Chinese translation of the Sanskrit word dharma.
One of the Chinese expressions for the Mahayana Buddhist concept of expedient means.
This Chinese term refers to the specific buildings or rooms in which an abbot of a Chan temple or monastery would live and conduct activities. In its extended usage, fangzhang also simply designates an abbot.
A Chan master of the Tang dynasty, Faru was a native of Shangdang (in present-day Shanxi province). His family name was Wang. He first studied with the master Huiming (d.u.) (also called Qingbu Ming) and became a monk at the age of 19. While learning extensively from Buddhist scriptures and treatises, he also traveled to seek the way. Finally, he went to study with Hongreng for 16 years at the Twin Peaks and became his dharma heir. For the ensuing eight or nine years, Faru’s whereabouts are unidentified, but one source reported that he avoided official appointment by moving to Shaolin Temple at Mount Song, despite his increasing influence at the capitals. In 686, Faru started to teach the dharma at Shaolin Temple after failing to turn down the invitation by the master Huiduan (d.u.) of Luoyang and the community of Shaolin Temple. It was reported that Faru recommended Shenxiu to his students for furthering their studies before his death in 689.
The main sources for Faru’s life and teachings are his epitaph (“Tang Zhongyue Shamen Shi Faru Chanshi Xingzhuang”), written shortly after Faru’s death by anonymous disciples, and the Chuan Fabao Ji (Annals of the Transmission of the Dharma Treasure). Faru’s epitaph contains the earliest Chan theory of the six generations of lineal transmission from Bodhidharma, thourgh Huike, Sengcan, Daoxin, and Hongreng, to Faru. This transmission is considered by the text as the transmission of the mind without words. It also mentions the teaching of suddenly entering into the one vehicle, a prototype of the later Chan emphasis on sudden enlightenment. The Chuan Fabao Ji extends the lineal transmission to Shenxiu, but still places Faru before Shenxiu. However, Faru’s prominence soon faded away, and the Lengqie Shizi Ji only lists Faru as a master of local influence. The later Chan history texts did not even include him. No texts have ever told whether Faru had his dharma heir. A few of his disciples can be traced through scattered texts.
A much neglected classical Chan notion on the use of language, as found in Huangbo Xiyun’s Wanling Lu. This Chinese term translates as “Buddha-dharma and speaking are non-dualistic.” This notion is in sharp contrast with the more one-sided but orthodox Song dynasty Chan emphasis on the inadequacy of language and the ineffability of Buddha-dharma as promoted by the transmission of the lamp literature. The transmission of the lamp literature canonizes the legend that the Buddha transmits the wordless dharma, simply by holding a flower without speaking, to a smiling and understanding disciple, Mahākāśyapa. This canonized legend and its generalized interpretation establish a privileged hierarchy of silence over speaking and identify the true dharma with the negation of language. Such an oversight contradicts the classical Chan Buddhist, especially Huangbo Xiyun and Hongzhou school’s, perspective of non-duality and their advocacy of the inseparableness between Buddha-dharma and everyday activities. For these Chan masters, everyday activities, including speaking, are necessary conditions and could be skillful means for triggering enlightenment. Furthermore, enlightenment can be verified in all everyday activities, including speaking. There is no impassable gap between Buddha-dharma (or enlightenment) and speaking. The non-duality between Buddha-dharma and speaking, or between silence and speaking, avoids seeing these opposites as isolated, independent, and exclusive of each other, seeing them instead in a dynamic interrelationship, as mutually conditioned, involved, and exchangeable. As a result, Chan masters are able to use language more differently, more creatively, and more effectively rather than simply abandoning language or staying in silence forever. The inadequacy of language is acknowledged by these masters in its relative context as the inadequacy of the conventional, purely cognitive, or descriptive use of language. Silence is regarded as silencing or negation of all dualistic pairs, including silence and speaking themselves.
The Chinese word here means “dharma hall.” Dharma hall is a kind of building in Chan monasteries for major assembly; for Chan masters’ sermons, including ensuing question and answer sessions; and for performances of Chan rituals such as ordaining novices and sūtra chanting prayers. In the Chanmen Guishi (“Rules for the Chan School”)—a document that appeared in the Jingde Chuandeng Lu as the outline of the alleged Baizhang Qinggui—dharma hall is opposed to the traditional Buddha hall (fodian). Whereas in a Buddha hall a Buddha statue is enshrined for reverence and ritual services, dharma hall altars bear only high lecture seats used by abbots for preaching dharma. The Chanmen Guishi and other Chan texts stated that Baizhang Huaihai started one of the new rules for Chan monasteries that established only dharma hall instead of Buddha hall, to emphasize the direct transmission of the dharma from Chan masters’ minds that represent all Buddhas and patriarchs to the students’ minds. This direct transmission went beyond all appearances, icons, and language. “Establishing dharma hall only” is thus regarded by the Chan tradition as revolutionary, as one of the features that mark the independence of Chan monasteries from the other Buddhist schools. Recent scholarship in Chan has challenged this long-standing view and has found that the establishment of dharma hall can be traced even back to the Indian Vinaya tradition. Despite a few extreme cases of dismantling the Buddha hall shrine, Buddha shrines were never abandoned in Chan monasteries. Buddha halls continued to be built in the central location along with dharma hall in Chan monasteries.
Of the five houses of the Southern school of Chan, the Fayan school was the last to emerge during the Five Dynasties. It was named after its founder, Fayan Wenyi. The teaching and practice of this school shares many similarities with the other four houses, such as “directly pointing to the human mind,” “seeing into one’s self-nature and becoming Buddha,” enlightenment not being sought outside everyday activities, and skillful adaptation to the different circumstances of students. What makes this school unique is its more prominent integration of the Huayan philosophy of the harmonious coexistence and non-duality of principle/events (li/shi) into its own teaching of Chan. The philosophy of harmony even facilitated the school’s good relationship with the local authorities, including the school’s influence on and receiving support from the emperors of the Southern Tang and the Wuyue. As far as the style of teaching is concerned, Fayan Wenyi is not famous for shouting at his students or hitting them with his staff, but he is exemplary in using paradox and tautology, responding to his students with the power of insight and challenge.
Among Wenyi’s 63 direct dharma heirs, Tiantai Deshao is the most outstanding. He was invited to the capital by the emperor of the Wuyue and respected as the National Teacher. He also had about 49 dharma heirs of his own. Among them, Yongming Yanshou is best known, due to his 100-fascicle, monumental work Zongjing Lu (Records of the Source-Mirror), which promotes the unification between Chan and other schools of theoretical teachings (Chanjioa yizhi). Yanshou was also the precursor for the syncreticism of Chan and Pure Land. Another disciple of Deshao was Yong’an Daoyuan (d.u.), the compiler of the 30-fascicle Jingde Chuandeng Lu. The teaching of the Fayan school even spread to Korea. Although this school was quite prosperous in the early Song, its lineage stopped in the mid-Song.
A Chan master of the Five Dynasties and the founder of the Fayan school, Wenyi was born in Zhejiang. His family name was Lu. He started his monastic life at the age of 7 and was officially ordained at age 20 at Kaiyuan Temple in Yuezhou. He studied Buddhist precepts with Xijue (864–948), a Vinaya master, at Yuwang Temple, and excelled in the Buddhist scriptures and Confucian classics. He was very soon attracted to Chan. On his pilgrimage, he first studied with Changqing Huileng (854–932), a disciple of Xuefeng Yichun. Later, he met Luohan Guichen (869–928), another disciple of Xuefeng Yichun. With Guichen, Wenyi attained enlightenment and became his dharma heir. After a period of wandering, he was invited to preside at Chongshou Temple in Fuzhou, Jiangxi. Due to his growing fame, Emperor Lijing (r. 943–961) of the Southern Tang invited him to the capital, Jinling, to be abbot at Baoen Monastery and later at Qingliang Monastery. Wenyi had more than 1,000 students there, including monks from Korea. When he died at the age of 74, Lijing granted him the title “Great Chan Master of Dharma Eye” (Dafayan Chanshi).
Wenyi had more than 60 direct dharma heirs from his students. Among them, Tiantai Deshao was the most eminent, even becoming respected by the emperor of the Wuyue as the National Teacher. Deshao himself had about 49 dharma heirs. Among them, Yongming Yanshou is most famous for authoring the 100-fascicle, monumental work Zongjing Lu (Records of the Source-Mirror). Another disciple of Deshao was Yong’an Daoyuan (d.u.), the compiler of the 30-fascicle Jingde Chuandeng Lu. As Daoyuan was from the Fayan school, three fascicles of the Jingde Chuandeng Lu included a considerable amount of information and recorded sayings on Fayan Wenyi and his disciples. Compared to the masters of other Chan schools, Wenyi integrated the Huayan doctrine of the harmonious relationship between principle (li) and events (shi) into the teachings of Chan more prominently. His renowned use of tautological answers to his students’ questions is one of the examples of how he skillfully invented unconventional expedient means to help students realize the harmonious, and non-dualistic, relationship of all things in the universe without being hindered by any conceptual words. Placed among the best of all Chan teachers, Wenyi even won high praise from the great neo-Confucian philosopher Zhu Xi (1130–1200).
There are many recorded sayings of Wenyi. Recorded Sayings of the Chan Master Wenyi from Qingliang Monastery in Jinling (Jinling Qingliang Yuan Wenyi Chanshi Yulu), compiled by Yufeng Yuanxin (1571–1647) and Guo Ningzhi (d.u.), and included in the Wujia Yulu (Recorded Sayings of Five Houses) in the Ming dynasty, is the most extensive record of Wenyi’s yulu. It is a collection of Wenyi’s sayings from all previously published records, including the Jingde Chuandeng Lu, the Chanlin Sengbao Zhuan, the Liandeng Huiyao, and the Wudeng Huiyuan. Moreover, an important work, Zongmen Shigui Lun (Treatise on the Ten Regulations of the [Chan] School), is attributed to Fayan Wenyi. It focuses on the criticism of various perverse conduct in the competition among different Chan lineages with each other, even though the formation of different lineages is not seen as completely negative. The text is usually regarded as the earliest source for differentiating the teaching styles and methods of the other four schools and for acknowledging the “five houses” of Chan.
A Chan master of the Linji school in the end of the Ming dynasty and the beginning of the Qing dynasty, Tongrong was born into a family of He in Fuqing (present-day Fujian province). He became a monk at the age of 14. During a period of about 10 years, he studied, respectively, with the Caodong masters Zhanran Yuancheng, Wuming Huijing, and Wuyi Yuanlai. However, he was still interested in the teaching and method of the Linji school. Eventually, he went to study with the Linji master Miyun Yuanwu and became his dharma heir. In 1633, Tongrong took up residence at Wanfu Temple on Mount Huangbo. In the ensuing years, he served as abbot at many Chan temples or monasteries, including Tianning Temple in Zhejiang, Fuyan Temple in Jiangsu, and Xingsheng Wanshou Temple on Mount Jing. He authored several books, including the Zuting Qianchui Lu and the Wuden Yantong. The latter was very controversial regarding the history of Chan lineal transmission and was condemned by local government after a lawsuit. His teachings were preserved in the Feiyin Chanshi Yulu of 14 fascicles. He had 64 certified dharma heirs. Because his dharma heir Yinyuan Longqi went to Japan and became the founder of the Japanese Obaku school, Tongrong was also revered by the followers of this Japanese Zen school.
A Chan master of the Linji school in the late Tang dynasty, Five Dynasties, and early Song dynasty, Yanzhao was a native of Zhejiang Province. His original name was Kuangzhao. His family name was Liu. Although he was extensively learned, he was not interested in passing the civil examination and instead became a monk. After studying the Lotus Sutra and the Tiantai meditation and consulting the Chan master Jingqing Daofu (868–937), a disciple of Xuefeng Yicun, Yanzhao went to Baoying Temple in Ruzhou to study with Nanyuan Huiyong (860–930), the disciple of Xinghua Cunjiang of the Linjin school. In six years, Yanzhao became the sole dharma heir of Huiyong; he subsequently practiced alone at the abandoned Fengxue Temple on Mount Qianfeng. Over about seven years, he and his followers renovated and enlarged this temple. In 951, under local patronage, he moved to Guanghui Temple. He lived there for 22 years and died at the age of 78. Among his many disciples, the most famous is Shoushan Shengnian. Among his teachings, his subversion of the absolute distinction of questioning and answering to inspire students is noteworthy.
A Chan master of the Linji school in the Song dynasty, Shanzhao was a native of Taiyuan (in present-day Shanxi). His family name was Yu. At the age of 14, he lost his parents and became a monk. He traveled to many places; it was said that he visited 71 Chan masters. Among the different styles and methods of Chan, the Caogdong school’s expedient of “five ranks” was his favorite. He went to Shimen Temple in Xiangzhou, Hubei, to study with the Caodong master Huiche (d.u.). Shanzhao’s Poem on the Five Ranks won Huiche’s praise, but Shanzhao was still not satisfied. He eventually turned to study with the Linji Chan master Shoushan Shengnian and became Shengnian’s dharma heir. After leaving his teacher, Shanzhao continued to travel in the south. He finally accepted an invitation to take up residence at Taizi Chan Monastery in Fenzhou (later called Fenyang, in present-day Shanxi). He taught there for about 30 years, until his death. His preaching won support from local officials and attracted many followers. Among his disciples, the most famous was Shishuang Chuyuan, who successfully spread the Linji school to the south.
Shanzhao’s teachings were preserved in the Fenyang Wude Chanshi Yulu, edited by his disciple Shishuang Chuyuan. This yulu includes Shanzhao’s sermons, his Songgu Baize (Verses [or Poetic Commentaries] on One Hundred Old Cases), collections of his daiyu (his own answers to the questions he raised for others) and bieyu (his alternative answers to the previous questions raised and answered in the Buddhist texts), short essays, and other poems. His Songgu Baize is often considered the earliest example of the new Chan genre—the gong’an literature—and the Song “Chan of letters and words (wenzi Chan).” Shanzhao’s further use of Linji’s didactic formulas, such as “three mysteries and essentials (sanxuan sanyao)” and “four encounters of guest-host (sibinzhu)”; his use of the Caodong school’s “five ranks”; and the invention of his own formulas, most notably “four turning phrases (si zhuanyu)” and “ten all-true wisdoms (shizhi tongzhen),” helped to develop the unique teaching style and method of the Linji school.
The original Chinese term for this is Wu Fangbian. It is an abbreviated title, referring to a handful of Dunhuang documents that contain similar material under different titles, especially Dasheng Wusheng Fangbian Men (The Expedient Means of [Attaining] Birthless in the Mahayana) and Dasheng Wu Fangbian Beizong (The Five Expedienct Means of the Mahayana—Northern School). Scholars believe it is a lost work of the Northen school, most likely a teachers’ manual that was compiled by Shenxiu’s disciples, and reflects Shenxiu’s teaching, although it was never preserved in any East Asian Buddhist canon. In the 20th century, Japanese scholars did editorial work on the discovered copies, published them, and then included this work in the Taishō.
The five expedient means or methods include the following:
Comprehensive manifestation of the substance of Buddhahood (zongzhang foti), also called the teaching of the transcendence of thoughts (linian), in terms of the Awakening of Faith in Mahayana (Dasheng Qixin Lun).
Opening the gates of wisdom and sagacity (kai zhihui men), also called the teaching of motionlessness, in terms of the Lotus Sutra.
Manifestation of inconceivable freedom (xian busiyi jietuo), in terms of the Vimalakīrti Sūtra.
Elucidation of the true nature of all dharmas (ming zhufa zhengxing), in terms of the Sūtra of Questioning by the God of Thinking-about-Goodness (Siyi Fantian Suowen Jing).
Realizing non-differentiated, natural, and unobstructed freedom (liao wuyi ziran wuai jietuo), in terms of the Avatamsaka Sutra (Huayan Jing).
The practice of these expedient means highlights Shenxiu and his followers’ flexible interpretation of scriptures and skillful use of conventional Buddhist terms, as well as their focus on contemplating the mind and purity, which unavoidably involves a privileged conceptual hierarchy of the pure and defiled mind, motionlessness and motion, interior and exterior. Nothing sounds non-Buddhist, but the later schools tended to take a turn away from such rhetoric.
“Five houses” (wujia) refers to the thriving of Chan schools with diverse teaching styles (jiafeng) and methods (menting shishe) during the late Tang dynasty and the Five Dynasties. Although different Chan schools all claim lineage to Huineng and the Southern school, after two generations the Southern school had evolved into two main lines, Mazu Daoyi and Shitou Xiqian, according to Chan tradition. From these two lines emerged the five schools, or main lineages, of Chan. From the line of Mazu Daoyi emerged (1) Guiyang school, which was named after the Gui and Yang mountains where its headquarter temples were built, and was founded by Guishan Lingyou and Yangshan Huiji; and (2) Linji school, founded by Linji Yixuan. From the line of Shitou Xiqian emerged additional schools: (3) Caodong school, founded by Dongshan Liangjie and Caoshan Benji; (4) Yunmen school, founded by Yunmen Wenyan; and (5) Fayan school, founded by Fayan Wenyi.
The Guiyang school was formed first among these five, but declined in the early Song. The Fayan school was the last to come into existence and disappeared in the middle of the Song. The Yunmen school did not survive after the Song. Only the Linji and Caodong schools continued after the Song and spread their lineages to Japan during the Song period. The Linji school developed into two main branches, or subschools, during the Song dynasty, one called Huanglong school (or Huanglong pai), founded by Huanglong Huinan, the other Yangqi school (or Yangqi pai), founded by Yangqi Fanghui. They were added to the original “five houses.” Thus the phrase “five houses and seven schools” is used to designate all these schools that appeared in the late Tang, Five Dynasties, and Song.
Scholars have recently questioned the historical accuracy of describing the Chan movements of the mid- to late Tang and Five Dynasties as “two main lines” and “five houses.” The mid-Tang sources do not regard the Shitou line as a major branch from Huineng’s Southern school or as opposed to the Hongzhou school. The assertion of a separate lineage of Shitou from Mazu was later made retrospectively by a number of Chan masters who broke away from the Hongzhou line and attached themselves to the Shitou line exclusively. Moreover, the division of Chan from the late Tang to the Five Dynasties involved eight major houses. In addition to the “five houses,” there were the houses of Deshan, Xuefeng, and Shishuang. The use of the phrase “five houses” was not fixed until the mid-Northern Song. Recent study also points out the overestimation of the significance of five houses and seven schools. The competition among these schools was not based on substantial differences of doctrines and practices, but rather on lineage relationships or loyalties.
The English translation of the Chinese word wuwei here refers to the teaching or doctrine of “five ranks” attributed to the Tang dynasty Chan master Dongshan Liangjie, the founder of the Caodong school. Influenced by Huayan Buddhism’s four kinds of relationships between principle (li) and phenomena (shi), this teaching describes five kinds of relationships between the categories zheng and pian, namely, between the correct and the partial, but the categories could also be the real and the apparent, the universal and the particular, oneness and many, the whole (ti) and the function (yong), or emptiness (kong) and form (se). Two more categories are sometimes added by the metaphors of lord (jun) and vassal (chen), or host (zhu) and guest (bin). The formulation of these five relationships could be regarded as a dialectical philosophy, or ontology, underlying Dongshan and the Caodong school’s understanding of reality. Some scholars also see these five relationships as five perspectives about the world or five modes of experience with the world. They are basically used by the Caodong school as a set of temporary expedients, or skillful means (shishe), to accommodate different student abilities and situations and lead them on to the realization of suchness (zhenru). They should not be understood as a series of stages of development.
The first kind of relationship is “the partial within the correct (zheng zhong pian),” which points to the traditional Mahayana Buddhist teaching that all forms or phenomena are empty of their own existence, and hence helps students realize that all forms and phenomena rely on emptiness. The second kind of relationship is called “the correct within the partial (pian zhong zheng),” which points to the other perspective that emptiness is just the nature of all forms and phenomena: it manifests itself through all forms and phenomena but not apart from them. Despite this point, the third relationship—“coming from within the correct (zheng zhong lai)”—teaches students that, still, attaining the perspective of emptiness and understanding all phenomena in terms of emptiness, rather than individual substantiality, is necessary. Thus far, all three relationships are based on distinguishing the two sides of the polarity.
The fourth relationship—“going within together (jian zhong zhi)”—advises students to deconstruct this polarity or aspire to the harmonizing of the two sides, based on the perspective that emptiness and form are interconnecting, interpenetrating, and ultimately one and the same. The fifth relationship—“arriving within together (jian zhong dao)”—brings up a perspective in terms of which all separation and sense of distinction are transcended while they are present. Neither side functions independently but rather in a complete and wondrous harmony.
Many of Dongshan’s encounter dialogues and poems are considered to be references to this teaching of five ranks. The brief formulation of this teaching could be found in a number of documents, including “The Jewel Mirror Samadhi” (Baojing Sanmei), and “Verses on the Five Ranks of Lord and Vassal” (Wuwei Junchen Ji), attributed to Dongshan. These documents on the five ranks are commonly believed to be directly transmitted from Dongshan to his disciple Caoshan Benji, although a southern Song text claims that “The Jewel Mirror Samadhi” was first transmitted from Yunyan Tansheng (782–841) to Dongshan. A number of commentaries on this teaching are also attributed to Caoshan and considered to be among the earliest and most authoritative interpretations.
A great deal of Chinese Caodong, as well as Japanese Sōtō, scholarship, has contributed to the exegesis of these works. However, these works had never been mentioned by the Zutang Ji and Jingde Chuandeng Lu, which were among the earliest of the transmission of the lamp literature. The earliest source that included these documents of five ranks, before the extant Ming edition of the Dongshan Yulu, is Juefan Huihong’s Chanlin Sengbao Zhuan (Biographies of the Monk Treasure of Chan Grove, compiled in 1119), long after the time of Dongshan and Caoshan. The historicity of these documents has not been convincingly verified, even though the Caodong tradition has long believed that they are authentic works of Dongshan and Caoshan. On the other hand, the importance of these formulations of five ranks has been de-emphasized by many Chan Buddhists and scholars, both in ancient and modern times. For example, Japanese Sōtō Zen master Dōgen opposed seeing the five ranks as fully representative of the Buddha-dharma that Dongshan has transmitted.
The Chinese translation of the Sanskrit word Buddha-dharma.
This is the English translation of the Chinese word wangxin. Its use in classical Chan is similar to the use of other apophatic terms, such as wuxin (“no-mind”). For example, in addition to Huangbo Xiyun’s well-known elaborations on “no-mind” in his Chuanxin Fayao, Huangbo also advises students that, if forgetting environment (jing) is relatively easy, it is most difficult to “forget mind.” The use of the term wangxin indicates the Chan adoption of Daoist Zhuangzi’s influence. Wang (“forgetting”) is a favorite term Zhuangzi uses in his philosophy to describe the enlightened mind of a Daoist sage who is able to transcend all kinds of distinctions, including self/other, subject/object, individual/world, and speech/silence, while living in the world. It is also a method related to Daoist meditation practices. However, the Chan use of wangxin has its own Chinese Buddhist context. Wangxin involves two basic meanings. First, it denotes the necessity to forget (or to transcend and transform) the discriminative mind that is the root cause of the human attachment to objects and environments. Without this sense of “forgetting mind,” forgetting (or detaching oneself from) objects or environments cannot be accomplished. Second, it also denotes the necessity of transcending even the distinction between the discriminative mind and the enlightened Buddha-mind. This Buddha-mind cannot be sought or obtained outside the ordinary human mind. In this sense, it must be forgotten. Wangxin is thus used in relation to the notion of “no-seeking” (wuqiu).
The English translation of the Chinese words wuxiang jie. This teaching of “formless precepts” is recorded in the Platform Sūtra and attributed to Huineng. Chan Buddhism inherits the practice of the Mahayana bodhisattva precepts, including the common ceremony of conferring the precepts on a gathering of monks and laypeople. According to the sūtra, on such an occasion, Huineng confers the “formless precepts” by performing repeated recitations of taking refuge in the threefold body of Buddha, the four bodhisattva vows, the formless repentance, and taking refuge in the three treasures of Buddhism, before giving his sermon to explain the dharma. The teaching of the formless precepts does not mean to completely abolish the traditional precepts and practices, as contemporary scholars have pointed out its similarities with those of the other Chinese Buddhist schools, including the Tiantai school and the Dongshan Famen, nor does this teaching mean to create totally new precepts. It merely attempts to provide the traditional precepts with refreshed understandings and interpretations.
One of the main points in the teaching of the formless precepts is to relate the practice of the precepts to seeing or realizing one’s own Buddha-nature (zixing). One’s own Buddha-nature is the formless source for the unimpeded practice of the precepts in various forms, and the practice of the precepts should not be separated from seeing one’s own Buddha-nature. The teaching thus advises Chan Buddhists to detach themselves from various forms of the precepts; not to see the precepts as external moral codes or regulations and rely on them externally, but to look beyond them while practicing them and to realize their internal source, which is the foundationless foundation of all ethical codes or regulations. The ethical source and power, which paradoxically goes beyond the merely ethical, lies within each human being, not outside. This teaching is based on the combined understanding of the tathāgatagabha (Buddha-nature) theory and the philosophy of emptiness from the Prajñāpāramitā literature. As a result, the conferral of the precepts and the performance of the ceremony, in the setting of an ordination intended more for lay believers (as presented in the sūtra or used by Shenhui), are more simplified, and the distinction between lay and monastic was not most important to Huineng (or Shenhui) and his followers.
The English translation of the Chinese words wuxiang chan or wuxiang chanhui. Formless repentance is a crucial part of the formless precepts recorded in the Platform Sūtra and attributed to Huineng. Inheriting the Mahayana perspectives on emptiness, non-duality, and the original purity of Buddha-nature, formless repentance further develops the early Chan Buddhist and Tiantai approach of uniting the practice of repentance with the practice of meditation and wisdom, denying the necessity of separating them with different procedures and methods. That approach could be found in the fourth patriarch Daoxin’s Rudao Anxin Yao Fangbian Famen, in which he expresses the view that attaining no-thought through meditation is the most advanced repentance (diyi chanhui). The descendants of the Dongshan Famen—Shenxiu and his followers—continued Daosin’s trend of seeing Buddha nature as the nature of all precepts, including repentance (foxing wei jiexing). A similar attitude can be found in the Tiantai master Zhiyi’s Mohe Zhiguan. Zhiyi identifies repentance practices as either “in form (youxiang)” or “formless (wuxiang),” but in the latter, the sins are eliminated not by remorse but by the realization of the mind that is free from any designations of sins or merits. Despite all these precursors, the formless repentance in the Platform Sūtra identifies itself most clearly with the “zixing chanhui (the repentance of self-nature).” Since the realization of self-nature is true repentance (zhen chanhui), it is not necessary to even recite verses of repentance or to cultivate merits and eliminate sins. This teaching paved the way for Chan Buddhists to simplify the ritual practice of repentance and other precepts, as illustrated in the Platform Sūtra and other Chan texts.
The English translation of the Chinese term siliaojian. It is one of the formulas of the Linji school’s didactic expedients, which can be found in the Linji Lu for its early elaboration. “Four alternatives” are the four ways of instructing students and helping them attain the four perspectives of non-attachment. The first is “to take away the person (ren) but not the environment (jing),” which means to help overcome the attachment to the subjective self. The second is “to take away the environment but not the person,” which means to overcome the attachment to objects and their self-nature. The third is “to take away both the person and the environment,” which means to overcome the attachment to both, if the attachments have existed or have been demonstrated. The fourth is “to take away neither the person nor the environment,” which means to let the student experience reality as such, if both attachments have gone, and object and subject themselves do not need to be negated (the negation of the previous negations). Scholars have pointed out the influence of Indian Madyamaka Buddhist philosophy’s fourfold logic (the negation of self, other, both, and neither) on this formula of four alternatives, as well as its correspondence to the Chinese Huayan Buddhist notion of the four realms of reality—the realms of facts (shi), principle (li), both facts and principle, and neither. But all these philosophies are expressed here in more simplified, vivid, pragmatic, and heuristic terms.
The English translation of the Chinese term sibinzhu. It is one of the formulas of the Linji school’s heuristic expedients, attributed to Linji, and can be found in the Linji Lu. “Four encounters of guest-host” refers to the four situations of communication between a student (guest or visitor) and a teacher (host). The first is “the guest examines the host (bin kan zhu),” in which situation the guest’s or student’s level of understanding seems higher than the host’s or teacher’s. (Chan students are allowed to challenge teachers in verifying each other’s enlightenment experience.) When the student gives a shout and utters a sentence to test the teacher, the teacher does not discern the situation but pretends to know and gives inadequate verbal explanations. The second is “the host examines the guest (zhu kan bin),” in which situation the teacher is superior. He allows the student to raise questions and then undercuts whatever attachment the student has right away. The third is “the host examines the host (zhu kan zhu),” in which case both the student and the teacher stay on the same level of understanding. The teacher would not be confused by the student’s subtle question, and the student’s mind resonates with the teacher’s. The fourth is “the guest examines the guest (bin kan bin),” in which situation both persons are misled by the question and answer. Their minds are all fettered. The point of these descriptions is to call attention to the singularity of each situation and to sensibility, flexibility, and skillfulness in carrying out effective conversation and mind-to-mind transmission.
These include a shout that is (1) used like a sword, cutting through all false understandings; (2) like the lion crouched in ambush before suddenly seizing upon the weak; (3) like a weed-tipped pole probing/testing for fish in the water; (4) and like something that is not shouting. These four types indicate how the Chan master Linji utilized shouting, which became the unique style of the Linji Chan. Modern scholars believe that this summary of four types of shouting is a later addition to the Linji Lu. The interesting part, however, is that these uses demonstrate how non-verbal utterances or gestures signify meaning in the context of Chan communication.
This is the rephrasing of the teaching “Dao must flow freely (dao xu tongliu),” attributed to Huineng in the Platform Sūtra. In the sūtra, Huineng elaborates on the reason that he opposes Chan quietism, the tendency to cut the practice of meditation from all daily activities and movements. This tendency obstructs the dao. Here, the popular Chinese term dao is used in a Buddhist context, though tinged with a Daoist spirit, to designate enlightenment, the realization of Buddha-nature, the ultimate reality, and the path or practice of Buddhism. For the Platform Sūtra, enlightenment or the realization of Buddha-nature should not impede the living flux of the everyday world. Enlightenment or dao is rather the unimpeded, or straightforward, flowing (tongliu) together with thoughts and things in all everyday circumstances. All Buddhist practices must follow this direction and avoid their own entanglements. This notion of free-flowing-dao was very influential on the later Chan traditions. It especially foreshadowed the Hongzhou school’s notion of renyun (following along with the movements of all things or circumstances).
Essays on Assisting the Teaching [of Buddhism], a book of three fascicles, written by the Song Chan master Qisong. The book consists of five essays: Yuanjiao (Inquiry into [the Essence of] the Teachings), Quanshu (Writing of Advices), Guang Yuanjiao (Extensive Inquiry into [the Essence of] the Teachings), Xiao Lun (Treatise on Filial Piety), and Tanjing Zan (Praise for the Platform Sūtra), composed during the 1050s. In these essays, Qisong refutes Confucian scholars’ criticisms of Buddhism, emphasizing that both Buddhism and Confucianism come out of the mind of sages. Buddhism’s practice of precepts and perfections is similar to Confucianism’s practice of five virtues. Confucianism is the teaching of governing the world; Buddhist teaching involves both governing the world and transcending the world. Buddhism would help Confucianism achieve peace in the world. Buddhism does not cancel out the filial piety taught by Confucianism, but rather complements it with a greater filial piety to all sentient beings, even beyond one’s limited life. Qisong’s Tanjing Zan (Praise for the Platform Sūtra) became an important source for the study of the Platform Sūtra and later was attached to the latter, being widely read.
A Chan master of the Caodong school in the Song dynasty and the most important figure in the historical Caodong revival, Daokai was a native of Yizhou (in present-day Shandong). His family name was Cui. During his youth, he learned Daoist practice. In 1073, he became a monk by passing the examination of the Lotus Sutra and was ordained the next year. In search of good teachers, Daokai visited Touzi Yiqing at Haihui Temple on Mount Baiyun in Shuzhou (in present-day Anhui), and he attained enlightenment under Yiqing’s instruction. In 1082, Daokai started preaching at Mount Ma’an. After that, he served as abbot at several temples, including Xiandong Temple in Yizhou, Zhaoti Temple in Luoyang, Temple of Dayang Mountain in Yingzhou, and Baoshou Chan Monastery on Mount Dahong in Suizhou. In 1104, Daokai was appointed by Emperor Huizong (r. 1100–1126) to be abbot at the Chan Temple of Shifang Jingyin in the east capital Kaifeng, marking the prominence of the new Caodong lineage. In 1107, after rejecting Huizong’s appointment to be abbot at Tianning Wanshou Temple in Kaifeng, Daokai was jailed, defrocked, and exiled in Zhizhou (in present-day Shandong). This exile further raised Daokai’s popularity among monks and laypeople. His lay follower Liu Fengshi (1041–1113) built a hermitage for him to live and preach in, at Lake Furong in Zhizhou. In 1117, Huizong granted the plaque “Huayan Chansi” to this hermitage. Daokai died at the age of 76. He had 93 disciples and 29 dharma heirs. Among them, the most famous is Danxia Zichun. Daokai’s teachings were preserved in the Furong Kai Chanshi Yuyao, which pioneered the silent illumination approach (mozhao Chan).