Faure [Bernard_Faure]_Chan_Buddhism_in_Ritual_Contexts_((BookZZ.org)


Чтобы посмотреть этот PDF файл с форматированием и разметкой, скачайте его и откройте на своем компьютере.
CHANBUDDHISMIN
RITUALCONTEXT
TheessaysinthisvolumeattempttoplacetheChanandZen
traditionsintheirritualandculturalcontexts,lookingatvarious
suchasthecultsoficons,relicsandthemonasticrobe.
Thebookemphasisestheimportanceofritualforaproper
understandingofthisallegedlyanti-ritualisticformofBuddhism.
ROUTLEDGECURZONSTUDIESIN
ASIANRELIGION
EditorialAdvisoryBoard
NickAllen,
UniversityofOxford
CatherineDespeux,
INALCO,Paris
ChrisMinkowski,
CornellUniversity
FabioRambelli,
SapporoUniversity,Japan
AndrewRippin,
UniversityofVictoria
RoutledgeCurzonpublishesaSeriesspecicallydevotedtoAsian
KRSNA:LORDORAVATARA?
CHANBUDDHISMIN
RITUALCONTEXT
EditedbyBernardFaure
Firstpublishedin2003
Listofcontributors
ChanandZenstudies:thestateoftheÞeld(s)1
BERNARDFAURE
BERNARDFAURE
ImaginingtheportraitofaChanmaster36
WENDIADAMEK
WENDIADAMEK
OntheritualuseofChanportraitureinmedieval
China74
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
ATangdynastyChanmummy[
]anda
moderncaseof
furtasacra?
:investigatingthe
contestedbonesofShitouXiqian
JAMESROBSON
JAMESROBSON
FillingtheZenshu
:notesonthe
CARLBIELEFELDT
CARLBIELEFELDT
Quandl’habitfaitlemoine
:thesymbolismof
inSo
BERNARDFAURE
BERNARDFAURE
Theenlightenmentofkamiandghosts:spirit
ordinationsinJapaneseSo
WILLIAMM.BODIFORD
WILLIAMM.BODIFORD
vii
HowDo
ÕsmedicinesavedDo
gen:medicine,
anandEdo-periodDo
genbiographies266
DUNCANRYUKENWILLIAMS
DUNCANRYU
KENWILLIAMS
CONTENTS
WendiAdamek
isAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentof
Religion,BarnardCollege,USA.
CarlBielefeldt
isProfessorintheDepartmentofReligiousStudies,
StanfordUniversity,California,USA.
WilliamM.Bodiford
isAssociateProfessorintheDepartmentof
EastAsianLanguagesandCulture,UCLA,USA.
BernardFaure
isProfessorintheDepartmentofReligiousStudies,
StanfordUniversity,California,USA.
T.GrifÞthFoulk
isAssociateProfessoratSarahLawrenceCollege,
USA.
JamesRobson
isaPh.D.candidateintheDepartmentofReligious
Studies,StanfordUniversity,California,USA.
RobertH.Sharf
isProfessorintheDepartmentofAsianLanguages
andCultures,UniversityofMichigan,USA.
DuncanRyu
kenWilliams
isAssistantProfessorofJapanese
ReligionsandCulture,TrinityCollege,Connecticut,USA.
CHANANDZENSTUDIES
ThestateoftheÞeld(s)
BernardFaure
Thefollowingcommentsfocusonacertainnumberofworks
which,despitethevaguenatureoftheirobject,canbegrouped
historyofthecontroversyoverÔsubitismÕ,whichanimatedthe
studieswerealsowritteninreactionagainsttheappropriationof
Zenbythecounter-cultureofthe1960s.TheÞrsttaskwastofree
EarlyChan
WesternscholarswhohavetakentheircuesfromYanagidahave,
1983).Thecollectioninwhichthisessayappeared,
StudiesinCh’an
andHua-yen
,editedbyGregoryandGimello,alsocontainedessays
byLuisGo
mezontheteachingofMoheyan(theChanmaster
studiedbyDemie
villein
LeconciledeLhasa
)andbyJohnMcRae
ontheNiutou(Oxhead)School(GimelloandGregory1983).
In1986,Gregoryeditedanothervolumedealingwiththe
reciprocalinßuencesofvariousChineseBuddhistschoolsregarding
meditation.ThelionÕssharewasneverthelessgiventoChan,with
essaysonChanandPureLand(Chappell),ontheÔOne-Practice
translation,unfortunatelystill
unpublished,ofZongmiÕsmajor
workonChan,his
GeneralPreface
totheChancanonwhichhe
plannedto(andperhapsdid)compile(Broughton1975).Other
studiesonZongmihavebeenpublishedbyJanYu
dealingwithChanduringthelaterperiods(Yuan,Ming,Qing)are
stilltoorare.Wewillnote,however,Yu
n-fangÕsarticleon
ZhongfengMingben,hermonographonZhuhong(Yu
1981,1982;
seealsoHurvitz1970),andHsu
Sung-penÕsworkonHanshan
Deqing(Hsu
1979,seealsoWuPei-yi1975).
StudiesonDo
ThesecondpoleofearlyChan/Zenstudiesisindeniablythework
andthoughtofDo
gen(1200Ð1253),thefounderoftheJapanese
school.Actually,theworksofmanyWesternspecialistsof
genbelongasmuchtothedomainofcomparativephilosophyas
tothatofChan/Zenstudiesproper.
Untilthelate1960s,theworkofDo
genwaspracticallyunknown
intheWest,andthemanhimselfhadbeeneclipsedintheRinzai
versionofZenhistoryspreadbySuzuki.Thencametheacademic
discoveryofDo
genbyKimHee-jinandAbeMasao.Thisdiscovery
genhasthusbeenassociatedtoorapidlywiththeKyo
school,nottomentionrecuperatedbyit,andstudiedalmost
exclusivelyfromtheviewpointofcomparativephilosophy.The
interestfortheKyo
toschoolwasalsostimulatedbythetranslation
ofvariousworksbyNishidaKitaro
andhisdiscipleNishitani
Keiji.LaFleurrecentlyeditedavolumeofessaysbyAbeMasao,
themainrepresentativeofthisschoolintheUnitedStates.Abe
himselfalsorecentlypublishedacollectionofhisessaysonDo
gen
(Abe1992).AlthoughthephilosophicalinterpretationofDo
genÕs
thoughtisperfectlylegitimate,andsometimesfecund(seefor
instanceMaraldo1985,Stambaugh1990),ittendstorelegatetoa
Otherthemes
JustliketherevisionofearlyChanhistory,whichledtoaquestioning
ofÔclassicalÕChanandtheRecordedSayings,thestudyofthe
historicalbackgroundofDo
genhasledtoareevaluationofZen
duringKamakuraandlaterperiods.Afteralonginfatuationwith
genandothergreatreformersofKamakuraBuddhism(Shinran,
Nichiren),wearenowwitnessingaprogressiveshiftofresearch
towardlessconspicuousÞgures,whowerenonethelessimportantfor
TheworkofRobertBuswellhasbeguntoÞllthegapinregard
organizedbyDonaldLopezin1984,whichledtothepublication
BuddhistHermeneutics
(Lopez1988).
whatGadamercalledtheÔhistoryofeffectsÕ(
oftheBuddhisttradition.TakinghiscuesfromYanagida,Maraldo
alsoemphasizedtheneedtoconsiderÔhistoricaldocumentsÕas
literaryartefacts.AsimilarviewpointwasproposedbyDale
Thisarticleoriginallyappearedinaspecialissueofthe
me-Asie
onChan/Zen,publishedasaspecialtributeto
ProfessorYanagidaSeizan.Sincethen,anumberofimportant
essayshavebeenwritten.Icanjustmentionafewhere.Onearly
Chan,themostimportantworkisundoubtedlyWendiAdamekÕs
dissertation,whichshedsnewlightonthe
Lidaifabaoji
JohnKieschnickÕsstudyoftheeminentmonks(Kieschnick
1997),althoughnotfocusedonChanproper,providesalotof
fascinatingmaterialsonearlyChanmonks.RegardingDo
therehavebeenafewnewtranslationsofthe
Sho
,but
neuticalapproach,reachesanewlevelofsophistication,and
mosttoopentheÞeldofZenstudiestotheinßuenceofpopular
cultureandtomoveitbeyondsectarianism.Twowesternscholars
indebtedtohisworkareWilliamBodifordandBernardFaure.
Alongthesamelines,theworkofhistorianssuchasKurodaToshio
andAminoYoshihikohasfosteredanewgenerationofJapanese
historianssuchasTairaMasayukiandSato
Hiroo,whoseworkon
medievalJapanhasgreatlymodiÞedourperceptionoftheso-called
newschoolsofKamakuraBuddhism,andhasledinparticularto
reconsiderthestatusofZen,RitsuandJimonks.Theeffectsofthis
revisionisthistoryarejustbeginningtobefeltinWestern
scholarship,buttheyareclearlygoingtobemomentous.
ThepresentvolumeisanattempttoreexamineChanandZenin
lightofsomeoftheagendasdeÞnedabove.Itisalwayssomewhat
artiÞcialtoattempttoÞndacommonthemetoessayswhichwere
writtenindependently.However,itisnoexaggerationtosaythat
theessayscollectedhereresonatewitheachother.Theyall
contributetoquestioningthetraditionalunderstandingofÔpureÕ
Zen.Eventhemosttextuallyoriented,BielefeldtÕsessay,decon-
structsZenlineageandspiritualclaims,andconstitutesan
ideologicalcritique.Severalofthememphasizethematerialculture
ofChanandZen(portraits,
,butalsomedicine).Theyalso
reßecttheimpactofritualandpopularbeliefsonaschoolwhich
hasrituallybeenrepresentedaselitistandantiritualistic.
Contributorstothepresentvolumehavefocusedonthewaysin
whichChan/ZenÕsiconoclasticandradicalteachingsareinter-
twinedwithapanoplyofvotive,apotropaicandpropitiatoryforms
ofpractice.Thus,BernardFaureandJamesRobsonelucidatethe
roleofmummiesofChanmastersinthedevelopmentofChan
sectarianism,GrifÞthFoulkandRobertSharfexaminetheusesof
ChanmasterportraitsintheSongdynasty,WilliamBodifordwrites
onÔtheenlightenmentofkamisandghostsÕ,andDuncanWilliams
discussesmedicineandthebiographiesofDo
WendiAdamekhasexaminedtheroleplayedbytheportraitof
Wuzhu(714Ð774),thefounderoftheBaoTangschoolinSichuan.
AdamekÕsanalysisandtranslationofthe
Lidaifabaoji
portrait-
eulogyillustratestopicsthatareexaminedfromanumberof
differentperspectivesinthisvolume.Forexample,keythemes
includetherecastingofindigenous/localconceptsandpracticesin
Chan/Zenmodes,andChanusesofthenotionofrepresentation.
Accordingtohisfollowers,sometimesoonafterhisdeatha
portraitwaspaintedoftheChanMasterWuzhu.Adescriptionof
theportraitappearsintheportrait-eulogy(
)includedatthe
BERNARDFAURE
endofthe
Lidaifabaoji
.The
Lidaifabaoji
ispreservedinatotal
oftwelvemanuscriptsandfragmentsfromtheDunhuangcacheof
materialsandonefragmentfromTurfan,butthefateofthe
portraitisunknown.Adamekintroducesthe
Lidaifabaoji
discussesthebackgroundofeighthcenturymemorialsandeulogies
writtenforChanmasters,andthenreviewsthedifferenttypesof
imagesofBuddhistmastersandthedevelopmentoftheportrait-
eulogygenreintheChancontext.Finally,sheexaminesthe
conßictingsoteriologicalparadigmsinvestedintheportrait,
throughananalysisoftheassertionsmadeintheeulogy.
ThisstudyispartofAdamekÕsresearchontherelationships
interestingcasehasresurfacedlately,thatofShitouXiqian,studied
inthisvolumebyRobson.FoulkandSharfalsoanalysethe
ÔportraithallsÕ(
)andtheirroleintheconstitutionofa
Chanlineage(
),inparticularintheso-calledNorthernschool.
AcaseinpointistheÔHalloftheSevenPatriarchsÕ(
qizutang
mentionedinachronicleofthatschool,the
Chuanfabaoji
.Here,
theportraitsclearlyservenotonlytoprovesectarianafÞliation,
buttoassertthereligiousorthodoxyofspeciÞcgroups.
TheproscriptionofBuddhismin845wastohaveimportant
repercussionsontheproductionanddistributionofBuddhist
portraitsduringtheSongandtheYuan.AsChandevelopedalong
lesssectarianlines,italsobecametheauthorizedrepresentativeof
ChineseBuddhismandofÞcialmonasterieswereincreasingly
redeÞnedimperiallyasÔChanmonasteriesÕ.Thesemonasteries
usuallypossessedaHallofthePatriarchs,inwhichtheportraitsof
abbotsgraduallysupersededthoseofthepatriarchs.Thus,the
portraitscametorepresent,notthelineageofamaster,butthatof
themonasteryitself.ThepleabyBaiyunShouduan(1025Ð1072)
infavouroftheportraitsofthetwopatriarchsBodhidharmaand
Baizhangmustbeplacedinthiscontext,asanattempttorestore
partiallythestatusofthosepatriarchs.Thesamedispositionis
foundinJapanesemonasteries,wheretheportraitsofthepatriarchs
aredisposednexttothoseoftheabbots.Butanotherimportant
phenomenonistheapparitionofportraitsoflivemasters,called
ÔimagesoflonglifeÕ(
shouxiang
Afterexaminingthewayinwhichthedispositionoftheportraits
inthepatriarchalhallsservedtolegitimizecertainlineages,Foulk
andSharfexaminetheritual,andmorepreciselyfunerary,function
oftheseportraits.InconformitywithChinesefuneraryrituals,the
portraitofthedeceasedwasperceivedastheseatofhisspirit,and
thesameroleasiconsoftheBuddha,and,likethelatter,theywere
ÔanimatedÕthroughthepresenceofrelics.Ontheotherhand,they
donotseemtohaveplayedaroleinDharmatransmission,asis
generallyassumed.
FoulkandSharfalsopointoutthatthisculticroleoftheworship
wascriticizedwithinChan,inasmuchastheÔtruthÕ(
)ofthe
mastercannotbeexpressedinaportrait(also
).Theyconclude
byquestioninganumberoftheoriesusuallyacceptedbyart
historians.Thus,theterm
chinzo
cannotbelimitedtoportraitsof
localandprovincialauthoritiesthroughtheuseofthemedia.It
raisesthequestionoftheextenttowhichtherevivalofthecult,and
thelocalmemoriesthatgowithit,havebeenprovokedbythe
investigators.ItalsoraisestheroleoftheWesternscholarswho
haveattractedattentiontothismummybywritingaboutitand
photographingit.ItshowsthatChanandZencannotbestudiedas
importanceofthe
inJapaneseZen,andparticularlyinthe
tradition(whichintheoryadheredtoDo
genÕspureZen)is
emphasizedbyWilliamBodifordÕsessay.
Bodifordfocusesonaveryimportant,althoughlargelyignored,
aspectoftheSo
Zentradition:legendsregardinglocalgods.Like
ChineseChan,theSo
schoolofJapaneseZenestablisheditselfin
theprovinces,farfromthearistocraticcirclesofthecapital.
However,So
monks,intheirproselytism,seemtohavepushed
furtherthantheirChinesepredecessorstheadaptationoftheir
doctrinetolocalcustoms.Ordination,inparticular,soonperceived
MichelSoymie
,So
monkswereoftenrenownedaswaterdiviners
1961).
AnothercharacteristicofsuchstoriesisthepowerofZen
mastersÐandtheirmonasticpreceptsÐtodeliver,andtherefore
placate,vengefulghosts.ThispowerledtotheassociationofZen
preceptsandfunerals,sincetheseghostsareoftentheresultofan
untimelydeath.Manystoriesdescribehowaghostissaved
throughtheordinationperformedbyaZenmaster.
Similarordinationswereavailableforpeople.Thesecollective
andquasi-magicalordinations,whichwerereceivedinthehopeof
obtainingworldlybeneÞts,constituteanotherradicaldeparture
materialrealities.Alltherobesbecomequasi-magical,andableto
bringaboutsalvation.ThisistruenotonlyofBuddhaÕsrobe,asin
earlyChan,butofany
aswell.Therobehasbecomeakind
ofmonasticregalia.InlatertextsoftheSo
tradition,allthe
wasthatithadpurportedlysavedDo
genÕslifewhenhebecame
gravelyillonhiswaybackfromChina.
ThispopularmedicinegaveSo
Zentemplesapowerful
alternativetootherherbalmedicines,suchas
Daranisuke
(soldby
theShingon-afÞliatedKo
hijiri
),whichappealedtothevast
majorityofvillagerswhodidnothaveaccesstotheexpensivetown
doctorsofEdoorNagasaki.Thepopularityofthemedicineis
attestedtobyWilliamsÕanalysisoftheincidentsofcounterfeitpills
appearingindifferentregionsofJapanaswellasofvarious
instructionsonhowtoadministerthemedicine(includinghowto
treatailmentsoffarmanimals).Throughthestudyofthisherbal
medicine,WilliamsÕessayshowshowSo
Zeninstitutions
participatedinEdo-periodmedicalpractices,andalsohowmedical
practicesshapedthecharacterofthesect.
AbeMasao.1985.
ZenandWesternThought
.WilliamR.LaFleur,ed.
Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
AbeMasao.1992.
AStudyofDo
gen:HisPhilosophyandReligion
.New
York:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.
AbeRyu
Brinker,Helmut,R.P.KramersandC.Ouwehand,eds.1985.
ZeninChina,
JapanandEastAsianArt:PapersoftheInternationalSymposiumon
Zen,Zu
richUniversity,16–18.11.1982
Cleary,Christopher(J.C),trans.1986.
ZenDawn:EarlyTextsfromTun
.BostonandLondon:Shambhala.
Cleary,Thomas,trans.1990.
TransmissionofLight(Denko
roku):Zenin
theArtofEnlightenmentbyZenMasterKeizan
.SanFrancisco:North
PointPress.
Cleary,ThomasandJ.C.Cleary,trans.1977.
TheBlueCliffRecord
3vols.BoulderandLondon:Shambhala.
Collcutt,Martin.1981.
FiveMountains:TheRinzaiZenMonastic
InstitutioninMedievalJapan
.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.
Despeux,Catherine.1980.
Faure,Bernard.1993.
ChanInsightsandOversights:AnEpistemological
CritiqueoftheChanTradition
Heine,Steven.1999.
ShiftingShape,ShapingText:PhilosophyandFolklore
intheFoxKo
.Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
Heine,Steven,andDaleS.Wright,eds.2000.
TheKo
an:Textsand
ContextsinZenBuddhism
.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Heisig,JamesW.,andJohnC.Maraldo,eds.1995.
RudeAwakenings:
Zen,theKyotoSchool,andtheQuestionofNationalism
.Honolulu:
UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
.1985[1970].
Jorgensen,JohnA.1987.ÔTheÒImperialÓLineageofChÕanBuddhism:
TheRoleofConfucianRitualandAncestorWorshipinChÕanÕsSearch
forLegitimationinthemid-TÕangDynastyÕ.
PapersonFarEastern
35:89Ð133.
Kasulis,ThomasP.1978.ÔTheZenPhilosopher:AReviewArticleon
genScholarshipinEnglishÕ.
PhilosophyEastandWest
28,3:
Kasulis,ThomasP.1985.
ZenAction,ZenPerson
.Honolulu:Universityof
HawaiÔiPress.
Kasulis,ThomasP.1985.ÔTheIncomparablePhilosopher:Do
genonHow
toReadthe
Õ.InWilliamR.LaFleur,ed.,
genStudies
pp.83Ð98.Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
Kieschnick,John.1997.
TheEminentMonk:BuddhistIdealsinMedieval
ChineseHagiography
.Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
Kim,Hee-Jin.1975.
genKigen:MysticalRealist
.Tucson:Universityof
ArizonaPress.
Levering,MiriamL.1987.ÔTa-huiandLayBuddhists:ChÕanSermons
onDeathÕ.InDavidW.Chappell,ed.,
BuddhistandTaoistPracticein
Nagatomo,Shigenori.1992.
AttunementThroughtheBody
.Albany:
SUNYPress.
Pachow,W.1963.ÔABuddhistDiscourseonMeditationfromTun-huangÕ.
UniversityofCeylonReview
21,1:47Ð62.Reed.InPachow,
Shaner,David.1985.
TheBody-MindExperienceinJapaneseBuddhism:
APhenomenologicalPerspectiveonKu
kaiandDo
.Albany:SUNY
Sharf,RobertH.1989.ÔBeingBuddha:APerformativeApproachtoChÕan
TanakaRyo
Yanagida,Seizan.1972.ÔTheLifeofLin-chiI-hsu
TheEastern
(n.s.)5,2:70Ð94.
Yanagida,Seizan.1982.ÔTheSearchfortheRealDo
gen:Challenging
TaboosconcerningDo
YoungEast
8,1:3Ð19.
Yanagida,Seizan.1983a.ÔThe
Li-taifa-paochi
andtheChÕanDoctrineof
SuddenAwakeningÕ.Trans.CarlBielefeldt.InWhalenLaiandLewisR.
Lancaster,eds.,
IMAGININGTHEPORTRAIT
OFACHANMASTER
WendiAdamek
First,awordaboutthetitle,‘ImaginingtheportraitofaChan
master’–asmostknow,Chinese‘Chan’isthesameasJapanese
‘Zen’,atransliterationof
representationsoftheemergingChanorthodoxy,particularlyas
regards‘formless’teaching,andtheartisticandliteraryformsthat
weredevelopedtoexpressthisformlessness.
Lidaifabaoji
successorsofthereveredChanmasterShenxiu(d.706).Claiming
torepresenttheteachingsofanobscuremonknamedHuineng
(638–713),Shenhuiadvocateddirectrealizationofthetruthof
one’sownBuddha-nature(i.e.suddenawakening)andcriticized
thepracticeofShenxiu’sfollowers,whohesaidupheldafalse
‘gradual’ormediatedteaching.AlthoughShenhuihimselfdidnot
disavowalltraditionalformsofBuddhistactivity,heandsubsequent
Chanmastersbecameincreasinglyattentivetothecontradiction
involvedinteachingandpractising(whichareinherentlygradua-
listic)accordingtotheorthodoxyofthe‘sudden’.The
Lidaifabaoji
authorswereheavilyinuencedbythissubitisttrend;conspicuously,
itistheonlytexttotakeShenhui’sdoctrinetoitslogicalextremeby
advocatingradicallyantinomian‘formless’practice.
Untilthe
discoveryofthe
Lidaifabaoji
,theBaoTangsectwasknownonly
throughthecriticismsofnear-contemporarieswhocondemnedits
followers’abandonmentofstandardBuddhistpractices.
Priestlyportraiture
Lidaifabaoji
portrait-eulogyevokesWuzhuthroughthe
portraitofhimthattheBaoTangdisciplesapparentlyhadpainted
immediatelyafterhisdeath.Howmightoneimaginethisportrait?
Referencestocommemorativeportraitsofmonksappearinworks
asearlyasthesixthcentury,butthepracticeofmakingportraitsof
Buddhistmastersappearstohaveincreasedinthelatterhalfofthe
eighthcentury.DunhuangspecialistJiangBoqincontendsthatfrom
theninthcenturyonwards,thedevelopmentofportraitartswas
closelytiedtocommemorativepracticesinBuddhistmonasteries.
Therearerecordsofmonkswhowereknownasskilledportrait-
painters,andmonksalsocontributedtothedevelopmentofthe
genreof‘appreciations’(
)forbothportraitsandBuddhist
images.Portraitsofeminentmonksandprominentlaygureswere
ofportraitsinportrait-halls(
zhentangoryingtang
)intheeighth
andninthcenturiesindicatethattheywerepatternedafter
AlthoughthepaintingofBukongisfromthesameperiodasthe
lostportraitofWuzhu,therearenocluesintheeulogyastothe
formatandsizeofWuzhu’sportrait,norofthepostureinwhichhe
wasportrayed.Nevertheless,Wuzhu’sportraitprobablyresembled
theZhenyanpatriarchs’portraitsmorethanitresembledthetypical
ChanorZenpriestportraitfamiliarfromanumberofthirteenthto
sixteenthcenturyexamples,oneofwhichwewillconsidershortly.
Wuzhu’sportraitwaspresumablypaintedwithcolouronsilk,
butthereisanimpressiveexampleoftheearlyuseofmonochrome
inkonpapertoproducetheimageofamonk,foundintheStein
collectionofDunhuangpaintingscrolls.
Basedonstylistic
featuresithasbeendatedtothelateninthorearlytenthcentury,
anditdisplaystheartist’scondentuseoflinealonetoproducea
nishedimage.Themonkisshownseatedonamatontheground
holdscouldbepoured,andtherosaryturnsasifit’smoving.
Aclearbreezeblowshisplaingarments,asifstraighteninghis
majesticdemeanor.
Praiseforthequalityof
presence
inthepaintingdrawsattention
experimentalbrushworkstylesforChansubjects.
Thus,wemight
wellcontemplatethefamouspairedpaintings‘TwoPatriarchs
HarmonizingtheMind’(
Erzutiaoxin
),consideredtoberepresen-
tativeofthe
yipin
(untrammelledbrush)style.Thepaintingsare
fromathirteenth-centuryhandscrollcopy,includingwhatis
purportedtobeacopyofthesignatoryinscriptionbyShiKein
963.ThesubjectsareclearlyrelatedtothepopularSong‘four
sleepers’theme,inwhichtheChaneccentricfriendsShide,
Hanshan,andFengganareshownsnoozinginaheapwith
Fenggan’stiger.
However,thesemasterfulink-blotsinviteahost
offree-associations.Wuxiang,inpopularlegend,cametobelinked
withatigercompanion,andthe
Lidaifabaoji
describesWuzhuand
Wuxiangsharingarapportandafondnessfor‘sittinginvacuity’
eventhoughseparated.Thus,formethesepaintingshavebecome
ofJingzhongShenhui(720–794),thoughhemayalsohavestudied
withthe‘seventhpatriarch’HezeShenhui.JingzhongShenhui,
unlikeBaoTangWuzhu,wasacknowledgedbyposterityas
Wuxiang’ssuccessor.ZhangWeizhong’spresenceinthescroll
themasterisinfullmonasticrobesseatedinlotuspostureina
chair,withhisshoesneatlyplacedonafootstoolbeforehimandhis
righthandholdinganimplementsuchasawhiskorstaff,andhe
maybeshownwithhairandabeard.
Buddhisthistory(withanemphasison‘schools’andafliations),
chuandenglu
or‘transmissionofthelamp’genealogyof
biographiesofChanpatriarchs,andthe
or‘discourserecords’
ofamaster’ssermonsandhisdialogueswithdisciplesandvisitors.
Focusinghereontheportrait-eulogy(
zhenzan
)genre,wewilltakea
lookatcorrespondencesbetweenthe
Lidaifabaoji
portrait-eulogy
andothereighth-centuryexamplesofmemorialappreciations,and
thencomparethesewiththestyleoftheChan
zhenzan
oftheSong
dynasty.
Afulltranslationofthe
Lidaifabao
jiportrait-eulogyisincluded
attheendofthisarticle.ThepieceprecedesanaccountofWuzhu’s
death,whichisportrayedinthestandardmannerofBuddhist
hagiographyandclosesthe
Lidaifabaoji
.Theprefacetothe
eulogypraisesWuzhu’steachingsandgivesthereasonsforhavinga
portraitmade,andtheeulogyitselfpraisestheDharmaandthe
portrait.Theprefacebeginswithidenticationoftheauthor:‘The
mountainmanSunHuan’.ThepieceechoesWuzhu’ssermonsas
giveninothersectionsofthe
Lidaifabaoji
,butiswritteninamore
polishedstylethanthatofthepersonorpersonswhowrotetherest
ofthetext.IntheprefaceWuzhuisreferredtoas‘ourteacher’,
sothewriteridentieshimselfasaBaoTangfollower.SunHuanis
fromthetwoextremes,transcendedall
,attainedthe
compassionoftheTatha
gatas,andenteredintothesuper-
knowledgesoftheBuddhas.
SunHuan’sstyleinthe
Lidaifabaoji
eulogyismoreakintosuch
eighth-century
forNorthernSchoolChanmastersthanit
AnumberofTang
zhenzan
forordainedandlayBuddhist
subjectsareextant,andtheDunhuangmaterialsincludearich
Itisnotablethattheportraititselfisnotmentioned;the
herereferstothemanifestationofanomen,itselfareferencetothe
Buddha’sparinirva
aunderpairedtrees.Many
praisethe
artistforcapturinglivingqualitiesofthesubject,andsomeallude
toapersonalrelationshipwiththesubject;weseebothofthese
qualitiesinthe
Lidaifabaoji
eulogy.Incontrast,the
theVenerableDugivesanimpressionofformalityandeven
impersonality.Perhapshisdeathwassudden,andthemonk
Zhizhao(d.u.),whoappearstohavebeenprominentatDunhuang
inhisday,wasrequestedtowritetheeulogyforthefuneral
ceremonywhiletheportraitwasstillinpreparation.Norcanwe
assumethatall
refertoactualportraits.Ihopethatmy
projectedthoroughstudyoftheDunhuang
willenableme
tomakemoreconcretespeculations,butforthetimebeingImust
contentmyselfwithpointingoutthecontrastspresentedbythe
followingsecular
zhenzan
,alsofromthelatterpartoftheeighth
century.Thisisthe
ShangshuyouchengXugongxiezhentuzan
bingxu
(Portrait-Eulogy,withPreface,fortheRightAssistant
DirectoroftheDepartmentofStateAffairs,GentlemanXu),by
DuguJi(725–777).
TheAttendantCensorGentlemanHanreachespurity;through
theexcellenceofhisstudyoftheartsandhispainting,heis
everywhererenowned.Inthethirdmonthofthe
xinchou
year
(761),hewasatYuzhang
intheofceofExaminerof
WastefulnessinPrincelyAffairs,andheresidedwiththe
former
RightAssistantDirectoroftheDepartmentofState
Affairs,GentlemanXu,inthePureRooms(
jingshi
)of
Huimingmonastery.[GentlemanHan]oncespentadayof
leisuretearingplain[silkorpaper]andscattering[ink]from
thebrush,andpaintedGentlemanXu’sportrait.Itwashungin
thatgentleman’ssitting-nook,andhisbeautifuleyesandsquare
mouth,hisharmoniousdispositionandrenedbones(i.e.
intrinsicnature)are[portrayed]withouttheleastdivergence,
asifdiscerninghisforminamirror.Someofthosecomingin
fromtheoutsidewanttokneelreverentlyandfoldtheirhands,
bowdownandpayobeisance,notknowingitisapainting.The
exclamationsofallthegentlemen
arenotsufcient,soIframe
wordstoeulogizeitsbeauty,aspiringtocarryonsinging[its
praises]tolater[generations].ThusIeulogize:
Themasterartistconveyshisconception,naturalgracesare
madecomplete;althoughheborrowstheessenceofthebrush,
WENDIADAMEK
heisintruthengagingthespirit.Hespontaneouslyaccom-
plishestheimage,assuddenlyaspartingthefog.Looking
reverentlyathisspirit-[brush]tipislikespyingintoanarmory
[ofneweapons].[GentlemanXu]isgeniallyeminent,proudly
standingforthalone,[like]thehighestlonepine,thewhite
rstexampletheymentiondatesfromtheeleventhcentury.
Lidaifabaoji
appearstobetheearliestChanworkinwhichwe
ndbiography,discourserecords,andportrait-eulogyconjoined.
Bytheeleventhcenturyitwasnotunknowntohavehundredsof
portraiteulogiescollectedattheendofthediscourserecordofa
famousChanmaster.
Theseeulogieswereincorporatedintothe
fromtheautographinscriptionsthatthemasterinquestion
hadwrittenonvariousportraitsofhimself,thusdifferingfromthe
Lidaifabaoji
eulogywrittenbyadisciple.
TheSongpracticemayhavebeenanechoofthemodelof
transmissionfoundintheearlyninthcentury
Baolinzhuan
,in
whicheachmastertransmitshisDharmathroughaga
hehas
composed.
However,contrarytoawidespreadmisapprehension,
portraitswerenotusedasproofofDharmatransmission.Instead,
FoulkandSharfassertthatthewritteninscriptionbythemasteron
auto-inscriptionisagoodexampleofthesocialusesofthegenre.
Diplomaticandwitty,itatterstheguestanddisparagesthehost
bymeansofelegantliteraryallusions.
ItalsobecameatropeforChanmasterstocomplainintheir
portraitinscriptionsaboutthepracticeofhavingportraitsmadeand
beingrequestedtowriteportraitinscriptions.Inthesecomplaints,
thecharacteristicChannelineisappliedwithgreaterorlesser
degreesofskill.Inaga
byGaofengYuanmiao(1238–1295)that
wasinscribedonaportraitgiventohisdiscipleZhongfeng
Mingben(1263–1323),wecanappreciatethelighthandlingof
andwantstospeak,theeyesdanceandareabouttosee.
‘Ilookupanditiseverloftier,Ivenerateanditisevermore
dear.’
subjectwasstillalive,andinsomecasesitisclearthatthepainter
wassummonedwhendeathseemedimminent.
InlaterSong
Chanmonasteries,theauraofthenuminouswasinstitutionalized.
FoulkandSharftellus:‘Songmonasticrulesstipulatedthatasan
abbotapproacheddeath,hisportraitwastobepainted,sincea
portraitofthedeceasedwasnecessaryfortheupcomingfuneral
rites....Songbiographicalchroniclesconrmthatportraitswere
indeedproducedjustpriortoor,ifneedbe,soonafteranabbot’s
death.’
AmongtheDunhuangmanuscriptsthereisaninteresting
monasticmemoregardinganupcomingfuneraryprocession,
affordingussomenotionofthemannerinwhichtheportraitof
adeceasedeminentmonkwasusedinfuneraryritual.Thefuneral
protocolinthe
Chanyuanqinggui
(dated1103),notedabove,
prescribesthefollowingforaChanabbot’sprocession:‘prepare
theportableshrinesfortheportraitandtheincense,aswellasthe
music,theowers,andthebanners’.
TheDunhuangmemo,
P.2856,dated895,bearsoutmanyofthefeaturesdescribedinthe
Chanyuanqinggui
.Thus,wecatchaglimpseoftheantecedentsof
funeraryportraitritual,whichtheChansectmademoreelaborate
inordertotransferitsabbotsthroughtheliminalpostmortem
periodintotheirnewabodeintheportraithall.
FuneralArrangementsNotice:TheVenerable‘Monastic
Controller’(
sengtong
)hasdied,andthefuneralwillbeon
the14thdayofthismonth.Wehavepreparedtheorderingof
theprocessionaccordingtofuneralritual,inthefollowing
divisions.Thespirit-carriage(i.e.carryingthecofn)willbe
attendedbytheentire–panAssociation,theVinayaMaster
Ciyin,andtheVinaya[Master]Xiqing.Theincensesedan
chairwillbeattendedbytheQinqingAssociation,
theVinaya
MasterCihui,andtheVinayaMasterQingguo.Theportrait
sedanchairwillbeattendedbythedisciples,theVinaya
MasterQingxiu,andtheVinayaMasterZhigang.Thebell-
carriagewillbeattendedbyZhangSu,LiTiti,andZhu
ShendeoftheMiddleRegiment.Thedrum-carriagewillbe
attendedbyShiXingziandZhangXingshengoftheWestern
Regiment.TheNineRanksofFutureBirthsedan-chair[will
beattendedby]arepresentativefromeachofthemonasteries
andconvents.Thelife-deportment
sedan-chairwillbe
attendedby[membersof]thismonastery.Thepaperpennants
willbecontinuousalongtheway,colored[
PORTRAITOFACHANMASTER
cotton)[willbeusedtopay?]VinayaMasterXiji[toofciate
as?]Daoji.Therewillbetwolargebanners,oneofadragon
andoneofalotus.Therewillbeapairofpennantseachfrom
Jingtu[monastery]andKaiyuan[monastery].Theforegoing
whohavebeenaskedtobeinvolvedinthesecapacities
[shouldkeepinmindthat]thedestinedfuneraldayfast
approaches,youcannotbelax,itisurgentthatyoulive
accordingtotheDharma,youcannotdoanythingcontraryto
[anattitudeof]reverence.
The11thdayofthe3rdmonthofthe2ndyearofthe
Qianningera(895).[Endorsedby:]MonasticAdministrator,
ChiefMonasticRegistrar,ChiefMonasticRegistrarXianzhao,
MonasticAdministrator,MonasticAdministrator.
Thealternativepossibilityisthattheportraitwasintendedtobe
destroyed.RongXinjianghassuggestedthatportraitsmighthave
beenburned,eitheraccompanyingthebodyorsubstitutingforit.
Thiswouldaccountforthetotalabsenceofportraitsofmonksin
theDunhuangcache,thoughmanyportrait-eulogiesremain.
Onemayalsosurmisethattheimmolationofaportraitcould
refertoamoredramaticculticformofsacrice:AlanColepoints
outthatlaterChancremationritualappropriatedthevocabulary
oferyself-immolation,afterthemanneroftheritualsuicides
inspiredbytheimageofthecosmicself-offeringofBhais
ajyara
inthe
LotusSu
ThefateoftheDunhuangportraitremainsan
intriguingmystery;whatisclearfromP.2856isthatboththe
externalorderandtheinternalstateofmindoftheparticipants
wasaseriousmatter,andthattherelationshipsenactedthroughthe
funeralhadramicationsfortheentirecommunity,involving
practitionertoachieveaspiritualbreakthrough,therelics
haveasoteriologicalfunction.
Faureclaimsthatrelicsandimagesmediatebothconceptually
andsoteriologically,symbolizing(oreffecting)andchannellingthe
experienceofdirectencounterwiththemaster,saint,orBuddha.
However,inthe
Lidaifabaoji
theemphasisisplacedondirect
effect,andWuzhu’sportraitisitselfa‘response-body(
yingshen
separatefromcharacteristic
sandemptiedofwords’.Not
incidentally,
yingshen
isatermthatissometimesusedtotranslate
(the‘teaching’manifestationsoftheBuddha)and
therepresentationsofreligiousstudies,steeringawobblycourse
Thenotionthattheabbotandhisimageareequallysimulacra,
virtualBuddhas,hasrootsintheninth-centurynotionoftheChan
masterasa‘livingBuddha’.Thisisinturnasacralizationofthe
‘sudden’teachingofintrinsicBuddhanature,therealizationofthe
virtualorcontingentastheultimatetruth.Thisisexpressedin
the
PlatformSu
tra
teachingthatthetrueselfistheTrika
ya,theThree
BodiesoftheBuddha.
RegardingChinesetheoriesofthenature
oftheBuddha,Sharfemphasizestheimportanceofunderstanding
thematrixofindigenousthoughtwithinwhichsuchtheorieswere
engendered.Heregardsanunderstandingofthenotionof
aliendiscourse.
Inotherwords,Chinesepatternsofthoughtand
Chineseconcernsdictatedthetermsofwhatappearedtobeajoint
venture,andtheyremainedinsecurepossessionofthecultural
Thus,whilenotionsof
yingshen
mayhavebeen
associatedwithIndianTrika
yatheory,theyrevealastrikingfamily
resemblanceto
.Sharfrelatesthenotionof
ganying
andthe
‘vephases’(
wuxing
)theoriesoftheHan,whereinthingsaffect
eachotherthroughpatternsandcyclesofcategoricalafnities.This
systemrenderswhatwouldappeartobesupernaturaloccurrences
(forexample,raininresponsetosacriceoranomenpreguring
death)apprehensibleasnaturalprocessesofmutualinuence
showsthatWuzhuandWuxiangbelongtothesamefamilyof
phenomena,whichexplainstheirmutualresonance,likemusical
instruments,evenwhenapart.Thisqualityisvividlyevokedin
Lidaifabaoji
passagesaboutWuzhuandWuxiang,alwaysin
conjunctionwiththenoteofdestinyandthepreordainednatureof
theirconnection.Moreover,thesoundoftheteachingof‘no-
thought’becomesthemediumthroughwhichWuzhumeets
Wuxiang‘face-to-face’,immediately.
Similarly,the
Lidaifabaoji
eulogy’scharacterizationofWuzhu’s
portraitasa‘response-bodyseparatefromcharacteristicsand
emptiedofwords’atonceevokesavotiveimage,asiteofpower
thatisneverthelessanaturalphenomenon,andamanifestationof
no-thought.Wemayalsoconsiderthisanearlyexampleofthe
soteriologicalandrituallogicofrepresentationasthe‘form’of
emptinessthatwouldlaterbecomeinstitutionalizedinSongChan
monasticpractice.Thenagain,itmaybeneithersosophisticated
norsoempty.
Formlesspractice
produced,thisthenisseeingtheBuddha,whytakethe
troubletogosofar?’
Themastersandmonkswantedtoleave.TheVenerable
expoundedaga
forthem:‘Lostchildrenrestlesslydashing
likewaves,circlingthemountainandpayingobeisancetoa
pileofearth.Man
isrighthere,youareclimbingthe
Buddha’sbacktosearchforAmita
InanotherpassageWuzhuredenestheconstructionofsacred
spaceas‘no-thought’:‘Regarddirectmindasthe
bodhiman
(seat
ofenlightenment,
daochang
)....Regardno-thoughtastheprecepts,
non-actionandnothingtoattainasmeditation,andnon-dualityas
wisdom.Donotregardtheconstructedritualarenaasthe
bodhiman
Thethrustofboththepilgrimageand
bodhiman
passagesisthatitisdelusorytolocatetheBuddhaandDharma
outsideofone’struenature,themindofno-thought.Naturally,then,
onemightwonderwhytheBaoTangfollowerssawnothingamissin
attributingthepoweroftheDharmatoanexternalimage.
ThatWuzhu’sdisciplesdidnotbalkaticonizationoftheir
teacher’siconoclasmisperhapsamanifestationoftherecoveryor
revengeoftheconventionallevelthatFaureclaimswasthe
inevitable‘otherpower’atworkwithinChanideology:‘Chan/Zen
monkswereinfacttryingtolimittheproliferationofsacred
symbolsandtoreserveforthemselvestheprivilegeofthepossession
ofselectedsymbolsoriconssuchas
andmummies.Their
iconoclasmwasthereforearelativeone,althoughthemostradical
paintingsofanykindremain.However,throughtheconventional
languageofSunHuan’s
wemaystillattuneourselvesto
thewords’.
Forthisreason,thosewhofollowverbalpreaching
fullofgratitudetowardourGreatMasterforhavingpityonour
delusionanddullness,forshowingusthetrueDharmanotthrough
Buddha-regions,[Bodhi]dharmareceiveditanditowedeastward
tothelandoftheHan.Thesearemattersspanningoverone
thousandyears,theholyonesforthirty-fourgenerationshave
directlyinheriteditonefromtheotherandhavepasseditdown
fromonetothenext.TheDharmatheyobtainedtallieswiththe
Dao’ssource,therobetheytransmittedclearlyshowstrueand
MonasticTradition(Ph.D.Dissertation,UniversityofMichigan,
1987);BernardFaure,
TheWilltoOrthodoxy:ACriticalGenealogy
ofNorthernChanBuddhism
(Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress,
1997;thisisatranslationandrevisionofFaure’s1984dissertationand
subsequentrevisionspublishedinFrench),
IdolizationofEnlightenment:OntheMummicationofCh’an
MastersinMedievalChina’,
HistoryofReligions
23(1)(1992),
pp.1–31;BernardFaure1991,
op.cit
.,pp.148–178;his‘Relicsand
FleshBodies:TheCreationofCh’anPilgrimageSites’,inSusanNaquin
andChu
n-fangYu
,eds.,
PilgrimsandSacredSitesinChina
UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1992),pp.150–189;andhisarticlein
thisvolume.
Songgaosengzhuan
50(2061)832c24–833a3.Areferencetoaclay
portraitdoneofHuinengwhilehewasstillaliveoccursinthe
chuandenglu
(RecordoftheTransmissionoftheLampCompiledin
theJingdeEra)compiledin1004,see
.51(2076)755b.
13Namely,Vajrabodhi(669–741),S
imha(637–735),Bukong
(705–774),Yixing673–727),andHuiguo(746–805).SeeShiShuqing,
‘RibenguoshoucangdeTangdaiYixingdengrenhuaxiang’(Portraitsof
[Master]Yixing
theCountryofDali).SeeLiLincan,
AStudyoftheNan-chaoandTa-li
KingdomsintheLightofArtMaterialsFoundinVariousMuseums
(Taibei:NationalPalaceMuseum,1982);HelenB.Chapin,
ALong
RollofBuddhistImages
[Articlespub.In1936–1938,revisedand
annotatedbyAlexanderSoper](Asconda:ArtibusAsiae,1971).
25NanyinmayhaveusedthenameWeizhonginordertobetakenfor
HezeShenhui’sdiscipleofthatname(dates705–782),andthusmaybe
thesourceoftheconfusionoverZongmi’sclaimtobeHezeShenhui’s
successorthroughNanyin/Weizhong.SeeYanagida,‘Jinnenosho
(ThePortraitofShenhui’),
Zenbunkakenkyu
jokiyo
15(1988),
46Thereareotherinscriptionsreferringtothispractice,seeJiang,
op.cit
p.82.Earlyoccasionalportraitsofthistypedonotsurvive,butthereis
acontemporarytombmuralportraitofthecourtofcialGaoYuangui
(d.756);heisshownseatedinachair,ankedbyafemaleattendant.
SeeZhangHongxiu,
ZhongguoTangmubihuaji
(ACollectionof
China’sTangDynastyTombMurals),(LingnanArtPublishingHouse,
1995),pp.148–153.
71See,forexample,StephenF.Teiser,
TheGhostFestivalinMedieval
89Acurlofhairabovethebridgeofthenose,oneofthemarksofthe
Lidaifabaoji
.51(2075)193a26–193b2.
.51(2075)185c29–186a5.
92Faure1991,
op.cit
.,pp.177–178.
Yangqifanghuiheshanghoulu
.47(1994)642b5–13,trans.Foulk
andSharf,
op.cit
.,p.203.However,Ihavesubstituted‘portrait’for
FoulkandSharf’stranslation,‘trueimage’,becauseIthinkbytheSong
simplymeantportrait.
Daodejing
,72.SeeD.C.Lau,trans.,
Taoteching
(PenguinBooks,
1963),p.91.
95Inotherwords,expedientmeanstoeradicatedelements.
96Basedonthe
.SeeBurtonWatson,trans.,
ChuangTzu
York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1964),p.140.
97ThisisatechnicaltermfromAbhidharmaexegesisonthemoral
qualitiesofdharmas,meaningmorallyneutral,notsubjecttokarmic
ONTHERITUALUSEOFCHAN
PORTRAITUREINMEDIEVAL
T.GrifÞthFoulkandRobertH.Sharf
ManyhistoricalsurveysofJapaneseart,includingboththose
writteninJapaneseandtheirlargelyderivativeWestern-language
counterparts,containasectiondevotedtoadistinctgenreof
paintingcalled
chinzo
(alsopronounced
chinso
,Chin:
dingxiang
comprisingportraitsofChanandZenBuddhistmonks.The
genre,suchsurveysexplain,ßourishedinSong(960Ð1279)and
Yuan(1279Ð1368)ChinaandwasÞrstintroducedtoJapanduring
theKamakuraperiod(1185Ð1333)inconjunctionwiththe
wholesaletransmissionofChan(Zen)Buddhistinstitutionsand
practices.Byallaccounts,theoldestandÞnestsurvivingexamples
includemorethanadozenportraitsofeminentChan
artinJapanesemuseumsandtemplecollectionstoday,including
thosewithnoofÞcialdesignationandagreatmanythatwere
producedduringtheTokugawaperiod(1615Ð1868),isroughlyten
timesthatnumber.
Theportraitsincludedinthisgenretendtofollowareadily
identiÞablecompositionalformula:themonkisdepictedseated
cross-leggedonachairwithshoesplacedneatlyinfrontona
footstool(Jpn:
,Chin:
tachuang
).TheÞgureisdressedinfull
ceremonialcostume,comprisinganinnerandouterrobe(Jpn:
)anda
orsurplice(Jpn:
,Chin:
jiasha
)draped
overtheleftshoulder.ThesurpliceofChanandZenlineageabbots
oft-repeatednotionthat
chinzo
wereusedascertiÞcatesofChan
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
andZenenlightenmentorproofofdharmatransmission(Jpn:
,Chin:
Agoodwaytotestthisclaim,we
reasoned,wouldbetosearchthevoluminoushistoricalrecordsof
EastAsianBuddhismforoccurrencesoftheterm
chinzo
.Analyses
ofthecontextsinwhichthetermappeared,wehoped,wouldshed
lightontheproductionandreligioususeofsuchportraits.
Accordingly,weundertookanextensivesurveyoftherelevant
literature,includingbiographicalcollections(Jpn:
,Chin:
gaosengzhuan
),discourserecords(Jpn:
,Chin:
yulu
ÔrecordsofthetransmissionoftheßameÕ(Jpn:
dento
,Chin:
chuandenglu
),monasticcodes(Jpn:
,Chin:
),koan
collections(Jpn:
,Chin:
gongÕan
),pilgrimsÕdiaries,medieval
textsonpainting,andpaintinginscriptions.Asintended,our
investigationenabledustocheckthehistoricalaccuracyofvarious
claimsmadeaboutChanandZenportraiturebyarthistorians.But
itdidfarmorethanthat,aswefoundourselvesforcedtoreconsider
theverybasisofthemodernart-historicaldelineationofa
chinzo
genre.Whatwediscovered,inbrief,isthatinmedievalChinaand
Japantheterm
chinzo
referredtoabroadrangeofportraitobjects,
andthatitsusetodesignateapreciselycircumscribedgenreofÔZenÕ
portraitureis,infact,arelativelyrecentart-historicalconventionof
dubiousutility.Indeed,moderndeÞnitionsof
chinzo
arenotmerely
descriptiveofanexistingbodyofportraiture,butactuallyfunction
inanormativeandstipulativewaytodelineateacorpusandcreate
agenreforart-historicalstudy.Accordingly,ourstudyoftheritual
functionofobjectscommonlysubsumedunderthedesignation
chinzo
scholarsinvolvedinthisproject,focusesononeaspectofour
collaborativeeffort,namely,thereligioussigniÞcanceandritual
functionofportraitsofeminentChanmonksinmedievalChina.
Alongtheway,wewilltakealongexcursusintotheevolutionof
themonasticstructureknownastheÔpatriarchhallÕorÔportrait
hallÕ.Aswewillsee,anunderstandingofthisfacilityÐthe
architecturalcounterparttotheChineseBuddhistnotionofa
ÔspiritualgenealogyÕorÔdharmalineageÕÐisessentialtoour
reconstructionofthemeaningandfunctionofChanportraiture.
Representationandreality:terminologicalissues
InChineseBuddhistliteratureofthemedievalperiod,threeterms
areusedvirtuallyinterchangeablytorefertoportraitsof
patriarchs:
,and
.Thelatterandsomewhat
lesscommonexpression,
dingxiang
,isexclusivelyBuddhist,andit
seemstohavecomeintouseduringthetenthcenturyÐatimewhen
signiÞcantchangeswerebeginningtotakeplaceintheproduction
anduseofBuddhistportraits.Wewillexploretheimportofthe
dingxiang
wordsÔsymbolÕorÔsymbolizeÕinthesenseofsubstitutionforor
representationofphysicaloremblematicobjectsÕ(1985:33).But,
asEdwardSchaferhasargued,thetranslationÔsymbolÕdoesnot
fullycapturethesigniÞcanceofthesemarkings,whichmustbe
understoodinconnectionwiththeÔtheoryofcorrespondencesÕÐ
adorningtherobesofthekingservedtoreinforcethe
ÔrealÕ,orÔgenuineÕ.Thistermwasusedforportraitureasearlyas
theSixDynastiesperiod,apparentlybecausethetaskofthe
portraitistwastocaptureaccuratelytheÔlivingspiritÕ(
)ofthe
subject,ratherthanhismereoutwardappearance(Shi1988:69).
Thisexaltedunderstandingofthecraftofportrait-paintingwas
givenformalexpressionbythepainterGuKaizhi(
.345Ð406),
whospokeofÔtransmittingthespiritÕ(
chuanshen
),andÔusingform
todepictthespiritÕ(
yixingxieshen
Thenotionthatportraitsshouldbeconcernedwithtransmitting
theÔspiritvitalityÕ(
)waslatercanonizedinthesomewhat
obscureÔsixprinciplesÕ(orÔsixlawsÕ,
)ofpainting,enumerated
bytheportraitistXieHe(active
.500Ð535).TheÞrstand
arguablythemostimportantofXieHeÕssixprinciplesconcernsthe
ÔspiritresonanceÕ(
,or
).Whilethereisconsiderable
debateamongbothtraditionalcommentatorsandmodernscholars
concerningtheprecisemeaningofthesebinomes,allagreethat
theÞrstprincipleconcernstheimportanceoftranscendingthe
inorganicmediaofbrushandinkorpigmentinordertobring
thesubjectmatterÔtolifeÕ.Inthecaseofaportrait,thismeant
capturingthevitalanduniquespiritorsouloftheportrait
Accordingtomedievaltheorists,oncetheartistsucceeds
incapturingÔspiritresonanceÕ,formallikenessorverisimilitude
willfollownaturally.The
Lidaiminghuaji
,aninth-century
compendiumonpaintinghistoryandtheorybyZhangYanyuan,
explainsthisprincipleasfollows:
ThepaintersofAntiquityweresometimesabletotransmit
formallikenesswhileendowingitwithanoblevitality.They
soughtforwhatwasbeyondformallikenessintheirpainting.
ThisisverydifÞculttodiscusswithvulgarpeople.Asfor
todayÕspainters,eveniftheyattainformallikeness,theydo
notgeneratespiritresonance.Iftheyweretoexplorepainting
throughspiritresonance,theninevitablyformallikeness
wouldresideinit.
Itwouldappearthattheuseoftheterm
forportraiture
emergedinconjunctionwiththisunderstandingoftheartistÕstask:
traditionalsourcesagreethatthe
orÔtruthÕoftheportraitlay
notinsurfacerealism,butratherintheabilityoftheportraitto
capturethesitterÕsinnermostbeing.
Inlatercataloguesofimperialartcollections,theterm
commonlyusedtodesignateformalportraitsÐprimarilymemorial
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
portraitsÐofemperorsandhighofÞcials.Moreover,
isnot
usuallyusedforimagesoflegendaryÞguresandheroes;the
commontermforsuchimagesinmedievalsourcesisthemore
appearstohavebeenthepreferredterm
marks,and[eighty]secondarymarks,theboundlessvoice,andthe
Canonicalsourcesoffervariousexplanationsforthefactthatthe
BuddhaÕs
cannotbeseenbylivingbeings.Accordingtosome
texts,thelightemanatingfromthe
isgreatereventhanthe
lightofthesun,andthuscannotbevieweddirectly.Thetradition
mostfamiliartotheChinese,however,explainedthe
invisibilityasstemmingfromthefactthatnonestandabovethe
Buddha:livingbeingsarealwaysgazingupathiseminence,a
positionthatprecludesaviewofthecrowning
.Some
sourcesgofurtherandclaimthattheBuddhaisunimaginablytall,
withhisheadreachingtothesky.
Theuseoftheterm
dingxiang
torefertoaportraitisnot,toour
knowledge,attesteduntiltheNorthernSongdynasty.Oneof
theproblemsweconfrontedwhenwebeganourresearchwasthe
following:howdidascholasticChinesetermfortheinvisible
protuberanceontheheadofaBuddhacometobeusedintheSong
torefertoportraitsofBuddhistmonks?Oursolutiontothispuzzle
involvedanexaminationoftheinstitutional,ritual,andliterary
signiÞcanceofBuddhistportraitsinmedievalChina.Itistothis
topicthatwenowturnourattention.
Theportraitasholyrelic
ReferencestoportraitsofeminentmonksinTangandpre-Tang
Buddhistsourcesaretypicallyfoundinthecontextof(1)thecultic
worshipofaparticularlycharismaticBuddhistsaint,and/or(2)the
funeralritesforadeceasedmaster.Inmostinstancesthetwo
categoriesÐdevotionalandfuneraryÐcoincide,andaportrait
producedinconjunctionwiththemortuaryritesforaneminent
monkfunctionsasthefocusforcontinueddevotionalactivity,
includingritualofferingstothespiritofthedeparted.
Thereareonlyahandfulofearlyinstancesinwhichtheportrait
ofaneminentmonkisusedasthefocusforworshippriortothe
deathofthedepictedsubject.OnesuchcaseisthatoftheEastern
QinBuddhistmasterDaoan(d.385)whosecommunityisknown
tohavehadstrongdevotionaltendenciescentredaroundreligious
images.In378politicaleventsforcedDaoantomovehis
communityfromXiangyangtotheShangmingmonasteryin
Jiangling,whichsoonbecamethecentreforÔDaoanworshipÕ.
Accordingtothe
Gaosengzhuan
biographyofTanhui(323Ð395),
anearlyfollowerofDaoan,TanhuimadeaportraitofDaoanthat
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
heusedasthefocusformeditativereßectionandworship.
Followingtheproductionofthisimage,Ôallthegentlemenand
ladiesofJiangling[bowed]tothewestandpaidhomagetothe
Bodhisattvawiththesealedhand[i.e.Daoan]Õ.
Anotherearlycaseinwhichanimagewasusedinconjunction
withtheworshipofalivingmasteristhatofthe
GregorySchopenputsit,ÔtheywereÒinformedÓ,Ò
parfume
ÒsaturatedÓ,ÒpervadedÓ,ÒimbuedÓwithjustthosecharacteristics
whichdeÞnedthelivingBuddhaÕ(Schopen1987:204).Moreover,
SchopenhasdemonstratedthatBuddhistrelicswereconsidered
ÔlegalpersonsÕwhoenjoyedrightsofproperty.Asobjectsof
worship,therelicswerefunctionallyequivalenttoaliving
Tatha
gata,insofarasthemeritaccruedwasidenticalineithercase.
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
Closelyassociatedwiththecultofrelicsisthenotionthatthe
bodyofadeceasedsaintisfreefromdeÞlementandthusnaturally
resistanttoputrefaction.ThemiraculousÔincorruptibilityÕofthe
remainsofaneminentmasterhadlongbeenconsideredasignof
highspiritualattainmentinmanypartsofAsia,includingBuddhist
China,andChineseBuddhisthagiographiesrecordnumeroussuch
cases.Formonthsandyearsfollowingtheirdeaththeirunembalmed
bodies,imbuedwithastockofpurityandmeritacquiredthrougha
Sharfhasarguedelsewhere,theprocessofmummiÞcationwas
originallyintendedasamereaugmentationofthenatural
incorruptibilityofthecorpseofasaintÐaconceitmadeplausible
bythefactthatmummiÞcationwasitselfadifÞcultanduncertain
showing,incidentally,notraceofanironcollarordamagetothe
neck,canstillbeseenattheNanhuatempletoday.
ThelacqueringprocessusedtopreservetheremainsofBuddhist
saintswascostly,time-consuming,anddangerousowingtothe
toxicityofrawlacquer.AndmostsigniÞcantly,thelacquer
technologyusedtoturnacorpseintoanimperishableiconwas
essentiallythesameasthatusedtoproducedry-lacquerportrait
sculptureintheTang.Thedry-lacquertechniqueinvolvedthe
applicationoflayeruponlayeroflacquer-saturatedhempencloth
ontoanarmatureofwoodorclay.Eachlayertookconsiderable
timetodry,suchthattheentireprocesscouldtakeupwardsofmany
months,buttheresultwasalacquercoatingofsufÞcientthickness
andpliabilitytoallowittobeÞnelymodelledanddelicately
carved.Thesculpture,likethelacqueredmummy,wasthenpainted
orgilded,andifaclaycorewasuseditwasdugoutoncethe
684Ð756),whoseclayefÞgy,mixedwithhisrelics,ßowedwith
ChanportraithallsintheSuiandTangdynasties
NumeroussourcesdatingtotheSuiandTangdynastiesattestto
theexistenceofhallswithinmonasticcompoundscontaining
portraitsofeminentChinesemonks.Whiletheoriginsofsuch
facilitiesarefarfromclear,itispossiblethattheyevolvedfromthe
-mausoleums,attestedinSixDynastiessources,that
werebuilttoenshrinetheremainsofcharismaticsaints.
Itseems
thatthesemodestmausoleumswereoriginallybuiltonremote
complex,whichwererenownedascentresforthepracticeand/or
Shenxiuasalegitimatesixth-generationheir.Whileourhistorical
reconstructionofthiscaseissomewhatinvolved,itisworth
YuquanMonasteryandDumenMonasteryinJingzhou.Infact,it
wasnotuntiltheyear700thatShenxiubeganteachinginthe
capitalsLuoyangandChangÕan,whereheremaineduntilhisdeath
in706.ShenxiuÕsmortalremains,moreover,weresentbacktothe
DumenMonastery,whereagrand
wassupposedlybuiltfor
himbytheemperorRuizong(r.710Ð712;McRae1986:55,Faure
1997:34).ItwouldseemthatShenxiuÕselevationtothestatusof
ÔsixthpatriarchÕwasengineeredbyhisdisciples,Pujichiefamong
them.Thiswasnoeasyfeat,asFaruwasapparentlyknowntohave
beenthechiefheiroftheÞfthpatriarch.PujiÕsstrategyinvolved
(1)thecompilationofthe
Chuanfabaoji
,inwhichearlier
materialswerereworkedtoincorporateShenxiuÕsbiographyand
serveShenhuiÕsintereststorefutetheclaimsofShenxiuÕsfollowers
byreestablishingFaruasHongrenÕstrueheir.Instead,Shenhui
drewattentiontothecontradictorynatureofthelineageclaims
madeinthe
Chuanfabaoji
andinsistedthatHuinengwasthesole
legitimatesuccessortotheÞfthpatriarch.
Aroundtheyear752,Shenhui,muchasPujibeforehim,
substantiatedhisclaimtoBodhidharmaÕslineagebyconstructinga
portraithall(
zhentang
)memorializingthesuccessivegenerations
ofIndianandChinesepatriarchs.Accordingtothebiographyof
Huinengfoundinthe
Songgaosengzhuan
,Shenhui,unlikePuji,
builtthehallathisownmonasteryinLuoyang(theHezesi)and
allowedonlyasinglepatriarchpergeneration(
.2061:50.755b10
ff.).SongDing,ahighofÞcialintheBureauofMilitary
Appointments,issaidtohavewrittenthetextforthestelemarking
thesite,andShenhuihimselfaddedaprefacedetailingthe
uninterruptedÔbloodlineÕofthelineage(
zongmo
).Images(
werepaintedforeachofthepatriarchsandplacedinthehall,and
theDefender-in-ChiefFangGuan(697Ð763)producedaÔprefaceto
theportraitsofthesixgenerationsÕ(
Liuyetuxu
.2061:
50.755b13).Whilewemayquestiontheaccuracyofsomeofthe
patriarchs,reiteratedthephysicalarrangementofimperial
ancestralshrines(Jorgensen1987:110).Theimperialshrineswere
arrangedaccordingtotheÔRegulationsoftheKingÕ(
Wangzhi
chapterofthe
Liji
:ÔTheSonofHeaven[has]seven
miao
:three
,andthree
throughShitouÕsteacherQingyuanXingsi(d.740).Historical
sourcesbearinguponthesemovementsarescarce,however,andwe
Dynastiesperiod(906Ð960)marksawatershedintheevolutionof
Buddhistmonasticinstitutionsingeneral,andtheorganization
ofpatriarchhallsinparticular.Thechangesintheconceptionand
arrangementofpatriarchhalls,inturn,hadamajorimpactonthe
productionanddistributionofBuddhistportraiture.
WehaveseenthatduringtheTangtheso-calledChanschool
byincorporatingChanlinesfromalloverChinaandbydepicting
theChanmastersoftheFukienregion(i.e.,theSouthernTang)as
theguardiansoftheßameofTangBuddhism.
TheSouthernTangfellsometwenty-threeyearsafterthe
compilationofthe
Zutangji
,whichitselfdisappearedfromChina
within150yearsorsoofitspublication(tobepreservedonlyin
Korea).Nevertheless,thecatholicconceptionofBodhidharmaÕs
lineagereßectedinthe
Zutangji
foundexpressioninother
biographicalcompilationsknowngenericallyastheÔrecordsof
thetransmissionoftheßameÕ,theoldestandmostinßuentialof
whichwasthe
Jingdechuandenglu
of1004.TheÔtransmission
oftheßameÕcollectionsallowedChanideologuestobringtogether
ahostofregionalmovements,givingeachaplacewithinthe
extendedChanÔfamilyÕ,andtopresentthisfamilytothecourtas
thestandardbearerofChineseBuddhism.Theirsuccessisseenin
thefactthatsuchcollectionsweresanctionedbytheSongcourtand
incorporatedintoimperialcollectionsoftheBuddhistcanon.As
such,theChanversionofBuddhisthistory,centredasitwasupon
themythofanunbrokenmind-to-mindtransmissionoriginating
withS
kyamuniBuddha,wasgrantedofÞcialcourtauthorization.
TheSongcourtdidmorethansanctionChanlineageclaimsas
embodiedinChanbiographicalcompilations:itreservedthe
abbaciesofmanyofthelargestate-supportedmonasteriesor
ÔmonasteriesofthetendirectionsÕ(
shifangcha
)fordharmaheirsin
theChanlineage.Manyofthemonasteriesinquestionhadhad
longanddistinguishedhistoriesandenjoyedimperialrecognition
andpatronageunderpreviousdynasties.ButpriortotheSong
therehadbeennoofÞciallydesignatedÔChanÕmonasteries.The
factthatthecourttransformedmanyofthegreatstatemonasteries
intoÔChanmonasteriesÕ(
,or
chanyuan
)byimperial
proclamationatteststotheprominenceofChanundertheSong.
Thetransformationtypicallyinvolvedrenamingtheinstitution,
issuinganimperialplaquebearingthenewnamefordisplayabove
themaingate,appointinganewabbot(regardedasthe
kaishan
ÔfoundingabbotÕ)fromamongthosemonkswhohadreceived
dharmatransmissionintheChanline,andrefurbishingtheportrait
Incomparisonwithearlierperiods,wepossessarelativewealth
ofhistoricaldocumentationbearingupontheorganizationand
functionofportraithallsintheSong.
EachmajorSongBuddhist
monasteryhadsuchahall,variouslyknownasaÔportraithallÕ
zhentang
),aÔpatriarchhallÕ(
),oraÔpatriarchalteacher
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
hallÕ(
),locatedtothewestoftheBuddhahallordharma
beenincreasinglydifÞculttorepresenttheentireextendedChan
familytreeinasingleportraithall.The
Zutangji
alreadycontained
morethan200biographies,andthe
Jingdechuandenglu
boasted
some1,700majorandminorentries.Thechallengewastolimitthe
WhiletheimagesoftheÞrstsixChinesepatriarchsmayhave
occasionallybeenhousedinthepatriarchhallalongwiththe
enshrinedabbots,thiswasbynomeansthenorm.Itwastakenfor
granted,ofcourse,thatthelineageofeachabbotcouldindividually
betracedbacktoBodhidharmathroughHuineng.Beyondthis,
however,therewasnonecessarymasterÐdisciplerelationship
amongtheabbotsofasinglemonastery.Anotherconsequence
wroughtbythesechangeswasthattheportraitsofanysingleabbot
mightbeenshrinedinanynumberofportraithalls,depending
uponthenumberofabbaciesheoccupiedduringhiscareer.The
obviousadvantageofthisnewarrangementwasthatitallowed
thepatriarchhalltocontinuetobeorganizedaccordingtothe
principlesof
,sinceitresultedinaunilinealsuccession
ofpatriarchs(onepatriarchpergeneration).
Ourunderstandingofthistransformationisbasedonlimited
butnonethelesscompellingevidence.Onecriticalsourceisthe
ÔPrefacetotheRulesforthePatriarchHallÕ(
Zutanggangjixu
composedbyBaiyunShouduan(1025Ð1072)anddated1070.
Thetextbeginsasfollows:
ItisthankstotheprinciplesestablishedbytheÞrstpatriarch
Bodhidharmathattheway[oftheChanschool]ßourishesin
thisland.ItisthankstoBaizhangDazhithattheregulations
forChanmonasterieshavebeenestablishedhere.Thesefacts
arecommonknowledgethroughouttheempire,but,alas,in
patriarchhallsthroughouttheempirethefoundingabbots
andtheirsuccessorsareregardedasthe[principal]patriarchs.
.120.209b2Ð4)
Afterlamentingthegeneralneglectoftheteachingsoftheearly
patriarchs,Shouduangoesontosay:ÔItismydesirethatin
patriarchhallsthroughouttheempireBodhidharmaand[Baizhang]
Dazhibetreatedasprimaryandthefoundingabbotsandtheir
successorsbetreatedassecondaryÕ(
.120.209b11Ð12).It
appearsthatbythemid-eleventhcenturytheportraithallsin
manyChanmonasterieshadceasedtoenshrineimagesoftheearly
patriarchsinfavourofformerabbots.Shouduanbelievesthatin
failingtoveneratethefoundersofChan,therewasadangerthat
fundamentalChanprincipleswouldbeforgotten.Thus,whilehe
doesnotobjecttoenshriningthefoundingabbotandhissuccessors,
heinsiststhattheyberituallysubordinatedtoBodhidharmaand
Baizhang.
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
ShouduanÕsselectionofBodhidharmaandBaizhangforspecial
attentionismostsigniÞcant.ThechoiceofBodhidharmarequires
littlecomment:hewastheÔprimalancestorÕofChineseChan,and
membershipinhislineagewasrequiredofallwhoaspiredto
becomeabbotsofChanmonaster
ies.Thesecondpatriarch
mentionedbyShouduan,BaizhangHuaihai(749Ð814,alsoknown
byhisposthumoustitleDazhiChanshi),wasveneratedintheSong
asthefounderoftheÞrstindependentChanmonasteryandthe
authoroftheÞrstChanmonasticcode.T.GrifÞthFoulkhasshown
elsewherethatthelegendsdepictingBaizhangasthefounderof
ChanCloisteronMt.Longmenduringhisabbacy.Whiletherules
ShouduanÕsÔPrefacetotheRulesforthePatriarchHallÕreproduced
infull.
AnotherinßuentialChanmonasticcodeoftheYuan,the
Chixiu
Baizhangqinggui
,similarlycitesShouduanÕsÔPrefaceÕasauthor-
itative,andendorseshisarrangementofimages(
.2025:
48.1117c16Ð18).Thiscode,whichhadagreatimpactonthe
organizationandoperationofZenmonasteriesinmedievalJapan,
containssimilarproceduralguidelinesandliturgicaltextsforthe
annualBodhidharmamemorialservice(
Damoji
),thememorial
serviceforBaizhang(
Baizhangji
),andthememorialservicesfor
thefoundingabbotandhissuccessors(
kaishanlidaizuji
.2025:
48.1117c19Ð1119a21).
Withasingleexception,allofthememorialservicesoutlinedin
Chanlinbeiyongqinggui
andthe
ChixiuBaizhangqinggui
forpersonsorclassesofpersonsmentionedinShouduanÕspreface.
Thesingleexceptionisthememorialservicefortheteacherfrom
whomthecurrentabbotinheritedthedharma(
).Aswehave
seen,itwasrarefortheabbotofapublicmonasterytohave
receiveddharmatransmissionfromthepreviousabbot;anew
TheplanoftheLingyinpatriarchhallindicatesalargestructure
containingportraitsarrayedalongthenorthwallinthefollowing
order(movingwesttoeast):(1)theÞrstgenerationabbot(
diyidai
(2)Baizhang,(3)thefoundingpatriarchBodhidharma,(4)thesecond
patriarchHuike,(5)thefoundingabbot,and(6)thesecond
generationabbot.
Inthisparticularcase,itappearsthattheimages
werearrangedinsuchawaythattheformerabbotsineven-
numberedgenerationswerelineduptotherightofBodhidharma,
andtheabbotsinodd-numberedgenerationswerelineduptotheleft
Ðanapparentreversalofestablishednorms.
WhiletheplanspeciÞes
onlytheplacementoftheportraitsoftheÞrstthreegenerationsof
abbots,itisclearthatthisrepresentsanabbreviationnecessitatedby
lackofspaceontheplan.Infact,thehallenshrinedallsubsequent
generationsofformerabbotsaswell.Andalthoughtherearesome
variousschoolslayintheidentityoftheenshrinedpatriarchs:Chan
portraithallshousedthespiritsofChanpatriarchs,Tiantaiportrait
hallshousedTiantaipatriarchs,andVinayaportraithallshoused
Vinayapatriarchs.
Thuswhenweturntodescriptionsofthepatriarchhallsofpublic
Tiantaimonasteries(commonlycalledÔTeachingmonasteriesÕ,
),forexample,weÞndthesameemphasisplacedonthe
positionofthefoundingabbotandhissuccessors.
Indeed,even
thesamenomenclatureisused(
kaishanlidaizu
).Itwasalso
commonforimagesofZhiyiandZhanran(711Ð782),thefourth
andninthpatriarchsintheÔorthodoxlineÕ(
zhengtong
)ofthe
TiantaiÔMountainschoolÕ(
),tobeenshrinedalongwiththe
lineofabbots.
Thesetwopatriarchswereconsideredresponsible
forformulatingandsystematizingTiantaidoctrineandpractice,
andtheirstatureinTiantaiwasroughlyanalogoustothatof
BodhidharmaandBaizhanginChan.Thereisalsosomeindication
thatallninepatriarchsmayhavebeenincludedinthepatriarch
hallsofsomemonasteries.
Inanycase,theproceduresforthe
annualmemorialservicesforZhiyi,Zhanran,andtheformer
abbotsasdetailedinTiantaimonasticcodesarelargelyidenticalto
thoseusedatChanestablishments.Andthesamesituationholds
forVinayamonasteries(
),wherethelineofabbotsshared
theportraithallswiththeninepatriarchsintheVinayalineageof
Daoxuan(d.667).
Webelievethattheorganizationalprinciples
manifestinthesehalls,whichallowedthelineofabbotstobe
splicedontotheearlypatriarchalline,canbetracedtothe
dominanceandpervasiveinßuenceofChanintheSongperiod.
Thedevelopmentdescribedabove,inwhichthepatriarchhall
cametorepresentthelineageofabbotsratherthanthelineageof
anyparticularindividual,
hadatremendousimpactonthe
productionanduseofBuddhistportraitureinChina.Most
importantly,itnecessitatedtheproductionofmemorialportraits
ofabbotswhiletheywerestillaliveÐapracticescarcelyknownin
theTangperiod.Songmonasticrulesstipulatedthatasanabbot
approacheddeath,hisportraitwastobepainted,sinceaportraitof
thedeceasedwasnecessaryfortheupcomingfuneralrites(see
below).Moreover,oncetheriteswereover,theportraitwasneeded
forthepatriarchhallandforannualmemorialservices.Song
biographicalchroniclesconÞrmthatportraitswereindeedproduced
justpriortoor,ifneedbe,soonafteranabbotÕsdeath.Butas
particularlyprominentmonksbecameincreasinglymobile,moving
fromoneabbacytoanother,itwasnolongerpracticaltowaituntil
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
deathapproachedtohavesuchaportraitdrawn;eachmonasteryat
whichanabbotservedrequiredhisportraitforitsportraithall,
themonastery,andthesucceedingformerabbots.Whilethiswas
clearlyacommonlayoutinChanpublicmonasteries,thereisalso
evidenceattestingtotheuseofalternativegroupings,particularly
withinprivateÔdisciple-lineageÕcloisters(
jiayitudiyuan
),the
abbaciesofwhichwerepasseddownfrommastertodisciple.We
writteninverticalcolumnsalignedinsequencefromrighttoleft,
andsuchisthecasewiththeinscriptionsontheportraitsofthe
second,fourth,andsixthpatriarchs.However,thearrangementof
columnsisreversedontheportraitsoftheÞrst,third,andÞfth
patriarchs,andmustbereadfromlefttoright.Thisreversalwas
wereerectedandtherubbingsweretobehung.
depictionofthesixpatriarchsseatedoncurvilinearchairs,inmuch
thesamemannerastheportraitsofSongabbotsthatarthistorians
.ThesixeulogiesbrushedbyXijian,likethose
foundontheaforementionedinkrubbings,allconsistofshort
biographiesderivedlargelyfromthe
Jingdechuandenglu
.These
portraitsadheretothesameconventionsof
asdothe
Onceagain,allthepatriarchsintheodd-numberedgenerations,
beginningonscroll#3withBodhidharma(1),Sengcan(3),Hongren
(5),Nanyue(7),andBaizhang(9),aredepictedfacingproperright,
whilethepatriarchsintheeven-numberedgenerations,beginning
onscroll#5withHuike(2),Daoxin(4),Huineng(6),Mazu(8),and
Huangbo(10),aredepictedfacingproperleft,suchthatallthe
depictedpatriarchsareshownturnedtowardthecentre.Aswith
monasteriesinwhichabbotswereappointedÔfromoutsideÕ.The
JapanesemonasteriesfoundedbyMuso
Sosekiandhisdisciples
withAshikagapatronagewereÔdisciple-lineagecloistersÕ(
toteiin
),inwhichtheabbacywaspassedfrommastertodisciple
inMuso
Õsline.
Sinceallofthesucceedinggenerationsofabbotsat
theDaifukudenHo
jiwereinMuso
andShunÕokuÕslineage,the
lineofpatriarchsenshrinedinthefounderÕshallwouldhave
representedthespiritualancestryofallsubsequentDaifukuden
sho
jiabbots.
Thefuneralritesforadeceasedabbotwerecentrednotsomuch
onhislifelesscorpseasonhisportrait.Thisportraitwastypically
producedshortlypriorto,orimmediatelyfollowing,theabbotÕs
death,sometimesattheabbotÕsownbehest.Oneoftheearliest
descriptionsofthefuneralritesforaChanabbotcanbefoundin
Chanyuanqinggui
of1103,thesinglemostinßuentialSong
Chanmonasticcode:
Whenthreedayshavepassed[followingthedeathofthe
abbot]putthebodyinthecasketfollowingthesame
procedureasthatusedfor[ordinary]deceasedmonks.When
representthespiritofthedeceasedabbot,butalso,insomesense,
toembodyit.Moreover,theritualproceduressuggestthatthe
spiritofthedeceasedcontinuedtooccupythepostofabbotand
continuedtoresideintheabbotÕsquarters,untilsuchtimethata
newabbotcouldbeinstalled.Onlythenwouldhisspiritjointhe
ranksofformerabbotsenshrinedinthepatriarchhall.
ThedescriptionoffuneralritesfoundintheSongandYuan
monasticcodeslargelyconformstothegeneralpatternofChinese
funeralpractices(withthenotableexceptionthatintheBuddhist
casecremationwascommon).Numerousaccountsofnon-Buddhist
ChinesefuneralsconÞrmtheimportantplaceoccupiedbythe
portraitashometothesoulofthedeceasedfromthemomentthat
instancescompelledtodothefaceoverandoveragain,until
hesucceedsinconvincingthemthatthelikenessisperfect.
(DeGroot1982:1.113)
Aswesawabove,Buddhistmaterialsgiveclearindicationthatthe
portraitofthedeceasedabbotwasindeedintendedtofunctionasa
dwellingplaceforhissoulor
.TheportraitoccupiestheabbotÕs
ceremonialmeditationseatandreceivesofferingsofincenseand
prostrationsinthesamemannerasdidthelivingabbot.Thefuneral
ritesevenincludeaformalÔdebateÕtobeheldwiththeabbotÕsspirit:
Inthedharmahallarrangeseatsinfrontoftheportraitfor
[theceremonyof]aminorconvocationwiththespirit[ofthe
deceased].Whentheeveningbellrings,soundthedrumand
gathertheassembly.Theprocedurefor[ofÞcersof]the[east
andwest]rankstoleavetheirplaces[andcomeforward
beforetheabbottoengageindebate]followstheusual
practice[i.e.thepracticefollowedinminorconvocations
overseenbyalivingabbot].
CHANPORTRAITUREINMEDIEVALCHINA
Thefuneralportraitisthenfunctionallyequivalenttotheancestral
Theexplicitpurposeoftheofferings,asstatedintheversesfor
thededicationofmerit,wastoÔraisetheenlightenedspirittoa
moreexaltedstatusÕ(
.112.24a).ThesocialstatusoftheChan
patriarchswasamatterofrealconcerntolivingmembersofthe
Chanlineage,foritwastheprestigeofthemythologicallineage
thataffordedthemtheirprivilegedpositionintheBuddhist
monasticinstitutionatlarge.Theexaltedstatustowhichthe
versesrefer,however,wasnotstatusinthisworld,butintherealm
oftheancestralspiritsÐthatvastcelestialbureaucracyinwhich
everyfamilyhopedtoplaceitsmembers.AsShouduanstressed,
themonasterycouldnotbeexpectedtoprospershoulditfailinits
obligationtonurturetheancestralspiritswholookedafterthe
monasteryÕsinterests.
Oneotheruseofapatriarchalportrait,speciÞcallyaportraitof
Bodhidharma,ismentionedinmonasticcodesinconjunctionwith
theceremonyknownasÔenteringthe[abbotÕs]roomÕ(
rushi
).Inthis
formalproceduretheabbotÕsdiscipleswouldcomebeforehimone
soughttotestthefortitudeandinsightoftheirstudents.Wedonot
Theportrayed:Ancestorsdeadandalive
Abriefwordisinorderconcerningthesubjectsoftheportraits
underconsiderationhere.On
lythosewhoreceiveddharma
transmission(
chuanfa
),andtherebyenteredtheextendeddharma
ÔfamilyÕtracingitselfbacktoS
kyamuniBuddha,wereconsidered
propercandidatesforformalcommemorativeportraits.Doctrinally
ceremony,wouldascendanornatethrone(theÔhighseatÕor
seatÕ)installedonanaltarinthecentreofthedharmahall.
Afterreceivingobeisanceandofferingsfromthecommunity,the
abbotdeliveredashortandhighlymanneredsermonwhichwas
meanttosignifythespontaneousdiscourseofanawakened
Buddha.
ThesigniÞcanceofthisrite,inwhichtheabbotascended
analtarfunctionallyhomologoustothealtaroccupiedbya
Buddhaicon,wasunambiguous:theabbotwasrenderedthe
spiritualequalofaTatha
TheidentiÞcationofabbotandBuddhaismadeexplicitinthe
earliestChanmonasticcode,the
Chanmenguishi
,whichclaims
thatthecentralBuddhaiconintheBuddhahallÐthefocalpointof
ChineseBuddhistmonasticritualÐwasreplacedinTangChan
monasteriesbythelivingpersonoftheabbot,therebyobviatingthe
eulogieswerecollectedandincludedattheendofanabbotÕs
discourserecordandweresinglyorcollectivelyprefacedwitha
briefcolophonidentifyingtheportraitsubjectandtheownerofthe
portrait.Thousandsofsucheulogiesandcolophonssurvivetothe
presentday,providinguswithaninvaluablesourceforthestudyof
medievalBuddhistportraiture.
Oneoftheearliestextantdiscourserecordstopreserveportrait
inscriptionsisthatofYangqiFanghui(992Ð1049).
Inthe
appendixtoYangqiÕsdiscourserecordweÞndfoureulogies
recordedundertheheadingÔautographportraiteulogiesÕ(
,inscribedbyYangqionportraitsofhimself.
TheÞrst
eulogymighttentativelyberenderedasfollows:
AmouthlikeabeggarÕsopensack;
Anoselikeashitladleinthegarden!
Thisgentlemantroubledhimself,applyinghistalented
.1995:47.666b15Ð17).WewillexplorethesigniÞcanceofsuch
knownposthumouslyasHongzhi(1091Ð1157).Thistextcontains
hundredsofsuchinscriptionsspanningseveralfascicles,andthe
sheervolumeofeulogiesgivesusanideaoftherangeofpersons
whoacquiredautographedportraits.AmongthoseidentiÞedinthe
recordweÞndmentionofmonasticofÞcers,miscellaneousChan
monks,laypersons,andvisitorstothemonasteriesinwhich
Hongzhiservedasabbot.Butthemoststrikingfeatureofthis
recordisthefactthatsomanyportraitsweredistributedsomewhat
anonymously.Thereismention,forexample,ofacongregationof
laypostulantswhomadeaportraitoftheabbotandrequestedan
enmasse
Andinfascicle7ofthetextovereighty
possession.Whenarequestforaportraitdedicationcamefroma
generouslaypatron,orapoliticallypowerfulofÞcial,itwouldhave
beendifÞcultfortheabbotofamajorChanmonasterytorefuse.
ConÞrmationofthishypothesiscanbefoundinthediscourse
recordofXiyanLiaohui(1198Ð1262).The
Zanfozu
(Ôeulogiesfor
BuddhasandpatriarchsÕ)sectionofthistextcontainsaverseeulogy
prefacedwiththefollowingcolophon:Ô[Eulogyforsomeonewho]
donatedmoneyfortheconstructionofapavilionintheShendu
templeÕ(
ShaqianjiangeShendusi
Appendedtothecolophonwe
Þndthefollowingnote:Ô[He]drewaportraitofthemasterand
inmedievalChina.Aswehaveseen,theabbotofamajorChan
establishmentintheSongwasveneratedasthelivingdescendant
andlocalrepresentativeofasacredlineageofenlightened
patriarchswhotracedtheirancestrybacktotheBuddha.Indeed,
theabbotÕsprimaryreligiousdutyconsistedinrituallyenactingthe
roleofBuddha.GiventheinstitutionalandritualcontextofSong
Chanmonasticism,theportraitofarespectedabbotwas,forall
intentsandpurposes,asacredicon,tobeveneratedasonewould
animageoftheBuddha.TheaddedpresenceofthemasterÕs
writteninscriptionwouldhaveestablishedaneffectiveconnection
symbolsoftransmissionseemtofeelitunnecessarytociteany
corroboratingevidencewhatsoever.Occasionally,the
(ÔinheritancecertiÞcateÕ)chapterofthe
Sho
bythe
JapanesemonkDo
genKigen(1200Ð1253)iscitedinsupportof
theclaim.
aportraitfromhisteacheratthetimehewasmadelineageheir.
Uponcloserexamination,however,thestorypresentsanumberof
problems,notleastofwhichisthefactthattheportraitpresented
toTouzi,andtheChanlineagerepresentedbytheportrait,were
notthoseofhisteacherFushanFayuan(991Ð1067),whobelonged
tothelineofLinjiYixuan(d.866).Rather,theportraitwasthatof
DayangJingxuan(943Ð1027),dharmaheirofLiangshanYuan-
guan(d.u.)intheCaodongline.Moreover,acarefulanalysisofthe
textualrecordrevealsthattheportraitofDayangitselfdidnotplay
avitalroleinsymbolizingtransmission:thatfunctionwasserved
byDayangÕsleathershoesandceremonialrobes.
Infact,thisistheonlyinstanceknowntousinwhichanabbotÕs
portraitappearsinthecontextofdharmatransmissioninChina.
Thisisnotsurprising,foraportraitofanabbotdidnotreadilylend
itselftosignifyingdharmain
heritance.Wehaveseenthat
autographedportraitsofChanabbotscouldbereadilyobtained
offerings,asameansofestablishingandmaintainingapersonal
relationshipwithalivingBuddha,and,followinganabbotÕsdeath,
asarestingplaceforhisspirit.ButtextsbelongingtotheChan
ÔtransmissionoftheßameÕandÔdiscourserecordÕgenresalso
engageinaratherÔChannishÕdeconstructionofthememorial
portrait.Thisdeconstructionplayswiththeliteralmeaningofone
commontermforaportraitinBuddhistmaterialsÐ
orÔtruthÕ.
wasideallyaÞlialrepresentationorlikenessofthe
departed,soasbesttoserveasasubstitutefortheabbotÕsphysical
presence.Chananecdotesplayfullymockthenotionthatthe
ortruthoftheabbotcouldbelocatedintheabbotÕsÔformÕor
physicalbody.HowthencouldÔtruthÕ(whichisidentiÞedinChan
sourceswith
orÔBuddhanatureÕ)besuccessfullycapturedin
aportrait?Chantextsillustratetheirpointbypunningonthe
meaningof
Notethetropeatworkhere:portraitsofabbotswereusually
producedaroundthetimeofdeathtobeusedinthefuneralrites.If
theportraitisagoodone,Zhaozhouseemstobesaying,thenit
mustbetimeforhimtodie;butifitfailstorenderhistrueimage
(asfailitmust),thenitistheportraitratherthanthebodyofthe
abbotthatshouldbecremated.
Thereisevenanaccountofanabbotengaginginantinomian
anticswhileworshippingtheportraitofhisownmasterduringhis
masterÕsfuneral.The
YangqiFanghuiheshanghoulu
,mentioned
aboveasoneoftheearliesttextstorecordaself-eulogy,containsthe
followinganecdotewhichsupposedlytookplaceduringthefuneral
ofYanggiÕsteacher,Ziming(ShishuangChuyuan,986Ð1039):
saidtobeseeingtheBuddhaÕ.
104
Theseexamplescouldbe
multipliedindeÞnitely:passagesthatcautionagainstidentifying
ÔawakeningÕwithanythingexternaltooneselfaretobefound
inscripturesassociatedwithvirtuallyeverymajorBuddhist
tradition.
Thus,whentheChanabbotissuesachallengetohisdisciplesto
producea
,toÔrenderhistruthÕ,theyareplacedinatypical
bind.HisÔrealformÕ,beingformless,cannotbecaptured
inanysortofpainting.Atruerepresentationordepictionofthe
Tospeakofaportraitisnotaportrait(or:thetruththatis
spokenisuntrue);tospeakofresemblanceisnotresemblance.
.2001:48.116c14)
Thisisbutasmallsampling;thegameisrepeated
adnauseam
theliterature.Andwhiletheterm
dingxiang
appearsless
frequently,ittooisusedinananalogousmanner.WeÞndthe
masterZhongfengMingben(1263Ð1323),tocitebutoneexample,
beginningaself-eulogywithareferencetothe
wujiandingxiang
ÔOnedoesnotusecolour[indepicting]theinvisible
dingxiang
whatneedistheretohangup[theportrait]wheneverythingis
[already]fullymanifest?Õ
Thisarticleisapreliminaryreportofourongoingresearchand
oddswiththeweightofscholarlyopiniononthesubject.Readers
unfamiliarwiththisliterature,however,maywellwonderatthe
polemictoneinwhichwecastourthesis,andourrepeated
emphasisonwhatappeartobestraightforwardstatementsoffact.
Itmaybehelpfulbywayofconclusion,therefore,tomentionsome
ofthewaysinwhichourÞndingscontrovertvariouswidelyheld
andoft-repeatednotionsconcerningthenatureofChanandZen
abbotportraiture.
Wehavefound,foronething,thattheterm
dingxiang
chinzo
inmedievalChineseBuddhismwasnotreservedforportraitsof
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
monksintheChanlineagealonebutwasusedtorefertoTiantai
andLu
portraitsaswell.Thisraisesdoubtsaboutthemannerin
whicharthistorianshavecircumscribedthe
genreasone
comprisingonlyportraitsofChanandZenmasters.
Itsimilarly
callsintoquestioninterpretationsthatsee
chinzo
astheembodi-
mentofreligiousthemesandvaluesostensiblyuniquetotheChan
tradition.ItwouldnowbedifÞcult,forexample,tosustainthe
notionthattheÔrealismÕofaso-called
chinzo
wasareßectionofthe
intimate(Ômind-to-mindÕaswellasÔface-to-faceÕ)relationship
directioninwhichtheportraitsubjectisfacingisindicativeof
thecorollaryclaimsthattheÔintimacyÕoftheverseinscription,
theÔnaturalismÕoftheportrait,oranyotherstylisticfeatureofthe
chinzo
genreÕcanbederivedfromtheirfunctionastransmission
certiÞcates.
Ourthesishasalreadygivenrisetocertainmisunderstandings,
nodoubtfosteredinpartbythepolemicalnatureofour
presentation.Atnopointhaveweevermeanttoimplythata
portraitproducedforthefuneralritesofaprominentabbotwould
havebeenvisuallyindistinguishablefromthehundredsofportraits
ofthesamepersoncommissionedbyhisfollowers,orproduced
fordistributionbytravellingevangelists.Moreover,virtuallyall
portraitsofeminentChanabbotswereproducedatthebehestof
followersandpatrons,anditseemsreasonabletoassumethatthe
timeandartisticskillinvestedinaspeciÞcportraitwouldreßectthe
statusandÞnancialmeansofthepersoncommissioningtheicon.
SufÞceittosaythatahostofquestionsremainconcerningthe
disparityinfeaturesofportraitsproducedspeciÞcallyforformal
monasticritualsversusportraitsproducedfortheediÞcationof
individualpatrons.Whilethesmallnumberofsurvivingportraits
linkingmagicallythepossessorofthe
chinso
tothemainstream
entailedtheactivewillandparticipationofthemaster,as
illustratedinliterallyhundredsofpopularChanandZen
anecdotes.InSongChina,inheritancecertiÞcateswereunderstood
toprovidedocumentaryevidencethatonehadindeedcomeÔmind
tomindÕwithalivingmaster,but,asDo
gencorrectlyobserved,
inscribedportraitsdidnot,forthesimplereasonthatabbotstook
virtuallynoinitiativeintheproductionordistributionoftheirown
portraits.Torepeat,portraitswereinvariablycommissionedby
studentsandlayfollowersofanabbot,followingwhichtheabbot
oftengrudginglyacquiescedt
oarequestforhisautograph
inscription.Likethecollectionanddistributionofrelicsafterthe
cremationofanenlightenedmaster,theproductionanddistribution
ofthemasterÕsportraitswasataskoverseenbyhisfollowers.Of
course,unliketraditionalrelics,commemorativeportraitscouldbe
producedinanticipationofthephysicaldeathoftheabbotÐwe
mightsaytheywereproducedincommemorationofthespiritual
ÔdeathÕ(enlightenment)byvirtueofwhichalivingmasterwas
TheoriginsofBuddhistportraitureinChinacanbetracedto
mortuarypracticesassociatedwithcharismaticBuddhistsaintsin
theSixDynastiesperiod.WiththeevolutionofBuddhistportrait
toNationalMuseum1981:5;Kyo
toNationalMuseum1983:8,
50,259Ð260;andHamada1986.Onthemanysurvivingportraitsof
ZhongfengMingben,seeTanaka1953:136,145;Fonteinand
Hickman1970:40Ð42;Kyo
toNationalMuseum1983:9,52Ð55,
260Ð261;Ide1986:49Ð51;andIde1989.
2SeeKawakamiandYoshikawa1979:166.SigniÞcant
arestill
comingtolightinJapan;seeIde1986forarecentlydiscoveredYuan
portraitsubsequentlydesignatedanImportantCulturalProperty.
3Thenotionthat
werepresentedtodisciplestocertifydharma
transmissionisrepeatedbyvirtuallyeveryscholarwhohasever
writtenonthesubject.See,forexample,Brinker1987a:147;Brinker
1987b:47;FonteinandHickman1970:xxxÐxxxi;Hamada1986:
13Ð15;Iijima1957:17;KawakamiandYoshikawa1979:165Ð166;
Komazawadaigaku1985:871c;Matsushita,O
ta,andTanaka1967:
199Ð200;andStanley-Baker1984:113.
situation,makesadvancesandgainsthegirlÕsaffections(92.21a;see
Chen1961:15).Thistaleof
,whileclearlyapocryphal,
doesattesttotheChinesefascinationwiththepowerofhumanimages
Ðparticularlyimagesrenderedbyamasterportraitist.(On
envou
tement
orÔimagemagicÕseeespeciallyFreedberg1989:263Ð270.)GuKaizhiis
alsosaidtohaveplacedparticularemphasisuponÔdottingtheeyesÕ,
marksinthe
Sanzangfashu
,whereitislistedasÔthemarkoftheßeshy
topknotonthetopoftheheadÕ(
dingchengroujixiang
).SeeHurvitz
1908:353Ð361.
.220:6.968c18Ð19;seealsoLamotte1949Ð80:3.1346Ð1347.
.1582:30.568a.Somesourcesunderstandtheeightysecondary
marksassimplyanelaborationofthethirty-twomajormarks,which
mightservetorectifywhatappearstobeacontradictioninthevariant
Shedachenglun
.1594),section10.5(seethe
editionbyNagao,1987:336).
23SeeDurt1967forafulldiscussion.
.2059:50.356b3ff;cf.Zu
rcher1972:1.199,andKobayashi1954:13.
.2060:50.488c10Ð12(ourthankstoKoichiShinoharaforthis
reference).AportraitofTanyankeptatBotitempleinHezhongseems
tohavebeenthefocusofTanyanworshiplongafterTanyanÕsdeath.
Accordingtothe
Songgaosengzhuan
biographyofWenzhao,
WenzhaoworshippedTanyanÕsimageatthetimewhenhetookhis
monasticvows.AsaresultofWenzhaoÕsworshipoftheimage,Tanyan
appearedandspoketoWenzhaoinadream(
.2061:50.868c10Ð22;
cf.thediscussioninKobayashi1954:19Ð20).
26Ontherelationshipbetweentheworshipofeminentmonks,the
preservationoftheirremains,andtheevolutionofBuddhistportraiture,
seeespeciallyKosugi1934and1937,andKobayashi1954.
27AccordingtotheGilgit
dinvinaya
,ÔHewhowould
worshipaliving[Buddha],andhewhowouldworshiponewhohas
enteredÞnalNirva
a,havingmadetheirmindsequallydevoutÐ
betweenthemthereisnodistinctionofmeritÕ(Schopen1987:
28OnthemiraculousincorruptibilityofthebodiesofdeceasedChan
mastersseeespeciallyKosugi1937;Demie
ville1965;Faure1991:
148Ð169;Faure1992;andSharf1992.Thefollowingdiscussionof
BuddhistmummiesandlacquerstatuaryistakenlargelyfromSharf
29Tsukamoto1974:180;translation(withsomechanges)fromHurvitz
1956:62Ð63.The
Shilaozhi
isahistoryofBuddhismandDaoism
duringtheNorthernWei(386Ð534),andcomprisesfascicle114ofthe
Weishu
byWeiShou;cf.HuishiÕsbiographiesinfascicle10ofthe
Gaosengzhuan
.2059:50.392b3Ðc7),andfascicle19ofthe
.2122:53.428a25Ðb1),whereheiscalledTanshi.
30SeethebiographyofTanyouinfascicle11ofthe
Gaosengzhuan
.2059:50.395c26Ð396b16,andthebiographyofHuiminginthe
sametext,400b4Ð15;seealsothediscussioninKobayashi1954:15.
31Fascicle9ofthe
Songgaosengzhuan
furtherrecordsthatFaqinÕshair
hadgrownsolongthatitcoveredhisface(
.2061;50.764b14Ð
765a11).SeealsoKosugi1937:109Ð110,wherehediscussestheseand
othercasesof
scontainingefÞgies.
.2059:50.395c5Ð25;cf.thediscussioninKobayashi1954:14.
33TheearliestrecordedcasesofBuddhistmummiÞcationinChina
involvethebodiesofeminentChanmasterswhosebodieswere
naturallyresistanttodecayafterdeath.ThemummiÞcationwas
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
apparentlyintendedtopreserveforposteritythemiracleoftheir
ÔterminalincorruptibilityÕ.SeethefulldiscussioninSharf1992.
34Foranextendedanalysisofthehistoryofthismummyandthe
monasterythathousesit,seeFaure1992:165Ð180.Anaccountofa
relativelyrecentvisittothetemplecanbefoundinBlofeld1972:86Ð92.
.2076:51.236c11Ð16;translation(withsomechanges)from
Yampolsky1967:86Ð87.
36AphotographofthemummyisreproducedinDemie
ville1965:416,
aswellasinNeedham1974:Þg.1330.Theidentityofthemummyis
uncertain,butitmostprobablyisnotthatofthehistoricalHuineng.
ScholarsnowbelievethatmuchofthebiographyofHuinengislater
legendandthathewasrelativelyunknowninhisownday.The
appearanceofthemummyandthevariouslegendssurroundingitwere
nodoubtattemptstocapitalizeuponthelaterfameofthemaster.
37OnEastAsiandry-lacquersculpture,seeWarner1936:10;Warner
1964:55Ð60;andNishikawaandSano1982:48Ð49.Although
numerousdry-lacquerimagesproducedinmedievalJapanhave
survivedtomoderntimes,worksfromTangChinaarerare.The
42Ontheevolutionoftheportraithallfrommemorial
s,seethe
discussioninKosugi1934and1937:111.
43SeeReischauer1955:64,67,71,72Ð73,217,220Ð221,224,228,230,
265,and294.
44SeetheeditedtextandJapanesetranslationinYanagida1971:
45TheDunhuangtextinquestionisShenhuiÕs
Putidamonanzongding
shifeilun
,editedbyHuShi(seeHuShi1968:289).Ouranalysis
demandsthattheexpression
qizutang
bereadasÔhallofseven
patriarchsÕratherthanÔhalloftheseventhpatriarchÕ.Suchareadingis
justiÞedbythelogicofShenhuiÕscritique:ShenhuicriticizedPujifor
extollingShenxiuasthepatriarchofthesixthgeneration.Accordingly,
qizu
meantÔseventhpatriarchÕitwouldnecessarilybereferringto
Faru.Butthisisunlikely,asFaruÕsbiographyisplacedsixthinthe
Chuanfabaoji
,andShenxiuÕsisseventh.Inanycase,thecruxof
ShenhuiÕsattackisthattheNorthernlineageallowed
two
patriarchsto
occupythesixthgeneration,withoutpositingaseventh.Alsonotethat,
accordingtoPujiÕsepitaph,hisfollowerscalledPujihimselftheÔseventh
patriarchÕ,ratherthaneitherShenxiuorFaru(McRae1986:65Ð66).
epitaphandtoestablishtheShaolinMonasteryastheancientand
legitimatehomeofsaidlineage.DuFeiÕsalterationofthetextconsisted
ofaddinganintroduction,apostscript,andabiographyofShenxiu,all
ofwhichwerecarefullywordedsoastoplaceShenxiuonanequal
footingwithFaruandtoendorseShenxiuastheheirtoHongrenÕs
lineageafterFarudied.DuFeiwentasfarashecouldtoaltertheÔUr
textÕofthe
Chuanfabaoji
soastosupporttheclaimsofShenxiuÕs
followers,giventheconstraintsimposedbytheavailabilityofthe
pre-existingrecord(s)ofFaruÕslineage.
48JohnJorgensenarguesthatShenhuiÕscriticismentailedaconceptionof
patriarchallineagebasedonthemodelofimperialsuccession:inthe
caseoftheimperialclan,therecanbeonlyonelegitimateheir(i.e.one
reigningmonarch)pergeneration(Jorgensen1987).Accordingto
Jorgensen,ininsistingupontheprincipleofoneheirpergeneration,
ShenhuisoughttoestablishanÔimperiallineageÕforSouthernChan
andtosimultaneouslyadvancehisowncredentialsascurrentlineage-
T.GRIFFITHFOULKANDROBERTH.SHARF
holder(p.104).ThesuggestionthattheprincipleofaunilinearChan
patriarchalsuccessionoriginatedwithShenhuiis,however,highly
debatable.Theprinciplemaywellhavebeenadvancedbythedisciples
ofFaru,onlytobeappropriatedbyShenhuiinhisattempttoneutralize
themachinationsofShenxiuÕsfollowers.
49SeeZongmiÕs
Yuanjuejingdashuchao
59Thisprefaceispreservedinthe
BaiyunShouduanchanshiyulu
(ÔThediscourserecordofChanMasterBaiyunShouduanÕ),appended
tosermonshegavewhileabbotoftheGanmingChanCloistersituated
onMt.Longmen.
60Seethereproductioninthe
Zengakudaijiten
3:12Ð13.The
jissatsuzu
comprisesseventy-twoillustrationsinall,including
monasticgroundplans,buildings,furnishings,ceremonies,andso
on.Theextanttextdatestothemid-Muromachiperiod,butitismost
abbacyofTo
82Theoccasionalportraiteulogyisinfactfoundindiscourserecords
attributedtoTangmasters.AJapaneseeditionoftherecordof
DongshanLiangjie(807Ð869),forexample,containsasingleentry
undertheheadingÔportraiteulogyÕ(
),forwhichtheÞrstten
charactersofthetwenty-characterinscriptionareillegible(
Liangjiechanshiyulu
.118.458b).Note,however,thatthisversion
ofthe
Dongshanlu
isfoundinalateJapanesework,the
diversegroup(
.122-292aÐb).Theselistsaretypicalofmost
orÔself-eulogyÕsectionsfoundinChandiscourserecords.
91Seethe
DahuiPujuechanshiyulu
.1998:47.860b22ff.
92See
.2001:48.103a4.
93Adescriptionofhisdutiescanbefoundinfascicle5ofthe
,Kagamishima
104FromtheBodhirucitranslation,
.671:16.516b.
105Seethe
Dafodingrulaimiyinxiuzhengliaoyizhupusawanxing
shoulengyanjing
:ÔIwholeheartedlytakerefugeintheSu
Kingoftheinvisible
Õ.(
.945:19.105c24).
106See,forexample,the
Congronglu
.2004:48.282b12Ð13;andthe
PuanYinxiaochanshiyulu
Brinker,Helmut.1987a.
ZenintheArtofPainting
.TranslatedbyGeorge
Campbell,LondonandNewYork:Arkana.FirstpublishedinGerman
ZeninderKunstdesMalens
.Berne,Mu
nchen:OttoWilhelmBarth
Verlag,1985.
Brinker,Helmut.1987b.ÔBody,RelicandImageinZenBuddhistPortraitureÕ.
Kokusaiko
ryu
bijutsushikenkyu
kai,dairokkaikokusaishinpojiumuÐ
sho
,pp.46Ð61.Kyoto:Kokusaiko
ryu
bijutsushikenkyu
kai.
Bush,Susan,andHsio-yenShih,eds.1985.
EarlyChineseTextson
.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.
Cahill,James.1961.ÔTheSixLawsandHowtoReadThemÕ.
4,pp.372Ð381.
ChenShih-hsiang.1961.
BiographyofKuKÕai-chih
.ChineseDynastic
HistoriesTranslationsno.2.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.
Collcutt,Martin.1981.
FiveMountains:TheRinzaiZenMonastic
InstitutioninMedievalJapan
.Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.
Conze,Edward,trans.1975.
ThePerfectionofWisdominEightThousand
LinesanditsVerseSummary
.Bolinas.Ca:FourSeasonsFoundation.
Firstprinting1973.
ville,Paul.1965.ÔMomiesdÕExtre
JournaldesSavants,
troisie
mecentenaire
,pp.144Ð170.Reprintedin
ChoixdÕe
.Leiden:Brill1972,pp.407Ð432.
Durt,Hubert,
IdeSeinosuke.1989.ÔChu
honjisanzo
omegutteÕ.
Bijutsukenkyu
343,pp.99Ð116.
IijimaIsamu.1957.ÔChinzo
nitsuiteÕ.
80,pp.17Ð20.
IshidaJu
shi,ed.1972.
Kamakurabukkyo
seiritsunokenkyu
:Shunjo
.Kyoto:Ho
.1987.ÔShokiTendaishu
nosho
kokuÐEnchinzo
ochu
niÕ.In
Kokusaiko
bijutsushikenkyu
kai,dairokkaikokusai
shinpojiumuÐsho
,pp.22Ð28.Kyoto:Kokusaiko
JanYu
n-hua.1966.
AChronicleofBuddhisminChina,581Ð960A.D
Lee,ShermanE.,MichaelR.Cunningham,andJamesT.Ulak.1983.
ReßectionsofRealityinJapaneseArt
.Cleveland:TheCleveland
MuseumofArtinCooperationwithIndianaUniversityPress.
Loewe,Michael.1979.
WaystoParadise:TheChineseQuestfor
.London:GeorgeAllen&Unwin.
McRae,JohnRobert.1986.
TheNorthernSchoolandtheFormationof
EarlyChÕanBuddhism
.KurodaInstituteStudiesinEastAsian
Buddhism3.Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiÔiPress.
Mather,RichardB.,trans.1976.
Shih-shuoHsin-yu
:ANewAccountof
TalesoftheWorld
byLiuI-chÕingwithcommentarybyLiuChu
Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.
MatsushitaRyu
taHirotaro
andTanakaSeidai.1967.
Zenderato
.GenshokuNihonnobijutsu10.Tokyo:Sho
MatsuuraHidemitsu.1976.
kojitsusonzo
nokenkyu
.Tokyo:
MochizukiShinko
,ed.1933Ð36.
MochizukiBukkyo
.10vols.
Tokyo:Sekaiseitenkanko
ri,Hisashi.1977.
JapanesePortraitSculpture
.JapaneseArtsLibrary
no.2.TranslatedandadaptedbyW.ChieIshibashi.Tokyo:Kodansha
InternationalLtd.andShibundo.OriginallypublishedinJapanese
underthetitle
,vol.10intheseriesNihonnobijutsu.
Tokyo:Shibundo
,1967.
Schopen,Gregory.1987.ÔBurial
AdSanctos
andthePhysicalPresence
oftheBuddhainEarlyIndianBuddhism:AStudyintheArcheologyof
17,pp.193Ð225.
SekiguchiShindai.1967.
Darumanokenkyu
.Tokyo:Iwanamishoten.
Sharf,RobertH.1989.ÔBeingBuddha:APerformativeApproachtoChÕan
Wayman,Alex.1957.ÔContributionsRegardingtheThirty-twoChar-
acteristicsoftheGreatPersonÕ.In
LiebenthalFestschrift
,KshitisRoy,
ATANGDYNASTYCHAN
MUMMY[
]ANDA
MODERNCASEOF
FURTASACRA
Investigatingthecontestedbonesof
ShitouXiqian
JamesRobson
Shitou’sroadisaslipperyone.
MazuDaoyi
Introductoryremarks
Inrecentyearsmanylong-deadmummieshavecomebacktolifein
scholarshiponChineseandJapaneseBuddhism.
Thisnewinterest
hasdevelopeddespitetheexcoriationofthepracticeofvenerating
mummiedcorpsesofBuddhistmonksamongmodernscholarsof
Buddhismandthetendency,asGregorySchopenphrasesit,for
scholarsofreligiontobemorecomfortabledealing‘withideas
thanwiththings’,especiallywhenthose‘things’aredeadthings.
HolmesWelch,forexample,oncewrotethat‘meatbodies’
roushen
)weretheproductofsuperstitionandthat‘thewhole
conceptofthemeatbodywouldseemtoexemplifytheantithesisof
thedoctrineofimpermanence...asinotherreligions,thesaintly
andthesordidseemtobeinextricable’.
Throughaseriesof
foundationalarticles,BernardFaureandRobertSharfhavestated
thecasewellforwhyBuddhistmummieshavebeenperceivedas
theyhaveplayedwithinmedievalChanBuddhism.
Whileother
evidencefurthersuggeststhatthevenerationofmummied
BuddhistmonksmayhavebeenattheheartofBuddhismsince
itsarrivalinChina,andisapracticefoundinawiderangeof
Buddhistlineages,itwaswithintheChanschoolthattechniques
fordeliberatelyaidingthemummicationprocessbywrappingthe
corpseinlacquer-soakedhempclothweredeveloped.
Inthewordsthatfollow,however,Iwillnotbeaddressingthe
studyofthehistoryofChineseBuddhistmummiesasawhole,but
ratherwilllimitmyinquiriestotheeventssurroundingthealleged
TheallegedtheftofShitou’s[Stonehead]mummy
NodoubtformostreadersthemummythatIwillbediscussing
hereisknownbestfromthepictureandshortdiscussioninBernard
Faure’sbook
continuedtodrinkit.Afteronemonthhewaspuriedand
thin,hisfacehadaredcomplexion,andhistwoeyeshada
brightglow.Thenonedaywhilehewassittingupright
recitingasu
trahepassedaway.Afterseveralmonthshad
passed,notonlyhadtheChanmonkseshbodynotdecayed,
butitwasstillfulloffragrantaromas.
regardtothelargequantitiesofmedicinalsouphedrank,itis
impossibleforustoknowjustwhatkindsofherbswereused.
Whilethisstoryiscertainlylledwithamplemysteryandintrigue,
allgoodingredientsforanattentioncatchingstory,manyofits
mainelements,whichalsoappearedinotherpapersalloverChina,
Wuji’seshbodywasmovedtoasafelocationoutsidethe
templebyatravellingJapanesedentist.Atrsthekeptthe
withintheTaiwaneseBuddhistworlddoesnotbelievethisaccount
andbelievesthatthisgreatChinesemaster’smummywasmoved
outofthecountrybytheJapaneseduringthenaldaysoftheWar
ofResistancewithJapan(1944).’
Althoughthisstatementwas
pureconjecture,itmayhavebeenprecipitatedbythefactthat
duringtheWarofResistancesomemonksdidfearthatfamous
ChinesemummieswouldbestolenbytheJapanese.Weknowfor
examplefromXuyun’sautobiographythatin1944,‘Inanticipation
tellthewholestoryaboutthismummyandforfurtherinformation
weneedtoturntomaterialsandresearchthatwasonlyavailablein
RescuingMasterWuji’smummyandShitou’srebirth
inJapan
ThemostinformedresearchonthehistoryoftheWujimummyin
JapanwasthatprovidedinpublicationsbytheJapaneseMummies
ResearchGroup(Nihonmiirakenkyu
pu),whichhadbeen
formedfollowingthediscoveryofacollectionofmummied
BuddhistmonksinYamagataprefectureinthe1950s.
reportsaboutthediscoveryoftheYamagatamummieswere
publishedbyHoriIchiro
andAndo
seiandlaterledtothe
publicationoftwoimportantvolumestitled
Nihonmiirano
,whichwaspublishedin1969,and
Nihon
gokumiira
nokenkyu
,publishedin1993.Althoughthemanybooks
andarticlesthatwerepublishedaboutmummiesinJapanwere
focusedonthenewlydiscoveredBuddhistmummiesfrom
Yamagataprefecture,oneofthemummiesthattheydiscovered
intheireldworkstoodoutfromalltheothers.Thiswasthe
mummyofMasterWuji.InthefollowingsectionIwillpresentthe
historicalmaterialasitisrepresentedintherecordsoftheJapanese
MummiesResearchGroupregardingthediscoveryofMaster
Wuji’smummyandhowitcametobeassociatedwithShitou
On28August1960MatsumotoAkira,oneofthemembersof
theJapaneseMummiesResearchGroup,wenttoMt.Sekito
AoumeCity,afterlearninginthecourseofhisresearchthatthere
wasreportedtobeamummythere.UponarrivalatMt.Sekito
foundatempleinruinsandasmalloldhousethatlookedlikeit
wasabandoned.Afterlocatingtheoccupant,acertainHirano
Zen’ichiro
,heaskedaboutthemummyandwasledtothecorner
ofadarkroomwherehewasshownalargewoodenbox.Whenthe
lidwaspriedoffandtheinsidewasilluminedwithasmalllantern
hecouldidentifythenapeoftheneck,thewhiteglowofvertebrae
andcouldtellthattherightearwasdamaged.Sinceitwastoo
precarioustomovethemummyhimself,MatsumotoAkira
MummyResearchGroup.Eventually,in1961,SeibuDepartment
storeagreedtonanceitandthemummywaspurchasedand
movedfromMt.Sekito
toProfessorAndo
sei’sresearchroomat
WasedaUniversityinTokyo.Afteraprovisionalexamination,
however,thegroupwassurprisedtondthatthismummywas
signicantlydifferentfromtheJapanesemummiestheyhad
encounteredintheirresearch.Ando
andanotherspecialist,
ProfessorOgataTamotsu,concludedthatthismummyhadbeen
wrappedinlacquersoakedhempcloth,aprocessusedonChinese
mummiessincetheTangDynasty,butwasnotatechniquethatwas
usedinJapan.
Theobviousquestionthatalltheresearchersasked
was:IfthisisinfactaChinesemummy,howdiditmakeitswayto
Giventhattherewerenosurvivingtextualrecordsregardingthe
mummy’sprovenanceattheMt.Sekito
Temple,MatsumotoAkira
madeapublicappealinaSundayeditionofthe
MainichiDaily
anyinformationrelatingtothismummy.Shortlythereafterthe
MummyResearchGroupwascontactedbyacertainNishinaSakae
whoclaimedthattwentyyearsearlierhehadknownaboutthis
mummy.
Mr.SakaerelatedthefollowingaccounttotheMummy
ResearchGroup.AccordingtowhatMr.Sakaecouldremember
fromthattime,themummyinquestionwasknowntobethatof
MasterWuji,whichtheyallunderstoodtobetheposthumous
namegiventotheTangDynastyChanmasterShitouXiqian,who
wassaidtohavebeenoriginallyenshrinedatatempleinHunan
provinceinChina.DuringtheChineseRevolution(1911)a
JapanesedentistnamedYamazakiTakeshiwastravellingaround
HunanwithhissonandsawthatthetempleenshriningShitou’s
sponsoredanumberofspecialviewings[
]ofthemummy
throughoutJapan.
Later,responsibilitiesforadministrationofthe
‘AssociationfortheReverenceofMaster[Wuji]’weretakenover
byHiranoandYamazakiandtheymovedthemummytoAoume,
wheretheMt.Sekito
Templewaseventuallyfounded.
In1930,afterbeinggivenlandbythelocalgovernment,Hirano
ZenkichibuiltalargetempleatMt.Sekito
tohousethemummy
andreceiveworshippers,butthelocalgovernmenthopedthatthe
presenceofShitou’smummyinthistemplewouldhelptoattract
Foratimeitseemsthattheplanworkedandthemummy
attractedlargecrowdsandworshippersockedtoMt.Sekito
issignicanttonote,however,thattheMt.Sekito
Templewas
originallyfoundedasaShugendo
templeandnotasaZentemple,
aswouldbeexpectedifthemummywasconsideredtobethatof
thewell-knownChan/ZenpatriarchShitouXiqian.
Itseems,
therefore,thatatthetimeofthefoundingoftheMt.Sekito
Temple
themummywasstillonlyknownasthatofacertainMasterWuji
Figure1
The‘LivingBuddha’MasterWujiondisplayattheTaisho
Exhibitionin1916.[Photographer:unknown]
JAMESROBSON
Shitou.DuringWorldWarIItheMt.Sekito
Templewasconverted
intoanarmyhospitalandsubsequentlyfellintoruins,nevertobe
revived.Luckily,themummysurvivedthistumultuousperiodand
remainedinaboxinanearbyhouseuntilitwaseventually
discoveredbyMatsumotoAkirain1960,whichwerecounted
thesameresearchreportpublishedin1969,MatsumotoAkira
pointedoutthatthe
SongBiographiesofEminentMonks
Songgaosengzhuan
]doesnotmentionShitouhavingbeenmummied.
Inthefaceofthatnegativeevidence,however,MatsumotoAkira
merelysuggestedthatperhapsotherlatersourcesrecordedthefacts
thatShitouhadstudiedwithHuinengwhosemummytheyhadalso
publishedreportsaboutanditmighthavebeenexpectedthata
closedisciplewouldalsohavebeenmummied.MatsumotoAkira
wasneverthelesscompelledtoasktwosignicantquestionsthathe
unfortunatelyneverpursued.Heasked,‘IfitisnotShitou’s
mummy,thenwhoseisit?AndifitisnotShitou’smummythen
howdiditcometobeassociatedwithShitou?’Itis,however,
preciselythosequestionsthatdeservefurtherconsiderationand
willbethesubjectofthenextsection.
AsitbecameknowntothepublicthatShitou’smummywasin
JapanatalaboratoryinNigata,So
Zenleaderscontactedthe
MummyResearchGrouptoexpresstheirconcern.
Giventhat
ShitouwasconsideredanancestoroftheSo
lineageandthathis
doctrinalpoemthe
Cantongqi
Sando
]isstillchanted
everymorninginSo
Zentemples,theseleadersconsideredit
inappropriatetohavesucharareandveneratedthingashis
mummytuckedawayinaresearchlab.In1975,afteraseriesof
negotiations,Wuji’smummywasmovedonelasttimeand
enshrinedatSo
jiji,aSo
ZenmonasteryinYokohama.
movementofthemummytoSo
jijiwasthesubjectofanarticlein
the18thJune1975
Mainichi
newspaper,thatmentionsthata
ceremonytoenshrinethemummywasheldatSo
jijiwhichwas
attendedbyover300monksandlayfollowers,andwasnodoubt
whatinspiredthearticlethatwaspublishedinTaiwan.
Uptothe
presentdaytheallegedmummyofShitouXiqianhasremainedat
jijiandisnotopenlydisplayedtovisitors,butcanbeviewed
withspecialpermission.Indeed,asopposedtothemanypublic
viewingsthatweregivenofthemummyearlierinthecenturyby
the‘AssociationfortheReverenceofMaster[Wuji]’andlaterat
theSeibuDepartmentstoreinTokyoaspartofa‘ZenExhibition’
zenten
],afterthepublicenshrinementofShitouatSo
jiji,itseems
Shitou’sbones?
WhenIrstheardallegationsaboutthetheftofShitou’smummyI
wasquitesurprised,notbythefactthatithadbeenstolen(relics
arealwaysonthemove),butsinceintheresearchIhaddoneon
ShitouandthehistoryofBuddhismatMt.Nanyue(thelocationof
Shitou’sNantaiTemple)therewasneveranyhintinthehistorical
sourcesthatShitouhadbeenmummied.Giventhewidespread
fameandrenownofotherTangmonkswhowereabletoself-
mummifyorweremummiedbytheirdisciples,ifthereeverwasa
mummyofShitouwewouldcertainlyhavesomeevidenceforitin
contemporarytextualsources.Therefore,letuspausefora
momenttoseewhatsomeofthosetextssayaboutShitou’sdeath
andtheposthumousfateofhisbones.
AfterlivingmostofhislifeinasmallhutbehindtheSouthern
TerraceTempleonMt.Nanyue,inthesixthyearoftheZhenyuan
reignperiod(790)Shitoupassedawayattheageof91.
Allofthe
historicalsourcesagreeonthefactthatafterhisdeathShitouwas
giventheposthumousnameWujiDashiandthatastu
pa,calledthe
Jianxiangta,wasbuiltonMt.NanyuenotfarfromtheSouthern
TerraceTemple.
AnentryontheChuningsiinthe
Collected
HighlightsoftheSouthernMarchmount
[NanyueZongshengji],
hasasinglelinethatreads,‘Thisisthesitewherethebonesofthe
ChanMasterfromtheSouthernTerraceareburied.’
Further-
more,noneofthewordinginanyoftheseentriesissuggestiveof
thefactthatShitouwasmummied,noristhereanysensethathis
Therefore,inordertore-identifythisrelic,the‘OriginofMaster
Wuji’documentbeginswithalongsectiontitled‘TheOriginofthe
LivingBuddha’thattracesthe‘history’ofthemummyandsituates
itwithinitsnewroleinJapan.
Giventhehistoricalimportanceofthisdocument,itremains
uncleartomewhyMatsumotoAkiragavemethisdocumentbut
neverreferredtoitinanyofhisownresearchintotheprovenance
oftheWujimummy.Onesuspectssometypeofsubterfugeor
persistentdesiretoupholdtheassociationwithShitou,eveninthe
faceofgrowingdoubts.Inmyview,itispreciselythisdocument
thatholdsthekeytohelpingunravelalltheinconsistenciesand
problemsofinterpretationsurroundingthestoriesoftheWuji
mummy.
Uponrstlookingoverthesectiontitled‘TheOriginofthe
LivingBuddha’,Iwasstruckbythefactthattheplacenames
mentionedwerealllocatedinFujianprovince,andnotinHunan
provinceasonewouldsuspectifthemummyofShitouwasindeed
takenfromMt.Nanyue.Midwaythroughthetextthecircum-
stancesregardingthemovementofthemummyareintroduced.
Thestoryasitispresentedhereismuchliketheaccountthatwas
givenorallybyNishinaSakae.Welearn,forexample,thatthe
dentistYamazakiTakeshiandhissonencounteredanarmyfaction
thatwascausingtroubleinsouthernChinaandthatduringthis
Oneofthekeypassagesin‘TheOriginoftheLivingBuddha’that
signicantlyaltersShitou’sstandardbiographyisthefollowing.
[He]wasthefounderoftheSouthernLineage[ofChan],a
veryfamousmonkwhohadbecomeadharmaheirofthe
veneratedsixthpatriarch,Huineng.Hecametobuildthe
NansiatHengshan,whereatonetimenumerousmonkscame
Xinghua,livedattheGoldenImmortalCloister[Jinxianyuan].He
wasaspecialistofthe
LotusSu
.Afterastonesuddenlyissued
forthaspring,theAuspiciousSpringChapel[Ruiquanan]was
AlthoughthispassagementionsamonknamedWuji
thereisnomentionofhismummicationand,unlessthenamewas
changedlater,thetemple’snamedidnotmatchreferencestothe
LivingBuddhaPalaceorHall[HuofogongorHuofotang]
mentionedinthe‘OriginofMasterWuji’document.Despitethese
reservations,theterm‘GoldenImmortal’mightstillbeaveiled
referencetoamummiedsaint.
Inthesecondcase,Iwaslookingfortemplenamesthatmatched
thoseinthe‘OriginofMasterWuji’document.Inthesectionon
‘TemplesandAbbeys’[
siguan
]inthe
Fujiantongzhi
thereisan
entryforaLivingBuddhaChapel[Huofoan],thatislocatedata
placecalledSouthernTerrace[Nantai].
Theentryalsomentions
that‘intheendoftheMingdynasty[1368–1644]therewasa
monksurnamedChen,whowasanativeofFuching.Afterhe
attainednirvanahis“eshbody”[
]didnotcorruptandup
totodayitisstillveneratedinsidethischapel.’
Basedonthename
ofthetempleandthefactthatithousedamummy,itappearedthat
understandthecircumstancesofShitou’smummyinZhangzhou,in
Fujianprovince,theChineseBuddhistCultureAssociationsenta
researchgroupinNovemberof1995toZhangzhou.Withthehelp
ofthelocalscholarsandauthoritiesthisgroupwasabletoconsult
mummybegantospreadthroughoutthearea.Onestriking
Figure2
ImageofMasterWujibeingveneratedinsidethehomeofa
devoteeinFujian,1997.[Photographer:HuangDaide]
ATANGDYNASTYCHANMUMMY
Giventheusualsensitivitytotakingpicturesofculticobjects,
whichisusuallythoughttodiminishtheir‘efcacy’[
ling
],itis
strikingtonotethatintheabsenceoftheactual‘livingBuddha’the
faithfulinZhangzhoustillseemtoaccesshispresencethroughthe
massproducedphotographswhichhavethemselvesbeenturnedinto
icons.
Thesenewsitesofvenerationareanextraordinaryglimpse
intothebirthofanewcult(orrenewedcult)inmodernChina,and
whichhasbecomeevenmorewidespreadsinceitsrstemergence
morethanayearandahalfago.Thetheftofthemummyhasserved
tofocusnewattentiononitandperhapsevenincreaseditsperceived
powerandefcacy.Indeed,asPatrickGearyhasshown,sacred
theftsoftenhelpedtocreateanevenstrongersenseofsacralityinthe
objectsthatwerestolen.Thisispreciselywhathappenedinthe
allegedtheftofHuineng’sheadbyKoreanmonksandmorerecently
inthecaseoftheWujimummy,whichhasliterallytakenonanew
lifeandimportanceforthelocalcommunityinChina.
Thecreationofnewsitesofcultandpilgrimagecentresthrough
thepossessionofrelics,or‘livingBuddhas’,isnothingnew.
ThroughoutChinesehistoryoneofthesignicantcorollariesof
possessinga‘livingBuddha’,wasthecreationofanewsacredsite
wheresymboliccapitalcouldbetransmutedintomaterialgainfor
thatarea.
Again,inthecaseofmedievalrelics,Gearynotesthat
theirpresence‘wasessentialtotheprosperityofthemonasteries
andchurchesthatlookedtothemforidentityandprotection,just
astheywereessentialtothepilgrimswhosoughtfromthesaints
thehelpthattheycouldobtainnowhereelse’.
Inasimilarway
‘livingBuddhas’wereprimaryagentsinthemakingorenrichingof
Chinesereligiouscentres.Weknow,forexample,thatCaoxiwas
utterlytransformedbythepresenceofHuineng’smummy.
Sharfhasalsoaverredthat‘thebodiesofBuddhistmasterswho
resisteddecayafterdeathwereaccordinglyworshippedas
reservoirsofmeritoriouskarmaandspiritualpower.Thepossession
ofa“eshicon”couldtransformanout-of-the-waytempleintoa
thrivingpilgrimagecentre,attractingBuddhistfaithfulfromall
quartersofChina.’
IftheGuanghuaMonastery,wherethemummy
oftheEsotericBuddhistmasterShanwuwei(S
ubhakarasim
ha)was
housed,isatallrepresentativethenweknowthathismummydid
infactattractalargeanddedicatedfollowing.Itissaidthat‘the
richpeopleinLo-yanggaveincompetition
ch’an-po
,cleaning
understandmoreclearlywhatisatstakeinthenegotiationsover
theWujimummyandwhyithasbecomesuchaboneofcontention
‘unfortunatelyforthehistorian,
translationes
arebynomeans
uniformintheiraccuracyorveracity’.
scienticaccountsidentifyingtheWujimummyasShitouthatledit
tobeultimatelyhousedintheheadSo
Zentemple,So
jiji,where
ithasremainedtothepresentday.
WhiletheinvestigationsintotheidentityoftheWujimummy
werebeingpursuedbyscholars,inotherquartersprogresswas
beingmadefortheeventualrepatriationofthemummytoChina.
thebodywouldgo.
AsforthefateoftheWujimummy,while
thewindsofhistoricalevidenceareclearlyblowingtowards
ZhangzhouinFujian,thiscaseisfurthercomplicatedbythefact
thatthetwosidesdonotagreeontheidenticationofthemummy,
andinorderforittoberepatriatedtoZhangzhoutheauthoritiesat
IndianBuddhism:AStudyintheArchaeologyofReligions’,in
17,(1987),pp.193–225.Ontheexcoriationofmummiesand
relicvenerationingeneralwithinBuddhiststudiesseeBernardFaure,
Appaduraied.,
TheSocialLifeofThings:CommoditiesinCultural
(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1986),
pp.64–94.InusingthistermIhopetofollowKopytoffinemphasizing
that‘biographiesofthingscanmakesalientwhatmightotherwise
remainobscure.Forexample,insituationsofculturalcontact,theycan
showwhatanthropologistshavesooftenstressed:thatwhatis
signicantabouttheadoptionofalienobects–asofalienideas–isnot
thefactthattheyareadopted,butthewaytheyareculturallyredened
andputtouse’[p.67].Fortheuseofthisapproachondiscussingthe
changingidentitiesofIndianimagesseeRichardH.Davis,
Livesof
IndianImages
seeKosugi(1937,p.424),Sharf,‘TheIdolizationofEnlightenment’,
andFoulkandSharf,‘OntheRitualUseofCh’anPortraiturein
MedievalChina’.
20ThefollowingaccountisbasedonthestatementsbyNishinaSakaein
Nihonnomiirabutsu
,p.223andin
gokumiirashinko
,p.210.
38PatrickGeary,
FurtaSacra
,p.6.
Musaidaishinoyurai
.Ihaveaddedtheemphasisinthisquotation.
.50.764a.15seealso
Jingdechuandenglu
.51.309b–c.The
gaosengzhuan
isalsotheprovenanceforthenamethatwasgivento
thetemplesiteinJapan,Sekito
zan,whichisnotfoundinothersources.
Fujiantongzhi
[1868–1861edition],juan98.21,sectiontitled‘Tang
43GoldenImmortal’[Jinxian]canrefertoaBuddha,seeNakamura
godaijiten
,p.248.Iwouldstillholdoutthe
possibilitythattheterm‘jinxian’referredtoamummysinceinother
sourcesweoftenndreferencestotheBuddhaasa‘GoldenPerson’
jinren]andrelicsreferredtoas‘GoldenBones’[
],see,for
example,MimiYiengpruksawan,‘TheHouseofGold:Fujiwara
Kiyohara’sKonjikido
’,in
MonumentaNipponica
,vol.49,no.1,1993,
p.50.
44Intranslatingthecharacter‘an’as‘chapel’Iamfollowingtheleadof
TimothyBrook,whojustiesthischoiceinhiswork
Prayingfor
UniversityPress,1983),andfortheinventionoftraditioninJapan,see
StephenVlastos,
TheMirrorofModernity:InventedTraditionsof
ModernJapan
(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1998).
FILLINGTHEZENSHU
Notesonthe
CarlBielefeldt
AccordingtoZentradition,theriseofZeninJapanispurelya
familyaffair.Itrepresentstheinheritanceofthetreasuryofthe
essenceoftrueBuddhism(
sho
genzo
)fromthelineageofits
ChinesepatriarchsbytheirchosensuccessorsinJapan.Thisinheri-
tancetookplaceduringJapan’sKamakuraperiod(1185–1333),
whenJapanesemonksmadepilgrimagestothemainlandChan
patriarchs,andChineseChanmissionariesfromtheSongandYuan
broughttheirteachingstotheislands.Atthetime,theChanfamily
wasdistributedintotwomajorhouses,theLinjiandCaodong;
hence,theJapaneseZenschoolwassimilarlydividedintoRinzai
andSo
accordingtothehouseafliationofitsfoundingpatriarchs.
ToEisai(1141–1215)goesthehonouroffoundingtheformer;to
gen(1200–1253),thelatter.Otherswouldfollow,bringing
variouslineageswithinthesetwohouses,buttheeventwasalways
thesame:adirecttransmissionoftheessenceofBuddhismfromthe
mindoftheChinesemastertothemindoftheJapanesestudent.The
masterspokeof
chan
,thestudentof
zen
,butsincetheysharedthe
sameessencebeyondwords,therewasnodifferencebetweenthem.
Whateverwemaysayaboutthereligiousvisionbehindthis
traditionofZen’stransmissiontoJapan,ashistoriographyitleaves
uswithmanyquestions.Itignores,ofcourse,ahostofbroadand
complexissuesintheinterpretationbothofcross-culturalunder-
Historiansregularlytellus,forexample,thattheZenteachings
werebroughttoJapanfromtheTangalreadyintheNaraperiod
(710–794)bytheChinesemonkDaoxuan(Do
sen,702–760)and
againatthestartoftheHeianperiod(794–1185)bythefounderof
JapaneseTendai,Saicho
(767–822).TheytellusthatthelateHeian
tradition,historiansregularlydescribethisprocessasthedevelop-
mentfrom‘jointpractice’(
)to‘pure’(
)Zen.The
formerrepresentsatransitionalphase,typicallyidentiedwiththe
reectsratherapeculiarlyJapanesenotionofaBuddhistschool(as
Ithinkmanymightnowwanttoargue),thenthepurication
involvedhereturnsouttobeaprocessofJapanization,andthe
oddityfollowsthatitwasfromDaolongandhiscompatriotsthat
theJapaneselearnedhowtodothis.
OurpictureofthetransmissionoftheZenschooltothe
Kamakuraisthuslinkedtoourunderstandingofwhatitmeantto
beaBuddhistschool,or
,intheKamakura.Herewemustbe
supportedbythecourt;sinceancienttimes,itisunheardoffor
someonetotrytostartanewone.WheredoesGenku
reectsthedisparateaudiencestowhich,andthevariousgenres
masterswouldhaveit;fortheuseofthisunusualnewgenrefrom
theSong,quiteunlikethestandardscripturesofJapanese
Buddhism,waslikelyintendedinparttodisplaytheChinese
authorityforZenanddistinguishitasaseparatetradition.Indeed
thepreferenceforthisesotericandhighlystylizedgenre,withits
xedformsoflectureandpoetryanditsobscurelinguisticplayand
literaryallusion,isprobablyoneoftheprimecriteriabywhichwe
particularlyrichresourcesforunderstandingearlyZenapologetics;
buttheKamakuraZenauthorsalsoworkedinothergenresthat
giveusgreaterinsightintohowtheyarguedforthenewmovement.
Such,forexample,arethelessformal‘dharmatalks’(
),often
writteninthevernacularandcomposed(atleastostensibly)for
individualbelievers,aswellasvariousgenresofmoreformal
essay,typicallydirectedtowardabroaderpublic.Among
thelatterisanunusualdocumentfromthisperiodinagenrethatis
explicitlyconcernedwithdeningtheorthodoxschoolsof
JapaneseBuddhism.Sincethetextisnotavailableinthestandard
Buddhistcollectionsandhasusuallyreceivedonlypassingnoticein
thesecondaryliterature,Ithoughtitworthwhiletoofferherea
beings.Theseteachings,84,000innumber,havetraditionallybeen
consolidatedineightschools(
),butitisnotourplace,weare
told,todebatethetruthorfalsityoftheirdoctrines.Rather,thereis
greatmeritinseeingthevirtuesofanother’sschool,whilehell
awaitsthosewhoslanderanother’sdharma.Oneshouldsimply
enterthegate(
)towhichhiskarmahasledhim,andhewill
surelybeliberated[1–2].
Theauthorgoesontosaythathehas
beenmovedtogivearoughaccountoftheessentialsofthevarious
schoolsbytherequestofacertainlaymanwhohadachievedsome
understandingof‘therealmarkoftheonevehicle’(
thatis,ofthecentraldoctrineoftheTendaischool[2].
Theintroductioncloseswithapreviewoftheschoolstobe
Thegatesleadingbeyondthelimitsofbirthanddeathinto
thecityofnirva
textcalls,followingstandardTendaiusage,thepreceptsas
‘contemplationofthemind’(
kanjin
This,then,isthecomplexstructureofBuddhistsystemswithin
which–andatthesametimeoveragainstwhich–the
seekstolocatetheBuddhaMind.Wemightdisplaythisstructure
CARLBIELEFELDT
OurinteresthereisespeciallyintheMeditationGate,butbefore
wesummarizethenalsectionofthetext,weneedatleastto
glanceathowthe
Jisshu
dealswiththeschoolsofits
TeachingGate,whichincludeafterallthemajorestablishedforms
ofBuddhismintheKamakura.Ingeneral,theauthorgivesless
attentiontothedoctrinesspecictohiseightTeachingschools
thantothedistinguishingcharacteristicsbywhichhedividesthem
intohiscategories.Hefocusesespeciallyontwothemes:
andfunctions(
),ofthemind[14].Putinsomewhatdifferent
terms,drawnfromtheteachingsofthe
Shimoheyanlun
Theteachingofthesixconsciousnesses(
rokushiki
)iscalled
theLesserVehicle;theteachingoftheeightconsciousnessesis
calledtheProvisionalGreaterVehicle;theteachingofthe
nineconsciousnessesiscalledtheRealGreaterVehicle;the
teachingofthetenconsciousnessesiscalledtheOneGreater
dependentorigination;Zenspeaksonlyof‘rootdelusion’(
[20].ThoseintheTeachingschoolsstruggletofollowtheantidotal
path(
taijido
),butthoseinZenoutsidetheteachingsjustrevealthe
oneknowing(
kenicchi
)andenjoytheblissofthedharma
).Theyarebeyondthestages(
)ofthepathandthethree
disciplines(
)ofrule,meditation,andwisdom;theyare
richlyendowedwiththevirtuesofwisdomanderadicationof
afictionswithoutsevering[thekles
a]orverifying[thedharma]
dansho
)[20].Othersrushinvaintopractisesuchmeditationsas
‘thethreecontemplationsinonemind’(
isshinsangan
)or‘no
thought,freefromwords’(
rigonmunen
),buttheinnateknowing
oftheseparatetransmissionoutsidetheteachingsiesbeyond‘the
incomprehensiblecrossroads’(
fushigishiku
)andplaysalone
among‘theheavensbeyondimages’(
geshiten
).Pointingdirectly
attheperson’smind,itmountstheheadofVairocana[21].
ThisexaltedspotontheheadofVairocanaisofcoursenone
otherthanourownnaturalstate;henceincontrasttothoseschools
thatclaimtobeaccessibleonlytothehighesttypeofpractitioner,
Zenisforeveryman.
Thespiritualcapacity(
)[towhichtheBuddhaMindschool
isdirected]istheinnateknowingbeyondthethreedisciplines
shutsusangakusho
);sinceallbeingspossessthisknowing,
whoisnotofthiscapacity?Itsdharma(
)[i.e.spiritual
wascorrectinattributingtheworktoSho
ichiKokushi.Inhis
descriptionofthedocumentpublishedsoonafteritsappearancein
print,ShimajiDaito
suggestssixreasonsforacceptingthe
attribution:(1)itsteachingsreectthesortof‘originalenlight-
enment’(
hongaku
)thoughtprominentinthetraditionsofboth
HieiandKo
yaduringEnni’sday;(2)itaccordswithwhatweknow
ofEnni’sowncareer–hisearlytraininginandlifelongteachingof
suspect–ChineseimporttoanindependentJapaneseinstitution,
patronizedbybothcourtandshogunateandacknowledgedasa
legitimatereligioustraditionbytheJapaneseBuddhistcommunity.
EnniwasbornlessthanadecadeaftertheopeningofEisai’s
missiontoestablishtheChineseChanpracticesinJapan.Weare
accustomedtothinkingofearlyKamakurasectarianstruggle
largelyintermsoftheBuddhistestablishment’ssuppressionof
nen’sexclusivepracticeofthe
nenbutsu
,butitshouldbe
perhapsalsohispoliticalskills),Do
genwasforcedtoabandonhis
ministryinthecapitalandwithdrawtothemountainsofEchizen,
wherehewouldliveouthisremainingyearswithafewdisciplesin
relativeisolationfromthecentresofsecularandecclesiastical
power.HisdeparturefromKyotoin1243coincidedwiththe
arrivalinthecapitalofEnni.
capitalvinaya’(
)movement,hewasparticularly
drawntotheesotericteachings;buthewasalsoascholarof
exoterictextsandissaidtohavepassedawayintoningthenameof
bha.Apassageinhisbiography,the
ningyo
describestherangeofhisreligion:‘Inhisperson(
)hewasin
theRitsuhouse;hisdoctrine(
)layinSanron;inhisverication
)hetastedShingon;ashisreward(
)heenjoyedreposeand
sustenance(
an’yo
)[i.e.thePureLand].’
alsostudiedatTo
fukuji,buthisexperiencethereseems
tohavebeenratherlessgratifyingthanthatofhisteacher
Ryo
hen.Thesamepassageinhisb
iographycontrastsEnsho
esteemforShingonwithhisdisdainforZen.Zen,hereports,is
unjustiablyproudofitself.Ifwecomparetheschoolsof
Buddhismtothesonsofafamily,thenShingonrepresentsthe
directheir(
chakushi
);theZendharma(
)amountstono
morethanthethirdson,noteventhesecond.WhereasinShingon
notice,inabriefafterwordremarkingontheirrecentpopularity
andaddingafewlinesofdescription.
Sinceancienttimes,Gyo
nensays,onlyeightschoolshavebeen
recognizedinJapan;butbeyondthese,theZenschoolandJo
havealsoourished.Foritspart,theZenschoolholdsthat‘from
thebeginningnotonethingexists.Originallythereareno
fundamentally,theyarebodhi’.Thisschoolclaimstodifferfromall
others,withtheirmyriaddistinctionsandvariousdiscussions:
‘WhenBodhidharmacamefromtheWest,[hetaught]without
relianceonthewrittenword,pointingdirectlyattheperson’s
mind,[thatonemight]seehisnatureandbecomeabuddha.’
nenthenrecordstheZenlegendofthemind-to-mind
transmissionofthetwenty-eightIndianandsixChinesepatriarchs,
theearlydivisionintoNorthernandSouthernbranches,andthe
subsequentdevelopmentofthelatterintotheFiveHouses.The
NorthernschoolwastransmittedtoJapanfromtheTangbythe
VinayaMasterDaoxuanandagainbytheGreatMasterDengyo
underthename‘BuddhaMindschool’.Now,hesays,Zenhasalso
beentransmittedfromtheSongandspreadwidelythroughoutthe
country.
nenthenaddsabriefpassageonJo
doandcloses
withapostscriptdisclaiminganyrankingofrelativeprofundity
implicitintheorderinwhichhehaspresentedtheschools.This
remarkwasnodoubtforthebenetofhisTendaireaders,whom
hecouldexpecttotakeumbragefromthefactthathisorder
happenstofollowKu
kai’snotoriousarrangementinhis
andelsewhere,accordingtowhichGyo
nen’sownKegon
schooloccurs‘above’Tendai,astheschooljust‘below’the
ultimateteachingofShingon.
Althoughthe
Hasshu
wastoprovehismostpopularwork,
nenwentoninhiscareertoproduceothersurveytexts.In
1311,towardtheendofhislife,hecomposedthe
Sangokubuppo
,inwhichhetracesthehistoriesoftheBuddhistschools
inIndia,ChinaandJapan.HerehissectionontheZenschoolin
ChinaopensbycallingattentiontothelongBuddhisttraditionof
meditation.TheseveralChinese
BiographiesofEminentMonks
),henotes,allrecordtheworthieswhopractiseddhya
sectiononJapanexcludesZen(andPureLand)fromthemain
discussionandtreatstheminabriefnoteattheend.
nenalsocomposedashorterworkinthesamesurveygenre,
Naitenjinrosho
,forwhichwehavenocleardate.Hereagain,
hetreatsZenandPureLandasthetwoexceptionstotheeight
schoolsthathecallsthe‘standard’(
).Whereasinthe
hepointstoZenasanecumenicalpracticeofmeditation,here
hetakesitsolelyasaseparatetraditionandinfactcontrastsits
historicalcharacterwiththatofJo
do.The‘singlegateoftheZen
dharma’(
zenpo
ichimon
),hesays,wasoriginallytransmittedto
JapanintheTenpyo
era(729–749)butdidnotspread;itisnow
beingre-transmittedbyJapanesepilgrimsandChinesemission-
aries.ThePureLandfaith,ontheotherhand,hasbeencommonto
alltheschools,withoutaseparateschoolofitsown;butrecently
Sho
ninhasestablishedasingleschool(
)withitsown
lineageofmasters(
InhissectionontheZen
school,Gyo
nenagainemphasizesitshistoricaltradition.Aftera
briefpassageontheteachings(whichaddsanewlistofstockZen
expressions),heexpandshistreatmentofthepatriarchallegend,
drawingonthewritingsofZongmitodiscusstheearlylineagesof
theNorthernandSouthernschoolsandcitingtheSonghistorical
Chuanfazhengzongji
onthehistoryoftheFiveHouses.
AmongthosewhohaverecentlyspreadtheSouthernschool
teachingsinJapan,hesinglesoutthenamesofEisai,Shinchi
Kakushin(1207–1298),andEnni.
theauthorofthemonumentalhistoryofJapaneseBuddhism,the
shakusho
,headoptshereGyo
nen’shistoricalstyleand
relegatesZenandPureLandtoanalsectiononthetwo‘other’
schoolsnotincludedintheofcialeight.Histreatmentofthe
Busshinschoolemphasizesitshistoricaltradition.
LikeGyo
nen’s
Sangokubuppo
,thissectionopensby
identifyingtheBuddhaMindschoolwithmeditation:itiscalled
the‘Zenschool’becauseitdoesnotdependonwordsbutattains
thedharmasolelythroughthepracticeof
.Thetextthen
proceedstogiveabriefrecountingofthepatriarchaltraditionand
itstransmissiontoJapanduringtheNaraperiod,addingto
nen’saccountthepopularlegendthatBodhidharmahadvisited
JapanduringthereignofEmpressSuiko(r.592–628)and
transmittedthedharmatoPrinceSho
toku.AmongrecentZen
monks,ShirensinglesoutthepioneeringguresKakushin,who
receivedthedharmainChinafromWumen;Enni,whoreceivedthe
transmissionofWuzhun;andDo
gen,whosetransmissioncame
fromRujing;aswellasShiren’sillustriouscontemporaryDaito
,1282–1336),afth-generationscionofSongyuan;plus
therstSongmissionarytotheKamakura,Daolong.
Inhis
,Shirengoesoutofhiswaytodismissthe
earlyZengureNo
ninforhislackofbothChinesemasterand
Buddhistpractice.
Here,too,wemaynotenotonlythatheomits
allreferencetoNo
ninbutthatheiscarefultovalidatetheChinese
authorityforZenbyassociatingeachofhisrepresentativeJapanese
gureswithamasterfromthemainland,andtodownplaythe
potentiallyantinomianfeaturesoftheBuddhaMindteachingin
favouroftheuniversalandrelativelyinnocuouspracticeof
meditation.Still,hisbrieftreatmentofZeninthe
Hakkaiganzo
ishardlyanargumentforthelegitimacyoftheschool.Bythe
fourteenthcentury,whenShirenwaswriting,theZenmovement
begunbyNo
ninandEisaiwasoveracenturyoldandcouldboast
animpressivearrayofgovernment-supportedmonasteriesinboth
capitals.Thequestionofitslegitimacywaslargelymoot,and
ShirencouldaffordtoimitateGyo
nen’shistoricalaccountofthe
acceptedtraditionsofJapaneseBuddhism.Butformostauthorsof
theKamakuraperiod,liketheauthorofthe
,the
proliferationofnewBuddhistmovements,ofwhichHo
nen’sPure
master’sjaundicedviewofZen,weknowthathecametohave
considerableinterestinHo
nen’smovement.Indeed,afewmonths
afterwritinghis
Sangokubuppo
,hecomposedthe
mongenrusho
,inwhichhetracesthehistoryandteachingsof
thePureLandpersuasioninChinaandJapanandsurveysthe
interpretationsofseveralcontemporaneousJapaneseJo
dog-
ures.
YearsbeforeGyo
nenwasborn,Ho
nenhimselfhad
producedoneoftherstexamplesofthesurveygenrefromthis
period,asummaryaccountofthetextsandteachingsofthemajor
ChineseandJapaneseschoolsknownasthe
doshogakusho
Thislittlework,asitstitleindicates,isintendedasakindofbasic
studyguideforJo
dobelieversand,assuch,focusesonthe
relationshipofeachschooltothePureLandteachings.
IntheyearsafterGyo
nen’sdeath,asimilarsectarianconcernis
expressedinthe
Busensho
,amuchmoresubstantialsurveyby
Shiren’scontemporary,theShinPureLandgureZonkaku
(1290–1373).Thisworkopenswithalistingofthetenschools
recognizedbythe
.Allofthemaresaidtoderive
fromtheoneBuddha,andeachisagate(
)leadingtobodhi.
ThedistinctionsamongthevariousBuddhistteachingsarea
functiononlyofthevariedcapacitiesofBuddhistbelievers,and
anyonewhopractisesaccordingtotheteachingwithwhichhehas
karmicafnity(
)canattainliberation.
Thissaid,however,
Zonkakugoesontoemphasizethatthecapacitiesofordinary
believersinthenalage(
)aresuchthatthePureLand
representstheironlyappropriatechoice.
nen,whodidnotlivetoseethespreadofZen,doesnottreat
theschoolinhiswork,butZonkakutakesuptheBusshinshu
theninthofhisschools.UnlikeGyo
nen,hespendslittletimeonthe
historyofZen.Instead,heemphasizesitsfamousclaimtothe
suddenpracticeoftheBuddhaMind.Thisschool,hesays,takes
notseeinganythingatallasthepathofseeing(
kendo
;i.e.
)andnotpractisinganythingatallasthepathofpractice
shudo
;bha
vana
).Ittellsusjusttomaintainour‘original
face’(
honrainomenmoku
)andexpressour‘originallot’(
jikono
),castingasideallgoodandevil,withoutconsidering
shiryo
)anything.DespitethisseeminglyradicalpictureofZen,
ZonkakugoesontointroduceZongmi’sclassical‘sudden-gradual’
distinction,noticedbythe
Jisshu
oneissupposedtocometoanunderstandingfromasingleword,
maybesuitabletothoseofthehighestspiritualcapacity(
konno
example,ofGyo
nen’syoungercontemporaryShinga(d.u.),known
asafounderoftheso-called‘provincial’branchoftheEshin
lineage(
inakaEshin
),addsZentoRaiyu’slistoftheMaha
schoolsinhisremarksontheirrelationshipstoTendai.Shinga’s
mentionofZenattheendofhis
isverybrief,asking
ofthetheoreticalrelationshipsamongtheirfourlineages.Giventhe
withTendaiandtocelebratethefactthatallthreearerepresented,
forthersttimeinthehistoryofBuddhism,onMt.Hiei.Ofthe
Zengate,hesaysthatittransmitsthecontemplationofthe
principleoftheGreaterVehicle(
);Tendaipractisesthe
meditationandwisdomoftheExotericteachings(
ShingoncultivatesthetheoryandpracticeofEsotericism(
Despitethefactthat,inrankingthesethree,heputsTendai
third,‘beneath’ShingonandZen,AnnenremainstruetohisTendai
sectarianinstinctsbyclaimingtowardtheendofhistextthatthe
outsidetheteachings.Inonesense,suchasystemreadslikean
contemplationofthemindintermsmoreappropriatetobuddha-
hood:theoldTendaiandShingonpracticesofmeditationand
mantrawerereplacedbyparticipationintheomnipresentgloryof
Tendai,andthatZenmastersaresupposedtobegoodatadapting
themselvestotheirstudentsandpreachingwhattheydonot
Thecalltoabandonmentoftraditionalreligiouspracticein
favourofanimmediateliberationthroughfaithremindsusofthe
PureLandteachingsbeingspreadamongthelaymenofthe
Kamakura.Indeed,ifthe
Jisshu
waswrittenbyEnni(or
welcomehistoricalprecedentfortheexistenceofaZenschool
withinJapaneseBuddhism.JustastheMantraya
naclaimedby
TendaiwasseparatelyrepresentedbyitsownShingonshu
;soit
couldbeimaginedthattheTendaiDharmaschoolwassimplya
waitingtobelled,andthatthenewZenmovementwasbutthe
latter-dayinstitutionaldevelopmentofapreordainedbuthitherto
strategy,theyshareaconcerntoe
stablishthehistoricalidentity
anddistinctivecultusofaZenshu
.Inthis,theydifferfromthe
Jisshu
.Despiteitspassingreferencetothehistorical
categoriesof‘past’and‘presen
t’schools,thistextneverdevelops
anyhistoricalrationaleforthenewschools,eitherasextensions
oforinnovationsonpriorJapanesetradition;despiteitsstandard
claimstoaseparatetransmissionoftheBuddha’s‘intention’
outsidetheteachings,itnevers
eekstoxthehistoricallimitsor
institutionalimplicationsoftheZenlineage,eitherinChinaor
Japan.Similarly,despiteitsassociationoftheBuddhaMind
schoolwiththeMeditationGate,
itsteadfastlyrefusestodene
anyformofmeditationorotherritualthatmightdistinguishthe
schoolasadistinctivespiritualp
ractice.Instead,itusesthe
notionsofaseparatetransmissio
nandspecialgatealmostsolely
then,Gyo
nen’sconservativeaccountoftheeightorthodoxschools,
soappreciatedamongecumenicalBuddhistsofmodernJapanfor
itsnon-sectarianstyle,mayhavedonemoretoadvanceZen
SocialScienceResearchCouncil.
1FunaokaMakotohasbeenperhapsthemostpersistentrecentlyin
arguingfortheimportanceofthe‘pre-history’ofJapaneseZenin
understandingitsestablishmentintheKamakura;see,e.g.his
noseiritsu
(Tokyo:YoshikawaKo
bunkan1987).Eisaimadea
rstbrieftriptoChinain1168,threeyearsbeforeKakua,buthis
promulgationofZenisusuallysaidtostemfromhissecondtrip,
2GrifthFoulkhasprovidedourmostthoroughcritiqueofthe
assumptionthatChineseCh’anwasanindependentBuddhist
institution;see‘The“Ch’anSchool”anditsPlaceintheBuddhist
MonasticTradition’(Ph.D.dissertation,UniversityofMichigan,
Kamakurakyu
,ed.byKamataShigeoandTanakaHisao,
Nihonshiso
15(1971),pp.312a–b.Thetexthasrecentlybeen
translatedinRobertMorrell,
EarlyKamakuraBuddhism:AMinority
(Berkeley:AsianHumanitiesPress1987),pp.75–88.
4Itwasdiscoveredin1912attheHo
kiinonMt.Ko
yabyMurakami
andpublishedinthesameyearasanappendixtothejournal
(210[9/12],pp.1–23).Soonafteritappearedin
ShimajiDaito
wroteabriefdescriptionoftheworkinthesame
journal:‘
narabini
Hakkaiganzo
nitsuite’,
(1/13),appendixpp.1–14;myarticleowesmuchtothisearlypiece,
whichseemsnottohaveattractedmanyeyesinthealmosteightyyears
sinceitspublication.
5Thissectionofthetext,includingsomeeditorialadditionsand
correctionstothe
printing,canbefoundin
fukujishi
(1930),pp.123–126.
9AfterShimaji,
214,appendixp.12,withminorchanges.
10Thetextisslightlydamagedhere;IfollowShimaji’sreconstructionat
214,appendixp.13.
214,appendixpp.9–11.
Nihondaizo
busho
1,1:65–280.Likethe
,thetextwasdiscoveredearlyinthiscentury.
214,appendixp.10.
kaikudensho
(alsoknownasthe
daijikudensho
9:567–570;forthediscussionofAnnen,see568aand569b.Themost
QUANDL’HABITFAITLE
Thesymbolismofthe
BernardFaure
ThisdiscussionoftheBuddhistmonasticrobe[Sk.
,J.
isasupplementto‘Den’e’[‘Transmissionoftherobe’],anessay
writtenbyAnnaSeidelalmostfteenyearsago.Atthetime,Iwas
myselfworkingonadissertationonearlyChan,andthequestion
ofChanDharmatransmissionbecamethetopicofmanylively
discussionsbetweenus.
Inheressay,sheestablishedmany
overlaidsymbolicmeaning.
However,itsbasicsymbolismwasone
ofausterityandsimplicity:thewearingofa
istherstofthe
twelve(orthirteen)
,the
lika
Therobeis
oftencalled
(fromtheSanskrit
suku
,lit.‘robe
tosweepexcrement’,probablyanabbreviationfor‘robe[com-
posedoftatteredcloths,whichhavebeenused]tosweep[allkinds
ofjunk,including]excrement’).
TheBuddhisttraditionlistssix,eight,oreighteenauthorized
InIndiaasinEastAsia,theterm
,referringtothe
originalcolouroftherobe,wasappliedtothreekindsofclothes.
Theinnerrobe(J.
,fromtheSanskrit
antarva
)wasave-
stripka
yawornforworkandsleep.Theouterrobe,hanging
fromtheleftshoulder,isthe
uttara
),aseven-
stripka
yawornforordinaryactivitiessuchasritual(su
andonlyKa
yapasmiled.Thislegendwascomplementedbythat
ofthetransmissionofS
kyamuni’ska
yatoKa
yapa.Inheressay,
AnnaSeideldescribedtheideologicalelaborationthatledtothe
theoryofthe‘transmissionoftherobe’,asitfounditsclassical
formwithHezeShenhui(684–758).Inhisrelentlesseffortto
establishhimselfastheseventhChanpatriarch,Shenhuiargued
thatafterthetransmissionoftheDharmaandtherobeto
Hongren’s(601–674)discipleHuineng(d.713),theka
yawas
nolongertransmitted.Shenhuicriticizedthevalueofotherinsignia
andtheirtransmissiontomorethanoneperson;heassimilatedthe
Chanpatriarchtotheuniversalmonarch(
cakravartin
)andtothe
Buddhahimself,arguingthattherecanneverbemorethanone
patriarchintheworldatagiventime.
FromAnnaSeidel’sanalysis,itappearsthattheChantradition
sameonethathehimselfreceivedfromhismasterTiantongRujing
(1162–1227),althoughhealsoseemstobelievethattheka
yawill
eventuallybetransmittedbyKa
yapatoMaitreya.
Speakingof
thesizeoftheka
ya,Do
gencriticizesthetraditionalstoryofthe
transmissionfromMaha
yapatoMaitreya,astoldforinstance
inthe
Dazhidulun
.Accordingtothisstory,thecomingofMaitreya
marksthebeginningofanewkalpa,aperfecttime,whenthe
lifespanofmenandtheirbodilysizeareverygreat.ThusKa
wholivedatatimeofdegeneration,appearstoMaitreya’s
astonisheddisciplesasaLilliputianArhat,andtheka
yathathe
transmitscanhardlycovertwongersofMaitreya.
writes:‘Itisgenerallysaidthatthebodilysizeofmenvariesasa
functionoftheirlifespan–whichcanvaryfrom80,000yearsto
onehundredyears.Somesaythat80,000yearsandonehundred
yearsaredifferent,othersthattheyarethesame.Thelatterviewis
thatofthecorrecttransmission.Thesizeofaman’sbodyandthat
ofaBuddha’sbodydiffergreatly.Thesizeofaman’sbodycanbe
measured,thatofaBuddha’sbodyinthelastanalysiscannot.This
iswhytheka
yaoftheBuddhaKa
yapaisneithertoolongnor
toolargefortheBuddhaS
kyamunitowear,whilethatofthe
BuddhaS
kyamuniisneithertooshortnortoosmallforthe
Tatha
gataMaitreyatowear.’
Interestingly,Do
gencallsKa
yapaa
Buddha,likeS
kyamuniandMaitreya.Do
genseemstobe
(conveniently?)confusingthepastBuddhaKa
yapa,predecessor
ofS
kyamuni,withS
kyamuni’sdisciple[Maha
yapa].Ka
yapaisnolongeranepigon,anintermediary–butafull-edged
Buddha,andhistransmissionoftheka
ya,goinghandinhand
withthatoftheDharma,impliesthatheisthemasterofMaitreya.
Thus,allthepatriarchsbecomeBuddhas–notonlythefuture
Buddha.
MujakuDo
pointsouttheconfusioninChan/Zenliterature
Thisdiscrepancyextendstothephysicaldescriptionoftherobe.
InDo
gen’saccount,forinstance,itaffectsthecolouroftheka
‘TheTatha
gataalwaysworeaesh-colouredka
ya.Thisisthe
colouroftheka
ya.Theka
yatransmittedbytherstpatriarch
[Bodhidharma]wasblue-blackincolour,andmadeofcottoncloth
fromIndia.ItisnowonMountCaoxi,anditistheonethatwas
transmittedthroughtwenty-eightgenerationsofIndianpatriarchs
andvegenerationsofChinesepatriarchs.’
KeizanJo
kin(1268–1325)triestosolvethediscrepancyby
assumingthattheBuddhatransmittedseveralrobes:‘Thereare
severalotherka
yaoftheBuddha[apartfromthegolden-sleeve
robe].TherobetransmittedfromBodhidharmatoCaoxi[Hui-
neng]wasmadeofblue-blackcottoncloth(
).Whenit
cametoChina,ablueliningwasadded.Itisnowkeptinthe
mausoleumofthesixthpatriarchandisconsideredanational
ThesymbolismoftherobeinChina
ItiswiththeestablishmentofthesixthpatriarchHuineng(d.713)
thatthepatriarchalrobeacquireditsreputation.Thisstoryiswell
knownandweneednotdwellonit.Sufceittosaythatthe
Dharmarobeandthebeggingbowlofthepatriarchswerenot
simplythe‘physicalproof’oftransmission,asmostscholars
believe,butwereessentially,asAnnaSeideldemonstrated,kindsof
dynasticrelicsandtalismans.Therobeistakenusuallyasasimple
symbol,a‘tokenoftransmission’that‘expressesthefaith’,but
preciselyatoken(inFrench,
)isalreadymorethanasimple
signbecauseithasaperformativevalue,itcommits(
en-gage
)the
future.Therobe,essentiallythe‘robeofDharmatransmission’
chuanfayi
,orsimply‘Dharmarobe’,
),isthephysical
representationoftheteachingofamaster.Itissymboliconlyin
expressionofitslegitimacyinsacredobjects(
):thus,whilethe
factremainsthattheSouthernschooltriedtoturntheka
yainto
oneoftheimperialsacra.The
Lidaifabaoji
,forinstancecompares
thetransmissionoftherobetothe
ritualperformedforthe
consecrationofacakravartinking,andthusinsistsontheIndian
precedent.ButtheBuddhistinuenceisinthechoiceoftherobe
itself,whichneverappearsamongChinesetreasures.Afterthe
interruptionofthetransmissionoftherobe,theproofresidesinthe
Buddhism,ordinationaswellasDharmatransmissionincludesthe
transmissionofaka
Aswewillsee,therobeandother
‘tokens’,whichwereatrstincludedasproofsofenlightenment,
tendedtobecomeitsmagicalcause.
gen’ssymbolicelaboration
DespiteHuineng’sallegedinterruption,thetransmissionofthe
robe–alongwiththatofotherinsignia–remainedanessentialpart
oftheDharmatransmission.Wearetold,forinstance,that
DainichiNo
nin,thefounderoftheDarumashu
,receivedin1189a
portraitofBodhidharma,aportrait[
chinzo
]oftheChinesemaster
ZhuoanDeguang(1121–1203),andhisDharmarobe[
].Do
alsoreceivedvariousinsigniafromhismasterRujing(1162–1227)
–amongthemarobeofablue-blackcolour–likethatof
BodhidharmaandoftheIndianpatriarchs–transmittedsince
FuyongDaokai(1043–1118).
However,itiswithDo
genthatthe
robecametoacquireasymbolicsurplusthatwouldeventuallyand
paradoxicallyundermineitsfunctionasasignoftransmission.
InthelaterSo
tradition,severaltextsdealspecicallywiththe
TheyallderivefromtwochaptersofDo
gen’s
Sho
.2582),‘Den’e’(TransmittingtheRobe)and‘Kesakudoku’
(Meritsoftheka
Fromthetitleofthetwochapters,it
wouldseemthat‘Den’e’isconcernedprimarilywiththe
mythmakingoftherobetransmission,while‘KesaKudoku’dwells
onthemagicalpropertiesoftherobeitself.
Actually,mostofthe
materialisrepeatedverbatiminbothtexts,andithasbeen
suggestedthat‘Den’e’wasmerelyadraftfor‘Kesakudoku’.In
thesechapters,Do
genrstrecapitulatesthetransmissionofthe
robethroughthetwenty-eightIndianandsixChinesepatriarchs.
Hethenproceedstoexplainthevirtuesoftheka
ya,thecorrect
waytowearit,topreserveit,thematerialsusedtomakeit,the
variouskindsofrobes,andthetenvirtuesoftheka
genconstantlyunderscoresthatthetransmissionoftheka
meanstheonlytruetransmissionoftheDharma.Heexplicitly
comparesthetransmissionoftheDharmatotheinvestitureofa
prince,andtheka
yatotheimperialregalia.Heemphasizesthat
severalTangemperors–Zhongzong(r.683–684and705–710),
Suzong(r.756–762)andDaizong(r.762–779)–hadaskedthatitbe
senttocourtandvenerateditasadynastictreasure.Do
genalso
insistsonthefactthatthistransmissionisacharacteristicofChan:
‘CollaterallineagesdidnottransmittheBuddha’ska
ya’.
THESYMBOLISMOFTHE
deliverance.Thus,inaninte
restingrhetoricalmove,Do
collapsesthetwoindependenttraditionsregardingtheka
theVinayatradition(s)ofDaoxuan(596–667)andYijing
(635–713),dealingwiththeka
yaasmonasticcloth,andthe
Chantraditiondealingwiththeka
yaassymboloftransmission.
Bythesame‘token’,heshiftsfromtheuniqueka
yatoits
‘orthodox’replicas,attributingtothelatterallthepowersofthe
originalmodelkeptbyHuinengandhisdisciples.Fromthat
momentonward,thetransmissionhasactuallybecomea
.Itbecomesmoredifculttoargue,asDo
gendoes:‘All
thedisciplesofCaoxi’soldBuddha[Huineng]transmittedand
preservedthetraditionoftheBuddha’ska
ya.Monksfromother
[schools]couldnotmatchthis.’
However,Do
genremains
adamantthatotherrobes,forinstancethosedevisedintheVinaya
school,areutterlynon-orthodoxandconsequentlyinefcient,
unabletobringaboutawakening.
genisabletodothisby
applyingtotheritualsoftransmissionandofordinationasimilar
‘hermeneuticoftranscendence’.
Silkorcotton?
Wehaveseenhow,inTangChina,themonasticrobe,borrowing
elementsfromtheIndiantraditionofthe
,orroyal
unction,butalsofromtheDaoistandimperialtraditions,cameto
assumeanewsymbolicvalue,avaluethatsupplementedand
eventuallycontradicteditspracticalfunction.InJapan,rstwithin
esotericBuddhism,thenwithDo
genandhissuccessors,this
processofsymbolicsuperscriptionresultedinan‘absolutization’of
theka
yathatledtoassertthekinglystatusofthemonkoverhis
procured?[...]Butif[therefusaloftheuseofsilk]comesfromthe
highestmotiveofpity,becausesilkismanufacturedbyinjuringlife,
itisquitereasonablethattheyshouldavoidtheuseofsilkto
ItmeansthatwehaveseentheTatha
gata,wehaveheardhim
preachtheDharma,wehavebeenilluminatedbyhislight,wehave
experiencedhissama
dhi,wehavedirectlyreceivedhismind,and
obtainedhismarrow.Weactuallyarecoveredwiththeka
yaof
theBuddhaS
kyamuni,andS
kyamumiBuddhaactuallygaveus
hiska
ya.’
Toexplainthesepowers,Do
gentellsofthe
fundamentalvowmadebytheBuddhawhenhewasstilla
Bodhisattva.Thisvowaccountsforthemeritsoftheka
ya,its
capacitytobringabundantbenetstoallsentientbeings:‘Those
advantagesarethoseoftheka
yaitself,theydonotderivefrom
thepractitioner’sarduousandconstantpractice.’
Thus,althoughtherobewornbymonksisnottheoriginalone,
itisitstruereplica,itsdouble.Do
genmakesclearthatitismore
thanasymbolintheordinarysense,andthatitshouldbe
worshippedasanicon,adoubleoftheBuddha.Heemphasizesthe
magicalpowersofthe‘deliverancerobe’,whichallowsthosewho
wearittoovercomekarmicbondage.Themiraculouspowerofa
yais‘beyondcomprehension’,anditsmerits‘inconceivable’:
noone,pastorpresent,haseverrealizedenlightenmentwithout
wearingone.
Thus,thekas
yaallowsoneto‘reachthehighest
rank’,toobtainawakeningor,asDo
genputsit,to‘quicklyrealize
thebodyoftheDharma-king’.
Theka
yaitself,is‘[oneof]the
bodilymarksofalltheBuddhas’.
Thetranscendentalredenitionoftherobeeventuallyaffectsits
physicalcharacteristics:afterenumeratingtheninekindsof
(fromninetotwenty-vestrips),Do
genaddsaka
of250stripsandanotherof84,000strips.
Thegure84,000,
purelysymbolic,representstheDharma,thetotalityofthe
Buddha’steachingasrecordedinthesu
tras,whereasthenumber
250isthatoftherulesofthe
,themonasticlistof
preceptsedictedbytheBuddhaintheVinaya.Theka
yabecomes
forDo
genthe
itself,themuch-vaunted‘treasuryofthe
eyeofthetrueDharma’:‘Thosepatriarchswhohavecorrectly
transmittedthe
haveinevitablytransmittedthis
ya.’Theka
yaiseveninsomerespectssuperiortothe
Dharma:‘TohearawordoraverseoftheDharmacanbeachieved
throughtheintermediaryoftreesorstones,andthishearingisnot
limitedtothenineways.Butthemeritsofthedirecttransmission
oftheka
yaarehardtoencounterinthetendirections.’
Thevirtueattributedtotheka
yaasasymboloftransmission
nallyextendstotheka
yareceivedatthetimeofordination.In
thelaterSo
tradition,themomentofordinationcollapseswith
THESYMBOLISMOFTHE
thoseofenlightenmentandofDharmatransmission.Ordination,
conferringautomaticdeliverancethrougharitualafliationwith
thelineageoftheBuddha,takesprecedence–logicalaswellas
chronological–overenlightenmentandtransmission.
Already
withDo
gen,theka
ya,assymbolofordination,partakesofall
themagicalvirtuesofordination.
cannottrulybesaidtohavereceivedtheprecepts,andonereceives
nobenetfromtheordination.
However,heargueselsewhere
that‘a[ka
ya]madenewlyandindependentlybyeverymonkis
notcorrectlytransmitted,andthismonkisnotatrueheir[ofthe
Buddha].’
AsthestoryofthenunUtpalavarn
shows,theka
yaworks
miracles,evenifitiswornasajoke.Utpalavarn
wasinaformer
lifeacourtesan,who,havingonceputonamonasticrobeasajest,
waslaterable,duetothegoodkarmicimpregnationofthisact,to
entertheBuddhistpath.
Themeritsofwearingaka
ya,and
consequentlythemeritsofordination,aresuchthattheyoutweigh
anynegativekarma.AsUtpalavarn
,tryingtoconvertother
women,putsit:‘ThereforeIknowthatonceyouleavethefamilyto
receivetheprecepts,eventhoughyoumaybreakthoseprecepts,
owingtothemyouwillreachArhathood.’
Althoughitisthedeningcharacteristicofthecleric,theka
canalsobeconferredtolayadepts,alongwiththeBodhisattva
Precepts:‘Thefactthatmenanddevas,althoughtheyarelay
disciples,havereceivedandpreservedtheka
ya,isoneofthe
utmostmysteriesoftheGreatVehicle’,writesDo
gen,whogivesas
examplestheChineseemperorsLiangWudi(r.502–549),Sui
Yangdi(r.604–617),theTangemperorsDaizong(r.762–769)and
Suzong(r.756–762),andmoreimportantforhispurpose,the
JapaneserulerSho
tokuTaishi(574–622).Do
genconcludes,‘Thus,
textsregardingtheka
yainsistontheroleitcametoplayin
convertinglocalgods.Anillustrationisfoundinthelegendofthe
RinzaimasterShinchiKakushin(1207–1298).Whilehewas
standingonthefamous‘rock-bridge’ofTiantaishaninChina,
theBodhisattvaMan
appearedtohimintheformofayoung
boyandgavehimaka
chanwei
)ofConfucianimperialideologyandtheDaoisttalismans
studiedbyAnnaSeidel.Beforeturningtothesedocuments,afew
wordsaboutKeizanmaybeinorder,sinceheisusuallyheld
responsibleforthisevolutionthatsupposedlycontaminated
gen’s‘pureZen’.
Asnotedearlier,inhis
,Keizanexplainstheoriginof
theka
ya.HealsotellsabouttheBuddha’stransmissionto
yapa,buttherealrecipientisMaitreya.Forhim,therobeis
clearlyakindof
.Keizanalsoindicatesthatarobewas
transmittedfromKa
yapatoA
nanda,but,aswehaveseen,he
Accordingtothe
Fozhibiqiuliuwutu
,aVinayacommentary
rathercriticaloftheChantradition,Chanmonksusuallyweara
nine-striprobe:‘Attimesthey[
,Chanmonks]havethreelong
patches[oneachstripoftheirka
ya],attimesfour;theyfabricate
themastheylike,notaccordingtotheDharma.’
Thenumberof
stripsofthe
alsoindicatestherankofthepriestwho
wearsit.Thedimensionsoftheka
InDo
gen’s‘Kesakudoku’,theBuddhadescribestoJn
uthetenmeritsoftheka
ya.Theninthisasfollows:‘The
yaislikeagoodeld,foritcannurturetheBodhisattva
way.’
Thesymbolismoffertilityalsoappearsinthe
‘Howwondrousthisdeliverancerobe,/Likeaformlesseldof
Alittlefurther,Do
genquotesthefollowingversebythe
Buddha:‘Thepowersoftheka
yaareinconceivable;theycan
nurturetheBodhisattvapractice.Thegrowthoftheseedsof
awakeningislikespringsprouts,thewondrousfruitsofawakening
resembleautumnfruits.’
Likewise,MujakuDo
quotesaVinayacommentaryaccord-
ingtowhich‘theka
yaisknownintheworldastherobeofthe
eldofmerits,afterthemodelofarice-eld.Inthemundanerice-
elds,oneirrigatestheparcelstomakericesproutsgrowandto
nurturethem.AstotheeldoftheDharmarobe,onellsitwith
theFourGreatVowstohelpsentientbeings,oneincreasesthe
thoughtofthethreetypesofgoodness,andonenourishesthe
wisdomoftheDharmabody.’
Therobeasarelic
Theka
yaiswhatwecouldcallacontactrelic.Iftherobe,like
variousothercontactrelics,cametolegitimizethetransmission
ritual,itisbecauseitwasperceivedasasubstituteofthe
,in
otherwords,asasubstitutebodyoftheBuddha.Thesimilarity
andtheveKnowledges.Theka
yathusbecomesakindof
microcosm,ormorepreciselyacosmogram.Inthe
Kesa-mandara
[KirigamioftheKa
yaMan
ala],therobeisassimilated
powers,andreachesthevewisdoms;itistheka
yathatall
theBuddhasofthethreeperiodshavetransmittedtoeach
other.Thusitiscalledtherobeofperegrination[
],or
robeofwork[
].Becauseitisakas
yaforalltimes,
Ihavenowreceivedit.
Theseven-striprobeexpressesthesevenBuddhas,manifests
thesevenbodhis,thesevensaintlyaptitudes[
],the
sevenequal
;wisdomiscontainedinit.Itiscalled
therobeformeals.Withthiska
ya,thefoodofpleasure
inDharmaandofblissindhya
nallsone’sheart.Thus,itis
externallyfreefromthesevenobstructingsins;internally,it
achievesthesevenkindsofgoodness.Thisisthekas
yasewn
bythe235Buddhas,andtransmittedbyalltheBuddhasof
thethreeperiods;andIhavenowreceivedit.
Thenine-striprobeistherobewithwhichalltheBuddhas
inthethreeperiodshavepreachedtheDharma....Hewho
wearsthisrobesewnbythe305Buddhaspossessesthe
consciousnessoftheTatha
gata,theperfectwisdom.He
transcendsallthoughtsofdesirefortheninerealmsand
THESYMBOLISMOFTHE
obtainsthestageofsubtleawakening[
].Becauseit
istheka
yaofdeliveranceofalltheBuddhasinthethree
periods,Ihavenowreceivedit.
Thus,therobeisaman
ala,asymboloftheuniverse,butitis
alsoa
bodhiman
,aritualareaofenlightenment.Folded,itcan
beusedasaseatformeditation,asymbolofthe
-seaton
whichtheBuddhareachedenlightenment.Thesametypeof
symbolismisofcoursefoundinesotericBuddhism.
Notealso
theprayerspronouncedwhenputtingonaka
yaortakingitoff.
Theka
yaclearlydenesaritualarea(
),ittransformsthe
bodyofthepractitionerintoa‘ritualbody’,a
bodhiman
.Even
thewayofholdingapartofthekesainonehand,asisshownin
severalpaintingsofthepatriarchsoftheShingonsect,indicates
that,likethe
-sceptre,theka
yacanbecomepartofa
Thus,puttingontheka
yameanstakingonacosmic
body.Theroyalsymbolismisalsoexpressedattimesthroughthe
ala.The
Fukuden-ekirigami
,forinstance,containsapassage,
unfortunatelytoofragmentary,inwhichtherobeisdescribed
symbolicallyintermsofanimperialaudienceinthepresenceof
variouscategoriesofofcialsandnobles.Inthediagramofthe
yathataccompaniesthetext,thestripontheupperleft
representstheimperialpalaceanditsinhabitants,thatontheupper
rightthemonksandthepeople.Thetwostripsalsocorrespond
totheupperandlowersectionsoftheimperialcapital,
respectively.
TherobeasBuddha
Frombeingacontactrelic,theka
genarguesthatonemustworshipitasanicon:‘Youshould
burnincense,scatterowers,walkclockwisearounditseveral
times,andprostrateyourselfthree,six,orninetimes.’
Again,in
‘Den’e’:‘Youshouldunderstandthattheka
yaistheBuddha-body
andtheBuddha-mind.Itisalsocalledtherobeofdeliverance.’
BeingasymboloftheBuddhistteaching,therobe,dulytransmitted
fromamastertohisdisciple,becomesasceptreofauthority,
transformingthepersonwhopossessesitintoaBuddha.According
toMujaku,thegold-embroideredka
yamustbewornatthetime
ofsermon,whenthemasterascendstheDharmaHall(
),that
is,whenhebecomesrituallyaBuddha.
Therobeasastu
ThisequivalencealreadyappearsinapassagewhereDo
genextols
themeritofthe
:‘Howwonderfulthisdeliverance
robe!/Likeaformlesseldofmerits/ItexpoundstheTatha
gata’s
teaching/Andsavesallsentientbeings.’Do
gen’scommentis
signicant:‘Afterrecitingthisverse,oneputsontheka
consideringitasifitwereone’smasterorthe[Buddha’s]stu
pa.’
AstheBuddhatellsJn
naprabhabhiks
u:‘SonoftheBuddha,
unfoldtheka
yasothatitlookslikeastu
pa.’
Thispassagemay
constitutetheimageoftherobeasaeldalsorepresentthetwo
pradaks
,theclockwiseandcounterclockwisecircumambulations
aroundthestu
pa,symbolizingtheupwardmovementfrom
ratonirva
a,andthedownwardmovementfromnirva
tosam
ra–thatis,deathandrebirth.
Shakushiho
ekun
quotesapassagefromthe
Ratnaku
,inwhichtheBuddhaexplainsastherstoftheeight
characteristicsoftheka
yaitshaving‘theformofastu
pa’(
‘Becausethestu
paistheTatha
gata’sdharmabodyofsixelements,
theultimatevirtues,theBodhisattvaMaitreyaalwaysholdsastu
ineachhand,andTamonTenno
[Vais
a]tooalwaysholdsa
pa.Thesameistrueofthevirtuesoftheka
Therobeasawomb
kirigami
,the
Ehatsukechimyakudenjusaho
,indicates
thattheDharmarobeanditstransmissionsymbolizethegestation
expressedbythethreadsofthetwostringsoftheka
Moreover,thecolouroftherobeismadeblacktoexpressthe
blacknessofthevoice-consciousness.
Likewise,accordingtothe
Fukuden-ekirigami
,‘Theka
ndsitsorigininthethreadofeventsduringthetimeonewas
insidethewomb.’
Accordingtoothersources,theredrobeofthe
patriarchBodhidharmawouldrepresenttheplacenta,andthenine
yearsspentbytheIndianmasterabsorbedinsama
dhiaresaidto
wasborn,heworeanaturalplacentarobe.Hisrightshoulderwas
bare,justasifhehadbeenwearingamonasticrobe.Itissaidinthe
appended[notice]:S
sainChinesemeansplacenta(embryo-
robe).Becausehewasbornwrappedinthisrobe,asaninfanthe
didnotneedswaddlingclothes.Ashegrewup,therobeadaptedto
hisbody,andwhenhewasordainedasamonk,itbecamea
Dharmarobe.Master[Tan]cheng’splacentarobeisverymuchlike
thatofS
ava
AlsosignicantinthisrespectisKeizan’stheoryabouttheorigin
oftherobe:‘Therearethreetheoriesconcerningthatka
ya.One
isthattheTatha
gataworeitwithhimfromthewomb.’
prevailingtradition,basedonXuanzang’sversionofthetransmis-
sionlegend,however,wasthattherobehadbeengivento
kyamunibyhisadoptivemotherGautami.
Therelationoftherobewiththeprocessofgestationis
suggestedbytheinclusionoftheclothsdeledbymenstrualblood
andbychildbirthamongthetentypesofcloththatmakerst-
.Equallysuggestiveisthewayinwhich,in
Karukaya
[1631],‘Ko
yanomaki’,thestoryofKu
kai’smotherexplainsthe
tabooagainstwomenenteringthemountain(
nyoninkekkai
WhenKu
kai’soldmotherwantstoclimbthemountaintoseeher
son,theearthshakes.Ku
kaiappearsandaskshertoleave,and,
whensherefusesandisabouttoproceed,hespreadshisrobe(
onthegroundandaskshertowalkacrossit.Whenshedoesso,her
menstrualblood,whichhadstoppedowingmorethanfortyyears
ago,startsowingagain.Whenitfallsontherobe,thelattertakes
reandcarriesKu
kai’smotheraway.
Thesymbolicequivalencebetweentheka
yaandthestu
paalso
remindsusofPaulMus’analysisinhis
Barabud
.Wendnot
onlythesamewombsymbolism,butalsothesamenumerical
symbolisminbothcases:liketheka
ya,thestu
paisaman
and/ora
bodhiman
Intheend,allthesesymbolspointto
differentaspectsofthesamenotion:toputonaka
yameansnot
onlytobecomeamonkbutalsotoreceivethe
eka
,tobe
rebornasacosmicruler,acakravartinking,asalivingicon,andto
become‘aBuddhainthisverybody’.
Bytheconstantmaterialhandlingofritualobjectsandthe
ideologicalmanipulationofthesymbolsadheringtothem,theZen
adeptgraduallylearnedhowtoreadthroughthesuperposed
symbolicsystems,usingthelogicoftheTwoTruths,andtomove
fromonesymbolicsystemtoanother.Thetruthofthesesystemslies
intheirrelationshiptoeachother,andtheZenmaster,whowas
supposedtorejectallsymbolicmediation,ishimselfabovealla
mediator,asymbolicshifter.Still,cosmologicalsymbolism,farfrom
beingtheprivatepropertyofZen,formsthecommonbasisof
ChineseandJapaneseculture,asortofsymbolicsyntaxthatdoes
notimplyonthepartofthosewhouseitanydeepfaithbutrathera
kindofweak,generalizedbelief.Incertaincasesitisnothingmore
thanacommonculturalreferencetowhichoneshouldnotattach
muchhermeneuticimportance.Nevertheless,beliefinthetalismanic
valueofcertainritualobjectsseems,inturn,sufcientlydeeply
rootedtoholdincheckorsubvertanyattempttodemythologizethe
tradition.
Wemustnallyquestiontherelevanceofthissymbolismto
actualpractice.ThefactthatitplayssuchaprominentroleinSo
kirigami
seemstoattesttoitsritualimportance,butwelack
evidenceoftheactualuseofthissymbolismfromother
contemporarydocuments.Theanalysisoftheunderlyingsymbolic
systemshouldnotbepushedtoofar.Probablytheanonymous
authorsofthe
kirigami
werenotawareofalltheimplicationsofthis
system.But,asJacquesLeGoffhasargued,‘asymbolicsystemcan
befullyeffectivewithoutexplicitawareness’.
Arewethenfaced,
asLeGoffinsists,witharealmofmentalities‘rifewithdistortions,
psychicautomatisms,survivalsandrejects,andobscure,incoherent
thoughtserectedintopseudo-logicalsystems’?
Itseemsthatwe
aredealingmorewitha‘practicallogic’,inthesenseusedbyPierre
Bourdieu,andthuswithanattitudethatdoesnotdeservetobe
discreditedas‘pseudo-logical’,asistoooftendone.Furthermore,
despitealltheseattemptsto‘sacralize’theka
ya,andthewarnings
THESYMBOLISMOFTHE
ofheavenlypunishmentforlackofrespect,therobewasoften
treatedrathercasuallybythemonksthemselves,aswecanseefrom
thecommentsoftheauthorofthe
Shakushiho
ekun
Thus,the
ideologyndsitslimitsinrealpractice.
Oneofthemainfunctionsoftheka
ya,throughoutitshistory,
wastolegitimizeorthodoxy,orsectarianism:notonlythatofthe
Buddhists
vis-a
thenon-Buddhists,ortheorthodoxtransmission
oftheChan/Zenschool,oracertainZensectorbranch(like
),butalsothesuperiorityofmonksoverlaymen.Actually,as
itssymbolicvalueincreased,itcametolegitimizemonastic
misbehaviour:becauseofthemagicalpoweroftheka
ya,itis
bettertobeamonk–howeverdepraved–thanalayman–
howevervirtuous.AsofteninJapaneseculture,thewrappingis
morevaluablethanthecontent:themagicpoweroftherobe
providestheultimateargumentforrespectingdepravedmonks.
138
Wehavehereaparadoxthatdoesnotseemtohaveworried
gen,forwhomitseemsbettertotransgressmonasticprecepts
thantoremainalaymanorlaywoman:‘Thefactthatthisnun
Utpalavarn
wasabletoreachArhathoodhasoriginallynothing
todowithherownmerits.Itisentirelyduetothemeritsofher
havingoncewornasajokethiska
yathatshenowobtained
awakening.’
However,therobealsosymbolizestheBodhisattvaPrecepts
whichcanbegiventolaymen.Do
genhimself,despitehisemphasis
onmonkhood,admitsthevalueofthesepreceptsandseems
thereforetoadmitthepossibility,thankstothemagicalpowerof
theka
amongotherrelics,byeminentlyorthodoxBuddhistmasters.We
needonlyreadotherfasciclesofthesamework,like‘Kuyo
shobutsu’,torealizethatDo
genhimself,whoseemstohavebeen
occasionallyinscribingspringtalismans(
risshundaikichi
),was
probablynotatotalstrangertosimilarpractices.Onemaywonder
iftheshort-sightednessofmodernapologetesisnotcausedbytheir
wearingaka
yaontheirhead,intheorthodoxChinesefashion
describedbyDo
gen.
Leavingpolemicaside,theevolutionoftheka
yaseemsrelated
totwodeparturesfromtheearlytradition:symbolizationand
sameastheonementionedbytheseH
nateachers.Therefore,
theheirsofDo
genshouldneverusethe
Fozhibiqiuliuwutu
Likewise,Mokushitsu’s
fukukakusho
criticizesDaoxuanand
Fozhibiqiuliuwutu
Shakushiho
ekun
,too,criticizes
DaoxuanandYuanzhaoforrejectingtheuseofsilk.Itarguesthat
Daoxuan,althoughhewasaneminentVinayamaster,wentagainst
theBuddha’steaching.Thisteaching,ontheotherhand,was
preservedbyYijing,acontemporaryofDaoxuanwhohadthe
advantageofrst-handexperienceofIndianBuddhism.Basedon
thatexperience,Yijingapprovedtheuseofsilk,whileDaoxuan
rejecteditonthebasisofavision.But,asDo
genargued,the
disciplesoftheBuddhashouldteachdivinebeings,notbetaught
bythem.Intheend,DaoxuanandhisepigonsareH
followers,whodonotunderstandtheteachingofMaha
na.This
conclusionissomewhatparadoxical,asDaoxuan’sVinaya,
althoughinspiredfromtheDharmaguptaka,wasmuchcloserto
theMaha
nathanthatofaconservativelikeYijing.
ideologicalliationsbecomeevenmoresurprising,sinceDo
whileheopposesthedominantVinayatraditionstemmingfrom
DaoxuanandseemstoagreewithYijing,willlaterseehis
argumentstakenupbyarelentlesscriticofBuddhismsuchas
TominagaNakamoto(1715–1746),inhisironiccommentsabout
mostappropriatetoexpresstheregalaspectofBuddhism.
BERNARDFAURE
Theka
yamad
1aMakabirushanabutsu[BuddhaMaha
vairocana]
bPureLandoftheVulturePeakofS
kyamuniBuddha
2aGakko
bosatsu[BodhisattvaCandraprabha]
bNikko
Bosatsu[BodhisattvaSu
ryaprabha]
3aKongo
kaimandara[Vajradha
tuman
bTaizo
kaimandara[Garbhadha
tuman
4aHo
Nyorai[Tatha
gataRatna
kara?],South
bFuku
butsu[BuddhaAmoghasiddhi],North
cAshukubutsu[BuddhaAks
obhya],East
dMuryo
jubosatsu[BodhisattvaAmita
yus],West
5a1Kanjizaibosatsu[BodhisattvaAvalokites
vara]
a2Jikyu
b1Kongo
b2Zenzaido
ji[Sudha
na]
6ThepastBuddhas
aBibashibutsu[BuddhaVipas
bShikibutsu[BuddhaSikkhin]
cBishabubutsu[BuddhaVis
dKarakusondabutsu[BuddhaKrakucchanda]
eKunagonbutsu[BuddhaKanakamuni]
fKasho
butsu[BuddhaKa
yapa]
1111111111111111
THESYMBOLISMOFTHE
7aJizo
bosatsu[BodhisattvaKs
itigarbha]
b1Mirokubosatsu[BodhisattvaMaitreya]
b2Daibontenno
[Deva-kingBrahma]
8a1SuperiorFieldofMeritsofallBodhisattvas
a2Monjubosatsu[BodhisattvaMan
b1FieldofMeritsofthePreciousRepositoryofallTatha
b2Fugenbosatsu[BodhisattvaSamantabhadra]
9a1Idaten[Skanda]
a2FieldofMeritsoftheEightAssembliesofHeavenlyNa
b1Earthgod
10ThefourLokapa
aDaizuratatenno
[=Jikokuten,Dhr
bBishamontenno
[Vais
cBirurokusha[=Zo
ten,Viru
dBirubakusha[=Ko
mokuten,Viru
11Theninerealms
a1Secondrealm
a2RiverofEightTastes
b1Thirdrealm
b2Riverofsilverwater
c1Fourthrealm
c2Lion’sheadriver
d1Sixthrealm
d2Horse-headriver
e1Seventhrealm
e2Ox-headriver
f1Eighthrealm
f2Womanofliferiver
g1Ninthrealm
15ThefourDeva
aHekiten
bKu
cSuiten[Varuna]
Listofabbreviations
DZZDo
genZenjiZenshu
JDZJo
saiDaishiZenshu
ZSZZokuSo
Zensho
TTaisho
ZZZokuZo
1‘Den’e’willappearin
8(forthcoming).
2AnnaSeidel,‘Kokuho
:Notea
proposdueterme“Tre
sorNational”en
23SeeIshikawa,1985:102–152.
24Themotifoftheka
ya’sweightisalsofoundinthebiographyof
Bodhidharma’scontemporary,thedhya
namasterSengchou.When
EmperorXuanDi(r.550–559)wantstoseeaBuddhistwonder,
Sengchouthrowshiska
yatotheground.Theemperorordersseveral
ofhismentopickitup,buttheyfailtomoveit.ThenSengchouhasit
liftedeffortlesslybyanovice.See
Busasokesako
,Shingi,2:539.
25See
.48,2025:1122b.
26SeeHolmesWelch,
ThePracticeofChineseBuddhism1900–1950
Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1965:156–157,290;
Zengakudaijiten
,To
:Taishu
kan,1978:887c.
27SeeO
kuboDo
teizo
hoDo
genzenjidennokenkyu
,To
Chikumashobo
,1971:169–171;and
Shakushiho
ekun
,Shingi,
Bussokesako
,in
,Shingi,2:524–547;
fukukakusho
,comp.by
Mokushitsu(1775–1833),
ibid.,639–676;Den’ezo
bisho
Shakushiho
ekun
.,549–575;
fukusho
gishaku
.,577–599.
29See‘Kesakudoku’,
.82,2582:47c–56a,
genZenjizenshu
DZZ]1:623–645;‘Den’e’,
.82,2582:56a–62a,
1:285–300.
30See‘Kesakudoku’inYu
Yokoi,
ZenMasterDo
,NewYorkand
:Weatherhill,1976:88–106.
31See‘Kesakudoku’,in
.82,2582:47c4,48c22,56a21.
.82,2582:48a2.
33See‘Den’e’,
.82,2582:53c–54a.Onthisquestion,seealsoFaure,
‘AlternativeImagesofPilgrimage:Sung-shanandTs’ao-hsi’,inSusan
NaquinandChu
n-fangYu
,eds.,
PilgrimageandSacredSitesinChina
Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1991:150–189.
.82,2582:56b–c.
.,48a.
36OntheproblemofDharmatransmissionintheSo
sectduringthe
Edoperiod,seeWilliamBodiford,‘DharmaTransmissioninSo
ManzanDo
haku’sReformMovement’,
MonumentaNipponica
46,4
(1991):423–452.
.82,2582:53a57.
.,49b.
.,49c.
40See‘Den’e’,
.,61a9.
.,50c26.
42See‘Hatsuu’,
.,260a2,b7–14.
.82,2582:50b.
saiDaishiZenshu
JDZ],ed.Koho
Chisan,433;onKeizan’sdreams,
seeFaure,
VisionsofPower
,ch.5.
45‘Kesakudoku’,
.82,2582:53a12.
46SeeMasunagaReiho
APrimerofSo
Zen:ATranslationofDo
gen’s
,Honolulu:UniversityofHawai‘iPress,1975:
71.Seealso
.,79.
.82,2582:55b7.
48TothecomplaintsoftheFrenchpeopleabouttheshortageofbread,
Susiddhi(J.Sojitsuji)Man
97Keizanactuallyquotesthe
Jingdechuandenglu
.51,2076:215a–b.
98SeeFaure,‘Do
gen,theDarumashu
,andSo
42,1(1987):25–55.
.82,2582:56c13.
.,56b26.
101SeeMasunaga,1975:5:‘AsIseeit,relicsshouldbereverenced,since
theyrepresenttheTatha
gata’simageandhisremainingbones.Itis
wrong,however,toexpectenlightenmentjustbyworshippingthem.’
Unlikeinthecaseoftheka
ya,accordingtoDo
102SeeAlanKennedy,1991:12.
103SeeIshikawa,
op.cit
.(6):108–109.
.,108.
.,110.
106The
Keiranshu
,forinstance,assimilatestheve-,seven-,and
nine-stripka
yatotheTaizo
kai,Kongo
kaiandSusiddhiman
respectively[
.76,2410:768b].Seenote79.
107SeeKennedy,1991:106.
108SeeIshikawa,1985:106–107.
.47,1966:127ab.
110Ishikawa,1985:106.
111See
Shakushiho
ekun
,Shingi:552.
.82,2582:51b4–8.
.,59c28–29.
114See
Zenrinsho
,683a.SeealsoRobertSharf,‘TheIdolizationof
Enlightenment:OntheMummicationofCh’anMastersinMedieval
HistoryofReligions
,32,1(1994):1–31.
115‘Kesakudoku’,
.82,2582:54a26.
.,54c1
117FromSamuelBeal,
BuddhistRecordsoftheWesternWorld
London:Tru
bner,1884,reprintNewYork:Paragon,1968,vol.1:
Shakushiho
ekun
,Shingi:551–552.
119Thisdocumentshouldbeputintorelationwithother
Inlightoftheabovediscussion,itmightberelevanttonotethat
BodhidharmacametobeassociatedinJapanwithsericiculture.In
Japanesefolk-art,hisfeaturesarepaintedonacocoon(
BERNARDFAURE
daruma).Apartfromtheshapeofthecocoon,whichNeillMcFarland
calls‘Darumamorph’,thisassociationcomesfromthefactthatboth
Darumaandthesilkwormwereseenassymbolsofgestationand
rebirth.SeeH.NeillMcFarland,
Daruma:TheFounderofZenin
JapaneseArtandPopularCulture
,To
andNewYork:Kodansha
International,1987:64–66.
123See
SuzukiDaisetsuzenshu
,vol.1,To
:Iwanamishoten,1968–1971.
124Seeforinstance
.82,2585:348b–349c.
.82,2582:50c10.Seealso
Bussokesako
,in
,Shingi:533.
.82,2582:50c6,c9and54c11.
Bussokesako
,Shingi:533.
128See
.82,2585:347b15–16.
129Seeforinstance
Fukuden-ekirigamiop.cit
130SeeSusanMatisoff,‘HolyHorrors:TheSermonBalladsofMedieval
andEarlyModernJapan’,inJamesSanfordandWilliamLaFleur,
FlowingTraces:BuddhismintheLiteraryandVisualArtsof
THEENLIGHTENMENTOF
KAMIANDGHOSTS
SpiritordinationsinJapaneseSo
WilliamM.Bodiford
JiangxiandHunan,or‘Jiang-Hu’Chanforshort,isanancient
designation.ContrastedtotheBuddhismoftheimperialcapital,it
smacksofthegreatoutdoors:countriedBuddhism,mundane
affairs,thereligionofthemasses....UnlikepreviousBuddhistswho
hadcoveredthemselvesintheborrowedrobesofIndianBuddhism,
oftheZenmasterwhoprovidedtheinitiatewithtangible,direct
evidenceofhisnewstatus.Firstheanointed(
)theinitiate
withsanctiedwater,usingaspecial(i.e.magical)wandthat
roku
)–dismissedtheirSo
counterpartsas‘self-styledmenof
theway’(
nin
)whomerelytravelaboutthecountryresidingin
ruralchapelsandshrines.
InmanyruralareastheemergenceofanewZeninstitutionata
localreligioussiteentailedshiftsincommunityrelationships.
relativesocialstatusofcommoners,villageleaders,andnearby
warriorgroupsallwereinvolved.TraditionalaccountsofJapanese
Zenhistoryhaveemphasizedtheindispensableroleoftherural
warriorswhodonatedthelandsandyearlyincomefornew
temples.Inthisview,thepopularizationofJapaneseSo
onmilitaryrulerswhoimposedthenewtemplesonthelocal
population,fromthetopdown,aspartofpoliciesintendedto
furthersecularpoliticalgoals.
Thesepoliticalpolicies,however,
oftenexploitedtheproselytizingeffortsofitinerantZenteachers,
effortsthatenhancedthepoliticalappealoftemplepatronage.
Actualpatronagebeganafterproselytizing,fromthebottomup,by
aSo
teacherwhoalreadyhadattractedwidespreadsupport
amongthelocalpopulace.
Awell-knownexampleofthis‘fromthebottomup’processis
theSo
monasteryRyu
enjiinKumagaya(SaitamaPrefecture),
foundedin1411throughthepatronageofalocalwarriorknown
leaderswhoformerlycontrolledreligiousritesatthechapel,butit
issafetoassumethatshiftsintheirfamilialfortuneshadpavedthe
wayforSeijun’sappearance.
MostmedievalSo
monasteriesbeganassmall,insignicant
villagechapels,liketheonethatbecameRyu
enji.Theseworship
hallsinitiallylackedanyfull-time,residentcelebrantsorsectarian
Usuallyanassociationofvillageelderscollectively
supervisedeachchapel’smaintenanceandseasonalrites.Thesocial
functionsofthesechapelsthusextendedbeyondoccasional
religiousservices.Theyreectedthepowerstructureandhierarchy
TheSo
monksinthesetales,likethe
yamabushi
whomtheysharedasimilarcharismaticaura,typicallyfunctioned
asthestereotypical‘mysteriousstranger’(
marebito
),the
liminal
gureatthemarginsofsocialrelationships,whoappearsatcritical
juncturestoreadjustspiritualrelationships.
Unlikeother
strangerbeggedRogakutohavecompassionforhim.When
Rogakunishedadministeringtheprecepts,thereptilespirit
instantlyattainedliberationfromhisfate.Inthanks,heledRogaku
downtoavalleyandtoldhimtobuildatemplethere.Walking
furtherdownintothevalley,Rogakufoundthedeadbodyofalarge
whitesnake.Whenthelocalvillagersheardofthedepartureofthe
snakespirit,theyallcametohelpRogakubuildhistemple.
anothertale,Ryo
anEmyo
(1337–1411)issaidtohavebeen
walkingdownaruralroadwaywhenalargemanappearedand
offeredtoserveasaguide.TheguideledRyo
andeepintoan
unchartedvalley,pointedtoadistantmountain,andsaid:‘That
mountainisbestforyou’.Ryo
anbecamesuspicious,buttheguide
reassuredhim:‘Donotbeafraid.Iamthe
kami
ofthatmountain’.
WhenRyo
anbegantoconstructatemple(thefutureSaijo
ji)onthe
mountainindicatedbythe
,allthelocalpeople,bothnoble
andbase,cametohelphim.Theworkwassooncompletedbecause
alltherawmaterialsforbuildingthetemplewerefoundin
abundancerightonthemountain.Later,whenRyo
anbegan
trainingstudentsatthenewtemple,everynighttwostrangers
powers.Especiallyinthesecondexample,thepeople’ssupportof
thenewZentempleandtheirexploitationofthemountain’s
resourcesaredepictedasfulllingthedesireofthelocal
Storiesofsupernaturalencountersatalreadyexistingtemples
mostoftendescribethecreationofnewmountainspringsorthe
discoveryofnewmountainlakes.Forexample,Jochu
Tengin
(1365–1440)reportedlyhadbeenledtothesiteofhisfuturetemple
bythebodhisattvaKannon.Afterthetemplehadbeenbuiltthe
localmountain
kami
cametotheabbot’sbuildinginthemiddleof
thenighttorequestapreceptordination.Jochu
providesanotherprimeexampleofthistypeofstory.
ReportedlyhewastravellingthroughHo
kiProvincewhenhe
encounteredtheghostofthewifeofShimazuAtsutada,thelordof
Kasugacastle.
Tsu
gen’slectures.Ikkeiconfrontedthestrangewoman,demanding
toknowwhoshewasandwhatshewanted.Sherepliedthather
byZenmonksimpressedmanypotentialsponsors.Thisstoryalso
indicatesthatolderformsofBuddhismtoacertainextenthad
failedtoholdontotheloyaltyofthelocalpopulace.Civil
disturbancesduringthemedievalperioderodedthelaity’sfaithin
WILLIAMM.BODIFORD
theefcacyofpreviousreligiousinstitutions,whichsupposably
possessedspiritualpowertomaintainpeaceandprosperity.
thelegendofDo
,oneofRyo
anEmyo
’smostimportant
disciplesatSaijo
ji,thetemplementionedearlier.Do
wasalocal
manwhoexcelledatZentrainingandattempleconstruction
projects.Hepossessedthestrengthoftenmen.Ontheoccasionof
Ryo
an’sdeath,Do
proclaimedhimselftobetheguardingdeity
ofSaijo
ji.Hisbodyassumedtheformofa
(long-nosed,
wingedmountaindemon),andheewup,disappearingintothe
sky.TodaySaijo
jiisoneoftheprincipaltrainingsites(
senmon
)forSo
Zenmonks.ItalsoisthecentreoftheDo
cult.PilgrimscomefromthroughouttheKanto
kairegionsinthehopethatDo
willrespondtotheirprayers
andtotakehomesomeofthetemple’smagical
water.At
ji,ratherthansupplantingthelocalsacredgeography,Zenhas
enricheditwithamulti-layeredsacredcosmology:theauraof
enlightenmentradiatingfromtheZentrainingcentre,theholy
waterowingfromtheground,andthemountaincultofDo
attractingprayers.
Differentsocialgroupsnaturallyrespondto
1YanagidaSeizan,‘Chu
gokuZenshu
shi’,in
Zennorekishi:Chu
8Ko
sanMyo
ChokushiShinku
Zenjigyo
(1442),inSZ,vol.17,
,2:273–275;andMyo
den(d.1871),
kakeifuden
fasc.3,inSZ,vol.16,
1:537–540.Regardingtheregional
expansionofSo
institutions,seemy
ZeninMedievalJapan
(Honolulu:UniversityofHawai‘iPress,1993).
kennichiroku
,entryfor1488:6:4,in
DaiNihonbukkyo
(To
:BusshoKanko
kai,1912–1922),135:217–218.
10TheinformationonvillagechapelsinthisparagraphisbasedonAsaka
Toshiki,‘Sondo
toRinka:KagaCho
fukujinoseiritsuwomegutte’,
14/4(Nov.1969):17–35.Theterm
isnot
limitedtoanyparticularJapanesehistoricalterm,butreferstothe
communalgroupsdenedbyNagaharaKeijiwithKozoYamamura,
‘VillageCommunitiesandDaimyoPower’,in
JapanintheMuromachi
,ed.JohnW.HallandToyodaTakeshi(Berkeley:Universityof
California,1977):107.Othertermsusedinthisparagraphalso
conformtoNagahara’sarticle(pp.107–127).
11E.g.SuzukiTaizan,‘So
Zennoko
futosonogegosha’,in
seikatsushikenkyu
,vol.4,
Seikatsutoshu
,ed.Ito
Tasaburo
(To
:YoshikawaKo
bunkan,1960):270–271.
12TamamuroTaijo
shikiBukkyo
(To
kyo
:Daiho
rinkaku,1963):
WaanSeijunZenjigyo
,includedaspartof
Ryu
enSeijunKiunItsu
gorokunarabinigyo
,comp.Daiso
sa(d.1537),inSZ,vol.5,
,1:215.
14LaterhistoricalsourcesoftenidentifySo
monasteriesashavingbeen
builtatthesiteofaformer‘Tendai’or‘Shingon’chapel,butthese
sectarianlabelsareusuallybasedonnothingmorethanthetypeof
Buddhisttermsusedinthechapel’soriginalnameorthetypeof
imageoriginallyenshrinedthere.Inactualpracticeruralchapels
servedasacentreforwhateverritualsmightbeperformedbyvillagers
oranyitinerantreligiousteacherwhohappenedtobeavailable;see
HanukiMasai,‘Zenshu
nohattentojippo
danna’,in
Chiho
bunkano
dento
toso
,ed.Chiho
shiKenkyu
Kyo
gikai(To
kyo
:Yu
zankaku,
1976):121.
15Nagahara,1977:119.
16KawakuboJunko
,‘Taisonoshu
norekishitekiseikaku:Tokuni
sonoshakaitekihaikeinitsuite’,in
Keizankenkyu
(To
:Keizan
ZenjiHo
sanKanko
kai,1974):50–52.
19SeeTenkaiKu
Zenjito
inSZ,vol.17,
,2:278a.Thisincidentbecamethebasisofthe
playknownas
.Thekillingstoneactuallyexists.Tourist
guidebooksreportthatitconsistsofatypeofporousvolcanicrock
thatemitspoisonousgas.Eventodayinsectsthatperchonthestone
die.InGenno
’stimegasfromthelargerstonereportedlykilledbirds
andsmallanimals.
20SeeHanukiMasai,‘To
monZenso
29Ko
HOWDO
’SMEDICINE
SAVEDDO
Medicine,Do
anandEdo-period
genbiographies
DuncanRyu
kenWilliams
Gedokuen
:Do
an’s‘Poison-Dissolving’Medicine
genfellgravelyillonhiswaybackfromChina,buthadno
medicineswhichcouldbeofuse.Suddenly,animmortal
appearedandgaveDo
genaherbalpillafterwhichhe
TakingthepillfromDo
,theZenmasterrecoveredalmost
immediately.SeeingDo
gencomebackfromthebrinkofdeath,
(orDo
genaccordingtoavariantversion)pleadedwiththis
mysteriouspersontorevealwhoshewasandwhattheformulafor
makingthispillwas.Shedisappearedjustasquicklyasshehad
appeared,butnotbeforeutteringtheformulaforthemedicineand
thatshewastheJapanesedeityInariindisguise.Wearealsotold
thatthisherbalpill–
Gedokugan
orotherwiseknownas
Gedokuen
ormoreformallyasthe
ShinsenGedokuManbyo
–later
becameapartofDo
’sfamilyheritageandthatitwastobecome
instrumentalinthespreadoftheSo
school.
Whatkindofmedicinewas
Gedokuen
Whowasthegure
?Inwhatperiodandcapacitydidthismedicineassistinthe
spreadoftheSo
school?Thesearesomeofthequestionsraised
bythetext.UponDo
sandoku
hadtheauthorizationoftheorthodoxmedicalestablishment
becausedreamsandvisionsofdeitiescouldnotbeveried.
Governmentregulationsontheproductionanddistributionof
medicinealsosupportedtheemergenceofsuchsacredmedicines.
Forexample,duringtheGenrokuperiod,theEdo
bakufu
newlawsthattookawayexclusiverightstotheproductionand
distributionofmedicinefromclanand
doctors.
resultedinadiffusionofpowertoproduceanddistributemedicine,
sothatpharmacieslikeDo
antookfulladvantageofthesenew
laws.Theresultofthislawcanbemostclearlyseeninthedramatic
growthof
kigusuriya
(pharmacies)inthewholesaledistrictsinboth
EdoandOsaka.
InbothOsakaandEdo,thesenewvenuesforthe
popularityof
Gedokuen
rosetosuchanextentthatimitators
sprungupalloverJapan.FortunatelyforDo
sho
an,theSo
headquartertempleofEiheiji,enlistingthe
bakufu
’ssupport,
attemptedtostrictlyenforcethese
niseyaku
Administeringthesacredpill
Whatkindofmedicinewas
Gedokuen
thatitinvitedimitatorsand
hadsuchpowerfulbackers?Whatkindofailmentswasthis
medicinepurportedlyabletocure?While
Gedokuen
considereda
yaku
anditssacredoriginsthesourceofits
efcacy,therewereinfactveryspecicinstructionsonhowto
administertheherbfordifferentkindsofailments.Ratherthan
simplyamedicinetakenonfaith,thissuggeststhat
Gedokuen
alsounderstoodtobeapartofabroaderrangeofChineseherbal
medicinesthatneededsomedirectivesonhowtotakeit.
AdocumentsentfromDo
antoRyu
sanji,aSo
Zentemple
inSagamiprovince–the
ShinsenGedokuManbyo
enFukuyo
–givesusanunderstandingofhowthismedicinewas
preparedandadministered.Thisdocumentcontainsinstructions
onhowtoprepare
Gedokuen
LegendsofDo
gen,Do
,and
ThebiographyofDo
geninwhichthisaccountisfoundisthe
Kenzeiki
,atextcompiledbythefourteenth-generationabbotof
Eiheiji,Kenzei(1415–1474).Althoughthetextwasoriginally
titled
EiheikaisanDo
genzenjigyo
,ashandcopiesafter
Kenzei’sdeathproliferated,itsimplybecameknownas‘The
RecordofKenzei’or
Kenzeiki
Thereareanumberofextant
handcopiedversions,butthestoryaboutDo
sho
andthemedicine
Gedokuen
comesfromtherstprintededitionofthetext,the
TeihoKenzeiki
(orformallythe
TeihoEiheikaisangyo
Kenzeiki
byMenzanZuiho
inHo
reki3(1753)whichwentontoeclipseall
thehandwrittenversions.
KawamuraKo
,inhisclassicstudy
onthe
Kenzeiki
,includessixversionsofthetext(handcopied
editions–Minshu
/1538,Zuicho
/1589,Empo
/1680,Monsu/1694,
Gemmon/1738–andtheprintededition,theTeiho/1753)in
columnsforcomparison.Whatisstrikinghereisthatnoneofthe
handwrittenversionsincludethestoryaboutDo
sho
andthe
medicine.
OnlytheTeihoversionofthe
Kenzeiki
,published
roughlythreehundredyearsaftertheoriginaltext,includesthis
story.
Theomissionofsuchanimportantincident–Do
gen’ssalvation
fromdeathbyamiraculousmedicine–bythecompilersofthe
earlierbiographiesissimplynotcomprehensiblewhenwethinkof
genandInari.ByclaimingthatDo
geninstructedDo
sho
an’s
founderto‘distributethismedicineofmanybenetstoour[So
Zen]templessothattheymayspreadtheDharmalineage’,
Bokujunclearlywantedtoprovidealegitimatebasisforselling
theirmedicinetoSo
temples,particularlyEiheiji.
Infact,inbiographiesofDo
genfollowingBokujun’s
,notonlywasthemedicineincidentrecorded,itbecamea
majorpartofDo
gen’slife.Forexample,inthe
Echizennokuni
Eiheijikaisanki
ofGenroku2(1689),
whichwasapartofanew
genreofpopularliteratureanddramacalled
bushi
thatrecountedDo
genandothersectfounders’lives
throughpicturesandperformance,thestoryofDo
’stravels
withDo
geninChinaisvirtuallythecentralaspect.Theplaywright,
kiMagozaburo
,embellishedDo
afterDo
gengiveshertheprecepts(
kechimyakuosazukeru
onlyis
Gedokuen
apartoftheirChineseadventures,butinAct
imperialhouse,theheadquartertemplesofothersectsdealt
directlywiththehousecalledtheTenso
ortheKaju
ji,whichwere
intermediariesforallrequeststotheimperialhousehold.Butinthe
caseofSo
Zen,onefurtherbufferexisted–namelyDo
JapanesescholarsresearchingDo
an,includingTamamuro
Fumio,HiroseRyo
andKumagaiChu
,havenotyet
nothinghadbeenimproperlyremovedbeforeanewabbotistobe
installed–fromKenkon’inTemple,suggestshowmany
Gedokuen
pillstheymayhaveeachreceived.Thismid-sizetempleinpresent-
dayAichiPrefecture,whichwasthefamilytempleforthe
(theMizunofamily),sentitsabbotstoKyotoforpromotionand
broughtback
Gedokuen
totheAichiarea.Inthetempleinventory
datedHo
reki9(1759),whichwaspasseddownfromabbotto
abboteverythreeyears,
underthemedicinalcauldronsectionof
thekitchenentry,thereisapassagewhichreads‘ithasbeenthe
customsincetheabbotshipofTaibitopassdown50
Gedokugan
pillsfromoneabbottothenext’.
Onecanatleastspeculate,then,
thatwhiletheabbotofEiheijiorSo
jijimayhavereceived100pills
fortheirstatusandtheamountofmoneytheypaidtoDo
sho
lower-rankingtemplesmayhavereceivedroughlyhalfthatamount
ofmedicine.Puttingasidethequestionoftheexactnumberofpills
distributed,usingtheiruniquepositionastheintermediarytothe
imperialhousehold,Do
anwasabletopromoteandselltheir
medicinenotonlytotheheadquartertemples,butallmid-size
templesbigenoughthattheirabbotswouldhavetheprestigeof
goingtoKyotoforpromotion.
medicinedirectlytotempleswouldbevalidfortenyears.
thiscontractindicatesisthatgraduallyDo
anwasabletosell
theirmedicinewithgreaterautonomytoaneverexpanding
Table1
Incidentsofcounterfeit
salesintheearlymodernperiod
Year
SelleroffakeGedokuen
Regionofsales
Keicho
12(1607)Ho
in,Ho
,Chu
Jin’emonandTo
nearKyoto
Kan’ei17(1640)So
iandhisdaughter
zaemonand35others
Kyoto,Tento
nomachi
Kan’ei17(1640)So
jiandhisson,Kanzaburo
Shinanoand25others
Kyoto,FuronoZushi-machi
Kan’ei17(1640)PharmacistMyo
kanand6othersnone(changednametoManbyo
’en)Kyoto,O
kitanoko
jiHigashicho
Kan’ei17(1640)Seizaemon
none(self-confession)
Kyoto,Gojo
Daikokucho
Kan’ei17(1640)Do
senofBizenya
Nagano,Kawanakajima
Kan’ei17(1640)SeibeiandNinbei
Kanesaburo
Nagano,Matsushiro
Manji2(1659)So
Jin’emonand4others
Kanbun5(1665)Yasuke
Ryu
sen’in
-Gunma-Koizumimura
Kanbun5(1665)Yasuke
Keirinji
-Gunma-Yabamura
Kanbun5(1665)Yasuke
Ryu
Yashu
-Tochigi-Hanedamura
Kanbun9(1669)Genzo
’an,Cho
Kyoto,Kuromondo
riDanjo
Kanbun9(1669)Genzo
anKo
Kyoto,Kuromondo
Kanbun9(1669)Takasakishiro
anKo
2(1685)Kyu
uponwhichonesworeallegiancetoafeudallord,promisednotto
primaryinterestofthesepartieswastostopunauthorizedsales
whichwouldcutintotheirprotmargin.Asmentionedabove,the
pillwasprobablysoldforarelativelyhighprice,cheaperimitations
wouldnotonlydamagesalesreceipts,butthereputationof
anwouldalsobetaintedifthemedicinewasofinferior
qualityorifthehouseholdcouldnotregulatethedistribution
andidnotdealwithoffendersindependently,butwiththe
institutionalandlegalauthorityofEiheiji,andattimes,evenwith
thehelpofthegovernment’sofceofshrineandtemples.Eiheiji
abbotssignedcontractswithDo
anguaranteeingthehousehold
theexclusiverightsforbothlodgingSo
abbotsinKyotoandthe
saleofmedicinetoSo
Zentemples.
Withsuchcontractsin
hand,Do
annotonlyhadtheabilitytoselldirectlytotemples,
buthadEiheiji’sinstitutionalbackingshouldanytemplebe
associatedwithunauthorizedsa
les.Furtherm
ore,although
anwasneitherashrinenoratemple,whentheresolution
ofanincidentofcounterfeitmedicinesalescouldnotberesolved
probablyrepresentsthemostdynamicgrowthphaseofthe
1The
Teihokenzeiki
wascompiledbyMenzanZuiho
inHo
reki3(1753)
asanannotatededitionofDo
gen’sbiographybyKenzei,thefourteenth
abbotofEiheiji.Thereliabilityofthistextisdiscussedbelow.
2The
ankeifu
–thefamilygeneaologyofDo
an–accountby
8AswithmostEdo-periodmedicines,theformulaofitsproductionwas
zealouslyguarded,butrecentlyKinoshitaJu
18Theoriginalis
Nakano’sargumentscanbefoundinNakanoTo
zen,‘Sekkyo
“EchizennokuniEiheijikaisanki”oto
shitemitaDo
genzenjishinko
kakenshu
43(1999):49–50.KagamishimaHiroyukihasalso
suggestedtheHatanofamily,atraditionalpatronofEiheiji,couldhave
beenthesponsoroftheplay.SincetheHatanofamilywerealso
involvedwiththebuyingandsellingof
inEchizenprovince,
whichhasbeennotedbySuzukiTaisan,thatthispatroncouldhave
beenthesponsorisanotherstrongpossibility.ForKagamishima’s
argument,seehis‘Sekkyo
bushiniokeruDo
genzenjidenkino
kyakushoku:Eiheijikaisankinitsuite’,
4/3(1937):11.Suzuki
TaisanhasdeducedHatanoinvolvementwith
becauseof
extantmedicineboxeswith‘Do
sho
anEchizenHatanoYakuho’
writtenon,whichweresolduntiltheTaisho
period;seehis
nochiikitekitenkai
(Kyoto:Shibunkakushuppan,1993):9.
28ForTsutsumi’sargument,seeTsutsumiKunihiko,‘Do
genedenno
seiritsu’,in
soko
eitherEiheijiorthe
.Ifitwere,itwouldhavehadtoappearin
theEnkyo
,fromwhichitisabsent.Seealso
Hirose2002.
33Thispracticeoftheimperialhouseawarding‘purple’(orimperial-
colour)robes,ofcourse,precedestheEdoperiodandwasimportedto
JapanfromChina.
34Onepossibilityadvancedwastheconnectionmadethroughthe
Shimazufamily,whoselinkstotheimperialfamilyarewellknown.
SinceDo
anservedasarefugeforShimazufamilymembersduring
thewarringstatesperiod,thedomainhadawarded300
ofland
toDo
an.KinoshitaJu
hasalsoshownanearlyconnection
nameandapurplerobeforactualabbotsofEiheijiandSo
jijitobea
littleover2,000
(inpresent-dayterms,approximately200million
yenor$2million),seehisconclusionsinChapter2ofhis
Edojidaino
notenkai
(Tokyo:So
tenkai
(Tokyo:So
shiritsuhakubutsukan,1991.Ontheuseofthesedocumentsascontracts
andthedifferenttypesissuedbythevariousshrinesandtemples,see
ChijiwaHaru,‘Goo
intokisho
mon’,in
in:Inoritochikaino
MachidaShiritsuHakubutsukan,ed.(Machida:Machidashiritsu
hakubutsukan,1991):7–14.OnKumano’s
,inparticular,see
ShimazuNorifumi,‘Kumanoshinko
toNachidakiho
in’,in
Inoritochikainojufu
,Machidashiritsuhakubutsukan,ed.(Machida:
Machidashiritsuhakubutsukan,1991):120–124.
47Itliterallyreads‘Nihonkokurokuju
jingi’or‘allthegods
greatandsmallofthesixtysomeprovincesoftheJapanesenation’.
48Amongtheextantcontractsinthe
anmonjo
,therearethoseby
Sonkaiin1671,Tesuo
in1680,Yu
zenin1736,Engetsuin1741,
genin1751,Esshu
in1755,Tankaiin1758,Mizanin1764,To
in1768,Taimyo
in1781,Daiko
in1786,Gento
in1796,Senpo
1809,Ikaiin1814,Mankaiin1819,Dai’enin1822,andKanzenin
49OnEdo-periodlettersofapology,seeMiyaharaIchiro
,‘Kinsei
monnoko
toseishitsu:ChichibuO
nomuranojireikara’,
Kokugakuindaigakudaigakuinkiyo
29(1997):305–321.
50SeeKumagaiChu
Eiheijinenpyo
.Tokyo:Rekishitoshosha,1978:
51Mostoftheinformationonthepost-Meijideclineof
takenfromKinoshitaJu
,‘Do
annitsuite’,
457(1981):
DUNCANRYU
KENWILLIAMS
GLOSSARY
AshikagaYoshimitsu
BaisanMonpon
Baisanosho
BaiyunShouduan
BaizhangDazhi
BaizhangHuaihai
Baizhangji
Baizhangzushiji
Bajiaosi
Banruotashizhita
Baolinzhuan
BaoTang
Baoyingsi
Beishan
Biyanlu
bodaisho
bonsho
BoSengguang
Bukkeichidaijiyawa
Busensho
busshinshu
Bussokesako
Bussosho
denbosatsukaisaho
butsudasokaishishin
buxiangruiying
Cantongqi
Caoxidashibiezhuan
Caoqi(seeCaoxi)
Caoxishan
Chanlinbeiyongqinggui
Chanmenguishi
chanrenpinghuazhuxiezhenqiuzan
chanrenxiezhenqqiuzan
Chanyuanqinggui
ChaozongHuifang
ChaozongHuifangchanshiyulu
ChikotsuDaie
chingokokkashido
ChokushiShinku
Zenjigyo
Chongshan
Chuanfabaoji
GLOSSARY
Chuanfazhengzongji
chuanshen
Conglinjiaodingqingguizongyao
Congronglu
Dafodingrulaimiyinxiuzhengliaoyi
zhupusawanxingshoulengyanjing
DahuiPujuechanshiyulu
DahuiZonggao
DaifukudenHo
Daijiho
sankai
shikiichiichishin
DaikenHo
daikushikitaichishin
)No
Dainichikyo
DaliBaoTangsi
DaliguoFanxiangjuan
Damoji
Damozushiji
Daolong(Jpn.Do
Daoxuan(Jpn.Do
GLOSSARY
darumaho
Daxingshansi
DayangJingxuan
Dazhichanshi
Den’ezo
bisho
chuandenglu
Dilun(J.Jiron)
dingchengrujixiang
gen(Kigen)
Dongfangshibao
DongshanLiangjie
DongshanLiangjiechanshiyulu
Dongshanlu
anBokujun
anKatsujun
ankeifu
anmonjo
anonkerainomonokisho
Dufalu
DuguJi
DuHungjian
Dumensi
Dunhuangshehuijingjiwenxian
zhenyishilu
Dunhuangxuedacidian
Duo(Pozao)
GLOSSARY
Ehatsukechimyakudenjusaho
EiheikaisanDo
genzenjigyo
Eiheikaisangodenzagumon
EiheiSho
shotaisei
enako
endonshinkai
enmitsuzenkai
EnniBen’en
ningyo
Erzutiaoxin
Fanwangjing
Fayanchanshiyulu
Fayuanzhulin
FohaiHuiyuanchanshiguanglu
GLOSSARY
Fozhibiqiuliuwutu
Fujiantongzhi
FukakiShunjo
Fukuden-ekirigami
FushanFayuan
fushigishiku
FuyongDaokai
GanmingChanyuan
GaofengYuanmiao
GaoYuangui
GaoYun
GasanJo
zenjiden
gondaijo
Go-Saga(Tenno
raimokuroku
Gozanjissatsuzu
guhuixiang
GLOSSARY
GuqianshimendufalujingzhaoDu
heshangxiezhenzan
GuoHong
gurenzhixiang
Hakusan(Shirayama)
HakuunEgyo
HanshitsuRyo
Hebujin’guanmingjing
heshanggan
GLOSSARY
HongKongKuaibao
Hongzhichanshiguanglu
Hongzhouzong
honraimuichimotsu
honrainomenmoku
Zenjito
shinzanmai
nikansho
HouLi
HuangDaide
HuanglongHuinanchanshiyulu
Huangmei(shan)
HuihongJuefan
Huiming[si]
Huishengqianzhiyingxiang
Huofoan
Huofogong
Huofotang
ichidaiengyo
GLOSSARY
IkkeiEishu
inakaEshin
Iseharashishishiryo
shozaimokuroku
isshinsangan
JiangBoqin
Jiaoyuanqinggui
jiayitudiyuan
jikishininshinkensho
jikonohonbun
jinenkaku
Jingdechuandenglu
JingdeMonastery
Jinxianyuan
jitsudaijo
JiXianlin
GLOSSARY
butsushijogo
Tengin
doho
mongenrusho
doshogakusho
jubutsuda
konnohito
zaichigyo
shinron
junsui(zen)
kaidanfunpun
kaishanlidaizuji
kaishanzuji
KangSenghui
Kanjinkakumusho
Kanromonshu
Kasuisaimonjo
Kechimyakunosan
Keiranshu
GLOSSARY
kenicchi
Kesadaiji
Kesakudoku
Kesa-mandarakirigami
kirigami(var.kirikami)
KinoshitaDo
KisenShu
fukujiso
kakeifuden
KokanShiren
konponmo
sanMyo
yanomaki
GLOSSARY
LiangshanYuanguan
LiangWudi
Lidaifabaoji
Lidaiminghuaji
lidaizu
Liji
Lingyinsi
LinjiYixuan
Linjianlu
LiTiti
liuyetuxu
Liuzuzhimiao
LiZhen
Longhuayihui
Longmenshan
chiaoch’an
LuXiongxi
yuanshigui
MangenShiban
mayudaruma
GLOSSARY
MitsuiBussan
mokushimokkai
[mo]na
monshie
MorinShihan
moshanchaobaxidingxiangwuxing
MuhonKakushin
MujakuDo
MujakuMyo
Musaidaishinoyurai
chishikunshi
muwuzhixiang
eKo
kechimyakufu
Naitenjinrosho
Nanhuasi
GLOSSARY
Nanshanchanzong
Nanshanlu
NanyueHuairang
NanyueZongshengji
GLOSSARY
PozaoDuo(seeDuo)
PuanYinxiaochanshiyulu
Pusachutaijing
Putidamonanzongdingshifeilun
qielanshen
Qinglongsi
QingyuanXingsi
QingZhou
qizhongyouxiang
Qizuzanwen
Renminribao
Renwangjing
rigonmunen
risshundaikichi
RogakuTo
rokudaisoshizu
rokushiki
Ruiquanan
Ryo
anEmyo
GLOSSARY
Ryo
andaiosho
zankaibyaku
narabinikuninro
jinnokien
Ryo
Ryo
Ryo
Ryu
Ryu
henSeijunKiunItsu
narabinigyo
Ryu
Ryu
Ryu
Ryu
tenjukaikirikami
Ryu
tennosan
Cantongqi
sangenjissho
Sangokubuppo
Sangokuso
denfukudenkirigami
Sanzangfashu
Kisenzenzigoyo
zanmusaidaishijimusho
SekizanZen’in
Senchakushu
senjunenbutsu
senmonso
GLOSSARY
Shakushiho
ekun
Shanjianlu
Shangmingsi
ShangshuyouchengXugongxie
zhentuzanbingxu
Shaolinsi
ShaqianjiangeShendusi
Shedachenglun
Shelun
Shenlongsi
GLOSSARY
Shinsengedokumanbyo
enFukuyo
nokoto
Shiren(seeKokanShiren)
ShishuangChuyuan
shishuzanmai
ShitouXiqian
ShiXingzi
Shizhuangrutai
doryo
Shoeko
shingishiki
ichiKokushi
ichikokushigoroku
ichikokushikanaho
ichikokushinenpu
Shokekyo
ishu
GLOSSARY
wateihonNichirensho
ninibun
daijikudensho
shue
monjissho
shumyo
shimon
Shun’okuMyo
siguan
SimaGuang
Sitaji
sizuXindashi
sokushinjo
SongDing
Songgaosengzhuan
nishiroku
SuiYangdi
SunHuan
GLOSSARY
taijido
Taikyu
Taikyu
jiyuraiki
Taimitsu
Taisho
hakurankai
TamonTenno
Tan’e
Tanggaosengzhuan
Tanhui
tannatang
Tanshi
Tanyan
Tendaimyo
mokuruiju
Tendaishingonnishu
isho
TenkaiKu
TenrinFuin
Tenso
TiantaiZhiyi
TiantongRujing
Tiantongshan
fukuSho
ichikokushi
TominagaNakamoto
tongotonshu
tongozenshu
TouziYiqing
Toyamanogyo
Tsu
genJakurei
GLOSSARY
TsujiZennosuke
tudishen
TuFei
WaanSeijun
Wangzhi
Wanniansi
WeiGao
WeiShou
Weishu
Wenzhao
WuDaozi
Wudenghuiyuan
Wuji
wujiandingxiang
Wujidashi
Wumen
Wumenguan
WuzhunShifan
Wutaishan
Wuxiang
WuxueZuyuan
GLOSSARY
XiaoZhongjing
XiatangHuiyuan
Xicizhuan
XieHe
XijianZutan
XiyanLiaohui
XiyanLiaohuichanshiyulu
Xuanhehuapu
XuanDi
XuDai
XuedouZhongxian
Xugaosengzhuan
YamazakiTakeshi
Yangchengwanbao
YangqiFanghui
YangqiFanghuiheshanghoulu
YanqingMonastery
Yijing
Yijing
Yixing
yixingxieshen
takujiTsu
genZenjigyo
Yuanjuejingdashuchao
GLOSSARY
Yuanwufoguochanshiyulu
YuanwuKequan
kiMagozaburo
Yuquansi
Yun’yanTancheng
Zanfozu
Zenrinsho
zensho
godan
zeshinzebutsu
ZhangWeizhong
ZhangXingsheng
ZhangYanyuan
Zhenyan(Jpn.Shingon)
zhenzan
Zhenzongbanruochuanfazhitang
Zhongfengheshangguanglu
ZhongfengMingben
Zhongguofojiaowenhuayanjiusuo
GLOSSARY
Zhonghuachuanxindichanmenshizi
chengxitu
ZhouHongzheng
ZhuoanDeguang
ZhuShende
ZhuTanyou
Zhuzijiali
zhuzuji
zishuzhenzan
geshiten
ZuikoChingyu
zunsuqianhua
zunsuxiang
zuonurenbai
zushita
Zutanggangjixu
GLOSSARY
,216,219,237
,222
AminoYoshihiko,14
Amoghavajra(seeBukong),89
nanda,227
sei,159
Annen(841–?),200,201,202,206
,200
,‘intermediary
being’),235
,innerrobe),
212,233
Arhats(Ch.Luohan,J.Rakan),42,
214,252(seealsoS
BaiSengguang(d.385),84
BaiyunShouduan(1025–1072),16,
100,101,102,104,118
BaizhangHuaihai(749–814),100,
101,102,104
(dynastictreasure),215–216,
BaoTang(school),36
Baolinzhuan
,50
BaoyingMonastery,93
Beizong(NorthernChan),90
,206
,202
Biyanlu
,69
Bodhidharma,90,91,94,100,
101,104,110;andHuike,213;
andSho
tokuTaishi,200;facing
thewall,235;inJapan,197;
lineageof,94,95,96,101;
memorialservicefor,102,103;
portraitof,115,122;robeof,
122,215,229
ta(see
,232
,80
BodhisattvaPrecepts,224
bSamYas(SamyeMonastery),2
;bowlofthe,220;
robeas,232–233
Buddhabhadra(359–429)218
Buddha-MindSchool(
183,187,190,195,197,204,
Bukong(Amoghavajra,705–774),
39–40,89
Busensho
,198,199
,seeBuddha-Mind
Bussokesako
,235
Cantongqi
),162
Caoxidashibiezhuan
,221
Chanhermeneutics,10–11
Chanlinbeiyongqinggui
,102,103
Chanmenguishi
,117
Chanyuanqinggui
,39,53,54,55,
ChaozhongHuifang(1173–1229),
ChikotsuDaie,191
,15–16,74,127,129,216
andpassim
;ofZhuoan
Deguang,217
Chuandenglu
,45,76
Chuanfabaoji
,92,92,138
Chuanfazhengzongji
,196
Cien(632–682),87
DahuiZonggao(1089–1163),6,
119,142
Genko(1428–1505),225
)No
nin,122,180,195
,191,197
,1282–1336),197
Daizong(Emperor),217,224
Daliscroll,42–43
Daoan(d.385),81,82
Daodejing
,134
Daolong(J.Do
,1213–1278),
Daoxin(580–651),90
Daoxuan(596–667),87,105,219,
239,240
Daoxuan(J.Do
sen,702–760),184,
195,200
,56,57
,202
,8,122,180,195
Daxingshan(Monastery),89
DayangJingxuan(934–1027),123
DeGroot(J.J.M.),113
ville,Paul,20–21
DenÕezo
bisho
,239
,226
Dharma-robe(
,seeRobe)
Dharmatra
ta(seeBodhidharma),64
,80,81,126,128(see
gen(1200–1253),7,8,18,
20–21,43,122,132,179,180,
206;andDo
,273;and
EmperorGo-Saga,228;and
Rujing,200,214;inEchizen,
DongfangShibao,155
DongshanLiangjie,6
(Daolong,1213–1278),181,
(1172–1248),266,272–273
an,21,266–281
anBokujun(d.1690),
Dragon,257;daughterofthe
dragon-king,273;seealso
DuFei,92,138,141
DuguJi,48,49,52
Dumen(Monastery),92
Dunhuang,37
Duo(Stove-Breaking),260
Ehatsukechimyakudenjusaho
226,234
Eiheiji,274–275,276
Eiheikaizangodenzagumon
,231
Eisai(var.Yo
sai,1141–1215),179,
Eizon(var.Eison,1201–1290),193
(robeandbowl),212
Ganming(Chancloister),102
(supernormalpowers),56
Kaidan’in,198
(Founder’sHall),110
Kakua(1143–?),180
Kakunyo(1270–1351),199
Kaltenmark(Max),216
,250–261
KangSenghui(.3rdc.),46
(contemplationofthemind),
194,203
Kanjinkakumusho
,193
Kannon(bodhisattva),257
,Dharmarobe),
20–21,75,211–240
,224,233
Kasuisai(Temple),276
yapa(seeMaha
212–213,226;andMaitreya,
(‘bloodline’,lineage
chart),19,218,224,234,251
Kegon,194
Keiranshu
,226,227
Keizan(Jo
kin,1268–1325),21,
226,236;ontheka
ya,215;
anddream,221
Kenninji,196
Kenzei(1415–1474),272
Kenzeiki
,266,272,274
Kesadaiji
,231
Kesa-mandarakirigami
,230
Killinglife,222
(var.
),13,20,
211,225,229,234,259
KisenShu
(d.1493),251
),13,19
fukujiso
,181
Kennichi(1241–1316),109
KokanShiren(1278–1348),196
Gaosengzhuan
,269
zengokokuron
,206
,199
Kudensho
,203
Michiie,192,193,202
kai(774–835),39,88,89,182;
motherof,236
Kumano,278–279
KurodaToshio,14
MujakuDo
,114,127,214,229
MujakuMyo
(1333–1393),251
(Ichien,1226–1312),19,206
Mummies,16,85,87
Mus(Paul),236,237
Soseki,(1275–1351),109,
e(Ko
ben,1173–1232),192,
shinji,108
Naitenjinrosho
,196
Nanyin(Weizhong),69
Nanyue(Mount),165
NanyueHuairang(677–744),94
NanyueHuisi(seeHuisi)
NanyueZongshengji,165
Nanzhao,43
Shandao(613–681),87
ShangshuYouchenxugong
,48
,ascendingthe
DharmaHall),16,116,117,
Shanwuwei(S
636–735),89,91;mummyof,
Shaolin(Monastery),90,91
ShaqianjiangeShendusi
,121
Shenhui(684–758),5,37–38,67,
92,93,138,213
Shenhui(Jingzhong),43
Shenxiu(606–706),91–92,138,
Shiji
,79
ShiKe,42
Shide(J.Jittoku),42
Tiantaishan,225
TiantaiZhiyi(seeZhiyi),105
TiantongRujing:seeRujing
daiji,194
daijikaidan’in,193
fukuji,111,183,193
kai(d.u.),200
TokiwaDaijo
,163
TominagaNakamoto(1715–1746),
TouziYiqing(1032–1083),122–123
(ThreeBodiesofthe
Buddha),58,59
Tsu
genJakurei(1322–1391),
TsujiZennosuke,204
(earth-spirit),100
,80,81,126,127
(nun),224
),212
Vairocana,190
Vajrabodhi,89
Vijn
,193
Vimalakõ
,125
Vinaya(Lu
,Ritsu),129,140,222,
223,228,239(seealso:
BodhisattvaPrecepts,Daoxuan,
a,Yijing)
WaanSeijun,252–253
Wannian(Monastery),103
ZhangYanyuan,49,52,79
Zhanran(711–782),105
Zhaozhou,124,125
,(‘truth’,‘trueimage’,
portrait),79–80,124,126,128
(portrait-hall),39
(trueimage),57
Zhenyan(seeShingon),39–40,89
(portraiteulogy),36,45,
47,119
Zhiyi(TiantaiZhiyi,538–597),87,
89,105,200
Zhizhao(d.u.),48,49,70
ZhongfengMingben(1263–1323),
51,74,128
Zhongzong(Emperor),217
ZhouHongzhen,82
ZhuDi,69–70
ZhuTanyou,83
ZhuXi(1130–1200),141
Zhuzijiali
,141
Zhuangzi,41
ZhuoanDeguang(1121–1203),
122,217
Ziming(ShishuanChuyuan,
986–1039),62,125
zizan
(self-eulogy),118
Zongjinglu
,191,193
Zongmi(GuifengZongmi,
780–841),6,93–94,139,189,
Zonkaku(1290–1373),198,199
(patriarchhall),93
Zutanggangjixu
,101
Zutangji
,96,97,99,124,213
INDEX

Приложенные файлы

  • pdf 14674389
    Размер файла: 1 MB Загрузок: 0

Добавить комментарий