The Power of the Buddhas: The Politics of Buddhism During the Koryo Dynasty (918-1392) 9781684174768, 1684174767

Citation preview

The Power of the Buddhas The Politics of Buddhism During the Kory6 Dynasty (918-1392)

Harvard East Asian Monographs 303

Publication of this work was aided by a generous subvention from the Korea Foundation, Seoul

The Power of the Buddhas The Politics of Buddhism During

the Koryo Dynasty (918-1392)

Sem Vermeersch

Published by the Harvard University Asia Center Distributed by Harvard University Press Cambridge (Massachusetts) and London 2008

© 2008 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America

The Harvard University Asia Center publishes a monograph series and, in coordination with the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, the Korea Institute, the Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies, and other faculties and institutes, administers research projects designed to further scholarly understanding of China, Japan, Vietnam, Korea, and other Asian countries. The Center also sponsors projects addressing multidisciplinary and regional issues in Asia. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data |

Vermeersch, Sem, 1971The power of the Buddhas : the politics of Buddhism during the Koryo dynasty (918-1392) / Sem Vermeersch.

p. cm. -- (Harvard East Asian monographs ; 303) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-674-03 188-3 (cl : alk. paper)

1, Buddhism—Korea--History--935—1392. 2. Buddhism and politics--Korea--History. 3. Korea--Politics and government--935—1392. 4. Buddhism and state--Korea--History. 5. Buddhism--Korea--Rituals--History. I. Title. II. Title: Politics of Buddhism during the Koryo dynasty (918-1392). BQ662.V37 2008 294.3'095 190902--dc22 2008011516 Index by the author

€9 Printed on acid-free paper Last figure below indicates year of this printing

18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 #10 09 08

To

my parents

and to Sumi and Jonas

BLANK PAGE

Acknowledgments

This book brings to completion a research project that started in 1996, the beginning of my Ph.D. research. In search of a suitable topic, I initially planned to research the effect of the Military Era (1170-1270) on the Buddhist establishment of medieval Korea. But while rethinking the widely held thesis that the military leaders favored the Sdn school and helped it to regain prominence, I realized that to understand the military’s impact on Buddhism, we had to know first of all how Buddhism was organized before they came to power. Then it became clear that just as the military leaders left political institutions intact, they did not change the Buddhist institutions either. Koryo Buddhism, just like Buddhism in any country, did not exist in some temporal vacuum, but was firmly anchored in the political system of the time. Rather than the Military Era, it was the founding of the Koryéd dynasty that marked a real break in the Bud-

dhist world, reshaping it fundamentally, initiating an organizational , and ideological template that remained more or less in place through-

out the dynasty. I also realized that this structure—an inherently bureaucratic system that regulated the management of temples and the public displays of Buddhist piety and power—had so far not been adequately described. Despite some misgivings about the daunting task I had set myself, I therefore decided to try to reconstruct this framework, since it appeared to be essential to understanding the dynamics and peculiar characteristics of Kory6 Buddhism.

Vill Acknowledgments The task is daunting not just because it takes on such a long period—Kory6 lasted nearly five centuries, and although my study focuses especially on the founding stage, it takes into account the whole period—but also because of the scarcity of useful material. Although it might appear at first glance that the scant documentary evidence would shorten the task, in fact the opposite is true: many institutions or practices are attested only in one or two brief references; what then are we to make of their significance in the absence of any context? The only solution in such cases seemed to be to look at the broader context of political, economic, ideological, and other intersections between Buddhism and Kory6 society at large, so that better knowledge of how things worked in these other areas could shed light on Buddhism. But this requires an excellent knowledge of these areas, not to mention mastery of the specific jargon relevant to these areas—by this I mean that of the original source texts, written in Classical Chinese. In many instances I have therefore had to rely on the best available consensus from secondary sources, despite the fact that often these are not adequate.

This study roughly developed in three stages, and at each stage | was fortunate to find inspiration and help when it was most needed. The first step was my Ph.D. research at SOAS, University of London, under the guidance of Martina Deuchler. Although her main field is the Confucian tradition in Korea, she was instrumental in helping me

carry this project through; there is probably nobody more familiar with reading and interpreting traditional Korean sources, and her mastery of the scholarly métier—from footnotes to style—is exemplary. Also at SOAS, Tim Barrett was always a useful resource for tracking down obscure articles and sources in the East Asian Buddhist tradition. As an external examiner, Mohan Pankaj provided balanced and much-needed critical feedback. And friends, colleagues, and mentors were helpful in many ways—TI should mention in particular the late Ralph Smith, Pak Youngsook, and Joseph Lee. Finally, a Ph.D. thesis naturally builds on the work of previous scholars, taking up where they have left off, and I am happy to confess my indebtedness to them. I have relied particularly on the foundations laid by H6 Hting-sik, whose Kory6 Pulgyosa yén’gu is nothing short of a reference work. Without his thorough sifting of the primary source mate-

Acknowledgments 1X

but impossible. ,

rial, the epigraphic sources in particular, my task would have been all

In a second stage, a generous post-doctoral fellowship furnished by the Korea Foundation allowed me to spend a year at the Korea Institute, Harvard University, to rework this doctoral dissertation into a book. With the fabulous resources available there, this proved an ideal setting to expand and improve on the original work. This was made possible by Carter Eckert’s interest in furthering the study of traditional Korea. While at the Korea Institute, I further benefited from the advice and assistance of Kim Sun Joo, Mark Byington, and Mark Caprio. I am also indebted to the staff of the Korea Institute and the Harvard-Yenching Library for their time and help in practical and bibliographic matters. Also during this stage many people sacrificed valuable time to read the book manuscript, and I am grateful for the comments and corrections provided by Robert Buswell, Edward Shultz, Anders Karlsson, and Janice Kim. Finally, I came to Korea; at Keimyung University, Kim Tschung-

Sun saved me from the ignominy of becoming an “independent scholar.” Affiliations first with Academia Koreana and then with the Korean Studies Department at Keimyung provided me with an income, a workplace, and finally some invaluable experience in teaching and organization. This left little time to add the final touches but provided the critical distance and maturity to polish the work further.

Invaluable in this was the feedback of two anonymous readers selected by Harvard University Press. The final revision of the manuscript was done during my fellowship at the Kyujanggak Institute for

Korean Studies, and I am grateful to Cho Eun-su for making this possible. Parts of this study are based on articles or book chapters that have been published elsewhere. Chapters 2 and 5 contain material that first appeared in Korean Studies (vol. 26, no. 2); Chapter 3 is based on an article published in the Buddhist Studies Review (vol. 20, no. 2); and parts of Chapter 2 have been adapted from material first published in

this work. |

Religions of Korea in Practice, edited by Robert E. Buswell, Jr.,

© 2006 by Princeton University Press. I would like to thank the publishers for their kind permission to reuse some of these contents for

X Acknowledgments Most important, however, is the help and nurture of the people who were there long before this project started and will be there long after it is finished: my parents, my wife Sumi, and my son Jonas. To them I dedicate this book. S.V.

Contents

Tables, Maps, and Figures XV

Kings of Unified Silla and Koryo XVil

Abbreviations XX1

Introduction I

Methodological considerations: religion and political order 4 Korean Buddhism: State Protectionism? 13

Sources 21 Structure 24

PartI Historical and Ideological Background

1 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 31 The fall of Silla and the rise of Wang Kin 32 Buddhism and the state in Unified Silla 40 The Son school in late Silla: dharma lineages and the Nine Mountains 49 The economic and social basis of the Son sanmun 62 Buddhism and the state in the Later Three Kingdoms 71

Conclusion 73

2 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy: T’aejo and Buddhism 75 Wang KOn’s policy of legitimation 76 Confucianism in early Kory6 86 Wang KO6n’s Buddhist Ideology: the Ten Injunctions 89

XII Contents The First Injunction: the power of the Buddhas 93

| The Second Injunction: the relation between Buddhism and geomancy 101 The Sixth Injunction: the relationship between Buddhism and

native religions 112 T’aejo’s relation with Buddhist schools 121 Representation of the ruler through Buddhism 133

Conclusion 146

Part II The Official Institution of Buddhism

3. Legal Provisions on the Status of Monks 151 Ordination restrictions 153 Other legislation concerning monks 161 Status divisions within the monkhood 168 Conclusion 181

4 The Sangha Examination, Ranking, and Administration 183

The examination for monks in Koryd 184 | The administrative system for the Sangha 203 The Sangha Registry: the central organ of the Buddhist

bureaucracy? 221 Conclusion 236

5 The Royal and State Preceptors 238 The origins of the office of state preceptor 239 The state preceptor in Silla 243 The emergence of the royal preceptor in early Koryd 247 The preceptors after T’aejo 255

Conclusion 267

Part III The Ritual and Economic Roles of Buddhism

6 The Buddhist Temple Economy in Early Kory6é 271 The nature of temple land in early Koryd 273 Land donations to temples: case studies 286 Official temples in Kory6: the pibo-sa system 295

Private temples 305 Conclusion 310

Contents X11

_ 7Defining Buddhist State Rituals 313 ritual 315 Main Koryo Buddhist state rituals 319 Royal ancestor worship through Buddhism 335 The Kory6 Tripitaka and the Kory6 dynasty 349

Conclusion 362 |

Conclusion 365

| Appendix |

Biographical Abstracts of Kory6 Monks 375 Reference Matter

Character List 419 Bibliography 433

Index 467

BLANK PAGE

Tables, Maps, and Figures

Tables

1 The Nine Mountain Schools 57

2 The mountain schools in late Silla 60

3 + Origin of monks’ patronage 64

45 Ten Major Kory6 rites 115 temples founded by T’aejo in 919 131

|7 Origins Silla—Kory6d 156 of Koryo monks 169 6 Average tonsure and ordination age in late

8 Various terms for the monastic examinations 186

9 Royal preceptors under T’aejo 250 10 Land categories in the Righteous Granary Decree 275

11 Kory6 memorial temples 344 Maps

1 The Nine Mountain Schools | 55

2 Koryo ca. 918 78

XV1 Tables, Maps, and Figures

Figures

1 Text of T’aejo’s First Injunction 100

2 Wang KonandIl6m ~ 137

3. Ranks of monks in Kory6 191

Kings of Unified Silla

and Koryo

Unified Silla

(T’aejong) Muyol wang 654-61

Munmu wang 661-81 Sinmun wang 681-92 Hyoso wang 692-702 Songddk wang 702-37 Hyosong wang 737-42 Kydngdok wang | 742-65

Hyegong wang 765-80 Sonddk wang | 780-85 Wonsong wang 785-98 Sosong wang 798-800 Aejang wang 800-809 Hondok wang 809-26 Htingd6ok wang 826-36 Hiigang wang 836-38

Min’ae wang 838-39

xviii Kings of Unified Silla and Koryo

Sinmu wang 839 Munsong wang 839—57 Hon’an wang 857-61 Kyongmun wang 861-75

Hongang wang 875-86

Chonggang wang 886—87

Chinsong yOwang (queen) 887-97

Hyogong wang 897-912

Sinddk wang 912-17

Kyongmyong wang 917-24

Kyong’ae wang 924-27 Kyongsun wang 927-35 Koryo

T’aejo (Wang Kon) 918—43

Hyejong 943-45 Chongjong 945-49

Kwangjong 949-75 Kyodngjong 975-81 Songjong | 981-97 Mokchong 997—1009 Hydnjong 1009-31 Tdkchong 1031-34 Chongjong 1034—46

Munjong 1046-83 Sunjong 1083 Sonjong 1083-94 Honjong 1094-95 Sukchong 1095-1105

Yejong 1105-22

Kings of Unified Silla and Kory6 XIX

Injong | 1122-46 Uijong 1146-70 Myongjong 1170-97 Sinjong 1197-1204 Huyong 1204-11 Kangjong 1211-13 Kojong 1213-59 Wonjong 1259-74 Ch’ungny6l wang 1274-1308

Ch’ungs6n wang 1308-13

Ch’ungsuk wang 1313-30, 1332-39 Ch’unghye wang 1330-32, 1339-44

Ch’ungmok wang 134448 Ch’ungjong wang 1348-51

Kongmin wang 1351-74 U wang 1374-88 Ch’ang wang | 1388-89 Kongyang wang 1389-92

BLANK PAGE

Abbreviations

CUS Chosen sotokufu, Chosen jisatsu shiryo (Seoul: Asea munhwasa, 1976).

CKS Chosen sotokufu, Chdsen kinseki soran (Seoul: Chungang munhwa ch’ulp’ansa, 1968).

CPTS Yi Ntng-hwa, Chosén Pulgyo t’ongsa (Seoul: Kyénghii

1990). |

ch’ulp’ansa, 1968).

HPC Han’guk Pulgyo chénsé (Seoul: Tongguk taehakkyo, K. Koryo taejanggyong (Seoul: Tongguk taehakkyo, 1957— 76).

KMC Koryo myonghyon chip (Seoul: Songgyungwan taehakkyo, 1986).

KRS Chong In-ji et al., Korydsa (Seoul: Asea munhwasa, 1990).

KRSC Kim Chong-s6 et al., Koryésa chdryo (Seoul: Asea munhwasa, 1973).

KSCM Ho Hung-sik, ed., Han’guk kitimsék chénmun (Seoul: Asea munhwasa, 1984).

KSPM Yi Chi-gwan, ed. and trans., Kamju kyoyok yoktae kosung pimun (Seoul: Kasan mungo, 1993-97).

xxii Abbreviations NYKSM _— Han’guk ydksa yon’guhoe, ed., Yokchu Namal Yoéch’o kuimsongmun (Seoul: Hyean, 1996).

SGSG Kim Pu-sik, Samguk sagi (Seoul: Uryu munhwasa, 1983). SGYS Iryon, Samguk yusa (Seoul: Uryu munhwasa, 1996).

T. Takakusu Junjird and Watanabe Kaikyoku, eds., Taisho shinshi daizokyo (Tokyo: Daizokyokai, 1924-35).

TMS SO K6-jong et al., Tongmun son (Seoul: Minjok munhwasa, 1994).

TYS No Sa-sin et al., Sinjting Tongguk yoji stingnam (Seoul: Sogyong munhwasa, 1994).

TYSC Yi Kyu-bo, Tongguk Yi sangguk chip, in KMC 1.

The Power of the Buddhas The Politics of Buddhism During

the Kory6 Dynasty (915-1392)

BLANK PAGE

Introduction The theologian may indulge the pleasing task of describing Religion as she descended from Heaven, arrayed in her native purity. A more melancholy task is imposed on the historian. He must discover the inevitable mixture of error and corruption which she contracted in a long residence upon earth, among a weak and degenerate race of beings.

_ Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. 15

In 1019, one century after the founding of the Kory6 dynasty (918-1392), a Buddhist layman living in a small district near presentday Taegu made a vow to construct a five-story stipa. He died before his wish could be realized, but his brother, who was vice head of the district, decided to fulfill the vow. He mobilized monks and no-

tables to raise funds and carry out the project, and finally, on the fourth day of the first month of 1031, the stiipa was dedicated at Chongdo-sa. Another official wrote a report, faithfully recording the history of the project as well as the names of all the people involved and their contributions. Together with some relics, a copy of the report was stored in a brass container inside the stitipa, where it was discovered in 1905.’ The report’s version of the layman’s original vow is as follows: In the tenth month of 1019, citizen Kwang-hyon of this district [Yangmokkun] vowed to build a five-story stupa, wishing that the country’s hegemony would be enduring and on a solid basis, that the ruler would infinitely 1, See H6 Hiing-sik, “1031-nyén Chéngdo-sa t’apchi,” p. 64.

l

2 Introduction continue in leisure and old age, that the officials relying on this marvelous cause and this wholesome project would be unaffected by disaster and increase their fortunes and life spans, that everywhere people would together enjoy the joyful enterprise, that foreign armies would be annihilated by lightning, that the suzerain country would enjoy more peace, that the hun-

| dred grains would ripen in abundance, that the myriad people would live in peace and harmony, that old and young, men and women, of this district would live to old age, reap fortune and avoid calamity, preserve eternal tranquility and enjoyment, that the lost souls of the three realms and the four evil rebirths would support this stipa construction and achieve their lost heaven.”

Kwang-hy6n’s motivations for building this stipa are not clear. Normally, such private acts of Buddhist piety served a specific goal. Inscriptions on Chinese votive paintings reveal that the donors usually prayed for the country’s peace and prosperity before stating their personal wish.” In this case, however, even if Kwang-hyon originally had a private wish, such as rebirth in the Buddhist Pure Land, after his premature death the project acquired a very public character as

funds were raised among dozens of local people. This may be the reason for the prayer for the good of everyone. But the project also had a dimension wider than the local community. Permission was requested from the central government to authorize the land donations to support the construction costs. Presumably the project itself was in some way resonant with the requirements of the Koryo state. Early in 1019 Kang Kam-ch’an (948-1031) had defeated a Khitan invasion

force, ending decades of conflict, and soon thereafter moves were made toward a peaceful settlement, finalized in 1022. It is therefore possible that commemoration of this event was encouraged across the country: after a severe crisis, it 1s natural to express a wish for peace and pray for the avoidance of similar crises. 2. For a recension of this text, see Maema Kydésaku, “Nyamoku sekitdgi no kaitoku.”” Maema included useful annotations to the text, which is written in idu, and photographs of the original text. For corrections to some of his readings, see H6 Hting-sik, “103 1-ny6n Chéngdo-sa t’apchi,” p. 68. 3. See, e.g., a votive painting from tenth-century Dunhuang, in Whitfield and

Farrer, Caves of the Thousand Buddhas, pp. 51-52. There are also examples of Buddhist gifts solely for the benefit of ruler and state; for one such case from the Southern Song, see Halperin, “Buddhist Temples,” pp. 71-72.

Introduction 3 _ If these are the motives behind the text quoted above, then it is a unique example of the mediating role of Buddhism between state and subjects and illustrates how Buddhism was used to express political wishes and engender compliance with broad policy goals. This study is an attempt to determine Buddhism’s place in the body politic of Kory6 and thus answer the question whether Buddhism did indeed

fulfill such a role. Kory6 Buddhism is still described as “StateProtection Buddhism” (hoguk Pulgyo), that is, a religion whose prime purpose was to rally support (supernatural and popular) against for-

eign invasions. This interpretation has always seemed reductive to me, as a closer look at Kwang-hyo6n’s vow illustrates. The annihilation of “foreign armies .. . by lightning” is but one of many wishes expressed. The tone of the vow is much more conciliatory, expressing support for the ruling dynasty and praying for the well-being of Kory6’s suzerain state. Moreover, we cannot determine whether the text was a genuinely spontaneous vow or a mediated expression originating with the state. At the very least, however, it shows that Buddhism was a broad canvas on which people projected many religious and secular concerns and desires, among which “protection of the state” was but one aspect.

This points to the need for a better understanding of the role of Buddhism in the body politic and society of Kory6. Surprisingly, although it is widely acknowledged that Buddhism was the “state religion” (kukkyo) of Kory,’ nobody has yet systematically attempted to ascertain to what extent and in what areas Buddhism functioned as such. Was Buddhism declared the only true religion? Was state support the main reason for Buddhism’s dominance in Koryd? How actively did the state seek to promote religious ideals? For what reason? What was the strength of Buddhism as an institution, the nature of its relation to the state? Although to anyone familiar with Korean history the answer to some of these questions may seem obvious, in truth we have a very blurred image of Kory6 Buddhism. The use of hoguk Pulgyo as a blanket term has obscured many phenomena. It lumps to-

gether very different rituals and events, such as the P’algwanhoe

ch’aek,” p. 37.

4. For representative views on Buddhism as an official religion, see Hd Hiing-sik, Koryo Pulgyosa yon’gu, p. 317; and Han Ki-mun, “Kory6 T’aejo ti Pulgyo chéng-

4 Introduction (Eight Prohibitions Festival) and the carving of the Kory6 Tripitaka, and explains them as part of a deliberate ideology of national resistance. This study reconsiders this ideological dimension, first of all by evaluating it systematically from the perspective of state-religion relations. Since the Kory6 dynasty left no record of its ideological program, if such a thing ever existed, we have to reconstruct its intentions from its actions and isolated statements. This is attempted in

Part I. Because of the paucity of good sources, any conclusion regarding the ideological program of the Kory6 must lack a firm foundation. Therefore I also look at the organizational dimension of statereligious relations, and in Parts II and III analyze the structure of the Buddhist institution and its ritual and economic role. This analysis is based on the assumption that we should be able to find a correlation between the ideology as an ideal construction and its concrete effects. To further strengthen these working assumptions, in this Introduction I first explain my methodological framework and then assess the current state of scholarship on state Buddhism; finally I present the approach taken in this work.

Methodological Considerations: Religion and Political Order How should we approach the relation between religion and politics? The literature on the subject is vast, deals mainly with Western reli-

gions, and presents numerous different categories to analyze the

| gamut of relations between politics and religion. Two recurrent themes emerge from these studies. First, the division between reli- gion and politics is not absolute: it is impossible to draw a neat dividing line between the two spheres. Even if Church and State exist as two distinct entities, political and religious values are often interchangeable and never the exclusive domain of either side, even if the opposite is claimed.” Second, the way people have understood and thus distinguished politics and religion has changed considerably over time. Even though typologies of different Church-State relationships can be drawn up, every case has to be explained in its context; 5. For a somewhat philosophical critique of the western dichotomy of politics and religion, see Panikkar, “Religion or Politics.”

Introduction 5 moreover, it has to be taken into account that these typologies are essentially synchronic, that is, they are relative not only to space but also to time.°

| For the purpose of this study, I define “politics” very broadly. Although the term is usually understood to refer to a dynamic process

in which a group of people reach a consensus for the good of the larger group to which they belong according to a set of principles and conventions,’ this is too specific for the purposes of this book. Since we know virtually nothing of how policy was understood or practiced outside a small circle of aristocrats based in the capital, I here equate politics simply with the actions and intentions of the state. In the Kory6 political system, political decisions were theoretically made on the basis of policy proposals advanced by state officials. These proposals were then debated by a small body of leading officials and presented to the king for final ratification and promulgation.® Hence, the generic term “state” is used here to refer to this small group of top officials. However, it should be emphasized that even this broad definition is problematic, because more often than not we cannot identify the real actors behind policy decisions. Especially in the beginning of Kory6, a small group of trusted advisors/ generals in the founding king’s circle were behind the formal state organs.

“Religion,” at least in this study, is more easily defined, since I will discuss only Buddhism. Still, a few caveats are necessary here too: Buddhism as a religious system embraces a variety of doctrines, practices, and institutions, only a small number of which are relevant for Kory6; given the paucity of sources and the consequent gaps in

our knowledge, we therefore have to be careful not to read things from other Buddhist cultures into Kory6 Buddhism. Viewed superficially, relations between religious and political or-

ganizations appear quite straightforward, with a limited number of possible scenarios, as described, for instance, in the model drawn up by Randall Collins for his sociological comparison of Buddhism and 6. Ramet, “Sacred Values,” esp. p. 6. 7. Miller, Blackwell Encyclopaedia, s.v. “Politics,” p. 390.

| 8. See Palais, Politics and Policy, pp. 14-15; Duncan, Origins of the Chosén Dynasty; and Son Pokee, Social History of the Early Chosén Dynasty.

6 Introduction Christianity. Collins suggests three basic structural forms for the re-

lationship between religion and regime in history: (1) religion is identical with political structure and activity; (2) religion is independent of the state but used by the state as the major basis of political legitimation and sometimes even of organization; (3) the state is fully secular in legitimation and organization, and religion is free to confront politics however it wants.’ Like Chinese Buddhism, Koryé Buddhism would appear to fit into the first category, because there

was no independent “church” and the political system exercised oversight of the country’s monastics. As we shall see, however, this is potentially misleading, since it suggests that Buddhism is subordinate to the state. To obtain a more comprehensive picture, rather than focusing on institutions alone, we should look more broadly at the role of religious and political values in society. The seven distinct forms of Church-State interaction distinguished by Sabrina Petra Ramet, in the introduction to a volume of studies on religion and politics, allow for such a broader comparison of values.'” Although I do not use them as a concrete analytical tool per se, these are useful concepts to frame my discussion of Kory6 Buddhism. The first two forms, legitimation and ideology, are the most important, and I deal with them in more detail below. The third form of interaction revolves around the question of adherence and collective loyalty. In some cases, the question of adherence to a particular religion 1s a question of state concern, for example, in order to define the state as protector of the orthodox faith against rival political forces labeled heterodox. In the case of Kory6é, adherence is only an issue insofar as the total number of adherents (i.e., monks) is concerned. The fourth form of religio-political interaction 1s organizational. This can refer either to state efforts to interfere in the organization of 9. Collins, “Historical Perspectives,” p. 259. 10. Ramet, “Sacred Values,” pp. 6-9. These are somewhat similar to the seven dimensions of religious experience distinguished by Ninian Smart (Dimensions of the Sacred, pp. 9-11), although Smart focuses on the religion itself rather than its interaction with the state. These dimensions, given a double name to elucidate them, are: the ritual or practical; the doctrinal or philosophical; the mythic or narrative; the experiential or emotional; the ethical or legal; the organizational or social; and the material or artistic. Although Smart’s categories deal with the religion an sich, they also take into account its interrelation with society and the state.

Introduction 7 the church or to state reliance on church organization for administration. This aspect of relations constitutes a recurring theme in this book. Also relevant to this study is the fifth form, interaction in the legislative sphere. Again, this can go both ways; in some cases the state may dictate alterations in religious laws, but in other cases the church can

exert pressure to make secular laws more religious. The last two forms of interaction apply equally to Koryd. Ramet’s sixth form is functional, or “the ability of either Church or State to affect the functioning of the other by gaining control of some of its resources or by

setting an ineluctable agenda.”'' The seventh and last form is the most pervasive yet also the most elusive category: it is the mutual interaction in the field of values. Since both religious and political systems are also value systems, both often have competing interests in fostering certain values, regarding either the self or society, and the behavior associated with these values.. Although political and religious authorities may have rival value systems, more often than not they share at least some values. Because of this and because values are often not made explicit, they form perhaps the most interesting

angle for studying the tensions, struggles, and mutual reliance of state and religion. As noted above, legitimation and the related concept of ideology are two of the core ideas for this narrative. According to Max Weber,

every political authority depends on legitimation for its exercise of power. Even though coercion and military power may be important in obtaining power, the maintenance of power demands that the governed be convinced that it is right and proper to obey those who govern and to abide by their decisions.'* Weber singled out three categories of grounds for making a legitimacy claim: (1) rational grounds, which rest on a belief that patterns of normative rules are “legal” and that those in authority have the right to enforce these rules; (2) traditional grounds, that is, an established belief in the sanctity of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of the status of those exercising authority under them; and (3) charismatic grounds,

or devotion to the specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism, or 11. Ramet, “Sacred Values,” p. 9. 12. Sternberger, “Legitimacy,” p. 244. “Legitimacy” refers to the result; “legiti-

mation” to the process and procedures leading to it. ,

8 Introduction exceptional character of an individual person, and of the normative patterns or order revealed or ordained by him.’* Although some have questioned whether the need for legitimation as defined by Weber is

really pervasive and operates equally in all societies," it is still a good starting point to discuss the exercise of power and how it 1s justified. I return to this point in Chapter 2, which discusses the legitimation of Koryo. In any given context, legitimation can be understood only in connection with extant ideologies. The manipulation of symbols, rituals, or beliefs to achieve the aura of legitimacy can usually be explained in

terms of the dominant ideology of the society in which this takes place. In a narrow sense, “ideology” refers to an intellectual doctrine that explains certain beliefs and values as just and thereby validates a certain political order. Marxist theorists have therefore used the term in a pejorative sense, describing it as a “false consciousness” that per-

| suades the oppressed to accept a representation of reality that keeps them in place.’ Recently the notion of ideology has broadened considerably; it is no longer confined to its function in the political sphere to impose norms and truth. It is now seen more as a system of representation, which reproduces the social order symbolically as a unity in which the individual subject has a place. In other words, it is any symbolic discourse that constructs the subject (or subjectivities).'°

The main ideologies discussed in this book are Buddhism and Confucianism. Both are systems that impose societal norms and construct subjects. Unfortunately, because of the available source material, it is not possible to look at the micro-politics of order and use

documents to investigate how the subject was represented in Koryd.'’ Instead, I focus on Buddhism as an institution and rely mainly on the traditional interpretation of ideology as a system that justifies 13. Weber, Theory of Social and Economic Organization, p. 328; idem, From Max Weber, pp. 78-79, 294-98. 14. See, e.g., Collins, “Historical Perspectives,” p. 263. For a critical reassessment of Weber’s theories, see Bendix and Roth, Scholarship and Partisanship. 15. See Scruton, Dictionary of Political Thought, s.v. “Ideology,” p. 213. 16. Thompson, Beliefs and Ideology, pp. 11-29. 17. On micro-politics, see Turner, Religion and Social Theory, p. 183; his remarks occur in the context of his discussion of Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish.

Introduction 9 political and religious order. However, from the more recent discourse on ideology, I adopt the notion that ideology can be studied from its material effects and is not always intentional and articulated.'* Hence the two-pronged approach adopted in this study. Besides reconstructing the ideological use the Koryd dynasty made of Buddhism, I also assess the full extent of the religion’s significance through the institutions created to sustain it. This allows a comparison of the abstract, theoretical model with its concrete applications. This approach is indebted to Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice, which is based on two fundamental levels of human experience: the “phenomenological” level of beliefs and representations and the “objective” level at which these beliefs and representations appear as ideological products.” Confucianism was undoubtedly the most likely legitimating ideology in premodern East Asia. As far as we can determine, discussions on the legitimacy of the Kory6 ruling house would have been framed in terms of the Mandate of Heaven (ch ’6nmyong, Ch. tianming). This doctrine originated in the Zhou dynasty (1122-256 BC) and became

the central conception around which Confucian debates on the legitimacy of the ruler took shape. According to the most ancient formulations of this doctrine, Heaven (Ch. tian) selects someone of outstanding virtue and ability and confers a mandate on him to rule “all under Heaven” (Ch. tianxia).*° The Mandate could be transferred to the ruler’s descendants to form a lineage or dynasty, but in case of misrule Heaven could also rescind the Mandate. Although this theory remained essentially unaltered throughout the history of China, perceptions of how and why the Mandate was conferred and rescinded evolved over time. By the Han dynasty, it was thought that there was 18. Thompson, Beliefs and Ideology, passim. 19. Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, p. 3. My interpretation of Bourdieu’s schema is indebted to Faure, The Rhetoric of Immediacy, p. 37.

20. Although Heaven later came to be understood as an impersonal force, it is important to note that there was also continuity with the Shang concept of a supreme lord (Ch. shangdi) who rules Heaven. This means that, to some, the Mandate was perhaps understood to be granted by this supreme being. See Ching, Mysticism and Kingship in China, p. 36. Further information on the Mandate of Heaven doctrine in this paragraph was derived from Chan, Legitimation in Imperial China, pp. 19-48; and Wechsler, Offerings of Jade and Silk, pp. 12-20.

10 Introduction a mutual interaction between Heaven and man, especially between Heaven and the ruler. Heaven communicated by sending auspicious or inauspicious omens. Anomalies, for example, natural disasters, were interpreted as warnings from Heaven that the ruler was in danger of losing his Mandate. The counselors and ministers who interpreted these warning signs then tried to convince the ruler to mend his ways in order to please Heaven and avert further calamities. Although various strategies could be employed to placate Heaven, the personal virtue of the ruler was usually regarded as the main source of Heaven’s displeasure, and therefore improving the ruler’s virtue was considered the main remedy.

In the Mandate of Heaven ideology, only the Chinese emperor could communicate with Heaven. This meant that other states theoretically had to receive the Mandate through the Chinese emperor. Kory6 rulers accepted this symbolic conferral of power from the Chinese emperor, although in practice they themselves determined the establishment of the new dynasty and the succession of kings. The fact that all Kory6d kings sought investiture from a Chinese empire shows that they subscribed to the Mandate ideology. Moreover,

the Korydsa (History of Kory6d) portrays Wang Kon (877-943), founder of the Kory6 dynasty, as someone worthy of the Mandate, in the sense that he performed all the rhetorical acts of a dynastic foun-

der in the Confucian mold. Yet, we should not conclude from this that Confucianism formed the main legitimating ideology. Early Kory6é had no substantial Confucian bureaucratic class, the chief audience for this ideology, and there is no evidence that the Mandate theory was discussed at court.*! As we shall see, although Koryéd

| seemed to conform outwardly to the Confucian worldview, domestically the Koreans pursued their own agenda. Also, the Mandate is a sufficiently broad concept that it can easily be used to confer the notion of legitimacy, however it is achieved. Kingship can be defined in many ways; among these, Confucian kingship is but one version. 21. To my knowledge, the only scholar who has dealt with the problem of legitimacy in Koryd is Michael Rogers; see especially “P’yénnydén T’ongnok’ and “National Consciousness in Medieval Korea.” Rogers surmises that there was no highly developed discourse on dynastic legitimacy (Ch. zhengtong) in Koryé6, but that its scholars and statesmen adapted it to their own purposes.

| Introduction 11 Until recently studies of Buddhism often overlooked the Buddhist notion of kingship since it did not seem to fit the “otherworldly” representation of the religion. The relation between Buddhism and secu-

lar power was, however, more substantial and durable than commonly acknowledged. From a very early stage, Buddhism developed a concept of society and politics that proved surprisingly influential. Early Buddhist texts describe a theory of statehood based on a social contract between ruler and ruled.”” Some siitras seem to advocate a form of republican government, but, according to David Kalupahana, the Buddha realized that if the constituents for this type of government were not morally committed, a monarchical government could

be more effective.** Yet, Indian Buddhism always maintained an ambivalent position toward kings. On one hand, they were distrusted as cruel and unreliable, and monks were urged to avoid the king and his court. On the other hand, monks also realized the need for protection and patronage by a powerful ruler. This more pragmatic view

prevailed, and although acknowledging the need for an effective kingship somewhat compromised the ideals of the early Sangha, this

apparent concession to the secular powers was attenuated by the concept of a Buddhist king. The ideal Buddhist king bases his rule on the dharma, or Buddhist

teachings. This is figuratively expressed in the term cakravartin, which means “one who turns the wheel [of the dharma]. However, the dharma practiced by rulers is distinguished from the dharma practiced by monks; otherwise, the king’s practice and propagation

of the dharma would render the difference between layman and monk obsolete. This “two-wheels-of-the-dharma” doctrine clearly distinguishes two separate spheres (or “wheels”) of authority, one secular and one monastic. The cakravartin is the leader of the temporal realm, the bodhisattva of the spiritual realm.” Theoretically, the cakravartin is the secular equivalent of the Buddha: neither is superior or inferior to the other. Both are described as having the features 22. Nakamura Hajime, “Tosi hiinggi sidae.” See also Harris, “Buddhism and Politics in Asia,” pp. 2-4. 23. Kalupahana, Ethics in Early Buddhism, p. 125. 24. Gokhale, “Early Buddhist Kingship,” p. 22. See also Reynolds, “Two Wheels of Dhamma.”

12 Introduction and characteristics of “supermen” (mahdapurusa), and both have accumulated a huge amount of merit in previous lives. In the words of Stanley Tambiah, “it is implied that a world conqueror (cakravartin) and a world renouncer (Buddha) are two sides of the same coin.” By expanding the concept of dharma from a religious and ascetic ideal to a universal principle, Buddhism effectively became an important force in the politics of many Asian states. The seminal ideal of the Buddhist king who practiced this concept of dharma is King

Asoka (fl. third century BC). Although there is still some debate whether AsSoka’s use of the term dharma coincides with its Buddhist interpretation,”° the important thing is that in Buddhist historiogra-

phy and mythology he became the archetypal Buddhist monarch. Naturally, the ways in which this model was implemented differed immensely depending on the society in which Buddhism found itself. Although the two wheels of dharma doctrine was supposed to guarantee that the Sangha existed as a separate authority within the state, this autonomy could not always be maintained. In China, for example, the rulers of the non-sinitic Northern Wei state (386-534) posed as incarnations of the Buddha, thereby combining the worldly role of

cakravartin with the spiritual authority of the Buddha. Under the Southern Dynasties (386-589), the Sangha seems to have succeeded

initially in maintaining its autonomy and in persuading rulers to adopt the cakravartin model.”’ One of the most famous Chinese em-

perors to have adopted the mantle of Buddhist rulership is Liang Wudi (r. 502-49). His approach, however, was idiosyncratic. Rather than relying on established procedures, he created a ceremony that allowed him to assume the position of bodhisattva.** After the found25. Tambiah, World Conqueror and World Renouncer, p. 43. Tambiah points out, however, that although both rely on the dharma, there is a distinction between the dharma of cosmic law and transcendence (nirvana) and the dharma of righteousness as practiced by the ruler; the first is considered superior. 26. Tambiah (ibid., pp. 54, 57-63) argues that, by and large, ASoka’s interpretation of the dharma conforms with Buddhist ideas. See also Reynolds, “Two Wheels of Dhamma,” p. 27. Others argue that the dharma that appears in Asoka’s edicts is distinct from the Buddhist dharma. See Strong, The Legend of King Asoka, pp. 1315, for an overview of the main proponents for or against a Buddhist reading of Asoka’s dharma. 27. Wright, Buddhism in Chinese History, pp. 42-64. 28. Janousch, “Emperor as Bodhisattva.”

Introduction 13 ing of the Tang in 618, the Buddhist church lost the autonomy it had gained in the south, and Chinese emperors henceforth seem to have eschewed the cakravartin paradigm. Scholars of legitimation in China have perhaps underestimated the legitimating power of Buddhism. Both Howard Wechsler and Chan Hok-lam in their discussions of legitimation in the Tang (618-907)

and Jin (1115-1234) dynasties, respectively, give short shrift to Buddhism and focus almost exclusively on Confucian ideology.” Yet the example of Empress Wu’s recourse to Buddhism to legitimate her interregnum (690-705) shows that it could form a powerful alternative, particularly for those not immersed in Confucian ways of thinking.” Buddhism remained a strong legitimating force, even after the Huichang repression of 845-46." It resurfaced, for instance, in the Wu-Yue kingdom (907-78), whose rulers were fervent Buddhist patrons and emulated Asoka by producing and distributing 84,000 small stiipas.** Buddhism also played an important political role in so-called lesser, or non-Han, dynasties, especially the Liao (907-1125) and the Xi-Xia (1038—1227).*° But under the more illustrious Song dynasty (960-1279) as well, the emperors of the North-

ern Song (960-1127) were fervent patrons of the religion and used its potential for enhancing power.” All in all, the rich and varied tradition of Buddhist political ideology in East Asia forms an important benchmark for understanding Kory6.

Korean Buddhism: State Protectionism? One cannot say that the political role of Buddhism has been underestimated in the case of Korea; to the contrary, the notion that Korean Buddhism has always been an ideological support for the nation 29. Chan, in Legitimation in Imperial China, does not mention the legitimating potential of Buddhism; Wechsler, in Offerings of Jade and Silk (pp. 71-72), pays attention only to Buddhist auguries of the rise of the Tang. 30. See Forte, Political Propaganda and Ideology; and Guisso, Wu Tse-t’ien. 31. See Weinstein, Buddhism Under the T’ang, pp. 114-36. 32. On Buddhism in Wu-Yue, see Shih Heng-ching, Syncretism of Ch’an and Pure Land; and Welter, Meaning of Myriad Good Deeds. 33. On the role of Buddhism under the Xi-Xia, see Dunnell, Great State of White and High; for the Liao, see Nogami Shunjo, Ry6 Kin no Bukkyo. 34. Huang Chi-chiang, “Imperial Rulership and Buddhism.”

14 Introduction is something of a truism. Known as State-Protection Buddhism, it is

usually portrayed as the hallmark of Korean Buddhism. Robert Buswell has summarized this view: “Three Kingdoms Buddhism seems to have been a thoroughgoing amalgamation of the foreign re-

| ligion and indigenous local cults. Autochthonous snake and dragon cults, for example, merged with the Mahayana belief in dragons as protectors of the Dharma, forming the unique variety of hoguk Pulgyo (“State-Protection Buddhism’’) that was thereafter to characterize Korean Buddhism.” Since the meaning of “State Protectionism”’ is taken for granted, most authors do not feel the need to articulate what

they mean by it, even though their understanding of the term obviously differs. Since the assumptions inherent in this interpretive framework still influence the understanding of Korean Buddhism, I preface my discussion of the legitimating role of Buddhism with a short history of the development of State Protectionism as an academic theory.

The term hoguk (Ch. huguo) has long antecedents in sinitic Buddhism. Soon after the start of serious Buddhist translation activities in the second half of the second century AD, there emerged a body of scriptures, sometimes apocryphal, that purported to be able to protect the state. These scriptures achieved a measure of influence in all East Asian states, since the courts of China, Korea, and Japan frequently organized siitra readings or rituals based on these scriptures. In this sense, the idea of State Protectionism is part of East Asian Buddhism,

which to varying degrees played a role in the religious history of East Asia. The foremost of these scriptures are the Jin guangming jing (Sitra of golden light) and the Renwang jing (Humane kings siitra).°° The Sitra of Golden Light is a translation from an Indian original and advocates a Buddhist definition of kingship in which the king relies on the dharma for governing his country. It also claims 35. Buswell, “Buddhism in Korea,” p. 422. 36. The Chinese titles quoted here are the commonly used abbreviations, not the full original titles. Two main Chinese versions of the Jin guangming jing exist: one translated by Dharmaksema between 414 and 421 (T. 663) and one translated by Y1jing in 703 (7. 665). Another version made by Baogui in 597 (T. 664) is essentially derived from Dharmaksema’s translation. As for the Renwang jing, there are two extant “translations” of this scripture, one attributed to Kumarajiva and dating to 410— 12 (T. 245) and one produced by Amoghavajra in 765-66 (T. 246).

Introduction 15 that reading, listening to, or generally following this scripture gener-

ates protective power. Dharma assemblies in which this sutra was read were especially popular in Japan.°’ Arguably more influential was the Humane Kings Sutra, which sets forth a more sinicized interpretation of Buddhist kingship and gives a more detailed exposition of rituals to avert or prevent calamities. Although purporting to be a translation of an Indian siitra, it was created in China in the decades following 450.°° Thanks to the extensive research into this si-

tra’s ideological strategies by Charles Orzech, we are now better aware of the complexity of its message. Orzech has demonstrated that the text is anchored in the political climate of fifth-century northern China. Created in the wake of a near-fatal persecution of Buddhism carried out by the Northern Wei, the Humane Kings Sutra

seeks to argue both the autonomy of the Buddhist Sangha and the necessity of Buddhism for Chinese rulers. It is strongly imbued with end-of-dharma rhetoric. On one hand, it sees the arrogance of both monks and kings as the cause of the ending of the dharma, and the

| enforced state registration of monks and state regulation of the Sangha as symptoms of this decay. On the other hand, the sitra states explicitly that it is to be entrusted to rulers; only if they recite and expound the scripture can serious calamities be averted.”’ In practice, its apotropaic function in particular testifies to the sttra’s importance. The Hundred Seat Assembly, a ritual prescribed by the siitra to ward

off calamities, became a popular instrument for rallying Buddhist monks behind the state’s interests. Its documentation in historical records provides a yardstick to trace the scripture’s popularity in East Asia.” In South Korea, the study of the state-protective ideology in Buddhism became widespread after the Korean War. The first article to study its role in Korean history, written by Kim Tong-hwa, appeared 37. For the textual history and translations of this siitra, see Nobel, Suvarnaprabhasottanna Sutra; for its popularity in Japan, see May, “Chingo kokka.” 38. For a translation and discussion of the text’s ideology and historical provenance, see Orzech, Politics and Transcendent Wisdom. 39. Orzech, “Buddhist Image of (Im)perfect Rule.” 40. See May, “Chingo kokka”; and Kim Jongmyung, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” pp. 101—5. However, there appears to be no comprehensive research on the practice of the Humane Kings assembly in Chinese history.

16 Introduction in 1956.*' While recognizing this ideology as an integral part of Buddhism, Kim also stressed that Buddhism had helped to foster a national identity in Korea and idealized the role of Korean monks in the protection of the country. Kim may well have taken some cues from Japanese scholars: as early as 1935, Eda Toshio had published an article on State-Protection Buddhism in Korea.” The subject had been popular for some time in Japan: following the Meyi restoration

(1868), Buddhism fell from grace, as the new leaders promoted Shintd as Japan’s original religion. Japanese Buddhism had to reinvent itself as a nationalist tradition, and many Japanese Buddhists became strong advocates of the imperial way, even when this meant supporting military aggression. In this climate, it was natural that the study of the state-protective tradition would receive a boost.” Although Japanese scholarship has claimed that State Protectionism was one of the most salient features of Japanese Buddhism,” this did not deter Koreans from doing the same for their tradition. Following Kim Tong-hwa’s early efforts, however, the emphasis gradually shifted from the study of state-protective scriptures and related practices to a broader understanding of State Protectionism. Earlier, in 1954, Yi Ki-baek had published a pioneering article on the important role of Buddhism in state-building in Silla.” He emphasized the role of monks such as Chajang and WOngwang in strengthening kingship and building moral values, as well as the impact of the important Buddhist symbols of state power developed on their advice. Subsequent scholarship would further emphasize the influence of na41. Kim Tong-hwa, “Pulgyo ti hoguk sasang.” 42. Eda Toshio, “Chosen Bukky6 to gokoku shis6.” Eda makes some disparaging remarks about Korean Buddhism in his conclusion, but otherwise the themes he selects clearly adumbrate what was to become popular in post-colonial Korean scholarship. An earlier article, which appeared in the 1920s, seems to have highlighted the resistance by Korean monks during the Hideyoshi invasions rather than State Protectionism per se (cited in Kim Chong-myong, Han ’guk chungse tii Pulgyo uirye, p. 280). Apparently, in the 1930s these ideas had already started to filter through to some Ko-

rean Buddhist scholars; see Pankaj, “Buddhism and State in Early Silla,” pp. 7—21. . 43. See Kitagawa, Religion in Japanese History, pp. 230-33; and Kim Jongmyung, “Appendix. State Protection Buddhism: A Reconsideration,” 1n idem, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” pp. 270-76. 44. See, e.g., Matsunaga Yukei, “Gokoku shis6 no kigen,” p. 69. 45. Yi Ki-baek, “Samguk sidae Pulgyo chdllae.”

Introduction 17 tive traditions on the development of a Korean form of State Protec-

tionism. It is impossible in the scope of this introduction to give a complete overview of the literature on this subject, since it runs to the dozens of articles, but a summation of some main themes 1s relevant to the discussion of state Buddhism. Generally, it became understood that the native Korean religion,

usually referred to as Shamanism (musok), had influenced stateBuddhist relations. Yi Ki-y6éng, in an excellent article on the Humane Kings Sttra as a text and as a source of practice, has shown that the stitra’s central tenets were often distorted by those who tried to practice it. It was often ignored, he argues, that the sutra empha-

sized the practice of prajnaparamita (perfection of wisdom) as the main source of merit. According to the sitra, rather than the ritual itself, the practice of the inner cultivation of wisdom was the real source of protection.*° Yi Ki-yéng concluded that in Korea shaman-

istic influence distorted the siitra’s original purport and this led to practices different from those in China.

Another element of native belief systems that received attention from scholars was the dragon myth. The dragon has a long and complex history in Buddhist and Asian mythology, and belief in dragon spirits seems to have been prevalent in Korea before the introduction of Buddhism. In most cases, they were subdued by monks or converted to Buddhism before lending protection to the new religion and the state. A culmination and sublimation of these myths can be seen in the story of Silla King Munmu’s (r. 661—81) vow to be reborn as a

dragon in the Eastern Sea to protect his country.” | Other symbols and institutions came to be regarded as expressions of the state-protection ideology. Kim Y6ng-t’ae has drawn attention to the Three Treasures (sambo) as the attributes of State-Protection

Buddhism. The Three Treasures are the nine-story pagoda at the 46. Yi Ki-yéng, “/nwang panyagyong kwa hoguk Pulgyo,” p. 191. Professor Yi also proves that “the state” in “State Protectionism” refers not only to the country in a physical sense but also to other, internal or virtual states. 47. On the role of the dragon in Silla Buddhism, see Kim Yodng-t’ae, “Silla Pulgyo e issosé tii yongsin sinang.” For an excellent treatment of the relation between dragons and Buddhism, see Inoue Hideo, “Reception of Buddhism in Korea.” For an interpretation of the significance of dragon cults in Asian Buddhism, see Buswell, Formation of Ch’an Ideology, pp. 51-60.

18 Introduction Hwangnyong-sa, which was thought to have the power to subdue foreign invasions, a sixteen-foot statue of the Buddha, and a jade belt granted to the king by an Indian deity.** Among the historical institutions associated with hoguk Pulgyo are the hwarang, the Silla elite youth organization, which was strongly associated with the worship of the future Buddha, Maitreya. Some scholars suggest that the hwarang were revered as reincarnations of Maitreya and were thought to embody the imminent advent of Maitreya’s paradise in Silla. Since Buddhist scriptures specify that Maitreya will appear when a cakravartin king is ruling, Yi Ki-baek has deduced from this that the Maitreya cult was intended to justify the existing social order by associating the king with a Buddhist ruler and the aristocracy (the hwarang were children of aristocrats) with the future Buddha.” The study of State-Protection Buddhism flourished in the 1970s,

undoubtedly because of the political situation of the time. Under Park Chung Hee’s dictatorship, a nationalist interpretation of the past was encouraged. Moreover, the idea of protecting the state also tied in well with the militarist spirit of the time and the perceived threat from North Korea. And Park Chung Hee himself was a pious Buddhist, who supported the renovation of Buddhist temples but also had

young monks drafted into the army, perhaps in the spirit of StateProtection Buddhism.” All this encouraged scholars to turn their attention to Buddhism’s historical mission of protecting the nation. One effect of this burgeoning scholarship was that whereas previously most attention had been directed at Silla, now Kory6 came within the purview of State Protectionism. In the introductory article to a series of articles on the subject, which appeared in Pulgyo hakpo (Buddhist journal), Hong Chong-sik argued that Buddhism acted as the spiritual basis of Kory6. He reasoned that in order to survive for

474 years in spite of suffering more invasions and upheavals than any other dynasty in Korean history, the Kory6 state must have had a

formidable spiritual resilience. Buddhism, Hong maintained, pro48. Kim Yong-t’ae, “Silla Pulgyo hoguk sasang.” 49. Lee Ki-baek, “Early Silla Buddhism,” p. 168. For a critique of this view and a comprehensive analysis of the hwarang phenomenon, see Yi Ki-dong, “Silla Hwarangdo”; and Pankaj, “Maitreya Cult in Early Silla.” 50. See Sgrensen, “Buddhism and Secular Power,” pp. 138-39.

Introduction 19 vided the faith that was needed to overcome the difficulties. Not a blind faith, but a carefully nurtured one, in which the state provided for and controlled the Buddhist community (external protection, oeho), while Buddhism ensured a firm moral foundation for the nation (national preservation, kukka chinho).”!

Thus the protection of the state came to be seen as a recurring and constant feature in the history of Korean Buddhism, if not its most salient feature. Although it is indisputable that Buddhist ideology was used for political ends, is this really so surprising, and does this set Korea apart from other countries where Buddhism was influ-

ential? The fact is that Buddhism never set out to be a strong institutional force on a par with the state; rather, it chose to ally itself with the monarchy and tried to mold the monarch as a protector and upholder of the religion. In this sense, Buddhism adopted a constructive role toward the authorities of nearly all countries where it became established.”* Thus the notion of State Protectionism is simply too broad a category to be useful as an analytic tool. It obfuscates other aspects of state-religious relations, such as the mutual need for legitimation or more subtle power struggles between state and Sangha. Also, it puts undue emphasis on the need for protection against foreign invasions: although Korea suffered many invasions in its history, there were also long periods of peace. More important, this interpretation describes only the desired effect of an ideology, not how that ideology functioned. We have to question how Buddhism operated as an ideological system, how it was implemented, and what its effects and limitations were. A third major problem with this term is that there 1s obviously a big difference between

51. Hong Ching-sik, “Kory6 Pulgyo sasang,” pp. 11-13. 52. This was especially pronounced in Silla. We know that Buddhism was officially patronized by the Silla rulers from King Chinhiing (r. 540—76) on, but the motivation for this political decision is very complex. Political expediency played a role, but the official recognition of Buddhism was also the result of a historical momentum: in the eastward permeation of the religion, it had become very much part of Chinese culture during the fourth to sixth centuries. At the time when Silla entered its state-building phase, all the Chinese dynasties to which it looked for inspiration had embraced Buddhism and encouraged its spread to vassal states. As a result, Buddhism became a civilizing influence and was thus naturally omnipresent in all aspects of Silla society.

20 Introduction Buddhism in sixth- and seventh-century Silla and tenth-century Koryo: there is no evidence of dragon myths or Maitreya worship in Koryo.” Some Korean scholars have tried to achieve a more generic understanding of the place and function of Buddhism in politics and society by moving beyond the notion of State-Protection Buddhism. Ho Hting-sik in particular has carried out some pathbreaking research in this field. In an introductory chapter to a volume of studies on several aspects of the history of Korean Buddhist schools and institutions, he tries to assess the influence of Buddhism on everyday life. Although he is successful in describing how it dominated the worldview of Koryd people and regulated their daily life, he 1s somewhat

less convincing in describing how it helped to actualize political power for the ruling elite. H6 almost completely ignores the rich legacy of stories and myths developed within the Buddhist tradition

to accommodate and assist the temporal power and thereby fails to address its ideological role at the level of politics.’ Following up on Hd Hting-sik’s work, Han Ki-mun has attempted a systematic analysis of the Buddhist policies used by the dynasty’s founder, King T’aejo (Wang Kon; r. 918-43). Although he pays attention to

| the concerns for legitimation underlying these policies, he does not contextualize them.’ Both H6’s and Han’s works have greatly enhanced our understanding of the Buddhist institution of Koryé, but they do not address the ideological background in which these institutions operated. My approach, then, is to try to understand the interaction between ideology and history, so as to draw up a comprehensive picture of the historical phenomenon that is Kory6 Buddhism.

53. We should bear in mind that all these elements were culled from the Samguk yusa, a work designed to enhance the state’s self-identity when sovereignty threatened to pass into Mongol hands (Kim Jongmyung, “Chajang and “Buddhism as National Protector,’” pp. 36-39).

54. H6 Hiing-sik, “Pulgyo wa yunghap toen sahoe kujo.” A partial and not wholly reliable translation of this article can be found in Lancaster et al., Buddhism in Koryo, pp. 1-33. 55. Han Ki-mun, “Kory6é T’aejo ti Pulgyo chéngch’aek.”

Introduction 21 Sources Unfortunately, every project is determined by the available sources. To a large degree, the questions I address and the scope of my research are results of the restrictions imposed by the available source materials. As is well known, there is an extreme paucity of documentary evidence. Primary sources—eyewitness accounts, transaction documents, or official communications—are almost completely lacking. The available sources broadly fit into three main categories: of-

, ficial historiography, literary collections, and epigraphy; each of these categories has specific limitations on the information on Buddhism it contains. The Koryosa 1s the official history of the Kory6 dynasty. It was not completed until 1451, almost 70 years after the founding of the

succeeding Chosdn dynasty. The compilation project had been fraught with difficulties, and earlier versions had been rejected, but under the auspices of King Sejong (r. 1418-50), the project was finally brought to fruition thanks to the editorial efforts of Chong In-ji and Kim Chong-s6.”° Their work was written according to the highest standards of the Chinese historiographic tradition, which means that there was little or no space for personal interpretation, the historian’s main task being the selection and careful editing of passages from the veritable records (sillok).°’ On the downside, the practice of history was not considered value-free; rather, it served first of all a didactic purpose in that it passed judgment on the conduct of previous rulers and ministers. Furthermore, it was also used as a source of precedents to advise present rulers and as a means to show the legitimacy of the present dynasty by demonstrating how the previous dynasty had lost the Mandate of Heaven. All this was achieved by a careful selection and juxtaposition of material. Rather than tampering

56. On the compilation history and structure of the Korydésa, see Pyén T’ae-sop, Koryosa ti yon’gu; and idem, “Kory6ésa ti chonghapchok kémt’o.” 57. On the practice of history writing in China, see Gardner, Chinese Traditional Historiography; and Beasley and Pulleyblank, Historians of China and Japan. The veritable records (Ch. shilu) were in themselves not primary sources but edited versions of the diaries of events kept by specially appointed court diarists; see Twitchett, Writing of Official History.

22 Introduction with material, the historian would in some cases insert a note to express his disgust with a situation, or worse, just omit things he did not approve of.”* Because of the contempt for Buddhism prevalent among the Neo-Confucian compilers of the Korydsa, a lot of invaluable material regarding Buddhism was undoubtedly left out. Out of respect for the previous dynasty’s rulers, entries in the annals section usually mention Buddhist affairs if they involved the king.”’ How-

ever, these are usually brief statements to the effect that the king went to a certain temple or appointed a certain monk and do not allow us to reconstruct the why and how. In short, the Korydsa does not provide contexts that would make the events related to Buddhism

intelligible. Literary collections (munjip) contain a variety of material, ranging from poetry, fictional stories, and anecdotes to texts for epitaphs and important administrative documents. Unfortunately, documents are

always quoted without background information. This means that facts such as dates, the people concerned, and other bureaucratic details are left out, presumably because the texts were selected only for their literary merits. Nevertheless, the literary collections offer unique insights into how Kory6 institutions functioned. It 1s impossible to describe all but a few of the munjip that I have used here. I should mention first of all the Tongmun son (Anthology of Korean literature), compiled by SO K6-j6ng in 1478. Although strictly speaking not a munjip, it contains the same range of texts, in this case by 58. For examples of historians’ comments, see KRS 1.11a—12b, where the genealogy of T’aejo Wang KOn is criticized for its mythological contents, and KRSC 9.50a—b, where the veneration of a Buddha relic by King Injong (r. 1122—46) is condemned. The Korydsa chéryo (Essentials of the history of Kory6; KRSC) is ordered

chronologically throughout and does not contain treatises or biographies. It was compiled in 1452 and generally mirrors the Korydsa, although there are minor discrepancies; see Han Yo6ng-u, “Korydsa Koryosa choryo ti pigyo yon’ gu.” 59. According to a prefatory note by the compilers of the Koryésa (KRS pomnye 1.a—b), regular events such as rituals were recorded only the first time they occurred,

unless the king participated, in which case an entry was required. It is not certain what other criteria were used to select data on Buddhism. Stories presenting it in a negative light were definitely more likely to be included, but otherwise the selection may have been haphazard. Appointments of royal and state preceptors, for example, are often mentioned, but from epigraphic sources we know that many other appointments were left out.

Introduction 23 eminent literati from the Late Silla up to the Early Choso6n periods. It also contains many texts on Buddhism or by Buddhist monks.’ The

Taegak Kuksa munjip (Collected works of State Preceptor Great Enlightenment) is a collection of various documents written by the monk Uich’dn (1055-1101), which offers unique insight into the more mundane activities and thoughts of a Koryé monk.” The Tongguk Yi sangguk chip (Collected works of Yi Kyu-bo) finally is the collected oeuvre of Yi Kyu-bo (1168-1241), one of the most prolific writers of

the Koryd period, who wrote many administrative texts related to Buddhism.” The third and most important category of source material for this book is epigraphic material, which consists exclusively of burial inscriptions, either in the form of small epitaphs (myojimydng) or larger

stelae (pisok).° It is perhaps exceptional—certainly in the study of East Asian Buddhism—to rely so heavily on epigraphic material, but it is the only extensive corpus of contemporary source material. Since, however, this type of source material has generally been undervalued and underutilized, I thought it merited a separate explanation in the Appendix. Besides an introduction to the specific features of this type of source, the Appendix also contains a synoptic list of all the stelae or epitaphs used for this study. What all these sources have in common is that, insofar as they discuss Buddhism, they do so in its capacity as official religion. They describe state Buddhist rituals, the careers of eminent monks, or aspects of the bureaucratic administration of the religious body. In short, they describe what I would call “state Buddhism”: the religion not in all its diversity but only in its interaction with the state.’ There are virtually 60. Hd Hiing-sik, “Tongmun sén ti p’yonch’an kwajong kwa Pulgyo saryo.” 61. Taegak Kuksa munjip, HPC 4. 62. Tongeguk Yi sangguk chip, KMC 1.

63. On this genre, see Hansen, “Inscriptions.” When citing the title of an inscription, instead of giving the full title, which is often long-winded, I have chosen to give abbreviated titles, containing only the name of the temple and the posthumous title given to a monk. Together with the date of the epitaph, this is sufficient to locate the text of an inscription in compilations other than the ones I have used. 64. Note the difference from definitions of the term “state religion” in other contexts. Sato Chisui (“Character of Yiin-kang Buddhism,” pp. 39-40) singles out three criteria that mark Northern Wei Buddhism as a state religion: (1) state control of the religious community; (2) development of the religion’s content to serve the state;

24 Introduction no documents that allow us to see the internal dynamics of the Bud- _ dhist world, how temple life was organized, how the religion was actually practiced or experienced among monks or laity. Only a few scattered documents give us glimpses of the issues that concerned individual temples or religious life in general at the level of ordinary people. Temple histories and writings by monks reveal something about religious movements and the economic life of large temples and warrant more study. But this can only be done once we come to grips with the all-pervasive system of state Buddhism in Kory6 and understand how and why it functioned and what its limitations were.

Structure This book consists of three parts. Part I describes the historical background of the founding of the Koryo dynasty and attempts to reconstruct its official relationship to Buddhism. Part II studies the state apparatus that dealt with and integrated Buddhist monks and monasteries. Part III looks at the ritual, social, and economic roles of Buddhism.

Part I has two chapters. The first chapter analyses the factors that led to the collapse of the Silla social and political order. Since Buddhism initially played an important part in justifying this order, the question arises of how the social and political changes affected it. The rise to prominence of several regional Sdn schools in the ninth century is an important factor in the changing balance of power, but their relations with regional and central authorities and their political significance have to be considered carefully. In Chapter 2, the focus shifts to Wang KO6n and his strategy of legitimation. The official historiography represents Wang KOn as an archetypal dynastic founder, but although this may basically conform to how Wang Kon sought to represent himself, undoubtedly this is a vision that panders to the concept of dynastic rise and fall of a Confucianized elite. The closest we can get to his original ideals is to critically analyze the Ten Injunctions attributed to him and compare them with contemporary (3) use of the religion to control the people. This kind of scheme presupposes an allpowerful state that can mold the religion to its own needs, which is not the case for Koryo.

Introduction 25 sources such as Buddhist epigraphy and official communications contained in literary collections. Chapters 3 to 5 make up Part II and deal with the institutionaliza-

tion of Buddhism by the Koryo authorities. Buddhist monks and monasteries were organized in certain ways according to the aspirations and needs of the state, although this required the consent and cooperation of the monastic community. Chapter 3 shows how the monks’ status was defined and restricted by the state. Entry into the monkhood was regulated, and once ordained, monks were further restricted by official regulations. However, the marked differences between the letter of the law and practice reveal the actual status of the Sangha. Chapter 4 describes the process that integrated Koryo monks into the state apparatus: the bureaucratic system that recruited and promoted monks to certain posts and functions. The disposition of the monks who passed the monastic examination and gained a

| ranking is also described here. After passing this examination, they either went on to work in the main state Buddhist organ, the Singnoksa (Sangha Registry), whose function is also described in this chapter, or received appointments to temples. By analyzing the appointment system of abbots to temples in the capital and the provinces, I hope to assess the extent of state control over monasteries and the reasons behind this state-controlled appointment system. The highest attainable positions were those of royal and state preceptor, important posts for their symbolic meaning in Kory6 state Buddhism, but with little or no actual power. Chapter 5 examines the meaning of these posts in the construction of temporal and religious power. Part III looks at some of the practical effects and limitations of the

system of state-controlled monks and monasteries. Chapter 6 examines the economic power of temples. Land was, of course, the main asset of temples, which were among the main landholders during the dynasty. The origins of their land, the conditions on their land entitlements, and the patterns of landholding were, however, highly complex. Hence, we need to question the degree of the temples’ control

over land: the allocation of land rents did not give the monastery much power, whereas granting it the use of the land gave the monas-

tery much more leeway in undertaking economic initiatives. Case

26 Introduction studies of land acquisition and use by certain temples reveal considerable variation in the status of monastic land. Chapter 7 focuses on the use of Buddhist ritual in the legitimation of the dynasty. Other studies on legitimation in East Asian history have argued that rites and ceremonies such as imperial ancestor worship were among the main avenues to shore up authority, vis-a-vis both the bureaucracy and the populace. Together with other symbols of power, rituals provided the miranda, things to be admired, or the externalization of the political ideas that lay behind them, the credenda.°’ Buddhist rituals were undoubtedly considered important by Kory6, yet it remains to be proved that they were the mainstay of the dynasty’s ritual program and that they played an important part in the legitimation of rulers. Although the book spans the whole of the Kory6 dynasty, the emphasis is on the first century, especially the reign of Wang KOn, since this is the period when the unique Kory6 Buddhist system emerged. T’aejo’s project was inspired by precedents in Korea and abroad, as well as the exigencies of the contemporary political situation. Born both from necessity and design, it was to become a unique linchpin of his dynasty, effectively tying the religion’s fate with that of the dynasty and vice versa. Together, these chapters serve to illustrate all relevant aspects of Buddhism in its guise as an official, state-supported religion during the Koryo period. Although running the risk of overemphasizing this official side at the expense of its more spontaneous devotional and other religious aspects, this approach serves to unravel how deeply the Kory6 dynasty was enmeshed with Buddhism. As we will see, it

is thus legitimate to speak of state Buddhism when referring to Kory6 Buddhism, but it should be understood not as an exclusive and hegemonic system but as a complex of institutions with an illdefined ideological content. Although this study does not eschew the oft-used epithet State Protectionism, it is used only for specific rituals, texts, and events, not to characterize the whole of Koryd Buddhism. In the final analysis, this work should serve to delineate the legitimating and organizational dimensions of Kory6 Buddhism and to put these into the context of East Asian state-Buddhist relations 65. Wechsler, Offerings of Jade and Silk.

| Introduction 27 and state-religious relations in general. If these dimensions are better understood, it will also be easier to understand the context of Bud-

dhist doctrine in Koryé, the focus of most research to date, and provide a basis for understanding the other dimensions of Kory6é Buddhism, notably its social role and its practice and meaning in daily life.

BLANK PAGE

PART I Historical and Ideological Background

BLANK PAGE |

ONE

Buddhism and the

State in Late Silla

When Wang Kon founded Kory6 in 918, it marked not just

the beginning of a new ruling dynasty but also the beginning of a process of profound social and political reforms. The preceding Silla order had been based on a system of aristocratic birthright and territorial discrimination; once this system collapsed, Wang K6n had to build a completely new power base. How he set about constructing allegiances with new social groups and legitimating his authority are dealt with in Chapter 2. But to understand the break with Silla tradition and practice, it is necessary to understand the underpinnings of Silla society. The differences in the political and social situation have to be sketched, for it is against this background that the Buddhist in-

volvement in the secular world should be understood. Buddhism was | espoused first by the king and the aristocracy, who sought to justify their position in terms of a Buddhist worldview. But this view was not static; it evolved and reflected the influence of different legitimation strategies and of individual Buddhist monks and schools. In the ninth century, moreover, the traditional order of Silla Buddhism was upset by the rise of a host of new S6n schools. This was partly a religious phenomenon, but the rise of these Sdn schools was also connected to contemporary social and political changes and that helped shape Wang K6n’s outlook and policies.

31

32 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla The Fall of Silla and the Rise of Wang K6én

Korean historians have always concurred that the death knell for Silla was sounded during the reign of Queen Chinsdng (887-97). In

the Samguk sagi (History of the Three Kingdoms), Kim Pu-sik (1075-1151) depicted her as a debauched person whose entrusting of government affairs to her lovers gave rise to widespread corruption. Moreover, heavenly portents and the elements were against her, and

her attempts to overcome adversity and fill the empty treasury by forcible tax collections prompted an outburst of popular unrest.’ Undoubtedly, Kim Pu-sik, who modeled both the format and the inter-

pretive framework of his history of the Three Kingdoms on traditional Confucian historiography, selected and presented the facts to fit them into the theory of the Mandate of Heaven. Although the basic facts regarding Queen Chins6ng’s rule may be true, it is almost certainly no coincidence that, as presented in History of the Three Kingdoms, these facts happen to coincide with the stereotyped portents auguring the loss of the Mandate. In other words, her rule was probably no more inept and corrupt than those of other rulers during

Silla’s last decades, but as a female ruler she was a convenient scapegoat for the Confucian historian Kim Pu-sik.’ In fact, the decline of Silla started much earlier. Some have even suggested that Silla never achieved hegemony over the Korean peninsula and that its apparent unification of the peninsula existed only in name.’ Although Silla, with the help of Tang forces, had managed

1. SGSG 11. The Samguk yusa offers two different views of Queen Chinsong’s reign. In one account, her wet nurse’s husband and some other favorite ministers rather than her lovers took effective control of government; see Chinséng yéwang, SGYS 2. In another context, however, the Samguk yusa vilifies her in the same terms as the SGSG.

2. On Kim Pu-sik’s historiography, see Gardiner, “The Samguk sagi and Its Sources.” On the scapegoating of Queen Chins6ng, see Hurst, “‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly,’” pp. 4-6. However, the perception that Silla’s death throes started during her reign had been adopted long before Kim Pu-sik’s time. See, e.g., the inscription for Chdlchung (dated 944): “[After the death of King Chénggang in 887] the throne was in crisis, as if eggs were stacked in a pile” (VYKSM, 1: 153).

3. According to Ellen Salem Unruh (“Reflections on the Fall of Silla’), traditional Korean historiography greatly overemphasizes the extent and quality of the

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 33 to vanquish Paekche in 660 and Kogury6 in 668, these victories were perhaps less comprehensive than is often thought.* Most of Koguryé territory was not incorporated into Unified Silla and eventually fell

under the sway of Parhae, a state founded by a Kogury6 general. Unified Silla’s sovereignty reached as far as a borderline somewhat south of the Taedong River, which means that it controlled about two-thirds of the peninsula. But even within this territory, its hegemony was far from absolute. The extent of Silla’s administrative control over former Paekche territories and the northern frontier regions is difficult to establish, but everything points to limited central

authority. Because of the isolated location of Silla’s capital, KimsoOng (Ky6ngyju), in the southeastern corner of the peninsula, five local capitals were established, which acted as small copies of the main capital and administered the surrounding areas. Also, many Paekche and Kogury6 aristocrats were incorporated into the new admuinistra-

tive system, especially in the lower echelons. Although this was a gesture of reconciliation, apparently they were never fully integrated into the Silla system. When Silla authority crumbled in the ninth cen-

tury, many areas formerly part of Paekche and Koguryd became semiautonomous under the leadership of local magnates.

The main reason for Silla’s failure to integrate these people was its adherence to the rigid bone-rank (kolp um) system.’ In this system of rigid social stratification on the basis of patrilineal and matrilineal

descent, most social functions were determined by birthright. The origin of the system is not clear, although it is possible that it originated with the descent group of King Naemul (r. 356—402), the pro-

- genitor of the Kim royal lineage. Calling themselves chin’gol (true bone) nobles, they used the term to denote their special heritage and their unique claim to the throne.° For a time in the sixth and seventh centuries, a further differentiation was made between sdnggol (hallowed bone) and chin’gol lineages, evidently in an attempt by one lineage to restrict the number of claimants to the throne. The sénggol political and cultural unification achieved by Silla after absorbing Paekche and Koguryo.

4. On Silla’s unification wars, see Guisso, Wu Tse-t’ien, pp. 107-25; and John C. Jamieson, “The Samguk Sagi and the Unification Wars.” 5. Kim Chong-sun, “The Kolp’um System.”

6. Yi Ki-dong, Silla kolp’umje sahoe, pp. 54-90, 415 (English summary). ,

34 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla lineage expired in 654 with the death of Queen Chinddk.’ After this, King Muy6dl (r. 654-61) sought again to differentiate royal power from that of the chin’gol aristocrats by restricting the royal line to an exclusive father-son descent line. For more than a century, this led to a stronger monarchy, but in the end the chin’gol aristocrats came to dominate the throne again. Some of the conquered people were given a place in the bone-rank system: the Kaya royal family, for example, acquired chin’gol status after Kaya’s incorporation into Silla in 562, but most of those subju-

gated were probably classified in the lower head ranks (tup’um), which gave access only to lower-level administrative posts, or even ended up as slaves. Since birth determined everything, upward mobility was impossible. Moreover, within the leading chin’go/ status group there was a further discrimination based on place of residence. All the top positions in the state administration went to people living in the capital, Kumso6ng. In other words, the highest stratum in the class hierarchy could only be maintained when one resided in the capital. To get rid of superfluous competitors, from quite early on in Silla,

people were sent to the five minor capitals and the nine provincial capitals, where duplicates of the administrative structure in Kimsong were created.” Although this displacement apparently did not lead to loss of chin ’gol status, it certainly implied a decline in prestige. Later,

the losers in factional strife for the throne were demoted from the chin’gol group and exiled. Although the country was thus colonized by people from the central aristocracy, the fact that no one could return to the capital meant that the exiles had no reason to remain loyal to Silla. Instead of expanding Silla’s authority, they formed regional power centers and became part of the quasi independent local elites known as hojok (local strongmen) in Korean scholarship. As early as 780, the dynasty faced a major crisis with the murder of King Hyegong (r. 765—80).’ With his death, the direct line of suc-

cession of Silla kings, dating from King Muydl, was broken, and kings henceforth emerged from contending factions among the chin7. Ibid., pp. 84-85.

8. Chong Ch’6ng-ju, “Hojok serydk,” pp. 70-71. , 9. On political developments in Late Silla, see Yi Ki-dong, “Silla hadae tii sahoe pyonhwa.”

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 35 gol aristocracy. Since the chin’gol were by definition descendants of the royal Kim lineage, each could lay more or less equal claim to the throne on the basis of some royal ancestor, however far removed.

Lineage became a mere subordinate factor, however, since the claimant who could rally the most support, often by threat of force, effectively conquered the throne. As a result, the king’s authority was no longer accepted by the aristocratic class as a whole but only by the faction from which he had emerged. At first the inner divisions that beset the chin ’gol class were restricted to court intrigues in the capital. But as the number of disgruntled pretenders to the throne increased, the conflicts grew uglier, and some claimants rebelled. In 822, Kim H6n-ch’ang tried to establish a new dynasty based in Ungju (modern Kongju). At that time, the chin’gol aristocrats still had enough power to send a military force to this former Paekche territory to suppress the breakaway dynasty. Soon, however, the ceaseless infighting among the central aristocracy so undermined its authority that it lost even nominal control over parts of the country. However, the contradictions within the chin’gol class were not the only source of dissent. The rigidity of the class system also alienated other groups. Of the lower classes, only the existence of the yuktup um, or headrank six class, is well documented. Headrank five also appears in the sources, but no lower classes are explicitly mentioned. The yuktup’um were a kind of subelite who were entitled only to clerical or subordinate posts in the bureaucracy. As a result, many of the most gifted moved to China, where their talents were more appreciated. Undoubtedly the most famous case is Ch’oe Ch’iwon (857—?). After a successful career in China, he returned to Silla but eventually withdrew from an official career after receiving appointments only as a local governor.’ It is not clear how he spent his last years, but it seems that he retired to Haein-sa, where he lived with his family. Although some sources suggest that his disciples

were allied with Wang Kon, there is nothing to suggest that they played a part in the breakup of Silla or the formation of other incipient states. Another group that was alienated by the Silla rulers but whose position in the bone-rank system is unclear consisted of the

10. Ch’oe Ch’i-w6n chon, SGSG 46.

36 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla local village heads and local officials. Presumably they were never fully controlled by the Silla government and were left alone in exchange for a kind of regular tribute. Although little is known about them, some of these local village heads also established independent domains.

The modern scholar Chong Ch’6ng-ju distinguishes four types within these regional elites, or hojok: demoted or relocated aristocrats; regional military commanders; maritime traders; and local village heads.'' The problems of conceptualizing such a group as a dis-

tinct social phenomenon are obvious: many appear only as single references in the sources, and the sources use various ill-defined terms for them that suggest they may have been mere bandits (tojdk) or military leaders operating in the service of others (changgun). Still,

there were many conspicuous cases of local leaders who were not powerful enough to establish their own state but had enough resources to maintain independence from a central authority. Their heterogeneous nature should caution against the use of an overarching term like hojok, but with this reservation in mind, it is a useful abstraction to describe power relations in the emergence of Kory6. Other evidence that a new, influential class emerged around this time can be found in the appearance of clan seats (pon ’gwan) as distinctive symbols of a family’s power. The places where a clan first held sway later became permanently associated with it, even after its members had been incorporated into a new regime.”

By the end of the ninth century, Silla had lost the power to deal with open revolts against its authority, and during the reign of Queen Chinsong the first attempts to found a new authority that did not start from a succession struggle appeared. Very soon two leading figures emerged and established dynasties that could challenge Silla: Kungye in the north and Ky6n Hw6n in the southwest. This period became known as the Later Three Kingdoms Period (Hu Samguk sidae) and lasted until the unification by Koryé in 936.” Kung-ye declared him11. Chéng Ch’6ng-ju, “Hojok seryék.” 12. Duncan, “Formation of the Central Aristocracy,” p. 41.

13. See Gardiner, “Korea in Transition’; Hurst, ““The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’”; Sin Ho-ch’6l, Hu Paekche Kyén Hwéon; and Cho In-séng, “T’aebong ti Kung-ye chéngkwon yén’gu.”

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 37 self ruler of the Kory6 state in 901 but changed its name to Majin in 904 and T’aebong in 911.'* Although he may have given the impres-

sion of creating a successor state to Kogury6, as a scion of Silla kings, he was more intent on revenging the wrongs his royal parents had inflicted on him. Despite initial success, his psychopathic behavior soon provoked opposition, and he was overthrown by Wang K6n in 918. Later Paekche was founded by Kyén Hwon, son of Ajagae, a warlord-leader of Sangju. Ky6n Hwon started out as a general in the Silla army. From 892 he acted in his own right, but waited until 900 to declare himself king.” He, too, appealed to popular sentiment in the region of the former Paekche by adopting the name of Paekche for his country.

In their bid to succeed Silla as unifier of the peninsula, Later Paekche and Kung-ye’s state engaged in numerous battles in the early tenth century. According to the scanty records of these confrontations, Kung-ye delegated the execution of most of these campaigns

to his young ally, Wang Kon. Wang KOn’s rise to prominence as Kung-ye’s right hand and strategist in the course of these campaigns

was truly remarkable. Accomplishing all his missions for Kung-ye successfully, he was promoted eventually to the highest government position of sijung (supreme chancellor). Many scholars have ques-

tioned the veracity of the almost mythical proportions of Wang _ K6n’s victories, but unfortunately there is no way to verify them. 14. Kung-ye chon, SGSG 50. This source does not mention what the initial name of his country was. Since he posed as an avenger for the ancient state of Kogury6, it would be logical to surmise that he chose the name Koryé, a variant of Koguryé6, just as Kyon Hwon chose to identify himself with Paekche by calling his state Later Paekche. The only evidence that Kung-ye initially called his state Koryé is found in the chronological table of kings in SGYS 1, for the year 901. One often finds his name transcribed as “Kung Ye,” as if Kung were his surname; since the Samguk sagi biography says that his surname was Kim, I have treated this as his first name, hence “Kung-ye.” 15. The sources concur that Kyén Hwéin’s original surname was Yi rather than Kyon, and that his father had been a farmer before declaring himself a “general.” However, the Samguk yusa quotes some older sources and presents a more detailed picture of Ky6n Hwon. One of the sources Samguk yusa quotes from is the record on a stele of the Yi family, which claims that he was a descendant of Sado, queen consort of King Chinhiting. Also, it asserts that he declared himself king as early as 892; see Hu Paekche Kyon Hwon, SGYS 2.

38 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla Still, the historical representation of Wang KO6n reveals how he was

remembered in Koryo and how the idealization of his actions and persona contributed to the legitimation of the dynasty. These aspects of Wang KOn are treated in the next chapter; here I give an outline of the events leading to the foundation of Koryo. According to the P’yénnyon t’ongnok (Comprehensive record ar-

ranged by year), a chronicle of the ancestors of dynastic founder Wang Kon, his ancestor in the fifth ascending generation, Kangch’ung, had settled near Song’ak (Kaesong). Kangch’ung became head of the Song’ak commandery around the middle of the eighth century, and his descendants continued to live there.'° Many scholars maintain that his ancestors were maritime traders, but this is no more than a hypothesis.'’ The P’yénnyon t’ongnok is essentially a foundation myth, similar to the foundation myths of Silla or Koguryé6, in-

tended to prove the divine ancestry of the dynastic founder. Since separating myth and fact is impossible without external material, which is totally lacking, I will not attempt that here. Probably the first relevant and uncontested fact concerning Wang Kon occurred in 896, when his father, Wang Yung, joined Kung-ye’s cause by recognizing the latter’s sovereignty over the Song’ak commandery.'® The gist of this story, and perhaps the only factual core, is that Wang Kon belonged to a family of regional powerholders loyal to Kung-ye in

the Song’ak region. -

Wang Yung submitted to Kung-ye only nominally, his true intent probably being to forge an alliance. He convinced Kung-ye to make

Song’ak a key fortress in the defense against the attacks of Later Paekche. Kung-ye agreed and recognized Wang KOn as castle lord

(songju) of Song’ak. Wang Yung was made prefect of Kimsong (Kyongju).’” In 898, when Kung-ye decided to move his capital from 16. See KRS, Koryo segye (preliminary chapter, genealogy of Kory6), 1-12. For a translation and analysis, see Rogers, “P ’yénny6n T’ongnok.”

17. See, e.g., Pak Han-sdl, “Wang Kon segye”; for other articles, see Kang, “First Succession Struggle of Kory6,” p. 414.

18. KRS 1.1b. The Epochal Progenitor (sejo), Wang Yung, is identified as sach’an of Song’ak, which is the same title as the one held by the first ancestor who headed this prefecture. 19. Ibid. The Samguk sagi (Kung-ye, SGSG 50) claims that it was Wang Kon, not

his father, who pledged allegiance to Kung-ye, and that he was made prefect of

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 39 Ch’dorw6n to Song’ak, he gave Wang KOon an honorary rank and put him in charge of the military operations against Later Paekche. From

900 Wang Kon conquered many towns in the northern part of Later Paekche, and in 903 he was ordered to lead a naval expedition to the southwest of the peninsula, to set up a base in Kimsong (Naju), thus besieging Kyo6n Hwon from two sides. After establishing a garrison in Kimsong, which he renamed Naju, Wang Kon used this place as a

| new power base. After 903 he was increasingly active in maritime campaigns. He expanded his fleet and garnered financial support by forging marriage ties with the Yu clan of Ch’Ongju and the O clan of Naju, both of whom had gained wealth and independence through

maritime trade.”°

Although Wang Kon had lost Song’ak as a power base, he had apparently outmaneuvered Kung-ye by establishing a successful navy and a naval base in Naju. Perhaps as a result of this, Kung-ye moved the capital back to Ch’drwén in 905.7’ Kung-ye duly acknowledged Wang’s military prowess by promoting him to higher ranks, but Kung-ye’s behavior became increasingly erratic and cruel. He regarded himself as a reincarnation of Maitreya and, convinced that he had the power to read people’s minds, eliminated all those he thought were opposed to his rule. Wang Kon nearly suffered a similar

Ch’drw6n in reward. This account seems to stretch credibility, given that Wang Kon was not yet twenty at the time and that Ch’d6rw6n was Kung-ye’s capital. Kim Pusik, the author of the Samguk sagi, was a subject of the Koryé dynasty, and therefore more likely to glorify the dynasty’s founder than the compilers of the Korydsa. On the other hand, Wang Yung could not possibly have been appointed to Kimsong either, since it was still part of the Silla kingdom. 20. Kang, “First Succession Struggle,” p. 415. For the biographies of his first consorts, see KRS, 88.1b—3b. As Hugh Kang points out, despite their humble origins, they became his principal queens among his twenty-nine matrimonies, and he desig-

nated as his heir his son with Queen Chang-hwa of the O clan. : 21. Some contemporary evidence seems to contradict this version. The stele for the monk Kydngyu states that Kung-ye himself led a campaign to conquer the south. Kyodngyu returned to Korea in 908 and landed in the southwest of the peninsula near Muju (Kwangju), where he hid in the mountains to avoid the war. However, he was summoned to the ruler’s military camp for an audience. This must have taken place sometime between 908 and 918. Kung-ye is identified only as “the previous ruler,” but the context makes the identification abundantly clear, showing that Kung-ye himself must have led some of the campaigns to the Naju area. See NYKSM, 1: 133.

40 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla fate but managed to escape execution with a ruse. Opposition to Kung-ye’s rule was now mounting, and more and more people urged Wang K®6n to overthrow him and take the throne. After much dallying, Wang Kon could no longer deny the course of events propelling him to the throne, and he accepted the mandate to rule in 918. In 935

Silla voluntarily transferred its mandate to him, and with the conquest of Later Paekche in 936 he completed the unification of the Later Three Kingdoms. Kung-ye’s state had been little more than a loose alliance of sev-

eral regional strongmen, and Koryd probably started out on an equally insecure foundation. After Wang Kon founded Kory6 in 918,

he had to cope with several attempts to overthrow him. Regional powerholders only gradually submitted their territories to the new dynasty, usually by sending hostages to the capital as an act of trust. Therefore, Yi Ki-baek’s conclusion that “the question of who could unite the Three Kingdoms was inextricably linked to the question of who could gain the support of the hojok”’ seems appropriate.” As a consequence, he points out, political power was even more important than military power at this stage. In this respect, it seems that Wang K6n played an ingenious political game, which laid the foundations

of a dynasty that was to last five centuries. Buddhism featured prominently in his plans; in a broad sense he followed in the footsteps of Silla kings when paying homage to Buddhas and monks, but the historical context, his personal proclivities, and political needs all contrived to put Kory6 Buddhism on a very different track from Silla Buddhism.

Buddhism and the State in Unified Silla Although the concept of “State-Protection Buddhism,” so frequently applied to characterize Korean Buddhism, is somewhat problematic, for the beginnings of Buddhism in pre-unification Silla the term cer-

tainly seems appropriate. Almost every mention of the religion in the sources is in connection with the king or the state. King Pophting (r. 514-40) wagered his credibility on the efficacy of Buddhism, and

thereafter the fate of the royal house, and by extension that of the 22. Yi Ki-baek, “Kory6 kwijok sahoe tii sOngnip kaegwan,” p. 3.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 4] state, and Buddhism seem inextricably linked. When Buddhism was officially recognized by King Péphiting, Silla was still in the process of transforming itself from a tribal state system into a centralized state with a bureaucracy of specialized administrators. During the transition, religious and political power were not yet separated. After the official recognition of Buddhism, kings initially continued their role of religious chief by acting as heads of the Buddhist religion, which they tried to absorb. Silla rulers thus posed either as supreme

Buddhist rulers (cakravartin) or as incarnations of the Buddha or members of his family.” This explicit use of Buddhism to justify and strengthen the authority of the royal lineage seems to have ended around the middle of the seventh century. To account for this and other changes in Silla Buddhism, it is useful to look at how its development may be periodized. Yi Ki-dong has proposed to divide Silla Buddhism into three main

periods. The first one he calls the period of “planned state Buddhism” (kihoekchok kukka Pulgyo), because the religion functioned as an ideology to justify the privileged position of the ruling class, to unite the country, and to provide a rallying point for the defense of the state.” This period lasted roughly from 514 until 654. It was followed by a period of sophistication, corresponding with the golden age of Silla (654-780), in which the crude form of Buddhist-inspired rulership was replaced by a truly Buddhist civilization. The maturation of Buddhism is reflected in achievements in all fields of Buddhist culture. Hwaém Buddhism became the dominant trend, and “the state borrowed a world vision of peace from Hwadm, a rare example of the state using religious symbolism for the stability and continuity of the system.”” With the gradual disintegration of the Silla aristocratic system in the ninth century, the established sects of Buddhism, which were so closely enmeshed with the system, declined. Their excessive preoccupation with doctrinal speculation on

one hand and the accumulation of economic wealth on the other 23. See H6 Hiting-sik, “Pulgyo wa yunghap toen sahoe kujo,” pp. 4-5. On the official recognition of Buddhism by Silla, see Lee Ki-baek, “Early Silla Buddhism,” . 162.

° 24. Yi Ki-dong, “Silla sahoe wa Pulgyo,” p. 978. 25. Ibid., p. 979.

42 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla caused them to lose all religious authority. This corresponds to the third period in Yi Ki-dong’s scheme, covering the period 780-935. The decline of the doctrinal schools coincided with the rise to prominence of Sdn (meditation) schools in this period. According to Y1, this was an expression of disaffection: many monks from the lower ranks of the aristocracy turned to Son, he argues, because it provided a spiritual rationale for their social emancipation. For the same reason, local elites supported S6n schools, thus providing a strong basis for S6n schools in many centers across the country; this contrasts with the doctrinal schools, which were based in the capital. Although this periodization helps to achieve a broad understand-

ing of the changing relationship between the state and Buddhism throughout the Silla period, it has some limitations. It is based on political rather than religious developments, implying that the latter always follows the former. The year 654 marks the end of the sénggol

lineage in the royal Kim clan, and with the enthronement of King Muyé6l the beginning of a more autocratic form of kingship. In this case, the political transition does seem to correspond with a shift in the religious realm. Queen Chind6ok (r. 647-54) was not only the last

of the hallowed-bone lineage, she was also the last ruler to use a name that linked her to an Indo-Buddhist worldview. This is signifi- | cant, since it suggests that the sénggol lineage was none other than the line of kings who identified with the Buddha clan, what N. M. Pan-

kaj has termed the “Sakyalineal descent [group].””° In other words, the term sdénggol denoted a lineage of Buddhas, Buddhist rulers

| about to become Buddhas, and Indian deities, with which the royal lineage sought to identify in order to differentiate itself from the chin’gol aristocrats. After 654, Korean kings turned to Chinese | modes of kingship, emphasizing their orthodox succession and the support of Heaven.”’ Undoubtedly, this was due mainly to the influence of Tang China, with whom Silla was forging an alliance in its strategy to unify the peninsula. Adapting the principles of royal succession to conform with Chinese standards undoubtedly helped Silla

increase its respectability vis-a-vis China. Henceforth there is no

26. Pankaj, “Buddhist Transformation of Silla Kingship,” p. 27. 27. Tikhonov, “Epigraphical Sources.”

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 43 more evidence linking Silla kings explicitly with Buddhist modes of rulership, although Buddhism continued to be an important part of the king’s religious and political life. Muy6l’s descent line came to an end in 780 when chin’gol aristocrats, who had never acquiesced to their loss of power to the king, finally gained the upper hand in their struggle with the throne. However, the link between this event and the situation of Buddhism is not immediately evident. SOn schools became prominent only in the course of the ninth century, and there were no explicit signs of the decay of doctrinal schools around 780. The only possible change, as noted by Ko Ik-chin, was the increased tendency among different lineages within the Kim clan to build more temples to worship their ancestors. As the direct descent line of the royal Kim clan ended, contenders from collateral branches who vied for the throne, Ko argues, staged memorial rites for their ancestors in Buddhist temples to enhance their legitimacy. Through these rites, they sought to “imitate the glory of the previous kings who unified the Three Kingdoms and encouraged the spread of Buddhism.””* However, it is questionable whether this marked a significant new departure. To the contrary, the construction of these new memorial temples in the capital would, if anything, strengthen the position of the doctrinal schools. The rise of SOn as a new social and religious movement would become apparent

only after Toti’s (d. 825) return from China in 821, which would therefore be a better date than 780 to mark this shift. (The rise of Sdn and the challenge it posed to the established order are treated in the next section.) Another problem with Yi Ki-dong’s scheme concerns his characterization of the role of the Hwadm school. There is still a strong tendency in Korean scholarship to ascribe to Hwadm philosophy a powerful legitimating potential. The central tenet of Hwadm Buddhism is that all phenomena are interrelated: even a small particle of dust contains everything else that exists, and a single thought can embrace all that is known. The principal Buddha in Hwadm temples is therefore the Vairocana Buddha, the cosmic Buddha who is the essence of all Buddhas and thus the embodiment of this principle of

28. Ko Ik-chin, “Introduction of Ch’an,” p. 173.

44 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla “all in one.” This philosophical reduction of complexity into a single unifying principle is attractive to rulers who seek religious parallels

for their attempts at establishing a unified, centralized authority. Japanese emperors of the Nara period (710-94), for example, identified with the cosmocratic Vairocana Buddha and sponsored the construction of a giant bronze Vairocana statue in Tddaiji.”” However, there is no evidence that Silla kings relied on Hwadm doctrine. It has been speculated that the phrase “one is 1n all and many is in all, one is identical to all and all is identical to one” in Uisang’s (625-702) | famous summation of Hwadm doctrine in a 210-character poem had a political meaning.”’ This rests on the belief that the “one” may refer to the autocratic ruler, and that the phrase could thus mean that all the elements constituting the state are concentrated in the person of the ruler. This notion has been deconstructed by Kim Sang-hy6n, who notes that not only is there no evidence to support such an interpretation, but the circumstantial evidence suggests that Uisang had no intention of supporting centralized royal power.” What is indisputable, though, is that around the middle of the seventh century Buddhism reached a stage of maturity. At this time, two of Silla’s greatest Buddhist philosophers, Uisang and Wonhyo (617— 686) came into their own and, through their works and actions, defined the Korean Buddhist tradition. But their influence was not confined to Korea; they transcended the confines of national boundaries and were committed primarily to religious ideals shaped by the Chinese Buddhist tradition. Thus Uisang, although he apparently belonged to the chin’gol class, sought to distance himself from court and aristocracy. After returning from China in 670, he chose to settle in Pusdk-sa, a temple located 150 km north of Kydngju, which he made into the main center for the Korean Hwa6dm school. He refused a donation of land and slaves from the king, because he did not want to discriminate between rich and poor in his teaching.”” Wénhyo dis-

29. De Bary et al., Sources of Japanese Tradition, 1: 105. 30. Uisang, Hwa6m ilsting popkyedo, T. 45, 1887: 711a. For a translation of the poem and Uisang’s autocommentary, see Odin, Process Metaphysics, pp. xix—xx, 191-213. 31. Kim Sang-hy6n, “Silla chungdae chénje wangkwon,” p. 119. 32. Ibid., pp. 121-28.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 45 played a similar interest in spreading the teaching regardless of the status of his audience. In W6nhyo’s case, his interest in popularizing Buddhism may have had something to do with his relatively humble origins. He did not belong to the capital aristocracy and was on one occasion prevented by the court from presiding over an important ritual.” Buddhism in Unified Silla was thus a religion that flourished in its own right, and its main proponents formed part of an East Asian tradition. However, this does not mean that Buddhism was completely free from the influence of Silla kings and aristocrats. The sophisticated and variegated Buddhist culture of the time makes it more difficult to discern straightforward patterns, but the religion continued to play an important secular role. I will try to distinguish the main patterns that characterize this secular role in four different areas: the social origin of monks, the patronage and location of temples, the representation of Korea as a Buddhist land, and Buddhist rituals and

beliefs at court. | Most of the eminent monks of the Early Unified Silla period (up to ca. 800) were connected to the Ky6dngju aristocracy. Eminent monks such as Chajang (fl. 636), Uisang, and Wonch’tik (613-96)

belonged to the chin’gol group; others such as Wongwang and Wonhyo belonged to the headrank six or five groups of the lower aristocracy.” Unfortunately, the scarcity of adequate biographies of Silla monks makes it difficult to deduct general trends from this 33. According to Wénhyo’s biography in Xu gaoseng zhuan (T. 50, 2061: 730a), he was a native of Sangju. He was recommended by his native town to participate in the Hundred Seat Assembly in the capital, but was snubbed by the other monks “for his personality.” According to the Samguk yusa, his father was an official of the eleventh rank, implying that he belonged to the odup’um (headrank five) group. See

Wonhyo pulgi, SGYS 4. ;

34. For Chajang’s chin’gol origins, see Chajang chéngyul, SGYS 4; Uisang is not explicitly identified as chin’gol in the sources. See Kim Sang-hy6n, “Silla chungdae chonje wangkwon,” p. 122, for the arguments to identify him as such. According to Wonch’itik’s biography (Ximingsi Yuance fashi taming, in Kim Yong-t’ae, Samguk Silla sidae Pulgyo ktimséngmun kojiing, p. 58), he was the grandson of a Silla king, suggesting chin’gol status. Several other Silla monks who were active in Tang China are also identified in Chinese sources as members of the royal clan. 35. For W6ngwang’s status, see Yi Ki-baek, “Wongwang kwa kt Ui sasang,” pp. 96-97. For Wonhyo’s status, see note 33 to this chapter.

46 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla material. When a family background is specified, monks invariably belonged to the chin’gol or lower aristocratic classes. This does not, however, preclude exceptions. Thus a former Kogury6 monk, Hyeryang, was appointed the first state overseer of monks (kukt’ong) in 551, and a former Paekche monk, Kyonghitng, was granted this position in 681. Undoubtedly these were exceptions. Hyeryang’s case should be seen as an attempt by Silla to adopt a more advanced Buddhist administration system, and Kydnghiing was given the position

in an attempt to pacify the newly annexed Paekche state.° Yet they serve to indicate that advancement in Buddhist offices was somewhat less dependent on social status than was advancement in government. The same pattern of privilege can be discerned in temple construction, which depended mainly on the capital aristocracy or the king

himself. All the earliest temples built in the sixth century, such as Hiingnyun-sa or Hwangnyong-sa, were constructed on royal command and functioned either as memorial temples for deceased kings or as state temples where important Buddhist rituals were held.”’ From the middle of the seventh century, monks such as Chajang, Wonhyo, and Uisang started building temples away from the capital, although it is difficult to ascertain how important these local temples were. In 664, King Munmu (r. 661-81) issued an edict forbidding the donation of funds or lands to temples, no doubt in an attempt to curtail the influence of temples not controlled by the state.°° Around the same time, Silla also started to build official temples outside Kyodngju, such as Changtti-sa in Seoul, as well as temples to pray for the repose of the spirits of fallen soldiers and generals, such as Ch’wis6-sa in Kyéngju.”’ This was probably intended to spread Buddhism out-

side Kydngju and use temples for a broader social role within the framework of the state’s interests. In the late seventh century, the state’s hold on Buddhist temples throughout the country was further strengthened with the implementation of a system of state-controlled temples. This was controlled through head temples in Kydngyju, in-

36. HO Hting-sik, “Kuksa-wangsa chedo wa kt kinting,” p. 393. — 37. Yi Y6ng-ho, “Silla chungdae wangsil saw6n,” pp. 82-83. 38. Munmu Wang 4-yon, SGSG 6.

39. For the former, see Chinji Wang 6-yén, SGSG 5; for the latter, see Mich’u Wang chugyop kun, SGYS 1.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 47 cluding Hwangnyong-sa, Punhwang-sa, and Sach’dnwang-sa.”” The

main center of Buddhist power remained in Ky6ngju, where the wealth of royal and aristocratic donors inspired lavish temple building and decoration. Examples of this are the construction of Pulguk-

sa and Sokkuram by the chin’gol aristocrat Kim Tae-song in the period 751-75 and the construction of Haein-sa, ordered by King Aejang in 802." This period also saw the development of ideas and strategies to

strengthen the concept of Silla as a Buddhist country. Earlier the Buddhist origins of the royal clan had been emphasized, but in the seventh and eighth centuries an emerging rhetoric transformed Silla into the abode of Buddhas and bodhisattvas. From an early stage in the development of Silla Buddhism, stories claiming the discovery of vestiges of an ancient, indigenous Buddhist culture circulated. This process was further developed in the seventh century.”” On one hand, the five holy mountains of pre-Buddhist Silla were converted into Buddhist shrines through the building of important temples. Hwadm temples especially seem to have been associated with these five peaks, although a tenth-century source indicating that there were ten prominent mountains with Hwaom temples implies a dilution of the significance of the original holy mountains.*’ On the other hand, the growing association of certain mountains with bodhisattvas promoted the reali-

zation of a Buddhist land in the present. One mountain, Odae-san (Five Terraces Mountain), attracted more veneration than the others. Like its Chinese counterpart, Wutaishan, it was dedicated mainly to 40. Yi YOng-ho, “Silla chungdae wangsil saw6n,” passim; see also Chapter 4. 41. For Kim Tae-sodng’s connection with the former two temples, see McBride,

“Buddhist Cults in Silla Korea,” pp. 541-56. On the foundation of Haein-sa, see Kaya-san Haein-sa kojok, CJS, 1: 495. For a table sketching the foundation dates of important Silla temples and their assets, see Volkov, Han’guk kodae Pulgyosa, pp. 74-77. 42. Rhi Ki-yoéng, “Brief Remarks.”

43. There is no consensus among scholars on the connection between Hwadm and the five mountains, and between these two and the monarchy. For a recent overview of the literature, see McBride, “Buddhist Cults in Silla Korea,” pp. 559-64. McBride argues that the five mountains were occupied by Hwadm temples, but agrees with Kim Sang-hyon that there was no specific connection between the symbolism of these Hwadm mountains and King Muy36l’s royal line, as Hwadm seems to have come more to the fore after this line ceased in 780.

48 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla the manifestation of Mafijusri. In contrast to the Chinese mountain, however, Majfijusri was the central deity, associated with the central peak, and the other peaks were associated with other deities. Thus, Odae-san represented a whole pantheon, identified by Rhi Ki-yong as a Hwaom one.” The mountain became an important pilgrimage site for Silla kings. One future king, Hyoso (r. 692-702), took refuge here with his brother before being recalled to Kyongyju to succeed his father.*” Apparently at least some Silla kings sought a kind of Buddhist blessing on their rule. This leads us to the important question of the relationship of Silla kings to the Buddhist faith in the middle period. As evidenced by the example of the royal princes seeking refuge on Odae-san, this relation was often very personal. Many Silla kings had their bodies cremated and the remains scattered on the Eastern Sea according to Buddhist custom. Many also relied on Buddhist rituals, prayers, or the power of thaumaturge monks to heal illnesses or avert drought or other natural calamities.*° They were also munificent donors. One of the most impressive of these donations is King Séngdok’s bell, popularly known as the Emille bell, now in the Kyéngju National Museum. Cast in 771, it was meant to commemorate the merits of King Songdok (r. 702-37) and help beings overcome suffering. Funds were gathered by his son, King Kyongdok (r. 742-65), and the project was finally completed by his grandson, King Hyegong.*’ Thus the bell was a monument to the Buddhist piety and filial devotion of kings of Muyd6l’s lineage. Finally, Silla kings were also keen on building sttipas and enshrining relics in them to pray for the souls of deceased kings and to obtain good retribution for the reigning king.”®

Whereas Buddhism in the first period had served to protect the country through the sacralization of rulers, the casting of spells to avert foreign invasions, and the use of Buddhist symbolism to

44. Rhi, “Brief Remarks,” p. 175. 45. Taesan oman chinsin, Myongju Odae-san Pojilto T’aeja chén’gi, SGYS 3. 46. For a comprehensive table of all such events in Silla, see Volkov, Han’guk

, kodae Pulgyosa, pp. 124-25. 47. Silla Singdok Taewang sinjong myong, in Kim YOng-t’ae, Samguk Silla sidae Pulgyo ktimséngmun kojiing, pp. 86-92. 48. Barrett, “Sttipa, Stitra and Sarira in China,” pp. 57-58.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 49 strengthen Silla’s conquest claims, after unification it became a much more diversified phenomenon. Although rulers continued to rely on Buddhist symbolism to strengthen their claims of legitimacy, it was no longer their exclusive domain. Aristocrats also enhanced their moral profile through temple patronage, and the religion became popular as a bridge to salvation for ordinary people. By and large Buddhism remained the domain of members of the privileged social groups, but it was equally significant as a religion and as an ideology to integrate the people of the peninsula into a Buddha-land.

The Son School in Late Silla: Dharma

Lineages and the Nine Mountains The spread of S6n Buddhism to Korea was one of the most important events in the history of East Asian Buddhism. During the ninth century, it became the dominant tradition of Buddhism on the peninsula. In contrast to the earlier Buddhist schools established in Silla, Son originally operated outside the fold of the state-supported Buddhist system. Institutionally and ideologically, it posed a challenge to the established Silla order. S6n has often been interpreted as a force opposed to the Silla state, as the ideology of local elites, who welcomed

Son’s emphasis on a direct perception of reality and on personal practice to achieve enlightenment in the present life as a justification for their own quest for independence.” Yi Ki-dong thus claims that Son provided the ideological basis for the overthrow of the Silla re-

gime.°’ Yi perhaps overstates his case and ignores the efforts by many ninth-century Silla kings to act as patrons of S6n leaders. It is, however, undeniable that Silla society underwent momentous changes in the ninth century, and it is possible that Sdn contributed to undermining the established order. Ko Ik-chin has shown that some late Silla kings were influenced by Son monks and ideas in their attempts to reform the system.”’ These widely divergent views stem in part

49. For a typical example of this view, see Kim Tu-jin, “Sasanggye ti pydndong,” p. 187. 50. Yi Ki-dong, “Silla sahoe wa Pulgyo,” p. 979. See also his “Silla soemang sagwan tii kaeyo,” p. 122. 51. Ko Ik-chin, “Introduction of Ch’an,” p. 202.

50 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla from the different approaches of Yi, a historian, and Ko, a Buddhist scholar, each of whom has focused on evidence conducive to their approaches. Moreover, neither of them has paid much attention to the rhetorical aspects of Chan/S6n discourse, which are relevant for the religious identity of the Chan school but distort its actual historical role. In my approach, I first try to look at how the Korean Son schools were defined as a religious movement and how their relligious self-image conflicted or resonated with state concerns. This provides a better framework for understanding their actual links to the various status groups of the period. The rise of S6n in late Silla can in large part be attributed to the appeal of its message of individual salvation and innovative training methods.” Sdn masters did not hesitate to debate with representatives of the doctrinal schools over the proper approach to enlightenment.°° As is well known, Chan ideology as it formed in China takes a radically antinomian, antischolastic stance, claiming to favor direct personal experience over external mediation, intuitive grasping over ratiocination, and an unorthodox and often irreverent attitude in its teaching process and in the behavior of masters.” All these factors contrive to allow the initiate to achieve the ideal of instant enlightenment, the immediate realization of Buddhist truth in this life. But the most instrumental factor is the transmission of this enlightenment experience from master to disciple: one of the central and most unalienable—and yet often overlooked—tenets of S6n is that enlightenment is a state of mind transmitted from master to disciple in

an unbroken chain starting with the Buddha Sakyamuni himself. Having an enlightened master is a precondition to reaching enlight-

enment. In time, this process was formalized and ritualized. The master transmitted the “mind-seal” (sim ’in) to his disciple. Originally a metaphor for the enlightenment experience, the mind-seal was later formalized in a procedure in which a seal (inka, Ch. yvinke) was liter-

ally transmitted. This formalization of the mind-transmission also 52. It is difficult to fathom, though, how these factors, which are well documented in Chinese history, acted in the case of Silla. 53. See Buswell, Tracing Back the Radiance, pp. 12-14. 54. On the problems engendered by this self-image of the Chan school, see Faure, Rhetoric of Immediacy.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 51 resulted in the emergence of so-called dharma lineages: genealogies of successive generations of patriarchs starting with Bodhidharma.”” As a result, authority within the Son school was based mainly on securing succession in an orthodox lineage.”° In the case of the late

, Silla monks who established Son temples, this usually meant the Hongzhou lineage of Mazu Daoyi (709-88).°’ Nearly all important S6n masters studied in China, where they received the seal or other attributes incorporating them into an orthodox lineage. Only then could

they establish a branch of this lineage in Korea. Once established, however, these Korean lineage schools became more exclusive, and transmission from Chinese patriarchs was discouraged in favor of Ko-

rean transmissions. These orthodox Korean lineage schools, which came into being in the second half of the ninth century, are commonly known as the Nine Mountain Schools of Son (Kusan SOnmun). The term “Nine Mountains” is now generally used in scholarship on Korean Buddhism to designate the S6n schools of late Silla, but it

is doubtful that the term dates to that period. Even though research by H6 Hiing-sik and others has shown that it cannot antedate the Koryo period, the term has become so commonplace in scholarship on the history of Sdn that tracing its origins is an inevitable starting point for trying to define the nature and structure of the S6n mountain schools (sanmun) of late Silla.°’ The first modern scholar to 55. On the origin and characteristics of lineage-thinking in Chan, see Jorgensen,

“The ‘Imperial’ Lineage of Ch’an Buddhism.” Theoretically, the genealogies reached back to Kasyapa, but in practice the key figures to whom they are traced are

Bodhidharma, the first patriarch who came to China, and the sixth patriarch, Huineng. See Yampolsky, The Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch. 56. Following Griffith Foulk’s definition, the lineage, though possessing a certain social and institutional reality, was essentially a mythological entity. Belief in the lineage and worship of the patriarchs in the lineage constituted the basis of the Chan school (Ch. Chanjia, Chanmen). Thus one should distinguish between the lineage as an elite group of enlightened monks and the school that later formed around the lineage. See Foulk, “Myth, Ritual, and Monastic Practice,” pp. 159-63.

| 57. Hongzhou is an old place-name, corresponding roughly with modern Jiangxi. It was the center for many of the “classical” schools of Southern Chan Buddhism, of which Mazu Daoyi’s school was considered the most influential; see Buswell, Tracing Back the Radiance, pp. 9-12, 4445. 58. In China, the term Chanmen (Sénmun), “Chan gate,” was used to denote the Chan master and his followers; see Foulk, “Myth, Ritual, and Monastic Practice,” p. 162. In Korea, the equivalent term is sanmun, “mountain gate.” Mountains played

52 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla draw attention to the importance of the Nine Mountains was Kim YO6ng-su. In an article on the origin and structure of Buddhist schools

in Korea, he proposed that Korean Buddhism consisted of five doctrinal schools founded in the seventh century, joined subsequently by the Son schools founded in late Silla. Accordingly he coined the term ogyo kusan—the five doctrinal schools and the nine S6n mountain schools.°’ Later, after Uich’6n’s attempts to reform the Buddhist orders in the 1080s, which resulted in the creation of the ecumenical Ch’ ont’ae school, the term ogyo yangjong—the five doctrinal schools and the two lineage schools (i.e., S6n and Ch’6nt’ae)—was used to describe the new situation, Kim argued.” Kim Y6ng-su maintained that the Nine Mountain Schools were carried over into Kory6, and in a separate article he dealt in more de-

tail with the history and development of each of these mountain schools.°’ However, his analysis is oversimplified. Kim glossed over large gaps in the history of some schools and ignored the existence

of others that fell outside this scheme. But the main problem concerns the identification and origin of the Nine Mountain Schools. As H6 Hiting-sik has pointed out, the term Kusan appears for the first time in a source dated 1084, but the first document explicitly identi-

fying the names of the Nine Mountains appears only in middle or late Koryo.” Ho explains that the emergence of the term in the late eleventh century should be seen against the background of Uich’dn’s

establishment of the Ch’ont’ae school around that time and its attempted absorption of the main Sdn lineages. The Nine Mountain Schools, he reasons, designated the Sdn lineage schools that did not transfer to Ch’6nt’ae. The implication is, of course, that originally an important symbolic role in Chan Buddhism, representing aloofness from the ordinary world. From the sixth patriarch, Huineng, on, patriarchs were identified with the mountain they had retreated to. 59. See Kim Yong-su, “Ogyo yangjong e taehaya,” p. 74. 60. Unlike ogyo kusan, the term ogyo yangjong actually appears in the sources; see Taegak Taehwasang myojimyong (1101) in Kim Yong-s6n, Kory6 myojimyong chipsong, p. 31. 61. Kim Yo6ng-su, “Chogye Sdnjong e ch’ wihaya.” 62. See H6 Hiing-sik, “SdOnjong Kusanp’as6l ti pip’an,” p. 161, for a list of the appearance of the term Kusan in sources, and pp. 153-60, for the date of a ritual text listing the names of all Nine Mountain Schools.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 53 there were many more schools—in one place H6 ventures there were fourteen—and as we will see below, this is a much more likely scenario.” Another factor that speaks against the existence of a “Nine Mountains” system in late Silla, is that the ninth school, the Sumi-

san school, was founded only in early Koryd.™

While the exact number of mountain schools was thus likely more than nine in late Silla, the number was certainly limited. From epi-

graphic material of the period, it becomes clear that there was a strong tendency to structure these schools according to a limited number of orthodox lineages. The example of the Kaji-san school il-

lustrates this clearly. Not much is known about its patriarch, Toti, except for a brief biography in the Chodang chip (Patriarch’s hall collection), according to which he went to China in 784 and received the mind-seal from Xitang Zhizang (735-814), himself a disciple of

Mazu Daoyi.” More information about the school is found on the stele of the third Kaji-san patriarch, Ch’ejing (804—80). According to

this text, composed around 884, Totii was the first Son patriarch of Korea, just as Bodhidharma was the first patriarch of Chinese Chan.

63. H6 Hting-sik, “Ch’dnt’aejong ti hySngséng kwajéng kwa sosok sawo6n.” Al-

though H6 shows clearly the circumstances that led to the heightened sectarian awareness and hence the emergence of more specific terms to delineate sectarian interests, he does not clarify whether there was a system of nine mountain schools. In earlier works he seems to regard the term as devoid of any specific meaning (“Koryé chén’gi Pulgyogye,” p. 67), but in later works he asserts that there were originally fourteen SOn mountain schools in early Kory6, five of which defected to Ch’dnt’ae (Han ’guk chungse Pulgyosa y6n’gu, p. 15). There are many problems with his later views; for one thing, the Ch’dnt’ae order seems to have been formed after 1084, when the term Kusan first appears in the sources; also, the names of the five lineages that transferred to Ch’dnt’ae are not the same as the names of additional Sdn schools found in the stele for Toh6n (see below). 64. Kim Yong-t’ae (“Hittyang-san Sdnp’a,” p. 13, note 6) therefore argues that the Nine Mountains arose in early Koryd. 65. Chodang chip, K. 45, 1503: 338b-—c. According to Totii’s biography, Zhizang exclaimed: “If I cannot transmit the dharma to this man, then to whom?” This text is based, it says in the last line, on Toiti’s stele, which is not extant. The Chodang chip was compiled in Fujian in 952, but there is some controversy over its origins. According to Arthur Waley (“A Sung Colloquial Story”), it contains stories that could have been made only in the late tenth century. Since the work was lost in China but preserved in Korea, and because the introduction clearly states it was re-edited in Korea, its textual history poses numerous problems (Welter, “Lineage and Context”).

54 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla However, the text continues, since the times were not right, he retired unknown to Sorak-san. He transmitted the dharma to YOomgd (d. 844), who also remained hidden from the world but passed the dharma seal (p6b’in) to Ch’ejing between 827 and 837. Ch’ejing traveled to China in 837 but discovered that there was nothing to learn there that he had not already learned from his Korean master. He returned after merely three years. Ch’ejing finally achieved wide renown, and in 858 King H6n’an (r. 857-61) acknowledged this by granting him a temple on Kayi-san (for the location of temples, see Map 1), which had previously belonged to another school. After Ch’ejing’s death, in 883 the king conferred the name Porim-sa on the

temple, and it became the representative temple of the Kaji-san school.” The case of the Kaji-san school illustrates the complexity of the mountain school phenomenon. In the late ninth century, Totii was regarded first and foremost as the patriarch of Son Buddhism in Korea rather than as the founder of the Kaji-san school. Second, there is no association whatsoever between Totii and Kaji-san: Toti retired to Chinjén-sa on Sdrak-san, which became his final abode.® The _ second patriarch of the putative Kaji-san school was also based there, and the third patriarch Ch’ejing received his enlightenment credentials there before moving on to Kaji-san, where he managed to attract official recognition for his school. The history of other mountain schools follows a similar pattern. Although Touti’s Kaji-san may have been regarded as the foremost school, it was more likely the first among equals. Other Silla monks also obtained transmission certificates in China and returned to found their own lineages. HyOnuk (787-869), regarded as the founder of the Pongnim-san school, received the mind-seal in Mazu’s lineage between 824 and 837. After returning to Silla, he settled at Hyemok-

san (before 840), where King Ky6ngmun (r. 861-75) eventually granted him Kodal-wo6n (AKA Kodal-sa). His disciple Simhti (855— 66. Porim-sa Pojo sénsa pimyéng (884), KSPM, 1: 97-98. This is Ch’ejing’s stele. For Y6m’g6’s stiipa epitaph (¢’apchi), see Kim Yong-t’ae, Samguk Silla sidae

Pulgyo ktimséngmun kojiing, p. 142. , 67. Porim-sa Pojo sénsa pimyong (884), KSPM, 1: 98. 68. Ibid., pp. 97-98; Chodang chip, K. 45, 1503: 338b-c.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 55 i

|| NEM “ og A \ Brome “> , fot ot ) | 4, Sagub-san

7 ce. ”7, Hittiyang-san On

pe "& A As? se on || adSay J do Sus rr (77 3. Tongrivans, pcre a

| bs 9

| Map 1 _ The Nine Mountain Schools

923) moved to Pongnim-san only in 897 (for the location of the mountain schools, see Map 1; for a digest of these facts, see Tables 1 and 3). The same pattern can be seen for the Hitiyang-san school. It traces its origins to the seventh-century monk Poémnang (fl. 632-46),

56 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla a disciple of Daoxin (580-651), but took shape in only 881, when Tohon, the fifth-generation successor to POmnang, settled at Hiuiyang-san.

As these examples show, the Korean S6n tradition makes a distinction between the founder of the lineage school (chosa, or patriarch) and the founder of the institution (kaesanjo, the patriarch who established the mountain), the monk who secured official recognition of the lineage school. As a dharma heir to the patriarch, the kaesanjo seems to have enjoyed equal status.” Some of these secondary founders, such as Chélchung (Saja-san) and Simhui (Pongnim-san), never traveled to China, since they had already received the transmission through a Korean lineage. Their biographies emphasize that Korean lineages, once established, were in no way inferior to Chinese Chan lineages.’” Other temple founders, like Ch’ejing, did travel to China but decided to stick with their Korean lineage. The first Korean patriarch who was also temple founder was Hyech’d1 (785-861), who founded the Tongni-san school during the reign of King Munsong (839-57).” Before that, the Silsang-san school had also been established by its patriarch, Hongch’6k, but the traditionally accepted date 69. This term does not occur in the biographic stelae or epitaphs of monks. It is first attested in Mid- to Late Koryé works. Kag’un’s Sénmun yomsong sérhwa (HPC, 5: 796b) thus identifies Ktingyang (878-956) as the kaesanjo of Paengom-sa. However, he belonged to the Httiyang-san lineage and, after founding Paengom-sa, took advantage of the unification under Kory6 to return to Hiiyang-san ca. 935. The term also occurs in the Samguk yusa, Chénhu sojang sari, SGYS 3-4. Despite the meager evidence, on the whole I think that the term can be used for the late Silla period. 70. Simhiii, when asked why he did not go to study in China, replied: “Ever since

Bodhidharma introduced the dharma and Huike transmitted his mind, the Sdn line-

age has spread east because its students departed from the west. I follow this” (Pongnim-sa Chingyong taesa pimyoéng, KSPM, 1: 342). This fact seems to have been recognized in China too, since Baizhang Huaihai (749-814) is said to have commented on Toii’s inclusion in Mazu’s lineage: “Now the Jiangxi [Mazu]| lineage is completely controlled by Korean monks!” (Chodang chip, K. 45, 1503: 338c). Muyodm’s Chinese master reputedly urged him to further transmit the mind-seal in Korea (Sdngju-sa Nanghye hwasang pimyong [890], KSPM, 1: 158-59). In the same source, a Chinese master is quoted as saying: “If one day Chan disappears in China, we can go to retrieve it from the Eastern people [Koreans].” 71. Taean-sa Chég’in sénsa pimyéng (872), KSPM, 1: 77. This is traditionally said to have taken place in 842, but no exact date is given in this inscription.

S5=

> 1 — = * ~~ S ; 2823—~ Q tO Q Q 8 0 = Sar ~Stee Qe=QL QQ |= > 7s I T —_= we = g/ulS2 Sc8 S2ee Y 82 Ss ssSAS aSSasx= 8eS : a5 Sava S&S §S g S228 = Sa S288 Sys OHAY ON sas 8 8 SS A 5CES oO¢xgxy 2SH S*¥K

7SoO big aS Ook . = . we ee a8 5 tT 3%§

Ne

=

zs 3& 2G aw o>San 2a§d09 6 &SeR

at PZETS ES 58 . aay nS — x” 2 2 soSC eoSCEC sco S8 2s § eo Bu OO

a Ss 2 3 CO > 0 S a S i so oo 10 = 7 C a as e CS =

4 .S. ofZB :S

5D © PStnav ~90 | 5S Te Sg a 2 § so} 30 vt ia 3 © yaad Nee” oO “ Newaee/ “4 S = a 7 “ |oc 33 o =i 3)we 8% © =a \eneee” S) = a™’s ~: cP=S see a0== 1=eg a5 a8 eos ou = uc mal

| fonSas -_dy 22223 :@aPa2g ep?85 & 28 Ls o:diTeter ; sgn8 FE an iMb ax 7BS P25258 SR EREE Ss S Zz. _-eee Cj enSABASAB +eaGS aE 2B FZ ~ 06gO nm On

58 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla for its founding (827) cannot be verified in the sources.” Thus Munsong’s reign seems to have been a kind of watershed, after which Korean kings started to take note of the Sdn lineage schools and offi-

cially recognize their temples. In contrast, although a stele was erected for the S6n monk Sinhaeng (706-79) in 813, nothing in the stele alludes to the existence of a S6n school. Sinhaeng was later

claimed to be the second patriarch of the Htiyang-san school, but there is no mention of dharma transmission or lineages in the stele.” This suggests that at that time there was still little awareness or recognition that Son represented a separate and distinct tradition. Official recognition was thus an important factor in the establishment of Son mountain schools. Before looking at the royal support of SOn masters and temples and the competition with local patrons, it is necessary to look at a crucial late ninth-century source that enumerates all the Sdn lineage schools extant at the time. Ch’oe Ch’1-w6n, in the stele inscription for Toh6n, lists thirteen additional patriarchs and their mountains.” The schools are identified in three-character

72. Some scholars quote 827 as the year the mountain school was founded, others 828, but there is no supporting evidence for either date. For the former, see Ch’oe Pydng-hon, “Silla hadae SOnjong Kusanp’a,” p. 96. For the latter, see, e.g., Buswell, Tracing Back the Radiance, pp. 10-11. The table of the Nine Mountain Schools Buswell provides on these pages is an abstract of recent Korean scholarship and perhaps does not represent his own insights on this matter. The Chodang chip (K. 45, 1503: 338c), quoting Hongch’dk’s epitaph, refers to him as “monk Hongch’dk from Silsang [san],” which means that he resided at this mountain, and that it was officially endorsed. However, the second patriarch of the Silsang-san school, Such’6l (817-93), resided at a different mountain temple, Simw6n-sa, near presentday Yangsan in the southeast; Silsang-san is in the southwest. See Kuksa Such’6l hwasang pimyong (ca. 893), KSCM 127, p. 229. In contrast to other schools, the Silsang-san school thus derived its name from the lineage founder, not from the temple founder. 73. Tansok-sa Sinhaeng sénsa pimyong (813), KSPM, 1: 54-58. Pdémnang is mentioned as Sinhaeng’s tutor, but there is no trace of the traditional Chan/S6n rhetoric here. 74. Ch’oe Ch’1-w6n, Pongam-sa Chijiing taesa pimyong (924), KSPM, 1: 283. Although the stele was erected in 924, the text probably dates from around 885, when Ch’oe was instructed to compose the inscription. There exist several premodern transcriptions of Ch’oe’s four main stele inscriptions, known as the sasan pi, but as far as I am aware there are no major discrepancies concerning the list of mountain schools.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 59 Table 2

~The Mountain Schools in Late Silla

Founder Location 1 Puksan Ui Kayji-san, Tot

2 Nam/’ak Ch’dk Silsang-san, Hongch’dk

3 Taean Kuksa Tongni-san, Hyech’6l 4 Hyemok Yuk Pongnim-san, HyOnuk

5 Chiry6k Mun Chongyuk(-san?) Mun (7?)

6 Ssanggye Cho Ssangye-sa, Hyeso

7 Sinhting On Ch’ungon (?) 8 Yongam Ch’e Kakch’e (?) 9 Chinmu Hyu Kakhyu (7?) 10 Ssangbong Un Saja-san, Toyun 11 Kosan Il Sagul-san, Pomil

12 Songyu Yom Songyju-san, Muyom

13. Pori Chong Kwangjong School

phrases, the first two characters indicating the name of the mountain and the third being part of the monk’s name (see Table 2). Several things are noteworthy about the list in Table 2. First of all, Ch’oe Ch’1-w6n regarded Totii’s and Hongch’6k’s schools, referred to as the Northern (Puksan) and Southern (Nam’ak) mountains, respectively, as the foremost Korean S6n schools; not only did he put them on top of the list, but he also provided a separate explanation on them. The reason seems to be because Totii and Hongch’6k were

the first to introduce the Hongzhou lineage to Korea.” Second, among these thirteen, we can identify seven of the traditional Nine 75. On the basis of this, Han Ki-du (Han’guk Son sasang yon’gu, pp. 165-83) has argued that the Silla mountain schools were divided into those following Toui’s school, the Puksan group, and those leaning to Hongch’dk’s school, the Nam’ak group. After 900 the Nam’ak group became dominant, ultimately influencing the formation of Sdn in Kory6é. However, this interpretation seems difficult to sustain. At the time (Late Silla), there seem to have existed different, competing claims as to which school was dominant. Although Ch’oe Ch’i-won here singles out Toi and Hongch’dk, as we have seen, Ch’ejing’s stele claims Toi as the first and foremost Korean patriarch. Another inscription suggests that Hyeso rather than Hongch’dk was the second chief patriarch next to Totti; see Ssanggye-sa Chin’gam sonsa pimyong (887), KSPM, 1: 130. This inscription was also composed by Ch’oe Ch’iwon, but here he quotes from an edict by King Htingdok.

60 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla Mountain Schools (nos. 1-4, 10-12, in Table 2). To this should be added the Htiyang-san school, whose temple founder is actually the subject of this inscription and which therefore does not figure here—

Ch’oe Ch’1-w6n is listing schools other than Tohoén’s. The ninth school, the Sumi-san school, founded by I6m (869—936), was established in Koryo and could therefore not have been included here. The list clearly shows that the term “Nine Mountains” does not apply to late Silla. Third, little information is known about the six additional schools, except for Hyeso’s (774-850) mountain school at Ssanggye-

sa, for which we have a separate stele—more on this below. For numbers 5, 7—9, and 13 in the list, I rely on HO Hiting-sik’s reconstruction of the full names.’° The fourth and final point emerging

from Ch’oe Ch’i-won’s inscription is that the names given to the schools still reflect the place associated with the founder of the lineage rather than the founder of the mountain temple (kaesanjo). Thus Toui’s school was still known as “North Mountain,” presumably referring to ChinjOn-sa, Sdrak-san, where he retired, and the Pongnimsan school was still known as Hyemok-san. This may indicate that in the late ninth century the Korean Sdn patriarchs were still seen as more important monks than the founders of temples. Although by that time Kaji-san had laid claim to Toiti’s lineage and was presumably an important institution, the main emphasis was still on the lineage founders. Later, however, the organizational skills of dharma heirs became more important, which is perhaps why some lineage schools became known by the name obtained by the temple founders. The disappearance of some mountain schools was probably due to their failure to find adequate support; sectarian rivalry may also have taken a toll. The exclusion of Hyeso of Ssanggye-sa from the list of Nine Mountain schools is an interesting case in point. Hyeso’s stele

has been preserved, and its contents suggest that he had attracted considerable attention as a bona fide S6n patriarch. He had received transmission in Mazu’s lineage, was ordained at the illustrious Chan center of Shaolin, was welcomed by King Hiingd6k (r. 826-36), who praised him as one of the country’s two bodhisattvas (the other being 76. See H6 Hiting-sik, “Sdnjong ti kyesting kwa sosok saw6n,” pp. 233-35. He leaves no. 5, ChirySk Mun, open; this is perhaps the ‘Choéngyuk Mun’ mentioned in Chodang chip, K. 45, 1503: 350, without further information.

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 61 Totu, who had returned from China a few years earlier), and established a successful school on Chiri-san.’’ However, there is no indication that his temple was officially recognized by the state during his lifetime. After his death in 850, it took a further thirty-six years before his heirs succeeded in obtaining a stele and a posthumous title for their master. This may be an indication that obtaining official recognition for a mountain school could often be an arduous process, and a process on which the school’s existence hinged.

Furthermore, sectarian wrangling also played a role in this case. At some point Hyeso’s lineage was simply incorporated into the Hutiyang-san school. The inscription for Ktingyang (878-956), a later

representative of the Hiityang-san school, claims that Hyeso was a teacher of Toho6n. Undoubtedly this was an attempt to insert the Htiiyang-san lineage in the classic Hongzhou school of Mazu, to

which Hyeso was heir; in fact, the Htityang-san school can be traced back to POmnang, himself a disciple of the fourth patriarch Daoxin, and also to the Northern school of Chan. This shows that, by Early Koryo, Hyeso’s Ssanggye school had disappeared as an independent institution; otherwise it would surely have protested this distortion.” As Tohon’s stele by Ch’oe Ch’i-w6n shows, the system of mountain schools in late Silla was somewhat different from that in later periods. First, it 1s exclusively devoted to students from the HongZhou school, that is, lineages descending from Mazu. This tendency would continue later, the only exception being l6m of the Sumi-san school, who belonged to the Caodong branch. Second, it seems to be a list of fourteen great So6n masters rather than fourteen schools— hence the emphasis on the founders rather than on later disciples. 77. Ssanggye-sa Chin’gam sonsa pimyong (887), KSPM, 1: 130. 78. It has also been argued that Hyeso’s lineage was later taken over by Muy6m,

one of his disciples; see Kim Y6ng-t’ae, “Httityang-san Sdnp’a,” pp. 26-32. Kim claims that the transmission from Hyeso to Muyém was a fabrication of a later Htiyang-san heir. It is more likely, however, that Hyeso was incorporated into the Hitiyang-san lineage to obscure the connection with Daoxin and especially with the Northern school of Chan, also apparent in the stele for Tohon, the kaesanjo of Htiiyang-san; see Faure, Will to Orthodoxy, p. 40. Generally, the preference for the Hongzhou school seems to have been overwhelming in late Silla, as all schools on this list belong to it.

62 Buddhism and the State in Late Silla Only two names of mountains in the list show any similarity to the names famous today. It is thus clear that some form of institutionalization took place, and although we do not know when this happened, it was most likely after the founding of the Kory6 dynasty. Whether all the “Nine Mountains” existed as schools, or whether this was something of an ideal, is impossible to say. At any rate, as we will see in later chapters, only three or four mountain schools appear regularly in Kory6 sources, for example, when mention is made of the selection of monks for the monastic examination.

The Economic and Social Basis of the Sén Sanmun

Despite the ideological pretense of being detached from secular authority—usually expressed by invoking the model of Hutyuan (334-417), a Chinese monk famous for fighting off government in, terference in the Buddhist sangha”—from at least the mid-ninth century, the Sdn lineage schools became increasingly entrapped in a quest for official recognition and economic power, which brought them firmly into the realm of social and economic forces. This impacted on the viability of the S6n mountain schools. However, my main concern here is whether and to what degree these schools acted as a battleground in the struggle between the declining Silla central aristocracy and local independent or semi-independent powerholders. In assessing the material support of the mountain schools, we should take into account not only the identity of the donors but also the nature and purpose of the donation and the ultimate authorization for it.

In many cases it is difficult to assess the identity of the individuals who supported the Sdn schools. Did they belong to the local elites? What was their relation to the S6n monks who founded the schools? What was their motivation for donating land to temples? In at least some cases, it seems that practical motives, such as tax exemption,

79. See Hurvitz, “Render unto Caesar.” Huineng (638—713), the sixth patriarch of Chinese Chan, is also often invoked as a model of religious independence of the state. As the monk Chin’ gong taesa put it, “Coming to the capital, I put to shame the legacy of Caoxi [Huineng]; dallying in the palace is really not in accordance with the spirit of Lushan [Hutyuan]” (Piro-am Chin’gong taesa pimyong [939], NYKSM, 1: 63).

Buddhism and the State in Late Silla 63 were at play.®’ Also, we should consider the role of the Silla court in the formation of these schools, a factor that is too often overlooked. Let us first look at those mountain schools supported directly by the state: the Kaji-san, Silsang-san, Tongni-san, Hyemok-san (predecessor of the Pongnim-san school), and Sdngju-san schools (see Ta-

ble 3). In the case of the Kaji-san school, the state acknowledged Ch’ejing’s religious status as dharma heir to Toii by granting him the Kaji-san temple. In 858, a local subprefect (pusu) was ordered to present Ch’ejing with tea and medicine as tokens of the state’s care and reverence for eminent monks and the religion they represented. Later in the same year, secular and religious officials were sent with an edict making him abbot of Kayji-san-sa, a temple that had once belonged to another Buddhist school. The state also ensured that local villages would provide funds for repairing the temple and put the establishment under the aegis of the Department of Religious Affairs (S6n’gyosong). Finally, after Ch’ejing’s death in 880, the state be-

stowed on him a posthumous title and conferred the official name “Pongnim-sa” on his temple, thus recognizing his status as mountain founder (kaesanjo) of the Kaji-san school.*’ Local officials played a subordinate role in the endowment of the

Kaji-san temple. According to Ch’ejing’s stele, the subprefect of Changsa, Kim On-gyéng, who had been ordered by the court to present Ch’ejing with tea and medicine, later became a lay donor. Some scholars have suggested that Kim On-gydng was a local strongman who was the real agent in supporting the Kaji-san school, but this is unlikely, since Kim was not based near Kaji-san.* It is possible that

| 80. That local elites had the more prosaic goal of securing tax-free status for their estates by donating it to temples controlled by monks loyal to them or even related to them is suggested by Ch’oe Pyéng-hon, “Namal Ydch’o Sdnjong.” 81. The information for this paragraph is drawn from Porim-sa Pojo Soénsa pimyong (884), KSPM, 1: 98. 82. Kim Tu-jin, “Sasanggye ti pyondong,” p. 192; Ko Ik-chin, “Silla hadae ti S6n chdllae,” p. 535. In fact, Kim On-gyéng had taken care of Ch’ejing before the monk was granted Kaji-san. Kim was subprefect of Changsa county, near presentday Koch’ang in Chdllabuk-to, almost 100 kilometers northeast of Kaji-san, which is in Chollanam-do, near Kwangju, where Ch’ejing had arrived on his return from China. Kim later gave money to cast a Buddha statue for Ch’ejing’s private quarters, but this may be seen as an act of private piety.

85 =i =— N t = Pas = bo S So oh 0D NA a ~ O°- i4=.‘~ 2% | ‘my, Le | d + meaty | Ay * | is 7 0 eee! AVY o

| N [Cet TDR SEA 42 BA em | | A | yy > | E af nN ii 7). B J?

| ee a“Vw | ie. J™ a {AY , ) > ]7|if| .as ‘ ."aN %)!’if' —aN : > pi, . + ||2: ;a= >> iaa PND

Fig. 1 Text of Taejo’s First Injunction (SOURCE: Chong In-ji et al., Koryosa).

and values were used to explain the vicissitudes of life. These views were not derived from any particular school of Buddhism but seem to have formed a substratum of basic Buddhist beliefs. In this perspective, much emphasis is placed on the piety and goodwill of the ruler, which produces the intended response from the Buddhas. Thus,

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 101 this conceptual universe comes close to Confucian ideology, with its emphasis on a “rectifiable” ruler beholden to Heaven, and indeed at times rulers leaned closer to the Mandate of Heaven rhetoric.”’ On the whole, however, I would argue that a Buddhist pantheon incorporating both Buddhist and local deities was more relevant for the le-

gitimation of Kory6 kings than the more abstract concept of Heaven. | This may have been due to the lack of a strong philosophical discourse on Confucian cosmology or a deliberate attempt to avoid upsetting the Chinese world order by appealing to the Buddha rather than the Mandate of Heaven, or a combination of these two factors. Ultimately, this serves as further evidence for the fundamentally pluralist worldview of the Kory6 leadership.” We should be careful, however, not to infer from this that Bud-

dhism was considered superior to the ruler; the elevation of the Buddhas was largely a symbolic act of the ruler. We can certainly not conclude from this that the temporal power was considered subordinate. The rationalizing discourse of the Mandate of Heaven ensured that such religious elements were forced into a secular paradigm. Also, the Kory6 rulers could draw on Buddhist narratives that empowered secular rulers, as we shall see in the last section of this chapter, on the representation of rulership through Buddhism.

The Second Injunction: The Relation Between Buddhism and Geomancy The Second Injunction, and to a lesser degree the Sixth Injunction, clarify T’aejo’s view of the relationship between Buddhism and geomancy and local deities. Whereas the First Injunction gives the 73. An example is the reign of King Injong. Thus the Korydésa chdéryo quotes a memorial addressed to King Injong, which urges him to “cultivate virtue in response to Heaven” instead of holding Buddhist rituals and maigre feasts (KRSC 10.12a). Yet although Injong seems to have been influenced by the memorial, it is not certain how deeply affected he was by Confucian notions of virtue. The si/lok for Injong’s reign were compiled by Kim Pu-sik (KRS 98.19a), and he may have exerted himself to include such Confucian criticisms of Injong. But just as Heaven was to be induced by virtue, the same goes for the Buddhas’ protection, as implied by King S6njong’s edict of 1086; see KRS 10.9a. 74. Several studies now propose that Kory6 was a basically pluralist society. For a recent assessment of this, see Breuker, “When Truth Is Everywhere.”

102. Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy impression that Buddhism was accorded prime place, or at least that other ideologies were subsumed by it, the Second Injunction seems

to assign geomancy the role of keeping the institutional power of Buddhism in check. To understand this, we should first look at what geomancy is and what it does and then consider its application in Koryo. A key figure in understanding Kory6 geomancy is the monk Toson (827-98), who plays a seminal if enigmatic role in the geomantic discourse of the time. Any foray into this area is severely restricted by the lack of any general historical survey of geomancy. Especially its early history in China and its relation to the philosophic tradition of China remain obscure. For the definition of geomancy and for the context in which

it operates, I have relied mainly on Korean works. Although the important treatises on geomancy originated in China, they seem to have been overlooked by mainstream sinology.” By contrast, Korean scholars have devoted more attention to the subject, since they recognized its impact on Korean history. A good starting point for a discussion of geomancy in Korea is Yi Pydng-do’s 1980 study on prognostication (toch’am) in the Kory6 dynasty. He defines geomancy (p ’ungsu, Ch. fengshui) as follows: Just as phrenology and physiognomy observe the bone structure and appearance of a person to determine his character and the events in his life, [geomancy] observes the features of the landscape [to determine] whether the geography is suitable for cities, dwellings, and graves; i.e., it explains the relation [of the location] to the fortunes or misfortunes of the people who live there.”°

That which actually exerts an influence on the people living in a certain location is the concentration of Yin or Yang energy, the manifesting forces of the vital energy, ki. Geomancy, then, is the skill to read the terrain to fathom the state of its vital energy.

The origin of the current term for geomancy, p’ungsu, can be traced to an ancient Chinese manual, the Zangshu (Book of burials), reputedly authored by Guo Pu (276-324). According to this book, a 75. The best introduction to geomancy remains Yoon, Geomantic Relationships. For a survey focusing on the anthropology of Chinese geomancy, see Feuchtwang, Anthropological Analysis of Chinese Geomancy. 76. Yi PyOng-do, Koryo sidae tii yén’gu, p. 21.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 103 place with good ki should “hold the wind (p’ung) and acquire the water (su).”’’ Since wind was believed to scatter ki, a good site had to prevent the dissipation of the natural flow of ki. Water, on the other hand, was believed not to be able to carry the vital energy; so the presence of water in front of a site would block ki and prevent it from flowing away. In the simplest and perhaps oldest way to detect such auspicious places, geomancy transposed to the topography the

characteristic features of the animals of the four directions, especially the Blue Dragon of the east, associated with Yin, and the White Tiger of the west, associated with Yang.’* Tombs were usually positioned facing south, preferably in a place where the landscape to

the left (the east) had the characteristic coiling configuration of a dragon and the landscape to the right (the west) the features of a tiger.

But in the course of history, geomancy absorbed several strands of thought, theories, and schools, and numerous methods were developed to read the topographical features. The dominant ones, which emerged during the Tang dynasty, were the Fujian and the Jiangxi schools. The Fujian version, also called the Directions school, uses a special compass to find auspicious places and takes the influence of

constellations into account. The Jiangxi variant, also called the Shapes school, was systematized by Yang Yunsong (fl. 874-88) and emphasized “landforms and terrain, taking them from where they arise to where they terminate, and thereby determine position and ~ orientation.”” The early history of geomantic thought and practice in Korea remains obscure. There is evidence that it played a role in the selection of cities and palaces as early as the Three Kingdoms period, but what motivated the selection is never fully articulated. In the course of the Unified Silla period, geomantic ideas, especially concerning the

77. Quoted in Field, “Numerology of Nine Star Fengshui,” p. 16. For a full discussion of the principles of wind and water, see Yoon, Geomantic Relationships, pp. 24-93. 78. Yi Pyoéng-do, Koryo sidae tii yin ’gu, p. 25. See also Groot, Fung-shui, p. 28. 79. Needham, Science and Civilization in China 4: 242. On the formation and characteristics of these two schools, see also Choi Bydng-hdn (Ch’oe Pydng-hon), “Tosd6n’s Geomantic Theories,” p. 66. On the distinction between the two schools, see also March, “Appreciation of Chinese Geomancy,” p. 261.

104 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy selection of burial sites, gradually became more pronounced.*’ On the basis of the available evidence, Ch’oe Pydng-hon has argued that by the end of the Unified Silla period the Jiangxi school exerted the strongest influence on Korean geomancy. He links the emergence of this trend with the travels of Korean S6n monks to China. Most of _ the Korean patriarchs of the Nine Mountain Schools received the transmission from members of Mazu’s lineage, which was established in Jiangxi province. Ch’oe assumes that besides instruction in Buddhism, the Korean monks also received training in the geomantic practice of the Jiangxi school.*’

Whether or not Sdn monks actively practiced geomancy, in late Silla a belief in the correlation between Buddhism and the local terrain emerged. After King Wons6ng died in 798, special attention was paid to the selection of a good burial site. Eventually the site of Sungbok-sa was chosen. Ch’oe Ch’i-w6n summarized the discussion regarding the pros and cons of this site in the stele inscription for Sungbok-sa. This text reveals that combining the right site with the presence of a Buddhist temple was believed to secure the longevity of the dynasty.*’ In another stele authored by Ch’oe Ch’i-won, he described the selection of a site for the Huiyang-san school. The diviner advised that if monks did not occupy this location, it would 80. See Ch’oe Pydng-hon, “Tosdn ti saeng’ae,” pp. 125-33, for a history of early geomantic practice.

81. Ibid., pp. 114-20. The author’s theory has become commonly accepted in later scholarship, but it contains several weaknesses that need to be addressed. First, there is absolutely no evidence to support the premise that Chinese Chan monks of Mazu’s school were specialists in geomancy, let alone the Jiangxi school. The examples he brings into evidence merely show that some early Chinese Chan monks were interested in geomancy but not that they practiced it themselves (pp. 116-17). One might as well suggest that the Korean Sdn monks learned it from others during their sojourn in China. Second, the figurehead of the Jiangxi school, Yang Yunsong, was active around 874—88 (exact dates unknown), which means that Tosdn, who died in 898, must have been instructed in this school very late in his life. Third, except for Tosén, in the stelae or biographies of the Korean monks nothing suggests that they were specialized in geomancy. Admittedly, they took special care in choosing a place to build their retreat, but it is never clearly stated on what principles their decisions rested. It seems much safer to accept that geomantic concepts were widely known in Silla and not monopolized by one group such as Sén monks. Also, it is difficult to identify Korean geomantic knowledge with one particular school. 82. See Ch’oe Ch’i-won, Sungbok-sa pimyong (887-96), KSPM, 1: 233.

| Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy — 105 become a den for the Yellow Turban bandits. Moreover, to secure this base, a building and Buddha statues had to be erected to protect the site.’ Thus, already in Silla, temples were constructed with a view to redressing evil geomantic influences, and thereby contributing to the protection of the dynasty and the state.

The formulation and systematization of such principles is attributed to the late Silla Son monk Toson. Although he belonged to the Tongni-san school, he gained a place in history not because of his meditation practice but because of his alleged contribution to the foundation of Kory6. The main source about his life is the inscription by Ch’oe Yu-ch’ong (1094-1173), composed in 1150 by order of King Uijong (1146-70), to commemorate and explain the bestowal of the posthumous title of Sdn’gak Kuksa (lit. “precognizant state preceptor”) on Tosén by King Injong.” The first part of this text is a ~ conventional biography of a Sdn monk, but the second part describes how Toson mysteriously received instruction in geomancy and used this knowledge to predict the birth of Wang K6n and his destiny to found a dynasty. This prediction is further embroidered on in the ge-

nealogy of King T’aejo contained in Kim Kwan-ti’s P’yénnydn t’ongnok, also compiled during King Uijong’s reign.*’ According to this genealogy, Wang Yung, T’aejo’s father, met Tosdn near Kaesong in 876. Toson had just returned from China, where he had stud-

ied Yixing’s (683-727) geomantic methods, and he explained the geomantic configuration of Wang Yung’s dwelling. He told Wang Yung that he was under the mandate of water and instructed him to

83. See Ch’oe Ch’i-w6n, Pongam-sa Chijiing taesa pimydng (924), KSPM, 1: 288. For the interpretation, see Ch’oe Pyéng-hon, “Toson tii saeng’ae,” pp. 134-35. 84. According to Ch’oe Pydng-hin (“Tosdn tii saeng’ae,” p. 105), this work is the most reliable source for the study of Tosdn. See also his article “Tosdn’s Geomantic Theories,” pp. 68—78, for an English synopsis of the available sources on Toson. The original text can be found in TMS 117. The stele itself is lost, but the com-

plete text, including the inscription on the reverse, was rediscovered during the colonial period; see Imanishi Ryu, “Gydryuji Senkaku daishi himei ni tsuite’; and KSCM, no. 347. For the appointment certificate bestowing the posthumous title of state preceptor on Tosdn, see Ch’oe Ung-ch’dng, Ongnyong-sa wangsa Toson kabong Son’gak Kuksa kyoso, TMS 27. 85. Kim Kwan-ti (dates unknown), P’ydénnyon t’ongnok; KRS, Koryo segye 7Tb-— 8a. For a translation and analysis of this text, see Rogers, “P ’yénnydn T’ongnok.”

106 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy build a palace according to certain measurements. “In this way,” Tos6n concluded, “you will respond exactly to the great destiny ordained by Heaven and earth, and next year you will certainly produce a holy child, whom you should name Wang K6n” (lit. “Wang the Founder”).*°

As Michael Rogers has shown, the compilation of these two key sources, which took place two and a half centuries after Tosdn’s death, should be understood in the context of the domestic and international political situation of the time. Two important events spurred the Koreans to rethink their representation as a country. First, there was the conquest by the Jurchen Jin of northern China in 1126—27, the so-called Jingkang disaster, which pushed the Song state south of the Huai River. This disturbed the balance of power between Koryd and the mainland states, Liao and Song. With Jin dominating KoryO’s frontier, a more stable relation emerged in which Kory6 had lit-

tle choice but to accept Jin as its suzerain. Second, there was the revolt by the monk Myoch’o6ng. He took advantage of the confusion following the attempted coup by Yi Cha-gy6m (suppressed in 1127)

and the controversy over accepting Jin as suzerain and persuaded King Injong to take a stronger, more independent stance. To reinvigorate the dynasty, he urged the king to move the capital to P’yongyang, arguing that the virtue of Kaesoéng had become depleted. Thus, he used a geomantic rationale to revive the spirit of ancient Kogury6 and recover its ancient heartland. However, he soon met with fierce opposition from the Kaesong elite, represented by Kim Pu-sik, which identified itself with Silla and favored peace with the Jin. Myoch’ dng then tried to secede, but his insurrection was crushed in 1136. After

these tumultuous events, Kory6 started looking inward, and under the leadership of Kim Pu-sik the view that Koryo had succeeded Silla rather than Kogury6 gained the upper hand. This necessitated an ideology of territorial self-sufficiency to replace the belief that advocated emulating ancient Kogury6 and thereby maintaining a claim on the ancient Kogury6 heartland on the mainland. Tos6n thus became a central figure in the creation of a new myth, which saw the peninsula as an organic system in which the mountains formed the spine channeling the energy from Mount Paektu across the pen86. KRS, Koryo segye 8a. Translated by Rogers, “P’ydénnydn T’ongnok,” p. 11.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 107 insula. According to the P’yénnyén t’ongnok, Wang K6n’s ancestors managed to tap into that energy thanks to Tosén’s instructions.*’

| It is impossible to ascertain how much creative liberty Kim Kwanti took in eulogizing Tos6n. The basic facts seem true—from the beginning Wang Kon had honored Tos6n for his ability to divine the rise of Koryé.** Wang Kon also relied on Toson’s geomantic insight to control the construction of temples, using the possible harm posed

by random temple building to the terrestrial forces as a pretext to forbid unauthorized constructions. Thus, the injunctions presuppose a relation between geomancy and Buddhism by emphasizing the potentially harmful effects of temple building. However, the P ’yénnydn

t’ongnok legend hardly mentions Buddhism: its main thrust is mythological, integrating several themes from Silla mythology into a

new story to explain the destiny and semidivine origins of Wang KOn’s ancestors. Geomancy is, in a sense, the final element that tips the balance in favor of the Wang lineage. Introduced by Tos6n from China, where he had learned it from Yixing, geomancy is here represented in terms that mark it as a superior system, based on observations of heaven and earth, and thus contrasted with the ignorance of

previous generations.*’ Although Michael Rogers may be correct in asserting that the mythical narrative of the P’ydnnyon t’ongnok served to give expression to the superiority of Kaeséng over 87. For an excellent treatment of these events, see Rogers, “National Consciousness in Medieval Korea”; and idem, “Regularization of Kory6-Chin Relations.” 88. Although Toson is not explicitly mentioned in the Injunctions, the stele inscription by Ch’oe Yu-ch’dng is based on a Silla original (no longer extant) by Pak In-b6m; also, he was repeatedly honored by successive Kory6 kings before Uijong. 89. It is, of course, chronologically impossible that Tosén had met Yixing, who died exactly a century before he was born. Nevertheless, Yixing was a respected monk at the Tang court, who belonged to both the Chan and the esoteric schools. He was also an expert in astrology and various other sciences, including—although this cannot be established with certainty—geography and geomancy. It is presumably for this reputation that Yixing is brought into the story. Although seeing this myth in terms of a scientific advance over superstition may be a too modern interpretation, nevertheless I do feel that geomancy is represented as a superior doctrine. For Yixing’s association with geomantic tracts, see Field, “Numerology of Nine Star Fengshui,” p. 17. For Yixing’s possible involvement in geography, see Yi Yong-bdm, “Tos6n ti chirisdl.” The author notes that the section on astronomy in the Xin Tang shu (juan 31) includes some theories about Chinese geography that may derive from Yixing.

108 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy P’yongyang and of Silla over Kogury6, the main narrative has a ring of oral tradition that is hard to ignore.”’ King Uijong, under whose aegis it was compiled, had an eclectic interest in Buddhism, Daoism, and geomancy and was intent on using these traditions to restore the

dynasty to its former glory. Thus it is possible that he ordered the compilation of folk tales that showed the workings of these ideas at the beginning of the dynasty. In any case, although the reign of King Uijong marks the consoli-

dation of Tos6n as the fountainhead of Korean p’ungsu, the two main sources about Tos6n’s life from this period make no mention of Buddhism. It is only toward the end of Uijong’s reign, in a set of reform measures he promulgated in 1168, that we find the appearance of a key term. The reform measures bear some resemblance to T’aejo’s Injunctions, but focus only on Yin/Yang ritualism and Buddhism, not on practical measures. The second of these measures is as follows: “Reverently attend to Buddhist affairs. Since it is the latter day when the law declines, if there are derelict establishments among the pibo temples built by our ancestors, the old dharma seats, and special prayer temples, the officials should repair them.””’ The term pibo-sa, literally “temples for aid and remedy,” appears here for the first time in Koryo sources. It is seldom mentioned again until the late Koryo— early Chosén period.” Yet it has been widely credited as one of the key concepts in Tos6n’s thought, and thereby a major feature setting Korean geomancy apart from its Chinese counterpart. A typical defi-

nition of the term can be found in an article by Ch’oe Pydng-hon: “Locations with weak earth veins or inauspicious mountain forms can artificially be cured of their defects by constructing a temple or 90. I feel that Michael Rogers’s reading of the P ’yénnyén t’ongnok as an indictment of P’yéngyang is somewhat strained, in that it requires that so much additional information be brought out. Despite the fact that Myoch’dng’s rebellion had discredited P’ydngyang, King Uijong continued to esteem the city. His reform measures (see below) envisaged a revival of the old Kogury6 capital (KRS 18.36a). 91. KRS 18.36a-37b. Uijong’s reform measures, and his reign in general, are traditionally regarded as ineffective, and the king himself is portrayed as superstitious, susceptible to fawning and indulging in aesthetic pleasures at the expense of government; see Yi Pyéng-do, Koryo sidae tii yén’gu, pp. 245 ff for this traditional view. For a revisionist interpretation, see Shultz, “Mulitary Revolt in Kory6.” 92. For translations of all the source materials that mention the term pibo, see Vermeersch, “Relation Between Geomancy and Buddhism.”

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 109 erecting stiipas.””” However, all the sources allowing us to infer such a meaning date from the Chos6n dynasty. The most famous and explicit of these is a dialogue between Yixing and Tos6n, in which the

_ Chinese monk compares the landscape with the human body: just as the human body needs acupuncture to be cured of a disease, so the earth needs a Buddhist edifice to be cured.” One of the earliest formulations of the beneficial effects of Buddhism on the geomantic constellation can be found in the T’aejong sillok, which claims that Toson had selected seventy temples as pibo-sa, because “if one establishes temples and holds Buddhist rituals in places where the mountains are treacherous and the water adverse, it would help to pacify the nation.””°

But was this view also current in the early Kory6 period? If we look at the Second Injunction again, it warns against only the danger of building temples in the wrong places but does not mention the po-

tentially beneficial aspects. Although it was probably understood from the beginning that Buddhism could exert a positive as well as a negative influence on the geomantic forces—as can be seen in the establishment of Pongam-sa (Htiiyang-san) to rid the place of crimi-

nals—this was not systematized and may have just been part of a general belief in the positive, humanizing qualities of Buddhism. Also, it was emphasized that only on those places selected by Tosén could temples exert a positive influence. In the course of time, this injunction was less and less heeded. In 1055, the Chancellery protested against the construction of Htingwang-sa, on the ground that it

“will damage beyond repair the vital arteries of the landscape.””° _ Also in the context of the construction of Hingwang-sa, the official Ch’oe Yu-s6n pointed out that temples had already been built on all the sites selected by Tosin.”’ This indicates again that Toson was invoked mainly to limit the construction of temples. By Uijong’s time, however, more and more temples were being built, and the king readily assented to the building of private temples 93. Choi Byén-hon (Ch’oe Pyéng-hén), “Tosdn’s Geomantic Theories,” p. 67. 94. Koryo kuksa Toson chon, CJS, 2: 377. 95. T’aejong sillok 3.23a. 96. KRS 7.36a-b. 97. KRS 95.6b—7a.

110 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy dressed up as temples dedicated to the king (see Chapter 6). If there had existed a list of seventy pibo temples designated by Tos6n, as the T’aejong sillok claims, Koryo officials would probably have invoked this list to restrict temple construction. However, many tracts attributed to Tos6n circulated in Kory6, and it is possible that there were many discrepancies between these. Moreover, it is likely that the view arose that since the geomantic virtue of a place can fluctuate, new temples had to be built to address changing situations. In any case, rulers favorable to Buddhism seemed to have emphasized its potential benefits, and those intent on lessening the temples’ power emphasized its potential harm.”* On the whole, however, the view that temples exerted a positive influence carried the day. Neither Tos6n’s ideas nor the term pibo was seen exclusively in geomantic terms, however: the term pibo could be used in a practical sense of assisting, and it also intersects with the world of local deities and with various Buddhist schools. Thus the Chancellery’s protest against the building of Htingwang-sa mentions that pibo temples were initially built as a reward for the earnest wish for unification, indicating that the term was also understood as “aiding the state.”””

Originally, the term may have simply referred to the temples rewarded by T’aejo for their support of the new dynasty. Toson has also been connected with native deities. According to the “Record of the Reconstruction of Yongam-sa,” dated between 1318 and 1325,

Toson was told by the female deity of Chiri-san to construct three cliff (am) temples in order to reunite the Three Han. He therefore built the Sdn’am, Un’am, and Yongam temples, “and thus these three temples became a great support (pibo) for the nation.”'”’ Buddhist schools other than the Son school also laid claim to Toson. The Ch’ 6nt’ae monk Ch’dnch’aek (1206-93) claimed that Tosén had told the 98. An example of the former is Uijong; an example of the latter is the military ruler Ch’oe Ch’ung-hoén, who issued a set of his own reform measures in 1196. One of these called for the immediate destruction of all non-remedial temples, something that was apparently never carried out (KRS 129.6b). 99. KRS 7.36a. Although the text says that temples were “built” as a reward for their unification wish, it presumably means that they were given official patronage and land grants. 100. Pak Chon-ji (1250-1325), Yéngbong-san Yongam-sa chungch’ang ki, TMS 68.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 11 Ch’ont’ae monk Ninggiting a secret formula for “unifying the three into one country through the mysterious way of uniting the three vehicles into one vehicle, and the three contemplations of one mind.” Nunggung in turn is said to have recommended this to T’aejo as a suitable ideology for a country that had to unite three constituents into one. Ch’dnch’aek identifies the ideology of Chinese Tiantai as “uniting the three and returning to the one” and traces Tos6n’s appli-

cation of this to practical situations to the ninth Tiantai patriarch Zhanran (711—82).'”' In contrast to the way Tosdn is represented during the Choson period and in modern times, Ch’6nch’aek clearly appropriated him as a Ch’6nt’ae master. The Hwadm school also tried to appropriate him. According to the Hwadm-sa sajék, published in 1677, “T’aejo, in the twenty-sixth year of his reign [943], following the instructions of Tos6n constructed first 500 Sdn temples and later 3,800 [other] temples, Hwadm-sa taking first place in the [strategy] of assistance (pibo).”"”

This analysis of the interconnections between Buddhism and geomancy shows that the relationship was anything but straightforward and static, although Wang Kon had perhaps hoped it would be. He was clearly concerned to control Buddhist temples, mindful of the example of the Silla, whose downfall was often attributed to the excessive construction of temples.'”’ Silla’s struggle to contain the random construction of temples can be gleaned from laws promul101. See H6 Hting-sik, ed. and trans., Chinjéng Kuksa wa “Hosamnok,” pp. 31011. The notion that Tosdén had transmitted the Tiantai doctrine of the “three into one” clearly dates from around 1300. Another author who lived around that time, Min Chi (1248-1326), quoted from the memorial allegedly submitted by Ninggiing: “We heard that in the great Tang empire there was a sitra called Lotus of the Wonderful Law and a wise man of Tiantai [Zhiyi] who [developed] a meditation method of three contemplations of one mind. As for Your Highness, bringing the three [kingdoms] together into one country, matching the customs and localities, if you pursue this way and spread it, then the future generations of rulers will be long-lived, the royal enterprise will not be interrupted and remain as one nation” (Kukch’dng-sa ktimdang chubul Sokka sari yong ’i ki, TMS 68). This text does not mention Tosén or Zhanran. Ch’dnch’aek refers to a work by the ninth Tiantai patriarch, Zhanran, the Fahua ji, in which this practical application is allegedly set out, but I could not trace this work. 102. See the edition by Ching Hwi-hon, Pulgyo hakpo 6 (1969), p. 227. 103. See, e.g., Kim Pu’s biography in SGYS 2.

112 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy gated throughout the dynasty. As early as 664 the uncontrolled dona-

tion of land and funds to temples was forbidden. In 806, the construction of new temples was completely forbidden.'°* However, the Silla state was apparently unable to enforce these measures. Wang KOn thus turned to the inspirational figure of Tos6n to justify his restriction on temple building and the dedication of new temples. Some temples were given the title of pibo-sa for their role in protecting the country, either because of their assistance in his unification project or

because of their geomantic function of suppressing the wayward elements in the ground. Ultimately, this plan did not quite work as intended, since geomantic ideas were invoked more and more to justify the building of new temples in the course of the dynasty. Wang Kon himself bears some responsibility for this, because he set the example by constructing new temples or endowing existing ones with land. In any case, geomantic discourse continued to be part of the agenda for economic policies concerning Buddhism throughout the dynasty, a point elaborated further in Chapter 6.

The Sixth Injunction: The Relationship Between Buddhism and Native Religion For the sake of convenience, I use the term “native religion” but this term should be approached with caution. It does not indicate a sys-

tematized religion; rather, I use it to refer to native deities, mainly those associated with mountains and rivers. Although these deities are often associated with Shamanism because they feature in modern

Shamanism, there is in fact no evidence that they belonged to any particular system.'”’ They appear in the sources only when the state eranted official titles, a strategy intended to recognize the deities and

thereby assert some control over them. This procedure was also very popular in Song China, where many contemporaneous sources

describe some of the local cults and their incorporation into the state system; unfortunately, no such information is available for 104. SGSG 6, 10. 105. On the problem of identifying modern Korean Shamanism with premodern

gion?” ,

indigenous religious practices, see McBride, “What Is the Ancient Korean Reli-

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 113 Koryo.'°° The lack of information may be due to the diffuse character of these deities: they were probably so much a part of daily life that people did not give them a second thought. It is also possible that they simply fused with geomantic concepts. Earth spirits, for example, could be confounded with the earth virtue of geomancy. Thus the T’aejong sillok notes that King T’aejo of Kory6 built temples “to pacify the gods of the earth (sajik)” rather than to suppress a negative flow of energy.'”’ In the religious universe of Koryé, the lines divid-

ing several systems of thought and religious pantheons were not clearly drawn, making it difficult for us to impose strict categories such as “Buddhist” or “geomantic.”'°* Yet the Sixth Injunction’s admonition to venerate both the Buddha and local deities suggests that the two were still strongly differentiated. To understand the importance of local cults and deities to Wang Kon, we have to take a closer look at the ritual universe of the Kory6 period. Both the Lantern Festival (Yondtinghoe) and the P’algwanhoe mentioned in the Injunction were important ritual events for the Koryé dynasty. Chapter 7 addresses the Buddhist aspects of the ritual universe of Kory6; this section deals with Kory6’s ritual system in general.

| Our main sources for the ritual system of Koryo are still the relevant chapters in the Korydsa. Unfortunately, we can be fairly certain that the system it presents is no more than a later imposition conditioned by the ideals of the Chosdn historiographers. They admit as much in their introduction to the first chapter on ritual: When King T’aejo of Kory6 first established a national policy (kukkyong), its scope was broad and wide-ranging, but since it was a first draft, it did not

106. See Hansen, Changing Gods in Medieval China, pp. 79-104. 107. T’aejong sillok 3.23a—b. Something similar is seen in Song China. According to the Fozu tongji (T. 49, 2035: 393b), Song Taizu believed that the destruction of temples by the Later Zhou, the dynasty he overthrew, had angered the earth spirits and led to its downfall. 108. The situation may be compared to that in traditional China, where, as Henri Maspero argued, people lived their religion as a coherent system and not as an assemblage of heterogeneous teachings; what we see as different systems would have been perceived by premodern Chinese as different specializations within a single system (Maspero, Les religions chinoises; quoted in Faure, Rhetoric of Immediacy, p. 93). Yet we need more evidence on how Kory6 people experienced religion to ascertain this.

114 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy dwell on a discussion of rites. Only at the time of SOngjong was the statebuilding enterprise resumed, and he sacrificed to Heaven at the Round Altar (wongu), plowed the first field [in spring] (chékchodn), built the royal ancestral shrine, and established the [altar] of earth and grain gods (sajik). King Yejong [r. 1105-22] was the first to establish a bureau to determine the rites and ceremonies, but the relevant documents on this have not been transmitted. At the time of King Uijong, Director of the Chancellery Ch’oe Yun-iti compiled the Sangjéng kogim ye [Detailed compilation of old and new rites] in 50 kwon, but still many things were left out. Since then, the other documents suffered from wars and fires, and only 10 to 20 percent have been

preserved.”

This means that the eleven chapters on rites (kwdn 59-69) in the Koryosa are based mainly on a twelfth-century work, which was pre-

sumably prescriptive rather than a reflection of ritual practice in early Koryé.''” Most sources for ritual practice in Koryé were lost by the early Chos6n dynasty, and as a result the information contained in the chapters on rites does not conform to actual practice.''’ More-

over, these chapters focus on ceremony, the ritualized, external forms of behavior, rather than on the function or background of these rites. Still, since it is the only available starting point for a discussion of Kory6 ritual, it is important to look at how the Chos6n historians

saw the Koryo ritual system. They argued that it was divided into five categories: Auspicious, Mourning, Military, Guest, and Congratulatory Rites. Of these, the Auspicious Rites were clearly more important and could be subdivided into major, medium, and minor (see Table 4).

This scheme was based on the Chinese ritual code, more particularly the Katyuan ritual code of 732, which had the same subdivisions, although in a slightly different order. It is not impossible that Kory6 ritual works, notably the Sangjéng kogtim ye, were based on

109. KRS 59. 1a—b.

110. For a more detailed discussion of the ritual sources used by the Korydsa compilers, see Provine, Essays on Sino-Korean Musicology, pp. 22-25.

111. Also, according to the section on mourning rites, mourning ceremonies were not codified in Kory6, and all were made up ad hoc (KRS 64.1a). The study of the Kory6 ritual system is still undeveloped. For a useful overview, see Yi POm-yik, Han ’guk chungse ye sasang yon’gu.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 115 Table 4

| Major Kory6é Rites According to the Koryoésa

Category Subcategory Rite Auspicious Major (¢aesa) Sacrifice to Heaven (wdngu) (killye) (KRS 59-63) Sacrifice to God of the Earth (pangt’aek) Sacrifice to Earth and Grain Spirits (sajik) Sacrifice at the Ancestral Hall (t’aemyo), including merit subjects (kongsin), Spectacular Numina Hall (kyéngnyéng chon) Sacrifice at the Royal Tombs (chenting)

Medium Plowing the Field (chédkchén) (chungsa) Sacrifice at Confucius’ Shrine (Munson

(KRS 62) wang myo)

Minor (sosa) Sacrifice to the Masters of Wind and Rain, (KRS 63) the Thunder God, and Star Spirits (p ’ungsa usa noesin yOngsong)*

Mourning National Mourning (kukhyul)* (hyungnye) KRS 64

Military (kullye) Sending a General Off to Battle

KRS 64 (kyonjang ch’ulchong ui)* Guest (pillye) Receiving an Edict from the ,

KRS 65 Northern Dynasty (yéng pukcho chosa ui)*

Congratulatory Investing a queen (ch’aek t’aehu ui)* (karye)

KRS 65-69 Various congratu- | Lantern Assembly at the First Full Moon of latory ceremonies Spring (sangwon yondutnghoe ii) (karye chabii) KRS 69

Eight Prohibitions Assembly at the Second Month of Winter (chungdong P’algwanhoe tii)

*Only the first ritual is listed.

the Tang code, but it is questionable whether actual ritual practice was that closely modeled on Chinese precedents. After all, even the Kaiyuan code was not very normative, and many Tang emperors improvised according to what they felt was appropriate.'’” Also, the ritual

codes were more elaborations on procedures, since the interpretive

112. McMullen, “Bureaucrats and Cosmology.”

116 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy framework of the rites remained the Chinese classics. The gap between ritual theory and practice is evident in many ways, but for want of a systematic survey of these discrepancies, two examples should suffice. First, the Treatise on Ritual treats the sacrifice to the spirits of Heaven as the most important ritual, yet the annals record only thirteen cases of the king performing this ritual.’'’ By contrast, the Lantern Festival and the P’algwanhoe, nominally only subordinate ceremonies (“Various congratulatory ceremonies”), are recorded as having occurred 160 and 115 times, respectively. ''* Moreover, they were instated by T’aejo more than half a century before the Sacrifice to Heaven was introduced, which means that they played a more important role in the foundation of the dynasty. A second example concerns the worship of mountains and rivers. Although numerous entries in the annals section of the Korydésa show that Koryo kings esteemed mountain and river gods by granting them titles and that shrines were established to worship them, this rite is not given a separate entry in the Treatise on Ritual.'’” Whereas it is easier to compensate for the Confucian expurgation of Buddhist rites in the Treatise on Ritual, because they are substantially documented in the annals section, it is much harder to find any documentation about the rites concerning native deities. This shows that they were substantially downgraded compared with their status

| under Silla. Judging from the paltry evidence found in the Samguk sagi, mountain worship occupied a much more important position in 113. Kuwano Eiji, “Korai kara Richo shoki ni okeru Engudan saishi,” p. 6. 114. Kim Jongmyung, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” p. 59. They are, moreover, represented as ceremonies (i) rather than rituals (ye).

115. Pak Ho-won, “Koryd ti sansin sin’ang.” Some instances of sacrifices to mountains and rivers and the shrines of mountain spirits are recorded among the “various sacrifices” (chapsa) heading at the end of the minor sacrifices. Some regard the chapsa as a separate category, but the Korydsa compilers treated it as a collection of ad hoc rites, since the rites mentioned under this heading are not listed separately but merely mentioned as the acts of individual kings. However, this does not reflect the Kory6 reality—these various sacrifices were considered regular rites; see Kim Ch’6r-ung, “Kory6 kukka chesa,” pp. 135-60. There was opposition to the performance of sacrifices to gods of mountains and rivers as early as SOngjong’s reign, yet they were performed throughout Kory6. Moreover, even the Chosdn dynasty officially included this among its minor sacrifices; see Provine, Sino-Korean Musicol-

, ogy, p. 17; and Kim Ch’6r-ung, “Koryo kukka chesa,” pp. 146-47.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 117 the Silla ritual system. The three main sacrifices of Silla, subdivided into major, medium, and minor, centered on mountains, rivers, and localities, with the mountains around Kyéngju taking precedence.''® Still, albeit on a reduced scale, Wang K6n continued to worship the mountains that were important to Silla, and this is where the Sixth Injunction’s purpose becomes clearer. It explains that the P ‘algwanhoe’s purpose is to worship heavenly spirits, the Five Peaks, and the mountains and rivers. The term Five Peaks appears to refer to the five sacred mountains of Silla. The Silla connection is also evident from the description of the festival found in the Korydsa chdryo: Eleventh month (918). The P’algwanhoe was instituted. An official said, “Every year in the second month of winter, the former king(s) organized a grand feast [in observance] of the eight prohibitions to pray for blessings. I beg you to honor this institution.” The king said: “We lack in virtue, and therefore protect the great enterprise [1.e., Buddhism]. Relying on Buddhism,

the realm can be pacified.” Then in the ball court a circle of lamps was made, flanked by rows of incense burners, so that the whole place was brightly lit at night. Also two colored tents were made, more than 50 feet high, and furthermore a platform was constructed in the shape of a lotus, it was dazzling to behold. In front of it a hundred plays, songs, and dances were held; the music troupe of the four immortals, cart-ships of dragons, phoenixes, elephants, and horses, all the old stories of Silla. All the officials paraded in full dress, carrying their insignia. The whole capital came to look and feasted day and night. The king watched from the Wibong Pavilion. It was nominally a gathering to offer to the Buddha and enjoy the spirits. After this it became an annual event.’’’

Thus the P’algwanhoe was unequivocally intended to revere Silla traditions, including its spirits of mountains and rivers. The fact that it was instated barely five months after the founding of the dynasty lends further credibility to the thesis that it continued a Silla tradition. Since Silla still existed, it may also have been an attempt to lay claim to Silla’s heritage and thereby undermine its authority. Wang Kon’s predecessor Kung-ye had also organized a P’algwanhoe in the first year of his reign (898).''® The festival as it was practiced in Kory, 116. Chesa, SGSG 32. 117. KRSC 1.15a. 118. Kung-ye chon, SGSG 50.

118 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy however, shows some marked differences with the original practice of eight prohibitions rituals. Originally the eight prohibitions were meant to be observed by Buddhist lay people on special days in the month, to influence the spirits who came down on those days to report on people.'’’ The practice of these prohibitions among lay believers is attested in China as early as the fourth century.'”° The ritual was introduced to Silla from Kogury6 by the Kogury6 monk Hyeryang in 551,'”' and in Silla it seems to have taken on a new significance. In 572 a P’algwanhoe was held for seven days to comfort the spirits of those fallen in battle,” and around 650 another was held to celebrate the completion of a nine-story pagoda at Hwangnyong-sa. > Although it had thus become a state event with a political agenda, in these instances it still retained a religious dimension, since the practice of eight prohibitions rituals can be seen as acts of penance or gratitude. The Kory6 P’algwanhoe was of a different character altogether: it

bore all the hallmarks of a festival, a celebration rather than a religious ritual. It was held on a fixed date, the middle of the eleventh month (the fifteenth, day of the full moon), lasted for two days, and

, featured performances of dance and drama commemorating the Silla hwarang tradition. Since there is a gap of about 350 years between the last mention of an eight prohibitions ritual in Silla and its first

mention in Koryé, there is no way of knowing how this change emerged. It is tempting to see this process as the enculturation of a native festival into a more organized religion of foreign origin, just 119. Nakamura Hajime, Bukkyogo daijiten, pp. 1102—8. The most comprehensive survey of the doctrinal background of the eight prohibitions in English is found in Kim Jongmyung, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” pp. 172-87. 120. In 343, the monk Zhidun (314-66) organized a “fast of the eight prohibitions” for twenty-four persons, lay and cleric, which lasted from the morning of the

twenty-third to the morning of the twenty-fourth day of the tenth month (Guang hongming ji, T. 52, 2103: 350a). 121. Kéch’ilbu chon, SGSG 44. 122. SGSG 4 (thirty-third year of King Chinhiing). 123. Hwangnyong-sa kuch’ting t’ap, SGYS 3. During his travels in China, the monk Chajang was instructed by the bodhisattva Mafijusri to construct the pagoda and hold a P’algwanhoe upon its completion. It is not known whether this ritual was held. According to SGSG 5 (twelfth year of Queen Sdnd6k) construction of the pagoda started in 645, but it is not known when it was finished.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 119 as Christianity transformed “heathen” festivals into Christian ones,

Christmas being the most famous example. The testimony of the Chinese envoy Xu Jing (1091-1153) suggests that this was the case. In his description of Kory6, he noted that “in the tenth month, there is a great gathering for an offering to Heaven called Tongmaeng ... this Tongmaeng gathering of the tenth month has now been fixed on the fifteenth day of the same month, a maigre feast is laid out, and it is referred to as the p ’algwan fast. The rituals are sumptuous.” According to Xu Jing, the P’algwanhoe was thus nothing but a continuation of the ancient Koguryé Tongmaeng sacrifice to Heaven.'”” Many scholars, pointing out that Xu Jing did not witness the P’algwanhoe and that he mistook Koguryd for Koryd in sources, have

questioned this view.'*° Also, the main festival took place in the eleventh month. Yet there were in fact two festivals, one that took place in the main capital, Kaesong, in the eleventh month and one that took place in the Western Capital, P’yOngyang, in the tenth month. Xu Jing may have had information on the festival in the Western Capital, and since the main festival celebrated Silla traditions, it is conceivable that its counterpart in the ancient Koguryd capital celebrated Kogury6 traditions. After all, Koryéd saw itself as the successor to Kogury6. However, since the king usually attended only the celebrations in the capital, little was recorded about the festival in P’yongyang. Several Korean scholars have sought to argue that even the name p algwan is not the Buddhist term for “eight prohibitions” but rather a transliteration of a Korean word. However, there is no agreement on what that Korean original may have been. Ch’oe Nam-s6n reconstructs it as pdlgdndi (4 1s here used to represent the obsolete vowel symbol known as arae-a), meaning “bright,”'”’ and Yang Chu-dong

124. Xu Jing, Xuanhe fengshi Gaoli tujing, pp. 173-74. 125. Described in the Sanguo zhi, compiled in China in the fourth century AD; see Michael Rogers, trans., “Kogury6,” in Peter Lee, Sourcebook of Korean Civilization, 1: 18. 126. Kim Jongmyung, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” p. 231. 127. Ch’oe Nam-son, Kosa t’ong 36 (1946): 81. For a suggestion that the name derives from palk, the name of the supreme heavenly being (hanzinim), see To Kwangsun, “P’algwanhoe wa p’ungnyudo,” p. 153.

120 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy regards pal as the name of an ancient religious festival.'** All such interpretations are tenuous, but it 1s possible that to Kory6 people the term had connotations other than Buddhist, especially since the eleventh month contained the winter solstice, an important date with reltgious connotations in most civilizations. Nominally the P’algwanhoe could not coincide with the winter solstice, and in one case it was even postponed till after the solstice,'*’ but this was perhaps to avoid conflict with Kory6’s suzerain state. The prayer for the renewal of light at the winter solstice was an important part of the Chinese emperor’s ritual role, and vassals could not lightly appropriate this. Yet, as Okumura Shuji has pointed out in a thoughtful analysis of Kory6’s position in the worship of Heaven, the P ’algwanhoe may have served as an alternative to China’s worship of Heaven. Outwardly it was a display of Kory6’s indigenous spirits and traditions, to which foreign envoys and traders were invited; yet at the same time it was a powerful ritual, presided over by the Koryo king, which took place near the time of the winter solstice and may have appropriated some of its symbolism.’*’

Also, the P’algwanhoe was by no means the only framework for integrating the native worship of mountain and river gods and other cults. As noted above, the Chinese custom of recognizing and integrating local deities into the state system by investing them with titles was also adopted, as the existence of plaques dating to the Kory6 period conferred on city gods attests.'°' The city gods were a Chinese import. But native deities or nature spirits were also forces in their own right. Xu Jing observed that there was a shrine to the mountain god of Song’ak, the mountain north of Kaesdng, which had been

erected after the mountain god had transformed the pines on its slopes into an army to drive the Khitan away.'” Although this deity may also have been invested with a title in the Chinese fashion, ~” 128. Yang Chu-dong, Ching jéng koga yon’gu, p. 528. 129. This was in 1358 (KRS 69.33b). 130. Okumura Shuji, “Korai no Engu saitenrei to sekaikan.” 131. No Myong-ho et al., Han’guk kodae chungse ko munso, 1: 404-10. 132. Xu Jing, Xuanhe fengshi Gaoli tujing 17, p. 183. See also Y1 Kyu-bo, Che Song’ak mun, TYSC 37.17b; and KRS 63.20b, where this miraculous event is described somewhat differently and said to have occurred in the second month of 1011. 133. In 1018, King Hyonjong gave merit titles (hunho) to the spirits of the coun-

try’s mountains and rivers (KRS 4.25b). This was eight years after the start of

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy = 121 clearly it was still considered to be a power in its own right, and one to be reckoned with.

Still, in the end, it is clear that the P’algwanhoe was one of the most important ritual events in the Kory6 calendar. Whereas the Lantern Festival (see Chapter 7) celebrated the advent of spring and the renewal of life, the P’algwanhoe was a syncretist rite of passage at

the occasion of the turning point in the cycle of Yin and Yang. At this time, Kory6 and Silla gods, nature deities and heroes, were worshiped with dance and drama. The P’algwanhoe was subsumed under a loose Buddhist framework: several sources indicate that 1t was not dedicated exclusively to local spirits but to the Buddha as well.

The king went to Pébwang-sa after the celebration, and, although this is not attested in official historiography, the notion of penance associated with the eight prohibitions continued to play a role as well.'** Although not ideologically prominent, Buddhism in this context provided a framework for justifying the continuing veneration of

religious and cultural traditions dating from Silla times while indirectly allowing the king a role in regulating the cosmological order.

T’aejo’s Relation with Buddhist Schools Although T’aejo’s vision for Buddhism as outlined in the Ten Injunctions transcended the views of any particular school of Buddhism, his actual dealings with Buddhism imply a pragmatic stance. He took advantage of the religious situation as it presented itself to him. In the late ninth and early tenth centuries, the doctrinal schools were definitely on the defensive. We know little of what happened to

the temples of these schools in the Silla capital; they presumably faded away together with the dynasty.'°’ Only some well-established the Khitan invasions and ten months before Kang Kam-ch’an routed a new Khitan Invasion. 134. See Kim Jongmyung, “Buddhist Rituals in Medieval Korea,” p. 233, for some examples of occasional writings on the P’algwanhoe that associate it with the spirit of the eight precepts; see also Yi Kyu-bo, Pébwang-sa p’algwan sdlgyéng mun, TYSC 39.14a. Also, according to Jacques Gernet (Buddhism in Chinese Society, p. 202), in

Dunhuang a vegetarian banquet of purification (jiezhai), an important part of the original practice of the eight prohibitions, took place on the winter solstice.

135. At least some of the most important ones were repaired; in 1012 King Hyonjong ordered the repair of Hwangnyong-sa (KRS 4.12a).

122 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy Hwaom temples in the countryside such as Haein-sa and Pusok-sa managed to sustain themselves. Still, the lack of information on doctrinal schools does not mean that they were completely obliterated. T’aejo, although paying much more attention to Sdn temples, certainly did not overlook the doctrinal schools, and tried to establish them in his new capital. Nevertheless, T’aejo forged the most conspicuous ties with monks of the S6n mountain schools. His relationship with the Sdn schools has been well researched, and therefore I first turn to them before evaluating the significance of the doctrinal

schools for T’aejo. | Even in the Kory6 dynasty, Son sectarian writers tried to represent

T’aejo as a ruler who worshiped S6n Buddhism. This is evident, for example, in the compendium of S6n history, anecdotes, and doc-

trine called Sénmun pojangnok (Precious compendium of the Son school).'°° This work discusses the historical relationship between rulers and Sd6n Buddhist advisors and the merits of S6n Buddhism for

government. It also quotes from the stele written by T’aejo for the monk Ch’ungdam, in which T’aejo shows an understanding and admiration of SO6n Buddhism and notes that T’aejo built no less than 500 Sdn temples.'*’ This notion was popular at least around the middle of the dynasty, when Son Buddhism flourished during the period of military government (1170-1270), as shown in a comment by Yi Kyu-bo: 136. HPC, 6: 469-84. This work is usually attributed to the Ch’dnt’ae monk Ch’dnch’aek (ca. 1206-93), but this attribution does not seem safe. Although the Korean Ch’dnt’ae school resulted from the union between Chinese Tiantai ideology and Korean Sdn lineages, and thus to a certain degree embraced S6n practice and rhetoric, it is unlikely to have tolerated such an uncompromising advocacy of Son as is evident in this work. For the attribution to Ch’6nch’aek, see HO Hung-sik, Koryo

Pulgyosa yon’gu, p. 453.

137. HPC, 6: 480c—81a. “I heard that the subtle words that established the teach-

ing were first expounded on Vulture Peak, whereupon the wonderful purport was transmitted by mind to Kasyapa, who entered final Samadhi at Mount Kukuttapada. Although it is called a separate practice of the dharma eye, I presume that [everyone] can equally partake of its mysterious essence. I am delighted that benevolence can

be found here, and that through concerted practice one can be an heir to this dharma.” For the original inscription, see Hiingbép-sa Chingong taesa t’appi (940), NYKSM, 1: 80. Thus the king not only congratulated Ch’ungdam on being a direct heir in the dharma lineage that started from Mahakasyapa, the mythical patriarch of the Chan/Sdn school, but also commended S6n as a way to establish benevolence.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy — 123 When T’aejo started his royal enterprise, he revered the S6n method, and thus built 500 Sdn temples in the capital and in the provinces to house the monks. Every two years a Dharma Discussion Assembly (tamsén péphoe) was held in the capital to suppress the northern armies. One year before this assembly, monks of the Nine Mountains retreated to an isolated temple and held dharma assemblies throughout winter, calling them ch’ongnim [Son assemblies].'°®

In this and similar writings, Yi Kyu-bo asserted that T’aejo favored S6n over other Buddhist schools and that it was more effective in repelling invaders.'°’ Whether Wang Kon was really so taken with SOn is impossible to ascertain, but the fact is that he grew up in a milieu with strong contacts with S6n monks. His grandmother and father sponsored Sunji, who had returned from China in 858 and belonged to the Guiyang school of Chan, and granted him a temple on Ogwan-san near the Wang stronghold of Kaesong.’*° The Wang clan also had a strong connection with Tos6n, who, despite his geomantic proclivities, was a Son monk, Even before his accession, Wang Kon enjoyed cordial relations with Son monks.

Modern Korean scholars have taken a more critical view of T’aejo’s relations to Son and, by analyzing the stelae for Son masters patronized by T’aejo in the historical context of his reign, have attempted to uncover the reasons behind his patronage. Thus, Ch’oe Pyong-hon suggested that Wang KO6n forged ties with Son monks in order to win over local elites.'*! As a local magnate, Wang Kon had to win over or conquer other local elites to broaden his power base to 138. Yi Kyu-bo, Yongdam-sa ch’ongnimhoe pang, TYSC 25.14b. On the popularity of Son during the Military Era, see Shultz, Generals and Scholars, pp. 138-41. 139. See also his Taean-sa tong chon pang, S6 Pot’ong-sa tong chén pang, TYSC 25.10a~—14a.

140. Sdun-sa Yoo hwasang pimyéng (937), NYKSM 1: 42. The stele is so damaged that much information on Sunji is irretrievably lost. From contextual evidence, it appears that he was born in 830/5 and died in 894/9. His patrons are identified as Queen Wonch’ang and her son, King Wimu, who granted the temple around 874-75. These patrons were none other than T’aejo’s grandmother and father, here identified by the posthumous titles conferred on them at the beginning of his reign (KRS 1.15a). To judge from the lengthy excerpt from his work in the Chodang chip, he must have been one of the most original Sdn thinkers of his time; see the translation by Robert Buswell in Peter Lee, Sourcebook of Korean Civilization, 1: 228-41. _ 141. Ch’oe Pyéng-hon, “Namal Yoéch’o Sdnjong,” p. 24.

124 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy a national scale. Opting for a policy of gradual absorption rather than conflict, he naturally turned to S6n monks, since, it is argued, they

held a key position in the balance of power. Kim Tu-jin has thus tried to show that a shift in the monks’ allegiance to Wang K6n considerably weakened the position of the local elites with whom they had previously been allied.'** As shown in the previous chapter, Son schools were an influential presence across the country, a fact that certainly attracted Wang KOn’s attention, but they had little organic

connection with local elites. Thus, their position between the new center of authority and other centers of authority was more complex than initially assumed. Ch’ae Sang-sik has shown this for the monk Hyonhwi (879-941). Of Chinese ancestry, he belonged to the Songju-

san school, but in the 920s T’aejo appointed him to a temple near Ch’ungju. The temple was far removed from both Soéngju-san and his

hometown of Namwon, but he was sent there mainly to administer the local temples and act as a preceptor to the local people.’*” Sd

Chin-gyu has comprehensively analyzed T’aejo’s contacts with monks and concluded that there are three main periods: before 918, between 918 and 936, and after 936. Before the founding of Kory6, T’aejo had little or no contact with Son monks. Between 918 and 936, he sought mainly to win over those monks who had just returned from China and lacked a strong alternative source of protection, but after unifying the peninsula he also patronized monks formerly loyal to Silla and Later Paekche.'* S3 argues that Wang Kén was interested primarily in the prestige and authority of these monks, which he hoped to use to control the central and local bureaucracies. He thus tried to relocate them to temples near Kaes6ng or in other crucial areas, where they could exert this influence.’” S6 also notes that T’aejo gradually sought to impose checks on the Son monks themselves.'*°

The political importance of S6n monks and temples to T’aejo is indisputable. This is clear from the number of funerary monuments established in the first decades of Kory6: twenty-one of the twenty142. Kim Tu-jin, “Wang K6n tii stngnyd kydrhap.” 143. Ch’ae Sang-sik, “Chodngt’o saji Popky6ng taesa pi tim’gi i punsok.” | 144. S6 Chin-gyo, “Kory6 T’aejo ti Sénsiing p’osdp,” pp. 371-73.

145. Ibid., pp. 373-81. | | 146. Ibid., pp. 381-91.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 125 two stelae for eminent monks erected between 936 and 994 were for monks of the Sd6n schools. These inscriptions detail the monks’ relations with local magnates, the Silla and Later Paekche courts, and Wang Kon. However, since they reveal nothing about the reasons why they accepted Wang’s patronage, we have to infer this from the context. The studies mentioned in the previous paragraph explain the role of S6n in T’aejo’s political plans, but they do so at the expense © of the religious context. The fact is that S6n mountain temples and the patriarchs who headed them retained a substantial amount of independence, at least until the reign of King Kwangjong in the third quarter of the tenth century, and were thus not completely subordinated to the political process. Thus, a description of the main developments in the mountain schools over the course of the tenth century will give a better sense of their place in the new dynasty. Two main trends can be discerned: consolidation and adaptation. Consolidation is seen first of all in the explicit precedence of Korean lineages over Chinese lineages. As seen in the previous chapter, most of the founders of Korean S6n lineages received transmission from disciples of Mazu, 1.e., the Hongzhou school, and they or their disciples established mountain temples between 840 and 880. For a while, no Korean monks traveled to China because of the turmoil of the Huichang repression of Buddhism (845-46), but in the late ninth century many went to study with Chinese Chan masters again. This time they seem to have favored the Caodong branch of the Southern Chan school. No less than four prominent Korean monks studied with Yunju Daoying (835?—902), the most prominent disciple of Dongshan Liangjie (807-69), '*’ and for this they became known as the “four fearless masters” (sa muoe taesa).'** However, before they had traveled to China, they had already received transmission in a Korean dharma lineage, and after their return, they remained true to their original lineage. The only exception was I6m, who had been

ordained as a Hwadm monk and later became the founder of the Sumi-san school. This seems to confirm the thesis by Kim Yo6ng-su 147. On Dongshan Liangjie and his disciples, see Powell, The Record of Tungshan, pp. 2-3. 148. The term appeared first in the stele for Ky6ngyu, Oyong-sa Pépkyong taesa

pimyong (944), NYKSM, 1: 131.

126 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy

that a monk always received the transmission from his original teacher (tdiktosa), that is, the teacher who first accepted him as a trainee monk, who should not be confused with the preceptor who gave him full ordination. Even though a monk might receive the dharma seal from another master (subdpsa) later in his career, Kim maintained that monks were always considered to belong to the lineage in which they were introduced to Buddhism.'”’ This, he argued, arose from the rule that a monk always had to be registered with the temple where he first entered monastic life, and registrations were hard to change. I doubt that registration played such a strict role in determining the lineage of Korean monks, especially at a time of political chaos when the registration process must have been in disarray. As pointed out in the previous chapter, there was in late Silla a prevailing sense that following the transmission of the Hongzhou school to Tot, Hongch’ok, and others, S6n had become an autonomous Ko-

rean school. This is evident in the case of Kyéngbo (869-947): ordained in a Hwadm temple, he received his original S6n training from Tosdon, who belonged to a branch of the Tongni-san school.

Evidently displeased with Tosdn’s teaching, he decided to seek enlightenment elsewhere, and after visiting Soéngju-san and Sagulsan, he went to China, where he was incorporated into the Caodong school. After returning to Korea in 921, he was courted first by Ky6n Hw6n and later by T’aejo, but Kyéngbo refused both offers of patronage and returned to Ongnyong-sa, where he had first studied with Toson.'”” Thus, despite his evident dissatisfaction with his original instruction and several opportunities to obtain sponsorship for a temple of his own, in the end he decided to stick with his original lineage school.

This clearly indicates that although the political situation may have influenced the choices made by S6n masters, in the end they could evade those pressures. Yet, it is likely that if they wanted to push their own agenda and establish a new mountain school, they had to have political and economic backing. This may explain why 149. Kim Yong-su, “Ogyo yangjong e taehaya,” p. 77.

150. Ongnyong-sa Tongjin taesa pimyong (958), NYKSM, 1: 229-35. In the inscription, his master is called “Tosting from Paekkye-san,” but Tosting is almost certainly an early variant for Tos6n.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 127 I6m was the only one able to establish his own mountain school after the founding of Korydé. Like the other three “fearless masters” he confronted a war-torn country upon his return from China.'*’ Unlike Ky6ngbo, the fearless masters sought to adapt to this new situation. Three of them, 6m, Hyéngmi (864—971), and Y6’6m (862-930), first

sought the patronage of local magnates, but shortly before 920 all turned to T’aejo. It seems that they were the first prominent Sdn masters to join the Koryd cause, which may also explain the sobriquet “fearless masters.” However, two of them died early: HyOngmi was apparently killed by Kung-ye in 917, while Kyéngyu (871-921) died early in 921, which means that only YO’6m and I6m could leave a mark. YO’6m was a disciple of Muydm, patriarch of the SOngju-san school, but the Sdngju-san location seems to have been abandoned

after Muydm’s death in 888. He met T’aejo and accepted an appointment as abbot of Pori-sa, about 75 km southeast of Kaesong. It is possible, however, that he also remained loyal to the warlord Kang Hwon, who had first sheltered him between 909 and 918, and who, though loyal to T’aejo, remained basically independent until around 936. lom, on the other hand, left the patronage of warlord Kim Yur-

hiii in Kimhae around 915 and turned to Wang Kén.'” He first served in temples in the capital, and finally, after Iom requested to retire, in 932 T’aejo granted him Kwangjo-sa on Sumi-san. We know that I6m became the founder of a mountain lineage only because he is listed as one of the Korean Son patriarchs in a ritual text of the Chosin period.'*’ Since there is no evidence for a Sumi-san lineage in Kory6, it is possible that he was included among the patriarchs of 151. HyOngmi traveled to China between 891 and 905, Y6’6m between ca. 890 and 909, Kyéngyu between ca. 900 and 908, and Idm between 896 and 911. See the

Appendix for biographical digests of these monks. See also Sim Chae-mydng, “Kory6d T’aejo wa sa muoe taesa.” It seems that all had to travel via Muju (modern Kwangju), the main port for travel to China, which was controlled by Wang K6n since around 900. From there, it may have been difficult to reach places in the central part of the peninsula. 152. Ch’oe Pyéng-hon, “Silla-mal Kimhae chibang.”

153. On this ritual text, which commemorates all the Sdn patriarchs, see Hd Htng-sik, “Sonjong Kusanmun.” Various editions exist of this text, but apparently only one, dating from 1660 has been reproduced: Sénmun chosa yech’am chakpop, in Pak Se-min, Han’guk Pulgyo ttirye, 2: 450. According to H6, the text itself may date to the late Kory6 period.

128 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy

the Nine Mountain Schools because he was one of the first Son monks to become a preceptor and advisor to the first monarch of the Kory6 dynasty. Other mountain schools chose a pragmatic approach to the new dynasty, using its support to consolidate and adapt. It is interesting to

see how the Pongnim-san and Hiutyang-san schools used Wang KO6n’s support to regain their patriarchal mountains. As noted in the

| previous chapter, for these schools the temple of the patriarch was different from the one where the school was eventually established. _ However, in early Kory6, monks of these schools used T’aejo’s sup-

port to recover the patriarchal places. Ch’anyu moved back from Pongnim-san to Hyemok-san, where Hyonuk had first founded the lineage.'°* Kiingyang moved back to Hiliyang-san from Paengdmsan, like Pongnim-san in the southeast of the peninsula, where his master had sought refuge from the war.’ The Sdéngju-san school, on the other hand, left its original mountain, since two of its main exponents in early Kory6, YO’6m and Hydnhwi, became loyal subjects of T’aejo and took up appointments in temples chosen by him.’”° Still other mountain schools seem to have remained fairly aloof from the new dynasty, or at least chose to retain their original mountain. An example of this is the Tongni-san school: although Yunda accepted an appointment at T’aejo’s request, he declined the abbacy of a temple in the capital, and after some time he requested permission to return to Tongni-san.'*’

Thus the Sdn schools show very different patterns: although T’aejo made overtures to all of them, some chose to go along, whereas others preferred to remain more aloof. In the following chapters, we shall see how S6n monks became part of the monastic bureaucracy created by Wang Kon, but I think that the discussion here shows that they did so voluntarily, without coercion, and retained a certain degree of control over their schools. Yet it is impossible to ascertain whether these mountain schools remained strong 154. Kodal-wén Wonjong taesa pimyong (975), NYKSM, 1: 289. 155. Pongam-sa Chéngjin taesa pimyong (965), NYKSM, 1: 267. 156. For Y6’6m, see Pori-sa Taegydng taesa pimyong (939), NYKSM, 1: 51-52; for Hyénhwi, see Chéngt’o-sa Pépkyong taesa pimyong (943), NYKSM, 1: 116. 157. Taean-sa Kwangja taesa pimyong (950), NYKSM, 1: 193.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 129 institutions throughout Koryd. We know that at least some of the main Sdn lineages remained active throughout Koryo (notably the Kaji-san, Hitiyang-san, and Sagul-san lineages),’”* but it is not clear whether they controlled any temples. An edict issued by Kwangjong

in 971 claimed that “among the country’s temples, there are only three ‘unmovable’ (pudong) temples where the disciples succeed each other as abbot, from generation to generation, in an immutable | pattern. These are Kodal-wén, Hiliyang-wén, and Tobong-won.””” Kodal-w6n is the name conferred on Hydnuk’s temple on Hyemoksan by King Ky6éngmun (r. 861—75) and thus refers to the Pongnimsan school. Hiiiyang-wo6n refers to Pongam-sa on Hiiiyang-san, and Tobong-w6n to Yongguk-sa on Tobong-san (in the mountains north of present-day Seoul).’®’ This would mean that by 971 there existed

only three mountain schools in which the teaching of the school’s pa- , triarch was carried on by his disciples in the temple founded by the patriarch. Other dharma lineages undoubtedly still existed, but they had apparently become scattered and were no longer the basis of a distinct school, that is, an organized institution. It is difficult to know whether Kwangjong’s edict is stating a fact or simply reflects his sympathies and thus official recognition of these schools. As seen above, the Tongni-san school—not mentioned in the edict—was still active under T’aejo, and later documents attest to its continuing operation throughout Koryé.’*' Although the edict is thus an unreliable source, it does point to an undeniable trend: toward the end of the 158. See H6 Hiing-sik, “Sonjong Kusanp’as6l ti p’ip’an,” p. 169. 159. Kodal-w6én Wonjong taesa pimyong, NYKSM, 1: 295. 160. While the first two belong to the Nine Mountains, the third appears to have been the center of the Pdb’an school introduced to Korea by Hyegod Kuksa (fl. 949)

in the beginning of the Koryé dynasty; see NYKSM, 2: 393, note 92. Only a fragment of Hyeg6’s stele remains, insufficient to construe the history and influence of his school; see NYKSM, 1: 348-51. Some also argue that Hyemok-san did not become part of the Pongnim-san school but existed independently until the founding of Ch’6nt’ae in the late eleventh century; see H6 Hting-sik, “Ch’Ont’aejong tii hydngsong kwajong kwa sosok saw6n,” pp. 267-68. 161. See the description of the temple’s assets in No Mydng-ho et al., Han’guk kodae chungse ko munso, pp. 419-28; the document is thought to date from about 1230. Also, a smaller S6n temple such as Yongmun-sa is known to have had a succession of abbots within the same lineage; see Yongmun-sa chungsu pi, KSCM 367, pp. 872-75.

130 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy tenth century, the Sdn schools were being replaced at court by the doctrinal schools and henceforth were receiving much less recognition. Also, as discussed in Chapter 4, the introduction of examination and appointment systems for temple administrators perhaps ended the authority of all but a few important temples to appoint abbots independently, without state interference. Despite the prominence accorded S6n schools, from the very beginning of his reign T’aejo tried to transplant the doctrinal schools to

his new capital. In the first month of the second year of his reign (919), he officially established his capital in Kaesdng, and in the third month of the same year, he initiated the construction of ten temples in the new capital and decreed that all temples and stiipas in the two capitals, Kaeséng and P’ydngyang, should be restored. ‘© Nothing is known about the intentions behind this construction project, but the temples were used throughout the dynasty for important

ritual events. Their importance was such that after the capital was moved temporarily to Kanghwa island in 1232, some of these temples were rebuilt there. Table 5 summarizes their main functions and affiliations, as far as known. After this initial spate of construction, T’aejo had at least sixteen more temples built, which either had a specific ritual function or fulfilled a particular role for one of the Buddhist schools. After his reign, still more temples were constructed in the capital, but those erected

by T’aejo remained the most important ones." Apparently T’aejo from the very beginning envisaged a specific purpose for these temples and, by extension, for Buddhism in general. It is very likely that

both the division of roles between these temples and the spread of schools were inspired by the situation in Ky6ngyju, still capital of Silla at that time, but this cannot be ascertained.

162. KRS 1.15a. For the names of the temples, see SGYS, dynastic tables (wangnyok), “Kory T’aejo.”

163. Some adjustments occurred over the course of time. The place where the king celebrated after the Lantern Festival, for example, was changed from Wangnyun-sa to Pongiin-sa in 1038, when King Chongjong (r. 1034-46) decided to offer incense to T’aejo’s effigy there during the festival (KRS 6.13b; Han Ki-mun, Koryo sawon, p. 37). According to the History of the Song, there were no less than seventy temples in the Kory6 capital (Tuo Tuo et al., Songshi 487, p. 14,054).

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 131 Table 5 Ten Temples Founded by T’aejo in 919

Pdbwang-sa Hwadm King usually prayed here after P’algwan-

Chaun-sa Yuga

hoe festival; venue for Hundred Seat Assembly

Wangnyun-sa Haedong King usually prayed here after Lantern Festival; venue for Kyo examination until 1038

Naejesog-w6n Son Worship of Sakra-devanam Indra

Sana-sa Son

Poje-sa Son Venue for triennial dharma meeting debating Sdn (tams6n péphoe)

Sinhting-sa Memorial temple for souls of merit subjects

Munsu-sa

Yongt’ong-sa Hwaom Chiang-sa SOURCE: based mainly on Han Ki-mun, Kory6 sawén, pp. 32-48.

Each temple was assigned to a particular school of Buddhism. By counting the number of temples assigned to each school, we can get an idea of how prominent these schools were. As expected, the Son school dominated, as seven temples erected by T’aejo belonged to this school.'™ Besides the two mentioned in Table 5, Kwangmydngsa is especially worth mentioning. Established in 922, when T’aejo donated his house, it became the center for the S6n monastic examination.’ As for the remaining Sdn temples, not enough is known to warrant discussion. The second most represented school in the capital was Hwaom.

One of its temples was Pobwang-sa, perhaps the foremost temple

164. For a table with all twenty-six temples founded by T’aejo and their affiliations, see Han Ki-mun, Koryo saw6n, pp. 47-48. 165. For the founding of this temple, see TYS 4.20b. According to Yi Nuing-hwa, T’aejo appointed a monk of the Yuga school as abbot to this temple, but this seems

school (CPTS, 1: 182).

highly unlikely, since Kwangmy6ng-sa is consistently associated with the Son

132 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy in the capital. Not only is it listed first among the ten temples erected by T’aejo, but it also played an essential part in the most important

Buddhist festival, the P’algwanhoe. Another indication of its preeminence was that PObwang-sa was re-established on Kanghwa island after the court and government fled there in 1232.'°° Another prominent Hwadm temple was Htingguk-sa, founded in 924, which became the foremost ordination temple.'®’ Hwaém temples provided ordination platforms for monks from all denominations. The Yuga (Yogacara) school was represented by two temples; of these, Mirtk-sa was apparently used as a shrine for meritorious subjects.'°* The Haedong (“East of the Sea,” i.e., Korea) school, Sin’in (esoteric) school, and Yul (Vinaya) school had one temple each. This situation substantiates HO Hiing-sik’s remarks on the sectarian situation in early Koryo. He argues that in the late Silla—early Kory6 peri-

ods there were three major blocks, namely, the Sdn, Hwadm, and Yuga “orders” (chongp’a), and a host of smaller schools.'™ After T’aejo’s reign, a gradual revival of the doctrinal schools took place. King Kwangjong in particular prized the Hwadm school. During his reign, T’anmun (900-975) became the first Hwadm state preceptor, and Kyuny6d (923-73) gave the school a firmer footing in the new capital through his scholastic and temple-building activities. By the eleventh century, the Hwadm and Yuga schools had come to domi-

nate the religious landscape of the capital.” |

166. According to Han Ki-mun, Kory6é sawon, p. 37, note 52, in the same year the capital was moved to Kanghwa (1232), the king went to Pébwang-sa after the P’algwanhoe. However, the earliest entry I could find in Koryésa showing that this temple had been re-established on Kanghwa Island is for 1235 (KRS 23.30b). 167. See SGYS, dynastic tables (wangny6ék), Kory6 T’aejo. Its purpose as an official ordination platform (kwandan) is revealed in the career of eminent monks who were ordained there. YOngjun, for example, was ordained in Htingguk-sa in 945 (Kdédon-sa Wongong Kuksa pimyong (1025), KSPM, 3: 215). 168. See KRS 2.12b. For its function, see KRS 25.25b: “[In 1261] Miriik-sa was

re-established and made a shrine for meritorious subjects. Since the time of T’aejo, pictures of meritorious subjects were pasted on walls. Every year in the tenth month, they were displayed in a Buddhist temple to pray for their souls.” 169. HO Hung-sik, Han’guk chungse Pulgyosa yon’gu, p. 7. 170. Ibid., p. 11.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy 133

Representation of the Ruler Through Buddhism The power of the Buddhas that looms so large in the First Injunction would seem to suggest that the king’s status was subordinate to Buddhism; in fact, this is not the whole story. The Injunction could be regarded as the credenda, the ideal situation, but the king as he revealed himself through Buddhism to his subjects is in many respects also accorded an important role as a Buddhist monarch. A rich body of texts in the Buddhist canon details how adherence to the Buddha’s law can aid a ruler in achieving good government and dominion over others. ‘™' Moreover, there were many historical precedents, from King Asoka to King Chinhting, that T’aejo could cite to justify his reliance on Buddhism to symbolize his authority. Elements of a discourse on Buddhist rulership are clearly present in the stelae erected during his reign and later. Epigraphic material is the best source for ascertaining in what way and to what degree T’aejo and his succes-

sors used Buddhism as a symbolic prop for their rule. However, these sources should be used critically and compared with other symbolic expressions of royal power. Howard Wechsler and other scholars of ritual and legitimation in Chinese history have maintained that one of the main Buddhist con-

tributions to the legitimation of Chinese emperors was through the manipulation of auguries relating to the rise of rulers.'”” His conclusions are, of course, contingent on the historical period he studied (the Tang) and the specific source materials he studied (official discussions on ritual). Yet this insight is a good starting point to see how Buddhism was enmeshed in the foundations of the Koryo dynasty. There is a fascinating, if fragmentary, array of stories and legends concerning divine symbols adumbrating and accompanying the birth of the Kory6, as well as ample evidence that auguries of Wang KOn’s rise circulated widely. These stories vary widely in nature. In some cases, they seem quite plausible, as, for example, Ch’oe Ch’1won’s prediction that Wang Kon would one day become king, which

dhism and Politics in Asia.” ,

171. For an overview of the critical literature on this subject, see Harris, “Bud-

172. Wechsler, Offerings of Jade and Silk, p. 72.

134 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy may well have been a deduction Ch’oe made on the basis of available facts.'’* Most of these stories are, however, rather more inventive, such as the predictions of Tosén and other geomancers that at-

tributed Wang K6n’s imminent rise to the manipulation of the geomantic forces or the premonitions of several Buddhist monks. Although no more than traces of their stories remain, one typical example of this is the reference in a stele recording the history of Yongmunsa (dated 1185) and Wang KOn’s relation to the temple. The stele claims that Wang KOn visited the temple before he had unified the country, perhaps even before he had acceded to the throne, and that he later granted Yongmun-sa an annual grain stipend of 150 bushels. The text explains that the monk Tu’un, the temple’s founder, “had perceived the royal force (wanggi) with his divine insight [Sk. divyacaksus| and secretly protected the divine ruler [Wang K6n],” which means that the temple was rewarded for Tu’un’s ability to perceive a new ruler.’” As pointed out above, Wang KO6n grew up in a family with close

links to S6n masters, and several sources document his interest in S6n doctrine. He was also a Buddhist disciple: following the precedent set by many Silla rulers who became disciples of Sén monks, we find T’aejo’s name on a list of disciples of Sén master Kyéngyu.’” Other stelae mention that the king “performed the master-disciple ceremony” or that he “took the triple refuge” with the master.'”° However, another, non-epigraphic source, reputedly authored by T’aejo himself, goes one step further, identifying the ruler as a “disciple [having taken] the bodhisattva precepts.” This comes from a prayer-text for Hwadm assemblies at Kaet’aesa, a temple erected at the place where Kory6 inflicted the final defeat on the armies of its last remaining rival, Singdm of Later Paekche.'”’ We know from Koryosa that kings regularly took the bodhisattva precepts, but for some reason this ceremony was not recorded before

173. P’ahan chip 2, KMC 2.95a. 174. Yongmun-sa chungsu pi, KSCM 367, pp. 872-75. 175. Oryong-sa Popkyong taesa pimyong (943), NYKSM, 1:141. On Silla kings as S6n disciples, see Jingde chuandeng lu, T. 51, 2076: 282a. 176. See, €.8., those for Hongjun (VYKSM, 1: 98) and Kyongyu (ibid., p. 135). 177. Yang Un-yong, “Kory6 T’aejo ch’inje,” p. 813.

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy —_ 135

1032.'”* Some scholars have argued that by taking the bodhisattva precepts, the king effectively assumed the status of bodhisattva,'” but since the bodhisattva ordination is open to everyone, layman and monk alike, this does not necessarily mean that the king thereby attained a superior status. The Fanwang jing (Stitra of Brahma’s net), one of the most important scriptural sources for the bodhisattva precepts, encourages rulers to accept the precepts as a part of their coronation, but this was probably done to ensure the ruler’s goodwill to-

ward Buddhism; '*° in the absence of any further evidence, this certainly does not prove that T’aejo saw himself as a bodhisattva. The contrast becomes clearer when we compare T’aejo with Emperor Wu of Liang, who took the bodhisattva vows in 519, according

to a ceremony and procedures devised by himself. Having thus assumed the status of bodhisattva, he tried to assert authority over the Sangha, using mass ordination ceremonies and vegetarian banquets

to appropriate for himself the Sangha’s power to embody Buddhism.'*’ Koryd kings, by contrast, never arrogated to themselves the spiritual power of a bodhisattva. Most likely, their recetving the bodhisattva precepts was an attempt to enhance their power through a symbolic affirmation of their adherence to Buddhism.’** The monks who conferred the precepts on the kings—mainly royal preceptors or other eminent monks—were, at least symbolically, the more powerful partner in the relation.

178. KRS 5.25a. Perhaps the destruction of the si/lok (veritable records) during the Khitan invasions of 1011 (KRS 95.20a—b) may explain the absence of its recording before 1032. According to one count, there are 60 entries in Korydsa saying that the king received the bodhisattva precepts; see YO Tong-ch’an (Roger Leverrier), “Kory6 sidae hoguk pdphoe e taehan yon’ gu,” pp. 78-79.

179. Ibid., p. 112. See also Ch’oe WoOn-sik, Silla posalgye sasangsa yon’gu, p. 256. For a similar argument, based on the description of the 519 ceremony when Emperor Wu of Liang took the bodhisattva vows, see Ching, Mysticism and Kingship in China, p. 229. 180. Groner, “The Fan-wang ching,” p. 256. 181. Janousch, “Emperor as Bodhisattva.” 182. Relevant expressions from Buddhist sources that support such a view can be found in Fayuan zhulin: “He who wishes to attain the status of King, or of Wheel King, or of the Hundred Ministers, should first receive the Bodhisattva Precepts. All the Buddhas will rejoice in this” (7.53, 2122: 939c; trans. Kamens, The Three Jewels, pp. 321, 325).

136 Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy The theoretical superiority of Buddhism is conveyed in the dialogues between T’aejo and monks. Especially important is the dialogue found on the stele for I6m, the first monument for a monk erected by T’aejo, barely a year after unification, in 937. As noted above, 16m was an important SO6n monk who enjoyed T’aejo’s patronage. The king may therefore have taken this opportunity to make a bold statement on Buddhism. In this dialogue, the king comes to visit I6m one night at his temple, presumably Sana-w6n, and seeks his moral counsel about the loss of life caused by the wars: With the two evils around [Kung-ye and Kyén Hwon?], despite my complete love of life, we kill one another more and more. I learned about the Buddha’s admonition [not to kill] a long time ago and secretly embraced compassion. I am afraid that to deal with the remaining bandits, I will endanger many lives. You, great master, did not regard 10,000 miles too much in order to convert the Three Han; to save the country, I hope for some good words.” [The great master replied]: ““The Way (fo) is in the mind, not in external affairs. Dharma ( pop) comes from oneself, not from others. Moreover, what emperors and kings practice, and what the people practice are different.

Although you raise an army and go on a campaign, it is for the benefit of the people. What is the original reason for this? The royal sway takes the [area within] the four seas as his home, the myriad people as his children, and does not kill those who are innocent. As for punishing the guilty in order to uphold good, this is universal salvation.”

This conversation apparently took place shortly before or after T’aejo founded the Koryd dynasty.’ T’aejo humbly refers to him| 183. Kwangjo-sa Chinch’6l taesa pimyéng (937), NYKSM, 1: 34. For another translation, by Hugh Kang and Edward Shultz, see Peter Lee, Sourcebook of Korean Civilization, 1: 386-88. 184. In I6m’s stele, the chronology of his meeting with T’aejo seems somewhat contrived. It is said that I6m left the Kimhae area in 915, and apparently he was immediately taken in by T’aejo, who gave him T’aehiing-sa on Ogwan-san, near the capital. The next year, 916, he was appointed to the Sana-w6n inside the palace. The reign title used to indicate the year is Tianyou (904-7), the last such title of the Tang, but since Kory6 did not recognize the succeeding dynasties, this reign title continued to be used. Thus Tianyou 12 presumably means 915. Although it is possible that Io6m traveled north to Kaesong, then still under Kung-ye’s dominion, in 915 it is unlikely that Wang Kon could bestow a temple. Also, according to KRS 1.16a, T’aejo “established Taehting-sa on Ogwan-san and invited the monk I6n [sic] to administer it” in 921. This appears to be a more likely date.

ODI ln LA ' Sal 7 rrr lrlrrrr—ees

eo

Foundations of a New Buddhist Policy — 137

8 EE rr hUrrS— the Construction of Oing Rule, 1680-1785

288. Carol Richmond Tsang, War and Faith: Ikko Ikki tn Late Muromacht Japan 289. Hilde De Weerdt, Competition over Content: Negotiating Standards for the Civil Service Examinations in Imperial China (1127-1279)

290. Eve Zimmerman, Out of the Alleyway: Nakagami Kenji and the Poetics of Outcaste Fiction

291. Robert Culp, Articulating Citizenship: Civic Education and Student Politics in Southeastern China, 1912-1940

292. Richard J. Smethurst, From Foot Soldier to Finance Minister: Takahashi Korekzyo, Japan’s Keynes

293. John E. Herman, Amid the Clouds and Mist: China’s Colonization of Guizhou, 1200-

I700 294. Tomoko Shiroyama, China During the Great Depression: Market, State, and the World

Economy, 1929-1937

295. Kirk W. Larsen, Tradition, Treaties and Trade: Oing Imperiahsm and Choson Korea,

I85O-I9IO ,

296. Gregoty Golley, When Our Eyes No Longer See: Reahsm, Science, and Ecology in Japanese Literary Modernism

Harvard East Asian Monographs 297. Barbara Ambros, Emplacing a Pilgrimage: The Oyama Cult and Regional Religion in Early Modern Japan

298. Rebecca Suter, The Japanization of Modernity: Murakami Haruki between Japan and the United States

299. Yuma Totant, [he Tokyo War Crimes Trial: The Pursuit of Justice in the Wake of World War II 300. Linda Isako Angst, In a Dark Time: Memory, Community, and Gendered Nationahsm in Postwar Okinawa — 301. David Robinson, ed., Culture, Courters, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368— 1644) 302. Calvin Chen, Some Assembly Required: Work, Community, and Pohtics in China’s Rural Enterprises 303. Sem Vermeersch, The Power of the Buddhas: The Poktes of Buddhism During the Koryé Dynasty (918-1392)

BLANK PAGE