Historical Dictionary of Chan Buddhism

by Youru Wang

  FOUR TYPES OF SHOUTING (Ch. sihe)

  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.

  FOXING

  See .

  FREE-FLOWING-DAO

  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).

  FUJIAO BIAN

  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.

  FURONG DAOKAI (1013–1118)

  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).

  G

  GAOFENG YUANMIAO (1238–1298)

  A Chan master of the Linji school in the Yuan Dynasty, Yuanmiao was a native of Wujiang (in present-day Jiangsu). His family name was Xu. At the age of 15, he entered his monastic life at Miyin Temple in Xiuzhou (in present-day Zhejiang), and he was ordained two years later, starting his study of the Tiantai doctrine. At age 20, he went to Jingci Temple in Hangzhou to study the meditation of contemplating key phrases (kanhua Chan) with Duanqiao Miaolun (1201–1261) and Xueyan Zuqin (1215–1287), the disciples of Wuzhun Shifan (1177–1240), who was the fourth-generation disciple of Huqiu Shaolong in the Linji school. In 1266, Yuanmiao went into retreat at Longxu Temple in Lin’an (in present-day Zhejiang), where he achieved a great awakening after hearing the sound of a falling pillow. His retreat there lasted for about eight years, and he continued it at Shuangji Peak in Wukang (in present Zhejiang). In 1279, Yuanmiao built a hermitage at Shiziyan on the western peak of Mount Tianmu to live and practice in, although he sometimes gave sermons and taught students at Shizi Temple. Later, he also taught at Dajue Chan Temple on Lianhua Peak. He died at the age of 58.

  Yuanmiao had several hundred disciples and ordained more than 10,000 people. Among his disciples, the most influential was Zhongfeng Mingben. Yuanmiao’s lineage continued into the Ming and Qing dynasties. His teachings were preserved in the Gaofeng Yuanmiao Chanshi Chanyao and the Gaofeng Dashi Yulu. His most important contributions include his development of the kanhua meditation, which shifted emphasis from contemplating key phrases to meditating on questions or doubts such as, “To where does the oneness return if myriad things return to oneness?” He was also well known for his characterization of “three essentials of the kanhua Chan”: great faith, great will, and great doubt. His posthumous title was Puming Guangji Chanshi (“Chan Master of Universal Illumination and Widespread Salvation”).

  GATELESS BARRIER

  This is the English translation of the Chinese work Wumen Guan. Compiled by the Song Linji Chan master Wumen Huikai, it is a collection of 48 gong’an cases, based on his lectures and published in 1229. Like many other gong’an collections, most of the stories in this selection involve the famous Tang Chan masters. However, here each anecdote is presented with a concise four-character title and with Huikai’s prose commentary and his summary poem only, distinguishing it from the other, larger collections that present a master’s secondary commentary on the primary commentary made by another master. Recent studies of Chan texts have captured the evolving process of Chan story making, and the Wumen Guan is no exception. Scholars have demonstrated traces of editorial change from the sources it claims to have. They have also pointed out the relationship between the compiler’s hermeneutical choice of gong’an cases, such as the preference for the play of negativity, and his purpose to help establish a distinctive sectarian identity, in the examination of this gong’an collection. The Wumen Guan was brought to Japan by Huikai’s disciple Shinichi Kakushin and became one of the most widely read texts in the Japanese Rinzai sect. However, it is still puzzling why it was not read in China to the extent that it was in Japan. A possible answer scholars have given is that texts other than the Wumen Guan existed extensively during that time and were already used by many Chinese practitioners.

  GETENG

  Literally denoting “vine,” this Chinese word is used in Chan texts to symbolize unskillful, unnecessary, or clinging uses of words or concepts in conveying Buddhist dharma. It also generally refers to any kind of reliance on words or concepts i
n expressing and exploring dharma, which often diverts people from the right path of Buddhism. The Song Linji Chan master Dahui Zonggao, and some others as well, criticized those of the second generation of the Yunmen school for geteng Chan, a style of Chan practice that became obsessed with certain forms of awkward or excessive language and in fact harmed the goal of Chan Buddhism.

  GONG’AN

  The Japanese translation of this Chinese term as koan is very popular in modern Western literature on Chan Buddhism. The most common English literal translation of the term is “public” (gong) “case” (an). With the root meaning of “the table” (an) “of a judge” (gong), this originally legal term in medieval China referred to a written document sitting on a judge’s table, a case before a court, or the record of a judge’s decision in a case. In Chan Buddhism, the term was used to denote those brief sayings, dialogues, or anecdotes that had been excerpted from the biographies and recorded sayings of Chan patriarchs and held up for interpreting and commenting. These extracted passages were seen as profound expressions or invaluable demonstrations of the awakened mind of the patriarchs, who lived in the 8th to mid-10th centuries. They were typically quoted by Song Chan masters in their sermons or in their exchanges with students, to test student insight, or to offer their own comments. Similar terms to the word gong’an in Song Chan texts include jugu and niangu, both referring to “commenting on an old case.”

  It is not exactly clear how or when the practice of using gong’an started. Various gong’an cases can be found in the materials contained in the two earlier genres of Song Chan literature: the transmission of the lamp literature (or the lamp histories, such as Jingde Chuandeng Lu), and yulu literature (the recorded sayings of individual Chan masters, such as Yunmen Guanglu). The earliest Chan masters whose commentaries on old stories are included in the yulu attributed to them appear to be Yunmen Wenyan and Fenyang Shanzhao. Contemporary scholars believe that from the Five Dynasties, or at least from the beginning of the Song, Chan masters increasingly quoted gong’an in their sermons, composed anthologies of gong’an commentary, and used gong’an to challenge students to see their own Buddha-nature. Chan texts offer numerous instances of a student experiencing enlightenment when a master challenged his understanding of a particular gong’an. The use of gong’an was not limited to any specific school of classical Chan, as some modern studies of Chan have suggested. All schools of Chan used gong’an.

  As the practice of commenting on the gong’an stories of patriarchs evolved, a whole independent genre of Chan literature emerged, distinguished from other genres of Chan literature. Many Song Chan masters involved themselves in the recording, compiling, and even publishing of the collections of commentaries on the gong’an. Recent study of the gong’an literature has revealed several subcategories of the gong’an genre. The first is prose commentaries versus poetic commentaries. The former gong’an collections were called niangu (picking up old cases) when a prose commentary was attached, and the latter songgu (eulogizing old cases) when the commentary was made in verse form. The second subcategory is primary collections versus secondary collections. “Primary collections” refer to those old cases that were selected and commented on by one single Chan master. The most famous example is the Wumen Guan (Gateless Barrier). “Secondary collections” are, in fact, those primary collections that were taken up and further commented on by another Chan master. A noteworthy example is the Biyan Lu (Blue Cliff Record) by Yuanwu Keqin, which is Keqin’s systematic commentary on Xuedou Chongxian’s Verses on One Hundred Old Cases (Songgu Baize). The third subcategory is independent collections versus collections attached to the recorded sayings of individual masters. Some gong’an collections were never circulated or published as independent texts furnished with prefaces, but existed only as sections within the recorded sayings (yulu) of individual masters, often grouped under the subtitles “picking up old cases (niangu)” and “eulogizing old cases (songgu).”

  GRADUAL CULTIVATION (Ch. jianxiu)

  This term is used in opposition to “sudden enlightenment” or “sudden cultivation” (dunxiu). The Platform Sūtra imputed both notions of sudden enlightenment and sudden cultivation to Huineng. One of the purposes of such rhetoric that privileges suddenness over gradualness, used by the Platform Sūtra and its producers and advocates, was to overturn the fixation on the conventional methods, or procedures, in Chan practices and the belief that these practices would gradually lead Buddhists to their goal. The teaching of suddenness assumes that this kind of fixation and belief is based on a false dichotomy of cultivation and realization. This non-dualistic view of cultivation and realization prevailed in classical Chan, as the later Chan masters often made such negative statements as that there is neither cultivation nor realization.

  All these deconstructive discourses on cultivation/realization make sense when they are applied to those Chan Buddhists who committed themselves to the practices. These discourses could also cause various misunderstandings and create new dichotomies when read out of context. Probably addressing the same concern, the Platform Sūtra had to acknowledge that there is no sudden or gradual in Buddha-dharma itself. While making those deconstructive discourses, the Platform Sūtra and later Chan texts never stopped advising students to continue their studies. To address the contradiction and avoid misunderstandings, even Shenhui, the greatest champion for the teaching of suddenness, allowed a kind of gradual cultivation after initial awakening. Zongmi more clearly proposed his synthesis that sudden enlightenment needs to be followed by gradual cultivation.

  GRADUAL ENLIGHTENMENT (Ch. jianwu)

  The teaching that enlightenment could be achieved gradually through a path of different stages and by increasing purity and wisdom over different but continuous periods of time is traditionally attributed to Shenxiu and his Northern school in Chan history. Allegedly, Huineng and his Southern school opposed this teaching of gradual enlightenment by proposing the teaching of sudden enlightenment, based on a radical non-duality between cultivation and realization, means and goal, prior time and subsequent time, and so forth. The later Chan schools almost all came to embrace the idea of sudden enlightenment as they claimed to be followers of Huineng and the Southern school. Contemporary historians have challenged the historical accuracy of the traditional conclusion of Shenxiu’s teaching on gradual enlightenment. Although some of Shenxiu’s and his followers’ views could be interpreted as favoring a kind of gradualism, Shenxiu himself never denied the instantaneity of enlightenment, nor did he preach that enlightenment is gradual.

  GUANGXIAO TEMPLE (Ch. Guangxiao Si)

  Temple of “luminous filiality.” Located in the current city of Guangzhou, it was formerly a residence used by the exiled Wu aristocrat Yu Fan, during the Three Kingdoms (220–265). After Yu’s death, his family donated it to the construction of a temple called Zhizhi Si. In 397, the Gandhāra monk Dharmayaśas (Ch. Tanmoyeshe) arrived at Guangzhou, built a Buddha hall there, and named it Wangyuan Temple. In 527, Bodhidharma arrived at Guangzhou and was invited to this temple. During the Zhen’guan era (627–649) of the Tang dynasty, it was renovated and renamed as Faxing Temple. Out of all its related legends, the most popular was its connection with the sixth patriarch, Huineng. It was said that in 676, Huineng arrived here after secretly receiving the transmission of dharma from Hongreng. Huineng was ordained by the masters Yinzong (627–712) in the presence of several preceptors. Then under the bodhi tree, Huineng gave his first sermon, and his cut hair from the ordination was buried under a pagoda. The Sixth Patriarch Hall and Banner Hall were later built to memorialize Huineng. The place was thus seen as one of the Chan temples of patriarchs (Chanzong zuting). Several eminent monks from India also visited and practiced there. During the Song dynasty, the temple was renamed Qianming Chan Monastery, Congning Wanshou Temple, and Bao’en Guangxiao Chan Temple. In 1151, it was named Guangxiao Temple once again. During the Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties, the temple was enlarged and became very prosperous.

  GUA
NXIN LUN

  The English translation of this Chinese title is Treatise on the Contemplation of the Mind. Initially having different versions and titles, and once attributed to Bodhidharma, this text has finally been identified by modern Japanese scholars as an authentic work of Shenxiu, based on their studies of newly discovered manuscripts from the Dunhuang documents and information from a reliable historical source. Most scholars now believe that it was compiled during Shenxiu’s residence at Yuquan Temple in the last quarter of the 7th century.

  In this treatise, Shenxiu elaborated on his teaching that “contemplating the mind (guanxin)” is the single most important dharma encompassing all Buddhist practices. This “contemplating the mind” is to realize the pure mind, the mind of true suchness (zhenru), by penetrating the nonsubstantiality of the defiled mind through meditation. It is also called “cultivating the mind (xiuxin).” Obviously Shenxiu’s teaching evolved from his teacher Hongren’s notion of “maintaining [the awareness of] the mind (shouxin).” But Shenxiu was even less explicit than his teacher about the actual techniques of “contemplating the mind” and more interested in a unique interpretation of the original Buddhist intent expressed to his students so as to facilitate their practices. Shenxiu also emphasized that the practice of contemplating the mind must be carried out constantly during one’s activities and acknowledged that the achievement of enlightenment occurs instantaneously—a position that was developed much further by his later opponents. The Guanxin Lun is a precious document for restoring and critically examining Shenxiu’s religious philosophy.