A successful disciple of Mazu Daoyi, Huaihui was a native of Quanzhou (in present-day Fujian province). His family name was Xie. He joined Mazu in 785; while there, he realized the essence of the mind (xinyao). After Mazu’s death, he traveled and stayed in several areas, including Jiangsu, Shangdong, and Hebei. In Hebei, he took up residence at Baiyan Temple, where his teaching attracted a great number of followers. Even when he was secluded at Mount Zhongtiao (in Shanxi), many students still sought him out. In 808, Emperor Xianzong (r. 805–820) invited Huaihui to preach at Zhangjing Temple in the capital, Chang’an. Numerous imperial officials and famous literati came to visit him for his instruction. He also participated in public debates at the imperial court. After his death in 816, the emperor granted him the posthumous title “Chan Master of Great Propagation of the Teaching” (Daxuanjiao Chanshi). Two memorial inscriptions were dedicated to him by the famous literatus Quan Deyu (759–818) and the poet Jia Dao (779–843). Quan Deyu’s inscription outlined Huaihui’s teaching of the original pure mind as non-cutting from the environment (jing) and dust (gou), which inherited Mazu’s teaching on dealing with various things as the way and freeing the mind (chulei shidao er renxin). Among Huaihui’s best-known disciples, Hongbian (781–865) succeeded his teacher to preach at the capital, Chang’an, took up residence at Jianfu Temple, and offered religious instruction to Emperor Xuanzong (r. 846–859). Huaihui’s Korean disciple, Hyŏnuk (787–868), became the founder of one of the nine schools of Korean Sŏn Buddhism. Together with the other members of the Hongzhou school, Huaihui and his disciples further secured the prominence of the Hongzhou lineage and the transmission of its teaching.
A Chan master of the Caodong school in the Ming dynasty, Yuancheng was a native of Kuaiji (in present-day Shaoxing, Zhejiang province). His family name was Xia. He became a monk at the age of 24 and received official ordination under the master Yunqi Zhuhong. Later, he became the disciple and dharma heir of the Caodong master Cizhou Fangnian (d. 1594). He began his teaching career at Shouxing Temple and subsequently became abbot at many other temples in Zhejiang, including Wanshou Temple at Mount Jing and Xiansheng Temple in Kuaiji. He was well known for using “words of true color (benseyu)” in impromptu conversations and discussions of gong’an stories with his students. His teachings were preserved in the Zhanran Yuancheng Chanshi Yulu. He also authored several books, including the influential Zongmen Huowen (Questions about the [Chan] School). Yuancheng left behind eight dharma heirs, the most active among them being Shiyu Mingfang (1593–1648), Sanyi Mingyu (1599–1665), and Ruibai Mingxue (1584–1641). All three of them were involved in the controversy of 1654, writing essays critical of Feiyin Tongrong’s position on Chan lineal transmission in his Wedeng Yantong, and they even brought the case to the local government.
One of the most famous Chan masters of the Tang dynasty and a disciple of Nanquan Puyuan. His recorded sayings are among the most widely circulated, but information about his life from the traditional sources is hardly consistent. According to the Song Gaoseng Zhuan, he was a native of Linzi in Qingzhou (in present-day Shandong). His family name was He. As a boy, he left his parents and became a novice monk at Longxing Temple near his home. Later, he was ordained at Liuli Platform at Mount Song. He studied with Nanquan Puyuan and became his dharma heir, but he continued his long pilgrimage after that, meeting and exchanging with many other Chan masters, before reaching 80 years of age, according to some other sources. He was then invited to live at Guanyin Monastery in Zhaozhou. During the next 40 years, his fame continued to grow, and he instructed many disciples, winning support from local officers, such as Wang Rong (874–921) and Li Kuangwei (d. 893).
He died in 897 at the age of 120, according to some sources, but a text entitled Records of Actions (xingzhuang), dated 953 and attached to the Song edition of his recorded sayings (Zhaozhou Lu), indicates he died in 868. His posthumous title was “Chan Master Zhenji,” bestowed upon him by imperial decree. In comparison to his enormous popularity, his dharma heirs only numbered 13, according to the Jingde Chuandeng Lu. His words and actions were collected in his recorded sayings, and many of them later became famous gong’an. His teaching style showed skillful use of marvelous, insightful, provocative, but sometimes seemingly irrelevant or illogical words, no less shocking than the use of shouting or beating. These words were sensitively played at the limits of ordinary language to achieve a therapeutic effect in dealing with different situations of Chan practice.
Song of the Realization of the Way, a collection of 63 rhymed Chan poems, attributed to the Chan master Yongjia Xuanjue of the Tang dynasty, the alleged disciple of the sixth patriarch, Huineng. It was first included in the Jingde Chuandeng Lu in 1004; Xuanjue’s own anthology Yongjia Ji did not even mention it. The Zhengdao Ge was one of the most popular, most extensively quoted Chan poetic works in Chan history. The poetic expressions in this work—such as “walking is Chan, sitting is Chan; [no matter] speech, silence, move or rest, the mind (ti) is undisturbed”; “the idle man of the Way who learns and does nothing, neither discarding delusion nor seeking truth”; and “the real nature of ignorance is the Buddha nature, the illusory empty body is the dharma body”—vividly convey the Hongzhou teaching that this very mind doing ordinary things is the Buddha, and that enlightenment cannot be sought or cultivated outside ordinary activities. The Zhengdao Ge also made reference to 28 Indian patriarchs of Chan, which was a clear adoption from the genealogical theory of the Baoli Zhuan (Biographies from the [Temple of] Treasure Groves), a product of the Hongzhou school, and which could not have happened during the lifetime of Xuanjue. In the 20th century, the earliest extant manuscript of the Zhengdao Ge (dated in 980) was discovered among the Dunhuang documents under the title Chanmen Miyaojue (Secret Essential Methods of Chan School), authored by a Chan master of a different name, Zhaojue. All these facts have been used by modern scholars to question the authenticity of Xuanjue’s authorship of the Zhengdao Ge, echoing similar doubts raised by some monks from Tiantai Buddhism in the Song dynasty.
Song Linji Chan master Dahui Zonggao’s Treasure of the Eye of the True Dharma of three fascicles, compiled by him and his assistant, Chongmi Huiran (d.u.), in 1147. It is a collection of more than 660 cases of recorded sayings or gong’an from other Chan texts, which he cited in his teaching during the period of his exile to Hengyang, and also included his brief commentaries on them, beginning with the words “Miaoxi (his nickname) says.” He used the common Chan term zhengfayan zang as the title to indicate the direct awakening of the mind or the “eye” of seeing one’s own nature, special to the tradition of Chan patriarchs and transcending scriptural teachings. In a letter to Zhang Jiucheng (1092–1159), and in his first commentary on this collection, Dahui emphasized that his collection of recorded sayings was not based on the division of the Chan schools and the order of the lineages, but only on the correct understanding and correct insight, which could help trigger enlightenment.
A Chan master of the Huanglong lineage of the Linji school in the Song dynasty, Kewen was a native of Shanfu (in present-day Henan province). His family name was Zheng. He entered North Pagoda Temple to study Buddhist dharma in his youth and became a monk at the age of 25. He then made his pilgrimage in the North and studied Buddhist scriptures and commentaries. Unsatisfied with these practices, he started to seek Chan teachers in the South. Upon hearing Yunmen Wenyan’s inspiring words recited by a monk, he attained his first realization. Eventually, he went to Jicui Hermitage at Huangboshan Temple to study with Huanglong Huinan and became one of his dharma heirs. In 1072, he took up residence at Dayu Temple in Junzhou, and he was later invited to Shengshou Temple and Dongshan Monastery. In 1085, Wang Anshi (1021–1086) invited Kewen to be the founding abbot at Baoning Temple. Emperor Shenzong (r. 1067–1085) granted Kewen the title “Great Master of Zhengjing.” In 1094, Kewen took up residence at Guizong Temple on Mount Lu. Three years later, the governor, Zhang Shangying (1043–1122), appointed him abbot of Baofeng Temple in Letan. Kewen retired from there to Cloud Hermitage, where he stayed until his death. He had 38 disciples and numerous followers. His teaching was preserved in the Baofeng Yun’an Zhengjing Chanshi Yulu. Among Huanglong Huinan’s disciples, Kewen had the most enduring influence through his criticism of the wushi Chan, which was inherited by later generations of the Lingji school, including Yuanwu Keqin and Dahui Zonggao, according to recent studies in Song Chan Buddhism.
Also called Changlu Qingliao. A Chan master of the Caodong school in the Song dynasty, Qingliao was born in Zuomian (in present-day Sichuan). His family name was Yong. At the age of 11, he entered his monastic life, and he was officially ordained after passing the examination of the Lotus Sūtra at the age of 18. He studied Mahayana scriptures and treatises at Daci Temple in Chengdu. Having traveled to a number of places, he then went to Mount Danxia (in present-day Henan) to study with Danxia Zichun. Once Zichun asked Qingliao a typical Caodong question: “What is your self before the empty eon?” As Qingliao was about to answer, Zichun slapped him, triggering Qingliao’s enlightenment. Qingliao continued to visit famous Chan masters, then joined the congregation at Mount Changlu, becoming assistant to the abbot, the Yunmen master Zuzhao Daohe (1057–1124), and eventually succeeding him. In 1130, he was invited to be abbot at Xuefeng Temple in Fuzhou. In 1136, he was appointed abbot at Guangli Temple on Mount Ayuwnag in Zhejiang by imperial decree. Later, he was also appointed abbot at Longxiang Temple in Wenzhou and at Neng’ren Chan Monastery in Lin’an. In 1151, Emperor Gaozong (r. 1127–1162) appointed Qingliao abbot at Congxian Xianxiao Chan Monastery, which was newly constructed for Gaozong’s mother, Empress Wei.
Qingliao died at the age of 62 while sitting in the lotus position. His posthumous title was “Chan Master of Realizing Emptiness” (Wukong Chanshi). Qingliao ordained more than 400 people, and more than 30 of his disciples became abbots in public monasteries. Although Qingliao did not actually use the phrase “silent illumination” (mozhao), he was regarded as an advocate of silent illumination Chan (mozhao Chan), which was most strongly emphasized by his dharma brother, Hongzhi Zhengjue; therefore, he was attacked by the Song Lingji Chan master, Dahui Zonggao. Qingliao’s teachings were preserved in the Zhenzhou Changlu Liao Heshang Jiewai Lu (Record of Being beyond the Empty Eon by Monk Liao from Zhenzhou Changlu) and in the Xuefeng Zhenxie Liao Chanshi Yizhang Lu (Record of One Slap by the Chan Master Zhenxie Liao from Xuefeng [Temple]).
This Chinese word means “cognitive knowledge” or “cognitive knowing or seeing.” A similar word used in Chan texts is zhijie, which means “cognitive understanding.” Many Chan masters use zhijian or zhijie to characterize the approach that mistakenly regards the practice of Buddhism or realization of Buddha-nature as a kind of cognitive maneuver, to grasp something objective or external through knowing or learning. The Chan masters do not tend to eliminate knowing or learning from ordinary activities that can be related to the practice of Buddhism, but they definitely oppose pursuing any further cognitive maneuver from this knowing or learning element, focusing on conceptual thought and isolating it from all other ordinary activities. In addition, many Chan masters use the word zhijian negatively to oppose equating enlightenment with any intuitive knowledge or awareness claimed to be isolatable from ordinary seeing, knowing, and other activities. For example, although Heze Shenhui’s teachings were influential on his contemporaries and the later Chan schools, he was criticized for “establishing the zhijian,” which refers to his establishment of a conceptual hierarchy that privileges the intuitive cognitive knowledge over ordinary knowing and other activities.
Record of Pointing to the Moon. Its original full title is Shuiyuezhai Zhiyue Lu (Record of Pointing to the Moon from the Studio of Water-Moon). The book was compiled by Qu Ruji (1548–1610), a literatus in the Ming dynasty in 1595, and printed by Yan Cheng in 1601. This book of 32 fascicles belongs to the genre of the transmission of the lamp literature. It collected the records of sayings and biographies for 650 Chan masters. In fascicles 1 to 3, it collected materials from the seven Buddhas to the 28 Indian patriarchs. Fascicle 4 collected materials of the Chinese patriarchs. Fascicles 5 to 30 included Huineng’s first generation of disciples to his 16th. The last two fascicles were for Dahui Zonggao. When compared to the earlier literature of the transmission of the lamp in the Song and Ming, Zhiyue Lu’s coverage of new lineal descendants did not expand much. However, it did include some famous masters’ commentaries and poems that the earlier literature did not have, in addition to the compiler’s own analysis. Moreover, it was considered a book that had studied Chan from a Confucian literatus’s point of view and so was relatively less biased from any Chan sectarian view. Therefore, as an outsider’s collection, it soon became very popular, was reprinted many times, and was included in the Ming Buddhist canon. A Supplemental Record of Pointing to the Moon (Xu Zhiyue Lu) was compiled by Nie Xian (d.u.) during the Qing dynasty.
A very influential Chan master of the Linji school in the Yuan dynasty, Mingben was a native of Qiantang (in present-day Zhejiang). His family name was Sun. He lost his mother at the age of 9 and made up his mind to become a monk at the age of 15. While studying Buddhist scriptures and learning meditation, he had to wait for his father’s approval to be ordained by Gaofeng Yuanmiao. He became the latter’s disciple on Mount Tianmu at the age of 25. With Yuanmiao’s instruction, Mingben attained enlightenment. After Yuanmiao’s death, Mingben traveled to several places. In 1298, he built a hermitage to live and practice in on Mount Bian in Luzhou (in present-day Anhui); two years later, he moved to Pingjiang (in present-day Jiangsu). In 1305, he returned to Mount Tianmu and was invited to be abbot at Shizi Temple. Not wanting to stay in one place for long, he soon turned to traveling again while still preaching. His residential hermitage was often called Huanzhu An (“Hermitage of Illusory Residence”), and he acquired fame as the jiangnan gufo (“ancient Buddha from the south”). In 1318, Emperor Yuan Renzong (r. 1311–1320) granted him a golden robe and the title Foci Yuanzhao Guanghui Chanshi (“Chan Master of Buddha’s Compassion, Perfect Illumination and Broad Wisdom”). Mingben died at the age of 61.
In contrast to his teacher, Gaofeng Yuanmiao, Mingben left many written works and poems, including a set of monastic rules. Several editions of his recorded sayings were put together as the Tianmu Zhongfeng Mingben Heshang Guanglu, which was approved by Emperor Yuan Huizong (r. 1333–1370) to be included in the Buddhist canon in 1334. His many disciples included members of the royal family, ministers, and literati. His teachings inherited Yuanmiao’s approach of kanhua Chan, but he elaborated more on its origin, significance, and process, which contributed to the development of the kanhua Chan literature. Mingben was also an important advocate of practicing both Chan and Pure Land (Chanjing shuangxiu) by combining the meditation on key phrases (kan huatou) and reciting Buddha’s name (nianfo), based on the traditional Chan understanding of “only the mind is pure land (weixin jingtu)” and “the self-nature is Amita-Buddha (zixing mituo).”
One of the four well-known characterizations that Heze Shenhui used to describe the teachings of Shenxiu and his Northern school. Zhuxin kanjing means “to stop the mind and contemplate quietness.” The other three characterizations that follow it are “to summon the mind and mirror externals (juxin waizhao),” “to control the mind and purify the internal (shexin neicheng),” and “to concentrate the mind and enter into meditation (ningxin ruding).” These descriptions have been seen traditionally as the best characterization of quietism and escapism in Chan, although contemporary historians have debated the fairness of Shenhui’s characterization of Shenxiu’s teachings, arguing that these are nothing but normal methods or procedures of meditation practice. Despite this, the Platform Sūtra seems to echo this criticism of Shenxiu by pointing out that Huineng’s notion of no-thought does not ask people to stop the mind and thought, which claims to be different from Shenxiu. The criticism of quietism and escapism was influential on classical Chan and was shared by later generations. The Linji Lu directly quoted these characterizations and regarded these teachings as “creating bad karmas.”
Records of the Source-Mirror, a book of 100 fascicles created by the Chan master Yongming Yanshou of the Song dynasty in 961. Another, less-used title for this book is Xinjing Lu (Records of the Mind-Mirror). This encyclopedic book serves to elaborate on the intentions and meanings of Buddhas and patriarchs by establishing the one mind (equivalent to true suchness or Buddha-nature) as the source and underlying principle (zong), which unifies, and manifests in, all teachings of scriptures/treatises and practices of Chan lineages, as it reflects all things in the universe like a mirror.
The Zongjing Lu consists of three parts. The first part reveals the source, or central message, of Chan (biaozong zhang), focusing on the notion of the one mind. The second part is “questions and answers (wenda zhang)” and runs from the later part of the first fascicle through the ninety-third fascicle. In his response to all of the questions, Yanshou further explains his soteriology of realizing the one mind by extensively citing Buddhist scriptures, commentaries and treatises, and clearly shows his position that the doctrinal teachings and Chan are from the same source. The third part is “citations and verifications (yinzheng zhang)” and runs from the ninety-fourth fascicle to the last fascicle, collecting quotations from about 120 scriptures; 120 texts of various patriarchs’s sayings and poems; and 60 treatises, including those of Huayan, Tiantai, Sanlun (Chinese Madhyamaka), and Faxiang (Chinese Yogācāra). Many materials collected in this part are not extant elsewhere, including those about Tang Chan masters, which are either different or excluded from those in the transmission of the lamp literature. These collections and the entire book serve Yanshou’s purpose of establishing a vision of Chan inclusivism, embracing all Chan lineages and reconciling Chan with the doctrinal teachings of Buddhism (chanjiao yizhi). Although the Zongjing Lu was kept privately for many years after its completion, it became popular in the Northern Song after a couple of issuings. It was also influential in Korea and Japan.
Treatise on the Ten Regulations of the [Chan] School, a text attributed to Fayan Wenyi. The earliest extant edition of this text includes a postscript dated to 1346, but no other Chinese sources mention this text. However, the important passages in this text do not show clear signs of later editing. Wenyi’s treatise aimed to regulate Chan Buddhists and overcome 10 perverse kinds of behavior in the competition among different Chan lineages, although the formation of different lineages was not seen as negative. The 10 kinds of unacceptable behavior were (1) improperly wanting to be a teacher of others without enlightening one’s own mind first; (2) sectarian preference and bias dominating disputes; (3) asserting the main points of Chan without knowing their origin and connection; (4) giving answers without considering the time and situation and losing the insights of Chan; (5) failure to reconcile principle (li) and facts (shi) or distinguish defiled from pure; (6) casual interpretations on the sayings of past and present masters without a critical attitude; (7) memorizing formulas without understanding their functions during the time when they were used; (8) being unable to master scriptures and using wrong citations; (9) composing verses without using rhyme and mastering principle; and (10) defending one’s own shortcomings and indulging in winning disputes.
The text has usually been 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. Contemporary scholars have argued that the differentiation of the five houses was not finalized by Wenyi until some texts produced in the mid-Northern Song. Moreover, the competition between these schools was not based on substantial differences of teachings and practices, but rather on lineage relationships or loyalties. The Zongmen Shigui Lun also criticizes the exaggeration of the differences among Chan lineages and emphasizes the common ground and approach of Chan shared by all lineages, in spite of varied uses of expedient means.
The United Essential Collection from the [Chan] School of 10 fascicles, compiled by Zongyong (d.u.) around 1093 in the Song dynasty and included in Gulin Qingmao’s (1262–1329) Zongmen Tongyao Xuji (The Continuous United Collection of the Essentials from the [Chan] School) in the Yuan dynasty. The Zongmen Tongyao Xuji was included in various editions of the Ming Buddhist canon, but the original Zongmen Tongyao Ji was no longer circulated separately. This collection of Chan recorded sayings seems not to have been highly esteemed, in terms of the observation that the compilation of the popular Wudeng Huiyuan was based on the five Song texts of the transmission of the lamp literature—the Jingde Chuandeng Lu, the Tiansheng Guangdeng Lu, the Jianzhong Jingguo Xudeng Lu, the Zongmen Liandeng Huiyao, and the Jiatai Pudeng Lu—but not on the Zongmen Tongyao Ji. Japanese scholars recently examined historical evidence for the Zongmen Tongyao Ji outside of the materials of the Ming Buddhist canon and discovered that the Zongmen Tongyao Ji was compiled earlier than the Jianzhong Jingguo Xudeng Lu (compiled in 1101). It has been argued that, unlike the transmission of the lamp literature that documented the order of transmission of the dharma through generations, the Zongmen Tongyao Ji was a gong’an collection used for the gong’an practice. Compiled prior to, and its materials being used by, Yuanwu Keqin’s Blue Cliff Record and Wumen Huikai’s Wumen Guan, the Zongmen Tongyao Ji exerted important influence on the development of the Song gong’an literature. The role it played in Chan history should not be overlooked.
Also called Guifeng Zongmi. A Chinese Buddhist monk in the Tang dynasty, who was both a Chan master of the Heze Shenhui lineage and the fifth and last patriarch of Huayan Buddhism in China. Born into an elite family, he received a thorough education in Chinese classics in his youth, including a two-year period of study in a Confucian academy and preparation for the civil service examinations. After a meeting with the Chan monk Daoyuan (d.u.), he decided to leave the household, and he became a Chan monk at the age of 25. In his Chan training, which he believed was an authentic transmission from the Southern school of Huineng through Shenhui, he particularly concentrated on the study of the Perfect Awakening Sūtra (Yuanjue Jing). It was reported that his initial enlightenment occurred as a result of reading several lines of this scripture.
At the age of 30, an encounter with a disciple of the Huayan master, Chengguan (738–839), and the reading of the latter’s commentary on the Huayan Jing attracted him to the intensive study of Huayan teaching. He studied closely with the master Chengguan at Chang’an for two years and won the latter’s praise for being his best student. Some contemporary scholars hold that although Chengguan and the Huayan teaching had a huge impact on Zongmi and his understanding of Chan, Zongmi basically appropriated Huayan from the perspective of Chan.
As a Chan master and scholar, Zongmi and his publications on Chan occupy a considerable place in Chan history. His Chan Chart (Zhonghua Chuanxindi Chanmen Shizi Chengxi Tu) included detailed critiques of the Northern school, the Ox-Head school, and within the Southern school, the Hongzhou and Heze schools, following the similar discussions he had recorded earlier in his Yuanjue Jing Dashu Chao. In his Chan Prolegomenon (Chanyuan Zhuquanji Duxu), he elaborated on the necessity of unifying scriptural teachings and Chan meditational practice (jiaochan yizhi), refuting what he thought of as extreme views. In his Yuanren Lun (Inquiry into the Origin of Man), he went further to critique the teachings of Confucianism and Daoism, while reincorporating them into his overarching Buddhist theory of how the human condition comes into being—making him a pioneer of Chinese Buddhist syncretism. He had many connections with literati of his day, was invited to the imperial court to give lectures, and was honored with the title “Great Worthy.” These same connections also brought him trouble, however, due to the changing political climate and events. Zongmi died at Chang’an in 841.
This popular term means “sitting” (zuo) “meditation” (chan) or “seated meditation.” Sitting meditation is a prototypical posture of meditation that can be traced back to the earliest practice of yoga in India. Buddhism is well known for its practice of meditation as either one of the three learnings (sanxue) or one of the six perfections (liu boluomi). Although there are other forms of meditation, such as standing or walking, sitting meditation has been most often practiced by Buddhists for almost 2,500 years. One of the most popular images of the Śākyamuni Buddha is him sitting cross-legged in the lotus position in meditation, palms held upward on the lap, back straight, and abdomen relaxed. Claiming inheritance of the true dharma from the Buddha, Chan Buddhists continued this practice throughout the ages. From a very small body of Chan texts on meditation, an extant earliest manual of Chan meditation, the Zuochan Yi (Principles of Seated Meditation), dated in 1103, attributed to the Song Yunmen Chan master Changlu Zongze and included in his Chanyuan Qinggui, provides a useful glimpse into Chan sitting meditation. The text taught beginners the same methods of sitting meditation that would likely have been used by the Buddha and early Buddhists, especially the tradition of tranquility (samatha) meditation, including the adjustment of posture, the regulation of breathing, being mindful of thought, and the transcendence of subject/object.
However, the text distinguished itself from the early tradition of tranquility meditation by integrating the method of tranquility meditation into the Sinicized Mahayana framework of bodhisattva practice and the manifestation of inherent wisdom and Buddha-nature. Calmness or meditative absorption became the condition for the natural manifestation of the pearl of Buddha-mind. Although this kind of framework and integration had been used earlier by the Tiantai master Zhiyi (538–97) and other texts, and the influence of Zhiyi’s works on meditation upon this text is discernible, the Zuochan Yi was nonetheless distinctive. It refrained from the doctrinal entanglement, scholastic or discursive analysis, and technical materials that were often characteristic of Zhiyi’s works, instead presenting the instruction in a much more simplified and colloquial language. When discussing the “controlling of the mind,” the Zuochan Yi seems more in line with the early Chan teachings on meditation, such as those found in Hongren and the so-called Northern school, or the approach of “gradual cultivation.” This tendency to lean toward more conservative teachings on meditation presented the problem of running against the radical Chan rhetoric of sudden teaching, after Shenhui and the widespread Chan slogan “no-cultivation and no-sitting (buxiu buzuo)” in classical Chan. It appears that this text emerged after a long silence on the actual content of Chan meditation practice by classical Chan texts. One explanation for this puzzling phenomenon is that a text of this nature met the need for formalization and regulation of Chan institutions and practices, after Chan Buddhism had become a dominant religion in the Song and the previous sectarian struggles accompanying the radical rhetoric were over.
Another interpretation points out that there is no complete lack of affirmation of the necessity of meditation in the teaching and practice records of great masters of classical Chan such as Mazu Daoyi and Baizhang Huaihai. Most Chan sayings of no-cultivation and no-sitting were parasitic on the ongoing practice of meditation in Chan monasteries and functioned as shock therapy to the misunderstanding of sitting meditation as the only form of practice or separating it from everyday activities and experiences. Even a radical figure like Shenhui, who advocated sudden enlightenment and criticized the gradual approach of Shenxiu so energetically, had to concede that sudden enlightenment should be followed by a gradual cultivation. Therefore, a text like the Zuochan Yi could play a necessary role in the Chan reconciliation of the sudden/gradual dichotomy. In the final analysis, sitting meditation was a primary Chan practice, often coexisting with the reiterated radical anti-meditation-like rhetoric of many Chan texts, a unique phenomenon of Chan Buddhism. After the Zuochan Yi, Chan meditation practice was further developed into its two best-known new approaches: the kanhua Chan (Chan of observing the key phrase) and the mozhao Chan (silent illumination Chan), which were respectively affiliated with the Song Linji Chan master Dahui Zonggao and the Caodong Chan master Hongzhi Zhengjue, and spread to all of East Asia.
Sūtra on the Samādhi of Sitting Meditation, a very influential Indian Buddhist text on meditation in China, compiled and translated by Kumārajīva (344–413) (Ch. Jiumoluoshi), one of the most popular Buddhist translators in 5th-century China. It is not a true scripture, but rather a compilation primarily from the dhyāna teachings and treatises of Indian Sarvāstivādin patriarchs, such as Vasumitra, Upagupta, and Kumāralāta. It represents a system of five categories, or gates (wumen), of meditation: the contemplation of the impure (bujing guan), the contemplation of goodwill or compassion (cibei guan), the contemplation of the 12-linked chain of interdependent origination (yinyuan guan), the contemplation of inhalation and exhalation (shuxi guan), and the contemplation or visualization of the Buddha (nianfo guan). These methods are the Hinayana-style approach to meditation. In his appendix to this scripture, Kumārajīva introduced some Mahayana ideas, such as prajñāpāramitā (perfect wisdom), bodhisattva (Buddha in the making), and śūnyatā (emptiness). However, modern scholars generally agree that the Zuochan Sanmei Jing basically transmitted Hinayana meditation methods from the Sarvāstivāda school to China. The Mahayana ideas were not integrated into the meditation delineated by this text.
Patriarch’s Hall Collection. As the earliest book in the transmission of the lamp (or the lamp history) genre, it was compiled in 952 during the time of the Five Dynasties and in the 10th year of the Baoda era of the Southern Tang, by two Chan monks, Jing (d.u.) and Yun (d.u.), from Zhaoqing Temple in Quanzhou (in present-day Fujian). The preface of the book, written by the abbot of Zhaoqing Temple, Wendeng (884–972), a descendant from the lineage of Xuefeng Yicun, indicates that it was compiled for the use of him and his students. While the book was mentioned by other sources roughly 100 years after its compilation, it disappeared from the subsequent history of Chan Buddhism until it was rediscovered in the 1920s in the Korean monastery, Haein-sa, by a Japanese scholar. The current studies of the Zutang Ji are all based on this rediscovered text in its Korean edition, which has been deemed by most scholars to be authentic and without substantial alteration, except for the number of fascicles, which changed from the original 1 to 20.
Fascicles 1 and 2 are records of the seven Buddhas of the past, the 28 Indian Chan patriarchs, and the 6 Chinese patriarchs. Starting in fascicle 3, the book documents various Chan lineages derived from Huineng, while including some records for the lineages that were not derived from Huineng, such as Niutou Farong, Shenxiu, and Hui’an. Fascicle 3 includes records of Huineng’s eight disciples, beginning with the two most important, Qingyuan Xingsi and Nanyue Huairang, who link Huineng to Shitou Xiqian and Mazu Daoyi. From fascicles 4 to 20, the book is devoted to the two great lineages of Shitou and Mazu. Reflecting the compilers’ own factional preferences, 10 fascicles and 104 entries are devoted to the lineage of Shitou. Specifically to promote the lineage of Xuefeng Yicun, the book covers eight generations of descendants from Shitou, rather than seven generations of other lineages, to include Yicun’s disciples and the abbot Wendeng himself.
Although only seven fascicles and 84 entries are devoted to the lineage of Mazu, in his verse commemorating Mazu, Wendeng showed that he and his lineage embraces, and were part of, the new trend represented by Mazu. As the book demonstrates, many masters of the Shitou lineage used similar methods of shouting and beating and were indistinguishable in style and teaching from those in the lineage of Mazu. Being a multilineal model, the narrative of the book thus focuses on the collective approach and heritage of this new Chan movement, rather than on the differences in individual styles and teachings that would be the focus of the later yulu texts, and also distinguishes itself from early transmission records that exclusively championed a particular lineage. Although in about 50 years it would be overshadowed by the compilation of the more comprehensive and imperially sanctioned Jingde Chuandeng Lu (Jingde Era Record of the Transmission of the Lamp), the Zutang Ji contains a greater wealth of idiomatic prose than the latter without being subjected to editorial standardization. In addition to the study of its language, contemporary scholars have called attention to the nature of its narrative as Chan hagiographical writing serving the didactic purposes of Chan Buddhism and helping to define the identity of the new movement. The Zutang Ji is also seen from a formerly forgotten angle as the record of the political associations of Chan’s most prominent masters: how they developed their relationships with local authorities, won political patronage, and benefited from regionalism during the period of the late Tang and Five Dynasties.
Anecdotes from the Patriarchs’ Halls, the earliest dictionary of Chan, completed by Mu-an Shanqing (d.u.) of the Northern Song dynasty in 1108, after 20 years of writing and research. It was reprinted in 1154. Arranged in eight fascicles, the Zuting Shiyan collected more than 2,400 entries—anecdotes, quotes, events, proverbs, dialects, personal names, names of places, technical terms, difficult vocabularies—taken from 17 important Chan texts in the early Song (some were later lost). Most of these texts were from the Yunmen school, but some were also from the Linji and Fayan schools, including the recorded sayings (yulu), poems (jisong), and commentaries on the gong’an, with regard to Yunmen Wenyan, Xuedou Chongxian, Fayan Wenyi, Yongjia Xuanjue, and others. Each entry was provided with a definition, explanation, source or origin, and correction of errors. The author offered clarifications, utilized various evidence, and checked and cited more than 300 sources, scriptures and treatises, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist, religious and secular.
The purpose of this book, as Shanqing indicated, was to help students who were at the beginning stage and had no knowledge of the origin and meaning of the Chan teachers’ many sayings or cases of the gong’an. Although Shanqing worried that his project as a literary work might go against the Chan tradition of “not establishing letters and words” and “the transmission from the mind to mind,” he believed that the key to the study of Chan was not to abandon words, but to acquire meaning beyond words after utilizing words. The later Chan books did cite the Zuting Shiyuan from Song to Qing, even though some extremists wanted to destroy it. Modern scholars of Chan also acknowledge its usefulness, including the use of materials that cannot be found elsewhere.