Chims phu. [alt. Mchims phu]. A conglomeration of meditation caves and hermitages on the side of a low ridge near BSAM YAS monastery south of LHA SA; also known as Mchims phu. It forms one of central Tibet’s most important and active pilgrimage sites. The location’s principal cave, Brag dmar ke’u tshang (Drakmar Ke’utsang), is one of eight major centers connected with PADMASAMBHAVA, and is considered the representation of the Indian master’s speech. It is identified as the place where Padmasambhava first gave the instructions known as the “eight transmitted precepts of attainment” (SGRUB PA BKA’ BGYAD) to his eight main disciples, including the Tibetan king KHRI SRONG LDE BTSAN. It is also the location where Padmasambhava resurrected Khri srong lde btsan’s young daughter PADMA GSAL, and gave her the teachings of the MKHA’ ’GRO SNYING THIG for the first time. The Chims phu complex also contains a natural representation of Padmasambhava’s pure land, ZANGS MDOG DPAL RI, the glorious copper-colored mountain, as well as meditation caves of YE SHES MTSHO RGYAL, VAIROCANA, and KLONG CHEN RAB ’BYAMS, who died there. Many of the caves and hermitages at Chims phu are still used for meditation retreat by Tibetan men and women.

Chin’gak Hyesim. (眞覺慧諶) (1178–1234). Korean SŎN master during the Koryŏ dynasty, also known as Yŏngŭl and Muŭija. Although he sought to ordain as a monk at an early age, his mother adamantly opposed his wish and he instead studied to become a Confucian literatus. It was not until 1202, after his mother’s death, that he finally was able to join the SUSŎNSA community established by POJO CHINUL and become his principal disciple. Hyesim was known for his intense style of practice: he is said, for example, to have been so absorbed in his meditation while he was at CHIRISAN that snow had piled up to his head. Although Chinul had decided to pass the leadership of his community on to Hyesim in 1208, Hyesim declined and went into hiding on Chirisan. In 1210, when Chinul passed away, some of his disciples notified the king of their master’s death and he issued a royal decree, ordering Hyesim to return to Susŏnsa and succeed Chinul. Hyesim thus became the second teacher of the Susŏnsa community. He spent the rest of his life building the community and teaching the kanhwa Sŏn (see KANHUA CHAN), or “questioning meditation,” technique that Chinul had first championed in Korea. Hyesim compiled the first indigenous kongan (C. GONG’AN) collection, the SŎNMUN YŎMSONG CHIP, and the emphasis on kanhwa Sŏn in subsequent Korean Buddhist practice owes much to his fervent advocacy of the technique. Hyesim passed away at the age of fifty-seven and received the posthumous title Chin’gak kuksa (State Preceptor Authentic Enlightenment). His other works include the CHOGYE CHIN’GAK KUKSA ŎROK and the Sŏnmun gangyo.

Chin’gam Hyeso. (眞鑑慧昭) (774–850). A Korean SŎN master and pilgrim during the Silla dynasty, also known as Chin’gam Sŏnsa. Hyeso is famous for introducing a traditional Indian Buddhist chanting style (K. pŏmp’ae; C. FANBAI) to Korea. In 804, Hyeso accompanied the official embassy to China, where he studied under a disciple of the eminent CHAN master MAZU DAOYI in the HONGZHOU school of early Chan. In China, Hyeso is said to have been often referred to as the Sage of the East (Dongfang shengren) and the Black-Headed Ascetic (Heidoutuo) because of his dark skin. In 810, Hyeso received full monastic precepts at the monastery of SHAOLINSI on SONGSHAN, where he met a fellow Korean monk TOŬI. Hyeso later traveled to Zhongnanshan, where he practiced ŚAMATHA and VIPAŚYANĀ meditation for three years. In 830, he returned to Korea and became the king’s personal teacher. He later established the monasteries of Changbaeksa on Sŏraksan and Okch’ŏnsa on CHIRISAN, where he constructed an image hall for the sixth patriarch (LIUZU) HUINENG. King Chŏnggang (r. 886–887) gave him the posthumous title Chin’gam (True Mirror) and changed the name of his monastery from Okch’ŏnsa to SSANGGYESA (Paired Brooks Monastery). Hyeso is also renowned for introducing tea and tea culture to the Korean peninsula and green tea from the mountains surrounding SSANGGYESA is still renowned in Korea for its quality. Chin’gam Hyeso is also reputed to have introduced the distinctive “Indian style” of chanting to Korea around 830, and current pŏmp’ae specialists trace their lineage back to him.

Chinhŭng wang. (眞興王) (534/540–576). Twenty-fourth king of the Korean Silla dynasty; his secular name was Kim Kongnŭngjong and his dharma name, Pŏbun (Dharma Cloud). He succeeded King Pŏphŭng at the age of seven and reigned for thirty-six years (r. 540–576). Later in his life he became a Buddhist monk and promoted the propagation of Buddhism in Silla. Following his footsteps, his queen, Lady Sado, also entered the SAṂGHA and received the dharma name Myoju (Sublime Dwelling); she resided at a monastery called Yŏnghŭngsa. King Chinhŭng’s reign is considered to be a turning point in the development of Buddhism in Silla. King Chinhŭng ordered the construction of the royal monastery Hŭngnyunsa, and after its completion allowed commoners for the first time to enter the saṃgha. At his request, the hundred high-seat ceremony (paekkojwa pŏphoe) for the recitation of the RENWANG JING as well as the eight restrictions festival (P’ALGWANHOE; cf. C. BAGUAN ZHAI) were held for the first time in Silla. HWANGNYONGSA, the grandest monastery in Korea, was also built during his reign.

Chinjong. (K) (震鐘). See YONGSŎNG CHINJONG.

Chinmyŏng Honwŏn. (眞明混元) (1191–1271). A Korean SŎN master during the Koryŏ dynasty. Honwŏn was ordained in 1203 and studied under various teachers before visiting the Sŏn master CHIN’GAK HYESIM. He began his training in Sŏn (CHAN) meditation under Hyesim’s disciple Mongyŏ (d. 1252), who became the third state preceptor (kuksa, C. GUOSHI) to lead the SUSŎNSA community established by POJO CHINUL. Honwŏn eventually became Mongyŏ’s disciple. In 1245, Honwŏn was invited by the powerful military commander Ch’oe U (d. 1249) to the newly founded monastery of Sŏnwŏnsa that he had established in the Koryŏ capital of Kaesŏng. There, Honwŏn attracted many talented disciples including CH’UNGGYŎNG CH’ŎNYŎNG. When Mongyŏ passed away in 1252, Honwŏn became the fourth state preceptor of Susŏnsa, but he quickly abdicated this position to his disciple Ch’ŏnyŏng in 1259 to become the personal teacher of the king (wangsa). He was later given the posthumous title Chinmyŏng (True Illumination).

Chinp’yo. (眞表) (fl. c. eighth century). Korean VINAYA master (yulsa) during the Silla dynasty. Chinp’yo was a native of Mangyŏng county in Wansan province (present-day Chŏnju). According to legend, Chinp’yo is said to have been a student of a certain dharma master named Sungje (d.u.) of the monastery of KŬMSANSA, and was himself responsible for a major expansion of the monastery that took place between 762 and 766. Sungje, who purportedly studied under the eminent Chinese monk SHANDAO, informed Chinp’yo of his vision of MAÑJUŚRĪ on WUTAISHAN, after which Chinp’yo decided to devote himself to the practice of body-discarding repentance (mangsinch’am) at Pusaŭiam (Inconceivable Hermitage). In 740, after seven nights of ascetic repentance, Chinp’yo had a vision of the BODHISATTVA KṢITIGARBHA. Chinp’yo continued his training at the monastery Yŏngsansa, where he had a vision of the bodhisattva MAITREYA. From Maitreya, Chinp’yo received the divination scripture, ZHANCHA SHANE YEBAO JING, and 189 divination sticks made of sandalwood, two of which were said to have been made of Maitreya’s fingers. In 766, he began teaching at Kŭmsansa, where he installed six gilded images of Maitreya in the main shrine hall (TAEUNG CHŎN). King Kyŏngdŏk (r. 742–764) later invited Chinp’yo to the palace and received the bodhisattva precepts (K. posal kye, C. PUSA JIE). Chinp’yo had many disciples, among whom Yŏngsim (d.u.) is most famous.

Chinul. (K) (知訥). See POJO CHINUL.

chinyŏng. (C. zhenying; J. shin’ei 眞影). In Korean, lit. “true image”; viz., a “monk’s portrait.” Although the term is known throughout the East Asian Buddhist traditions, it is especially associated with Korea; the related term DINGXIANG (J. chinzō, lit. “head’s appearance”) is more typically used within the Chinese and Japanese traditions. The employment of the term chinyŏng in Korea is a late Chosŏn dynasty development; different terms were used in Korea before that era to refer to monk’s portraits, including chinhyŏng (“true form”), sinyŏng (“divine image”), chinyong (“true appearance”) and yŏngja (“small portrait image”). “Chin” (“true”) in the compound refers to the inherent qualities of the subject, while “yŏng” (“image”) alludes to his physical appearance; thus, a chinyŏng is a portrait that seeks to convey the true inner spirituality of the subject. Images of eminent masters who had been renowned patriarchs of schools, courageous monk soldiers, or successful fund-raisers were enshrined in a monastery’s portrait hall. These portraits were painted posthumously—and, unlike Chinese dingxiang portraits, typically without the consent of the subjects—as one means of legitimizing the dharma-transmission lineage of their religious descendants; this usage of portraits is seen in both meditation (SŎN) and doctrinal (KYO) monasteries. Korean monk portraits were not given out to individual disciples or lay adherents, as occurred in Chinese and Japanese Buddhism, where dozens and even hundreds of portraits were produced by and for a variety of persons. In the context of the Korean Sŏn school, the pictures additionally enhanced the Sŏn Buddhist emphasis on the direct spiritual transmission (see YINKE) between master and disciple. The development of monk portraiture was closely tied to annual commemorative practices in Buddhist monasteries, which sought to maintain the religious bonds between the dharma ancestors and their descendants.

Chion’in. (知恩院). In Japanese, “Knowing Beneficence Cloister”; the headquarters of the JŌDOSHŪ, or PURE LAND school of Japanese Buddhism, which was founded by HŌNENs (1133–1212); located in the Higashiyama district of Kyōto. Chion’in was the site where Hōnen taught and where he died after a long period of fasting. His disciple Genchi (1183–1238) built the complex in his honor in 1234 and, still today, a statue of Hōnen is enshrined in the founder’s hall. Most of the monastery was destroyed by fire in 1633, but the third Tokugawa shōgun rebuilt the monastery in the middle of the seventeenth century with the structures present today. These include the main gate, or sanmon, built in 1619 and the largest gate of this type in Japan at seventy-nine feet tall. The oldest building on the monastery campus is the hondō, or main Buddha hall, built in 1633, which can hold three thousand people. Guesthouses from 1641 are roofed in the Irimoya style, and the roof beams on many of the buildings are capped with the Tokugawa three-hollyhock leaf crest. Various hallways in the monastery have also been built with “nightingale floors” (J. uguisubari)—floorboards with metal ends that rub on metal joints when someone walks across them, making them extremely squeaky. This flooring was specifically designed to sound an alarm in case any assassin might try to sneak into the sleeping quarters when the Tokugawa family stayed over at the monastery. The monastery’s bell was cast in 1633 and weighs seventy-four tons; it is so massive that it takes seventeen monks to ring it when it is rung annually on New Year’s Day.

Chirisan. (智異山). In Korean, “Mountain of the Wise and Extraordinary [Bodhisattva]” (though the term more probably means “round mountain”; see below); a Buddhist sacred mountain and the second highest mountain in Korea (its highest peak is Ch’onwangbong at 5,745 ft./1,915 m.) after Hallasan. Chirisan is located on the southern end of the Paektu taegan, the marchmount that is regarded geographically and spiritually as the geomantic “spine” of the Korean peninsula, and is the widest and highest section of the Sobaeksan subrange. Chiri Mountain stretches across the three southernmost provinces of the Korean peninsula: North Chŏlla, South Chŏlla, and South Kyŏngsang and has been considered a place where the BODHISATTVA MAÑJUŚRĪ is constantly preaching. Because of this association, Buddhists have traditionally interpreted the Chinese characters used to transcribe the mountain’s name Chiri as deriving from the -ri in the Sino-Korean transcription of Mañjuśrī’s name (K. Munsusari) combined with the character chi(-ji) in his epithet “He of Great Wisdom” (Taeji); the near-homophone i (“extraordinary”) was ultimately substituted for the character -ri to indicate that Mañjuśrī represents himself in various “extraordinary” guises in order to save sentient beings. Recent research by historical linguists has, however, called this Buddhist parsing of the name into question. One of the earliest names found in Korean sources for the mountain is Turyu (lit. “Head Flowing”), which seems to be a transcription using Sinographs of the indigenous Korean word turu (now the adverb “widely” but previously used as an adjective meaning “round”), which in the local dialect changed from turuto turi, tŭri, tiri, to finally chiri. Hence, Chirisan is actually the transcription of an indigenous Korean word meaning “round mountain,” referring to the many rounded peaks, punctuated by winding valleys, that dominate the massif. Chirisan’s steepest summit is Ch’onwangbong Peak (5,745 ft/1,915 m) in the north, but its principal peaks include Songnisan (3,171 ft./1,057 m) in the south, Nogodan (4,521 ft/1,507 m) in the west, and Panyabong (5,271 ft/1,751 m) in the north central region of the massif. Chirisan has long been considered one of the “three spiritual mountains” (samsinsan) of Korea, along with KŬMGANGSAN and Hallasan, and has been a major center of Buddhist practice on the peninsula. There are currently 350 to 400 monasteries and hermitages on Chirisan, the three largest of which are HWAŎMSA, SSANGGYESA, and CHŎNŬNSA. Chiri Mountain is now protected as a national park, the first such designation made in Korea.

chiroutuan. (J. shakunikudan; K. chŏgyuktan 赤肉團). In Chinese, “lump of red (viz., raw) flesh”; a CHAN expression attributed to LINJI YIXUAN (d. 867) to refer to the physical body that is constantly buffeted by the senses. Linji contrasts this lump of flesh with the “true man of no rank” (C. WUWEI ZHENREN), which is equivalent to the sentience, or numinous awareness (LINGZHI), that enables sensory experience.

Ch’obalsim chagyŏng mun. (初發心自警文). In Korean, “Personal Admonitions to Neophytes Who Have First Aroused the Mind,” a primer of three short texts used to train Korean postulants and novices in the basics of Buddhist morality and daily practice, compiled during the middle of the Chosŏn dynasty (1392–1910). The title of the primer is constructed by combining elements from its three constituent texts: (1) POJO CHINUL’s (1158–1210) Kye ch’osim hagin mun (“Admonitions to Neophytes”), a vade mecum for monastic conduct directed to novices, monks, and SŎN monks residing in the meditation hall; (2) WŎNHYO’s (617–686) PALSIM SUHAENG CHANG (“Arouse Your Mind and Practice”) (-balsim is the first two Sinographs in the title of Palsim suhaeng chang); and (3) Yaun Kagu’s (fl. c. 1376) Chagyŏng or Chagyŏng mun (“Self-Admonitions”), a set of ten behavioral codes to follow in religious development. The Ch’obalsim Chagyŏng mun continues today to be among the very first works read by male and female postulants in the monastic community.

Chodang chip. (C. Zutang ji; J. Sodōshū 祖堂集). In Korean, “Patriarchs’ Hall Collection”; one of the earliest “lamplight histories” (CHUANDENG LU), viz., lineage records, of the CHAN tradition, compiled in 952 by the monks Jing (K. Chŏng) (d.u.) and Yun/Jun (K. Un/Kyun) (d.u.) of the monastery of Chaojingsi in Quanzhou (in present-day Fujian provine). The Chodang chip builds on an earlier Chan history, the BAOLIN ZHUAN, on which it seems largely to have been based. According to one current theory, the original text by Jing and Yun was a short work in a single roll, which was expanded into ten rolls early in the Song dynasty and subsequently reissued in twenty rolls in the definitive 1245 Korean edition. The anthology includes a preface by the compilers’ teacher and collaborator Zhaoqing Shendeng/Wendeng (884–972), also known as the Chan master Jingxiu, who also appends verse panegyrics after several of the biographies in the collection. The Chodang chip provides biographies of 253 figures, including the seven buddhas of the past (SAPTATATHĀGATA), the first Indian patriarch (ZUSHI) MAHĀKĀŚYAPA up to and including the sixth patriarch (LIUZU) of Chan in China, HUINENG, and monks belonging to the lineages of Huineng’s putative disciples QINGYUAN XINGSI and NANYUE HUAIRANG. In contrast to the later JINGDE CHUANDENG LU, the Chodang chip mentions the lineage of Qingyuan before that of Nanyue. In addition to the biographical narrative, the entries also include short excerpts from the celebrated sayings and dialogues of the persons it covers. These are notable for including many features that derive from the local vernacular (what has sometimes been labeled “Medieval Vernacular Sinitic”); for this reason, the text has been the frequent object of study by Chinese historical linguists. The Chodang chip is also significant for containing the biographies of several Silla-dynasty monks who were founders of, or associated with, the Korean “Nine Mountains School of Sŏn” (KUSAN SŎNMUN), eight of whom had lineage ties to the Chinese HONGZHOU ZONG of Chan that derived from MAZU DAOYI; the anthology in fact offers the most extensive body of early material on the developing Korean Sŏn tradition. This emphasis suggests that the two compilers may themselves have been expatriate Koreans training in China and/or that the extant anthology was substantially reedited in Korea. The Chodang chip was lost in China after the Northern Song dynasty and remained completely unknown subsequently to the Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen traditions. However, the 1245 Korean edition was included as a supplement to the Koryŏ Buddhist canon (KORYŎ TAEJANGGYŎNG), which was completed in 1251 during the reign of the Koryŏ king Kojong (r. 1214–1259), and fortunately survived; this is the edition that was rediscovered in the 1930s at the Korean monastery of HAEINSA. Because the collection is extant only in a Koryŏ edition and because of the many Korean monks included in the collection, the Chodang chip is often cited in the scholarly literature by its Korean pronunciation.

Ch’oesangsŭng non. (K) (最上乘論). Original Korean title of the Xiuxin yao lun. See XIUXIN YAO LUN.

Chogye Chin’gak kuksa ŏrok. (曹溪眞覺國師語録). In Korean, “Recorded Sayings of the National Master Chin’gak of Mt. Chogye”; a collection of the sayings of the Korean SŎN master CHIN’GAK HYESIM. As the first and oldest recorded saying (YULU) collection in Korea, the Chogye Chin’gak kuksa ŏrok has served as an important source for studying the early history of kongan studies in that region (see GONG’AN). The oldest extant edition of the text dates to 1526. The collection consists largely of Hyesim’s various public lectures (e.g., SHANGTANG, shizhong, and FAYU), private lessons (DUIJIs, xiaocan, and AGYO), and letters to his students. Many of his lectures are concerned with the famous kongan attributed to ZHAOZHOU CONGSHEN, wherein Zhaozhou offers the reply “wu” (“no”) to the question, “Does a dog have buddha nature, or not?” (see GOUZI WU FOXING).

Chogye chong. (曹溪宗). In Korean, the “Chogye order”; short for Taehan Pulgyo Chogye chong (Chogye Order of Korean Buddhism); the largest Buddhist order in Korea, with and some fifteen thousand monks and nuns and over two thousand monasteries and temples organized around twenty-five district monasteries (PONSA). “Chogye” is the Korean pronunciation of the Chinese Caoxi, the name of the mountain (CAOXISHAN) where the sixth patriarch (LIUZU) of CHAN, HUINENG, resided; the name is therefore meant to evoke the order’s pedigree as a predominantly Chan (K. SŎN) tradition, though it seeks also to incorporate all other major strands of Korean Buddhist thought and practice. The term Chogye chong was first used by the Koryŏ monk ŬICHŎN to refer to the “Nine Mountains school of Sŏn” (KUSAN SŎNMUN), and the name was used at various points during the Koryŏ and Chosŏn dynasties to designate the indigenous Korean Sŏn tradition. The Chogye order as it is known today is, however, a modern institution. It was formed in 1938 during the Japanese colonial administration of Korea, a year after the monastery of T’aegosa was established in central Seoul and made the new headquarters of Chosŏn Buddhism (Chosŏn Pulgyo ch’ongbonsan). This monastery, later renamed CHOGYESA, still serves today as the headquarters of the order. The constitution of the order traces its origins to Toŭi (d. 825), founder of the Kajisan school in the Nine Mountains school of Sŏn; this tradition is said to have been revived during the Koryŏ dynasty by POJO CHINUL, who provided its soteriological grounding; finally, the order’s lineage derives from T’AEGO POU, who returned to Korea at the very end of the Koryŏ dynasty with dharma transmission in the contemporary Chinese LINJI ZONG. In 1955, following the end of the Korean War, Korean Buddhism entered into a decade-long “purification movement” (chŏnghwa undong), through which the celibate monks (pigu sŭng) sought to remove all vestiges of Japanese influence in Korean Buddhism, and especially the institution of married monks (taech’ŏ sŭng). This confrontation ultimately led to the creation of two separate orders: the Chogye chong of the celibate monks, officially reconstituted in 1962, and the much smaller T’AEGO CHONG of married monks.

Chogye order. See CHOGYE CHONG.

Chogyesa. (曹溪寺). In Korean, “Chogye Monastery”; the administrative headquarters of the CHOGYE CHONG, the largest Buddhist order in contemporary Korea, and its first district monastery (PONSA). In an attempt to unify Korean Buddhist institutions during the Japanese colonial period, Korean Buddhist leaders prepared a joint constitution of the SŎN and KYO orders and established the Central Bureau of Religious Affairs (Chungang Kyomuwŏn) in 1929. Eight years later, in 1937, the Japanese government-general decided to help bring the Buddhist tradition under centralized control by establishing a new headquarters for Chosŏn Buddhism (Chosŏn Pulgyo Ch’ongbonsan) in the capital of Seoul. With financial and logistical assistance from the Japanese colonial administration, the former headquarters building of a proscribed Korean new religion, the Poch’ŏn’gyo, was purchased, disassembled, and relocated from the southwest of Korea to the site of Kakhwangsa in the Chongno district of central Seoul. That new monastery was given the name T’aegosa, after its namesake T’AEGO POU, the late-Koryŏ Sŏn teacher who received dharma transmission in the Chinese LINJI ZONG. After the split in 1962 between the celibate monks of the Chogye chong and the married monks (taech’ŏ sŭng), who organized themselves into the T’AEGO CHONG, T’aegosa was renamed Chogyesa, from the name of the mountain where the sixth patriarch (LIUZU) of Chan, HUINENG, resided (see CAOXISHAN). This monastery continues to serve today as the headquarters of the Chogye chong. In addition to the role it plays as the largest traditional monastery in the city center of Seoul, Chogyesa also houses all of the administrative offices of the order.

chŏl. Vernacular Korean term for a Buddhist “monastery” and the indigenous Korean equivalent of the Sino-Korean term sach’al (see, e.g., SAMBO SACH’AL). The derivation of the term is uncertain: some historical linguists derive it by metonymy as a place where “bows” (chŏl) are performed; others scholars, from the Pāli/Prakrit term THERA (elder). Cf. TERA.

Ch’ŏnch’aek. (天頙) (1206–?). The fourth patriarch of the Korean White Lotus Society (PAENGNYŎN KYŎLSA) during the middle of the Koryŏ dynasty; also known as State Preceptor Chinjŏng (“True Calmness” or “True Purity,” using homophonous Sinographs). Ch’ŏnch’aek was a descendent of a Koryŏ merit official, who devoted himself to Confucian studies from a young age and passed the civil-service examinations at the age of twenty. At twenty-three, he became a monk under the tutelage of State Preceptor WŎNMYO YOSE (1163–1245), the founder of the White Lotus Society (cf. BAILIAN SHE) at Mount Mandŏk in T’amjin county (present-day Kangjin in South Chŏlla province), and subsequently assisted his teacher Yose in the Society’s campaign. In 1244, Ch’ŏnch’aek traveled to Mimyŏnsa on Mount Kongdŏk in Sangju county (present-day Mun’gyŏng in North Kyŏngsang province) to open and lead the society there at the request of the renowned magistrate of Sangju, Ch’oe Cha (1188–1260). The Kongdŏksan branch of the society was called the East White Lotus; the Mandŏksan branch was by contrast called the South White Lotus. In the late 1250s or early 1260s, Ch’ŏnch’aek returned to Mandŏksan to become the fourth patriarch of the White Lotus Society. He later retired to Yonghyŏram (Dragon Cavity Hermitage) on Mount Tŏngnyong, south of Mandŏksan, where he continued an active correspondence with literati. Indeed, Ch’ŏnch’aek maintained close associations with several of the famous literati of his time and invited them to participate in the activities of the White Lotus Society. Ch’ŏnch’aek’s thought reflects the historical realities of Korea during the Mongol invasion. In his letters to civil and military officials, Ch’ŏnch’aek opined that killing the invading Mongol army would be an appropriate act for a BODHISATTVA, because it would stop the invaders from performing evil actions that would lead them to endless suffering in the hells. His Haedongjŏn hongnok (“Extended Record of the Transmission [of Buddhism] in Korea”), a four-roll collection of miracle tales related to worship of the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA (“Lotus Sūtra”) , sought to popularize that scripture also in order to help bring peace to the Korean peninsula. Ch’ŏnch’aek’s literary talent was so renowned that the famous Chosŏn literatus Chŏng Yagyong (1762–1836) counted him among the three greatest writers of the Silla and Koryŏ dynasties. Ch’ŏnch’aek’s works, none of which are extant in full, include the Haedongjŏn hongnok and his literary collection, the Hosan nok (“Record of Lakes and Mountains”). Authorship of the SŎNMUN POJANGNOK is attributed to Ch’ŏnch’aek, although this attribution is still in question.

Chongfasi. (崇法寺). In Chinese, “Esteeming the Dharma Monastery”; Song dynasty name for WUZHENSI.

Chŏngho. (K) (鼎鎬). See HANYŎNG.

Ch’ŏnghŏ Hyujŏng. (清虚休静) (1520–1604). Korean SŎN master of the Chosŏn dynasty; best known to Koreans by his sobriquet Sŏsan taesa (lit. the Great Master “West Mountain,” referring to Mt. Myohyang near present-day P’yŏngyang in North Korea). Hyujŏng was a native of Anju in present-day South P’yŏngan province. After losing his parents at an early age, Hyujŏng was adopted by the local magistrate of Anju, Yi Sajŭng (d.u.), and educated at the Sŏnggyun’gwan Confucian academy. In 1534, Hyujŏng failed to attain the chinsa degree and decided instead to become a monk. He was ordained by a certain Sungin (d.u.) on CHIRISAN in 1540, and he later received the full monastic precepts from Hyuong Ilsŏn (1488–1568). Hyujŏng later became the disciple of the Sŏn master Puyong Yŏnggwan (1485–1571). In 1552, Hyujŏng passed the clerical exams (SŬNGKWA) revived by HŎŮNG POU, who later appointed Hyujŏng the prelate (p’ansa) of both the SŎN and KYO traditions. Hyujŏng also succeeded Pou as the abbot of the monastery Pongŭnsa in the capital, but he left his post as prelate and spent the next few years teaching and traveling throughout the country. When the Japanese troops of Hideyoshi Toyotomi (1536/7–1598) invaded Korea in 1592, Hyujŏng’s disciple Kihŏ Yŏnggyu (d. 1592) succeeded in retaking the city of Ch’ŏngju, but died shortly afterward in battle. Hyujŏng himself was then asked by King Sŏnjo (r. 1567–1608) to lead an army against the invading forces. His monk militias (ŭisŭnggun) eventually played an important role in fending off the Japanese troops. When the king subsequently gave Hyujŏng permission to retire, the master left his command in the hands of his disciple SAMYŎNG YUJŎNG; he died shortly thereafter. Hyujŏng is said to have had more than one thousand students, among whom Yujŏng, P’yŏnyang Ŭn’gi (1581–1644), Soyo T’aenŭng (1562–1649), and Chŏnggwan Ilsŏn (1533–1608) are best known. Hyujŏng left a number of writings, including the SŎN’GA KWIGAM, which is one of the most widely read works of the Korean Buddhist tradition. Other important works include the Samga kwigam, Sŏn’gyo sŏk, Sŏn’gyo kyŏl, and Sŏlsŏn ŭi. In these works, Hyujŏng attempted to reconcile the teachings of the Sŏn and Kyo traditions of Buddhism, as well as the doctrines of Buddhism and Confucianism.

Chonghŏn. (K) (宗憲). See MANAM CHONGHŎNs.

Chŏnghye Kyŏlsa. (定慧結社). In Korean, the “SAMĀDHI and PRAJÑĀ Society”; an important Korean “retreat society” (kyŏlsa; C. JIESHI) during the Koryŏ dynasty. The first Samādhi and Prajñā Society was established by the Korean SŎN master POJO CHINUL at the monastery of Kŏjosa on Mt. Kong in 1188. At the invitation of a monk by the name of Tŭkchae (d.u.), Chinul and a handful of monks gathered at Kŏjosa in 1188 and formally began their retreat two years later in 1190. Throughout the retreat, Chinul continued to invite willing participants, both clergy and laity, to join the community. Among the most renowned of these recruits was the Korean CHŎNT’AE CHONG (TIANTAI ZONG) adept WŎNMYO YOSE (1163–1240). Seven years later, in 1197, the community had grown to such a size that Chinul began looking for a larger, more suitable site to relocate the community. A small, dilapidated monastery known as Kilsangsa on Mt. Songgwang was chosen as the new site, and reconstruction of the temple began immediately. King Hŭijong (r. 1204–1211) later renamed Kilsangsa SUSŎNSA, or Sŏn Cultivation Community; it is now the major monastery of SONGGWANGSA, the so-called Saṃgha-Jewel monastery (Sŭngbo sach’al) of Korean Buddhism. Chinul’s first composition, the Kwŏn su Chŏnghye kyŏlsa mun (“Encouragement to Practice: The Compact of the Samādhi and Prajñā Society”), written in 1290, provides the rationale behind the establishment of the community and critiques PURE LAND adepts who claim that buddhahood cannot be achieved in the present lifetime.

chongjŏng. (宗正). In Korean, “supreme patriarch” (lit. “primate of the order”); the spiritual head of the CHOGYE CHONG (Chogye order) of Korean Buddhism. The term chongjŏng first began to be used in Korean Buddhism during Japanese colonial rule (1910–1945) and has continued to be employed since 1954 when the celibate monks (pigu sŭng) established an independent Chogye order, which eventually excluded the married monks (taech’ŏ sŭng) who had dominated monastic positions during the colonial period. A Korean Supreme Court ruling in 1962 ultimately gave the celibate monks title to virtually all the major monasteries across the nation and led to the Chogye order’s official re-establishment as the principal ecclesiastical institution of Korean Buddhism, with the chongjŏng serving as its primate. The married monks subsequently split off from the Chogye order to form the independent T’AEGO CHONG. ¶ To be selected as chongjŏng, a candidate must be a minimum of sixty-five years of age and have been a monk for at least forty-five years; his rank in the Chogye order must be that of Taejongsa (great master of the order), the highest of the Chogye order’s six ecclesiastical ranks. To select the chongjŏng, a committee of seventeen to twenty-five monks is appointed, which includes the Chogye order’s top executive (ch’ongmuwŏnjang), council representative (chonghoe ŭijang), and head vinaya master (hogye wiwŏnjang); the selection is finalized through a majority vote of the committee members. The chongjŏng is initially appointed for a five-year term and is eligible for reappointment for one additional term. The contemporary Chogye order counts Wŏnmyŏng Hyobong (1888–1966), appointed in 1962, as its first chongjŏng.

Chŏngjung Musang. (C. Jingzhong Wuxiang; J. Jōshu Musō 淨衆無相) (680–756, alt. 684–762). Korean-Chinese CHAN master of the Tang dynasty; because he was of Korean heritage, he is usually called Musang in the literature, following the Korean pronunciation of his dharma name, or Master Kim (K. Kim hwasang; C. Jin heshang), using his Korean surname. Musang is said to have been the third son of a Silla king and was ordained in Korea at the monastery of Kunnamsa. In 728, he arrived in the Chinese capital of Chang’an (present-day Xi’an) and had an audience with the Tang emperor Xuanzong (r. 712–756), who appointed him to the monastery of Chandingsi. Musang subsequently traveled to Chu (in present-day Sichuan province) and became a disciple of the monk Chuji (alt. 648–734, 650–732, 669–736), who gave him dharma transmission at the monastery of Dechunsi in Zizhou (present-day Sichuan province). He later resided at the monastery of Jingzhongsi in Chengdu (present-day Sichuan province; later known as WANFOSI), which gave him his toponym Chŏngjung (C. Jingzhong). Musang became famous for his ascetic practices and meditative prowess. Musang also began conferring a unique set of precepts known as the three propositions (SANJU): “no recollection” (wuji), which was equated with morality (ŚĪLA); “no thought” (WUNIAN) with concentration (SAMĀDHI); and “no forgetting” (mowang) with wisdom (PRAJÑĀ). He also taught a practice known as YINSHENG NIANFO, a method of reciting the name of the Buddha by extending the length of the intonation. Musang’s prosperous lineage in Sichuan came to be known as the JINGZHONG ZONG line of Chan. Musang seems to have taught or influenced several renowned Chan monks, including HEZE SHENHUI (668–760), BAOTANG WUZHU (714–774), and MAZU DAOYI (707–786); he also played an important role in transmitting Chan to Tibet in the 750s and 760s.

ch’ongnim. (叢林). In Korean, lit., “dense grove”; a large, ecumenical monastery. In Korea, the term ch’ongnim is used in the contemporary CHOGYE CHONG to refer to a handful of major monasteries that are able to provide training in the full range of practices that exemplify the major strands of the Korean Buddhist tradition, including SŎN meditation, KYO (and especially Hwaŏm, C. HUAYAN) doctrine, PURE LAND recitation of the buddha AMITĀBHA’s name (K. yŏmbul; see NIANFO), and VINAYA (monastic discipline) observance. While most monasteries are primarily devoted to one or another of these types of training, a ch’ongnim serves as a center where all can be practiced. These monasteries thus typically are larger comprehensive training centers, with a meditation hall (sŏnbang) and a monks’ seminary or lecture hall (kangwŏn) on the campus; additionally, their spiritual head is called a pangjang (C. FANGJANG) rather than the usual chosil (“occupant of the patriarchs’ room”). A monastery designated as a ch’ongnim receives a second name, most of which designate the mountain at which they are located. The five current Korean ch’ongnims are HAEINSA (also known as the Haein Ch’ongnim), SONGGWANGSA (Chogye Ch’ongnim), T’ONGDOSA (Yŏngch’uk Ch’ongnim), SUDŎKSA (Tŏksung Ch’ongnim), and PAEGYANGSA (Kobul Ch’ongnim). See also CONGLIN.

Ch’ŏnt’ae chong. (C. Tiantai zong; J. Tendaishū 天台宗). In Korean, “Altar of Heaven order”; a new order of Korean Buddhism, founded in 1966 by Wŏn’gak Sangwŏl (1911–1974). Despite the order’s name, which evokes that of the Chinese TIANTAI ZONG, the Ch’ŏnt’ae chong is not heavily beholden to traditional Tiantai (K. Ch’ŏnt’ae) doctrine and practice but is a thoroughly modern order, which seeks to respond to contemporary religious and social concerns. The school professes “aeguk Pulgyo” (patriotic Buddhism), which purports to contribute to the development of the nation through personal cultivation and social-welfare activities. Its primary method of spiritual cultivation involves the repetitive recitation of the name of Kwanseŭm posal (AVALOKITEŚVARA bodhisattva), based in part on the constant-action SAMĀDHI (K. sanghaeng sammae; C. changxing sanmei), one of the four kinds of samādhi attributed to the Chinese TIANTAI monk TIANTAI ZHIYI (538–597). The Ch’ŏnt’ae order introduced a few distinctive elements that distinguish it from other Korean Buddhist orders, e.g., (1) all its followers, whether monks, nuns, or lay people, participate together in a one-month retreat each summer and winter, although monks and nuns have an additional fifty-five day retreat period that immediately follows the winter retreat; (2) monks observe the tradition of shaving their heads, while nuns keep their hair in a small chignon in order to distinguish themselves from laywomen. Since its inception, the order has emphasized lay activities: it encourages lay people to involve themselves in administrative affairs, such as temple finance; it founded the Kŭmgang Buddhist seminary, which offers a two-year program to educate lay people on Tiantai and general Buddhist doctrines and a one-year program to train lay propagators of Buddhism (p’ogyosa); finally, the order has also established Kŭmgang University (Geumgang Daehakkyo), which offers a full range of majors in both Buddhism and secular topics. The order is also active in social activities, such as the promotion of social welfare and environmental preservation. Its major temples are the Kuinsa headquarters founded by Sangwŏl in 1945 in North Ch’ungch’ŏng province; and Samgwangsa, founded in 1969 in Pusan. The school also has overseas branches in Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Mongolia.

Ch’ŏntae marhak Unmuk hwasang kyŏngch’aek. (天台末學雲默和尚警策). In Korean, “Admonitions of the Preceptor Unmuk, a Latter-day Scholar of Ch’ŏnt’ae/Tiantai,” in one roll, by the late-Koryŏ monk Unmuk (d.u.; fl. late fourteenth century?). See UNMUK.

Ch’ŏnt’ae sagyo ŭi. (C. Tiantai sijiao yi; J. Tendai shikyōgi 天台四教儀). In Korean, the “Principle of the Fourfold Teachings of the Tiantai [School],” composed by the Korean monk Ch’egwan (d. 970); an influential primer of TIANTAI ZONG (K. Chŏnt’ae chong) doctrine. The loss of the texts of the Tiantai tradition in China after the chaos that accompanied the fall of the Tang dynasty prompted the king of the Wuyue kingdom to seek copies of them elsewhere in East Asia. King Kwangjong (r. 950–975) of the Koryŏ dynasty responded to the Wuyue king’s search by sending the monk Ch’egwan to China in 961. In order to summarize the major teachings of the Tiantai school, Ch’egwan wrote this one-roll abstract of TIANTAI ZHIYI’s Sijiao yi, which also draws on other of Zhiyi’s writings, including his FAHUA XUANYI. Ch’egwan’s text is especially known for its summary of Zhiyi’s doctrinal classification schema (see JIAOXIANG PANSHI) on the different (chronological) stages of the Buddha’s teaching career and the varying methods he used in preaching to his audiences; these are called the “five periods and eight teachings” (WUSHI BAJIAO). The five periods correspond to what the Tiantai school considered to be the five major chronological stages in the Buddha’s teaching career, each of which is exemplified by a specific scripture or type of scripture: (1) HUAYAN (AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA), (2) ĀGAMA, (3) VAIPULYA, (4) PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ, and (5) SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA and MAHĀPARINIRVĀṆASŪTRA. The different target audiences of the Buddha’s message lead to four differing varieties of content in these teachings (huafa): (1) the PIṬAKA teachings, which were targeted at the two-vehicle adherents (ER SHENG) of disciples (ŚRĀVAKA) and solitary buddhas (PRATYEKABUDDHA); (2) the common teachings, which were intended for both two-vehicle adherents and neophyte bodhisattvas of the MAHĀYĀNA; (3) the distinct teachings, which targeted only bodhisattvas; (4) the perfect or consummate teachings (YUANJIAO), which offered advanced bodhisattvas an unvarnished assessment of Buddhist truths. In speaking to these audiences, which differed dramatically in their capacity to understand his message, the Buddha is said also to have employed four principal techniques of conversion (huayi), or means of conveying his message: sudden, gradual, secret, and indeterminate. Ch’egwan’s text played a crucial role in the revitalization of the Tiantai tradition in China and has remained widely studied since. The Ch’ŏnt’ae sagyo ŭi was also influential in Japan, where it was repeatedly republished. Numerous commentaries on this text have also been written in China, Korea, and Japan.

Ch’ŏnŭng. (K) (處能). See PAEKKOK CH’ŎNŬNG.

Chŏnŭnsa. (泉隱寺). In Korean, “Monastery of the Hidden Fount”; one of the three major monasteries located on the Buddhist sacred mountain of CHIRISAN. The monastery is said to have been founded in 828 by an Indian monk named Tŏgun (d.u.) and was originally named Kamnosa (either “Sweet Dew Monastery” or “Responsive Dew Monastery”), after a spring there that would clear the minds of people who drank its ambrosial waters. During the Koryŏ dynasty, Chŏnŭnsa was elevated to the status of first Sŏn monastery of the South, during the rule of Ch’ŭngnyŏl wang (r. 1275–1308). Most of the monastery was destroyed during the Japanese Hideyoshi invasion (1592–1598). In 1679, a Sŏn monk named Tanyu (d.u.) rebuilt the monastery, but changed the name to Chŏnŭn (Hidden Fount), because the spring had disappeared after a monk killed a snake that kept showing up around it. Subsequently, fires of unknown origin repeatedly occurred in the monastery, which stopped only after hanging up a board with the name of the monastery written in the “water” calligraphic style by Wŏn’gyo Yi Kwangsa (1705–1777), one of the four preeminent calligraphers of the Chosŏn dynasty.

Ch’ŏnyŏng. (K) (天英). See CH’UNGGYŎNG CH’ŎNYŎNG.

Chŏryo. (K) (節要). See PŎPCHIP PYŎRHAENG NOK CHŎRYO PYŎNGIP SAGI.

chōsan. (朝参). In Japanese, lit. “morning meditation”; the morning-period ZAZEN that begins the day at a Japanese ZEN monastery.

Chos ’byung mkhas pa’i dga’ ston. (Chöjung Kepe Gatön). In Tibetan, “A Scholar’s Feast of Doctrinal History”; the title of a seminal historical study of Indian and Tibetan Buddhism, composed between 1545 and 1564 by the renowned scholar DPA’ BO GTSUG LAG PHRENG BA. Due to the author’s lineage affiliation as an incarnation (SPRUL SKU) of the BKA’ BRGYUD sect, the text emphasizes the history and doctrine of the KARMA BKA’ BRGYUD, tracing lines of transmission and doctrinal development, although it also addresses other Tibetan traditions more cursorily. There is an extensive section on Tibet’s early imperial period, likely written on the basis of first-hand access to many original documents, ledgers, royal receipts, and historical notes, all long since lost. This religious history is therefore held by both Tibetan and Western scholars to be an authoritative and historically reliable source. It is also known as the Lho brag chos ’byung (“The Lho brag History of the Doctrine”) in reference to the author’s principal seat in the region of Lho brag in southern Tibet. Its complete title is Dam pa’i chos kyi ’khor los bsgyur ba rnams kyi byung ba gsal bar byed pa mkhas pa’i dga’ ston.

Chos grub. (Chö drup) (C. Facheng 法成) (c. 755–849). Tibetan translator of Chinese Buddhist texts into Tibetan during the early ninth century; he worked at the Chinese outpost of DUNHUANG along the SILK ROAD. At the command of King RAL PA CAN, Chos grub translated what the Tibetans know as the “Great Chinese Commentary” on the SAṂDHINIRMOCANASŪTRA, a massive exegesis to this important YOGĀCĀRA text that was composed by the Korean commentator WŎNCH’ŬK; Chos grub’s rendering was an important source for TSONG KHA PA’s Drang nges LEGS BSHAD SNYING PO (“Essence of Eloquence on the Definitive and Provisional”). Chos grub was also the translator of the Chinese apocryphon YULANBEN JING (“Book of the Yulan Vessel”), an influential text on the “Ghost Festival” (YULANBEN).

Chos kyi ’byung gnas. (Chökyi Jungne) (1700–1774). Tibetan Buddhist scholar recognized as the eighth TAI SI TU incarnation, remembered for his wide learning and his editorial work on the Tibetan Buddhist canon. He traveled extensively throughout his life, maintaining strong relationships with the ruling elite of eastern Tibet and the Newar Buddhists of the Kathmandu Valley. Born in the eastern Tibetan region of SDE DGE, Chos kyi ’byung gnas was recognized as a reincarnate lama (SPRUL SKU) by the eighth ZHWA DMAR, from whom he received his first vows. He would go on to study with KAḤ THOG Rigs ’dzin Tshe dbang nor bu (1698–1755), from whom he learned about GZHAN STONG (“other emptiness”). At the age of twenty-one, he accompanied several important Bka’ brgyud hierarchs, the Zhwa dmar and the twelfth KARMA PA, to Kathmandu, a journey that was to have a profound impact on the young Si tu’s life. He returned to eastern Tibet in 1724, where he was received favorably by the king of Sde dge, Bstan pa tshe ring (Tenpa Tsering, 1678–1738). Under the latter’s patronage, Chos kyi ’byung gnas founded DPAL SPUNGS monastery in 1727, which became the new seat for the Si tu lineage (they are sometimes called the Dpal spungs si tu). Between the years 1731 and 1733, he undertook the monumental task of editing and correcting a new redaction of the BKA’ ’GYUR section of the Tibetan Buddhist canon, to be published at the printing house of Sde dge. Although in his day Tibetan knowledge of Indian linguistic traditions had waned, Chos kyi ’byung gnas devoted much of his later life to the study of Sanskrit grammar and literature, which he had first studied with Newar paṇḍitas during his time in Kathmandu. He sought out new Sanskrit manuscripts in order to establish more precise translations of Sanskrit works already translated in the Tibetan canon; he is esteemed in Tibet for his knowledge of Sanskrit grammar. In addition to his prolific scholarly work, Chos kyi ’byung gnas was an accomplished painter as well as a gifted physician, much sought after by the aristocracy of eastern Tibet. In 1748, he visited Nepal once again, where he translated the Svayambhūpurāṇa, the legends concerning the SVAYAMBHŪ STŪPA, into Tibetan. He was received amicably by the rulers Jayaprakāśamalla (1736–1768) of Kathmandu, Raṇajitamalla (1722–1769) of what is now Bhaktapur, and Pṛthvīnārāyaṇa Śāha, who would unify the Kathmandu Valley under Gorkhali rule several decades later. Chos kyi ’byung gnas’ collected writings cover a vast range of subjects including lengthy and detailed diaries and an important history of the KARMA BKA’ BRGYUD sect coauthored by his disciple Be lo Tshe dbang kun khyab (Belo Tsewang Kunkyap, b. 1718). He is retrospectively identified as an originator of what would become known as Khams RIS MED movement, which gained momentum in early nineteenth century Sde dge.

Chosŏn Pulgyo t’ongsa. (朝鮮佛教通史). In Korean, “A Comprehensive History of Chosŏn Buddhism”; compiled by the Buddhist historian Yi Nŭnghwa (1868–1943). Yi’s Chosŏn Pulgyo t’ongsa is the first modern attempt to write a comprehensive history of Korean (or Chosŏn as it was then known) Buddhism. The text was first published by Sinmun’gwan in 1918. The first volume narrates the history of Korean Buddhism from its inception during the Three Kingdoms period up until the time of the Japanese occupation. Information on the temples and monasteries established by Koreans and a report on the current number of monks and nuns are also appended to end of this volume. The second volume narrates the history of Buddhism in India after the Buddha’s death. The compilation of the canon (TRIPIṬAKA; DAZANGJING) and the formation of the various schools and traditions are provided in this volume. The third and final volume provides a commentary on some of the more important events described in volume one. Yi relied heavily on biographies of eminent monks and stele inscriptions. Yi’s text is still considered an important source for studying the history of Korean Buddhism.

Chosŏn Pulgyo yusin non. (朝鮮佛教唯新論). In Korean, “Treatise on the Reformation of Korean Buddhism”; composed by the Korean monk-reformer HAN YONGUN in 1910. While sojourning in Japan, Han personally witnessed what to him seemed quite innovative ways in which Japanese Buddhists were seeking to adapt their religious practices to modern society and hoped to implement similar ideas in Korea. This clarion call for Buddhist reform was one of the first attempts by a Korean author to apply Western liberalism in the context of Korean society. Han attributed many of the contemporary problems Korean Buddhism was facing to its isolation from society at large, a result of the centuries-long persecution Buddhism had suffered in Korea at the hands of Confucian ideologues during the previous Chosŏn dynasty (1392–1910). To help restore Buddhism to a central place in Korean society and culture, Han called for what were at the time quite radical reforms, including social and national egalitarianism, the secularization of the SAṂGHA, a married clergy, expanded educational opportunities for monks, the transfer of monasteries from the mountains to the cities, and economic self-reliance within the monastic community. Both the Japanese government-general and the leaders of the Korean Buddhist community rebuffed most of Han’s proposals (although several of his suggestions, including a married clergy, were subsequently co-opted by the Japanese colonial administration), but the issues that he raised about how to make Buddhism relevant in an increasingly secularized and capitalist society remain pertinent even to this day.

Chos rgyam Drung pa. See TRUNGPA, CHÖGYAM.

Ch’oŭi Ŭisun. (草衣意恂) (1786–1866). Korean SŎN master of the Chosŏn period; also known as Ilchiam (“One-Finger Hermitage”). He received the full monastic precepts and the name Ch’oŭi from the monk Wanho Yunu (1758–1826). Ch’oŭi became Yunu’s disciple, and made a name for himself as an influential Sŏn master. Ch’oŭi is perhaps most renowned for his efforts to revitalize the art of tea in Korea. He developed the tea ceremony as a form of religious practice and is known for synthesizing the tea ceremony and Sŏn practice, as exemplified in his slogan ta sŏn ilmi (“tea and Sŏn are a single taste”). Ch’oŭi also wrote several guides to growing, preparing, and drinking tea, such as the Tongdasong and the Tasin chŏn, which is based on the Chinese classic Wanbao quanshu. Ch’oŭi’s other writings include a collection of his poetry, the Ch’oŭi shigo, and a biography of the eminent Korean monk Chinmuk Irok (1562–1633), the Chinmuk chosa yujŏkko. Among his writings, the Sŏnmun sabyŏn manŏ (“Prolix Discourse on Four Distinctive Types in the Sŏn School”) in particular played a major role in determining the future of Sŏn discourse in Korea. The text was written as a critique of PAEKP’A KŬNGSŎN’s equally influential text, the Sŏnmun sugyŏng (“Hand Mirror on the Sŏn School”).

chuandeng lu. (J. dentōroku; K. chŏndŭng nok 傳燈録). In Chinese, “transmission of the lamplight record”; a generic term for a genre of historical writing associated with the CHAN school, or more specifically to the most representative text of that genre, the JINGDE CHUANDENG LU. These so-called “lamp” or “lamplight histories” (denglu) include the CHODANG CHIP (C. Zutang ji), CHUANFA ZHENGZONG JI, Tiansheng guangdeng lu, Wudeng huiyuan (“Collected Essentials of the Five Lamplight Histories”), and others. These texts were composed primarily to establish a genealogical map of Chan orthodoxy and to reinforce the legitimacy for the lineages, teachings, and practices of the various Chan lines. These mature Chan histories were strongly influenced by earlier genealogical histories compiled during the Tang dynasty, such as the CHUAN FABAO JI, LENGQIE SHIZI JI, LIDAI FABAO JI, and BAOLIN ZHUAN. In these earlier texts, contending groups of masters and their disciples wove together intricate lineages that they traced back to the legendary Indian founder of Chan, BODHIDHARMA, and his immediate successors. These texts began using the metaphor of a “lamplight” (deng) being transmitted from lamp to lamp to suggest the wordless, mind-to-mind transmission (YIXIN CHUANXIN) of the Buddha’s insight from master to disciple and down through the generations. These chuandeng lu also came to serve another important purpose as the primary source of the stories about the interactions between masters and students, from which important precedents or cases (GONG’AN) were collected for contemplation or testing of meditative experience.

chuanfa. (J. denbō/denpō; K. chŏnpŏp 傳法). In Chinese, lit., “transmit the dharma”; the transmission from master to disciple that constitutes the genealogy or lineage of different schools of Buddhism. See CHUANDENG LU;CHUANFA ZHENGZONG JI; FASI; YINKE.

Chuan fabao ji. (J. Denbōhōki; K. Chŏn pŏppo ki 傳法寶紀). In Chinese, “Annals of the Transmission of the Dharma Jewel”; compiled c. 713 by the layman Du Fei (d.u.) for followers of the so-called Northern School (BEI ZONG) of CHAN. Along with the LENGQIE SHIZI JI, the Chuan fabao ji is probably one of the earliest Chan chronicles that delineate the theory of the “transmission of the lamplight” (see CHUANDENG LU). The narrative of transmission that appears in the Chuan fabao ji seems to be based on an epitaph for the monk Faru (638–689), which is the oldest extant document outlining the transmission of the lamplight theory (written in 689). According to Faru’s epitaph and the Chuan fabao ji, the wordless teaching of Chan that ŚĀKYAMUNI transmitted to his disciple ĀNANDA was inherited by BODHIDHARMA, HUIKE, SENGCAN, DAOXIN, HONGREN, Faru, and finally by SHENXIU. The Chuan fabao ji is largely comprised of the biography of these figures.

chuanfa ji. (J. denbōge/denpōge; K. chŏnpŏp ke 傳法偈). In Chinese, “dharma-transmission GĀTHĀ.” See YIJI.

Chuanfa zhengzong ji. (J. Denbōshōshūki; K. Chŏnpŏp chŏngjong ki 傳法正宗). In Chinese, “Record of the Orthodox Tradition’s Transmission of the Dharma”; edited by FORI QISONG (1007–1072) and published in 1591; an influential history of the CHAN tradition, the Chuanfa zhengzong ji largely follows the genealogies delineated in the JINGDE CHUANDENG LU, with the crucial difference of accepting a roster of only twenty-four, not twenty-eight, patriarchs (ZUSHI) in the Chan tradition. In its first roll, the Chuanfa zhengzong ji begins with the biography of the Buddha, and follows in the next few rolls with the biographies of his successors, starting with MAHĀKĀŚYAPA and the twenty-four Indian patriarchs of Chan, continuing through to the sixth Chinese patriarch HUINENG. In rolls seven and eight, approximately thirteen hundred short biographies of monks who trace their lineages back to Huineng are provided. The last roll offers more than two hundred biographies of important meditators, ascetics, and Chan masters who predate Huineng, as well as brief notes on monks who thus do not belong to the “orthodox” Chan lineage outlined above. One of the primary purposes of this text was to argue against the dominant “twenty-eight Indian patriarchs” model borrowed from the apocryphal FUFAZANG YINYUAN ZHUAN (the model used, for instance, in the Jingde chuandeng lu) and substantiate instead the alternative paradigm of twenty-four Indian patriarchs.

Chuanxin fayao. (J. Denshinhōyō; K. Chŏnsim pŏbyo 傳心法要). In Chinese, “Essential Teachings on the Transmission of the Mind”; by the CHAN master HUANGBO XIYUN, also known as the Huangboshan Duanji chanshi chuanxin fayao. Huangbo’s prominent lay disciple Pei Xiu’s (787?–860) preface to the text was prepared in 857. Pei Xiu, the powerful Tang-dynasty minister of state, is said to have recorded the lectures delivered by Huangbo at the monasteries of Longxingsi and Kaiyuansi, and edited his notes together as the Chuanxin fayao and WANLING LU. The two texts seem to have circulated together until the eleventh century. The central tenet of the Chuanxin fayao is the teaching of the “one mind” (YIXIN). Since everything, including buddhas and sentient beings, are all considered to be aspects of the one mind, Huangbo’s use of this term underscores the fundamental unity of all things. Huangbo also likens this mind to space, a common metaphor for emptiness (ŚŪNYATĀ). Chan practice entails bringing an end to the discriminative process of thought, so that this one mind will be made manifest. Since all beings are inherently endowed with this one mind, which is complete in and of itself, there is no need to develop a series of practices, such as the six PĀRAMITĀs, or to amass stores of merit (PUṆYA), in order to perfect that one mind. Simply awakening to that one mind will itself be sufficient to transform an ignorant sentient being into an enlightened buddha.

Chu dbar. (Chubar). A Tibetan name for the region of the Rongshar Valley in southern Tibet close to the Nepalese border, chiefly associated with the eleventh-century Tibetan YOGIN MI LA RAS PA; also spelled Chu ’bar. According to Mi la ras pa’s biographies, many of the yogin’s favored retreat sites were located in the Chu dbar area, a short distance from the famed enclave of LA PHYI. Foremost among these was ’Bri lce phug (Driche puk), or “Dri’s Tongue Cave,” which served as the site for his cremation. Many of Mi la ras pa’s patrons hailed from Chu dbar and the neighboring village BRIN, both of which later came under the administrative control of ’BRI GUNG BKA’ BRGYUD hierarchs. The region is also home to Chu dbar monastery, which was eventually directed by the tenth KARMA PA Chos dbying rdo rje (Chöying Dorje, 1604–1674), but was destroyed during the Cultural Revolution. Nearby is Mt. Tseringma (Nepalese: Gaurishanker) which, together with four surrounding peaks, is believed to be the divine residence of the five long-life sister goddesses (TSHE RING MCHED LNGA) who were converted to Buddhism and became disciples of Mi la ras pa.

chuin’gong. (主人公). In Korean, lit. “master” or “owner”; a term used within the SŎN and CHAN tradition to refer to “buddha-nature” (C. FOXING) or “true mind” (C. zhenxin). See ZHURENGONG.

chuishi. (J. suiji; K. susi 垂示). In Chinese, lit “giving instructions,” viz., a “pointer”; also known as shizhong (instructing the assembly), chuiyu (giving words), and suoyu (searching for words). In order to measure the depth of a student’s understanding, CHAN masters often challenged him with a question, word, or phrase. This process of interrogation was referred to as chuishi. In various case (GONG’AN) collections, such as the BIYAN LU, the term chuishi also began to refer to the introductory words, or “pointers,” placed before the actual case (bence). These introductory words often included questions and anecdotes. Similarly, the CONGRONG LU used the term shizhong to refer to these introductory words.

chūkai. (抽解). In Japanese, “to take off”; referring to the rest period between meditation periods for monks practicing in the sōdō, or SAṂGHA hall. In between meditation sessions, monks are allowed to leave the SAṂGHA hall and take off their robes to lie down and rest.

chukpi. (竹蓖). In Korean, “bamboo clacker”; an instrument used in Korea to mark the beginning and end of Buddhist ceremonies and meditation sessions. The instrument is a hollow stick of bamboo split down the middle, which, when struck, produces a clacking noise. The chukpi is typically clacked three times to signal the beginning and end of a ceremony or meditation session. Cf. MOKT’AK.

Chulalongkorn. (Thai). See RĀMA V.

Ch’unggyŏng Ch’ŏnyŏng. (冲鏡天英) (1215–1286). Korean monk of the Koryŏ dynasty and fifth patriarch of the SUSŎNSA community established by POJO CHINUL. Ch’unggyŏng was ordained by CHIN’GAK HYESIM in 1229 and passed the national clerical examinations (SŬNGKWA) in 1236. He subsequently began his studies under Hyesim’s disciple Mongyŏ (d. 1252), and he later became the student of Mongyŏ’s disciple CHINMYŎNG HONWŎN. Ch’unggyŏng continued studying with his teacher while they were living at the monastery of Sŏnwŏnsa and in the Susŏnsa community. When Chinmyŏng stepped down as patriarch of Susŏnsa in 1256, the king gave Ch’unggyŏng the title of Great Sŏn Master (taesŏnsa) and appointed him as Chinmyŏng’s successor. The community flourished under Ch’unggyŏng’s supervision. He passed away at the monastery of Pulgaesa in 1286 and was succeeded as patriarch of the Susŏnsa community by his chief disciple MIRAM CH’UNGJI.

Chunghyangsŏng. (K) (衆香城). “City of Multitudinous Fragrances”; city where the AṢṬASĀHASRIKĀPRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ says the BODHISATTVA DHARMODGATA lived and taught the perfection of wisdom (PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ); an alternate name for the Korean “Diamond Mountains.” See GANDHAVATĪ, KŬMGANGSAN; DHARMODGATA.

Ch’ungji. (K) (冲止). See MIRAM CH’UNGJI.

Chungwŏn. (K) (重遠). See HANAM CHUNGWŎN.

Chu sanzang jiji. (J. Shutsusanzōki shū; K. Ch’ul samjang kijip 出三藏集). In Chinese, “Compilation of Notices on the Translation of the TRIPIṬAKA”; edited by the monk SENGYOU (445–518) and published around 515. The Chu sanzang jiji is the first extant scriptural catalogue (JINGLU) and incorporates in its listings an even earlier catalogue by DAO’AN (312–385), the ZONGLI ZHONGJING MULU, which is now lost. The Chu sanzang jiji consists of five principal sections: (1) a discussion on the provenance of translated scriptures, (2) a record of (new) titles and their listings in earlier catalogues, (3) prefaces to scriptures, (4) miscellaneous treatises on specific doctrines, and (5) biographies of translators. Sengyou’s catalogue established the principal categories into which all subsequent cataloguers would classify scriptures, including new or old translations, anonymous or variant translations, APOCRYPHA, anonymous translations, MAHĀYĀNA and HĪNAYĀNA literature divided according to the three divisions of the TRIPIṬAKA, and so forth. The roster of texts includes translations of scriptures and commentaries from the Han to the Liang dynasties and compares the listings of these various translations in official scriptural catalogues in order to determine their authenticity. Short biographies of the various translators are also provided. Sengyou also discusses indigenous Buddhist literature, such as biographical and historiographical collections, scriptural prefaces, and the catalogues themselves, in order to provide subsequent generations with guidance on how properly to transmit Buddhist literature. Sengyou’s text is as an important source for studying the early history of translation work and indigenous scriptural creation (see APOCRYPHA) in Chinese Buddhism.

cibu/cibu tong. (祠部/祠部筒). In Chinese, “tonsure certificate” and “tonsure-certificate canister.” Monks and nuns in China were subject to governmental supervision through tonsure certificates (cibu) and either annual and/or triennial registration. Starting as early as 729 during the Tang dynasty, the Chinese state required monks to register their ordinations, with one copy of the registration kept at the central Bureau of Sacrifices and the other at the local government office. By the Song dynasty, monks could no longer be ordained by a monastery without having first received official government permission, and anyone not formally registered would be laicized. Tonsure certificates were issued by the Bureau of Sacrifices (Cibu), the name thus referring to the government office that issued them. Tonsure certificates are traditionally presumed to have first been issued in 747 during the Tang dynasty, and were required in order to hold any kind of monastic position. Certificates imprinted with a postulant’s name were typically issued only after a candidate had passed a required set of monastic examinations; blank certificates were sometimes simply sold on the open market, with the number varying according to the revenue needs of the state. The price of blank certificates in particular varied widely, sometimes becoming so expensive that monasteries had to take up donations in order to fund their postulants’ registrations. Such tonsure certificates became an important revenue source for the Chinese state, rivaling the taxes placed on salt and commercial activity, and were a valuable commodity because they came with a substantial tax exemption. Tonsure certificates were kept in a special canister known as the cibu tong, which the CHANYUAN QINGGUI (“Pure Rules from the Chan Grove”) lists as one of the standard requisites that a Chinese monk should carry with him as he traveled from monastery to monastery. By requiring that all monks receive and carry such tonsure certificates, the government ensured that the Buddhist ecclesia remained under strict government regulation.

cidi sandi. (J. shidai no santai; K. ch’aje samje 次第三諦). In Chinese, “sequential three truths”; also known as the “differentiated three truths” (GELI SANDI). See SANDI, YUANRONG.

cidi sanguan. (J. shidai sangan; K. ch’aje samgwan 次第三觀). In Chinese, the “sequential threefold contemplation.” See SANGUAN.

cidi xingbu men. (次第行布門). In Chinese, the “approach of sequential practices.” See YUANRONG.

Ci’en (dashi) Kuiji. (慈恩[大師]窺基). See KUIJI.

Ci’en xuepai. (C) (慈恩學派). In Chinese, “The Ci’en Scholastic Lineage” of the Chinese YOGĀCĀRA school, which is associated with KUIJI. See FAXIANG ZONG.

Cihang. (慈航) (1895–1954). Chinese monk during the Republican Era and prominent disciple of the influential Buddhist reformer TAIXU; his mummified remains continue to be a major focus of relic worship in Taiwan. Cihang was first educated in the traditional Chinese Buddhist exegetical traditions of the CHAN, TIANTAI, and PURE LAND schools before beginning his studies in 1927 at Taixu’s modern Buddhist academy in Minnan. It was there that Cihang was exposed to, and inspired by, Taixu’s reformist ideals, and began his own active missionary career. Cihang’s achievements as a missionary included establishing various Chinese Buddhist organizations and lecturing on Buddhism throughout Southeast Asia, including the Philippines, Singapore, Burma, and Malaysia, where he was credited with promoting a type of “socially engaged Buddhism.” Cihang was also the founder and editor of the Buddhist monthly Renjian (“Human Realm”), and served as abbot of various monasteries. Most notably, Cihang founded the renowned Mile Neiyuan (MAITREYA Buddhist Academy) in Taiwan for training young clergy who had recently relocated from the Chinese mainland, so that they would be able to minister to new Taiwanese converts to Buddhism. Cihang’s classes on YOGĀCĀRA and other MAHĀYĀNA traditions in and outside of the academy were influential on the way Chinese Buddhism spread, developed, and took root in Taiwan after the retreat of the Kuomintang (Guomindang) from the Chinese mainland in 1949. Cihang’s mummified remains—in the form of his largely intact body—continue to be a source of great fascination and controversy in Taiwan. In addition to the many debates within both the secular and religious communities concerning his “whole-body relic” (QUANSHEN SHELI), a new cult of relic worship began in earnest as soon as the existence of his mummified body became publicized. Cihang’s pious followers undertook extra measures to ensure the lasting preservation of his body. Cihang’s mummy, still sitting in a meditative posture, remains on display inside the memorial building (Cihang guan) dedicated to him.

Cimin Huiri. (J. Jimin Enichi; K. Chamin Hyeil 慈愍慧日) (680–748). Founder of the Cimin lineage of Chinese PURE LAND Buddhism. Inspired by his meeting with the pilgrim and translator YIJING (635–713), Huiri also traveled to India between 702 and 719, where he is said to have studied with Indian teachers about SUKHĀVATĪ, the pure land of AMITĀBHA and had a vision in which the BODHISATTVA AVALOKITEŚVARA personally instructed him in pure land teachings. After Huiri returned to China, he taught an ecumenical approach to pure land practice, which combined the practices of meditation, recitation, and discipline. Because Huiri’s approach differs markedly from that offered by LUSHAN HUIYUAN (334–416) and TANLUAN (476–542), his teachings are sometimes considered to constitute a separate Cimin line of the Chinese pure land tradition. Huiri also made a concerted effort to respond to critiques of pure land practice made by adepts within the CHAN ZONG, who disparaged the pure land approach as an expedient intended for spiritually inferior practitioners. The Tang emperor Xuanzong (r. 712–756) bestowed on Huiri the posthumous title of Cimin Sanzang (TREPIṬAKA Compassionate Sympathy) for his service in transmitting the pure land teaching. Cimin’s combination of recitation of the Buddha’s name (NIANFO) with meditation subsequently influenced the nianfo Chan of YONGMING YANSHOU (904–975).

cintāmaṇi. (T. yid bzhin nor bu; C. ruyi baozhu; J. nyoihōju; K. yŏŭi poju 如意寶珠). In Sanskrit, “wish-fulfilling gem”; in Indian mythology a magical jewel possessed by DEVAs and NĀGAs that has the power to grant wishes. The term is often as a metaphor for various stages of the path, including the initial aspiration to achieve buddhahood (BODHICITTOTPĀDA), the rarity of rebirth as a human being with access to the dharma, and the merit arising from the teachings of the Buddha. According to the Ruyi baozhu zhuanlun mimi xianshen chengfo jinlunzhouwang jing (also known simply as the Jinlunzhouwang jing), which describes in great detail the inexhaustible merit of this gem, the cintāmaṇi is rough in shape and is comprised of eleven precious materials, including gold and silver, and has thirty-two pieces of the Buddha’s relics (ŚARĪRA) at its core, which give it its special power. In the DAZHIDU LUN, the gem is said to derive from the brain of the dragon king (nāgarāja), the undersea protector of Buddhism, or, alternatively, to be the main jewel ornamenting the top of his head. The text claims that it has the power to protect its carrier from poison and fire; other texts say that the cintāmaṇi has the capacity to drive away evil, clarify muddy water, etc. This gem is also variously said to come from the head of a great makara fish (as in the RATNAKŪṬASŪTRAs) or the heart of a GARUḌA bird (as in the GUAN WULIANGSHOU JING). Other texts suggest that while the king of the gods, INDRA, was fighting with the demigods (ASURA), part of his weapon dropped to the world and became this gem. The bodhisattvas AVALOKITEŚVARA and KṢITIGARBHA are also depicted holding a cintāmaṇi so that they may grant the wishes of all sentient beings.

cintāmayīprajñā. (P. cintāmayapaññā; T. bsam pa las byung ba’i shes rab; C. sihui; J. shie; K. sahye 思慧). In Sanskrit, “wisdom derived from reflection [or analysis]”; the second of the three types of wisdom, together with ŚRUTAMAYĪPRAJÑĀ (wisdom derived from what is heard, viz., study) and BHĀVANĀMAYĪPRAJÑĀ (wisdom generated by cultivation or meditation). Building upon what one has learned through śrutamayīprajñĀ, the practitioner deepens that knowledge by reflecting upon its significance and its application in understanding the nature of this world and beyond. This reflection may involve a certain level of mental attention and concentration, but not yet full meditative calmness (ŚAMATHA). This level of understanding is therefore not as profound as the third and final stage of wisdom, bhāvanāmayīprajñā, where the knowledge first learned and subsequently developed over the preceding two stages of wisdom is now authenticated at the level of VIPAŚYANĀ.

cishi song. (J. jiseiju; K. sase song 辭世頌). In Chinese, lit., “taking leave of the world hymn”; alternate name for a “bequeathed verse.” See YIJI.

Citipati. (T. Dur khrod bdag po). In Sanskrit, “Lord of the Funeral Pile”; a pair of male and female dancing skeletons associated with the CAKRASAṂVARATANTRA and who are often depicted as protectors of VAJRAYOGINĪ. They are also called śrīśmaśānādhipati or “lords of the charnel ground” and are regarded as enlightened beings and emanations of CAKRASAṂVARA. They are also propitiated for wealth and for protection from thieves. According to legend, they are the spirits of two Indian ascetics who were murdered by thieves while practicing austerities in a charnel ground (ŚMAŚĀNA). They each hold a daṇḍa or staff made of bone and a KAPĀLA and dance on corpses in ARDHAPARYAṄKA pose, either in YAB YUM posture or side by side. They are not to be confused with the skeleton dancers in Tibetan ’CHAM performances, who represent servants of YAMA, the deity of death.

citta. (T. sems; C. xin; J. shin; K. sim 心). In Sanskrit and Pāli, “mind,” “mentality,” or “thought”; used broadly to refer to general mentality, citta is the factor (DHARMA) that is present during any type of conscious activity. Citta is contrasted with the physical body or materiality (RŪPA), and is synonymous in this context with “name” (NĀMA), as in the term NĀMARŪPA. In this sense, citta corresponds to the last four of the five aggregates (SKANDHA), excluding only the first aggregate, of materiality (RŪPA), i.e., sensation (VEDANĀ), perception (SAṂJÑĀ), conditioning factors (SAṂSKĀRA), and consciousness (VIJÑĀNA). (Where the correspondences on this list are further refined, the first three of these mentality aggregates correspond to the mental concomitants, viz., CAITTA, while citta is restricted to the last aggregate, that of consciousness, or vijñāna.) Citta in this broad sense is synonymous with both mentality (MANAS) and consciousness (vijñāna): mind is designated as citta because it “builds up” (cinoti) virtuous and nonvirtuous states; as manas, because it calculates and examines; and as vijñāna, because it discriminates among sensory stimuli. Mind as “consciousness” refers to the six consciousnesses (ṣaḍvijñāna): the five sensory consciousnesses of the visual (CAKṢURVIJÑĀNA), auditory (ŚROTRAVIJÑĀNA), olfactory (GHRĀṆAVIJÑĀNA), gustatory (JIHVĀVIJÑĀNA), and tactile (KĀYAVIJÑĀNA), along with the mental consciousness (MANOVIJÑĀNA). In some strands of MAHĀYĀNA thought, such as YOGĀCĀRA, mind is instead considered to encompass not only mentality but all dharmas, and the distinction between mentality and materiality is presumed to be merely nominal; Yogācāra is thus sometimes called the school of CITTAMĀTRA, or “mind-only.” Citta as mentality serves as one of the four foundations of mindfulness (SMṚTYUPASTHĀNA) in Buddhist meditative training, and refers to various general states of mind, e.g., a mind (citta) that is depressed, distracted, developed, concentrated, or freed. Citta is also used to signify mind itself in distinction to various sets of mental concomitants (caitta) that accompany the basic sensory consciousnesses. The DHAMMASAṄGAṆI, the first of the seven books of the Pāli ABHIDHAMMAPIṬAKA, classifies citta as the first of a fourfold division of factors into mind (citta), mental concomitants (P. CETASIKA), materiality or form (rūpa), and NIRVĀṆA (P. nibbāna). In this text’s treatment, a moment of consciousness (citta) will always arise in association with a variety of associated mental factors (P. cetasika), seven of which are always present during every moment of consciousness: (1) sensory contact or sense impression (P. phassa; S. SPARŚA), (2) feeling or sensation (VEDANĀ), (3) perception or conception (P. saññā; S. SAṂJÑĀ), (4) volition (CETANĀ), (5) concentration (SAMĀDHI), (6) vitality (JĪVITA), and (7) attention, viz., the advertence of the mind toward an object (P. manasikāra; S. MANASKĀRA). The SARVĀSTIVĀDA ABHIDHARMA instead divides all dharmas into five groups: mind (citta), mental concomitants (caitta), materiality (rūpa), forces dissociated from thought (CITTAVIPRAYUKTASAṂSKĀRA), and the unconditioned (ASAṂSKṚTA). In this system, ten specific factors are said universally to accompany all conscious activity and are therefore called “factors of wide extent” or “omnipresent mental factors” (MAHĀBHŪMIKA): (1) sensation (vedanā); (2) volition (cetanā); (3) perception (saṃjñā); (4) zeal or “desire-to-act” (CHANDA) (5) sensory contact (sparśa); (6) discernment (mati); (7) mindfulness (SMṚTI); (8) attention (manaskāra); (9) determination (ADHIMOKṢA); (10) concentration (samādhi). According to the system set forth by ASAṄGA in his ABHIDHARMASAMUCCAYA, this list is divided into two sets of five: the five omnipresent (SARVATRAGA) mental factors (vedanā, saṃjñĀ, cetanā, sparśa, and manaskāra) and the five determining (pratiniyama) mental factors (chanda, adhimokṣa, smṛti, samādhi, and prajñā). ¶ In the experience of enlightenment (BODHI), the citta is said to be “freed” from the “point of view” that is the self (ĀTMAN). The citta is then no longer subject to the limitations perpetuated by ignorance (AVIDYĀ) and craving (TṚṢṆĀ) and thus becomes nonmanifesting (because there is no longer any projection of ego into the perceptual process), infinite (because the mind is no longer subject to the limitations of conceptualization), and lustrous (because the ignorance that dulls the mind has been vanquished forever). Scriptural statements attest to this inherent luminosity of the citta, which may be revealed through practice and manifested in enlightenment. For example, in the Pāli AṄGUTTARANIKĀYA, the Buddha says, “the mind, O monks, is luminous” (P. pabhassaraṃ idaṃ bhikkhave cittaṃ). Such statements are the strands from which the Mahāyāna subsequently derives such concepts as the inherent quality of buddhahood (BUDDHADHĀTU; C. FOXING) or the embryo of the TATHĀGATAs (TATHĀGATAGARBHA) that is said to be innate in the mind.

Citta. A lay follower of the Buddha, mentioned in Pāli sources as being foremost among laymen who preached the DHARMA; also known as Cittagahapati. Citta was treasurer for the township of Macchikāsaṇḍa in the kingdom of Kāsī. When he was born, the sky rained flowers of many hues, hence his name which means variegated color. Citta was converted to Buddhism when he encountered the elder Mahānāma (S. MAHĀNĀMAN) while the latter was sojourning in Macchikāsaṇḍa. Citta was greatly impressed by the monk’s demeanor and built a monastery for him in his park named Ambāṭakārāma. There, listening to Mahānāma preach on the subject of the six senses, he attained to state of a nonreturner (ANĀGĀMIN). On one occasion, Citta visited the Buddha in the company of two thousand laypeople, bringing with him five hundred cartloads of offerings. When he bowed at the Buddha’s feet, flowers in a variety of colors rained down from the heavens. Like Mahānāma, the Buddha preached a sermon on the six senses to him. Citta distributed offerings for a fortnight, the gods continuously refilling the carts. Citta was endowed with a great intellect and was a gifted speaker. His conversations with members of the order are recorded in the “Citta Saṃyutta” of the Pāli SAṂYUTTANIKĀYA, and he is also described as having refuted the views of non-Buddhist teachers, such as Nigaṇṭha Nātaputta (S. NIRGRANTHA-JÑĀTĪPUTRA, viz., Mahāvīra), the eminent JAINA teacher, and Acela Kassapa. Although he was not an ARHAT, he possessed the analytical knowledge (P. paṭisambhidā; S. PRATISAṂVID) of a learner (P. sekha). It was for these aptitudes that he earned preeminence. On his deathbed, divinities visited him and encouraged him to seek rebirth as a heavenly king, but he refused, stating that such an impermanent reward was not his goal. He then preached to them, and to all the kinfolk who had gathered around him, before passing away. Together with HATTHAKA ĀḶAVAKA, Citta is upheld as an ideal layman worthy of emulation.

cittaikāgratā. (P. cittekaggatā; T. sems rtse gcig pa; C. xin yijing xing; J. shin ikkyō shō; K. sim ilgyŏng sŏng 心一境性). In Sanskrit, “one-pointedness of mind”; a deep state of meditative equipoise in which the mind is thoroughly concentrated on the object of meditation. In the progression of the four meditative absorptions associated with the subtle-materiality realm (RŪPĀVACARADHYĀNA), the first absorption (DHYĀNA) still involves the first two of the five constituents of dhyāna (DHYĀNĀṄGA): i.e., the application of thought to the meditative object (VITARKA) and sustained attention to that object (VICĀRA). As concentration deepens from the second dhyāna onward, applied and sustained thought vanish and the meditator moves from the mental “isolation” or “solitude” (VIVEKA) that characterizes the first dhyāna, to the true one-pointedness of mind (cittaikāgratā) that characterizes all higher stages of dhyāna; in this state of one-pointedness, the mind is so completely absorbed in the meditative object that even these most subtle varieties of thinking have disappeared.

cittamahābhūmika. In Sanskrit, “omnipresent mental factors.” See MAHĀBHŪMIKA, SARVATRAGA.

cittamātra. (T. sems tsam; C. weixin; J. yuishin; K. yusim 唯心). In Sanskrit, lit. “mind-only”; a term used in the LAṄKĀVATĀRASŪTRA to describe the notion that the external world of the senses does not exist independently of the mind and that all phenomena are mere projections of consciousness. Because this doctrine is espoused by the YOGĀCĀRA, that school is sometimes referred to as cittamātra. The doctrine is closely associated with the eight consciousness (VIJÑĀNA) theory set forth in the “ViniścayasaṃgrahaṇĪ” of the YOGĀCĀRABHŪMIŚĀSTRA and in the MAHĀYĀNASAṂGRAHA and ABHIDHARMASAMUCCAYA that are supplemental to that work. In East Asia, these texts are associated with the name of the Mahāyāna writer ASAṄGA and his quasi-mythological teacher MAITREYA or MAITREYANĀTHA. According to this theory, there are not only six consciousnesses (vijñāna), viz., the visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, and tactile consciousnesses, and the mental consciousness (manovijñāna) well known to canonical Buddhism; there are two further consciousnesses, called the afflicted mind (KLIṢṬAMANAS) and the storehouse consciousness (ĀLAYAVIJÑĀNA). The ālayavijñāna is also known as the sarvabīja, or the consciousness that carries all the seeds or potentialities (BĪJA). The Cittamātra school holds that mental states leave a residual impression that is carried by the ālayavijñāna. These impressions (VĀSANĀ) literally “perfume” or “suffuse” this underlying consciousness, where they lie dormant as seeds. Among the many categories of seeds, two are principal: the residual impressions giving rise to a new form of life (VIPĀKA) in the six realms of existence, and the residual impression that is basic ignorance causing all ordinary mental states to appear in a distorted way, i.e., bifurcated into subject and object. Vasubandhu, who is said to have been converted to the Cittamātra doctrine by his brother Asaṅga, argues in his TRIṂŚIKĀ (Triṃśikāvijñaptimātratā[siddhi]kārikā), the famous “Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only,” that there could not possibly be an atomic basis for objects known by mind. In the absence of an atomic basis, only the ripening of the residual impressions left on the ālayavijñāna can account for the variety of mental states and experience, and only this doctrine of mind-only can properly account for the purification of mind and the final attainment of BODHI. The object and subject share the same mental nature because they both arise from the residual impressions left on the ālayavijñāna, hence the doctrine of cittamātra, mind-only.

cittasaṃprayuktasaṃskāra. (T. sems dang mtshungs ldan gyi ’du byed; C. xin xiangying fa; J. shinsōōbō; K. sim sangŭng pŏp 心相應法). In Sanskrit, “conditioned forces associated with thought”; an ABHIDHARMA term synonymous with the mental concomitants (CAITTA), the dharmas that in various combinations accompany mind or thought (CITTA). The ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA, for example, explains that mind and its concomitants always appear in conjunction with one another and cannot be independently generated. These factors are “associated” because of five equalities that they share with mind, i.e., equality as to (1) support (ĀŚRAYA), in this context, meaning the six sensory bases; (2) object (ĀLAMBANA), viz., the six sensory objects; (3) aspect (ĀKĀRA), the aspects of sensory cognition; (4) time (kāla), because they occur simultaneously; and (5) the number of their substance (DRAVYA), because mind and its concomitants are in a one-to-one association. The different schools of ABHIDHARMA enumerate various lists of such forces. The VAIBHĀṢIKA school of SARVĀSTIVĀDA abhidharma lists forty-six cittasamprayuktasaṃskāras, while the mature YOGĀCĀRA system of MAHĀYĀNA scholasticism gives a total of fifty-one, listed in six categories. The Vaibhāṣika and Yogācāra schools also posited a contrasting category of “conditioned forces dissociated from thought” (CITTAVIPRAYUKTASAṂSKĀRA), which served to account for specific types of complex moral and mental processes (such as where both physicality and mentality were temporarily suspended in higher meditative absorptions), and anomalous doctrinal problems. (The Pāli equivalent cittasaṃpayuttasaṅkhāra is attested, but only rarely, in Pāli commentarial literature; it does not appear in canonical ABHIDHAMMA texts. This doctrinal category therefore has no significance in the THERAVĀDA abhidhamma.) For more detailed discussion, see CAITTA; and for the complete lists, see SEVENTY-FIVE DHARMAS OF THE SARVĀSTIVĀDA SCHOOL and ONE-HUNDRED DHARMAS OF THE YOGĀCĀRA SCHOOL in the List of Lists.

cittasaṃtāna. [alt. cittasaṃtati] (P. cittasantāna; T. sems rgyud/sems rgyun; C. xin xiangxu; J. shinsōzoku; K. sim sangsok 心相續). In Sanskrit, “mental continuum.” The notion of a continuum is employed in the ABHIDHARMA traditions to clarify that there is continuity between an action (KARMAN) that an individual undertakes and its eventual effect (VIPĀKA) as well as continuity between one lifetime and the next, without going so far as to posit a perduring self (ĀTMAN). In the theory of karman, the fruition of action is experienced by the mental continuum (cittasaṃtāna) of the being who initially performed the action, not by another; thus in mainstream Buddhism one can neither receive the fruition of another’s karman, nor redeem another’s actions. This notion of a mental continuum also serves to counter annihilationist interpretations (see UCCHEDAVĀDA; UCCHEDĀNTA) of the quintessential Buddhist doctrine of nonself (ANĀTMAN): there may be no permanent, underlying substratum of being that we can designate a self or soul, but this does not negate the continuity that pertains in the flow of moral cause and effect or the possibility of rebirth. Hence, there can be rebirth, moral efficacy, and spiritual progress despite the lack of a permanent self. See also BHAVAṄGASOTA; SAṂTĀNA.

cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra. (T. sems dang ldan pa ma yin pa’i ’du byed; C. xin buxiangying fa; J. shinfusōōbō; K. sim pulsangŭng pŏp 心不相應法). In Sanskrit, “conditioned forces dissociated from thought”; forces that are associated with neither materiality (RŪPA) nor mentality (CITTA) and thus are listed in a separate category of factors (DHARMA) in ABHIDHARMA materials associated with the SARVĀSTIVĀDA school and in the hundred-dharmas (BAIFA) list of the YOGĀCĀRA school. These conditioned forces were posited to account for complex moral and mental processes (such as the states of mind associated with the higher spheres of meditation, where both physicality and mentality were temporarily suspended), and anomalous doctrinal problems (such as how speech was able to convey meaning or how group identity was established). A standard listing found in the DHARMASKANDHA and PRAKARAṆAPĀDA, two texts of the Sarvāstivāda abhidharma canon, includes sixteen dissociated forces: (1) possession (PRĀPTI); (2) equipoise of nonperception (ASAṂJÑĀSAMĀPATTI); (3) equipoise of cessation (NIRODHASAMĀPATTI); (4) nonperception (āsaṃjñika); (5) vitality (JĪVITA); (6) homogeneity (sabhāgatā); (7) acquisition the corporeal basis (*āśrayapratilābha); (8) acquisition of the given entity (*vastuprāpti); (9) acquisition of the sense spheres (*āyatanaprāpti); the four conditioned characteristics (SAṂSKṚTALAKṢAṆA), viz., (10) origination, or birth (JĀTI); (11) continuance, or maturation (STHITI); (12) senescence, or decay (JARĀ); and (13) desinence, or death (anityatā); (14) name set (nāmakāya); (15) phrase set (padakāya); 16) syllable set (vyañjanakāya). The later treatise ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA includes only fourteen, dropping numbers 7, 8, 9 and adding nonpossession (APRĀPTI). These listings, however, constituted only the most generic and comprehensive types employed by the VAIBHĀṢIKA school of Sarvāstivāda abhidharma; the cittaviprayuktasaṃskāras thus constituted an open category, and new forces could be posited as the need arose in order to resolve thorny doctrinal issues. The four conditioned characteristics (saṃskṛtalakṣaṇa) are a good example of why the cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra category was so useful in abhidharma-type analysis. In the Sarvāstivāda treatment of causality, these four characteristics were forcesthat exerted real power over compounded objects, escorting an object along from origination, to continuance, to senescence or decay, until the force “desinence,” or death finally extinguishes it; this rather tortured explanation was necessary in order to explain how factors that the school presumed continued to exist in all three time periods (TRIKĀLA) of past, present, and future nevertheless still appeared to undergo change. The YOGĀCĀRA school subsequently includes twenty-four cittaviprayuktasaṃskāras in its list of one hundred dharmas (see BAIFA), including such elements as the state of an ordinary being (pṛthagjanatva), time (KĀLA), place (deśa), and number (saṃkhyā).

cittavisuddhi. (S. cittaviśuddhi). In Pāli, “purity of mind”; according to the VISUDDHIMAGGA, the second of seven “purities” (VISUDDHI) to be developed along the path to liberation. Purity of mind refers to the eight meditative absorptions (P. JHĀNA; S. DHYĀNA) or attainments (SAMĀPATTI) belonging to the subtle-materiality realm (rūpāvacara) and the immaterial realm (ārūpyāvacara). Meditative absorption belonging to the subtle-materiality realm (P. rūpāvacarajhāna; S. RŪPĀVACARADHYĀNA) is subdivided into four stages, each of which is characterized by an increasing attenuation of consciousness as the meditator progresses from one stage to the next. Meditative absorption belonging to the immaterial realm (P. arūpāvacarajhāna; S. ĀRŪPYĀVACARADHYĀNA) is likewise subdivided into four stages, but in this case it is the object of meditation that becomes attenuated from one stage to the next. In the first immaterial absorption, the meditator sets aside the perception of materiality and abides in the sphere of infinite space (P. ākāsānañcāyatana; S. ĀKĀŚĀNANTYĀYATANA). In the second immaterial absorption, the meditator sets aside the perception of infinite space and abides in the sphere of infinite consciousness (P. viññaṇañcāyatana; S. VIJÑĀNĀNANTYĀYATANA). In the third immaterial absorption, the meditator sets aside the perception of infinite consciousness and abides in the sphere of nothingness (P. ākiñcaññāyatana; S. ĀKIÑCANYĀYATANA). In the fourth immaterial absorption, the meditator sets aside the perception of nothingness and abides in the sphere of neither perception nor nonperception (P. nevasaññānāsaññāyatana; S. NAIVASAṂJÑĀNĀSAṂJÑĀYATANA). To this list of eight absorptions is added “access” or “neighborhood” “concentration” (P. UPACĀRASAMĀDHI), which is the degree of concentration present in the mind of the meditator just prior to entering any of the four jhānas.

cīvara. (T. chos gos; C. yi; J. e/koromo; K. ŭi 衣). In Pāli and Sanskrit, “monastic robe”; the generic term for the robes worn by Buddhist monks, nuns, female probationers, and male and female novices. The cīvara may be made of cotton, wool, linen, or silk. Initially, the robe was to be made of rags discarded in the rubbish heap (S. pāṃsukūla; P. paṃsukūla) or from funeral shrouds. The rule was amended by the Buddha to allow monks also to accept cloth offered by the laity. A full set of monastic robes is comprised of three robes (S. TRICĪVARA; P. ticīvara): the larger outer robe (S. SAṂGHĀṬĪ; P. saṅghāṭi), the upper robe (S. UTTARĀSAṂGA; P. uttarāsaṅga), and the lower robe or waist-cloth (S. ANTARVĀSAS; P. antaravāsaka). The antarvāsas is the smallest of the three robes: normally made of one layer of cloth, it is worn about the waist and is intended to cover the body from the navel to the middle of the calf. The uttarāsaṃga is worn over one or both shoulders, depending on whether one is inside or outside the monastery grounds, and is large enough to cover the body from the neck to the middle of the calf; it too is normally made of one layer of cloth. The saṃghāṭī or outer robe is the same size as the uttarāsaṃga but is normally made of two layers of cloth rather than one; it is worn over one or both shoulders, depending on whether one is inside or outside the monastery grounds. The saṃghāṭī was required to be tailored of patches, ranging in number from nine up to twenty-five, depending on the VINAYA recension; this use of patches of cloth is said to have been modeled after plots of farmland in MAGADHA that the Buddha once surveyed. All three robes must be dyed a sullied color, interpreted as anything from a reddish- or brownish-yellow saffron color to an ochre tone (see KĀṢĀYA). Robes were one of the four major requisites (S. NIŚRAYA; P. nissaya) of the monks and nuns, along with such basics as a begging bowl and lodging, and were the object of the KAṬHINA ceremony in which the monastics were offered cloth for making new sets of robes at the end of each rains’ retreats (VARṢĀ).

clear light. See PRABHĀSVARACITTA; ’OD GSAL.

compassion. See KARUṆĀ.

conditioned origination. See PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA.

confession. See PĀPADEŚANĀ.

conglin. (J. sōrin; K. ch’ongnim 叢林). In Chinese, a “dense grove”; also known as chanlin, or “CHAN grove”; the term translates the Sanskrit vana (trees) or vindhyavana (grove). The term conglin is a metaphorical reference to the monastic grounds: like trees densely gathered in a grove, monks quietly gather together in a monastery to train together. More specifically, the term refers to the monastic training grounds of Chan, SŎN, and ZEN monks. In Korea, the term CH’ONGNIM is used in the contemporary CHOGYE CHONG to refer to a handful of larger monasteries that are able to provide training in the full range of practices that exemplify the major strands of the Korean Buddhist tradition. While most Korean monasteries are primarily devoted to one or another of these types of training, the ch’ongnims offer a center where all can be practiced together.

Conglin dashi. (C) (叢林大士). See FU DASHI.

Congrong lu. (J. Shōyōroku; K. Chongyong nok 從容録). In Chinese, “Encouragement (Hermitage) Record”; edited by Chan master Wansong Xingxiu (1165–1246). Also known as the Congrong an lu and Wansong laoren pingzhang Tiantong Jue heshang songgu Congrong an lu (“Encouragement Hermitage Record of the Prose Commentaries by Old Man Wansong on the Case and Verse [Collection] by Master Jue of Tiantong”). In 1223, while residing at the hermitage Congrong’an at the monastery of Bao’ensi near Yanjing, Wansong was asked by the famous layman and statesman Yelü Chucai (1190–1244) to expound upon an earlier collection of one hundred cases (GONG’AN) and their verse commentaries (SONGGU) prepared by the Chan master HONGZHI ZHENGJUE. In the Congrong lu, Wansong added some introductory words (shizhong; see CHUISHI), prose commentaries (pingchang), and capping phrases (ZHUYU) to Hongzhi’s collection. The Congrong lu is considered one the most important scriptures of the CAODONG ZONG lineage of Chan and demonstrates definitively that the Caodong school (J. SŌTŌSHŪ) employed gong’ans (J. koan) as part of its training.

Congshen. (C) (從諗). See ZHAOZHOU CONGSHEN.

consciousness. See VIJÑĀNA.

contaminants. See ĀSRAVA.

Conze, Edward. [Eberhard (Edward) Julius Dietrich Conze] (1904–1979). An influential Anglo-German Buddhist scholar and practitioner, Edward Conze was born in London, the son of the then German vice consul, but was raised in Germany. He attended the universities of Cologne, Bonn, and Hamburg, where he studied both Western and Indian philosophy and Buddhist languages, including Sanskrit, Pāli, and Tibetan. Conze was raised as a Protestant, but he also explored Communism and had a strong interest in Theosophy. Because of his deep opposition to the Nazi ideology, he became persona non grata in Germany and in 1933 moved to England. Although initially active with English socialists, he eventually became disillusioned with politics and began to study the works of DAISETZ TEITARO SUZUKI, whom he came to consider his informal spiritual mentor. Conze taught at various universities in the UK between 1933 and 1960, expanding the range of his visiting professorships to the USA and Canada in the 1960s. However, the Communist affiliations of his youth and his outspoken condemnation of the Vietnam War put him at odds with American authorities, prompting him to return to England. Conze was especially enamored of the perfection of wisdom (PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ) texts and the related MADHYAMAKA strand of Buddhist philosophy and became one of foremost scholarly exponents of this literature of his day. He saw Buddhism and especially Madhyamaka philosophy as presenting an “intelligible, plausible, and valid system” that rivaled anything produced in the West and was therefore worthy of the close attention of Western philosophers. He translated several of the major texts of the prajñāpāramitā, including The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousands Lines and Its Verse Summary (1973), and The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom with the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra (1975), as well as the VAJRACCHEDIKĀPRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀSŪTRA (“Diamond Sūtra”) and the PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀHṚDAYASŪTRA (“Heart Sūtra”). His compilation of terminology derived from this translation work, Materials for a Dictionary of the Prajñāpāramitā Literature (1967), did much to help establish many of the standard English equivalencies of Sanskrit Buddhist terms. Conze also wrote more general surveys of Buddhist philosophy and history, including Buddhism: Its Essence and Development (1951) and Buddhist Thought in India (1962).

correct action. See SAMYAKKARMĀNTA.

correct concentration. See SAMYAKSAMĀDHI.

correct effort. See SAMYAGVYĀYĀMA.

correct intention. See SAMYAKSAṂKALPA.

correct livelihood. See SAMYAGĀJĪVA.

correct mindfulness. See SAMYAKSMṚTI.

correct speech. See SAMYAGVĀK.

correct view. See SAMYAGDṚṢṬI.

Council, 1^st. The term translated as “council” is SAṂGĪTI, literally “recitation,” the word used to describe the communal chanting of the Buddha’s teaching. The term suggests that the purpose of the meeting was to recite the TRIPIṬAKA in order to codify the canon and remove any discrepancies concerning what was and was not to be included. The first Buddhist council is said to have been held in a cave at RĀJAGṚHA shortly after the Buddha’s passage into PARINIRVĀṆA, although its historicity has been questioned by modern scholars. There are numerous accounts of the first council and much scholarship has been devoted to their analysis. What follows draws on a number of sources to provide a general description. The accounts agree that, in the SAṂGHA, there was an elderly monk named SUBHADRA, a former barber who had entered the order late in life. He always carried a certain animus against the Buddha because when Subhadra was a layman, the Buddha supposedly refused to accept a meal that he had prepared for him. After the Buddha’s death, Subhadra told the distraught monks that they should instead rejoice because they could now do as they pleased, without the Buddha telling them what they could and could not do. MAHĀKĀŚYAPA overheard this remark and was so alarmed by it that he thought it prudent to convene a meeting of five hundred ARHATs to codify and recite the rules of discipline (VINAYA) and the discourses (SŪTRA) of the Buddha before they became corrupted. With the patronage of King AJĀTAŚATRU, a meeting was called. At least one arhat, GAVĀṂPATI, declined to participate, deciding instead to pass into nirvāṇa before the council began. This led to an agreement that no one else would pass into nirvāṇa until after the conclusion of the council. At the time that the council was announced, ĀNANDA, the Buddha’s personal attendant and therefore the person who had heard the most discourses of the Buddha, was not yet an arhat and would have been prevented from participating. However, on the night before the council, he fortuitously finished his practice and attained the status of arhat. At the council, Mahākāśyapa presided. He interrogated UPĀLI about the rules of discipline (PRĀTIMOKṢA) of both BHIKṢUs and BHIKṢUṆĪs. He then questioned Ānanda about each of the discourses the Buddha had delivered over the course of his life, asking in each case where and on whose account the discourse had been given. In this way, the VINAYAPIṬAKA and the SŪTRAPIṬAKA were established. (In many accounts, the ABHIDHARMAPIṬAKA is not mentioned, but in others it is said the abhidharmapiṭaka was recited by Mahākāśyapa or by Ānanda.) Because of his extraordinary powers of memory, Ānanda was said to be able to repeat sixty thousand words of the Buddha without omitting a syllable and recite fifteen thousand of his stanzas. It was at the time of his recitation that Ānanda informed the council that prior to his passing the Buddha told him that after his death, the saṃgha could disregard the minor rules of conduct. Since he had neglected to ask the Buddha what the minor rules were, however, it was decided that all the rules would be maintained. Ānanda was then chastised for (1) not asking what the minor rules were, (2) stepping on the Buddha’s robe while he was sewing it, (3) allowing the tears of women to fall on the Buddha’s corpse, (4) not asking the Buddha to live for an eon (KALPA) or until the end of the eon although the Buddha strongly hinted that he could do so (see CĀPĀLACAITYA), and (5) urging the Buddha to allow women to enter the order. (There are several versions of this list, with some including among the infractions that Ānanda allowed women to see the Buddha’s naked body.) The entire vinayapiṭaka and sūtrapiṭaka was then recited, which is said to have required seven months. According to several accounts, after the recitation had concluded, a group of five hundred monks returned from the south, led by a monk named Purāṇa. When he was asked to approve of the dharma and vinaya that had been codified by the council, he declined, saying that he preferred to remember and retain what he had heard directly from the mouth of the Buddha rather than what had been chanted by the elders. Purāṇa also disputed eight points of the vinaya concerning the proper storage and consumption of food. This incident, whether or not it has any historical basis, suggests that disagreements about the contents of the Buddha’s teaching began to arise shortly after his death.

Council, 2^nd. The second council was held at VAIŚĀLĪ, some one hundred years after the Buddha’s death. It is said that the monk YAŚAS was traveling in Vaiśālī when he observed the monks from the city, identified as VṚJIPUTRAKAs, receiving alms in the form of gold and silver directly from the laity, in violation of the disciplinary prohibition against monks’ handling gold and silver. He also found that the monks had identified ten points in the VINAYA that they considered were sufficiently minor to be ignored, despite the decision at the first council (see COUNCIL, FIRST) not to disregard any of the minor precepts. The ten violations in question were: (1) carrying salt in an animal horn; (2) eating when the shadow of the sundial is two fingerbreadths past noon; (3) after eating, traveling to another village on the same day to eat another meal; (4) holding several assemblies within the same boundary (SĪMĀ) during the same fortnight observance; (5) making a monastic decision with an incomplete assembly and subsequently receiving the approval of the absent monks; (6) citing precedent as a justification for violating monastic procedures; (7) drinking milk whey after mealtime; (8) drinking unfermented wine; (9) using mats with fringe; and (10) accepting gold and silver. Yaśas informed the monks that these were indeed violations of the disciplinary code, at which point the monks are said to have offered him a share of the gold and silver they had collected; when he refused, they expelled him from the order. Yaśas sought support of several respected monks in the west, including ŚĀṆAKAVĀSIN and REVATA, and together with other monks, they travelled together to Vaiśālī. Once there, Revata went to Sarvagāmin, the senior-most monk in the order, who was said to have been a disciple of ĀNANDA. However, when Revata questioned him about the ten points, the elder monk refused to discuss them in private. At Revata’s suggestion, a jury of eight monks was appointed, with four representatives from each party. Revata was selected as one of four from the party declaring the ten practices to be violations, and it was Revata who publicly put the questions to Sarvagāmin. In each case, he said that the practice in question was a violation of the vinaya. Seven hundred monks then gathered to recite the vinaya. Those who did not accept the decision of the council held their own convocation, which they called the MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA, or “Great Assembly.” This event is sometimes referred to as “the great schism.” The second council is generally accepted as a historical event. ¶ Some accounts make MAHĀDEVA a participant at the second council, which is said to have resulted in the schism of the SAṂGHA into the conservative STHAVIRANIKĀYA and the more liberal Mahāsāṃghika. However, the chief points of controversy that led to the convening of the council seem not to have been Mahādeva’s five theses, but rather these ten relatively minor rules of monastic discipline. If Mahādeva was a historical figure, it is more likely that he was involved in a later schism that occurred within the Mahāsāṃghika, as a result of which the followers of Mahādeva formed the CAITYA sect. See also SAṂGĪTI.

Council, 3^rd. The third council is said to have been held at PĀṬALIPUTRA under the patronage of the Mauryan Emperor AŚOKA. According to Pāli sources, Aśoka’s lavish support of the Buddhist SAṂGHA had prompted many non-Buddhist mendicants and brāhmaṇas to don the robes of Buddhist monks in order to receive alms. With the legitimate saṃgha unable to forcibly remove the false monks from their midst, the UPOṢADHA ceremony was suspended. The emperor sent a minister to order the monks to continue to perform the ceremony. When they refused, he beheaded a number of monks, only stopping when he was about to behead the emperor’s ordained brother. The emperor eventually summoned the distinguished monk MOGGALIPUTTATISSA, who taught him the correct DHARMA and VINAYA in order that Aśoka might intervene on behalf of the legitimate party. Aśoka interrogated the saṃgha and, using the authority of the state, defrocked those found to be false monks. With the saṃgha thus purified of corruption, Moggaliputtatissa selected a group of one thousand monks from a total of sixty thousand and convened a council to rehearse the Buddha’s teachings as preserved in the Pāli tipiṭaka (S. TRIPIṬAKA) and its commentaries (AṬṬHAKATHĀ). At that same time, Moggaliputtatissa composed the KATHĀVATTHU, the seventh and last book of the Pāli abhidhammapiṭaka, in order to refute various heretical Buddhist views; he also declared the dharma as it was understood by the VIBHAJYAVĀDA to be orthodox. At the conclusion of the council, Moggaliputtatissa dispatched missionaries to nine neighboring lands to propagate the newly purified teaching. Since accounts of this council only appear in Pāli sources, the historicity of this council has been questioned by modern scholars. It is possible that such a council occurred only within the STHAVIRANIKĀYA tradition, but perhaps a century later, in the last half of the second century BCE, at which time the Kathāvatthu was compiled. See also SAṂGĪTI.

Council, 4^th. Two different events are referred to as the fourth council. According to the account of the Chinese pilgrim XUANZANG, four hundred years after the Buddha’s death, King KANIṢKA called an assembly of five hundred ARHATs, either in GANDHĀRA or KASHMIR, to compile the canon once again. Under the direction of the monk VASUMITRA, the SARVĀSTIVĀDA monks compiled the VINAYA and composed the ABHIDHARMAMAHĀVIBHĀṢĀ. This council is not now considered to have been a historical event and the MahāvibhāṣĀ was likely composed long after the reign of Kaniṣka. The second event that is known as the fourth council took place in Sri Lanka under King VAṬṬAGĀMAṆI ABHAYA in 25 BCE. Up until this time the canon (P. tipiṭaka, S. TRIPIṬAKA) had been maintained entirely orally, with different monastic families of monks responsible for its recitation (see DHARMABHĀṆAKA). Fearing that famine and social discord might lead to the death of those monks and hence the loss of the canon, the king convened a council at the MAHĀVIHĀRA in the capital of ANURĀDHAPURA, where the canon was recited by five hundred monks and then inscribed onto palm leaves. According to tradition this was the first time that the canon was committed to writing. See also SAṂGĪTI.

Council, 5^th. What Burmese Buddhism regards as the fifth council was convened in 1868, when King MINDON MIN summoned 2,400 learned monks from throughout the kingdom to Mandalay to revise and recite the Pāli tipiṭaka. The recitation of the canon lasted over a period of seven months. In 1871, the revised Burmese canon was inscribed in Burmese script on 729 stone slabs that were erected, each in its own shrine, in concentric rings around the massive Kuthodaw Pagoda (Pagoda of Great Merit). The entire complex occupies fourteen acres and is situated to the northeast of the fortified city at the base of Mandalay Hill. Nearby is the Sandamuni Pagoda, constructed along a similar plan; it enshrines 1,171 slabs on which are inscribed the Pāli commentaries.

Council, 6^th. What the THERAVĀDA school calls the sixth council was held in Rangoon from 1954 to 1956, commemorating the 2,500th anniversary of the Buddha’s passage into PARINIRVĀṆA. The convocation was sponsored by the Burmese government under Prime Minister U Nu. A special cave was constructed for the purpose, since the first council was also said to have been held in a cave. At this event, attended by some two thousand five hundred monks from eight Theravāda countries, the Pāli canon was edited and recited, with discrepancies among versions in the various Southeast Asian scripts noted and corrected. MAHASI SAYADAW was appointed to the dual position of pucchaka (questioner) and osana (editor). See also SAṂGĪTI.

Council of Bsam yas. See BSAM YAS DEBATE.

Council of Lha sa. See BSAM YAS DEBATE.

craving. See TṚṢṆĀ; TAṈHĀ; cf. LOBHA.

Csoma de Kőrös, Alexander. (1784–1842). Early European scholar of Tibet and its Buddhist culture. Csoma de Kőrös was born in Transylvania, to a family descended from Magyar nobility. He developed an early interest in the origins of his Hungarian ancestry, which led him to dedicate himself to learning more about the history of the Hungarian language. Through his studies in Arabic, he eventually came to the conclusion that Hungarian had developed in the Tarim Basin of modern Xinjiang province in China, and so in 1819 he set out on foot for Yarkand in Turkestan. He crossed the mountains into Ladakh and reached KASHMIR in 1822. There, he spent a year travelling between Srinagar and Leh (the capital of Ladakh) in the hopes of finding a caravan to join in order to make his way to Yarkand. On one of these journeys, Csoma de Kőrös met William Moorcroft, a veterinarian working for the British government. Moorcroft suggested that Csoma de Kőrös’ research might benefit more from traveling to LHA SA to learn about Tibetan language and literature. Although he never reached Lha sa, Csoma de Kőrös spent nine years in monasteries in Ladakh and Zanskar learning Tibetan and studying Tibetan Buddhist texts. He devoted much of his research time to mastering Buddhist terminology. In 1830, he left for Calcutta, where he would live for eleven years. In Calcutta, Csoma de Kőrös worked for the British East Indian Company through the Asiatic Society cataloguing Tibetan texts that were sent by BRIAN HOUGHTON HODGSON (1800–1894). He also published the first Tibetan grammar and dictionary in English, a translation of a ninth-century catalogue of Buddhist terminology, the MAHĀVYUTPATTI, and a number of scholarly articles on the Tibetan canon. He died of malaria in Darjeeling (1842) as he continued his search for the ancestral homeland of the Hungarian people. Although Csoma de Kőrös was not a Buddhist, he was declared a BODHISATTVA by Taishō University in Tokyo in 1933 and is often described as the “Father of Tibetology.”

Cūḍapanthaka. (P. Cūḷapanthaka/Cullapantha; T. Lam phran bstan; C. Zhutubantuojia; J. Chūdahantaka; K. Chudobant’akka 注荼半托迦). An eminent ARHAT declared in Pāli sources as foremost among the Buddha’s disciples in his ability to create mind-made bodies (MANOMAYAKĀYA) and to manipulate mind (cittavivaṭṭa). Cūḍapanthaka was the younger of two brothers born to a merchant’s daughter from RĀJAGṚHA who had eloped with a slave. Each time she became pregnant, she wanted to return home to give birth to her children, but both were born during her journey home. For this reason, the brothers were named “Greater” Roadside (Mahāpanthaka; see PANTHAKA) and “Lesser” Roadside. The boys were eventually taken to Rājagṛha and raised by their grandparents, who were devoted to the Buddha. The elder brother Panthaka often accompanied his grandfather to listen to the Buddha’s sermons and was inspired to be ordained. He proved to be an able monk, skilled in doctrine, and eventually attained arhatship. He later ordained his younger brother Cūḍapanthaka but was gravely disappointed in his brother’s inability to memorize even a single verse of the dharma. Panthaka was so disappointed that he advised his brother to leave the order, much to the latter’s distress. Once, the Buddha’s physician JĪVAKA invited the Buddha and his monks to a morning meal. Panthaka gathered the monks together on the appointed day to attend the meal but intentionally omitted Cūḍapanthaka. So hurt was Cūḍapanthaka by his brother’s contempt that he decided to return to lay life. The Buddha, knowing his mental state, comforted the young monk and taught him a simple exercise: he instructed him to sit facing east and, while repeating the phrase “rajoharaṇaṃ” (“cleaning off the dirt”), continue to wipe his face with a clean cloth. As Cūḍapanthaka noticed the cloth getting dirty from wiping off his sweat, he gained insight into the reality of impermanence (ANITYA) and immediately attained arhatship and was equipped with the four analytical knowledges (PRATISAṂVID), including knowledge of the entire canon (TRIPIṬAKA). (According to other versions of the story, he came to a similar realization through sweeping.) Thereafter Cūḍapanthaka became renowned for his vast learning, as well as for his supranormal powers. He was a master of meditative concentration (SAMĀDHI) and of the subtle-materiality absorptions (RŪPĀVACARADHYĀNA). He could simultaneously create a thousand unique mind-made bodies (MANOMAYAKĀYA), while other meditative specialists in the order could at best produce only two or three. ¶ Cūḍapanthaka is also traditionally listed as the last of the sixteen arhat elders (ṢOḌAŚASTHAVIRA), who were charged by the Buddha with protecting his dispensation until the advent of the next buddha, MAITREYA. In CHANYUE GUANXIU’s standard Chinese depiction, Cūḍapanthaka sits among withered trees, his left hand raised with fingers slightly bent, and his right hand resting on his right thigh, holding a fan.

Cūḷadhammasamādānasutta. (C. Shoufa jing; J. Juhōkyō; K. Subŏp kyŏng 受法經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on Undertaking the Dharma”; the forty-fifth sutta of the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 174th sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to a gathering of monks in the JETAVANA Grove at Sāvatthi (S. ŚRĀVASTĪ). The Buddha describes four ways of undertaking things in this life and the good and bad consequences that accrue to one who follows these ways. The first way is to live happily in the present, but suffer a painful consequence in the future, e.g., when a person wantonly indulges in sensual pleasures in the present life and, as a result, is reborn into a woeful state later. The second way is to live a painful existence in the present, and suffer a painful consequence in the future; this is the case with ascetics who mortify their flesh only to be reborn in a woeful state. The third way is to live a painful existence in the present, but enjoy a happy consequence in the future; this is the case with a person who suffers in this life due to greed, hatred, and delusion but nevertheless strives to lead a blameless life and is consequently reborn in a happy existence as a human or lesser divinity (DEVA). The fourth way is to live happily in the present, and enjoy a happy consequence, as is the case with a person who cultivates the meditative absorptions (JHĀNA; S. DHYĀNA); he is happy in the present life and is rewarded with a happy rebirth as a BRAHMĀ divinity. An expanded version of this sermon is found in the MAHĀDHAMMASAMĀDĀNASUTTA, or “Longer Discourse on Undertaking the Dharma,” also contained in the Majjhimanikāya.

Cūḷadukkhakkhandhasutta. (C. Kuyin jing; J. Kuongyō; K. Koŭm kyŏng 苦陰經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Mass of Suffering”; the fourteenth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the one hundredth sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to the Sakiyan prince Mahānāma at Kapilavatthu (S. KAPILAVASTU). The Buddha explains the full implications of sensual pleasures, the advantages of renouncing them, and the path needed to escape from their influence. In a discussion with JAINA ascetics, he describes how greed, ill-will, and ignorance cause moral defilement and misery.

Cūḷagopālakasutta. In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Cowherd”; the thirty-fourth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (separate recensions appear, but without title, in the Chinese translations of the EKOTTARĀGAMA and SAṂYUKTĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to an assembly of monks at Ukkācelā in the land of the Vajji (S. Vṛji). The Buddha explains that if monks are not equipped with the requisite skills in understanding this world and the next, the realm of death and the deathless, etc., the teachings cannot be expected to prosper. He uses the example of an unskillful cowherd under whose guidance a herd is led across a river, only to meet with destruction before they reach the other shore.

Cūḷagosiṅgasutta. (C. Niujiaosuoluolin jing; J. Gokakusararingyō; K. Ugaksararim kyŏng 牛角娑羅林經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse in Gosiṅga Park”; the thirty-first sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 185th sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA; there is also a recension of uncertain affiliation that appears without title in the Chinese translation of the EKOTTARĀGAMA). The Buddha visits the eminent monks, Anuruddha (S. ANIRUDDHA), Nandiya, and Kimila while the three are residing in the Gosiṅga grove. The monks describe to him how they carry out their daily activities in cooperation with one another and the Buddha praises them for their harmonious lifestyle, declaring it to be an adornment to the grove.

Cūḷahatthipadopamasutta. (C. Xiangjiyu jing; J. Zōshakuyugyō; K. Sangjŏgyu kyŏng 象跡經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint”; the twenty-seventh sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 146th sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA), preached by the Buddha to the brāhmaṇa Jāṇussoṇi at the JETAVANA grove in the city of Sāvatthi (ŚRĀVASTĪ). Jāṇussoṇi asks the Buddha whether a person could infer something of the virtues of the Buddha and his teachings in the same way that a hunter can infer the size of an elephant from its footprint. The Buddha responds that the virtues of the Buddha and his teachings could only be fully comprehended by following the teachings oneself until one has attained the final goal of NIRVĀṆA; this is just as with a hunter, who can only truly know the size of an elephant by following its tracks and seeing it directly at its watering hole. The Buddha then provides a systematic outline of his path of training, from morality (sīla, S. ŚĪLA), through the four meditative absorptions (jhāna; S. DHYĀNA), to the three higher knowledges (tevijjā; S. TRIVIDYĀ).

Cūḷaniddesa. In Pāli, “Shorter Exposition,” second part of the Niddesa (“Exposition”), an early commentarial work on the SUTTANIPĀTA included in the Pāli SUTTAPIṬAKA as the eleventh book of the KHUDDAKANIKĀYA; also written as Cullaniddesa. Attributed by tradition to the Buddha’s chief disciple, Sāriputta (S. ŚĀRIPUTRA), the Niddesa is divided into two sections: the MAHĀNIDDESA (“Longer Exposition”), and Cūḷaniddesa. The Mahāniddesa comments on the sixteen suttas (S. SŪTRA) of the AṬṬHAKAVAGGA chapter of the Suttanipāta, while the Cūḷaniddesa comments on the sixteen suttas of the Parāyaṇavagga chapter and on the Khaggavisānasutta (see KHAḌGAVIṢĀṆA). The Mahāniddesa and Cūḷaniddesa do not comment on any of the remaining contents of the Suttanipāta, a feature that has suggested to historians that at the time of their composition the Aṭṭhakavagga and Parāyaṇavagga were autonomous anthologies not yet incorporated into the Suttanipāta, and that the Khaggavisānasutta likewise circulated independently. The exegesis given to the Suttanipāta by the Mahā- and Cūḷaniddesa displays the influence of the Pāli ABHIDHAMMA (S. ABHIDHARMA) and passages from it are frequently quoted in the VISUDDHIMAGGA. Both parts of the Niddesa are formulaic in structure, a feature that appears to have been designed as a pedagogical aid to facilitate memorization. In Western scholarship, there has long been a debate regarding the dates of these two compositions, with some scholars dating them as early as the third century BCE, others to as late as the second century CE. The Mahā- and Cūḷaniddesa are the only commentarial texts besides the SUTTAVIBHAṄGA of the VINAYAPIṬAKA to be included in the Sri Lankan and Thai recensions of the Pāli canon. In contrast, the Burmese canon includes two additional early commentaries, the NETTIPAKARAṆA and PEṬAKOPADESA, as books sixteen and seventeen in its version of the Khuddakanikāya.

Cūḷasaccakasutta. In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse to Saccaka”; thirty-fifth sutta contained in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (two separate recensions appear, but without title, in the Chinese translations of the EKOTTARĀGAMA and SAṂYUKTĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to the wandering ascetic Saccaka in the Mahāvana forest outside the city of Vesālī (S. VAIŚĀLĪ). Saccaka maintained that that the five aggregates (P. khandha; S. SKANDHA) of materiality (RŪPA), sensations (VEDANĀ), perception (P. saññā; S. saṃjñā), conditioning factors (P. saṅkhāra; S. SAṂSKĀRA), and consciousness (P. viññāṇa; S. VIJÑĀNA) are one’s self (P. attan; S. ĀTMAN), and that it was this self that experienced the results of good and bad deeds (P. kamma; S. KARMAN). The Buddha refutes this view by pointing out that all of the aggregates are impermanent (P. anicca; S. ANITYA), unsatisfactory or suffering (P. dukkha; S. DUḤKHA), nonself (P. anatta; S. ANĀTMAN) and beyond one’s control.

Cūḷasāropamasutta. In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Simile of the Heartwood”; thirtieth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate unidentified recension appears, without title, in the Chinese translation of the EKOTTARĀGAMA), preached by the Buddha to the brāhmaṇa Piṅgalakoccha at the JETAVANA Grove in the town of Sāvatthi (S. ŚRĀVASTĪ). Piṅgalakoccha asks whether the six mendicant teachers (P. samaṇa ; ŚRAMAṆA) who were the Buddha’s rivals were, as they claimed, all buddhas themselves. The Buddha responds by explaining that, whereas the religious practices set forth by his rivals could lead to fame and profit and to the attainment of supranormal powers (P. abhiññā; S. ABHIJÑĀ), these were but like the leaves and twigs of a tree. Only the holy life (P. brahmacariya; S. BRAHMACARYA) set forth by the Buddha leads to the status of arahant (S ARHAT), which is like the heartwood of a tree.

Cūḷasīhanādasutta. (C. Shizihou jing; J. Shishikukyō; K. Sajahu kyŏng 師子吼經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Lion’s Roar”; eleventh sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 103rd sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA; a separate recension of unidentified affiliation appears, without title, in the Chinese translation of the EKOTTARĀGAMA), preached by the Buddha to a group of monks in the JETAVANA grove in the city of Sāvatthi (S. ŚRĀVASTĪ). The Buddha explains how only in his teachings can one attain any of the four degrees of sanctity (see ĀRYAPUDGALA): stream-enterer, once-returner, nonreturner, and perfected ARHAT; all other teachings lack these. Also, only in his teachings are found a rejection of all notions of a perduring self (P. atta; S. ĀTMAN).

Cūḷāssapurasutta. (C. Mayi jing; J. Meyūkyō; K. Maŭp kyŏng 馬邑經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse at Assapura”; the fortieth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 183rd sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA); preached by the Buddha to a group of monks dwelling in the market town of Assapura in the country of the Aṅgans. The people of Assapura were greatly devoted to the Buddha, the DHARMA, and the SAṂGHA and were especially generous in their support of the community of monks. In recognition of their generosity, the Buddha advised his monks that the true path of the recluse is not concerned with mere outward purification through austerities but rather with inward purification through freedom from passion and mental defilements. The dedicated monk should therefore devote himself to the path laid down by the Buddha until he has abandoned twelve unwholesome states of mind: (1) covetousness, (2) ill will, (3) anger, (4) resentment, (5) contempt, (6) insolence, (7) envy, (8) greed, (9) fraud, (10) deceit, (11) evil wishes, and (12) wrong view. Having abandoned these twelve, the monk should then strive to cultivate the divine abidings (BRAHMAVIHĀRA) of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity; through those virtues, the monk attains inner peace and thereby practices the true path of the recluse.

Cūḷataṇhāsaṅkhayasutta. In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on the Destruction of Craving”; the thirty-seventh sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (two separate recensions appear, but without title, in the Chinese translations of the EKOTTARĀGAMA and SAṂYUKTĀGAMA), preached by the Buddha to Sakka (S. ŚAKRA), king of the gods, in the city of Sāvatthi (S. ŚRĀVASTĪ). Sakka inquires how the Buddha trained himself so that he achieved the destruction of craving and reached the ultimate goal of liberation, whereby he became foremost among humans and gods. In response, the Buddha describes how a householder, after renouncing the world, trains himself to purify his mind of mental defilements and reaches the final goal. Mahāmoggallāna (MAHĀMAUDGALYĀYANA) overhears the sermon and travels to the heaven of the thirty-three (P. tāvatiṃsa; S. TRĀYASTRIṂŚA) to find out whether Sakka had correctly understood the meaning of the Buddha’s words. While there, Sakka gives Mahāmoggallāna a tour of his magnificent palace, which the king explains was constructed following the defeat of the demigods (ASURA).

Cūḷavagga. [alt. Cullavagga]. In Pāli, “Lesser Chapter”; one of the sections of the Pāli “basket of discipline” (VINAYAPIṬAKA). The second major division of the Pāli VINAYA, the KHANDHAKA (Collections), is subdivided between the MAHĀVAGGA (“Great Chapter”) and the Cūḷavagga. The Cūḷavagga includes twelve sections, in two parts that differ markedly in length and scope. The first part (chaps. 1–10) covers a variety of disciplinary regulations and relatively minor rules of monastic etiquette, ranging from transactions (P. saṅghakamma; S. SAṂGHAKARMAN) for imposing penance and probation on monks to methods of settling disputes within the order, apportioning lodging, handling schism within the order, and proper procedures for the ordination of nuns (P. bhikkhunī; S. BHIKṢUṆĪ). The second part (chaps. 11–12) continues the Mahāvagga’s narrative on the history of the SAṂGHA, relating events that followed the Buddha’s PARINIRVĀṆA, including the first council at RĀJAGṚHA shortly after his death and the second council at VAIŚĀLĪ a century or so later (see COUNCIL, FIRST; COUNCIL, SECOND).

Cūḷavaṃsa. In Pāli, “The Shorter Chronicle”; a historical chronicle of Sri Lanka and a continuation of the MAHĀVAṂSA. Written in segments by several authors beginning in the thirteenth century and continuing through the eighteenth century, the text offers a synopsis of the history of the island and its religion from the reign of Sirimeghavaṇṇa (362–390 CE) to that of Sirivikkamarājasīha (1798–1815 CE).

Cūḷavedallasutta. (C. Fale biqiuni jing; J. Hōraku bikunikyō; K. Pŏmnak piguni kyŏng 法樂比丘尼經). In Pāli, “Shorter Discourse on Points of Doctrine”; the forty-fourth sutta in the MAJJHIMANIKĀYA (a separate SARVĀSTIVĀDA recension appears as the 210^th sūtra in the Chinese translation of the MADHYAMĀGAMA; the entire discourse is also subsumed in the Tibetan translation of Śamathadeva’s commentary to the ABHIDHARMAKOŚABHĀṢYA), expounded by the nun Dhammadinnā (S. DHARMADINNĀ) to her former husband, the householder Visākha, at the Veḷuvana (S. VEṆUVANAVIHĀRA) bamboo grove in Rājagaha (S. RĀJAGṚHA). Visākha approached Dhammadinnā and questioned her concerning a number of points of doctrine preached by the Buddha. These questions included: what is the nature of this existing body (P. sakkāya; S. satkāya); what is its origin (SAMUDAYA), its cessation (NIRODHA), and the path (P. magga; S. MĀRGA) leading to its cessation; how does wrong view concerning this body (P. sakkāyadiṭṭhi; S. SATKĀYADṚṢṬI) arise and how is it removed; what is the noble eightfold path; what is concentration (SAMĀDHI); what are bodily, verbal, and mental formations; what is the attainment of cessation (nirodha); what is sensation (VEDANĀ); what are the underlying tendencies with regard to pleasant, painful, and neutral sensations and how should these be overcome; and what are the counterparts of pleasant, painful, and neutral sensations. Dhammadinnā answered all of the questions put to her to the satisfaction of the householder Visākha—proving why the Buddha considered her foremost among his nun disciples in the gift of preaching.

Cullavagga. (P). See CŪḶAVAGGA.

Cunda. (T. Skul byed; C. Zhuntuo; J. Junda; K. Chunda 準陀). In Sanskrit and Pāli, the proper name of a metalworker famous, or perhaps infamous, for having offered the Buddha his final meal before his demise. According to the Pāli account, the Buddha was traveling to Kusinārā (S. KUŚINAGARĪ) and interrupted his journey to rest at Cunda’s mango grove in Pāvā. Cunda paid his respects to the Buddha and invited him and his followers for the morning meal the next day. Cunda prepared for them sweet rice, cakes, and SŪKARAMADDAVA, literally “tender boar” or “soft boar’s [food].” There has been much debate, both in the tradition and among modern scholars, as to the meaning of this term. It is unclear whether it means something soft that is consumed by boars (such as a type of mushroom, truffle, or bamboo shoots that had been trampled by boars) or some kind of pork dish. The Indian and Sinhalese commentators prefer, although not unanimously, the latter interpretation. Some East Asian recensions of Cunda’s story state that he offered the Buddha mushrooms rather than pork for his last meal, thus preserving the idea that the Buddha was vegetarian. At the meal, the Buddha announced that he alone should be served the dish, and what was left over should be buried, for none but a buddha could survive eating it. This has led some modern interpreters to suggest that the meal had been poisoned, but no such implication appears in traditional commentaries. Shortly thereafter, the Buddha became afflicted with the dysentery from which he would eventually die. Shortly before his death, the Buddha instructed his disciple ĀNANDA to visit Cunda and reassure the layman that he was blameless; in fact, he should rejoice at the great merit he earned for having given the Buddha his last meal. In an earlier meeting, Cunda remarked to the Buddha that he approved of Brahmanical rites of purification, to which the Buddha responded with a sermon on the threefold defilement and purification of the body, the fourfold defilement and purification of speech, and the threefold defilement and purification of the mind. Although Cunda is not recorded as having ever reached any degree of spiritual attainment, he did have his doubts removed by the Buddha, whom he regarded as his teacher. There are a variety of different transcriptions of the name in Chinese, of which the above is among the most common.

Cundī. (T. Skul byed ma; C. Zhunti; J. Juntei; K. Chunje 准提). In Sanskrit, the name Cundī (with many orthographic variations) probably connotes a prostitute or other woman of low caste but specifically denotes a prominent local ogress (YAKṢIṆĪ), whose divinized form becomes the subject of an important Buddhist cult starting in the eighth century. Her worship began in the Bengal and Orissa regions of the Indian subcontinent, where she became the patron goddess of the Pāla dynasty, and soon spread throughout India, and into Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia, and Tibet, eventually making its way to East Asia. Cundī was originally an independent focus of cultic worship, who only later (as in the Japanese SHINGONSHŪ) was incorporated into such broader cultic practices as those focused on the “womb MAṆḌALA” (see TAIZŌKAI). Several scriptures related to her cult were translated into Chinese starting in the early eighth century, and she lends her name to both a MUDRĀ as well as an influential DHĀRAṆĪ: namaḥ saptānāṃ samyaksaṃbuddhakoṭīṇāṃ tadyathā: oṃ cale cule cunde svāhā. The dhāraṇī attributed to Cundī is said to convey infinite power because it is in continuous recitation by myriads of buddhas; hence, an adept who participates in this ongoing recitation will accrue manifold benefits and purify himself from unwholesome actions. The efficacy of the dhāraṇī is said to be particularly pronounced when it is recited before an image of Cundī while the accompanying Cundī mudrā is also being performed. This dhāraṇī also gives Cundī her common epithet of “Goddess of the Seventy Million [Buddhas],” which is sometimes mistakenly interpreted (based on a misreading of the Chinese) as the “Mother of the Seventy Million Buddhas.” The texts also provide elaborate directions on how to portray her and paint her image. In Cundī’s most common depiction, she has eighteen arms (each holding specific implements) and is sitting atop a lotus flower (PADMA) while being worshipped by two ophidian deities.

cyutyupapādānusmṛti. (S). See CYUTYUPAPATTIJÑĀNA.

cyutyupapattijñāna. [alt. cyutyupapādānusmṛti] (P. cutūpapātañāṇa; T. ’chi ’pho ba dang skye ba rjes su dran pa; C. shengsizhi; J. shōjichi; K. saengsaji 生死智). In Sanskrit, lit., “recollection of the disappearance [in one life] and rebirth [in another],” viz., “insight into the future rebirth destinies” of all other beings, a by-product of the “divine eye” (DIVYACAKṢUS), or clairvoyance, and the second of the “three knowledges” (TRIVIDYĀ). This recollection comes as a by-product of the enlightenment experience of a “worthy one” (ARHAT), and is an insight achieved by the Buddha during the second watch of the night of his own enlightenment. Through his enlightenment, the adept realizes not only that himself and all beings have been governed by the association between past actions (KARMAN) and their fruitions (VIPĀKA) throughout all their past lives; but through this insight, he also realizes that all other beings continue to be governed by their actions, and he is able to observe where beings will be reborn in the future as well. Specifically, one who possesses this insight sees the disappearance and arising of beings as low or noble, beautiful or ugly, etc., according to their good and evil deeds (KARMAN) performed through body, speech, and mind. Those who revile the noble ones (ĀRYAPUDGALA), hold perverse views (MITHYĀDṚṢṬI), and act in accordance with perverse views are observed to be reborn in lower realms of existence, e.g., in baleful destinies (APĀYA; DURGATI) such as the hells. Those who honor the noble ones, hold right views, and act in accordance with right views are observed to be reborn in higher realms of existence, e.g., in pleasant destinies such as the heavens. This ability is also listed as one of the superknowledges (ABHIJÑĀ).