛燄，爍破重昏，使歷劫情根，一揮頓 裂。回視昔遊，皆同夢事。…始知從前皆墮光影門頭，非真知見力。

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

370

Zhang

life was fundamentally shaped by the Prince of Shanyin, who not only trained him, but, probably more importantly, brought him onto a stage rarely accessible to other monks at his age. Nonetheless, once Fudeng outgrew this formative stage, it was essentially his seriousness in religious cultivation and his devotion to the cause of other people that gave him the passport to success that was rarely seen in monks throughout the Ming. Fudeng was indeed gifted in project design and project management, and we should never overlook a seemingly simple fact: although he left his footprints all over the country, as shown by the concentration of his activities, he was nonetheless a master locally based in northwest China, especially Shanxi. In this vast enough but still relatively manageable (when compared to the entire empire) area, Fudeng created a base for himself through his deep involvement in construction projects, especially those mainly with secular functions, in both an extensive and an intensive way. This is significant for two reasons: first, with the establishment of a close connection with local societies there, he could expect reliable support from a wide range of people. Second, backed by this base, Fudeng was able to maintain relative independence even when he forged very close ties with the inner court.131 Fudeng’s remarkable success may have meant little for him as a Chan master, but it was his accomplishments that made it possible for the establishment of so many Buddhist monasteries, the rise of Buddhist sacred sites, and the widespread distribution of the Buddhist canon. In this sense, Fudeng made great contributions to Buddhism as it was experiencing a major renewal. Mahāyāna Buddhism emphasizes the realization of the Buddhist ideal of “perpetuating the Dharma and saving sentient beings.” In Fudeng’s case, we can see a perfect combination of the two goals. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile to recognize that, as shown by Fudeng’s dependence on the Prince of Shanyin for training, and by his heavy reliance on the secular world, the local society and the inner court alike, for human and material resources, Buddhism in late Ming China was moved forward by the combined efforts of the saṃgha and the secular world, and, probably more importantly, the monastic efforts essentially conditioned by the secular world from which they sought to transcend. When compared to his friends who were tragically trapped by their ties with the inner court, Fudeng’s religious career embodied a unique mode in terms of the relationship between the saṃgha and state: involved but not entangled. This mode cannot be fully appreciated without recognizing the connection between his political sensitivity and his dominating reliance on local society 131

As Fudeng’s contemporaries, Yunqi Zhuhong 雲棲袾宏 (1535–1615), the most influential Buddhist master in the late-Ming saṃgha, also benefited from his owing of a base, though in Jiangnan, while Deqing and Zhenke suffered the pain without it.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

371

rather than on the inner court. For Fudeng, imperial patronage was surely significant because it brought him the symbolic capital that was highly valued within the saṃgha and beyond. With the enormous backing he obtained from local society, however, there was little urgency or necessity for him to expect huge resources from the court, which was then plagued with a shortage of financial resources. Politically, in contrast to Deqing, Fudeng clearly shunned the imperial capital when Cisheng and Wanli were in conflict. During the years when the situation improved and he was present in the court, he did not pretend to be a moral judge by discriminating against the reigning emperor as his two famous friends did. In these ways, Fudeng effectively reduced possible criticism against him and avoided being involved in court strife. Furthermore, the imperial favor frequently given to Fudeng enhanced his profile on a national level and further strengthened his ability to mobilize. Thus, a good circle formed between local society, the inner court, and the saṃgha. Notably, even in late Ming China which was notorious for the persecution of a few prominent Buddhist masters, Fudeng was not the only leading monk whose success heavily relied on the support from the inner court. Zhencheng 鎮澄 (1547–1617), a lifelong friend of both Fudeng and Deqing who won an honorary title from the emperor despite his long-term connection with Cisheng, was another case.132 In this sense, this study offers a qualification to Yü Chün-fang’s statement cited in the introduction. Fudeng represented a distinct type of eminent monk, as opposed to his friends Deqing and Zhenke, and revealed a dimension often ignored in the study of the late Ming Buddhist renewal in particular and of East Asian Buddhism in general.133 Fudeng was well known for his deep involvement in construction projects, including those mainly with secular functions. On the 132

133

Jiang Canteng held high esteem for Zhencheng. Owing to his efforts, we can now have a much better appreciation of the thought of this important master. See Jiang, Wan Ming fojiao gaige shi, pp. 299–382. It is worth noting that Fudeng’s involvement in the secular world was not a marginalized practice within the saṃgha. Fudeng was active in north China during the Ming, but studies that we have cited by scholars such as Huang Minzhi and John Kieschnick show that he was actually in a well-entrenched tradition which, in China, could be traced back at least to the Song period. It is worth noting that this spirit would be emphasized once again in modern times by the “Humanistic Buddhism” or “Engagement Buddhism” movement (人間佛教) that was first advocated by Master Taixu 太虛 (1890–1947) and has since become so popular in Taiwan. In addition, Nakamura Hajime 中村元 reminds us that similar spirit of service can be found in Buddhism in Japan. See his “Riben fojiao de fuwu jingshen” 日本佛教的服務精神. Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究 2 (1986): 1–6.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

372

Zhang

one hand, his acts reflected the spirit of Mahāyāna Buddhism: seeking transcendence but staying in the world for the benefit of others. On the other hand, they belonged to a chain of mutual reinforcement between the secular and sacred worlds. Suppose Fudeng had confined himself to a closed circle as Deqing suggested, surely he would have lost the chance to obtain the enormous support he received. Deqing offered the opposite case, for his exile and his failure in restoring Bao’en si can largely be explained by his overlooking of others’ well-being, like the suffering caused to Shanxi people by the Jiajing earthquake.134 In this sense, the spirit of service, as represented in Fudeng’s case, though varying in form, time, and region, pushed forward the development of Buddhism with a momentum which is likely much greater than we have traditionally recognized.

Abbreviations

T X

Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大藏經 Shinsan Dai Nihon zoku zōkyō 新纂大日本續藏經



Bibliography



Primary Sources

Baohua shan zhi 寶華山志 (Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980). Bu Xu Gaoseng zhuan 補續高僧傳. Minghe 明河 (X 77, no. 1524). Dafangguanfo huayan jing 大方廣佛華嚴經 (T 10, no. 279). Dafoding shoulengyan jing zhengmai shu 大佛頂首楞嚴經正脈疏. Jiaoguang Zhenjian 交光真鑑 (Taibei: Fotuo jiaoyu jijinghui, 2013). E’mei shanzhi 峨嵋山志 (Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980). Fahua jing dakuan 法華經大窾. Yiyu Tongrun 一雨通潤 (X 31, no. 614). Foshuo zhude futian jing 佛說諸德福田經 (T 16, no. 683).

134

Like Deqing, Zhenke was also disappointed with people in north China. The last words he left before his death in jail were “I am leaving. Please express my gratitude to all Dharmaprotectors in the Jiangnan region.” (吾去矣, 幸謝江南諸護法) (Mengyou ji, juan 27, X 1456, p. 654, b18–19) Despite the support he frequently obtained from North China, he singled out Jiangnan as the place for appreciation. Fudeng’s case, in this sense, counters their claim by showing that the real problem was their failure to effectively mobilize the resources in north China.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

373

Fubao tang wenxuan 負苞堂文選. Zang Maoxun 臧懋循 (in Siku quanshu cunmu cong­ shu 四庫全書存目叢書 [Jinan: Qilu shushe, 1996], jibu 集部, no. 168). Hanshan dashi nianpu shuzhu 憨山大師年譜疏註 (in Beijing tushuguan cang zhenben nianpu congkan 北京圖書館藏珍本年譜叢刊 [Beijing: Beijing chubanshe, 1990], vol. 52: 589–732; vol. 53: 1–118). Hanshan laoren mengyou ji 憨山老人夢游集. Hanshan Deqing 憨山德清 (cited as Mengyou ji in this paper) (in Gu zunxiu yulu 古尊宿語錄, X 73, no. 1456). Huang Ming zuxun 皇明祖訓 (in Zhongguo zhenxi falü danji xubian 中國珍稀法律典籍 續編, ed. Yang Yifan 楊一凡 and Tian Tao 田濤 [Rpt. Harbin: Heilongjiang renming chubanshe, 2002]). Jiajing shilu 嘉靖實錄 (Rpt. Taibei: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo, 1962–68). Jiajing yilai neige shoufu zhuan 嘉靖以來內閣首輔傳. Wang Shizhen 王世貞 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1991). Jingshan zhi 徑山志 (Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980). Kezuo zhuiyu 客座贅語. Gu Qiyuan 顧起元 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1987). Lengyan jing zhengmai shu xuanshi 楞嚴經正脈疏懸示. Jiaoguang Zhenjian 交光真鑑 (X 12, no. 274). Ming Huiyao 明會要. Long Wenbin 龍文彬 (Rpt. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1998). Mingshi jishi benmo 明史紀事本末. Gu Yingtai 谷應泰 (Rpt. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1958). Mingshi 明史. Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 et al. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974). Ming wenhai 明文海. Huang Zongxi 黃宗羲 (Beijing: Zhonghu shuju, 1987). Mizang Kai chanshi yigao 密藏開禪師遺稿. Mizang Daokai 密藏道開 (in Mingban Jiaxing da zangjing 明版嘉興大藏經 [Rpt. Taibei: Xing wenfeng chuban gongsi, 1987] vol. 23, no. B118). Pingyang fuzhi 平陽府志 (the 1736 edition) (Nanjing: Fenghuang chubanshe, 2006). Puzhou fuzhi 蒲州府志 (the 1754 edition). Zhou Jinggui 周景貴 et al. (Nanjing: Fenghuang chubanshe, 2005). Qinliang shanzhi 清涼山志 (Taibei: Minweng shuju, 1980). Sanyuan xian xinzhi 三原縣新志. Jiao Yunlong 焦雲龍; He Ruilin 賀瑞麟, eds. (Taibei: Chengwen chubanshe, 1968). Shanxi shengzhi, dezhen zhi 陝西省志. 地震志. Song Lisheng 宋立勝 et al. (Beijing: Dizhen chubanshe, 1989). Shiyin yuan canggao 石隱園藏稿. Bi Zhiyan 畢自嚴 (in Wenyuange yingyin Siku quanshu 文淵閣影印四庫全書 [Taibei: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1983], jibu 集部, no. 1293). Shoulengyan jing 首楞嚴經 (T 19, no. 945). Wen Gongyi ji 溫恭毅集. Wen Chun 溫純 (in Wenyuange yingyin Siku quanshu 文淵閣 影印四庫全書 [Taibei: Shangwu yinshu guan, 1983], jibu 集部). Wudeng quanshu 五燈全書. Jilun Chaoyong 霽侖超永 (X 82, no. 1571).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

374

Zhang

Wu zazu 五雜俎. Xie Zhaozhe 謝肇淛 (Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 2001). Xuanhua xian xinzhi 宣化縣新志. Chen Jizeng 陳繼曾 and Guo Weicheng 郭維城, eds. (Taibei: Chenwen shuju, 1968). Yongji xianzhi 永濟縣誌. Li Ronghe 李榮河 et al. (the 1886 edition) (Rpt. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan chubanshe, 2002). Zibo zunzhe bieji 紫柏尊者別集. Zibo Zhenke 紫柏真可 (X 73, no. 1453). Zibo zunzhe quanji 紫柏尊者全集. Zibo Zhenke (X 73, no. 1452).



Secondary Sources

Adamek, Wendi L. “Robes Purple and Gold: Transmission of the Robe in the ‘Lidai Fabao ji’ (Record of the Dharma-Jewel through the Ages),” History of Religions 40, no. 1 (2000): 58–81. Benn, James A. Burning for the Buddha: Self-Immolation in Chinese Buddhism (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2007). Brook, Timothy. Praying for Power: Buddhism and the Formation of Gentry Society in Late-Ming China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993). Chen, Qinhui 陳清慧. “Mingdai fanfu keshu yanjiu” 明代藩府刻書研究 (Ph.D. diss., Nanjing University, 2011). Chen, Yunü 陳玉女. Mingdai de fojiao yu shehui 明代的佛教與社會 (Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 2011). Chen, Yunü. “Mindai Bukkyō Shakai No Chiiki Teki Kenkyū: Kajō Manreki Nenkan Wo Chūshin Toshite” 明代仏教社會の地域的研究 - 嘉靖・萬曆年間 (1522–1620) を中 心として (Ph.D. diss., Kyushu University, 1995). Cleary, Jonathan Christopher. “Zibo Zhenke: A Buddhist Leader in Late Ming China” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1985). Cleary, Thomas F. The Flower Ornament Scripture: A Translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra. (Boulder: Shambhala Publications, 1984). Cleary, Thomas F. Entry into the Inconceivable: An Introduction to Hua-yen Buddhism (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1983). Cui, Zhengsen 崔正森. “Wutai shan yu Putuo shan fojiao wenhua jiaoliu” 五臺山與普 陀山佛教文化交流, Wutaishan yanjiu 五臺山研究, no. 3 (1998): 38–45. Du, Baoren 杜保仁. “Shanxi sheng dizhen beishi diaocha shouhuo” 陝西省地震碑石調 查收穫, Kaogu yu wenwu 考古與文物 4 (1980): 62–66. Forte, Antonio. “On the Origin of the Purple Kasaya in China,” in Buddhist Asia 1: Papers from the First Conference of Buddhist Studies in Naples in May 2001, ed. Giovanni Verardi and Silvio Vita (Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies, 2003): 145–166. Fu, Yiling 傅衣淩. Ming Qing shidai shangren ji shangye zhiben 明清時代商人及商業資 本 (Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 1956). Gregory, Peter N. “Sudden Enlightenment Followed by Gradual cultivation: Tsung-mi’s Analysis of Mind,” in Sudden and Gradual: Approaches to Enlightenment in Chinese

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

375

Thought, ed. Peter N. Gregory (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1987): 279–321. Gu, Min 古敏. Zhongguo di yi shangdao 中囯第一商道 (Beijing: Jincheng chubanshe, 2004). Guoxiang 果祥. Zibo dashi yanjiu 紫柏大師研究 (Taibei: Dongchu chubanshe, 1987). Hamar, Imre. A religious leader in the Tang: Chengguan’s biography (Tokyo: International Institute for Buddhist Studies of the International College for Advanced Buddhist Studies, 2002). Hargett, James M. Stairway to Heaven: A Journey to the Summit of Mount Emei (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006). Hasebe, Yūkei 長谷部幽蹊. Ming Qing fojiao shi yanjiu xushuo 明清佛教史研究序說 (Kyoto: Dohosha Shuppan, 1993). Hirakawa, Akira 平川彰. Hirakawa Akira chosakushū 平川彰著作集 (Tōkyō: Shunjusha, 1997). Hibino, Takeo 日比野丈夫. “Myoho Fukuto no jiseki ni tsuite” 妙峰福登の事蹟につい て, in Tsukamoto Hakushi shōju kinen Bukkyō Shigaku ronshū 塚本博士頌壽記念佛 教史學論集 (Kyoto: Tsukamoto Hakushi shōju kinenkai, 1961): 583–95. Ho, Puay-peng. “Building for Glitter and Eternity: The Works of the Late Ming Master Builder Miaofeng on Wutai Shan,” Orientations 27, no. 5 (1996): 67–73. Huang, Minzhi 黃敏枝. Songdai fojiao shehui jingji shi lunji 宋代佛教社會經濟史論集. (Taibei: Xuesheng shuju, 1989). Huang, Minzhi 黃敏枝. “Songdai fojiao yu defang gongyi shiye” 宋代佛教寺院與地方公 益事業, in Lisu yu zongjiao 禮俗與宗教, ed. Lin Fushi 林富士 (Beijing: Zhongguo da baikequanshu chubanshe, 2005): 262–84. Huang, Ray. 1587, A Year of No Significance: The Ming Dynasty in Decline (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981). Huang, Xianian 黃夏年. “Fushan Huayan si Langmu Benzhi chanshi pingzhuan” 浮山 華嚴寺朗目本智禪師評傳, Jianghuai luntan 江淮論壇 2 (2008): 165–66. Jiang, Canteng 江燦騰. Wan Ming fojiao gaige shi 晚明佛教改革史 (Guilin: Guangxi shifan daxue chubanshe, 2006). Kieschnick, John. The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002). Kieschnick, John. “Blood Writing in Chinese Buddhism,” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 23, no. 2 (2000): 177–94. Lian, Kaowen 廉考文. “Mingdai gaoseng, jianzhu jia Miaofeng” 明代高僧、建築家妙 峰, Wutaishan yanjiu 五臺山研究 4 (1986): 23–25. Li, Gang 李剛. Ming Qing shiqi Shanxi shangpin jingji yu shichang wangluo 明清時期陝 西商品經濟與市場網路 (Xi’an: Shanxi renmin chubanshe, 2006). Li, Lifeng 李利鋒. “Dong Yiyuan jiashi” 董一元家史. (accessed on March 25, 2014)

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

376

Zhang

Liu, Jiansheng 劉建生; Li, Yu 李宇. “Jin Hui shang zidi keju jiaoyu Chengdu bijiao fenxi: yi Puzhou, Taiyuan yu Huizhou jinshi shu weili” 晉徽商子弟科舉教育程度比較分 析—以蒲州、太原與徽州進士數為例, Jinzhong xueyuan xuebao 晉中學院學報 27, no. 2 (2010): 33–36, 92. Liu, Shufen 劉淑芬. “Cibei xishe: zhonggu shiqi fojiaotu de shehui fuli shiye” 慈悲 喜捨: 中古時期佛教徒的社會福利事業, Beixian wenhua 北縣文化 40 (1994): 17–20. Luo, Shaofeng 雒少鋒. “Sishi juan Hanshan laoren mengyou quanji bianzuan xushuo” 四十卷《憨山老人夢游全集》編纂敘說, Xuedeng 學燈 no. 28. (accessed on March 25, 2014) Goodrich, Luther Carrington; Fang, Chaoying, eds. Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368– 1644. 2 vols. (New York: Columbia University Press, 1976). Ma, Huaiyun 馬懷雲. “Mingdai Henan fanwang keshu de tedian jiqi jiazhi” 明代河南藩 王刻書的特點及其價值, Henan tushuguan xuekan 河南圖書館學刊 30, no. 6 (2010): 129–34. Miao, Yuquan 苗玉泉; Li, Zhizhi 李智志. “Xuanhua Yanghe daqiao shihua” 宣化洋河大 橋史話, Zhangjiakou wanbao 張家口晚報, December 6, 2013. Michihata, Ryōshū 道端良秀. Chūgoku Bukkyō to shakai fukushi jigyō 中國仏敎と社會 福祉事業 (Kyōto: Hōzōkan, 1967). Nakamura, Hajime 中村元. “Riben fojiao de fuwu jingshen” 日本佛教的服務精神, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究 2 (1986): 1–6. Naquin, Susan. Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400–1900 (Berkeley: California University Press, 2000). Needham, Joseph et al. Civil Engineering and Nautics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971). Qin, Peiheng 秦佩珩. “Qingliang tongdian zakao” 清涼銅殿雜考, Zhenzhou daxue xuebao 鄭州大學學報 3 (1984): 79–84. Shengyan 聖嚴. Mingmo fojiao yanjiu 明末佛教研究 (Taibei: Dongchu chubanshe, 1993). Struve, Lynn. “Deqing’s Dreams: Signs in a Reinterpretation of His Autobiography,” Journal of Chinese Religions 40 (2012): 1–44. Hsu, Sung-peng. A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: the Life and Thought of Han-shan Te-ch’ing (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979). Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro 鈴木大佐. Essays in Zen Buddhism (first series) (London: Luzac and Co., 1927). Shi Jianye 釋見曄. “Yi Hanshan weili tanjiu Wanming fojiao zhi ‘fuxing’ neihan” 以憨山 為例探究晚明佛教之 “復興” 內涵, Zhonghua foxue yanjiu 中華佛學研究 2 (1998): 231–249. Tang, Huancheng 唐寰澄. Zhonguo gudai qiaoliang 中國古代橋梁 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1957). Talukdar, S.P. Genesis of Indigenous Chakma Buddhists and their Pulverization Worldwide (Delhi: Kalpaz Publications, 2010).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Miaofeng Fudeng 妙峰福登 (1540–1612) and the Late Ming Court

377

Tokiwa, Daijō 常盤大定. Zoku Shina bukkyō no kenkyū 續支那仏教の研究 (Tōkyō: Shunjūsha Shōhakukan, 1941). Wang, Qiyuan 王啟元. “Zibo dashi wanjie yu Wanli jian fojiao de shengcun kongjian” 紫柏大師晚節與萬曆間佛教的生存空間, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究 1(2005): 28–41.

Wang, Richard. The Ming prince and Daoism: Institutional Patronage of an Elite (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Wang, Rudiao 王汝雕. “Shanxi Huaxian da dizhen yinfa shijie hanjian de dezhen cisheng zaihailian: cong Shanxi Ronghe Puzhou Shanxi Chaoyi sancheng de gongcheng changdi tiaojian tanqi” 陜西華縣大地震引發世界罕見的地震次生災害鏈：從山西 榮河蒲州陜西朝邑三城的工程場地條件談起, Shanxi dizhen 山西地震 2 (2006): 4–6, 18. Wang, Xiulin 王秀林; Zhang, Junmei 張君梅. “‘Ai seng buai ziyi seng’ xiaokao” “愛僧不 愛紫衣僧” 小考, Renwen zazhi 人文雜誌 6 (2002): 108–111. Wang, Yuanlin 王元林. “Mingdai Huanghe xiao beiganliou hedao bianqian” 明代黃河 小北幹流河道變遷, Zhongguo lishi dili luncong 中國歷史地理論叢, no. 3 (1999): 188–200. Weidner, Marsha. “Imperial Engagements with Buddhist Art and Architecture: Ming Variations on an Old Theme,” in Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism Cultural intersections in later Chinese Buddhism, ed. Marsha Weidner (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2001): 117–44. Welter, Albert. Yongming Yanshou’s Conception of Chan in the Zongjing lu: A Special Transmission within the Scriptures (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). Wu, Jiang. Enlightenment in Dispute: the Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in SeventeenthCentury China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). Xie, Yushou 謝毓壽; Cai, Meibiao 蔡美彪, eds. Zhongguo dizhen lishi ziliao huibian 中 國地震歷史資料匯編 (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe, 1985). Xu, Hong 徐泓. “Jiajing da dizhen: Zhongguo lishi shang shiwang renshu zuiduo de dezhen” 嘉靖大地震：中國歷史上死亡人數最多的地震. (accessed on March 25, 2014) Yang, Guozhen 楊國楨 et al. Mingshi xinbian 明史新編 (Taibei: Yunlong chuban, 2002). Yü, Chün-fang. The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York: Colombia University Press, 1981). Yü, Chün-fang. “Ming Buddhism,” in The Cambridge History of China, vol. 8, The Ming dynasty, 1368–1644. Part 2, ed. Denis Twitchett and Frederick W. Mote (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 927–52. Yuan, Tinghong 袁廷宏 et al. 1556 nian Huaxian teda dizhen 一五五六年華縣特大地震 (Beijing: Dizhen chubanshe, 2010).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

378

Zhang

Zhang, Dewei. “A Fragile Revival: Chinese Buddhism under the Political Shadow, 1522– 1620” (Ph.D. diss., The University of British Columbia, 2010). Zhang, Dewei. “Challenging the Reigning Emperor for Success: Hanshan Deqing 憨山 德清 (1546–1623) and Late Ming Court Politics,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 134, no. 2 (2014): 263–85. Zhang, Jianwei 張劍葳. “Zhongguo gudai tongdian yanjiu” 中國古代銅殿研究 (M.A. thesis, Dongnan University, 2007). Zhang, Zhengming 張正明. Jinshang yu jinyin wenhua 晉商與經營文化 (Taiyuan: Shanxi guji chubanshe, 1995). Zhao, Lin’en 趙林恩, ed. Wutai shan shige zongji 五臺山詩歌總集 (Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe, 2002). Zhou, Dongzhen 鄒冬珍. “Chong lidai beike yichun kan Wangu si de xinshuai fazhan” 從歷代碑刻遺存看萬固寺的興衰發展, Wenwu shijie 文物世界 5 (2005): 79–82.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

379

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period: A New Look at Old Figures Barend J. ter Haar I

Preliminary Considerations

The relationship between the imperial state and the Buddhist saṃgha in traditional China has always been an uneasy one. The state did not necessarily share the beliefs of the saṃgha and therefore rarely took on direct leadership of what we might call a Buddhist church, but, instead, tried to keep it in check by combining non-institutionalized and institutionalized forms of control. Non-institutionalized forms would include persecution as much as patronage (the latter in its role as a reward or incentive). Institutionalized forms included the establishment of a supervisory bureaucracy, as well as a framework of rules, for instance, for ordination and membership of the saṃgha. This bureaucracy was entirely manned by members of the controlled community itself. By the Ming and Qing period, this bureaucracy was the dominant mode of state control, next to limited patronage by officials or members of the imperial household on a private basis and those few occasions when members of the saṃgha had a brush with the law. The existence of a bureaucratic apparatus for controlling the monastic community is often stressed as an inhibiting factor for Buddhist and Daoist traditions during different periods of Chinese history, but at the same time its abolishment in the second half of the eighteenth century is depicted as a factor furthering religious decline. This is not a very consistent form of analysis. Moreover, both viewpoints ignore the agency of religious institutions, as if the state is the only institution that could preserve the quality of religious activity—quite apart from the problem of what this “quality” would actually consist of. How strong was Qing institutional control over the saṃgha in actual practice? In this article, I will approach this question from two angles. In the first half I will analyze some quantitative information on the total numbers of monks and nuns in order to ascertain the degree to which the Qing state was or was not able to keep track of all of the members of the saṃgha.1 On the basis 1 The early work by Wolfram Eberhard, “Temple-Building Activities in Medieval and Modern China: An Experimental Study,” Monumenta Serica 23 (1964): 264–318 has been a source of inspiration in this respect.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_009

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

380

Ter Haar

of this quantitative analysis I will suggest that the reach of the state was much more limited than is suggested by the existence of sophisticated forms of institutional control. I will then flesh out this argument in the second half, by looking more closely at the failures of institutional control in the actual lives of prominent Buddhist monks—since these are documented in biographical sources with sufficient detail. Hopefully, this article will contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between state and saṃgha in the late imperial period. Empirical work on Buddhist religious culture in the late imperial period is still very limited, and mostly concentrates on the late Ming period. In Western languages we can refer to the studies by Timothy Brook on Buddhist monasteries in the Lower Yangzi region;2 by Wu Jiang on Chan lineages during the Ming-Qing transition (continuing the trailblazing work by Hasebe Yūkei and others);3 and by Hubert Seiwert on new religious movements.4 Important elite monks have received biographies, such as Zhuhong by Yü Chun-fang or Hanshan Deqing by Hsu Sung-peng.5 T’ien Ju-k’ang wrote an important article on the monasteries in the late Ming in Fujian,6 and Joseph McDermott describes in some detail the role of Buddhist institutions in maintaining the ancestral cult throughout the Song and Yuan in the Huizhou region, after which lineage institutions gradually took over and Buddhist institutions lost much of their landed wealth—though not without putting up a fight.7 But even then, research is still sketchy, with most of our evidence limited to the 2 Timothy Brook, “Funerary Ritual and The Building of Lineages in Late Imperial China,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 49, no. 2 (1989): 465–499 and Praying for Power: Buddhism and the Formation of Gentry Society in Late-Ming China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993). 3 Hasabe Yūkei 長谷部幽蹊, Min Shin Bukkyō kyōdanshi kenkyū 明淸佛教教團史研究 (Kyōto: Dōhōsha, 1993); Wu Jiang. Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-century China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). 4 Hubert Seiwert (in coll. with Ma Xisha), Popular Religious Movements and Heterodox Sects in Chinese History, (Leiden: Brill, 2003). 5 Hsu Sung-peng, A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: The Life and Thought of Han-shan Te-chʾing (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979); Yü Chün-fang, The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981). 6 T'ien Ju-k'ang, “The Decadence of Buddhist Temples in Fukien in Late Ming and Early Ch'ing,” in: E.B. Vermeer ed., Development and Decline of Fukien Province in the 17th and 18th Centuries (Leiden: Brill, 1990): 83–100. 7 Joseph P. McDermott, The Making of a New Rural Order in South China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013): 84–96, 213–224. This addresses the importance of smaller Buddhist institutions as well for maintaining ancestral worship and a means for keeping land outside

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

381

wealthy regions and a small number of elite monasteries and their abbots. A true social history of Buddhist religious culture as a whole is still lacking, even for the relatively well-documented late Ming period. The situation in the Qing is even worse, although Wu Jiang’s recent study of Chan lineages into the eighteenth century has been an important improvement in terms of Western secondary literature. We still do not have a clear quantitative sense of the size and geographical distribution of the Buddhist saṃgha during the late Ming and Qing periods, despite the existence of some relevant evidence. The present study can be considered a first, albeit admittedly small and still highly speculative, step in this direction. Two preliminary issues must be touched upon before we enter into our analysis proper, which are the definitions of the terms state and saṃgha, even if only in a very general way. The notion of state in this article will be that of the imperial bureaucracy as an official entity, rather than the well-attested patronage of Buddhist institutions by devout emperors and their courts throughout Qing history or private patronage by local officials. A more complicated issue is that of the precise composition of the Buddhist saṃgha, i.e. do we include all types of monks and nuns or not? One might define this institution in normative terms as the community of those who have been properly ordained according to the rules of the vinaya and who possess an ordination certificate. This would certainly be according to the normative ideals of the Ming and Qing state who wished to limit the saṃgha to formally initiated monks only. Except for a small number of prominent monks for whom we have more detailed biographical evidence, however, we rarely know whether monks or nuns were initiated according to the rules, which makes this criterion very hard to apply. If we define the saṃgha as those people called monks or nuns who were recognized by their customers as such, there is a very plausible chance that the number of monks or nuns without formal initiation would be substantial. The reasons for this are manifold; for instance, because they could not afford the required documentation and examinations, or simply because the distance from a monastery which could ordain monks or nuns legitimately was too large. As long as they lived in religious institutions and were recognized by local communities as monks or nuns who could legitimately provide ritual services, I consider them members of the saṃgha. This essentially means including everybody who was called or called themselves “monk” (seng) or “nun” (ni). As we will see below, the state encountered precisely this situation on the ground and was profoundly bothered by the fact that all kinds of people the clutches of the state taxation system, also see Barend J. ter Haar, The White Lotus Teachings in Chinese Religious History (Leiden: Brill, 1992), 22–23, 33, 42, 81.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

382

Ter Haar

were included in the saṃgha that should not have been—that is, not from a normative point of view. II

Quantifying the saṃgha

For the Qing period, we possess some quantitative information on the size of the Buddhist saṃgha and its buildings. There can be little doubt about the poor quality of our data from a modern perspective, but they will have to do as a point of departure for further analysis. Most likely, our statistics cover only those specialists and institutions with some kind of official recognition (such as an ordination certificates or a temple plaque) and exclude those without the money and/or patronage, and/or interest, to obtain these certificates. However, even this is not certain. In this section I will first discuss this information and then propose some possible corrections on the basis of Republican period data. Based on a wealth of unreliable information, my calculations will remain speculative. Their value is not primarily in providing completely reliable data, but in the analytical argument that they allow us to make about the actual size of the saṃgha as a larger historical phenomenon in the early and mid-Qing period, as well as its relationship or lack thereof with the state. In 1667, the following information was compiled on the number of monks and nuns, as well as monasteries and temples in all thirteen provinces:8 Table 1

The 1667 statistics

Big monasteries and temples erected by imperial fiat: Small monasteries and temples erected by imperial fiat: Big monasteries and temples erected privately Small monasteries and temples erected privately Total Buddhist monks Daoist monks Buddhist nuns Total

6,073 6,409 8,458 58,682 89,622 110,292 21,286 8,765 140,343

Although we have no hard data on the size of the Chinese population at the time, different suggestions have been made, most recently and convincingly by 8 Qing huidian shili 清會典事例 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1991), 501: 793Bb-794Aa.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

383

Martin Heijdra, whose proposals I will follow here.9 When we estimate the population at 270 million people at the time, the above data imply one Buddhist or Daoist monk or nun on every 1,923 persons (Buddhist monks or nuns only would yield 1: 2,267). A higher estimate of 300 million would yield one such person on every 2,137 persons (Buddhist monks or nuns only would yield 1: 2,519). Most of them would have survived by providing ritual services and only a relatively small group would have survived solely on the endowment of their institution. The data does not mention the affiliation of the registered institutions, but assuming that the Daoist monks occupied relatively the same number of institutions as the Buddhist saṃgha, circa 73,327 institutions may have been of a Buddhist background (subtracting 15.17% of the total of institutions, or the share of Daoist monks in the total number of monks and nuns). Especially interesting is the explicit mention of privately erected monasteries and temples in the above list. This must have been an attempt to include unofficially founded institutions as well. Whether the monks and nuns had ordination certificates is unclear, but very likely. This would have enabled to carry out a count at the magistrate’s office on the basis of the local archives, rather than a timeconsuming inspection throughout each county that would have been beyond the administrative ability of the late imperial state. From the perspective of the state, the saṃgha would be limited to monks or nuns with ordination certificates living in officially recognized institutions, and most likely these monks or nuns would agree with that definition since this recognition provided them with status and privileges. Most documentation comes from such officially recognized institutions and it seems likely that the above figures represent this official saṃgha. For the social historian, however, the saṃgha must be the entire monastic community irrespective of state recognition. It is possible to get a clearer view of the size of this broader defined saṃgha, as well? The next bit of quantitative information about the size of the saṃgha dates back to the early reign of the Qianlong emperor, although the actual project was initiated during the last years of the reign of his father, the Yongzheng emperor.10 As I have discussed in some detail elsewhere, the Yongzheng emperor was a devout lay Buddhist since his youth, leading to close friendships with leading monks of the Bolin 柏林 Monastery in Beijing, who were members of a prominent Chan-lineage centered on the Li’an 理安 Monastery in 9

10

Martin Heijdra, “The Socio-economic Development of Rural Chinese during the Ming”, in: Denis Twitchett and Frederick Mote eds., The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8 The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 435–439. Qing huidian shili, 501: 793Bb-794Aa.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

384

Ter Haar

Hangzhou.11 Throughout his reign, he showered them with favors, which was continued by his son and successor, the Qianlong emperor. One of them was Fa’nan Shisheng 法南實勝 (1690–1752), who had been recently appointed abbot of the Li’an Monastery by imperial command, when an invitation of the Puren 普仁 Monastery in Yushan also arrived. Considerable pressure was exerted on him to come, and they even entrusted him with the contracts for the landed property of the permanent endowment of the place. He took up the new abbacy next to his appointment in Hangzhou. When he entered the monastery in Yushan, the permanent endowment was desolate and even the monastery itself had been invaded by local people who paid no rent. He then took legal action with a higher level official, who ordered the two county magistrates (apparently the Puren Monastery originally owned land in two counties) to have the land returned, and the situation improved a bit.12 No doubt this kind of event would have become known to the Yongzheng emperor through his close friends from the Bolin Monastery or maybe even through a letter from Fa’nan Shisheng himself. Generally speaking, the landed property of a monastery was under constant threat from within and without, which endangered the economic foundations of large monastic communities.13 This was not a new phenomenon and does not in itself “prove” the decline of the monastic institution during the Ming or Qing, but it was a problem nonetheless. McDermott in particular has described in great detail how Buddhist institutions in the Huizhou region were initially damaged by late Yuan destruction and early Ming repression of Buddhist monasteries, followed by the rise of lineage-based institutions.14 It was certainly a concern of the Yongzheng emperor, who expressed his concern about the threat that was posed to the livelihood of the monks and the survival of monasteries by this kind of encroachment. The situation was complicated, since it was often “unworthy” monks themselves or the sons and grandsons of the donors who sold the land. In a very positive turn of events, the Yongzheng 11

12

13

14

Barend J. ter Haar, “Yongzheng and his Abbots,” in: The People and the Dao: New Studies of Chinese Religions in Honour of Prof. Daniel L. Overmyer, ed. Philip Clart and Paul Crowe (Sankt Augustin: Institut Monumenta Serica, 2009): 435–477. Wulin li’an sizhi 武林理安寺志 (1878 reprint) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan 中國佛史寺 志彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol. 21), 5: 34a, 35a. Also see Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 28a for a similar case. Yunlin si xuzhi 雲林寺續志 (1888 reprint) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan, vol. 25), 1: 18b contains a prohibition of burials on top of the hill where the monastery was located and testifies to tense relationships with the surrounding population. T'ien, “The Decadence of Buddhist Temples in Fukien”, 83–100 and McDermott, The Making of a New Rural Order, 213–224.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

385

emperor therefore ordered local officials to investigate the records of donations and make sure that false sales were nullified; moreover, future donations should be properly reported for inclusion in the yamen’s records. He also stressed that clerks and dibao should not abuse the situation to bully smaller institutions such as cloisters, belvederes, tea-pavilions (for free tea and hot water), or local temples to make a profit from this.15 This investigation took place in 1734 and 1735, shortly before the emperor suddenly died, and undoubtedly this led to the follow-up investigation in the state of the saṃgha that produced the following quantitative data. From 1736 to 1739, a total of 340,112 religious specialists with ordination certificates were counted. If we assume that the relative number of Daoist monks is the same 15.17 % as in 1667, then the number of counted Buddhist specialists would have been 288,518. All certificates were reviewed according to stricter standards than before, and this approach clearly excluded an unknown number of monks without certificates. At the time, it was expected that pupils would inherit the certificates of their teachers, turning the system into a method to curb the total number of ordained monks and nuns, rather than one for checking the quality of the monastic institution by requiring all novices to pass certain examinations before receiving recognition of their status as a monk or nun. Therefore, by the middle of the Qianlong reign the entire system was abandoned, confirming its failure as an instrument of control. As a result we also no longer have any statistical data on the size of the saṃgha until the Republican period. All the same, the above figures must represent a sizeable part of the saṃgha in the mid-1730s. With an estimated population of 300 million people at the time, the above number of certificates would yield one Buddhist or Daoist monk or nun to every 882 persons (350 million people would yield a ratio of 1: 1,029 persons). If we calculate only for Buddhist monks or nuns, under the above recalculation, 300 million people would yield one to every 1,039 and 350 million people a ratio of one to every 1,213 persons. This ratio takes into account population increase, which means that the far higher number of specialists as compared to the 1667 figures reflects the improved bureaucratic control of the eighteenth century or a significant rise of the relative numbers of monks and nuns. In the following section, I will argue that both the 1667 and the 1730s figures reflect a severe undercount of the actual population of Buddhist monks and nuns (and most likely also Daoist monks). This would imply that the first

15

Jingci sizhi 淨慈寺志 (Zhongguo fosi shizhi huikan, vols. 17–19) (prefaces 1805, 1888), 7:1a3a.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

386

Ter Haar

option of increased bureaucratic control by the 1730s is an explanation of the differences in size, but that this control was still not complete. In order to reevaluate the nature of the Qing quantitative data, I will look first at similar figures for the Republican period. On the basis of these figures, I will try to evaluate the quality of the older numbers and secondly suggest a way of correcting the undercount of the different Qing figures. I will not delve too much into the question of reliability, since it seems highly likely that the Republican figures, too, are still an undercount. I make this assumption because monastic Buddhism at the time was on the defense and new religious movements were expanding massively. I will assume that the ratio between the saṃgha and the overall population during the Republican period therefore represents a suitable starting point for re-interpreting the Qing figures quoted above. I offer these calculations as a first attempt to put our understanding of the numerical size of the saṃgha on a better footing, but more work is still necessary—preferably with more and better data. On the basis of the ratio between monks or nuns and the overall population during the Republican period, I will propose some corrections to the Qing data. This should provide a basis for further discussion about the relevance of Qing state control. As Holmes Welch has made clear in his seminal books on Buddhist religious culture in the first half of the twentieth century, during the Republican period, Buddhism in its many forms was still flourishing, despite the general sense of decline that is presented in the secondary literature.16 Welch collected provincial figures on Buddhist specialists (monks, priests) and institutions into two tables.17 His material stems from a survey by the Chinese Buddhist Association (based in Shanghai) in 1930, which distinguished monks and nuns, male as well as female lay devotees.18 The last two categories are problematic in the Chinese situation, since they are based on Western post-Reformation notions of the believer with a self-aware sense of having beliefs, and I will therefore not use that set of data. In the following tables, I have reorganized the material collected by Welch on the basis of the absolute size of the monastic community in various provinces. In some cases, he also presents population figures, indicated here between brackets. Again we do not need to take these population figures as overly reliable, but they should provide at least some indication. I have used these to calculate the amount of people per monk and nun together and for 16

17 18

See for instance, Kenneth Ch’en, Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Prince­ton University Press, 1964), 454ff or even Holmes Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968), 291–292. Holmes Welch, The Practice of Chinese Buddhism: 1900–1950 (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1967), 412–419. I am using 1928 population figures. On this project, see Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 40–50 and passim. Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

387

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

monks alone. I suspect (but cannot prove) that the number of nuns in traditional China was much lower than in the Republican period. Therefore the number of monks and the corresponding ratio to the population will be more relevant for comparisons with the Qing figures. Table 2a

Republican (1930) statistics on Buddhist specialists and institutions: high ratios

Jiangsu Zhejiang Hubei Hunan Fujian Sichuan Yunnan Anhui Shanxi

Table 2b

Population

Monks

Nuns

Population/ monks and nuns

Population/ monks

34,126,000 20,642,701 26,699,000 31,501,000 10,071,000 47,992,000 13,821,000 21,715,396 15,247,000

91,400 64,300 54,400 44,600 28,900 124,210 33,400 22,100 15,440

80,360 43,400 21,640 17,800 4,460 34,400  3,780  7,440  1,200

198 191 351 504 301 302 371 735 704

373 321 498 706 348 386 413 982 758

Republican (1930) statistics on Buddhist specialists and institutions: implausibly low numbers

Jiangxi Guangdong Guizhou Guangxi Shandong Henan Hebei Shaanxi Gansu Liaoning Heilongjiang Nanjing

Monks

Nuns

2,300 15,300 480 350 2890 2,450 1,780 780 460 580 680 30

340 3,820 240 110 1840 510 320 230 30 190 30

N.B. In this survey no statistics are available for Jilin Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

388

Ter Haar

A number of things can be said regarding this data. For one, the ratio of nuns to monks is surprisingly high in most areas, which is contrary to what one would expect from qualitative descriptions about the decline of Buddhism. It is unclear to me whether this reflects a recent development of the very late imperial period or was the case for centuries already. I have not calculated the average for the second subset (Table 2b), since the totals seemed unlikely and grossly incomplete. The ratio of the total population to monks and nuns and to monks alone is plausible to possible in the first subset (Tables 2a). The most likely explanation seems to be that the quality of these figures was influenced by the geographical spread of its organizer, the Chinese Buddhist Association, and the limited political reach of the Guomindang government under whose umbrella it functioned. In addition it is possible that there were simply less Buddhist institutions in northern China outside of Beijing. The latter is suggested for instance by the very thorough surveys by Willem Grootaers c.s. in the 1940s in the far north of modern Shanxi and Hebei.19 Given the amount of economic surplus required, it would not be surprising at all that the generally poorer north of China also had fewer Buddhist monasteries. There could still have been a saṃgha in the broader social historical sense that I would prefer to use, but the monks and nuns in question would have resided in local temples and would have survived as temple keepers and small-scale providers of ritual services, rather than living in specialized monasteries. Northern China also appears to have had a larger number of new religious movements who took over some of the ritual and devotional functions of monastic institutions.20 19

20

Willem A. Grootaers, “Les temples villageois de la region au sud-est de Tat'ong (Chansi nord), leurs inscriptions et leur histoire,” Folklore Studies IV (1945): 161–212; “Temples and History of Wanch’üan (Chahar): The Geographical Method Applied to Folklore”, Monumenta Serica XIII (1948): 209–316; “Rural Temples around Hsüan-hua (South Chahar): Their Iconography and Their History”, Folklore Studies X (1951): 1–116; The Sanctuaries in a North-China City: A Complete Survey of the Cultic Buildings in the City of Hsüan-hua (Chahar) (Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques, Vol. XXVI; Bruxelles: Institut Belge des Hautes Études Chinoises, 1995). For modern surveys of the situation in the north, see the work by Thomas DuBois, The Sacred Village: Social Change and Religious Life in Rural North China (Honolulu: Hawaii University Press, 2005) passim and Stephen Jones, In Search of the Folk Daoists of North China (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010), passim (as well as his earlier work). For an example of what we can find in the south, Tam Yik Fai, “A Historiographic and Ethnographic Study of Xianghua Heshang (Incense and Flower Monks) in the Meishan Region” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 2005) and Tan Hwee-San, “Sounds for the Dead: Ritualists and Their Vocal Liturgical Music in the Buddhist Rite of Merit in Fujian, China” (Ph.D. dissertation, School of African and Oriental Studies, London, 2003). On Taiwan, see

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

389

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

Although its ritual specialists would not normally be included in the official saṃgha, a group such as the Way of Yellow Heaven was apparently closely associated with Buddhist establishments. Thus, much more research is required to establish the density of Buddhist institutions in northern China. Some corrections of the above figures are possible by means of a preliminary comparison with data compiled by the Japanese colonial bureaucracy in 1937 and 1940 in Manchuria (mainly Rehe [Jehol] and the three provinces of Manchuria, namely Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning). Although not without their own problems, they indicate quite clearly that at least the above information on the northeast (partially included in Table 2b above) is woefully incomplete, suggesting that the data for other northern provinces may also be incomplete. I have summarized the Japanese data in the following table. The main data comes from 1940, but between brackets I have added figures from 1937 as well. With a few exceptions they are lower than the 1940 figures. Since it is unlikely that the number of institutions and monks would have increased so rapidly in just a few years, this shows how much difference can be created by changes in survey quality even under the same regime.21 Table 3

Total

Buddhist institutions in the occupied territories in 1940

Buddhist institutions (1)

Monks (2)

3869 (1992)

7066 (4217)

ratio 1:2 = 1:1,82

This data still requires further analysis, but it does show how pervasive Buddhist institutions still were, even in the regions under Japanese occupation during the late 1930s and early 1940s. The Manchurian data summarized in table 2B above (Liaoning and Heilongjiang) are therefore certainly too low. Given the very low ratio of monks per institution, one also suspects that there may have been more monks who were not included in the survey.

21

for instance: Yang Shixian 楊士賢, Taiwan minnan sangli wenhua yu minjian wenxue 台 灣閩南喪禮文化與民間文學 (Xin taibei: Boyang wenhua, 2011). The statistics come from Manshû jijô annaisho 満州事情案内所 comp., Manshû no shûkyô 満洲の宗教 (Shinkyô, 1937), 50, 52 and Manshû no shûkyô 満洲の宗教 (Shinkyô: 1940), 68, 70. Except for the quantitative information these two editions are identical. I have excluded the totals for Heihe, Mudanjiang and Xingan, since they were largely Lamaist communities with a Mongol or Manchu following.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

390

Ter Haar

Although outside the period under investigation, such detailed figures from the Republican period based on field investigations provide us with an important perspective on the available data from the Qing period quoted above. Here, we should also consider that by the Republican period religious institutions were under considerable pressure and that overall statistics might just as well have been lower than during earlier periods.22 All of this strongly indicates that our Qing data has huge underestimates, since they are solely derived from figures on Buddhist religious specialists (mainly monks and nuns) possessing ordination certificates. One way of analyzing the Qing data in a more experimental way could be by calculating the ratio between the number of institutions and the number of monks from good data on one location in the Republican period, and then correct the Qing figures on the basis of this ratio. This requires the assumption that this ratio would hold for the entire country, which is probably wrong, but at least we can get some approximation of the actual undercount hidden in the Qing statistics.23 I will base myself on the remarkably well-documented example of Yin County (around Ningbo city) in Zhejiang province. A fuller investigation should and could include a much larger sample of northern and southern locations.24 22

23

24

This becomes especially clear, for instance, from the discussion in Sidney Gamble, Ting Hsien: A North China Rural Community (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1954), 405–410, 425. According to his data on the closely investigated 62 villages of the Experimental District, in 1882 there still used to be 435 temples (or 7,01 per village, ranging from 1–5 [36%], 6–10 [48%], 10+ [15%]), but only 104 as of 1928 (or 1,67 per village overall, and 3,35 for those villages that still had any temples at all). Local gazetteers and other fieldwork confirm this impression. Of course, Ding County was the center of late Qing and Republican reform movements by local elites (which is why Gamble landed here in the first place), and local religious culture will have suffered more here than for instance in the relative backwaters studied by Grootaers. This is not necessarily correct. Vincent Goossaert has used incomplete, but very detailed data on the 1736–1739 census to calculate ratios per province that suggest uneven distribution. See his important article “Counting the Monks: the 1736–1739 Census of the Chinese Clergy,” Late Imperial China 21, no. 2 (2000): 40–85, esp.  59–61. However, he makes his calculations on the basis of dubious population figures from the Qing period. The high ratios of monks/nuns per 1000 people in his survey are precisely those for rich provinces where the population is most likely to have been underreported for tax reasons (namely Zhejiang, Guangdong, Hubei, and Jiangxi) or where a lot of migration had taken place that was not yet properly recorded (Sichuan). Yinxian tongzhi 鄞縣通志 (1935; Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng 中國地方志集成, Zhejiang fuxian zhiji 浙江府縣志輯, Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1993, vols. 16–18), zhengjiao 政教 1267–1347 (reprint, 846–865) and 1353–1357 (reprint, 867–868) for lists of functioning monas-

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

391

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period Table 4

Religious institutions in Yin County (1931)

Buddhist monasteries Buddhist cloisters/halls Total Monks and nuns

Male

Female

Unclear

Total

169 142 311 1195

 24 216 240 663

20 69 89

213 427 640 1858

Using the county’s total population figures for 1931 of 705,779 people (381,992 males and 323,787 females), we can calculate the ratio of the population to the number of monks and nuns as well. By far the majority of these monks and nuns have a Buddhist background. Table 5

The 1931 Yin County ratio of Buddhist institutions

one monk or nun one smaller or larger monastery

379 persons (per monk: 590; per nun: 1064) 1102 persons

On the basis of the Yin County ratio, we can now proceed with a re-analysis of the statistical data of the saṃgha from 1667 and 1736–1739. The first extrapolation that I have made takes as its departure the low estimates of lay persons per monk or nun from 1667 (1923: 1) and 1736–1739 (882: 1) on the basis of a population at the time of 270 million in 1667 and 300 million in 1736–1739.25 I have calculated a multiplication factor for the total number of monks and nuns by dividing the uncorrected ratio by the Yin county ratio. Since the Yin County ratio combines Buddhist and Daoist monks and nuns, I have also combined these two categories in my recalculations.

25

teries; zhengjiao, 1637 (reprint, 938) for numbers of religious specialists; yudi 輿地, 725–793 (reprint, 444–478) on temples (my count excludes shrines for Confucian cults, whereas the original list probably excludes all simpler shrines). The same source gives various population figures compiled in different political contexts, with the highest ones for 1931, op.cit., yudi, 296 (reprint, 229). Population estimates by M. Heijdra, “The Socio-economic Development of Rural Chinese during the Ming,” in Denis Twitchett and Frederick Mote eds., The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8 The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 435–439.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

392

Ter Haar

Table 6a

Low extrapolations for Qing period monks and nuns

Year

Official record

Multiplication factor

Corrected figure

1667

140343 monks and nuns 340112 monks and nuns

5,07 (1923/379)

711539 monks and nuns 789058 monks and nuns

1736 to 1739

2,32 (882/379)

The second extrapolation takes as its departure the high estimates of lay persons per monk or nun from 1667 (2137: 1) and 1736–1739 (1029: 1) on the basis of a total population at the time of 300 million in 1667 and 350 million in 1736–1739. Table 6b

High extrapolations for Qing period monks and nuns

Year

Official record

Multiplication factor

Corrected figure

1667

140343 monks and nuns 340112 monks and nuns

5,6 (2137/379)

785920 monks and nuns 918302 monks and nuns

1736 to 1739

2,7 (1029/379)

Since the multiplication figure is based on the number of monks and nuns in 1931, the corrected figure only concerns Buddhist and Daoist religious specialists. Obviously, other assumptions yield different figures, but the main point should be clear: the Qing figures of the Buddhist saṃgha are most likely severe underestimates, even on the basis of the Republican figures that date from a point in time that religious institutions were under severe stress.26 Moreover, the seeming doubling of the saṃgha between 1667 and 1736–1739 is a distortion caused primarily by increased state control and therefore better (i.e. less incomplete) registration, although only relatively speaking. The real increase is far more moderate and probably largely the result of the overall population increase, which necessitated (or enabled economically) an increase in the saṃgha as well. 26

Goossaert, “Counting the Monks,” 62–63 comes to the same overall conclusion.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

393

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

At the same time this comparison between the uncorrected figures and several possible reconstructions suggest a much more limited state control than the uncorrected figures at first suggestion. Moreover, and hardly surprising, Qing bureaucratic control did improve during the Qianlong reign, even though it was by no means total. All the same, the largest part of the Buddhist saṃgha, as defined from a social historical perspective, clearly remained out of state control most of the time. Indeed, I would argue that unless something happened on an individual or local level, such as legal disputes or a rebellion, the largest part of this saṃgha was not in contact with the state. This also explains why the Qing state, despite its much-vaunted strength, was still frequently surprised by religiously inspired incidents and rebellions. III

A Brief Excursus on the Tang Dynasty Quantitative Data

One of the few other nation-wide figures on the size of the Buddhist saṃgha dates of course from the persecution of 842–846, during the late Tang dynasty. Although the historiography of this event is often problematic, I cannot go into details here. I do wish to analyze some of the figures that were produced in this context, as a means for putting the size of the Qing saṃgha in perspective. Interestingly, the Ministry of Rites reported the following overall figures for the Buddhist saṃgha, namely 4,600 monasteries, 40,000 smaller establishments, and as many as 260,500 monks and nuns.27 Of course, the next step would be to calculate an average for this period as well, but here we run into the problem of the unclear size of the population at the time. One estimate for the first half of the Tang is 50 million, with 80 million people in the latter half. It is never specified whether these figures concern the same territory, which is not unimportant given that the Tang court is thought to have controlled a much smaller part of the nation after the An Lushan rebellion of 755–764. Moreover, during that rebellion many people were killed, so it is not at all clear to what extent the overall population would have rebounded by the mid-ninth century. On the other hand, I suspect that the pre-755 figures are largely limited to northern China, because they were compiled for the purpose of maintaining the Equal Field system that was the basis of the dynasty’s tax income up to that date.28 In other words, even before 755 the overall population of the empire should have been enlarged with an estimate for the south. Adding 30 million to the overall 27 28

Edwin O. Reischauer, Ennin’s Travels in Tang China (New York: Ronald Press, 1955), 227. My preliminary conclusion based on Frank Leeming, “Official Landscapes in Traditional China,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 23 (1980): 153–204.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

394

Ter Haar

figure seems reasonable given the much larger proportion of the southern population in the following dynasties. These figures would yield the following averages: Population estimate

People per institution

People per monk/nun

80,000,000

1793

307

Clearly, this is a highly speculative exercise, given the problematic nature of this data. However, they compare surprisingly well to the Qing situation. What we do not know is whether all monks and nuns registered as such in the late Tang period were religiously active, or merely farmers registered as such for evasion of taxes. Moreover, a proper analysis should include other categories of religious specialists as well, both for the Tang and Qing periods. But still, at our present level of analysis, when (or if) we accept the analysis proposed in this article, and given the many uncertainties in our data, it does not seem likely that the Qing saṃgha was dramatically smaller in size relative to the overall population than in the Tang period. Moreover, in the Tang period there were no popular lay Buddhist religious movements, which did exist by the Qing period and should be included in a fair comparison of the state of Buddhist religious cultures in these two periods. In other words, it is even possible that Buddhism as a whole was stronger rather than weaker than during the Tang. IV

The Extent of Institutional Control

As I have argued above, a substantial part of the saṃgha remained completely out of reach of the state, and was therefore not counted. Nonetheless, an important part of the relationship of the state to the saṃgha consisted of the elaborate bureaucracy that was erected in order to register and examine novice monks and nuns. Outside this bureaucratic context, the state encountered the saṃgha primarily when its members were involved in some form of real or perceived law-breaking. In the remainder of this article, I describe briefly the supervisory bureaucracy, followed by anecdotal evidence on the limited efficacy of this bureaucracy in enforcing various rules that were imposed on the saṃgha by the Qing state. On the whole, the Qing state continued the Ming system of control upon recognized Buddhist monastic institutions by setting up a largely self-ruling bureaucracy. Officially, it was forbidden for monasteries to let monks without

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

395

certificates stay within their quarters or solicit donations to hold public rituals and religious meetings.29 The urge to control stemmed from worries of maintaining public order and more specifically from a concern that monastic institutions should conform to certain conceptions of proper monastic and moral order. Given the superficial coverage of state control below the county magistrate level, it is not surprising that the reality was very different. Before we briefly discuss the actual bureaucracy, it should be pointed out that the size of individual monastic communities that had to be controlled differed considerably. Generally speaking, one suspects that bigger communities were much easier to control, since one act of controlling could cover many hundreds of monks all at the same time (probably far less for nuns, since their establishments were relatively small). In the eighteenth century, the famous Buddhist monasteries around Hangzhou may have had thousands of inhabitants at any single time and fluctuated in size depending on the fame of the local abbot. For the Li’an Monastery it is noted in 1733 that it would have 2000 inhabitants on a regular basis, but that numbers reached 10.000 in that particular year. In 1761, an inscription that recorded a big land donation to the Zhaoqing 昭慶 Monastery noted that it would usually have some 1000 inhabitants and that there would be times when there was a worry about empty bowls.30 The hills around Hangzhou must have been filled with monks indeed. And yet, such huge institutions were the exception, since feeding so many monks was a major organizational problem, requiring sufficient income from landed property and intensive begging. Both required stable and abundant crops. Precisely for this kind of logistical reason, most monks and nuns (whether ordained or not) would have spread out over the countryside and cities, rather than concentrate in a single place and becoming entirely dependent on a region’s limited economic surplus.31 Controlling these dispersed communities involved far more leg-work and would therefore have been far more difficult to organize. It seems likely that the control apparatus instituted by the state mattered mostly to the larger monasteries. At the top of the bureaucracy for overseeing Buddhist institutions was the Registry for [Buddhist] Monks (senglusi 僧錄司) in the capital, which was staffed by a number of pre-eminent monks from the capital with different titles and tasks. These monks were selected through examinations, and were 29 30

31

Qing huidian shili, 501: 793Aa, 793Ba, 794Bb. Li’an sizhi, 5: 34a and Da Zhaoqing lüsi zhi 大昭慶律寺志 (1882) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan, vol. 16), 2: 2a. Compare the figures in Welch, The Practice of Chinese Buddhism, 288–290. See also Goossaert, “Counting the Monks,” 68.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

396

Ter Haar

supposed to be well-versed in their respective canonical texts, as well as unblemished in behavior. Overall surveillance of them was placed with the Ministry of Personnel. It is interesting that they were treated as bureaucratic staff, rather than falling under the Ministry of Ritual. On a lower level we find the fu-level prefectural Comprehensive Office of [Buddhist] Monks (senggangsi 僧綱司), the zhou-level prefectural Correct Office of [Buddhist] Monks (sengzhengsi 僧正司), and the county level Overall Office of [Buddhist] Monks (senghuisi 僧會司).32 The various offices were to be manned by monks and had the task of supervising the moral quality of the monastic communities. Probably, but not explicitly recorded in the sources that I have seen until now, the different levels of the control apparatus corresponded to the abbacies of prominent local monasteries. Those monks and priests who received court patronage and therefore lived in the capital would have functioned as the overall heads of this system. I have not yet found explicit evidence of people occupying these positions.33 Complaints from the late Qianlong period indicate that, from the state’s perspective, the system did not function as it should, with positions remaining unfilled and even married Buddhist priests sometimes filling the offices.34 These comments, recorded in 1771 and 1774 are not surprising, since following the sorcery scare of 1768 the regime had started sev32

33

34

Qing huidian shili, 501: 794 Aa-Ba. A modern Western-language description of the Ming period system which the Qing continued is given by Yü Chün-fang, “Ming Buddhism,” in: Denis Twitchett and Frederick Mote eds., The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8 The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 893–952, esp.  905–906. This system was continued unchanged under the Qing, see J.J.M. de Groot, Sectarianism and Religious Persecution in China (Amsterdam: J. Müller, 1903–1904), vol. 1: 96–136, who discusses and translates many of the relevant institutional regulations for the Qing period. We do find many examples of lower level functionaries in this type of system from a Daoist background. See Xiaoyaoshan wanshou gong zhi 逍遙山萬壽宮志 (Jin Guisheng 金 桂聲 and Qi Fengyuan 漆逢源 comp.; original 1878; Daojiao wenxian 道教文獻, Vols. 6–9; Taibei: Danqing tushu, 1983), 13: 14b-15b; Wulin yuanmiao guanzhi 武林元妙觀志 (compiled by Yangheng 仰蘅 and Qingyu 青嶼; prefaces from 1818, 1824) (Wulin zhanggu congbian 武林掌故叢編), 49.2: 13a, 15b. The Xiaoyaoshan wanshou gong zhi, 13: 15a also notes that a monk who had made rain on the magistrate's request became daoji 道紀 afterwards and that “this [Wanshou] Palace relied much upon him.” Chen Jiaoyou 陳教 友, Changchun daojiao yuanliu 長春道教源流 (Daojiao yuanliu ziliao 道教研究資料; Taibei, Yiwen yinshuguan, 1988), 7: 361 records the example of someone who entered the Daoist religious center on Luofu Mountain at 38 years of age and was later elected as an abbot by the monks. He was much appreciated by the local magistrate and made a daohuisi 道會司. Qing huidian shili, 501: 802Aa-Ba.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

397

eral years of persecuting new religious groups and in 1774 the (actually quite limited) Wang Lun rebellion again upset the confidence of the regime in controlling religious culture. The speculation that the system did not function fits my argument that a large part of the saṃgha went unrecorded by the state. An important dimension of the control apparatus was supervising the entrance of monks and nuns into the system and guaranteeing their religious knowledge and moral caliber. There were rules about the minimum age of monks and nuns upon first entry and ordination in the community. Fully initiated monks and nuns were obliged to possess ordination certificates, and their religious knowledge and moral stature were formally tested before receiving such certificates. Qing bureaucrats and emperors alike were continually frustrated by the failure of the system to move beyond numerical control and the lack of impact on the perceived moral quality of Buddhist and Daoist religious specialists.35 The fact that the system did not function in the way(s) that the state wanted it to evidently does not prove that the moral caliber of the monastic communities and other types of Buddhist and Daoist priests must have been low, certainly not any lower or higher than that of society as a whole. The belief that exams can successfully test someone’s moral caliber is an old assumption of Chinese examination tradition, motivated by traditional ideology and not necessarily by hard facts.36 On the other hand, the fact that the system continued to some extent, however imperfectly, suggests that it had not entirely lost its significance to the state, or to the monks and nuns who took part in it. We do not have quantitative information on the numbers of people who took an examination and of those who simply inherited their teachers’ certificates. However, in both cases the monks and nuns in question felt that acquiring a certificate was meaningful minimally for protection against the predatory behavior of local yamen clerks and the like (by providing legality) and possibly because of local status (by providing legitimacy). During the heydays of the system from 1736 to 1739, even though in all likelihood there was an under-registration of 50% or more, the recorded figures still imply that as many as 340,112 monks and nuns did go

35 36

Qing huidian shili, 501: passim (792Aa-807Aa). Instead I see the Chinese examination system, whether for civil and military officials, or for Buddhist and Daoist monks and nuns, as a means for indoctrinating participants in the same ideological system and creating loyalty on their part towards the imperial center. These are important functions, but should not be mistaken for objective evidence (according to modern norms) of someone’s moral stature.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

398

Ter Haar

through the trouble and expenses of registering in the first place and/or handing their registration down to successors.37 But even for this specific group of people within the registered monastic population, the legal rules were not consistently maintained. For instance, there were explicit age limits on when one could become a monk and the precise familial conditions under which this was allowed. Adults in their productive years were not supposed to enter the monastic order and yet this rule was certainly broken. We find quite a few cases of adult men becoming Buddhist monks after they had turned twenty.38 In addition, parental permission was required and single sons were not allowed to become monks because they were supposed to care for their parents. Numerous cases demonstrate that this was not an empty rule.39 In one case, parents actually went to court because their sons had illegally entered a monastic community, and were thus able to prevent them from becoming monks.40 In another case, parents forced their son to marry, but the marriage produced no children and their son became a monk once his parents had died. He went on to become the abbot of a prominent monastery in the Lower Yangzi region, known for its close association 37

38

39

40

These remarks are only deductions. We have little factual information. Goossaert, “Counting the Monks”, 42–45 gives some remarks on the certificates from an institutional historical point of view. Op, cit., 45–53 discusses Yongzheng and early Qianlong policy towards certificates, partly based on original archival information. De Groot, Sectarianism and Religious Persecution in China, vol. 1: 109–112 translates some of the official documents. Jingtu shengxianlu 淨土聖賢錄 (compiled by Peng Jiqing 彭際清; preface 1783) (Manji zokuzōkyō 卍字續藏經, 1549) (CBETA edition, ; Jingtu shengxian lu xubian 淨土聖賢錄續編 (compiled by Hu Ting 胡珽, early 19th century) (Manji zokuzōkyō, 1550) (CBETA-edition, ), 1: p. 318, a080, b03, b11; p. 320, b02; p. 321, b17 and b19; p. 322, a21–22; p. 323, b18; p. 324, a11 and a23; Yunlin sizhi 雲林寺志 (preface 1744, reprinted 1888) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan 中國佛 史寺志彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol 24), 3: 9a-b (had studied for the examinations, left his wife and child[ren] behind after he was 30); Yunlin si xuzhi, 3: 9b (after he had become adult), 10a (left the family at 18), 11b; Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 16b (at 18), 21b (apparently only really left the family at 20), 22b (at 28, implicitly only after his parents had died), 25b (at first restrained by his father and elder brothers, but left the family at 24 nonetheless), 39b (at 19); Da Zhaoqing lüsi zhi, 8:11a-b (as an adult), Examples of explicit mention of parental permission: Jingtu shengxianlu, 6: 275, a06; Jingtu shengxianlu xubian, 1: 318, b20; 321, a14; Yunlin si xuzhi, 3: 3b; Da Zhaoqing lüsi zhi, 3: 3b; Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 39b (implicitly: his mother could not stop his ambitions and he left the family at 19). Jingtu shengxianlu, 6: 282, a24-b02.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

399

with the state.41 Ultimately, however, parents could only force their children as long as they were still alive and many would have died already while their children were still relatively young. In fact, many children entered a monastery precisely because their parents had died and they were too young to care for themselves.42 The restrictions for nuns were probably much better kept, since there was most likely a dearth of marriageable women, due to infanticide, concubinage, prostitution, culturally determined high death rates for women, and so forth.43 The following example tells us of a young adult who carried through his ambition, despite the ongoing resistance of his mother and his own urge to remain filial as well. Xiaoan 曉菴 (1606–1685), who would eventually become abbot of the Li’an Monastery in Hangzhou, originated from Longyou County in Chuzhou. He had lost his father early on and had been brought up by his mother. He secretly studied Buddhist teachings after reading the Platform Sutra. When his mother wanted him to marry after his capping ritual, he ran off. The first master whom he visited in order to receive the first tonsure refused, because his mother was still alive and opposed his ambition. The master instructed him earnestly to serve his mother, but when his relatives tracked him down, he ran off again. After a painful—in the most literal of ways— learning period with another master on distant Mount Tiantai, he returned to his mother, and she once more urged him to return to lay status. He secretly left again, but returned home soon after because his mother was old. He now took care of her, but during a period of famine she died. After the burial had been completed, he could finally devote himself properly to studying the Buddhist way.44 His monastic lineage would be one of the most successful ones of the

41 42

43

44

Wuqing zhenzhi 烏青鎮志 (1760 preface; 1918) (Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng, Xiangzhen zhi zhuanji 鄉鎮志專輯, [Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1992], vol. 22), 11: 4a (reprint, 326). Although most monks did indeed enter at a young age, concrete non-hagiographic evidence on the background to this choice is not often given. Yunlin sizhi, 3: 6a, 7a (father died when he was six, family ruined by labor service, “left the family” when his mother died). Consider also the case of another abbot who had been inspired by a performance of the play of Mulian 目連 visiting the underworld to save his mother, see Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 21a. The fact that the (mainly elite) female mortality rate improved until the late eighteenth century does not invalidate the overall fact of a scarcity of women. Susan Mann, Precious Records: Women in China's Long Eighteenth Century (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 33–34. Jingtu shengxian lu xubian, 1: 324, 325 gives examples of explicit permission by a parent. Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 12b-14b, esp. 13a-b on these events.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

400

Ter Haar

first half of the Qing period, producing numerous abbots who became close to the Qing emperors. One source of frustration to the emperor and his officials were the large numbers of married Buddhist and Daoist religious specialists in possession of ordination certificates, in flagrant contradiction to the official monastic rule. Although not mentioned in the relevant discussions, we also know that prohibited and persecuted religious groups had monastic institutions, monks, and priests; in one instance we even explicitly learn that one of them (in this case a Daoist priest) possessed an ordination certificate.45 Married priests were quite normal in the Daoist Heavenly Master tradition and not unusual in some regions for Buddhist priests as well, such as those belonging to the Incense Flower tradition.46 More importantly, the fact that they went to the trouble of getting an ordination certificate, even though formally they should not, indicates that the certificate still mattered to them. This does not necessarily mean that the certificate was considered evidence of someone’s ritual or doctrinal competence, but more likely that it provided protection and legitimacy with respect to the state. In fact, biographies of or anecdotes on religious specialists never mention certificates, confirming that in religious terms they were not very significant. There is no evidence that local people at all distinguished between legally ordained and legitimate monks and priests, married monks or other types of religious specialists. The crucial factor for local people was perhaps not state recognition, but the nature of the initiation rituals that a specialist had gone through on the one hand and the sheer availability and affordability of specialists on the other hand. So-called “illegal” religious specialists and members of new religious groups who performed ritual services to their local communities went through different formats of ritual initiation, which was undoubtedly publicly known and recognized in the localities where these specialists lived and worked. Officially recognized monasteries and monks with ordination certificates possibly had more status, and their rituals may have been perceived as more powerful (at least in the eyes of higher social strata), but, in the absence of explicit evidence, further empirical research is still required.47 State recognition can only have been part of the story. From the beginning of the dynasty until the early nineteenth century, we read complaints about the quality of the monastic community and in45 46 47

Ma Xisha 馬西沙 and Han Bingfang 韓秉方, Zhongguo minjian zongjiaoshi 中國民間宗 教史 (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1992)., 913 (case of priest with ordination certificate). Tam, “A Historiographic and Ethnographic Study” passim. See note 19 above.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

401

fringe­­ments of rules intended to maintain its moral and doctrinal quality, as well as to prevent the perceived “unnecessary” skimming off the top of local economic surplus. These complaints continued independently of the individual religious interests of these emperors, who were often pro-Buddhist, indicating that we are dealing with a kind of bureaucratic consensus. Clearly the system was not working and in the 1730s, it was already recommended that the ordination certificate system be dropped altogether, which was then effectuated a few years later.48 Instead of seeing this as a form of capitulation to the much-vaunted decline of the monastic community, this can be understood much more convincingly as a realistic administrative measure, reflecting insight in the limitations of bureaucratic power. The fact that the age requirement did not work may even have been quite beneficial to the quality of the monastic institution. Although we have no way of knowing how large the number of late joiners was, it is clear that such people would bring in a better acquaintance with elite culture, as well as more varied social contacts, and, at times, useful organizational experience. An important category of late joiners were local Students who discontinued their studies for the civil service examination system in order to join the monastic community. The late Ming-early Qing master Ouyi Zhixu 蕅益智旭 himself had first opposed Buddhist teachings, although his father had already been a devout Buddhist. Zhixu had devoted himself to the “teachings of the Saints” (shengxue 聖學), but reconverted to the Buddhist teachings at twenty.49 This is quite a typical career path and we find numerous similar instances of Buddhist and Daoist monks whose fathers, or who themselves, came from a “Classicist” (ru 儒) background. Their biographies tell us, for instance, that they had studied the classics and the histories at a young age, had joined the county school (yixiang 邑庠), were students (zhusheng 諸生), and so on.50 Others came from merchant or military backgrounds, which suggests that they would have had 48 49 50

Qing huidian shili, 501: 798Aa-802Bb. Jingtu shengxianlu, 6: 273, b19. Jingtu shengxian lu xubian, 1: 319, c01; 320, b09; 322, a20; 323, c15–16; Yunlin sizhi, 3: 9a-b (had been a boshi dizi 博士弟子, became a monk after he had passed 30 and still had not passed the examinations), 5: 47a (abbot who had originally studied in a local school and whose precocious abilities had inspired people to hope that he would go for the examinations); Yunlin si xuzhi, 3: 3b, 13a (studied both Confucian and Buddhist classics at a young age, before turning into a monk); Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 22b (talented student, in the Confucian school, monk only at 28 while his parents were still alive), 25b (monk studied the Zhu Xi commentaries on the Four Books and only became a monk at 24), 32b (at first entered the village school, but was sent to a local cloister because of an illness); Da Zhaoqing lüsi zhi, 3: 3b; 8:11a-b (recited the “Buddha’s name” since he could speak, but studied the ju

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

402

Ter Haar

organizational experience.51 Most of them had already attained the age at which one was no longer legally permitted to join the Buddhist order. Not only was the rule on the age limit not rigorously maintained, but such monks could function without problems on the highest political level, with nobody showing any concern about this infringement. The monk Jialing Xingyin 迦陵性音 (1670–1726) is such an example, who was much appreciated by the Yongzheng emperor in the years before his ascent to the throne. He came from an established family in Shenyang. As a youth, he went to the village school. When he was first instructed in Zhu Xi’s commentaries on the Four Books, he was able to ask penetrating questions about the “learning of human nature and life.” When he grew up, he was no longer interested in worldly affairs, but his father and elder brother(s) kept him from leaving the family, and he could only join when he was an adult.52 Eventually he would become one of the best known intellectuals and religious figures in the capital region, despite the fact that he had joined the saṃgha as an adult (and therefore an illegal age). V

Concluding Remarks

This article has presented an argument that even during the Qing dynasty, most likely the strongest of all dynasties in Chinese imperial history, the state was only able to control the saṃgha to a limited degree. This tells us something about the strength of the state, which was remarkable, but by no means total. At the same time, the very fact that the state could not control the saṃgha completely also tells us something useful about those people whom it did control, or, perhaps more appropriately, who allowed themselves to be controlled. After all, religious specialists apparently exerted themselves to obtain the correct ordination certificates, even when they did not formally fit the require­ments. The reason for this acceptance of state control must have been that documents such as monastic plaques or ordination certificates provided legality and legitimacy. Even when the imperial state did not provide

51

52

profession when he had grown up. When he had to take the examinations, he suddenly realized his original roots and entered a monastery). Jingtu shengxianlu, 6: 275, b09–10; Jingtu shengxian lu xubian, 1: 318, c20; p. 323, c16; Nanxun zhi 南潯志 (1922; Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng, Xiangzhen zhi zhuanji 鄉鎮志專輯 [Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1992], vol. 22), 23: 4a; Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 16b (trader overseas until he almost drowned and became a monk at 18). Wulin li’an sizhi, 5: 25b.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

403

such materials, local communities would often invent them, as in the case of the She-Yao as a southern local culture (“ethnic minority”) or the Non-Action Teachings as a prominent southern Chinese lay Buddhist movement.53 These materials served to protect people against rapacious clerks and others in the local yamen, providing them with some form of entitlement. This dimension deserves more detailed investigation than was possible in this brief study. Similarly, the rules for entering a monastery could be used successfully by parents to stop their sons from joining. At the same time, such attempts by youngsters suggest that they either did not know that their parents had this form of address (i.e. that they were unaware of the rules) or thought that the rules were not necessarily clad in iron. The rule on the age limit for joining was less relevant in so far as most children probably joined as youngsters for economic reasons, but the available evidence indicates that adult men did still join—as long as their parents allowed them to. Moreover, because many parents would have died before or shortly after their sons reached majority age, the need for parental permission was of limited relevance to begin with. The age rule itself was clearly not strictly maintained. The relationship between state and saṃgha clearly was more complicated than merely one of absolute state control, but one should also not jump to the reverse conclusion that the state did not matter in the first place. One possible hypothesis for explaining the many infringements of official rules, for instance on the age of joining, might be to see this as a form of resistance to the state. In the terms of James Scott, we could describe such infringements as weapons of the weak.54 Since I do not see any indication of an actual intention to resist the state, I am hesitant to apply this explanation. Instead, I would argue that people simply ignored the state, unless it was to their advantage to make use of the state. This would explain the perceived abuses of the ordination certificate system, which clearly brought a degree of legitimacy that was welcome to local religious specialists. In the case of the age-limit, too, parents might make use of the state to support their resistance to their children’s (usually a son) wish of joining a monastery. Thus, the state was a resource that could be used or ignored. 53

54

Regarding the She-Yao charters ascribed to Song or earlier emperors, see for instance my own “A New Interpretation of the Yao Charters,” Paul van der Velde and Alex McKay eds., New Developments in Asian Studies (London: Kegan Paul International, 1998), 3–19. I have written on the use of the “Proclamation to Protect the Sutras”, ascribed to the Kangxi Emperor, in my recent Practising Scripture: A Lay Buddhist Movement in Late Imperial China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2014), 183–187. James C. Scott, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

404

Ter Haar

Two important reasons why the saṃgha also needed the state, as much as the other way around, was the protection that it might provide for its landed properties as well as the support for quality controls of the monastic population. Monastic land guaranteed a stable source of income and made monasteries less dependent on incidental donations and the need to make a living by providing ritual services. Quality control through examinations potentially served to increase a monk’s status vis-á-vis competing local religious specialists. Thus, state control of the saṃgha always went in two direc­tions, something that may still be true today. Next to the saṃgha existed a whole world of Buddhist or less clearly doctrinally defined ritual and religious life that also needs to be taken into account when understanding the monastic community, and even more when we truly want to understand the history of late imperial Buddhism in general.55 What the limited relevance of the state or its complaints about local people disregarding or manipulating its rules and regulations do not mean is a decline of the saṃgha as an institution. It would be naive to reduce the Buddhist saṃgha to an institution that is solely defined by the state and some elite monks. Local people, including monks and abbots, might use the state to their own advantage and if anything that denotes an active saṃgha. Moreover, we should not reduce the saṃgha to a group of top intellectuals engaged in doctrinal discourse.56 Instead of the traditional simplistic qualifications of the Qing saṃgha as an institution in decline, more research on the actual situation on the ground, also with respect to non-institutional forms of control and supervision, not only for the late imperial period, but also for the more distant past is necessary. Irrespective of the state, the Buddhist saṃgha continued to flourish 55 56

My own Practising Scripture is one attempt to contribute to this need for a broader understanding of late imperial Buddhist religious life. In addition to Kenneth Ch’en, as quoted above, see for instance Chan Sin-wai, Buddhism in Late Ch'ing Political Thought (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press & Boulder: Westview, 1985), 13–19; Tan Xuan 談玄, “Qingdai fojiao zhi gailüe 清代佛教之概略,” 183 (he reduces Qing Buddhism to the activities of emperors and a few prominent laypersons) in: Mingqing fojiao shipian 明清佛教史篇 (reprinted in Zhang Mantao 張曼濤 comp., Zhongguo fojiao shi zhuanji 中國佛教史專集 6 [Taibei: Dacheng wenhua, 1977]), 133– 191; Guo Peng 郭朋, Zhongguo fojiao sixiangshi 中國佛教思想史 (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin, 1994): xia juan, p. 494. For the Ming period, see the similarly flawed comments by Yü, “Ming Buddhism”, 896 ff. One of the few more nuanced points of views is that by Hasebe, Minshin bukkyô kyôdanshi kenkyû, 155, who stresses that during the mid-Ming period, too, even if the formal initiation of Buddhist monks may have lapsed, initiation rituals were still being carried out. Wu Jiang, Enlightenment in Dispute, is a major revision of this negative view.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

405

throughout the late imperial period and deserves much more research attention than it has been given up to now. What the decline in landed property, described in detail for the Huizhou region by McDermott, could have meant is that Buddhist institutions with a larger number of monks who did not produce income, but devoted their lives to religious cultivation, became more difficult to maintain. Every monk would have had to beg, making them dependent on a certain level of local affluence, and/or perform rituals for the outside world. In the latter respect, they would be competing with other local ritual experts—not just Daoist priests, but also mediums, lay Buddhists, and members of new religious groups. How this worked out in practice is a topic for further research, but none of this would necessarily signify the decline of the saṃgha, but rather a possible shift in orientation and the generation of income. But then, the research by McDermott also shows that the reason for local families to donate landed property to local Buddhist institutions in the Song and Yuan period was not to support their private religious cultivation, but to guarantee the maintenance of rituals for their ancestors.57 Thus, in terms of religious activity, the situation before and after the loss of religious property would not have been that different after all.

Bibliography



Primary Sources

Changchun daojiao yuanliu 長春道教源流 (compiled by Chen Jiaoyou 陳教友) (Daojiao yuanliu ziliao 道教研究資料; Taibei, Yiwen yinshuguan, 1988). Da Zhaoqing lüsi zhi 大昭慶律寺志 (1882) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan huikan 中國佛 史寺志彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol. 16). Jingci sizhi 淨慈寺志 (prefaces 1805, 1888) (Zhongguo fosi shizhi huikan 中國佛史寺志 彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vols. 17–19). Jingtu shengxian lu xubian 淨土聖賢錄續編 (compiled by Hu Ting 胡珽, early 19th century) (Manji zokuzōkyō 卍字續藏經, 1550) (CBETA-edition, ). Jingtu shengxianlu 淨土聖賢錄 (compiled by Peng Jiqing 彭際清; preface 1783) (Manji zokuzōkyō 卍字續藏經, 1549) (CBETA edition, ). Nanxun zhi 南潯志 (1922; Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng, Xiangzhen zhi zhuanji 鄉鎮志專輯 [Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1992], vol. 22). Qing huidian shili 清會典事例 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1991). 57

McDermott, the Making of a New Rural Order, 84–96.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

406

Ter Haar

Wulin li’an sizhi 武林理安寺志 (1878 reprint) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan 中國佛史寺 志彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol. 21). Wulin yuanmiao guanzhi 武林元妙觀志 (compiled by Yangheng 仰蘅 and Qingyu 青 嶼; prefaces from 1818, 1824) (Wulin zhanggu congbian 武林掌故叢編). Wuqing zhenzhi 烏青鎮志 (1760 preface; 1918) (Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng, Xiangzhen zhi zhuanji 鄉鎮志專輯, [Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1992], vol. 22). Xiaoyaoshan wanshou gong zhi 逍遙山萬壽宮志 (Jin Guisheng 金桂聲 and Qi Fengyuan 漆逢源 comp.; original 1878; Daojiao wenxian 道教文獻, Vols. 6–9; Taibei: Danqing tushu, 1983). Yinxian tongzhi 鄞縣通志 (1935; Zhongguo difangzhi jicheng 中國地方志集成, Zhejiang fuxian zhiji 浙江府縣志輯, Shanghai: Shanghai shudian, 1993, vols. 16–18). Yunlin si xuzhi 雲林寺續志 (1888 reprint) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan 中國佛史寺志 彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol. 25). Yunlin sizhi 雲林寺志 (preface 1744, reprinted 1888) (Zhongguo foshi sizhi huikan 中國 佛史寺志彚刊 [Taibei: Mingwen shuju, 1980], vol 24).



Secondary Sources

Brook, Timothy. “Funerary Ritual and The Building of Lineages in Late Imperial China,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 49, no. 2 (1989): 465–499. Brook, Timothy. Praying for Power: Buddhism and the Formation of Gentry Society in Late-Ming China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1993). Ch’en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China: A Historical Survey (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964). Chan, Sin-wai. Buddhism in Late Ch'ing Political Thought (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press & Boulder: Westview, 1985). De Groot, J.J.M. Sectarianism and Religious Persecution in China (Amsterdam: J. Müller, 1903–1904). DuBois, Thomas. The Sacred Village: Social Change and Religious Life in Rural North China (Honolulu: Hawaii University Press, 2005). Eberhard, Wolfram. “Temple-Building Activities in Medieval and Modern China: An Experimental Study,” Monumenta Serica 23 (1964): 264–318. Gamble, Sidney. Ting Hsien: A North China Rural Community (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1954). Goossaert, Vincent. “Counting the Monks: the 1736–1739 Census of the Chinese Clergy”, Late Imperial China 21, no. 2 (2000): 40–85. Grootaers, Willem A. “Temples and History of Wanch'üan (Chahar): The Geographical Method Applied to Folklore”, Monumenta Serica XIII (1948): 209–316. Grootaers, Willem A. “Les temples villageois de la region au sud-est de Tat'ong (Chansi nord), leurs inscriptions et leur histoire”, Folklore Studies IV (1945): 161–212.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

State and Saṃgha in the Qing Period

407

Grootaers, Willem A. “Rural Temples around Hsüan-hua (South Chahar): Their Iconography and Their History”, Folklore Studies X (1951): 1–116. Grootaers, Willem A. The Sanctuaries in a North-China City: A Complete Survey of the Cultic Buildings in the City of Hsüan-hua (Chahar) (Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques, Vol. XXVI; Bruxelles: Institut Belge des Hautes Études Chinoises, 1995). Guo, Peng 郭朋. Zhongguo fojiao sixiangshi 中國佛教思想史 (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin, 1994). Hasabe, Yūkei 長谷部幽蹊. Min Shin Bukkyō kyōdanshi kenkyū 明淸佛教教團史研究 (Kyōto: Dōhōsha, 1993). Heijdra, Martin. “The Socio-economic Development of Rural Chinese during the Ming,” in: Denis Twitchett and Frederick Mote eds., The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8 The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 435–439. Hsu, Sung-peng. A Buddhist Leader in Ming China: The Life and Thought of Han-shan Te-chʾing (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1979). Jones, Stephen. In Search of the Folk Daoists of North China (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2010). Leeming, Frank. “Official Landscapes in Traditional China”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 23 (1980): 153–204. Ma, Xisha 馬西沙 and Han, Bingfang 韓秉方. Zhongguo minjian zongjiaoshi 中國民間 宗教史 (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1992). Mann, Susan. Precious Records: Women in China's Long Eighteenth Century (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997). Manshû jijô annaisho 満州事情案内所 comp., Manshû no shûkyô 満洲の宗教 (Shinkyô: 1940). Manshû jijô annaisho 満州事情案内所 comp., Manshû no shûkyô 満洲の宗教 (Shinkyô, 1937). McDermott, Joseph. The Making of a New Rural Order in South China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013) Scott, James C. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985). Seiwert, Hubert (in coll. with Ma Xisha). Popular Religious Movements and Heterodox Sects in Chinese History (Leiden: Brill, 2003). Tam, Yik Fai. “A Historiographic and Ethnographic Study of Xianghua Heshang (Incense and Flower Monks) in the Meishan Region” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 2005). Tan, Hwee-San. “Sounds for the Dead: Ritualists and Their Vocal Liturgical Music in the Buddhist Rite of Merit in Fujian, China” (Ph.D. dissertation, School of African and Oriental Studies, London, 2003).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

408

Ter Haar

Tan, Xuan 談玄. “Qingdai fojiao zhi gailüe” 清代佛教之概略, in Mingqing fojiao shipian 明清佛教史篇 (reprinted in Zhang Mantao 張曼濤 comp., Zhongguo fojiao shi zhuanji 中國佛教史專集 6 [Taibei: Dacheng wenhua, 1977]): 133–191. ter Haar, Barend J. The White Lotus Teachings in Chinese Religious History (Leiden: Brill, 1992), ter Haar, Barend J. “A New Interpretation of the Yao Charters”, Paul van der Velde and Alex McKay eds., New Developments in Asian Studies (London: Kegan Paul International, 1998): 3–19. ter Haar, Barend J. “Yongzheng and his Abbots,” in The People and the Dao: New Studies of Chinese Religions in Honour of Prof. Daniel L. Overmyer, ed. Philip Clart and Paul Crowe (Sankt Augustin: Institut Monumenta Serica, 2009): 435–477. ter Haar, Barend J. Practising Scripture: A Lay Buddhist Movement in Late Imperial China (Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2014). T’ien, Ju-k’ang. “The Decadence of Buddhist Temples in Fukien in Late Ming and Early Ch'ing”, in: E.B. Vermeer ed., Development and Decline of Fukien Province in the 17th and 18th Centuries (Leiden: Brill, 1990): 83–100. Welch, Holmes. The Buddhist Revival in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968). Welch, Holmes. The Practice of Chinese Buddhism: 1900–1950 (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1967). Wu, Jiang. Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenthcentury China (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). Yang, Shixian 楊士賢. Taiwan minnan sangli wenhua yu minjian wenxue 台灣閩南喪禮 文化與民間文學 (Xin taibei: Boyang wenhua, 2011). Yü, Chün-fang. “Ming Buddhism,” in: Denis Twitchett and Frederick Mote eds., The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 8 The Ming Dynasty, 1368–1644, Part 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 893–952. Yü, Chün-fang. The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Chu-hung and the Late Ming Synthesis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981).

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

Indices Indices

409

Indices In the following indices footnotes are referred to by giving the number of the footnote in brackets after the relevant page number. If information given in a footnote seems particularly important, the footnote is pointed to in an extra reference even if a general reference to the same page has been made before.

Index of Personal Names An Lushan, Uyghur rebel leader in Tang China Aśoka, ruler of the Indian Maurya Empire and patron of Buddhism Avalokiteśvara, the bodhisattva of compassion (see also Guanyin) Ayurbarwada Buyantu Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Renzong

4, 230, 393 9 f., 43 f., 82, 98 f., 130 (131), 223, 235 (26), 236, 249 113, 126 ff., 337

Baqisba (Mongolian for ’Phags-ba), an influential Tibetan lama in Yuan China Bāṇa, author of the Harṣacarita

292

Baoxian, Buddhist nun of the Liu-Song dynasty Brahmadatta, son of the ṛṣi Cūlin Bo Yuan, the Buddhist opponent of the Daoist polemicist Wang Fu Chen Ziliang, author of foreword and commentary of the Bianzheng lun Cisheng, Empress Dowager of the Ming dynasty Confucius Cui Yinfu, Tang dynasty official impeaching the monk Huifan Daoxuan, Buddhist scholar monk and historiographer living during the early Tang dynasty Dardess, John Deshao, Tiantai monk of the Wudai period Dong Yikui, Regional Commander during the Ming dynasty Dongfang Shuo, legendary magician at the court of Han Wudi Du Ruhui, high-ranking official under Tang Taizong Empress Wang, wife of the Wanli emperor of the Ming dynasty

293, 301, 303, 315

99 (27), 103 ff., 116 ff., 120 (102), 127 (124), 129 f., 131 (133) 263 106 f., 107 (58) 63, 83 33, 33 (90), 45, 71 f., 75 336, 344, 345 (64), 352 ff., 358 f., 362, 363 (114), 365 f., 368, 371 48, 55–58, 62 f., 67, 81, 83, 165 f., 231, 239 191, 191 (144), 197, 204, 207, 213 3, 78, 117 (91), 130 (132) 279 232–235 351 47 30 f., 30 (68), 33 364

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/9789004322585_010

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

410

indices – index of personal names

Empress Wei, wife of Tang Zhongzong Empress Wu (i.e. Wu Zetian)

141 ff., 151, 164, 167 f., 172 (84), 181, 197 f. 6, 10–13, 22, 79, 84, 99, 140–144, 147, 155 ff., 157 (46), 158, 161 (55), 164, 168, 178 ff., 183, 195, 202, 205, 255, 266, 363 (112)

Fachao, Buddhist rector in the capital under Liang Wudi Faguang, Chan master of the Ming dynasty Fa’nan Shisheng, Buddhist monk enjoying imperial favor in the Qing dynasty Faqin, Buddhist monk of the Later Qin dynasty Fayun, Great Buddhist Rector under Liang Wudi Fazang, Avataṃsaka master of the Tang dynasty

263

Fan Zhongyan, Neoconfucian scholar of the Song dynasty Fotudeng, Buddhist monk missionary from Kucha in 4th century China Fu Xi, Buddhist lay-scholar at the court of Liang Wudi Fu Yi, Daoist priest agitating against Buddhism at the court of Tang Gaozu Fuli, Buddhist monk involved in the establishment of the legitimation ideology of Wu Zetian Fuzheng, disciple of Hanshan Deqing

327 384 260 263 143, 145, 147, 149 f., 153 ff., 153 (33), 154 (35), 161, 168 f., 168 (74), 169 (75), 198, 199 (173), 203 272 48, 83 50 22 f., 22 (20), 29 f., 32 f., 53 (211), 266, 266 (114–115) 10, 11 (39), 178, 180 323, 323 (4)

Ge Hong, Daoist master of the Jin dynasty, author of the Baopu zi and the Shenxian zhuan Guanyin, the transformed Chinese image of Avalokiteśvara Guanding, disciple of Zhiyi Guifeng Zongmi, late Tang monk scholar and historiographer of Chan Buddhism Guṇavarman, Buddhist monk missionary from Kashmir in 5th century China

82

Haishan Külüg Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Wuzong Haiyun, influential Chan master in Yuan China Han Mingdi Han Wudi Han Yu, Tang dynasty Confucian scholar and opponent of Buddhism Hanshan Deqing, Ming dynasty Chan master of the Linji tradition

289 f., 302 (58), 307, 313 292 46 f., 59, 83 46, 47 (173) 226, 226 (5), 230 f., 231 (14), 239, 244

14, 37 f., 250 27 (51), 232 342 49, 83

322, 324 (6), 327, 331, 380

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

411

indices – index of personal names Harṣa, founder of the greatest empire in medieval Indian history He Chengtian, Confucian scholar of the Liu-Song dynasty Huan Yanfan, Tang dynasty official impeaching the monk Huifan Huibin, Buddhist monk of the Later Qin dynasty Huili, disciple of Xuanzang Huineng, sixth patriarch of Chan Buddhism Huiyuan, early Chinese master of Pure Land Buddhism, founder of the White Lotus Society on Mount Lu Huo Qubing, General of Han Wudi

99 f., 100 (29), 101 (37), 102–105, 102 (38– 39), 103 (42), 109 ff., 113, 115–118, 120 f., 120 (102), 122 f., 126 f., 127 (124), 128 f., 130–131 (131–133), 133 54 165 f., 168, 171, 172 (84), 195 ff., 203, 208, 210, 212, 214 260 95, 177 (100) 324, 334 2, 2 (3), 179 (110), 367 46, 83

Jialing Xingyin, a Buddhist monk appreciated by the later Yongzheng emperor Jiang Bin, Daoist supporter in the BuddhistDaoist court debate at the court of Wei Mingdi Juwaynī, also written Juvaini, Persian governor of Baghdad under Mongol rule, author of a history of the Mongolian Empire

402

Kang Senghui, Buddhist monk missionary from Sogdiana in the Sanguo-Wu state Kāśyapa-Mātaṇga, one of two Indian monks who allegedly brought Buddhism to China under Han Mingdi

49

Laozi

22, 36 ff., 55 (220), 57 f., 60–68, 70, 70 (298), 83, 121, 265 37 24, 24 (33), 30–33, 30 (68), 32 (82), 125 141 ff. 29 32 f.

Li Hu, General of the Western Tuoba-Wei Li Jiancheng, prince of the Tang dynasty Li Longji, prince of the Tang dynasty Li Shizheng, Tang dynasty official Li Zhongqing, Daoist priest of the early Tang dynasty who opposed Buddhism Li Zunxu, compiler of the Tiansheng Guangdeng lu Liang Wudi Liu Jinxi, Daoist priest of the early Tang dynasty who opposed Buddhism Liu Kai, Neoconfucian scholar of the Song dynasty Liu Su, Tang dynasty author Liu Ze, Tang dynasty official impeaching the monk Huifan

60 f., 84 297, 297 (45), 298 (46–47)

47

243 f. 8, 10, 22, 49 f., 83, 263 32 f. 239, 244 165, 186 f. 182 ff., 196 f., 203, 209, 211, 213, 215, 217

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

412

indices – index of personal names

Luo Yin, Daoist-Confucian author of the late Tang and early Wuyue kingdom

232

Maitreya Mañjuśrī, the bodhisattva of wisdom Maudgalyāyana, a direct disciple of the Buddha Möngke Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Xianzong Murong Xun, Tang dynasty official impeaching the monk Huifan

6, 12 f., 223 13 f., 45, 82, 339, 358, 367 52 f. 289–292, 298, 298 (47) 185–189, 185 (125), 186 (127), 190 (143), 191, 195 ff., 203, 209, 213, 215, 217

Nārāyaṇa, deity of the Vedic Brāhmaṇa literature

120, 128 (127), 131, 132 (134)

Ouyang Xiu, Song dynasty historiographer, author of the Xin Tangshu Ouyi Zhixu, Buddhist master of the late Ming / early Qing dynasty, associated with the Tiantai, Pure Land, and Chan traditions

191, 227 (6), 272

Polo, Marco Prabhākaramitra, Buddhist scholar monk from Nālandā Prabhākaravardhana, father of Harṣa

97, 299 f., 299 (50), 306 34 f.

Qian Chu, ruler of the Wuyue state

232 f., 233 (19, 21), 235 f., 247, 248 (50), 249, 251 45, 46 (170), 50 (192), 82 36

Qin Shihuang Qin Shiying, Daoist priest who sued Falin for having slandered Laozi Qubilai Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Shizu

401

111 (71), 118 f., 121 (103), 129

280, 284–289, 291 f., 294, 296, 298 ff., 302 f., 310, 314 f., 317

Rājyaśrī, Harṣa’s sister Rubruck, William of, Franciscan friar who travelled to the court of Möngke Qa’an

105, 129 f. 306, 307 (71), 310

Schmidt-Glintzer, Helwig Shangguan Waner, confidante of Wu Zetian Shi Chongxuan, Daoist priest collaborating with the princess Taiping Shi Hu, Xiongnu ruler of the Later Zhao Shi Jie, Neoconfucian scholar of the Song dynasty Shi Le, Xiongnu ruler of the Later Zhao Shi Lifang, legendary Buddhist missionary allegedly introducing Buddhism to Qin Shihuang Shoushan Shengnian, master of the Linji Chan lineage Song Wendi, Liu-Song emperor Su Dongpo Su Ting, Tang dynasty author Sui Wendi Sui Yangdi

26, 80 141, 181 143, 169 f. 48, 83 272 48, 83 45, 46 (170), 82 243 49, 83 81 178 (103), 187 5, 10 ff., 22, 49 f., 83 3

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

413

indices – index of personal names Taiping, princess of the Tang dynasty Tanmozui, Buddhist apologist in the BuddhistDaoist court debate at the court of Wei Mingdi Tang Gaozong Tang Gaozu Tang Ruizong Tang Suzong Tang Taizong Tang Wuzong Tang Xuanzong, 唐玄宗 Tang Xuanzong, 唐宣宗 Tang Zhongzong Tao Hongjing, 9th Shangqing patriarch Temür Öljeitü Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Chengzong Tuq-Temür Jaya’atu Qa’an, the Yuan emperor Wenzong

142, 144, 147, 163 f., 168 (73), 171, 172 (84), 181 f., 182 (116), 183 (118), 184, 188 f., 190 (143), 191–197, 192 (146), 202–205 60 f., 84 2 f., 78 f. 22 ff., 29, 31 f. 34 140, 142, 144, 163 f., 181 f., 182 (116), 184, 188, 191, 193, 194 (156), 195 f., 203, 205, 266, 266 (118) 3 5, 25, 30 (68), 34–38, 79 5 3 f., 79, 84, 142, 144, 163 f., 184, 187, 191–197, 204, 222 (3), 230, 266 5, 269 140–145, 148 f., 151, 153–157, 159 f., 162 f., 165–168, 170 ff., 174 ff., 179, 181, 195 f., 198, 201 ff., 205 75, 84 288, 290, 293 288, 290, 295, 313

Wang Anshi Wang Fu, author of the Huahu jing Wang Qinruo, Song dynasty official Wang Xuance, Chinese ambassador sent on a mission to India Wang Yuanzhi, 10th Shangqing patriarch Wang Yucheng, Neoconfucian scholar of the Song dynasty Wu Sansi, nephew of Wu Zetian Wu Zetian, see Empress Wu

56 63, 83 158, 174, 238 (30) 99

Xiaoan, Buddhist monk of the early Qing dynasty Xu Xuan, Neoconfucian scholar of the Song dynasty Xue Deng, Tang dynasty official impeaching the monk Huifan Xue Huaiyi, architect of the legitimation ideology of Wu Zetian

399 240, 244

Yamarāja Yang Yi, Song dynasty official Ye Jingneng, Daoist priest Yisün-Temür, Khan of the Chaghatay Khanate

63 242 ff. 143, 146 (13), 165, 170 289, 301, 309 f., 311 (81), 313

22 239, 240 (34), 244 141, 178

186 f., 189 ff., 189 (139–140), 196 f., 203, 211, 213, 215, 217 12 f., 156

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

414

indices – index of personal names

Yongming Yanshou, Chan master of the Five Dynasties and the Song dynasty periods Yu Shinan, Tang dynasty official and calligrapher Yü Chün-fang

229, 233 f., 237, 241, 333, 337, 337 (42), 342, 30, 30 (69–70), 32 322 f.

Zhanran, 6th patriarch of Tiantai Buddhism Zhang Daoling, the founder of the Tianshi dao (Way of the Celestial Masters) Zhang Jianzhi, Tang loyalist engaged in the Tang restoration Zhang Qian, Chinese explorer sent on a mission by Han Wudi Zhang Yizhi, health consultant of Wu Zetian Zhili (i.e. Siming Zhili), Tiantai monk of the early Song dynasty Zhishi, Buddhist monk opposing policies of Tang Taizong Zhiyi, founder of Tiantai Buddhism Zhiyuan, 智圓, Song Buddhist monk Zhiyuan, 志遠, Buddhist monk of the Later Qin dynasty Zhou Wudi Zhu Changluo, the Taichang emperor of the Ming dynasty Zhu Changxun, third son of the Wanli emperor of the Ming dynasty Zhu Falan, one of two Indian monks who allegedly brought Buddhism to China under Han Mingdi Zhu Junshan, prince of the Ming dynasty Zhu Liyao, prince of the Ming dynasty Zhu Minchun, prince of the Ming dynasty Zhu Xi, Neoconfucian philosopher Zhu Yuanzhang, personal name of the first Ming emperor Zibo Zhenke, Buddhist master of the Ming dynasty Zürcher, Erik

232 68 f., 72, 77 f. 140 f., 165, 169 46 140, 153, 167, 172 242 35 f. 27 f., 27 (50–51), 51, 232 f., 242 240 f., 240 (39), 244 260 5, 11, 49 f. 352, 364 f. 364 47 326 f. 358, 363 353 81, 245 (47), 246 7, 326 322 f., 323 (3), 332 (26), 342 f., 352 f., 359, 363–365, 371 46, 74

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

415

indices – index of place names

Index of Place Names Bolin si, Buddhist monastery in Beijing

383 f.

Chang’an

5, 29, 34 f., 94, 95 (5), 130 (132), 140, 152, 160, 163, 172, 172 (83), 173 (89), 174, 176, 230, 232, 260, 262, 264 f. 151 f., 160 f., 172 (83), 173–176, 198, 200

Changluo slope, slope located in the East of Chang’an Dahe Palace, Tang dynasty palace in the Zhongnan Mountains

34

Gaṅgā, the river Ganges Ganquan Palace, Palace in which a Buddha image captured by Huo Qubing was displayed

107, 113, 129 46, 83

Hangzhou Huayan si, Buddhist monastery on Mount Luya

231, 384, 395, 399 337, 362

Jifa si, Buddhist monastery in Chang’an Jizu shan, mountain in Yunnan Jiangnan

29 367 286, 288 f., 294, 307, 317, 335, 348, 363

Kanyākubja, state in medieval Northern India Kunming Lake

99, 105, 107, 109 ff., 128 f., 132 f. 47, 47 (173)

Li’an si, Buddhist monastery in Hangzhou Lingyin chansi, Buddhist monastery in Hangzhou Longtian si, Buddhist Monastery in the Zhongnan Mountains Luoyang

383 f., 395, 399 236 34 f.

Luya shan, mountain in Shanxi

5, 13, 35 f., 47 f., 151 f., 172 (83), 173 f., 176, 194, 198, 257, 262, 265 337, 352, 362 ff., 367

Mao shan, mountain in Jiangsu

76

Nālandā, foremost center of Buddhist scholasticism in medieval India

35, 94, 100, 367, 367 (127)

Putuo Island, Mount Putuo, Buddhist cult place of Guanyin in front of the coast of Zhejiang

331, 358, 367

Shaolin si, Buddhist Monastery on Mount Song Shengshan si, Buddhist monastery in Luoyang

5, 283 (15), 284 f., 292 145–152, 155, 160 f., 169 ff., 173–177, 190, 195, 198 ff., 203 ff. 103 f.

Sthāṇvīśvara, modern Thanesar, original territory of the Puṣpabhūti dynasty Tiantai shan, mountain ridge in Zhejiang

232, 399

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

416

indices – index of place names

Tianzhong si, Buddhist monastery on Mount Song

178 ff., 179 (108), 180, 202

Wutai shan, Buddhist cult mountain of Mañjuśrī in Shanxi Wuyue, one of the ten states during the Five Dynasties period

14, 335 f., 338, 344, 352, 356, 358, 365 f.

Xiantong si, Buddhist monastery on Wutai shan

338, 358

Yongming si, Buddhist Monastery in Hangzhou Yungang, site of cave temples close to the Tuoba-Wei capital of Datong

233, 236 8

Zhongnan shan, mountain ridge south of Chang’an Zhongtiao shan, mountain ridge in Shanxi

34

229–237, 241, 247–250

326, 330, 337

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

417

indices – index of terms

Index of Terms Buddhist rector (sengzheng) 260–263 Buddhist registrar (senglu) 260 f., 264–270

Maukhari, royal dynasty of Kanyākubja 105, 131 (133)

cakravartin 9 ff., 223, 229 f., 229 (7), 235, 251 Chan Buddhism 80, 244 f., 327, 332, 332 (25), 336 f. chujia (leaving the family) 52 Court for Buddhist affairs (Xuanzheng yuan) 287, 291–294, 303 f., 306, 314 Court for Dependencies (Honglu si) 254, 257 f.

Puṣpabhūti, Northern Indian royal dynasty which Harṣa was born into 99 f., 103, 104 (48), 109, 111, 116 f., 118 (98), 119 f., 121 (103), 123 (109), 127 (124), 128

Daoxue 244, 246 dharmadhātu 330

Saṃgha Administrator (zhishi seng) 259 f., 259 (80), 269 senglu, see Buddhist registrar sengzheng, see Buddhist rector shamans / shamanic 164, 279 Shangqing Daoism 22, 67, 75 Sheep Year Statute 288 ff., 293 f., 296, 307, 309, 314, 317 Shidian rite 23

fengshan sacrifice 50, 50 (192) filial piety 3, 52, 364 great peace (taiping) 42, 51, 58 Gujin renbiao 68, 68 (289) guwen movement 81 (363), 239–242, 272 Honglu si, see Court for Dependencies huahu theory (see also Huahu jing in the index of work titles) 55, 60 f., 63, 78, 84 f. Huayan Buddhism / Huayan thought (see also Huayan jing in the index of work titles) 330, 337, 339 f., 358 (98) Huangjin, see Yellow Turbans

Quanzhen Daoism 238 (30), 279, 295 Realpolitik 229, 229 (8), 230, 247

taiping, see great peace tianming, see Mandate of Heaven Tiantai Buddhism 80, 80 (362), 232, 242 Tibetan Buddhism 13, 295 f. Uyghur Buddhism 281, 283 (15), 296 f., 281

Lixue 238 Linji school 235, 242 ff., 246, 342

Xuanwumen incident 24 f., 30 (68), 33, 125 Xuanzheng Yuan, see Court for Buddhist affairs Yellow Turbans (Huangjin) 76 ff., 76 (346) yulu (Records of Sayings) 243, 248 (52)

Mandate of Heaven (tianming) 10, 52 (204), 112 (76), 125, 126 (120), 129

zhiguai (Accounts of Anomalies) 26, 63 zhishi seng, see Saṃgha Administrator

junzi 225, 247, 271

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access

418

indices – index of work titles

Index of Work Titles Aśokāvadāna 44, 44 (152) Avataṃsaka sūtra, see Huayan jing Bhagavadgītā 104, 105 (51), 110 Bianhuo lun 41, 72, 76 Bianwei lu 84 f. Daren lun 56 Erjiao lun 41, 55, 63, 67 f., 72, 74 Fodao lunheng 20, 23, 32, 36 ff., 78, 78 (354), 177 (100) Fozu tongcan ji 242 Fozu tongji 22 f., 27, 36, 80, 80 (362), 147, 150 f., 159, 198, 201 Futian lun 2 Gaoseng zhuan 15, 41, 47 ff., 54, 63, 179 (110), 260 (85), 263 (101) Han faben neizhuan 48 Harṣacarita 97 (15), 102 (38), 103, 103 (42), 104 (48), 112 (75), 118, 120, 121 (103), 122 f., 129, 132 Hou Hanshu 77 Huahu jing (also written Laozi huahu jing) 60–63, 83, 279, 295 Huayan jing (Avataṃsaka sūtra) 14, 332, 331, 332, 334, 337–341, 352, 355 Huainan zi 58 Huangshu 72, 72 (312)

Liangshu 75 Liezi 55 f., 55 (220) Lunyu 52 (204), 55, 57, 69, 187 (131) Mahābhārata 104, 105 (51), 109, 118, 129 Mañjuśrī parinirvāṇa sūtra 45 Mingfo lun 45 Mouzi lihuo lun 41, 52, 54 ff., 70 Mu tianzi zhuan 43 Nāgānanda 102, 129 Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan 102 Rāmāyana 105 f. Renwang jing 59 Ronghua lun 41, 63, 74 Sanguo zhi 77 Shenxian zhuan 65 f. Shiji 22, 28 (58), 57 f., 57 (230) Shijia fangzhi 117 (91), 130 (132) Shishuo xinyu 44 Śūrangama sūtra, see Lengyan jing Taiping guangji 26 Tiansheng Guangdeng lu 243 Wanshan tonggui ji 235 Xisheng jing 60 ff. Xiaodao lun 41, 55, 66, 70, 72 f., 77 Xu Gaoseng zhuan 20, 27 f., 36 f.

Ji shamen bu ying bai su deng shi 2 f. Jingde Chuandeng lu 237, 242

Yanshi jiaxun 42, 42 (145), 51, 70 f. Youming lu 63

Kālacakra Tantra 301

Zhenzheng lun 78 f. Zhengwu lun 41, 61, 71 Zhoushu yiji 43 Zhuangzi 57, 182 (116) Zongjing lu 234, 236 f., 242, 333, 337, 337 (42), 342, 342 (54)

Lengyan jing (Śūrangama sūtra) 63, 330, 336 f., 337 (40) Lichao Shishi zijian 151 Lidai sanbao ji 11, 41, 45 f., 49 f. 269 (132) Liexian zhuan 44 f.

Thomas Jülch - 978-90-04-32258-5 Downloaded from Brill.com05/05/2020 04:13:24PM via free access