| F |
Fachang. (C) (法常) (d.u.). In Chinese, “Constancy of the Dharma”; proper name of the first “state preceptor” appointed in China, during the reign of Emperor Wenxian (r. 550–559) of the Northern Qi dynasty. See GUOSHI.
fachuang. (J. hōdō; K. pŏptang 法幢). In Chinese, “banner of dharma”; in its literal usage, this term refers to the banners that would be raised whenever dharma sermons, rituals, or festivals were held. By extension, the opening or founding of a monastery or lecture hall came to be called the “establishment of the dharma banner” (ji’an fachuang). Metaphorically, the proclamation or exposition of the Buddhist truths was also said to be like raising the dharma banner, which would terrify MĀRA’s legions, thus symbolizing the vanquishing of Buddhism’s ideological opponents.
Fafang. (法舫) (1904–1951). In Chinese, “Skiff of Dharma”; distinguished Chinese Buddhist scholar and activist who initiated some of the earliest ecumenical dialogues between Chinese MAHĀYĀNA and Sri Lankan THERAVĀDA Buddhists. Ordained at the age of eighteen, Fafang was one of the first students to study in the Chinese Buddhist Academy that TAIXU founded in Wuchang (Wuchang Foxue Yuan). He eventually taught at the academy, as well as at other leading Chinese Buddhist institutions of his time, contributing significantly to Taixu’s attempts to found international Buddhist research centers and libraries. He also was longtime chief editor of the influential and long-running Buddhist periodical Haichao yin (“Sound of the Tide”). In 1946, Fafang traveled to Sri Lanka after becoming proficient in Sanskrit, Pāli, Japanese, and English and studied Theravāda Buddhism with Kirwatatuduwe Prasekene. Among his later accomplishments, Fafang taught at the University of Sri Lanka, served as one of the chief editors for the compilation of Taixu’s collected works, founded one of the first Pāli learning centers in China, and created a student exchange program for Chinese and Sri Lankan monks.
Fahai. (J. Hōkai; K. Pŏphae 法海) (d.u.). In Chinese, “Sea of Dharma”: a disciple of HUINENG, the sixth patriarch (LIUZU) of the CHAN ZONG. Fahai is said to have been the head monk of the monastery of Tafansi in Shaozhou Prefecture, where Huineng is presumed to have delivered a sermon on the “sudden” teachings (DUNJIAO) of the Southern school (NAN ZONG) of Chan. Fahai is dubiously credited with compiling the written record of this sermon, the LIUZU TAN JING (“Platform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch”). A rather late “brief preface” (luexu) to the Liuzu tan jing is also retrospectively attributed to Fahai. The story of this figure may have been based on a monk by the same name who was affiliated with the NIUTOU ZONG of Chan.
Fahua anle xingyi. (J. Hokke anrakugyōgi; K. Pŏphwa allak haengŭi 法華安樂行義). In Chinese, “Exegesis on the ‘Blissful Practice’ Section of the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” treatise composed by NANYUE HUISI and one of the earliest texts of the nascent TIANTAI ZONG. The text situated the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA at the locus of Tiantai teachings and outlined the archetypal contemplative techniques that were subsequently developed by TIANTAI ZHIYI. It contained both the incipient Tiantai understanding of the notion of “emptiness according to the PRAJÑĀPĀRAMITĀ” (bore kongxing) and the ritualistic elements of visualization and chanting that became central in subsequent iterations of Tiantai practice.
Fahua chanfa. (J. Hokke senbō; K. Pŏphwa ch’ambŏp 法華懺法). In Chinese, “penance ritual according to the ‘Lotus Sūtra.’” Despite its name, this intensive twenty-one-day ritual was based as much on the Guan Puxian pusa xingfa jing (“The Sūtra on the Procedures for Visualizing the Bodhisattva SAMANTABHADRA”) as it was on the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA. As explained in TIANTAI ZHIYI’s Fahua sanmei chanfa (“Penance Ritual according to the Lotus Samādhi”), the goal of the ritual is to ensure visions of celestial buddhas and/or BODHISATTVAs, which were taken to be signs that the one’s unwholesome actions (AKUŚALA-KARMAN) had been expiated. The penitent was required to refrain from lying down for the full duration of the ritual, by constantly alternating between walking and sitting postures. Demanding intense mental and physical devotion, the ritual involves extensive contemplation of the TIANTAI teachings, making vows and supplications, uttering prescribed words of repentance, chanting the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra and performing intermittent circumambulation.
fahua ermiao. (C) (法華二妙). See DAIJUE ERMIAO.
Fahua jing lüeshu. (J. Hokekyō ryakusho; K. Pŏphwa kyŏng yakso 法華經略疏). In Chinese, “A Brief Commentary on the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” the earliest extant Chinese commentary on the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA, though there is considerable controversy regarding its authenticity. The text is attributed to DAOSHENG from the Liu-Song period (420–479), who was one of the direct disciples of the Kuchean translator KUMĀRAJĪVA. Daosheng claimed that the treatise combined the famous translator’s lectures notes on the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra with Daosheng’s own insights. If authentic, this commentary would be Daosheng’s only surviving work, offering a rare perspective into the way the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra was understood and interpreted by Kumārajīva and his circle of adherents. Employing expressions found in the Chinese “Book of Changes” (Yijing), this commentary discusses the notions of “consummate perfection” (yuan) and a peculiar MAHĀYĀNA definition of the “middle way” (C. zhongdao, MADHYAMAPRATIPAD), notions that were further elaborated by subsequent TIANTAI and HUAYAN exegetes.
Fahua jing shu. (C) (法華經疏). See FAHUA JING LÜESHU.
Fahua jing yi ji. (J. Hokekyō giki; K. Pŏphwa kyŏng ŭi ki 法華經義
). In Chinese, “Notes on the Meaning of the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” also known as “Commentary on the Meaning of the ‘Lotus Sūtra’” (Fahua yi shu), eight-roll text composed by Fayun (467–529). This commentary is the second-oldest extant treatise in Chinese on the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA, after the FAHUA JING LÜESHU. These two commentaries played an important role in shaping early HUAYAN and TIANTAI thought.
Fahua sanbu [jing]. (J. Hokke sanbu[kyō]; K. Pŏphwa sambu [kyŏng] 法華三部[經]). In Chinese, “The Three [Sister] Sūtras of the ‘Lotus,’” and often referred to in English as the “Threefold ‘Lotus Sūtra.’” The three scriptures are: the WULIANG YI JING (“Sūtra of Immeasurable Meanings”); the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA (“Lotus Sūtra”) itself; and the GUAN PUXIAN PUSA XINGFA JING (“Sūtra on the Procedures for Visualizing the Bodhisattva SAMANTABHADRA”). They are called “sister sūtras” in East Asia because they seem to contain internal references to one other, which implied that they were propounded in this order during the final period of the Buddha’s ministry (according to the TIANTAI school’s temporal taxonomy of the scriptures; see WUSHI). The first of the three scriptures, the Wuliang yi jing, was presumed to be the prequel to the influential Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra (although the text is now generally believed to be an indigenous Chinese composition, see APOCRYPHA); the last, the Guan Puxian pusa xingfa jing, was considered its sequel. The three texts are also called “sister sūtras” because they all figured prominently in Tiantai teachings, although the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra far eclipsed the other two sūtras in importance in the school’s exegetic tradition.
Fahua wenju. (J. Hokke mongu; K. Pŏphwa mun’gu 法華文句). In Chinese, “Words and Phrases of the ‘Lotus Sūtra’”; a major commentary on the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA, taught by TIANTAI ZHIYI and put into writing by his disciple Guanding (561–632), in alt. ten or twenty rolls. Along with the MOHE ZHIGUAN and the FAHUA XUANYI, the Fahua wenju is considered one of Zhiyi’s three great commentaries. The lectures that formed the basis of the Fahua wenju were delivered by Zhiyi in 587 at the monastery of Jinzhaisi in Jinling (present-day Jiangsu province), and they offered a thorough exegetical analysis of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra. The Fahua wenju was incorporated in the Song-dynasty Buddhist canon at the recommendation of the Tiantai monk Ciyun Zunshi (964–1032) in 1024. The treatise employs a fourfold exegetical technique (sishi) unique to Zhiyi and his TIANTAI ZONG, viz., exegesis via: (1) causes and conditions, (2) classification of the teachings (see JIAOXIANG PANSHI), (3) fundamentals and traces, and (4) contemplation on the mind. Throughout the Fahua wenju, the interpretations of other teachers, such as DAOSHENG, are critiqued. An influential commentary on the Fahua wenju known as the Fahua wenju ji was prepared by JINGXI ZHANRAN.
Fahua wubai wen lun. (J. Hokke gohyakumonron; K. Pŏphwa obaek mun non 法華五百問論). In Chinese, “Treatise on Five Hundred Questions Regarding the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” in three rolls; text composed by JINGXI ZHANRAN (711–782) to refute the Chinese YOGĀCĀRA school’s (see FAXIANG ZONG) interpretation of the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA. It is so named because it contains roughly five hundred entries offering rejoinders (mainly from a TIANTAI position) against hypothetical Faxiang argumentations. Questions such as whether one’s spiritual potential is determined and fixed (see GOTRA), whether consciousness is fundamentally defiled or innately immaculate, and the relation between the different Buddhist “vehicles” (YĀNA) have been addressed in this polemical work.
Fahua wuchong xuanyi. (J. Hokke gojūgengi; K. Pŏphwa ojung hyŏnŭi 法華五重玄義). In Chinese, “The Five Layers of Profound Meaning according to the Fahua (TIANTAI) [school],” a standardized set of interpretive tools devised by TIANTAI ZHIYI to be used in composing Buddhist scriptural commentaries. The five topics of exegesis that Zhiyi states should be covered in any comprehensive sūtra commentary are: (1) “explanation of the title [of the sūtra]” (shiming); (2) “discernment of its main theme” (bianti); (3) “elucidation of its cardinal doctrine or main tenet” (mingzong); (4) “discussion of the sūtra’s intent or purpose” (lunyong); (5) “adjudication of its position in a hermeneutical taxonomy of the scriptures” (panjiao; see JIAOXIANG PANSHI). These five topics are covered in most East Asian sūtra commentaries written after Zhiyi’s time.
Fahua xuanyi. (J. Hokke gengi; K. Pŏphwa hyŏnŭi 法華玄義). In Chinese, “Profound Meaning of the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” taught by the eminent Chinese monk TIANTAI ZHIYI and put into writing by his disciple Guanding (561–632). Along with the MOHE ZHIGUAN and FAHUA WENJU, the Fahua xuanyi is considered one of Zhiyi’s three great commentaries. The lectures that form the basis of the Fahua xuanyi were delivered by Zhiyi in 593, perhaps at the monastery of Yuquansi in Jingzhou (present-day Hubei province), and they are concerned with the thorough analysis of the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA. The treatise is divided into two broader methods of interpretation: general (tongshi) and specific (bieshi). The general interpretation further consists of seven subtypes, such as a listing of the chapters, citations, provenance, and so forth. The specific interpretation consists of five subtypes (see FAHUA WUCHONG XUANYI): the interpretation of the title, determination of its main theme, clarification of its main tenet, discussion of its purpose, and classification of its teachings (panjiao; see JIAOXIANG PANSHI). Nearly two-thirds of the treatise is dedicated to the first two characters in the title of the Chinese translation of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka, “subtle” (miao) and “dharma” (fa).
Fahua xuanzan. (T. Dam pa’i chos puṇḍa rī ka’i ’grel pa [rgya las bsgyur pa]; J. Hokke genzan; K. Pŏphwa hyŏnch’an 法華玄贊). In Chinese, “Profound Panegyric to the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” a commentary to the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA composed by KUIJI, whose unique YOGĀCĀRA perspective on the text set him at odds with the more influential commentaries written by earlier and contemporaneous TIANTAI and HUAYAN exegetes. This commentary is still extant in both Chinese and, notably, a Tibetan translation.
Fahua zhuan[ji]. (J. Hokke den[ki]; K. Pŏphwa chŏn[’gi] 法華傳[]). In Chinese, “Compendium of the ‘Lotus Sūtra,’” also known as the Hongzan fahua zhuan[ji], was composed by Huixiang during the Tang dynasty. This work included much information regarding the translation, circulation, commentaries, epigraphy, illustrations, magical lore, and other aspects of the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA. Several other comparable compendia devoted exclusively to the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra are still extant (by authors from China, Korea, and Japan), testifying to the scripture’s popularity throughout East Asia.
Fajie guanmen. (C) (法界觀門). See HUAYAN FAJIE GUANMEN.
fajie jiachi. (J. hokkai kaji; K. pŏpkye kaji 法界加持). In Chinese “the empowerment of the DHARMADHĀTU.” According to the MAHĀVAIROCANĀBHISAṂBODHISŪTRA, the buddhas, the TANTRAS, and sentient beings (SATTVA) mutually pervade and “empower” (ADHIṢṬHĀNA) each other. This mutual interfusion is what makes the dharmadhātu unfathomably profound and interconnected.
fajie yuanqi. (J. hokkai engi; K. pŏpkye yŏn’gi 法界
起). In Chinese, “conditioned origination (PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA) of the dharma-element (DHARMADHĀTU),” an East Asian theory of causality elaborated within the HUAYAN school. Unlike the Indian systematization of the twelvefold chain of pratītyasamutpāda, which views existence as an endless cycle of painful rebirths that begins with ignorance (AVIDYĀ) and ends with old age and death (jarāmaraṇa; see JARĀ), this Huayan vision of causality instead regards the infinitely interdependent universe as the manifestation of the truth to which the Buddha awakens. The term “fajie yuanqi” does not appear in the Huayan jing (AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA) itself and seems to have been first coined by ZHIYAN (602–668), the “second patriarch” of the Huayan lineage. Zhiyan used fajie yuanqi to refer to the concurrency between cause (C. yin; S. HETU) and fruition (C. guo; S. PHALA), here meaning the “causal” practices (hsing) that are conducive to enlightenment and their “fruition” in the realization (zheng) of the quiescence that is NIRVĀṆA. As this Huayan theory of pratītyasamutpāda is elaborated within the tradition, it is broadened to focus on the way in which every single phenomenal instantiation of existence both contains, and is contained by, all other instantiations, so that one existence is subsumed by all existences (yi ji yiqie) and all existences by one existence (yiqie ji yi); in this vision, all things in the universe are thus mutually creative and mutually defining, precisely because they all lack any independent self-identity (SVABHĀVA). Each phenomenon constitutes a part of an organic whole that is defined by the harmonious relationship between each and every member: just as the whole is defined by all of its independent constituents, each independent constituent is defined by the whole with which it is integrated. This relationship is called endless multiplication (chongchong wujin), because the process of mutual penetration and mutual determination (xiangru xiangji) is infinite. Due to this unlimited interdependence among all phenomena, this type of pratītyasamutpāda may also be termed “inexhaustible conditioned origination” (wujin yuanqi). This interdependence between one phenomenon and all other phenomena developed through fajie yuanqi is indicative also of the Huayan “dharmadhātu of the unimpeded interpenetration of phenomenon with phenomena” (SHISHI WU’AI FAJIE). The Huayan doctrines of the “ten profound mysteries” (SHI XUANMEN) and the “consummate interfusion of the six aspects” (LIUXIANG YUANRONG) also offer systematic elaborations of the doctrine of fajie yuanqi.
fala. (J. hōrō; K. pŏmnap 法臘). In Chinese, “dharma age,” the number of years since one has been ordained as a novice or monk or nun. See JIELA.
Famensi. (法門寺). In Chinese, “Dharma-Gate Monastery,” located approximately seventy miles outside the city of Chang’an (present-day Xi’an) in Shaanxi province, China. Though the exact dates of its construction are unknown, the monastery claims to have been built during the Eastern Han dynasty but more likely dates from the Northern Wei period (386–534). One of only four monasteries in China to house a relic (ŚARĪRA) of the Buddha, Famensi was particularly renowned for its four finger-bone relics, which were displayed in the Tang-dynasty capital several times during the seventh and eighth centuries. Famensi’s renowned thirteen-story, octagonal brick pagoda (STŪPA) collapsed in 1981 after a torrential rainfall, and excavations in 1987 revealed three secret stone chambers under the foundations, which had remained unopened since the ninth century. The chambers housed a large number of precious objects, including incense burners (see GANDHAGHAṬIKĀ), jewelry, and textile items, as well as 122 gold and silver objects that are exhaustively inventoried in two stone tablets written in 874 and left with the cache. An exquisite, gilded reliquary casket containing a nested series of smaller reliquaries was also discovered in the chamber. One of the purported finger-bone relics of the Buddha was found intact within the innermost reliquary; the other three were located elsewhere in the chambers.
faming. (T. chos ming; J. hōmyō; K. pŏmmyŏng 法名). In Chinese, “dharma name.” In East Asian Buddhism, the given name in one’s dharma lineage is typically a new religious name—often consisting of two Sinographs for monks, nuns, and laymen, or sometimes three Sinographs for laywomen—that is conferred by the preceptor to a person who has undergone either the three refuges (RATNATRAYA) ceremony or monastic ordination. After ordination, monks and nuns no longer use their secular names but will subsequently be known only by their dharma names. In many East Asian traditions, following long-established Chinese practice going back to the time of DAO’AN (312–385), monks and nuns also often abandon their secular surname and take in its place the surname SHI (J. Shaku; K. Sŏk; V. Thích), a transliteration of the first syllable of ŚĀKYA, the Buddha’s own clan name, as a mark of their spiritual ties to the clan of the Buddha. In the case of monks and nuns and people of notable accomplishment, this dharma name is traditionally preceded by another cognomen or cognomina that alludes to one’s lineage group, place of residence (such as one’s home monastery or mountain), an imperially bestowed title, and/or other known virtues. ¶ In Tibet, two names are given and the first name is typically the first name of the preceptor; thus, those ordained by Bstan ’dzin rgya mtsho (Tenzin Gyatso) (the fourteenth Dalai Lama) will have Bstan ’dzin (Tenzin) as the first of their two dharma names.
fanan. (J. hōnan; K. pŏmnan 法難). In Chinese, “calamities that befall the dharma,” referring to political persecutions of Buddhism, or other forms of systematic harassment of the religion and its adherents. Examples of such persecutions abound throughout Buddhist history. In India, e.g., there were Indian rulers who were hostile to Buddhism, such as King Puśyamitra (c. end of the second century BCE) and those of the Sena dynasty (c. eleventh to twelfth centuries), as well as Muslim generals and rulers who sacked Buddhist centers and forced the conversion of the local populace. In East Asia, China saw the systematic persecution by four emperors with Daoist affinities, as well as the infamous Huichang persecution (HUICHANG FANAN). More recent periods saw Japan’s suppression of Buddhism during the Meiji period (beginning in 1868; cf. SHINBUTSU BUNRI) and the Korean Chosŏn dynasty’s five centuries of persecution of Buddhism, which extended into the late nineteenth century. Related Chinese terms are feifo (“abolition of Buddhism”), miefo (“annihilation of Buddhism”), pofo (“destruction of Buddhism”), huifa (“damage to Buddhism”), and mie-Shi (“annihilation of [the teachings of] ŚĀKYAMUNI”).
fanbai. (J. bonbai; K. pŏmp’ae 梵唄). In Chinese, lit., “the speech of BRAHMĀ,” Buddhist ritual chanting performed in a distinctively clear, melodious, and resonate voice; “fan,” lit. Brahmā, is generically used in China to refer to all things Indian, and “bai” is a transcription of the Sanskrit word bhāṣā, or “speech,” so fanbai means something like “Indian-style chanting.” Although the historical origins of fanbai are uncertain, according to legend, it derives from the singing of the heavenly musicians (GANDHARVA) or from the chants of Gadgadasvara (Miaoyin), a bodhisattva appearing in the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA who eulogized the virtues of ŚĀKYAMUNI Buddha. An account in the NANHAI JIGUI NEIFA CHUAN, a pilgrimage record written by the Chinese monk YIJING (635–713), who sojourned in India for twenty-five years, confirms that fanbai chanting was still popular on the Indian subcontinent during the seventh century. Fanbai was transmitted to China almost simultaneously with the introduction of Buddhism. The Chinese developed their own style of fanbai by at least the third century CE: Cao Zhi (192–232) of the Wei dynasty is said to have created it inspired by a fish’s movement, leading to the use of the term yushan (lit. “fish mountain”) as an alternate name for fanbai. According to the Korean SAMGUK YUSA, the transmission of fanbai (K. pŏmp’ae) from China to Korea occurred perhaps as early as the first half of the seventh century; subsequently, the monk CHIN’GAM HYESO (774–850) is said to have introduced the Tang-Chinese style of fanbai to the Silla kingdom around 830. The NITTŌ KYŪHŌ JUNREIGYŌKI by ENNIN (794–864), a Japanese pilgrim monk who visited both Silla Korea and Tang China, reports that both Silla and Tang styles of pŏmp’ae were used in Korean Buddhist ceremonies. The Chosŏn monk Taehwi (fl. c. 1748), in his Pŏmŭmjong po (“The Lineage of the Brahmā’s Voice School”), traces his Korean lineage of pŏmp’ae monks back to the person of Chin’gam Hyeso. Fanbai was preserved orally in China and Korea, but was recorded in Japan using the Hakase neume style of notation. The fanbai chanting style involves special vocalization techniques with complex ornamentation that are thought to have been introduced from India, but uses lyrics that derive from Chinese verse; these lyrics are usually in non-rhyming patterns of five- or seven-character lines, making up four-line verses that praise the virtues of the Buddha. Vocables are sometimes employed in fanbai, unlike in sūtra chanting. The different fanbai chants are traditionally performed solo or by a chorus, often in a call and response format. Only in Korea has fanbai branched into two distinct types: hossori pŏmp’ae and chissori pŏmp’ae. Some pŏmp’ae texts can be performed only in one style, but others, such as porye and toryanggye, leave the choice to the performer. Hossori pŏmp’ae is performed in a melismatic style that is elegantly simple, in a vocal style somewhat similar to Western music. By contrast, chissori pŏmp’ae is solemn, highly sophisticated, and utilizes a tensed throat and falsetto for high notes. Although chissori pŏmp’ae is considered to be a more important vocal musical form, there are only twelve extant compositions in this style. Owing to how texts and melodic phrases are organized, even though it uses a shorter text, chissori pŏmp’ae takes two or three times longer to complete than hossori. Of the two, only hossori can be accompanied by musicians or sung to accompany dance. Korean pŏmp’ae is also performed during Buddhist ceremonies such as YŎNGSANJAE.
Fangshan shijing. (房山石經). In Chinese, “Lithic Scriptures of Fangshan,” the world’s largest collection of scriptures written on stone, located in the Fangshan district about forty miles southwest Beijing. The blocks are now stored on Shijingshan (Stone Scriptures Hill) in nine separate caves, among them the Leiyindong (Sound of Thunder Cave), near the monastery of YUNJUSI (Cloud Dwelling Monastery). The carving of the lithic scriptures was initiated during the Daye era (604–617) by the monk Jingwan (d. 639) with the support of Empress Xiao (?-630) and her brother Xiao Yu (574–647). Among the scriptures carved during Jingwan’s lifetime were the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA (“Lotus Sūtra”), the MAHĀPARINIRVĀṆASŪTRA (“Nirvāna Sūtra”), and the AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA (“Flower Garland Sūtra”). The project continued up through the Tianqi era (1621–1627) of the Ming dynasty. The collection now includes 1,122 Buddhist scriptures carved on 14,278 lithographs, or stone slabs. The Fangshan canon is a product of the Chinese belief that Buddhism had entered the “dharma-ending age” (MOFA; see SADDHARMAVIPRALOPA): by carving the Buddhist canon on stone, this project was thus one way of helping to ensure that the Buddhist scriptures would survive the inevitable demise of the religion. Most of the scriptures in the Fangshan canon represent textual lineages that derive from recensions that circulated during the Tang and Khitan Liao dynasties. The monk Xuanfa (fl. c. 726–755) initiated a project to carve the entire canon after being presented with a copy of the handwritten Kaiyuan manuscript canon (see KAIYUAN SHIJIAO LU) by the Tang princess Jinxian (689–732). During the rule of the Khitan Liao emperors Shengzong (r. 983–1031), Xingzong (r. 1032–1054), and Daozong (r. 1055–1100), the new Qidan canon was carved on xylographs (viz., woodblocks), with the lithic carving of the same texts carried out in tandem at Yunjusi for several decades. By the late eleventh century, all nine caves had been filled to capacity. Consequently, in 1117, a pit was excavated in the southwestern section of Yunjusi to bury a new set of carvings initiated by the monk Tongli (1049–1098); these texts were mostly commentarial and exegetical writings, rather than sūtra translations. By the time of the Jin dynasty (1115–1234), most of the mainstream Mahāyāna canonical scriptures had been carved. In the twelfth century, during the Song dynasty, the growing popularity of tantric materials and the ĀGAMAs prompted a supplementary carving project to add them to the Fangshan canon. However, the Fangshan Shijing does not exclusively contain Buddhist texts. In the third year of the Xuande era (1428) of the Ming dynasty, many Daoist scriptures were carved with an intent similar to that of the Buddhists: to ensure that these texts were transmitted to posterity. The Buddhist Association of China made rubbings of a substantial part of the extant lithographs in 1956. For modern historians, these rubbings offer a rich tapestry of information for studying the textual history of the Buddhist canon and the social history and culture of Buddhism in northern China. See also DAZANGJING.
fangsheng. (T. srog blu/tshe thar; J. hōjō; K. pangsaeng 放生). In Chinese, “releasing living creatures,” referring to the practice of buying captured animals, such as fish, turtles, or birds, and then setting them free; the focus of a ritual popular in East Asian Buddhism, the “ceremony of releasing living creatures” (FANGSHENG HUI). The Buddhist tradition asserts that merit (PUṆYA) is produced by both actively pursuing wholesome actions (KUŚALA-KARMAPATHA) as well as refraining from unwholesome actions (AKUŚALA-KARMAPATHA); fangsheng is regarded as an enhancement of both types of action, by furthering the first lay precept (ŚĪLA) that forbids the unsalutary action of killing, as well as the MAHĀYĀNA precept that encourages the salutary act of vegetarianism. ¶ The two representative scriptures on fangsheng are the FANWANG JING (“Book of Brahmā’s Net”) and the SUVARṆAPRABHĀSOTTAMASŪTRA (C. Jinguangming jing; “Sūtra of Golden Light”), the former providing the doctrinal basis for the practice of fangsheng, the latter a protypical example of a fangsheng hui. The Fanwang jing says that because all sentient beings in the six destinies (ṢAḌGATI; see also GATI) have at some time or other during the vastness of SAṂSĀRA been one’s parents, a person should always strive to rescue creatures from people who would kill them in order to save them from their torment. The Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra tells a story about Jalavāhana (ŚĀKYAMUNI Buddha in an earlier life), who saved ten thousand fish who were dying in a dried up pond by bringing water to refill it. He then recited for them the ten epithets of the buddha Ratnaśikhin/Ratnabhava, since he had been told that any creatures who heard that Buddha’s name at the time of their deaths would be reborn in the heavens. The fish were reborn as divinities in the TRĀYASTRIṂŚA heaven, who then rained jewels down on the earth.¶ In China, the Buddhist custom of vegetarianism had started to pervade the culture by the Qi (479–501) and Liang (502–556) dynasties, a custom that encouraged the freeing of animals. In 619, an imperial decree prohibited fishing, hunting, and the slaughter of animals during the first, fifth, and ninth months of the year. A decree of 759 established eighty-one ponds for the release and protection of fish. Fangsheng appears to have been practiced not only by individual laypeople and monks. There is a record of the Liang dynasty monk Huiji (456–515) who practiced mendicancy so he could buy and release captured animals. TIANTAI ZHIYI (538–597), the founder of the TIANTAI ZONG, is known to have performed a formal ceremony for releasing animals in 575. Zhiyi lamented the fact that local folk made their living by catching fish, so he built a “pond where creatures could be released” (fangsheng chi) and preached to the freed fish the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA and the Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra. Zhiyi thus established the Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra as the scriptural authority for fangsheng. Following Zhiyi, the fangsheng ceremony subsequently became one of the important rituals used within the Tiantai school. Ciyun Zunshi (964–1032) and SIMING ZHILI (960–1028), both Tiantai monks during the Song dynasty, were ardent advocates of fangsheng, who established ponds for releasing creatures and performed the ceremony of releasing creatures, especially in conjunction with celebrations of the Buddha’s birthday. In the CHAN school, YONGMING YANSHOU (904–975) and YUNQI ZHUHONG (1535–1615) were among the most enthusiastic proponents of fangsheng. Zhuhong wrote works regarding the practice of vegetarianism, including the Shirou (“On Meat-Eating”) and the Shasheng feirensuowei (“Killing Is Not What Humans Are Supposed To Do”), and also composed tracts on the ritual practice of fangsheng, such as the Fangsheng yi (“Rite for Releasing Living Creatures”) and the Jiesha fangsheng wen (“Text on Prohibiting Killing and Releasing Living Creatures”). His Fangsheng yi is still considered today one of the standard sources for the Fangsheng ritual. Eventually, almost every large monastery in China had a pool for releasing fish and pens for the care of livestock that had been rescued from the butcher. Because these animals had been given Buddhist precepts, they were encouraged to observe them, with males and females segregated and carnivorous fish kept separately. Birds, turtles, and fish were more popular for release than domesticated animals because they required no further assistance. The pious who delivered cows and pigs to the monastery, however, were required to contribute toward their sustenance. ¶ The practice was popular in other Buddhist countries. In medieval Japan the imperial government would order the capture of three times the number of fish needed to be released at a ceremony in order that the requisite number—often from one to three thousand—would still be alive by the time the ceremony took place. In such cases, the practice of releasing animals resulted in the unfortunate death of many before they could be liberated. Among Tibetan Buddhists, the killing of animals is normatively deplored, and protecting the life of even the tiniest insect (srog skyob) is a common practice; in the LHA SA region, a small Muslim community traditionally performed the task of killing and butchering animals; farmers and nomads butcher some of their animals each year. Vegetarianism (sha med) is admired, but not widespread in Tibet, except during the first two weeks of the fourth Tibetan month SA GA ZLA BA when, it is believed, the results of wholesome actions increase one hundred thousand times. Buying an animal destined for slaughter to protect one’s own life, or more commonly to protect the life of an important religious figure, is also common; that practice is known as tshe thar, lit., “liberating life” in Tibetan.
fangsheng hui. (J. hōjōe; K. pangsaeng hoe 放生會). In Chinese, “ceremony for releasing living creatures,” a Buddhist ceremony held throughout East Asian Buddhism, usually on the fifteenth day of the eighth month of the lunar calendar or the third day of the third month. The practice of releasing animals is claimed to have been initially established as a formal ceremony by TIANTAI ZHIYI (538–597), who followed the account presented in the SUVARṆAPRABHĀSOTTAMASŪTRA (C. Jinguangming jing; “Sūtra of Golden Light”), which describes the practice of releasing captured animals (FANGSHENG), especially fish. The Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra tells a story about Jalavāhana (Śākyamuni Buddha in an earlier incarnation), who saved ten thousand fish by bringing water to a dried-up pond. He then recited for them the ten epithets of the buddha Ratnaśikhin/Ratnabhava, since he had been told that any creatures who heard that buddha’s name at the time their deaths would be reborn in the heavens; he continued on to teach them the doctrine of conditioned origination (PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA). In 575, Zhiyi is said to have lamented the fact that local folk made their living by catching fish, so he built a “pond where creatures could be released” (fangsheng chi) and preached to the freed fish the SADDHARMAPUṆḌARĪKASŪTRA and the Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra. The fangsheng ceremony subsequently became one of the important rituals within the TIANTAI ZONG, even though there is no extant record of its performance until it was revived by Luoxi Yiji (919–987), the fifteenth head of the Tiantai school. Public ceremonies of releasing animals were also held at court, particularly on the Buddha’s Birthday, and lay groups were organized at the local level to release animals. The Ming-dynasty monk YUNQI ZHUHONG’s (1535–1615) Fangsheng yi (“Rite for Releasing Living Creatures”) is considered one of the standard sources for the fangsheng ritual. This ritual entails bestowing the three refuges (TRIŚARAṆA) on the creatures to be released, reciting the ten epithets of the buddha Ratnaśikhin/Ratnabhava, teaching the creatures the twelvefold chain of dependent origination (a difficult doctrine even for bipeds), and concluding with a repentance rite for the animals’ transgressions.
fang yankou. (S. pretamukhāgnivālāyaśarakāra; J. hōenkō; K. pang yŏmgu 放焰口). In Chinese, “releasing the burning mouths,” Chinese esoteric Buddhist ritual for those dead who have been reborn as hungry ghosts (PRETA). The “burning mouths” refers specifically to hungry ghosts, whose tiny mouths and narrow gullets leave them congenitally incapable of filling their distended bellies; even worse, as they try to feed themselves such tiny morsels, the tidbits turn into fire, ash, and burning iron in their mouths. The ritual is performed by monks during the ULLAMBANA festival for the dead or at the request of laypeople on behalf of their ancestors. The ritual typically takes five hours to complete and is always held in the evening when hungry ghosts can more easily travel from their realm of existence to attend. During the performance, the monks wear red or golden hats in the shape of a five-pointed crown, which symbolizes the five buddhas (S. PAÑCATATHĀGATA). At first, the five buddhas and other divinities are invited and offered “sweet dew” (C. ganlu; S. AMṚTA), viz., water consecrated through the recitation of a MANTRA. After summoning all the inhabitants of the six realms of existence (ṢAḌGATI), the hungry ghosts are then released and feted; purged of their afflictions (KLEŚA), they then pay homage to the three jewels (RATNATRAYA) and make a vow to become BODHISATTVAs. Finally, after being taught the Buddhist teachings, they are sent on their way to the PURE LAND. The ritual is accompanied by such features as ringing hand bells, chanting mantras, and performing MUDRĀ in order symbolically to open both the gates of the hells and the throats of the hungry ghosts and to remove their karmic obstructions (KARMĀVARAṆA). The ritual is supposed to have been created in response to a nightmare of the Buddha’s attendant ĀNANDA: after dreaming one night about the horrible plight of the hungry ghosts, Ānanda asked the Buddha to help beings avoid such a baleful rebirth and to rescue all the current residents of that bourne. The Buddha then recited DHĀRAṆĪ on all their behalves. The Jiuba yankou egui tuoluoni jing (S. Pretamukhāgnivālāyaśarakāradhāraṇī; T. Yi dwags kha la me ’bar ma la skyabs mdzad pa’i gzungs, “Dhāraṇī-Sūtra for Liberating the Burning Mouth Hungry Ghosts”), translated by AMOGHAVAJRA during the eighth century, includes the earliest version of the ritual. The fangyan kou is still performed today within the Chinese Buddhist community, especially in Taiwan and Hong Kong.
fangzhang. (J. hōjō; K. pangjang 方丈). In Chinese, lit. “a square zhang,” the “abbot’s quarters” at a CHAN monastery. This term comes from the Chinese translation of the VIMALAKĪRTINIRDEŚA, where it is said that the layman VIMALAKĪRTI was able to accomplish the miraculous feat of seating thirty-two thousand beings in his small room measuring only one square (fang) zhang (a Chinese measurement of length equivalent to a little more than three meters or ten feet) in size. The notion of a fangzhang was appropriated by the Chan tradition as the technical term for the abbot’s quarters at a Chan monastery. The abbot, a Chan master, would often have private interviews there with students and greet private visitors to the monastery. In some contexts, the “abbot’s quarters” comes by metonymy to refer to the abbot himself. Korean monasteries distinguish between a chosil (lit. occupant of the patriarch’s room), the Sŏn master at a regular monastery, and a pangjang, the Sŏn master at a CH’ONGNIM, one of the large ecumenical monastic centers where the full panoply of Buddhist training is maintained, such as HAEINSA or SONGGWANGSA. At the ch’ongnim, the pangjang is then considered the Sŏn master who heads the practice centers in the monastery, while the chuji (C. ZHUCHI; abbot) is the head of monastic administration.
Fanwang jing. (J. Bonmōkyō; K. Pŏmmang kyŏng 梵網經). In Chinese, “Brahmā’s Net Sūtra,” the scripture is often cited by its reconstructed, but unattested, Sanskrit title, the *Brahmajālasūtra. This scripture is reputed to have been translated by KUMĀRAJĪVA in 406, but it is most likely an indigenous Chinese scripture (see APOCRYPHA) composed during the middle of the fifth century. The Fanwang jing, in its current recension in two rolls, purports to be the tenth chapter of a much longer, 120-roll scripture titled the Bodhisattvaśīlasūtra, which is otherwise unknown. The first roll provides a description of the buddha VAIROCANA and the ten different stages of the BODHISATTVA path. Because subsequent Chinese indigenous scriptures that were closely related to the Fanwang jing, such as the PUSA YINLUO PENYE JING, provided more systematic presentations of these soteriological models, this first roll was not widely studied and was typically omitted in commentaries on the scripture. Far more important to the tradition is the second roll, which is primarily concerned with the “bodhisattva precepts” (BODHISATTVAŚĪLA); this roll has often circulated independently as PUSAJIE JING (*Bodhisattvaśīlasūtra; “The Book of the Bodhisattva Precepts”). This roll provides a list of ten major and forty-eight minor MAHĀYĀNA precepts that come to be known as the “Fanwang Precepts,” which became a popular alternative to the 250 monastic precepts of the DHARMAGUPTAKA VINAYA (also known as the SIFEN LÜ). Unlike the majority of rules found in other non-Mahāyāna vinaya codes, the bodhisattva precepts are directed not only at ordained monks and nuns, but also may be taken by laymen and laywomen. The Fanwang jing correlates the precepts with Confucian virtues such as filial piety and obedience, as well as with one’s buddha-nature (FOXING). Numerous commentaries on this text were composed, and those written by FAZANG, Mingkuang (fl. 800 CE), and the Korean monk T’AEHYŎN (d.u.) were most influential. As the primary scriptural source in East Asia for the bodhisattva precepts, the Fanwang jing was tremendously influential in subsequent developments in Buddhist morality and institutions throughout the region. In Japan, for example, the TENDAISHŪ monk SAICHŌ (767–822) disparaged the PRĀTIMOKṢA precepts of the traditional vinaya as being the precepts of HĪNAYĀNA adherents, and rejected them in favor of having all monastics take instead the MAHĀYĀNA precepts of the Fanwang jing. In Korea, all monastics and laypeople accept the bodhisattva precepts deriving from the Fanwang jing, but for monks and nuns these are still seen as complementary to their main monastic vows.
fanzhao. (J. henshō; K. panjo 返照). In Chinese, “tracing back the radiance,” or “counter-illumination,” a description used in the CHAN school for the underlying process governing a variety of different types of meditation, referring specifically to the process of introspection or “counter-illumination” that moves the mind away from its attachment to sensory objects and back toward its fundamental source, called variously the “numinous awareness” (LINGZHI), buddha-nature (BUDDHADHĀTU; C. FOXING), TATHĀGATAGARBHA, or the DHARMADHĀTU. “Tracing back the radiance” receives one of its most detailed treatments in the writings of the Korean Sŏn adept POJO CHINUL (1158–1210). Chinul’s Korean commentator Yŏndam Yuil (1720–1799), e.g., defines the term as follows: “To trace back the radiance means to trace the radiance back to the numinous awareness of one’s own mind…. It is like seeing the radiance of the sun’s rays and following it back until you see the orb of the sun itself.” The original enlightenment (BENJUE) of the mind is naturally luminous, shining ever outward and allowing beings to experience their external world. This natural quality of luminosity is what is meant by “sentience,” and the very fact that “sentient” beings are conscious is proof that they are inherently enlightened. If this meditator can turn this radiance emanating from his mind back to its source, he would rediscover that luminous core of the mind and be instantly enlightened. This inherent radiance of the mind does not merely shine over the sense realms; in addition, as the mind’s natural brightness is restored through meditative introspection, it comes virtually to shine through objects, exposing their inherent emptiness (ŚŪNYATĀ). Hence, numinous awareness is the quality that constitutes sentient beings’ ultimate capacity to attain enlightenment. It serves as both the inherent faculty that allows meditation to develop and the quality of mind perfected through that meditation. By starting at the sensory level of what is seen, heard, etc., the meditator then trains to trace these sensory experiences back to their perceptual source in the quality of sentience itself, just as if he were following the rays emanating from the sun back to the sun itself; the perception of that sentience then constitutes “seeing the buddha-nature” (JIANXING), or the “understanding awakening” (JIEWU). The term is also known by its expanded form “follow back the light and trace back the radiance” (HUIGUANG FANZHAO), and various other permutations.
faqi. (S. *dharmabhājana; T. chos kyi snod; J. hōki; K. pŏpki 法器). In Chinese, “dharma vessel” or “implement of dharma.” When referring to objects, faqi is the collective name for all the implements used either for ritual and liturgical purposes (e.g., bells, drums, and wooden fish) or for decorative purposes (e.g., canopies, banners, flower vases, censers, and lamps). The term is also used to refer to the few possessions allowable to a monk or nun, such as the begging bowl (PĀTRA), recitation beads (JAPAMĀLĀ), and the staff; see also PARIṢKĀRA. One of the six forms of AVALOKITEŚVARA, the Thousand-Hands and Thousand-Eyes emanation (S. SĀHASRABHUJASĀHASRANETRĀVALOKITEŚVARA; C. Qianshou Qianyan Guanshiyin Pusa), is commonly depicted in abbreviated form with forty hands, each of which holds a different faqi (cf. T. phyag mtshan, lag cha). According to the Nīlakantha[ka]sūtra, these forty faqi include weapons, precious jewels, liturgical instruments, the sun and moon, and plants. The bodhisattva uses these various faqi to protect and save the sentient beings of the continent of JAMBUDVĪPA. When used metaphorically to refer to a person, faqi is a term of praise, meaning “one who has been, or has the potential to be, molded into a vessel of the dharma,” or “someone who is suitably prepared to believe in and understand the teachings of Buddhism.” In the CHAN tradition, one who is capable of being entrusted with the store of the proper dharma eye (ZHENFAYANZANG), the sublime mind of NIRVĀṆA, is called a “dharma vessel.”
Faqin. (J. Hōkin; K. Pŏphŭm 法欽) (714–792). In Chinese, “Dharma Reverence”; CHAN master in the NIUTOU ZONG, also known as Daoqin. A chance encounter with the monk HELIN XUANSU when Faqin was twenty-eight is said to have resulted in his decision to become a monk. In 741, Faqin went to Mt. Jing, where he established a small hut to study. Faqin was later summoned in 768 by Emperor Daizong (r. 762–779) to give a lecture in the imperial palace. In honor of his achievements, the emperor bestowed upon him the title Great Master Guoyi (Foremost of the Country) and a plaque for Faqin’s monastery that bore the name Jingshansi, or Mt. Jing monastery, which later came to be known as WANSHOUSI. Faqin had many famous disciples; in addition, masters in other Chan lineages, such as XITANG ZHIZANG, TIANHUANG DAOWU, and DANXIA TIANRAN, also sought instruction from Faqin. In 790, Faqin moved to the hermitage Jingtuyuan at the monastery Rongxingsi, where he passed away two years later at the age of seventy-nine. Emperor Dezong (r. 779–805) later gave Faqin the posthumous title Chan master Dajue (Great Awakening).
Farong. (C) (法融). See NIUTOU FARONG.
fashen sheli. (J. hosshinshari; K. pŏpsin sari 法身舍利). In Chinese, “relics of the dharma body,” Buddhist scriptures that were enshrined in STŪPAs and worshipped as if they were physical remains. See DHARMAŚARĪRA; ŚARĪRA.
fashu. (J. hossū; K. pŏpsu 法數). In Chinese, “enumerations of dharmas,” the numerical schemes involving successive integers used to organize and memorize Buddhist teachings, such as the one path, two truths, three refuges, FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS, etc. This classificatory and mnemonic device is frequently employed in both SŪTRAs (such as the “Numerically-Arranged Discourses,” or AṄGUTTARANIKĀYA/EKOTTARĀGAMA) and ŚĀSTRAs. East Asian exegeses, compendia, and concordances were also often arranged by, or composed exclusively of, such sequential set of numerical headings. See also GEYI.
fasi. (J. hōshi/hassu; K. pŏpsa 法嗣). In Chinese, lit., “DHARMA heir”; a disciple who has received transmission (see YINKE) in his or her master’s lineage. Generally, a fasi refers to a disciple whose understanding has been certified by his teacher, thereby becoming his inheritor. Histories of the CHAN tradition, such as the JINGDE CHUANDENG LU can largely be characterized as the history of the dharma heirs of such thriving Chan lineages as the LINJI ZONG, CAODONG ZONG, etc. See also CHUANFA; PARAṂPARĀ.
Faxian. (J. Hōken/Hokken; K. Pŏphyŏn 法顯) (c. 337–422). In Chinese, “Display of Dharma”; a Chinese monk pilgrim of the Eastern Jin dynasty, who is best known for his pilgrimage record of his travels to India, titled the FAXIAN ZHUAN. The text, also known as the FOGUO JI, (“Record of Buddhist Kingdoms”) is an invaluable source for understanding South Asian Buddhism in the early fifth century. Motivated by a desire to procure a complete recension of an Indian VINAYA, in 399 Faxian left the Chinese capital of Chang’an for India, together with his fellow monks Hujing, Daozheng, and others. He left a detailed record of his journey through numerous kingdoms in Central Asia, his arduous path through the Himalayas, and various pilgrimage sites (see MAHĀSTHĀNA) in central India. He ended up staying for several years in India, studying Sanskrit and copying various SŪTRAs and vinayas such as the MAHĀSĀṂGHIKA vinaya, SAṂYUKTĀGAMA, and MAHĀPARINIRVĀṆASŪTRA, before leaving for Sri Lanka. Taking the southern sea route home from Sri Lanka, Faxian’s ship was damaged in a typhoon and he was forced to stay on the island of Java for five months, finally returning to China in 413. Faxian brought back with him the new texts that he had collected overseas, and spent the rest of his life translating them into Chinese, several in collaboration with the Indian monk BUDDHABHADRA.
Faxiang zong. (J. Hossōshū; K. Pŏpsang chong 法相宗). In Chinese, “Dharma Characteristics School,” the third and most important of three strands of YOGĀCĀRA-oriented MAHĀYĀNA Buddhism to emerge in China, along with the DI LUN ZONG and SHE LUN ZONG. The name Faxiang (originally coined by its opponents and having pejorative connotations) comes from its detailed analysis of factors (DHARMA) on the basis of the Yogācāra doctrine that all phenomena are transformations of consciousness, or “mere-representation” (VIJÑAPTIMĀTRATĀ). The school’s own preferred name for itself was the WEISHI ZONG (Consciousness/Representation-Only School). Interest in the theories of the SHIDIJING LUN (viz., Di lun) and the MAHĀLĀNASAṂGRAHA (viz., She lun) largely waned as new YOGĀLĀRA texts from India were introduced to China by the pilgrim and translator XUANZANG (600/602–664) and the work of HUAYAN scholars such as FAZANG (643–712) on the AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA (within which the Daśabhūmikasūtra is incorporated) began to gain prominence. One of the reasons motivating Xuanzang’s pilgrimage to India, in fact, was to procure definitive Indian materials that would help to resolve the discrepancies in interpretation of Yogācāra found in these different traditions. Because of the imperial patronage he received upon his return, Xuanzang became one of the most prominent monks in Chinese Buddhist history and attracted students from all over East Asia. The Faxiang school was established mainly on the basis of the CHENG WEISHI LUN (*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi; “The Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only”), a text edited and translated into Chinese by Xuanzang, based on material that he brought back with him from India. Xuanzang studied under ŚĪLABHADRA (529–645), a principal disciple of DHARMAPĀLA (530–561), during his stay in India, and brought Dharmapāla’s scholastic lineage back with him to China. Xuanzang translated portions of Dharmapāla’s *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, an extended commentary on VASUBANDHU’s TRIṂŚILĀ (“Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only”). Dharmapāla’s original exegesis cited the different interpretations of Vasubandhu’s treatise offered by himself and nine other major scholiasts within the Yogācāra tradition; Xuanzang, however, created a précis of the text and translated only the “orthodox” interpretation of Dharmapāla. Xuanzang’s disciple KUIJI (632–682) further systematized Xuanzang’s materials by compiling the CHENG WEISHI LUN SHUJI (“Commentarial Notes on the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi”) and the Cheng weishi lun shuyao (“Essentials of the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi”); for his efforts to build the school, Kuiji is traditionally regarded as the first Faxiang patriarch. The Faxiang school further developed under Huizhao (650–714), its second patriarch, and Zhizhou (668–723), its third patriarch, but thereafter declined in China. ¶ The teachings of the Faxiang school were transmitted to Korea (where it is called the Pŏpsang chong) and were classified as one of the five major doctrinal traditions (see KYO) of the Unified Silla (668–935) and Koryŏ (935–1392) dynasties. The Korean expatriate monk WŎNCH’ŬK (613–696) was one of the two major disciples of Xuanzang, along with Kuiji, and there are reports of intense controversies between Kuiji’s Ci’en scholastic line (CI’EN XUEPAI) and Wŏnch’uk’s Ximing scholastic line (XIMING XUEPAI) due to their differing interpretations of Yogācāra doctrine. Wŏnch’ŭk’s commentary to the SAṂDHINIRMOCANASŪTRA, the Jieshenmi jing shu (K. Haesimmil kyŏng so), was transmitted to the DUNHUANG region and translated into Tibetan by CHOS GRUB (C. Facheng, c. 755–849) at the behest of the Tibetan king RAL PA CAN (806–838), probably sometime between 815 and 824. Wŏnch’ŭk’s exegesis of the scripture proved to be extremely influential in the writings of TSONG KHA PA (1357–1419), and especially on his LEGS BSHAD SNYING PO, where Wŏnch’ŭk’s work is called the “Great Chinese Commentary.” ¶ The Japanese Hossōshū developed during the Nara period (710–784) after being transmitted from China and Korea, but declined during the Heian (794–1185) due to persistent attacks from the larger TENDAI (C. TIANTAI) and SHINGON (C. Zhenyan) schools. Although the Hossōshū survived, it did not have the wide influence over the Japanese tradition as did its major rivals. ¶ Faxiang is known for its comprehensive list of one hundred DHARMAs, or “factors” (BAIFA), in which all dharmas—whether “compounded” or “uncompounded,” mundane or supramundane—are subsumed; this list accounts in large measure for its designation as the “dharma characteristics” school. These factors are classified into five major categories:
All of these factors were seen by the Faxiang school as being simply projections of consciousness (VIJÑAPTIMĀTRALĀ). As noted earlier, consciousness (VIJÑĀNA) was itself subdivided into an eightfold schema: the six sensory consciousnesses (visual, auditory, gustatory, olfactory, tactile, and mental), plus the seventh ego consciousness (manas, or KLIṢṬAMANAS), which invests these sensory experiences with selfhood, and an eighth “storehouse consciousness” (ālayavijñāna), which stores the seeds or potentialities (BĪJA) of these experiences until they sprout as new cognition. One of the most controversial doctrines of the Faxiang school was its rejection of a theory of inherent enlightenment or buddhahood (i.e., TATHĀGATAGARBHA) and its advocacy of five distinct spiritual lineages or destinies (PAÑCAGOTRA): (1) the TATHĀGATA lineage (GOTRA), for those destined to become buddhas; (2) the PRATYEKABUDDHA lineage, for those destined to become ARHATs via the pratyekabuddha vehicle; (3) the ŚRĀVAKAYĀNA lineage, for those who will become arhats via the ŚRĀVAKA vehicle; (4) those of indefinite (ANIYATA) lineage, who may follow any of three vehicles; and (5) those without lineage (agotra), who are ineligible for liberation or who have lost the potential to become enlightened by becoming “incorrigibles” (ICCHANTIKA). The Faxiang school’s claim that beings belonged to these various lineages because of the seeds (BĪJA) already present in the mind seemed too fatalistic to its East Asian rivals. In addition, Faxiang’s acceptance of the notion that some beings could completely lose all yearning for enlightenment and fall permanently into the state of icchantikas so profoundly conflicted with the pervasive East Asian acceptance of innate enlightenment that it thwarted the school’s aspirations to become a dominant tradition in China, Korea, or Japan. Even so, much in the Faxiang analysis of consciousness, as well as its exegetical techniques, were incorporated into mainstream scholasticism in East Asia and continued to influence the subsequent development of Buddhism in the region.
Faxian zhuan. (J. Hokken den; K. Pŏphyŏn chŏn 法顯傳). In Chinese, “The Record of Faxian,” commonly known as the FOGUO JI (translated into English as A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms), the record of the Chinese monk FAXIAN’s pilgrimage to India. Faxian left the Chinese capital of Chang’an in 399 and visited numerous cities and kingdoms in Central Asia, India, Sri Lanka, and the island of Java. He traveled to many sacred sites in India and Sri Lanka until his return to China in 413. Faxian left a fairly detailed record of the various ways in which Buddhism was practiced in these kingdoms. His record is replete with myths and legends associated with the pilgrimage sites he visited. Faxian’s record also served as an authoritative guidebook for many pilgrims who later followed in his footsteps. As one of the earliest records of its kind, the Faxian zhuan serves as an indispensable tool for studying Buddhist pilgrimage, the state of Buddhism across the continent during the early fifth century, and the history of various kingdoms that once flourished in Asia. It was among the first Buddhist texts to be translated in Europe, published in Paris in 1836 as Foĕ Kouĕ Ki ou Relation des royaumes bouddhiques: Voyage dans la Tartarie, dans l’Afghanistan et dans l’Inde, exécuté à la fin du IVesiècle, par Ch˘y Fă Hian. The translation of the text was undertaken by Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat (1788–1832). The Chinese text is relatively short, but Abel-Rémusat provided detailed notes, in which he sought to identify and explain the many Buddhist persons, places, and doctrines that occur in Faxian’s work. Abel-Rémusat died in the cholera epidemic of 1832, when the book was only half-finished. Heinrich Julius von Klaproth (1783–1835) took over the project until his own death. It was completed by Ernest-Augustin Xavier Clerc de Landresse (1800–1862) and published in 1836. Until the publication of EUGÈNE BURNOUF’s Introduction à l’histoire du Buddhisme indien in 1844, this was the most detailed study of Buddhism to be produced in Europe. Faxian’s text was translated into English by SAMUEL BEAL in 1869 and by James Legge in 1886.
Faxing zong. (J. Hosshōshū; K. Pŏpsŏng chong 法性宗). In Chinese, “Dharma Nature school,” the intellectual tradition in East Asian Buddhism that was concerned with the underlying essence or “nature” (xing) of reality; contrasted with the “Dharma Characteristics School” (FAXIANG ZONG), the tradition that analyzed the different functions of various phenomena. The term “Faxing zong” was employed to refer to more advanced forms of the MAHĀLĀNA, such as to the MADHYAMAKA teachings of the SAN LUN ZONG, the TATHĀGATAGARBHA teachings, or to the last three of the five teachings in the Huayan school’s hermeneutical taxonomy (see JIAOXIANG PANSHI): viz., the advanced teaching of Mahāyāna (Dasheng zhongjiao), the sudden teaching (DUNJIAO), and the perfect teaching (YUANJIAO). By contrast, “Faxiang zong” was a pejorative term referring to the Chinese YOGĀLĀRA school that was established on the basis of the new Yogācāra texts introduced from India by XUANZANG (600/602–664) and elaborated upon in his lineage. The Huayan exegete CHENGGUAN (738–839) first used the term Faxing zong to differentiate it from the Faxiang zong. In his Dafangguang fo huayanjing shu (“Commentary on the AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA”), Chengguan presents ten differences between the two schools of Faxing and Faxiang, and in his own hermeneutic taxonomy, Chengguan polemically equates the elementary teaching of the Mahāyāna (Dasheng shijiao) with Faxiang, and the advanced (Dasheng zhongjiao) and perfect teachings (yuanjiao) of the Mahāyāna with the Faxing school. The contrast between “nature” (xing) and “characteristics” (xiang) was used in FAZANG’s (643–712) HUAYAN WUJIAO ZHANG as a means of reconciling the differences in the approaches taken by the Madhyamaka and Yogācāra schools. Although Fazang did not use the term Faxing zong himself, he did coin the term “Faxiang zong” to refer pejoratively to Xuanzang’s lineage of Yogācāra teachings. It appears, then, that Chengguan projected the concept of Faxing and Faxiang schools onto Fazang’s doctrinal notions as well, for Chengguan sometimes interprets Fazang’s notions of the “provisional” and “definitive” teachings (see QUAN SHI) as the Faxiang and the Faxing schools, respectively, or sometimes replaces a concept such as “true nature” (zhenxing) with the term faxing.
Fayan Wenyi. (J. Hōgen Mon’eki; K. Pŏban Munik 法眼文益) (885–958). Chinese CHAN master and reputed founder of the FAYAN ZONG of Chan. Fayan was a native of Yuhang in present-day Zhejiang province. At the age of six, he was ordained by the monk Quanwei (d.u.) of the monastery Xinding Zhitongyuan and later received the full monastic precepts at the monastery of KAIYUANSI in Yuezhou. Fayan first visited the Chan master Changqing Huiling (854–932); later, while staying at the monastery Dizangyuan on Mt. Shi (present-day Fujian province), he met Luohan Guichen (867–928) and eventually became his disciple. Later, Fayan arrived in Linchuan (present-day Jiangxi province) where he was invited by the steward to serve as abbot of the monastery of Chongshouyuan. Admired by the local ruler, Fayan was again invited as the abbot of the monastery of BAO’ENSI in Jinling (present-day Jiangsu province) and was given the title Chan master Jinghui (Pure Wisdom). Fayan later moved to the monastery of Qingliangyuan in Shengzhou (present-day Jiangsu province), which flourished under his guidance and the support of the ruler of the state of Wuye. He was also given the posthumous title Chan master Dafayan (Great Dharma Eye). Fayan composed the ZONGMEN SHIGUI LUN (“Treatise on the Ten Rules of the Tradition”), which outlines ten defects of Chan practice; the text is also important for being the first to name the so-called five houses (wu jia), viz., schools or lineages, of the mature Chan tradition (see WU JIA QI ZONG).
Fayan zong. (J. Hōgenshū; K. Pŏban chong 法眼宗). In Chinese, the “Dharma Eye School,” one of the “five houses” (wu jia; see WU JIA QI ZONG), or distinct schools, that had developed with the mature Chinese CHAN lineage during the late Tang dynasty, c. ninth to tenth centuries CE. Chan genealogical histories (see CHUANDENG LU) speak of a lineage of monks that can be traced back to the eminent Chan master FAYAN WENYI (885–958), who himself inherited the lineage(s) of XUEFENG YICUN (822–908), XUANSHA SHIBEI (835–908), and their student Luohan Guichen (867–928). With the support of the ruler of the state of Wuyue, Fayan and his monastery of Qingliangyuan in Shengzhou (present-day Jiangsu province) flourished. Fayan’s prominent students TIANTAI DESHAO (891–972), Baizhang Daoheng (d. 991), Guizong Yirou (d.u.), and Bao’en Fa’an (d.u.) firmly established Fayan’s line in the area of Zhejiang and Fujian provinces. Chengtian Daoyuan (d.u.), the compiler of the influential genealogical history of Chan known as the JINGDE CHUANDENG LU, also belongs to the Fayan line of Chan through his teacher Tiantai Deshao.The Fayan line’s interest in harmonizing the iconoclastic aspects of Chan with the exegetical tradition of HUAYAN and the recitative practices of PURE LAND (see NIANFO) is best exemplified in the Fanyan Chan master YONGMING YANSHOU’s magnum opus ZONGJING LU. The works of Fayan masters also exerted much influence in Korean Sŏn Buddhism. Although the Fayan zong did not survive into the Song dynasty as an active lineage, it remained an integral part of the retrospective imagining of the Chan tradition that took place during the Song.
fayou wowu zong. (J. hōugamushū; K. pŏbyu amu chong 法有我無宗). In Chinese, “the school that posits that ‘DHARMAs are real but the self is nonexistent.’” The HUAYAN ZONG in particular uses this label polemically to denigrate the majority of the ŚRĀVAKAYĀNA or HĪNAYĀNA traditions. The latter group was presumed to have inferior doctrinal understanding, because it acknowledged that compounded things have no existent self, while positing (mistakenly) that the constituent dharmas that make up those illusory, compounded things are in fact real. So, e.g., while the hīnayāna may posit that there is no “self” to be found in a person because he/she is contingent on and comprised of a whole range of constituent factors (dharma), the physical and psychological aggregates (S. SKANDHA) that make up that person would be considered objectively real and not lacking a real substance. By contrast, Huayan exegetes would suggest that a distinguishing doctrinal theme in the MAHĀLĀNA tradition is the acknowledgment of the “emptiness” (S. ŚŪNYALĀ) or “selflessness” (S. ANĀTMAN) of not just the individual person but also the constituent factors (dharma) from which that person is constructed. This supposedly superior doctrinal stance is advocated by “the school that posits that both self and dharmas are nonexistent” (wofa juwu zong). See also PUDGALANAIRĀTMYA; DHARMANAIRĀTMYA.
fayu. (J. hōgo; K. pŏbŏ 法語). In Chinese, “dharma talk” or “religious discourse,” referring broadly to sermons by the Buddha or eminent teachers, teachings that accord with reality (yathābhūta), or talks on topics related to the dharma; rhyming verses or terse essays containing spiritual exhortations are also sometimes called fayu. In the CHAN zong, fayu refer to anecdotal conversations or formal lectures of the patriarchs and masters of the tradition. Chan fayu are typically in colloquial prose, and often offer transcripts of Chan masters’ spontaneous utterances on, or specific responses to, real-life contingencies. There are many such anthologies of Chan fayu in the literature, including both collections of the sayings of an individual master and anthologies of the sayings of multiple teachers. See also YULU.
Fayuan zhulin. (J. Hōon jurin; K. Pŏbwŏn churim 法苑珠林). In Chinese, “A Grove of Pearls in the Garden of the Dharma,” compiled in 668 by the Tang-dynasty monk Daoshi (d. 683) of XIMINGXI; a comprehensive encyclopedia of Buddhism, in one hundred rolls and one hundred chapters, based on the DA TANG NEIDIAN LU and XU GAOSENG ZHUAN, which were compiled by Daoshi’s elder brother, the monk DAOXUAN (596–667). The encyclopedia provides definitions and explanations for hundreds of specific Buddhist concepts, terms, and numerical lists. Each chapter deals with a single category such as the three realms of existence (TRILOKA[DHĀTU]), revering the Buddha, the DHARMA, and the SAṂGHA, the monastery, relics (ŚARĪRA), repentance, receiving the precepts, breaking the precepts, and self-immolation (SHESHEN), covering these topics with numerous individual entries. The Fayuan zhulin is characterized by its use of numerous passages quoted from Buddhist scriptures in support of its explanations and interpretations. Since many of the texts that Daoshi cites in the Fayuan zhulin are now lost, the encyclopedia serves as an invaluable source for the study of medieval Chinese Buddhism.
Fazang. (J. Hōzō; K. Pŏpchang 法藏) (643–712). Tang-dynasty Chinese monk and putative third patriarch of the HUAYAN ZONG, also known as Xianshou, Dharma Master Guoyi (Nation’s Best), Great Master Xiangxiang (Fragrant Elephant), and state preceptor (GUOSHI) Kang Zang. Fazang was the third-generation descendent of immigrants to China from the kingdom of SOGDIANA in Central Asia (the Greek Transoxiana) and thus used as his secular surname the ethnicon KANG. At a young age, Fazang became a student of the Chinese monk ZHIYAN, and studied the AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA. Fazang was also fluent in several Central Asian languages, and assisted the monks ŚIKṢĀNANDA and YIJING in translating new recensions of the Avataṃsakasūtra (699) and the LAṄKĀVATĀRASŪTRA (704). Empress WU ZETIAN often requested Fazang to lecture on the Avataṃsakasūtra and its teachings on PRATĪTYASAMUTPĀDA. Fazang devoted the rest of his career to the study of the Avataṃsakasūtra and composing commentaries on the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, FANWANG JING, DASHENG QIXIN LUN, and other texts. Many of Fazang’s compositions sought to systematize his teacher Zhiyan’s vision of the Avataṃsakasūtra in terms drawn from indigenous Chinese Buddhist materials, such as the Dasheng qixin lun. In so doing, Fazang developed much of the specific doctrinal terminology and worldview that comes to be emblematic of the Huayan zong, making him the de facto founder of this indigenous school of Chinese Buddhist philosophy. Among Fazang’s many works, his HUAYAN JING TANXUAN JI, HUAYAN WUJIAO ZHANG, and his commentary to the Dasheng qixin lun shu (“Awakening of Faith According to the Mahāyāna”) are most famous. Fazang passed away while residing at the monastery of Da Qianfusi. Fazang remained close throughout his life to his Korean colleague ŬISANG, the founder of the Korean Hwaŏm school, with whom he studied together under Zhiyan, and some of his correspondence with Ŭisang survives. SIMSANG (J. Shinjō) (d. c. 744), another Korean who is claimed to have been a direct disciple of Fazang, was the first transmitter of the Huayan teachings in Japan, and Simsang’s own disciple RYŌBEN [alt. Rōben] (689–773) is considered the founder of the Japanese Kegon school. For discussion of Fazang’s philosophical views, see also HUAYAN ZONG; INDRA’S NET; SI FAJIE.
fazhan. (法戰). In Chinese, “dharma combat.” See JIFENG.
Fazhao. (J. Hōshō; K. Pŏpcho 法照) (d.u.). Tang-dynasty Chinese monk, now revered by followers of the Japanese JŌDOSHŪ and JŌDO SHINSHŪ as the fifth patriarch of the PURE LAND (JINGTU ZONG) tradition in China. Fazhao resided at LUSHAN early in his career, where he devoted himself to recitation of the name of the buddha AMITĀBHA (see NIANFO); there, Fazhao had a vision of AMITĀBHA, who personally taught him about the pure land. Fazhao subsequently traveled to the Chinese capital of Chang’an, where he developed the method of WUHUI NIANFO, or “five-tempo intonation of [the name of] the Buddha.” When he demonstrated this practice in 767 at the monastery of Yunfengsi, the practice is said to have resulted in a series of miracles, such as the appearance of Amitābha amid the clouds, which in turn purportedly led Emperor Daizong (762–779) to invite Fazhao to the imperial palace. In addition to demonstrating the value of buddha-recitation practice, Fazhao also sought to explain pure land teachings in terms drawn from TIANTAI doctrine, bringing pure land beliefs into the mainstream of contemporary Buddhist intellectual discourse. Because of his success in propagating pure land teachings, his peers called Fazhao the “latter-day SHANDAO.” Fazhao later moved to the monastery of Zhulinsi on WUTAISHAN and acquired the cognomen Wuhui fashi (Dharma Master Five-Tempo).
fazhi. (J. hōshū/hosshū; K. pŏpchip 法執). In Chinese, “attachment to factors”; in contrast to ĀTMAGRĀHA, the attachment to a self, attachment to factors (DHARMA) refers to either a clinging to the constituent aggregates that make up a person as ultimately real, or an attachment to the Buddhist teachings themselves. In the former scenario, the SARVĀSTIVĀDA, for example, rejects the reality of a self among the constituent factors (DHARMA) that constitute the person, but maintained that constituent parts themselves do have a perduring, ultimate reality. Rival Buddhist schools, most notably the MADHYAMAKA tradition, criticize such a view as being emblematic of an attachment to the dharmas. In the latter scenario, dharma-attachment is the clinging to Buddhist teachings and other heuristic devices as being ultimately real (cf. PARAMĀRTHASATYA). Various Buddhist scriptures tout the Buddhist teachings as skillful strategems (UPĀYA) that serve a provisional purpose. Buddhist teachings are likened to a raft that could be used to cross a river, but once having reached the other shore, the traveler should leave the raft behind lest it become a burden. Doctrinaire interpretations of, or an undue fascination with, the Buddhist teachings, especially when they are ill-suited for the present situation, is said to be a kind of dharma-attachment. Traditionally, two kinds of dharma-attachment are delineated: “dharma-attachment that arises from discriminatory cognition” (fenbie fazhi) and “inborn dharma-attachment” (jusheng fazhi). The former is primarily an epistemic error resulting from improper thinking and exposure to fallacious doctrines—it is eradicated at the path of vision (DARŚANAMĀRGA). The latter is primarily an affective, habitual, and instinctive clinging (conditioned by similar tendencies accrued from previous lives) that may be present whether or not one subscribes to fenbie fazhi—the view of independent, irreducibly real dharmas. “Inborn dharma-attachment” is only gradually attenuated through the successive stages of the path of cultivation (BHĀVANĀLĀRGA). In Mahāyāna polemics, the so-called HĪNAYĀNA can only lead to the eradication of the attachment to self but never to the attachment to dharmas. Cf. DHARMANAIRĀTMYA.
fazhu. (J. hōshu/hosshu; K. pŏpchu 法主). In Chinese, “Lord of the DHARMA,” a reverential epithet for the Buddha, e.g., “The World Honored One is the source of the dharma; the World Honored One is the lord of the dharma.” In addition, the term fazhu is used to refer to the chief officiant of a religious ritual or ceremony, and with reference to a teacher who give dharma lectures. In China during the Southern and Northern Dynasties (Nanbei chao) period (c. 420–589), fazhu was the title of a minor SAṂGHA official who oversaw a monastery’s internal affairs. In modern Japan, the term is also used as a title for leaders of different Buddhist sects (when it is then pronounced as hosshu or hossu).
fazi. (J. hōshu/hosshu; K. pŏpcha 法子). In Chinese, “progenies of the dharma,” an expression referring to Buddhist renunciants, viz., those who have entered homelessness and received ordination. They are said to have been reborn through “the mouth of the Buddha” and belong to the same “clan lineage” of the Buddha. Sometimes this term refers to all Buddhists, both clergy and laity. In another context and in East Asian monasteries, designated successors of the abbot are called fazi, “successors to the dharma [of the lineage].”
Fazun. (法尊) (T. Blo bzang chos ’phags) (1902–1980). Twentieth-century Chinese translator of Buddhist scriptures and scholar of Tibetan religious and political history. In 1920, Fazun was ordained as a novice on WUTAISHAN. He became acquainted with Dayong (1893–1929), a student of TAIXU’s who introduced him to the techniques of Buddhist TANTRA, at the time a popular strand of Buddhism in China in its Japanese (MIKKYŌ) and Tibetan forms. Fully ordained in Beijing in 1922, Fazun trained under Taixu’s patronage in the tenets of the PURE LAND and TIANTAI schools at the Wuchang Institute for Buddhist Studies. During the same years, Taixu urged Dayong to train in Japanese mikkyō on KŌYASAN. Taixu’s aim was to verify and rectify the opinions about Buddhist tantra that circulated in China, where this form of Indian Buddhism had flourished at the Tang court. Upon his return, Dayong conferred on Fazun several ABHIṢEKAs of the lower tantric cycles that he had brought from Japan. He also instructed Fazun in the Mizong gangyao (“Essentials of Tantra”), a primer for students of Buddhist tantra by the Japanese SHINGONSHŪ scholar Gonda Raifu (1846–1934) that Wang Hongyuan (1876–1937), a Chinese student of Gonda’s, had translated in 1918. After an introduction to the Tibetan tantric traditions by Bai Puren (1870–1927), a Mongolian lama stationed at Beijing’s Yonghe Gong, Dayong became gradually dissatisfied with Japanese mikkyō. With Taixu’s endorsement, he resolved to study Buddhist tantra in its Tibetan form. In 1924, Fazun joined Dayong’s Group for Learning the Dharma in Tibet (Liu Zang Xuefa Tuan), a team of some thirty Chinese monks who were studying the basics of the Tibetan language in Beijing. From 1925 to 1929, Fazun carried on his language learning in eastern Tibet and began his training in the classics of the DGE LUGS monastic curriculum, which in the ensuing years would become his main focus of translation. After Dayong’s passing in 1929, Fazun followed his Tibetan teacher, DGE BSHES A mdo, to central Tibet. He stayed at ’BRAS SPUNGS monastery from 1930 to 1933. In 1934, Taixu asked Fazun to take on the position of director at the newly established Sino-Tibetan Institute (Hanzang Jiaoli Yuan) near Chongqing. The thirteenth DALAI LAMA also encouraged Fazun to spread TSONG KHA PA’s synthesis of the Buddhist teachings in China. Hence from 1935, under the Japanese occupation and during the Chinese civil war, Fazun served as an educator of young monks in Tibetan Buddhism and as a translator of Tibetan scriptures at the Sino-Tibetan Institute. These years of prolific translation work established Fazun as the foremost translator of Buddhism from Tibetan sources in the history of Chinese Buddhism. Among his translations are Tsong kha pa’s LAM RIM CHEN MO (Putidao cidi guanglun), LEGS BSHAD SNYING PO (Bian liaoyi buliaoyi lun), SNGAGS RIM CHEN MO (Mizong daocidi lun); MAITREYA’s ABHISAMAYĀLAṂKĀRA (Xianguan zhuangyan lun); CANDRAKĪRTI’s MADHYAMAKĀVATĀRA (Ru zhonglun); and ĀRYADEVA’s CATUḤŚATAKA (Sibailun song). Fazun also translated into Tibetan the ABHIDHARMAMAHĀVIBLĀṢA, extant in the two hundred rolls of XUANZANG’s Chinese rendering (Da piposha lun), by the title Bye brag bshad mdzod chen mo. In 1950, after the Communist authorities discontinued the activities of the Institute, Fazun moved to Beijing. The Committee for Minority Affairs appointed him as a translator of communist propaganda materials, including Chairman Mao’s Xin minzhu zhuyi(“New Democracy”) and Lun renmin minzhu zhuanzheng (“On the People’s Democratic Dictatorship”), for the education of the new generation of cadres in occupied Tibet. In 1966, as the Cultural Revolution set in, he was charged with expressing anti-Communist sentiments during the 1930s. He was confined in a labor camp until his release in 1972. During the 1970s Fazun resumed his translation activity from Tibetan with DHARMAKĪRTI’s PRALĀṆAVĀRTTIKA (Shiliang lun), DIGNĀGA’s PRALĀṆASAMUCCAYA (Jiliang lun), and ATIŚA DĪPAṂKARAŚRĪJÑĀNA’s BODHIPATHAPRADĪPA (Putidao deng lun). Fazun suffered a fatal heart attack in 1980. Because of his unsurpassed knowledge of Tibetan language, religion, and history, and his writing style inspired by KUMĀRAJĪVA’s and Xuanzang’s Buddhist Chinese, Fazun is often referred to as “the Xuanzang of modern times.”
Feilaifeng. (J. Hiraihō; K. Piraebong 飛来峰). In Chinese, “Flying-In Peak,” site of Buddhist rock carvings and grottoes, located in front of LINGYINSI in Hangzhou, Zhejiang province. Feilaifeng houses the most important sculptural works of Tibetan Buddhism found in Han Chinese territory. The name of the peak was inspired by a legend, according to which Vulture Peak (GṚDHRAKŪṬAPARVATA) flew to this location from India. There are more than three hundred carved images still in existence at the site, with eleven from the Five Dynasties period, more than two hundred from the Song dynasty, and around one hundred from the Yuan. The Song-dynasty images were mostly carved during the Xianping era (998–1003) under Emperor Zhenzong. Many of these figures are ARHATs (C. LUOHAN), but some works illustrate special themes, such as XUANZANG’s pilgrimage to India or MAITREYA’s “Hemp Sack” (BUDAI) form. The gilded, colorfully painted Yuan images are delicately carved and constitute a significant development in the history of Chinese sculpture. Nearly half of these images depict esoteric themes, with buddhas, bodhisattvas, female deities, and dharma protectors (DHARMAPĀLA). The image enshrined in Niche 25 is VAJRADHARA. Also found here are images of MAÑJUŚRĪ, AVALOKITEŚVARA, and VAJRASATTVA. The female deity SITĀTAPATLĀ is depicted in Niche 22; she was highly venerated by the Yuan rulers because she was believed to be able to destroy armies and overcome disasters.
Feiyin Tongrong. (J. Hiin Tsūyō; K. Piŭn T’ongyong 費隱通容) (1593–1661). Chinese CHAN master in the LINJI ZONG, who lived at the end of the Ming dynasty. Feiyin was a native of Min Prefecture in present-day Fujian province. After losing his father at age six and his mother at eleven, Feiyin entered the monastery two years later and became the student of a certain Huishan (d.u.) of Sanbaosi. Feiyin subsequently studied under the renowned Chan masters ZHANRAN YUANDENG, Wuming Huijing, and Wuyi Yuanlai. In 1622, he departed Jiangxi province for Mt. Tiantai, where he continued his studies under MIYUN YUANWU. Feiyin eventually became Miyun’s disciple and inherited his lineage. In 1633, Feiyin served as abbot of Wanfusi on Mt. Huangbo. He subsequently resided at such monasteries as Tianningsi and WANSHOUSI in Zhejiang province. His disciple YINYUAN LONGQI edited Feiyin’s teachings together in the Feiyin chanshi yulu. Feiyin himself composed several texts including the Chan primer ZUTING QIANCHUI LU and the Chan history Wudeng yantong.
fenbie fazhi. (C) (分別法執). See ER FAZHI.
fenbie wozhi. (C) (分別我執). See ER WOZHI.
fenduan shengsi. (J. bundanshōji; K. pundan saengsa 分段生死). In Chinese, “birth and death in punctuated succession,” one of the two types of rebirth (SAṂSĀRA) described in the Chinese FAXIANG (YOGĀLĀRA) and TIANTAI schools; the other is “birth and death as alteration and change” (BIANYI SHENGSI). This type refers to the actual physical process of death and rebirth into new bodies, bodies that are the products of our previous actions (KARMAN) and whose duration is therefore measured by the life span of the individual physical body.
Fengfa yao. (J. Hōhōyō; K. Pongpŏp yo 奉法要). In Chinese, “Essentials of Upholding the DHARMA,” a short Buddhist catechism, composed by Xichao (336–377), a lay follower of the monk ZHI DUN, which is preserved in the HONGMING JI. The Fengfa yao provides a brief overview of a number of important doctrinal concepts and categories, such as the three refuges (TRIŚARAṆA), five precepts (PAÑCAŚĪLA), fasting, six recollections (ANUSMṚTI), five rebirth destinies (GATI), five aggregates (SKANDHA), five hindrances (NĪVARAṆA), six sense bases (INDRIYA), mind (CITTA), KARMAN, patient endurance (KṢĀNTI), NIRLĀṆA, six perfections (PĀRAMILĀ), FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS, confession, doing good works, etc. These notions are sometimes explained with reference to Daoist thought and historical and mythical events in China. As such, the Fengfa yao is an important source for studying the manner in which Buddhist doctrine was understood in early China.
Fenollosa, Ernest Francisco (Kano Yeitan). (1853–1908). An American proponent of Japanese Buddhism and Japanese art. Born in Salem, Massachusetts, to a mother from Salem and a Spanish father, he was part of Boston’s East Asian renaissance during the 1890s and one of the first students of the incipient discipline of art history. He studied philosophy at Harvard and attended the School of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. At the age of twenty-five, Fenollosa went to teach at the Imperial University in Japan, where his students introduced him to Buddhism. His interest in the religion grew through his visits to temples near Nara and Kyōto. Fenollosa also became interested in traditional Japanese art and met the aristocratic families who had been court painters during the Tokugawa shogunate. By 1882, Fenollosa was considered enough of an expert to lecture at the Ryuchikai Club and, in 1884, he was named an imperial commissioner of fine arts. Sakurai Keitaku Ajari, the head of the Hoyugin Temple at MIIDERA, became Fenollosa’s teacher of Buddhism. Fenollosa received the precepts of TENDAI Buddhism in 1885, making him one of the first Americans to practice MAHĀLĀNA Buddhism. During his time in Japan, he was adopted into the Kano family and received the name Kano Yeitan. He was also presented with the “Order of the Sacred Mirror” by the Meiji emperor. After returning to the United States in 1890, Fenollosa lectured and wrote about Buddhism, became the curator of Far Eastern Art at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, and in 1893 published a poem called East and West. In 1895, he married his second wife, Mary McNeil Scott, and they returned together to Japan, where Fenollosa taught English at Tōkyō Higher Normal School. He and Mary remained in Japan until 1900. Epochs of Chinese and Japanese Art, his magnum opus, was published posthumously, with help from Ezra Pound.
Fire Sermon. See ĀDITTAPARIYĀYASUTTA.
first sermon. See DHAMMACAKKAPPAVATTANASUTTA; DHARMACAKRAPRAVARTANASŪTRA; PAÑCAVARGIKA.
five buddha families. See PAÑCATATHĀGATA; PAÑCAKULA.
five houses (of the Chan school). See WU JIA QI ZONG.
five mountains. See GOZAN.
five nikāyas. See DĪGHANIKĀYA; MAJJHIMANIKĀYA; SAṂYUTTANIKĀYA; AṄGUTTARANIKĀYA; KHUDDAKANIKĀYA.
five periods and eight teachings. See WUSHI BAJIAO.
five precepts. See PAÑCAŚĪLA.
Flower Garland Sūtra. See AVATAṂSAKASŪTRA.
Flower Sermon. See NIANHUA WEIXĪAO.
fo. [alt. fotuo/futu] (J. butsu/budda/fuda; K. pul/pult’a/fudu/pudo 佛/佛陀/浮屠). In Chinese, the transcription of “buddha” and the term most often used to render the Sanskrit. Fo, the first syllable of the transcription, is ubiquitous in premodern Buddhist Chinese. (In premodern Chinese, the full transcription fotuo is more often found in the names of Indian figures, such as BUDDHABHADRA, BUDDHAYAŚAS, etc.) In modern Chinese, both colloquial and written, the compound fotuo is generally employed to refer to the Buddha. The pronunciations of the Sinographs fo-tuo have been tentatively reconstructed as *but-da in Early Middle Chinese (c. seventh century), demonstrating that, when the transcription was created, it was a close approximation of the original Sanskrit or Middle Indic phonology. The Sinograph is composed of the phonetic element fo and the semantic component “man”; thus, in a Buddhist context, the character can be construed to mean “the man whose name is fo.” Buddhist exegetes typically glossed fo with the Sinographs juezhe (“the awakened one”). Buddhist translators into Chinese often preferred to transcribe, rather than translate, especially sacred or polysemous Buddhist terms like NIRVĀṆA, PĀRAMITĀ, or SAṂGHA; thus it was with the term buddha, where a semantic translation seems never to have been used in China. In the early centuries of the dissemination of Buddhism in China, several competing transcriptions of buddha were in use, such as the archaic form futu (reconstructed as *buw-dɔ) in the entry heading for fo above, which represented different stages in the phonology of premodern Chinese, or local dialectical variations. These were eventually superseded by fo when Buddhist translators and exegetes active in the region of the Chinese capital of Luoyang adopted it in their court-sponsored translations.
Foguo ji. (C) (佛國). In Chinese, “A Record of Buddhist Kingdoms.” See FAXIAN ZHUAN.
Foguo Yuanwu chanshi biyan lu. (C) (佛果圜悟禪師碧巖録). See BIYAN LU.
footprints of the Buddha. See BUDDHAPĀDA.
forest monks. See ARAÑÑAVĀSI.
Fori Qisong. (J. Butsunichi Kaisū; K. Puril Kyesung 佛日契嵩) (1007–1072). In Chinese, “Buddha Sun, Accords with Loftiness”; renowned scholar-monk during the Song dynasty and fifth-generation successor in the YUNMEN ZONG of the Chan school. After entering the monastery in his seventh year and being ordained in his thirteenth year, he traveled widely throughout China to meet with the famous Chan masters of his age. He eventually received formal dharma transmission from Dongshan Xiaocong (d.u.) in the Yunmen school. Qisong served as abbot of Jinghuisi, a monastery located nearby the city of Hangzhou on Mt. Fori, hence his toponym. He was known as a severe abbot, and his presence led many of the less serious monks who had been residing there to leave the monastery. Around 1061, Qisong completed an early history of the Chan school titled Chuanfa zhengzong ji (“Essay on the Authentic Lineage of Dharma Transmission”), which contains the first reference to the five houses schema of the mature Chan school (see WU JIA QI ZONG): the GUIYANG ZONG (which Qisong says was virtually extinct in his day), CAODONG ZONG (which he says is barely extant), and the LINJI ZONG, Yunmen zong, and FAYAN ZONG (all three of which he says were flourishing). Qisong also wrote a widely read and cited introduction to the Yuan-dynasty edition of the “Platform Sūtra of the Sixth Patriarch” (LIUZU TAN JING), the edition of that text most commonly used in the Chan school from that point forward. Qisong died in 1072 in his sixty-sixth year. Many relics (ŚARĪRA) remained after his cremation and near-contemporary records say that his eyes, tongue, and penis survived the flames. These relics were enshrined in a reliquary (STŪPA) at Lingyinsi in Hangzhou. We know of only one named disciple of Qisong’s, and the Yunmen school with which he was affiliated faded soon after his demise.
form is emptiness, emptiness is form. See RŪPAṂ ŚŪNYALĀ ŚŪNYATAIVA RŪPAM.
forty-ninth day ceremony. See SISHIJIU [RI] ZHAI; ANTARĀBHAVA.
Fotudeng. [alt. Fotucheng] (J. Butsutochō/Buttochō; K. Pultojing 佛圖澄) (232–348). A monk and thaumaturge, perhaps from the Central Asian kingdom of KUCHA, who was a pioneer in the transmission of Buddhism to China. According to his hagiography in the GAOSENG ZHUAN, Fotudeng was a foreign monk, whose surname was BO, the ethnikon used for Kuchean monks; in some sources, his name is transcribed as Buddhasiṃha. He was talented at memorizing and expounding scriptures, as well as in debate. Fotudeng is said to have received training in Kashmir (see KASHMIR-GANDHĀRA) and to have arrived in China in 310 intending to spread the DHARMA. Fotudeng is described as a skilled magician who could command spirits and predict the future. Despite his initial failure to establish a monastery in the Chinese capital of Luoyang, Fotudeng was able to convert the tyrannical ruler of the state of Later Zhao, Shi Le (r. 319–333), with a demonstration of his thaumaturgic skills. Fotudeng’s continued assistance of Shi Le won him the title Daheshang (Great Monk). After Shi Le’s general Shi Hu (r. 334–339) usurped the throne, Fotudeng was elevated to the highest status at the palace, and he continued to play the important role of political and spiritual advisor to the ruler. During his illustrious career as royal advisor, Fotudeng also taught many Buddhist disciples and is said to have established hundreds of monasteries. Among his disciples Zhu Faya (d.u.), DAO’AN, and Chu Fatai (320–387) are most famous.
four extremes. See CATUṢKOṬI.
four great vows. See SI HONGSHIYUAN.
four immeasurables. See APRALĀṆA; BRAHMAVIHĀRA.
four noble truths. (S. catvāry āryasatyāni; P. cattāri ariyasaccāni; T. ’phags pa’i bden pa bzhi; C. si shengdi; J. shishōdai; K. sa sŏngje 四聖諦). Although the term “four noble truths” is well established in English-language works on Buddhism, it is a misleading translation of the original Sanskrit and Pāli terms. The term translated as “noble” (ĀRYA) refers not to the truths themselves, but to those who understand them; thus, the compound may more accurately, if less euphoniously, be rendered as “four truths [known by the spiritually] noble”; they are four facts known to be true by those “noble ones” with insight into the nature of reality, but not known by ordinary beings (PṚTHAGJANA). The four truths are: suffering (DUḤKHA), origination (SAMUDAYA), cessation (NIRODHA), and path (MĀRGA). The four noble truths are the subject of extensive exegesis in the tradition, but the four terms and the relationships among them may be summarized as follows. Existence in the realms that are subject to rebirth, called SAṂSĀRA, is qualified by suffering (duḥkha), the first truth (the Sanskrit term may also be rendered as “sorrow,” “pain,” or more generally “unsatisfactoriness”). The types of sufferings that beings undergo in the various destinations of rebirth are enumerated at great length in Buddhist texts. In his first sermon delivered after his enlightenment (see DHARMACAKRAPRAVARTANASŪTRA), the Buddha identifies the following as forms of suffering: birth, aging, sickness, death, encountering what is unpleasant, separation from what is pleasant, not gaining what one desires, and the five SKANDHAs. The second truth is the origination (samudaya), or cause, of suffering. In his first sermon, the Buddha identifies the cause of suffering as craving (TṚṢṆĀ) or attachment; in his second sermon, the ANATTALAKKHAṆASUTTA, said to have been delivered five days later, he suggests that the belief is self (ĀTMAN) is the cause of suffering. In other works, he lists two causes of suffering: unwholesome or unsalutary (AKUŚALA) actions (KARMAN) such as killing, stealing, and lying, and the unwholesome mental states (see CAITTA) that motivate unwholesome actions. These unwholesome mental states include greed (LOBHA), hatred (DVEṢA), and ignorance (MOHA), with ignorance referring here to an active misperception of the nature of the person and the world or, more technically, to an unsystematic attention (AYONIŚOMANASKĀRA) to the true nature of things, leading to the following “inverted views” (VIPARYĀSA): seeing pleasure where there is actually pain, purity where there is impurity, permanence where there is impermanence, and self where there is no self. The third truth is the cessation (nirodha) of suffering, which refers to NIRLĀṆA, the “deathless” (AMṚTA) state that transcends all suffering. The fourth and final truth is that of the path (mārga) to the cessation of suffering. The path is delineated in exhaustive detail in Buddhist texts; in his first sermon, the Buddha describes an eightfold path (ĀRLĀṢṬĀṄGAMĀRGA). The four truths therefore posit the unsatisfactory nature of existence, identify its causes, hold out the prospect of a state in which suffering and its causes are absent, and set forth a path to that state. Suffering is to be identified, its origin destroyed, its cessation realized, and the path to its cessation followed. The four truths demonstrate the importance of causality (see HETUPRATYAYA) in Buddhist thought and practice. Suffering is the effect of the cause, or origin, viz., “craving.” Cessation is the absence of suffering, which results from the destruction of suffering’s origin, craving. The path is the means by which one attains that cessation. The Buddha states in his first sermon that when he gained absolute and intuitive knowledge of the four truths, he achieved complete enlightenment and freedom from future rebirth. The four truths are also often described in terms of their sixteen aspects (ṣoḍaśākāra), which counteract four inverted views (viparyāsa) for each truth. For the truth of suffering, the four aspects are knowledge that the aggregates (SKANDHA) are impermanent, suffering, empty, and selfless; these counteract seeing permanence, pleasure, mine (MAMAKĀRA), and I (AHAṂKĀRA), respectively. For the truth of origination, the four aspects are knowledge that KLEŚA(affliction) and action (karman) are cause (HETU), origination (samudaya), producer (saṃbhava), and condition (PRATYAYA); they counteract the view that there is no cause, that there is a single cause, that the cause is transformation of a fundamental nature, and that the cause is a prior act of divine will, respectively. For the truth of cessation, the four aspects are knowledge that nirvāṇa is cessation (NIRODHA), peace (śānta), sublime (praṇīta), and a definite escape (niryāṇa); these counteract the view that there is no liberation, that liberation is suffering, that the pleasure of meditative absorption (DHYĀNA) is unmitigated, and that NIRLĀṆA is not firmly irreversible. And for the truth of the path, the four aspects are knowledge that the eightfold noble path is a path (mārga), correct method (UPĀYA), practice (PRATIPATTI), and brings a definite escape (nairyāṇika); these counteract the view that there is no path, that this eightfold noble path is vile, that something else is also a path, and that this path is reversible. Some Mahāyāna sūtras say that those who are attached to (ABHINIVEŚA) the four noble truths as being essentially true do not understand the purport of the Buddha’s doctrine; only the teaching of the third noble truth, NIRLĀṆA, is definitive (NĪTĀRTHA), the statements about the other truths require interpretation (NEYĀRTHA). See also DARŚANAMĀRGA.
Four-Part Vinaya. See SIFEN LÜ, DHARMAGUPTAKA.
four seals. Four assertions that mark a philosophical system as Buddhist. See CATURMUDLĀ.
four signs/sights. See CATURNIMITTA.
four truths, sixteen aspects of. See FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS.
foxing. (J. busshō; K. pulsŏng 佛性). In Chinese, “buddha-nature,” a translation of the Sanskrit term BUDDHADHĀTU (buddha-element). According to the East Asian YOGĀLĀRA tradition (see FAXIANG ZONG), there are “two kinds of buddha-nature” (er foxing), referring to the “buddha-nature of principle” (li foxing) and the “functional buddha-nature” (xing foxing), or literally, “buddha-nature of the nature.” The former type is said to be the true nature of factors (DHARMA), which is beyond production and cessation, birth and death, conceptualization and designation—a “principle” (li) discoverable by all through wisdom. The latter type is a latent seed or potentiality (BĪJA) within the eighth storehouse consciousness (ĀLAYAVIJÑĀNA) that may, if it is activated and matured, eventually result in the achievement of buddhahood. According to the Faxiang school, the “buddha-nature of principle” is “universal” in the sense that all sentient beings partake in it. Only some sentient beings, however, are endowed with the “functional buddha-nature”; others are said to be devoid of the potential to achieve buddhahood for all eternity (see ICCHANTIKA). The FOXING LUN, an important treatise on the buddha-nature and TATHĀGATAGARBHA thought, discusses three types of foxing: (1) “the buddha-nature that dwells in itself,” viz., that is inherent in the minds of deluded ordinary beings (PṚTHAGJANA); (2) “the emergent buddha-nature,” which emerges as a result of practice, and which is initiated when the adept first generates the aspiration for enlightenment (BODHICITTOTPĀDA); and (3) “the attained buddha-nature,” which is achieved once the BODHISATTVA path (MĀRGA) is completed and the fruition of buddhahood attained. See also the extended coverage in BUDDHADHĀTU.
Foxing lun. (J. Busshōron; K. Pulsŏng non 佛性論). In Chinese, “Treatise on the Buddha-Nature,” an important exposition of the MAHĀLĀNA theories of buddha-nature (FOXING) and storehouse, womb, or matrix of the tathāgatas (TATHĀGATAGARBHA). Authorship of the treatise is traditionally attributed to the Indian scholiast VASUBANDHU (fl. c. mid-fourth to mid-fifth centuries CE), with the Chinese translation made by the Indian YOGĀLĀRA exegete PARAMĀRTHA (499–569). Scholars now generally accept, however, that the text at the very least displays the heavy editorial hand of Paramārtha and may in fact have been written by him. The text offers a tripartite account of the buddha-nature as “dwelling in itself,” “emergent,” and “attained” (see discussion in FOXING, s.v.). It is also well known for its outline of three aspects of the tathāgatagarbha, as (1) the contained, (2) the concealed or hidden, and (3) the container. The “contained” means the “embryo” of enlightenment that is contained within the womb of the tathāgatas. “Concealment” denotes both the tathāgata as (a) an active agent of liberation, secreting himself inside the minds of ordinary sentient beings in order to motivate them toward enlightenment, and (b) a passive factor that is covered over and hidden by the afflictions (KLEŚA). As the “container,” the tathāgatagarbha is the fulfillment of the infinite numbers of meritorious qualities perfected by the buddhas. See also RATNAGOTRAVIBHĀGA.
Foxin zong. (J. Busshinshū; K. Pulsim chong 佛心宗). In Chinese, “Buddha-Mind School”; a term used largely as a synonym for the CHAN ZONG. According to the BIYAN LU, for instance, NĀGĀRJUNA, the fourteenth patriarch in the Chan patriarchal lineage, is said to have transmitted the Buddha-Mind School to the fifteenth patriarch Kānadeva. The term “buddha-mind” also functions in certain cases as a synonym for BUDDHADHĀTU (FOXING) or TATHĀGATAGARBHA.
Fo yijiao jing. (佛遺教經). In Chinese, “Scripture on the Teachings Bequeathed by the Buddha.” See YIJIAO JING.
Fozhao Deguang. (J. Busshō Tokkō; K. Pulcho Tŏkkwang 佛照德光) (1121–1203). Chinese CHAN master in the LINJI ZONG. Fozhao studied under DAHUI ZONGGAO at Mt. Ayuwang and took the name of the mountain, Yuwang, as his toponym. He later served as preceptor of Emperor Xiaozong (r. 1162–1189), from whom he received the title Chan master Fozhao. His conversations with the emperor were recorded in the Fozhao chanshi qindui lu and his teachings in the Fozhao Guang heshang yuyao.
fozu. (J. busso; K. pulcho 佛祖). In Chinese, “buddhas and patriarchs,” referring to the ancestors of the Buddhist tradition. Many traditions of Buddhism, especially those in East Asia, trace their pedigree back through an unbroken lineage of patriarchs (cf. ZUSHI) to the Buddha or buddhas. Positing such a succession of teachers directly connects the contemporary tradition both temporally and geographically to the founder of the religion himself and thus authenticates the school’s presentation of the Buddhist tradition. The buddhas in these rosters typically refer to the seven buddhas of antiquity (SAPTATATHĀGATA), the last of whom in the succession is ŚĀKYAMUNI, the founder of the current dispensation (ŚĀSANA) of Buddhism. Śākyamuni in turn is followed by a succession of Indian patriarchs (ZUSHI), whose numbers vary: in East Asia, the CHAN ZONG ultimately accepts a list of twenty-eight Indian patriarchs, beginning with MAHĀLĀŚYAPA and ending with BODHIDHARMA; the TIANTAI ZONG accepts twenty-four Indian patriarchs, beginning with Mahākāśyapa and ending with Siṃha bhikṣu. These Indian predecessors would then be followed in turn by a list of Chinese patriarchs, of whom six are best known in the Chan school (ending with the sixth patriarch, LIUZU, HUINENG) and nine in the Tiantai school. Especially for a school like Chan, which claims not to base its presentation of Buddhism on the scriptures of the religion (see BULI WENZI) but instead on its direct connection to the mind of the Buddha (foxin), the existence of such an unbroken lineage of “buddhas and patriarchs” is a principal means of legitimating the school. See also FOZU TONGJI; JINGDE CHUANDENG LU.
Fozu sanjing. (J. Busso sangyō; K. Pulcho samgyŏng 佛祖三經). In Chinese, “The Three Scriptures of the Buddhas and Patriarchs,” referring to a collection of three texts, YIJIAO JING, SISHI’ER ZHANG JING, and GUISHAN JINGCE. The Fozu sanjing texts were compiled together sometime during the late Tang and early Song dynasties as an accessible primer of Buddhist doctrine and practice, recommended to all beginners in the CHAN ZONG for its simple and clear exposition of the Buddhist teachings. The earliest extant commentary on this compilation was composed by the CAODONG ZONG monk DAHONG SHOUSUI (1072–1147). Interestingly, the first two texts in the anthology are now presumed to be Chinese APOCRYPHA, indigenous scriptures composed on the model of Indian scriptures, suggesting that they appealed to their Chinese audience in a way that translated Indian scriptures did not.
Fozu tongji. (J. Busso tōki; K. Pulcho t’onggi 佛祖統紀). In Chinese, “Chronicle of the Buddhas and Patriarchs,” a massive history of Buddhism and TIANTAI orthodoxy written in the manner of an official chronicle, composed by ZHIPAN (1220–1275) in fifty-four rolls. The chronicle begins with the life of the Buddha, the division of his relics (ŚARĪRA), and the compilation of the Buddhist canon (see TRIPIṬAKA; DAZANGJING). The fifth roll details the lives of the twenty-four Indian patriarchs, beginning with MAHĀLĀŚYAPA and ending with Siṃha bhikṣu. This theory of the twenty-four patriarchs is also found in TIANTAI ZHIYI’s magnum opus MOHE ZHIGUAN, wherein it is stated that the transmission ends after Siṃha bhikṣu was killed by the tyrant Mihirakula, the king of Damiḷa. Rolls six and seven discuss the nine patriarchs in China, starting with Huiwen (d.u.), NANYUE HUISI, Zhiyi, Guanding (561–632), Zhiwei (d. 680), Huiwei (634–713), and JINGXI ZHANRAN; roll eight covers the rest in the series of patriarchs leading up to SIMING ZHILI. The rest of the chronicle details the lives of worthy monks of other traditions. Other important charts and histories are provided in the last few rolls. The Fozu tongji thus serves as an important source for studying the history of the Tiantai tradition and the ways in which the school envisioned Buddhist orthodoxy during the Song dynasty.
Frauwallner, Erich. (1898–1974). Austrian scholar of Sanskrit philology; professor at the University of Vienna and a member of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Frauwallner wrote some twenty monographs on various strands of Indian Buddhist literature, especially concerning the VINAYA and ABHIDHARMA, and broader surveys of Indian philosophy. His works include his The Earliest Vinaya and the Beginnings of Buddhist Literature (1956) and Abhidharmastudien (translated into English as Studies in Abhidharma Literature and the Origins of Buddhist Philosophical Systems), which treats the analytical structure of early Buddhist abhidharma as the inception of systematic philosophical thought in Buddhism. Frauwallner was also one of the first Western scholars to explore the writings of DHARMAKĪRTI on Buddhist logic and epistemology and especially the APOHA theory, laying the foundation for PRALĀṆA studies in Austria. Frauwallner, with other Indologists like Ludwig Alsdorf, were tainted by their association with Nazism and anti-Semitism; Frauwallner, however, later acknowledged the great contributions that the Alsatian Jewish scholar SYLVAIN LÉVI had made to Buddhist studies.
Fu dashi. (J. Fu daishi; K. Pu taesa 傅大士) (497–569). In Chinese, “Great Layman Fu,” his secular name was Xi and he is also known as Shanhui, Conglin, and Dongyang dashi. Fu dashi was a native of Wuzhou in present-day Zhejiang province. At fifteen, he married and had two sons, Pujian and Pucheng. Originally a fisherman, he abandoned his fishing basket after hearing a foreign mendicant teach the dharma and moved to SONGSHAN (Pine Mountain). After attaining awakening beneath a pair of trees, he referred to himself as layman Shanhui (Good Wisdom) of Shuanglin (Paired Trees). While continuing with his severe ascetic practices, Fu and his wife hired out their services as laborers during the day and he taught at night, ultimately claiming that he had come from TUṢITA heaven, where the future buddha MAITREYA was currently residing. He is said to have been summoned to teach at court during the reign of the Liang-dynasty emperor Wudi (r. 502–549). In 539, Fu dashi is said to have established the monastery Shuanglinsi at the base of Songshan. His collected discourses, verses, and poetry are preserved in the Shanhui dashi yulu, in four rolls, which also includes his own biography as well as those of four other monks who may have been his associates. Fu is also credited with inventing the revolving bookcase for scriptures, which, like a prayer wheel (cf. MA ṆI ’KHOR LO), could yield merit (PUṆYA) simply by turning it. This invention led to the common practice of installing an image of Fu and his family in monastic libraries. In painting and sculpture, Fu dashi is typically depicted as a tall bearded man wearing a Confucian hat, Buddhist raiments, and Daoist shoes and accompanied by his wife and two sons.
Fudōchi shinmyōroku. (不動智神妙録). In Japanese, “Record of the Mental Sublimity of Immovable Wisdom,” a treatise on ZEN and sword fighting composed by the Japanese RINZAISHŪ monk TAKUAN SŌHŌ (1573–1645). In the first half of the seventeenth century, Takuan found himself in the middle of a political battle known as the “purple robe incident” (shi’e jiken), which, in 1629, ultimately led to his exile to Kaminoyama in Uzen (present-day Yamagata Prefecture). There, he composed this treatise on the proper use of the mind in Zen and sword fighting for the samurai sword master Yagyū Muneori (1571–1646), the personal instructor to the shōgun. Takuan first describes the afflictions that rise from ignorance (AVIDLĀ) as hindrances to proper sword fighting. Then he explains the “immovable wisdom” as the unclinging, unstopping mind. Takuan likens this unmoving state to the concept of “no-mind” (J. mushin; C. WUXIN) in the “Platform Sūtra” (LIUZU TANJING), wherein one’s movements are not calculated, but instinctual; thus, there should be no gap between mind and sword. The rest of the treatise expounds upon the proper means of attaining this state of no-mind.
Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan. (J. Fuhōzō innenden; K. Pu pŏpchang inyŏn chŏn 付法藏因傳). In Chinese, “History of the Transmission of the Dharma-Storehouse,” a lineage history of the Indian Buddhist patriarchs, purportedly translated in 472 by Kiṅkara (d.u.) and Tanyao (fl. 450–490) of the Northern Wei dynasty, but now known to be an indigenous Chinese composition, in six rolls. The Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan outlines the history of the transmission of the dharma-storehouse (fazang), viz., the lineage of teachers, following the BUDDHA’s PARINIRLĀṆA, beginning with the first patriarch of the tradition, the elder MAHĀLĀŚYAPA, and ending with the beheading of the putative twenty-fourth patriarch, Siṃha bhikṣu, at the hand of the tyrant Mihirakula, the king of Damiḷa. This account of the Buddhist transmission lineage was adopted in TIANTAI ZHIYI’s magnum opus MOHE ZHIGUAN and exerted much influence over the development of the transmission histories of the the TIANTAI ZONG and the CHAN ZONG (see CHUANDENG LU). Both the Tiantai and Chan schools thus hold this text in high esteem, as offering documentary evidence for their sectarian accounts of the Buddhist transmission lineage. Despite the wide influence of the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan within Chinese Buddhism, however, the text seems not to be a translation of an Indian original but is instead a Chinese composition (see APOCRYPHA). As the discussions of the text in the DA TANG NIEDIAN LU and LIDAI SANBAO JI both suggest, the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan may have been compiled in response to the persecution of Buddhism that occurred during the reign of the Northern Wei emperor Taiwu (r. 441–451). Later, after his successor, Emperor Wencheng (r. 452–465), had ascended to the throne and revived Buddhism, Tanyao and his collaborator Kiṅkara were inspired to compose this book at the cave site of Beitai in order to clarify definitively the orthodox lineage of ŚĀKYAMUNI Buddha. The book also largely resembles Chinese recensions of the biography of King AŚOKA and thus probably could not have been a translation of an Indian text. Finally, many of the sources cited in the book are otherwise unknown and their authenticity is dubious. For all these reasons, it is now generally accepted that the text is of Chinese provenance.
Fukan zazengi. (普勸坐禪儀). In Japanese, “General Advice on the Principles of Seated Meditation,” an important meditation manual composed by the eminent Japanese ZEN master DŌGEN KIGEN. Although this treatise is traditionally dated to 1227, recent discoveries of a hitherto unknown copy of the Fukan zazengi suggest the date of 1233. The Fukan zazengi is a relatively short treatise on seated meditation (ZAZEN), which is also embedded in Dōgen’s magnum opus, the SHŌBŌGENZŌ. The treatise underscores the need to practice seated meditation as a corrective against excessive indulgence in “words and letters,” viz., scholastic interpretations of Buddhist doctrine (cf. BULI WENZI). The explanation of how to perform seated meditation starts with preparing a quiet spot for practice and following a proper diet. The correct posture for meditation is then described. The actual practice of seated meditation begins with the regulation of breathing, which is followed by an injunction to stay aware of all thoughts that arise in the mind. The treatise then briefly explains the psychosomatic effects of meditation and the proper way to rise from seated meditation. The importance of seated meditation is reiterated at the end. Dōgen’s manual is in large part a revision of the Chinese Chan master CHANGLU ZONGZE’s influential primer of meditation, the ZUOCHAN YI.
Fukeshū. (普化宗). In Japanese, “Puhua Sect”; a secondary sect of the Japanese ZEN school, founded by SHINCHI KAKUSHIN (1207–1298). While Kakushin was in China studying under WUMEN HUIKAI (1183–1260), he is said to have met a layman, the otherwise-unknown Zhang Can (J. Chō San; d.u.), who claimed to be a sixteenth-generation successor of the little-known Tang-dynasty monk Puhua (J. Fuke; d.u.), supposedly an eccentric friend of LINJI YIXUAN and a successor of MAZU DAOYI. Four lay disciples of Zhang’s accompanied Kakushin when he returned to Japan, helping Kakushin to establish the sect. There is no evidence of the existence of a Puhua school in China apart from Kakushin’s account, however, and the school seems to be a purely Japanese creation. During the Tokugawa era (1603–1867), in particular, the school attracted itinerant lay Zen practitioners, known as “clerics of emptiness” (kamusō), who played the bamboo flute (shakuhachi) as a form of meditation and wore a distinctive bamboo hat that covered their entire face as they traveled on pilgrimage around the country. Because masterless samurai (rōnin) and bandits began adopting Fuke garb as a convenient disguise during the commission of their crimes, the Meiji government proscribed the school in 1871 and it vanished from the scene.
Fukurokuju. (J) (福祿壽). See SHICHIFUKUJIN.
full-lotus posture. See VAJRAPARYAṄKA; PADMĀSANA.
Fumon. (J) (普門). See MUKAN FUMON.
Fumu enzhong jing. (J. Bumo onjūgyō; K. Pumo ŭnjung kyŏng 父母恩重經). In Chinese, “The Scripture on the Profundity of Parental Kindness,” an indigenous Buddhist scripture, composed in the seventh century that extols the virtues of filial piety (C. xiao). There are several different recensions of this sūtra, including one discovered in the caves of DUNHUANG. The scripture denounces unfilial sons who, after their marriages, neglect and abuse their parents, and instead urges that they requite the kindness of their parents by making offerings at the ghost festival (C. YULANBEN; S. *ULLAMBANA) and by copying this scripture and reciting it out loud. This text seems to be related to other earlier Chinese APOCRYPHA, such as the Fumu enzhong nanbao jing (“The Scripture on the Difficulty of Requiting Parental Kindness”) and the YULANPEN JING (“Ullambana Scripture”), and displays the possible influence of the indigenous Confucian tradition. The Fumu enzhong jing continues to be one of the most popular scriptures in East Asian Buddhism and is frequently cited in the Buddhist literature of China, Korea, and Japan.
Furong Daokai. (J. Fuyō Dōkai; K. Puyong Tohae 芙蓉道楷) (1043–1118). Chinese CHAN master in the CAODONG ZONG, a native of Yizhou in present-day Shandong province. When he was young, Daokai is said to have trained to become a Daoist transcendent (shenxian). He later became a monk at the monastery Shushengyuan (or Shutaisi) in Jingshi, where he studied under a monk named Dexian (d.u.); and, in 1074, he received the full monastic precepts. Daokai later became a disciple of the Chan master TOUZI YIQING at the Chan monastery of Haihui Chansi on Mt. Baiyun in Shuzhou prefecture (present-day Anhui province). In 1082, he established himself on Mt. Xiantong in Yizhou and in 1103 became the second abbot of the influential Chan monastery of Baoshou Chanyuan on Mt. Dahong (present-day Hubei province). A year later he relocated to the Chan monastery of Shifang Jingyin Chanyuan in Dongjing (present-day Henan province) and again to the nearby Tianningsi in 1107. The emperor offered him a purple robe and the title Chan Master Dingzhao (DHYĀNA Illumination), but Daokai declined. Later, a prominent lay follower built a hermitage for him on Furong island (present-day Shandong province), whence he acquired his toponym. The community at Furong quickly grew into a prominent monastery. In 1117, Daokai’s hermitage was given the official plaque Huayan Chansi, thereby elevating it to an official “monastery of the ten directions” (SHIFANGCHA). Inheriting his lineage were twenty-nine disciples, of whom the most famous was Danxia Zichun (1064–1117). Furong’s teachings are recorded in the Furong Kai chanshi yuyao.
fushō Zen. (不生禪). In Japanese, “unborn Zen”; a form of ZEN meditation popularized by the RINZAISHŪ master BANKEI YŌTAKU. The teaching of the “unborn” (fushō) functioned as the central theme of Bankei’s vernacular sermons (kana hōgo). According to Bankei, the unborn is none other than buddha-nature (FOXING), or buddha mind, itself. As such, he emphatically notes that there is little need actually to seek buddhahood, since everyone is already born with the innate, unborn buddha mind. Bankei’s teaching of unborn Zen was harshly criticized by the fellow Rinzai Zen master HAKUIN EKAKU.
fusi. (J. fūsu; K. pusa 副司). In Chinese, “assistant comptroller,” the third assistant to the prior (JIANYUAN) in an East Asian Buddhist monastery. Along with the rector (WEINUO), cook (DIANZUO), superintendent (ZHISUI), prior’s assistant (DUSI), and comptroller (JIANSI), the assistant comptroller is one of the six stewards (ZHISHI) at an East Asian CHAN monastery.
fuzangwu. (J. fukuzōmotsu; K. pokchangmul 腹藏物). In Chinese, “interred objects,” referring to items enshrined within the cavities of buddha images, a practice widespread in the Buddhist traditions of East Asia (if not throughout all of Buddhism). Typically the “lost-wax” casting process for creating iron or bronze images would leave a substantial cavity inside the image, in which could be interred such sacred objects as written or printed scriptures, DHĀRAṆī, and MANTRA; smaller images of buddhas and bodhisattvas; information on the creation of the image, lists of sponsoring donors, and various dedications and vows; replicas of internal organs carved from wood or sown from cloth; or paddy rice, hulled rice, and soy beans as a form of permanent offering to the Buddha. The sealing of such things inside an image often took place as part of the consecration ritual for the image. Wooden images were also often carved in imitation of cast images in order to leave such an interment cavity. By serving as a repository of sacred objects, the image could thus serve not only as an object of worship but also play a role similar to that of a STŪPA or CAITYA.
fuzi. (S. vālavyajana; P. vālavījanī; T. rnga yab; J. hossu; K. pulcha 拂子). In Chinese, “fly whisk” or “chowrie,” a yak-tail fan that Buddhist monks used to keep flies and mosquitoes away, which comes to be a symbol of the office of CHAN master. The chowrie is presumed to have originally been used among followers of the JAINA tradition to shoo away flies without injuring them and came to be used widely throughout India. In the Chinese Chan tradition, the fly whisk (which in East Asia is usually made from a horse tail) became a symbol of the office or privilege of a Chan master and is one of the accoutrements he traditionally is depicted as holding in formal portraits. “Taking up the fly whisk” (BINGFU) is, by metonymy, a term used to refer to a formal Chan sermon delivered by a master. See also VĀLAVYAJANA.