by Youru Wang
See .
JIEYIN ZHICI
This Chinese term literally means “words for accommodating and guiding people.” It refers to the Chan understanding of the necessity of using words and the most significant function of words in Chan soteriological practices. Words do not function as the cognition or representation of objective truth. They do not correspond to a fixed object or reality. Words are only expedient means, serving soteriological and pragmatic purposes—adapting to the situation of ordinary people and helping them to attain enlightenment.
JIGONG
See .
JING’AN (1851–1912)
A Chan master and poet of modern times, Jing’an was a native of Xiangtan in Hunan. He was born into a farmer’s family, living his youth in poverty. At the age of 18, he entered his monastic life with the monk Donglin (d.u.) at Fahua Temple in Xiangyin and was ordained by the preceptor Xiankai (d.u.). Later, he went to Renrui Temple on Mount Qi to study with the Chan master Hengzhi (d.u.). At the age of 23, he started to compose poems. Two years later, he made a pilgrimage in southeast China. At the age of 27, he went to Ayuwang Temple, offering a sacrifice to the Buddha’s relic by burning two of his fingers. It was from this action that he received his famous nickname “the eight finger ascetic” (bazhi toutuo). At the age of 31, he published the first anthology of his poems. In his 40s and 50s, he successively took abbacy at seven different Chan temples. In 1908, he took the initiative to organize an association for educating monks in Nibo, Zhejiang. In 1912, he became the president of China’s first national association of Buddhism. Not only did he engage himself in saving Buddhism from declining in a modern, and then chaotic, environment by protecting Buddhist temples, developing schools for educating monks and laypeople, and establishing Buddhist associations, but he was also actively involved in broader patriotic affairs, like helping in fights against foreign invasion and addressing national poverty and injustice. He was seen as the representative of a new generation of Chan activism, who practiced Buddhism and Chan without forgetting involvement in the world, and fully engaged himself in creating pure land in the world with pure mind.
JINGDE CHUANDENG LU
Jingde Era Record of the Transmission of the Lamp, the most famous and influential book in the transmission of the lamp literature of Chan Buddhism and the first comprehensive and imperially sanctioned Chan transmission record published in the Song dynasty, setting the standard for all subsequent compilations of Chan transmission records (denglu). The book was compiled by Daoyuan (d.u.), a disciple of Tiantai Deshao, who was a disciple of Fayan Wenyi, the founder of the Fayan school. After the completion of the compilation in 1004, it was subjected to an editorial process conducted by a group of leading literati, headed by Yang Yi (974–1020), and then was officially issued in 1011. In addition to changing confusing word order; removing coarse vocabulary; and checking on titles, names, and dates, Yang Yi supposedly decided to append some more material to enhance the work, but modern scholars know little about if and how Yang Yi altered its content. The only clue is the comparison between Daoyuan’s interpretation of the work, revealed in his original preface (which has survived elsewhere), and Yang Yi’s. Daoyuan’s original title for this book, Fozu Tongcan Ji (Collection of the Common Practice of the Buddhas and Patriarchs), and his original preface suggest harmony between Chan and conventional Buddhist practice. However, Yang Yi used the book not only to champion Chan as the new style of Buddhism favored by the Song establishment, but also to embrace its break with conventional Buddhist approaches. His preference reflects the preoccupation of Song government officials with a new identity of Chan in a newly united kingdom.
The Jingde Chuandeng Lu has 30 fascicles. Fascicles 1 and 2 mainly contain material about the seven Buddhas of the past and the 27 Indian Chan patriarchs after Sākyamuni. Fascicles 3 and 4 contain material about the five Chinese patriarchs before Huineng and the disciples from Daoxin and Hongren, including Niutou Farong, Shenxiu, and their descendants. Fascicle 5 records Huineng and his direct disciples. The next eight fascicles, fascicles 6 to 13, are mainly occupied by records of the nine generations of Chan masters from the lineage of Nanyue Huairang and Mazu Daoyi. Fascicles 14 to 26, the next 13, are devoted to records of the 11 generations of masters from the lineage of Qingyuan Xingsi and Shitou Xiqian. The last four fascicles are miscellaneous. The number of masters acknowledged in this book is 1,750, far more than the 256 of the Zutang Ji. The orthodoxy of Chan established by the lineage of Nanyue Huairang and Mazu Daoyi is clearly maintained, but a certain preference for inclusion in the book is given to the lineage of Qingyuan Xingsi and Shitou Xiqian, especially the descendants of Xuefeng Yichun, from whom the compiler’s Fayan lineage is derived. Many of the stories and dialogues included in this book formed the basis for the later gong’an and yulu texts, although their historical reliability has been critically questioned in modern times. Without denying its literary and didactic values, contemporary scholars have increasingly agreed upon the hagiographical and retrospective nature of the book’s narrative as reflecting the perspective of the Song period on the masters of the classical age.
JINGSHAN FAQIN (714–792)
Also called Daoqin. A Chan master of the Ox-Head school in the Tang dynasty, Faqin was born into a family of Zhu in Kunshan (in present-day Jiangsu province) and studied Confucian classics in his youth. At the age of 28, when he met the Ox-Head Chan master Xuansu (668–752), he decided to give up his opportunity to be selected as an official and became an ordained monk instead, under the instruction of Xuansu at Helin Temple. Later, he went to Mount Jing at Hangzhou to practice, gradually gained fame, and attracted many students. In 768, Emperor Daizong (r. 762–779) invited Faqin to the capital, consulted him on Buddhist dharma, and let him reside in Zhangjing Temple. It was said that from the members of the royal family to the commoners in the streets, all were eager to hear his teaching. When Faqin decided to return to Mount Jin, Emperor Daizong granted him the title National Teacher. In 780, Faqin took up residence at Longxing Temple in Hangzhou. He died at the age of 79, and his posthumous title, granted by Emperor Dezong (r. 779–805), was “Chan Master of Great Awakening” (Dajue Chanshi). Faqing was seen as the most influential Ox-Head Chan master in the Tang after the founder, Farong. Among Faqin’s disciples, his dharma heir, Daolin (741–824), was most famous. Faqin’s teaching of Chan focused on transcending the limitation of words and particular methods, and deconstructing reified goals of practice.
JINGZHONG SCHOOL (Ch. Jingzhong zong)
A school of Chan Buddhism that existed in the 8th-century Tang dynasty in the area of Jiannan (in present-day Chengdu, Sichun Province, and surrounding areas), in southwestern China. The founder of this school was Wuxiang, a disciple of Chuji (ca. 669–736), who was the disciple of Zhishen (609–702) from the lineage of Hongren. The name of the Jingzhong (“purifying masses”) school was derived from the Jingzhong Temple in Chengdu, where Wuxiang and his disciples taught and practiced for several generations. Much of the reference to the Jingzhong school in Chan history was made by another Sichuan Chan master and scholar, Zongmi. In his 9th-century work on Chan schools, Zongmi introduced the central tenet of the Jingzhong founder Wuxiang’s teachings, known as “three phrases”: no-recollection (wuyi), no-thought (wunian), and no-forgetting (mowang). These three phrases are Wuxiang’s understanding of how to practice the traditional three learnings—precepts (jie), concentration (ding), and wisdom (hui). The last phrase was changed to no-delusion in the Lidai Fabao Ji by the Baotang school and Wuxiang’s student, the Baotang founder Wuzhu. This change and its new interpretation did not convince others such as Zongmi and Wuxiang’s other disciple, Shenqing (?–820?). In his Beishan Lu (Record of North Mountain). Shenqing refuted the Baotang school’s claim of lineage and the story that Wuxiang transmitted Bodhidharma’s robe to Wuzhu. Both Shenqing and Zongmi criticized the iconoclastic and antinomian tendencies of the Baotang and emphasized the importance of precepts and scriptural studies for Chan practice.
In addition to the “three phrases,” Wuxiang taught reciting Buddha’s name (nianfo) with his own special style. The Jingzhong Temple became associated with Pure Land practices of devotion in the 9th century. Wuxiang and the Jingzhong school could thus be seen as pioneers of the syncretistic approach to Chan and Pure Land practices. Wuxiang’s dharma heir was Jingzhong Shenhui (720–794), who became abbot at Jingzhong Temple after Wuxiang’s death and continued his lineage. Both Wuxiang and Jingzhong Shenhui received strong support from regional high officials. The Jingzhong school existed much longer than its rival, the Baotang school.
JINGZHONG ZONG
See
JUEFAN HUIHONG (1071–1128)
A literatus-monk of the third generation of the Huanglong Huinan lineage in the Linji school of the Northern Song dynasty, Huihong was a native of Xinchang in Junzhou (in present-day Jiangxi). His family name was Yu. His original name was Dehong. He lost his parents at the age of 14. At the age of 19, he passed the examination of scriptures in the eastern capital Kaifeng and was officially ordained as the monk Huihong at Tianwang Temple. He studied the Yogācāra doctrines and extensively read the Chinese classics for four years, showing talent in writing poetry and prose, which impressed literati in the capital. He then became Zhenjing Kewen’s disciple at Gueizong Temple in Mount Lu, followed Kewen for seven years, and achieved realization. At the age of 29, he started to travel to various temples. He made friends with some famous literati and officials, including Zhang Shangying (1043–1122), who became prime minister of China in 1110. When these friends lost their political battles, Huihong also suffered; due to these connections, he was imprisoned, defrocked, and exiled several times. Despite these personal sufferings, Huihong continued his monastic life and literary production whenever possible. He died at the age of 58.
Huihong was a prolific author of more than 150 fascicles, including books about Chan lineages and records of Chan masters, such as the Chanlin Sengbao Zhuan (Chronicles of the Monk-Treasure in the Chan Grove) and the Linjian Lu (Records from the Groves [of Chan]), books on poetics like the Lengzhai Yehua (Evening Discourses from Cold Studio), and books of commentaries to Buddhist scriptures. The Chanlin Sengbao Zhuan consists of 30 fascicles, collecting records of the activities, stories, and sayings of 81 Chan masters from different lineages, who mostly lived during the Song dynasty. It is an important source for the study of Chan Buddhism from the late Tang and Five Dynasties to the Northern Song. The Linjian Lu compiles Huihong’s notes from personal encounters with other Chan masters and literati who were influenced by Chan. Many of these materials are not found in other Chan texts, and his descriptions of these encounters are vivid and highly valuable. Huihong’s 30-fascicle Shimen Wenzi Chan (Chan of Letters and Words from Shimen [Temple]) assembles various literary forms of Chan writings, including different types of poems, prefaces, afterwords, letters, eulogies, epitaphs, and so forth, showing his practice of “Chan with letters and words.”
JUEGUAN LUN
Treatise on the Transcendence of Cognition, which is a work attributed to Niutou Farong and discovered in several editions in the Dunhuang documents in the 20th century. Most scholars have deemed this work reliable. The treatise is written in the form of a dialogue between a teacher and a student. Its significant contribution includes the remarkable integration of the Mahayana philosophy of emptiness and Daoist influence into Chan practice and the rejection of the conceptualized goals and techniques by the notion of no-mind (wuxin). A recent study of the Jueguan Lun distinguishes Farong’s more sophisticated position of transcending all discriminative cognition (juenguan) from a simpler rejection of meditative contemplation, in terms of its connection with the Madhyamika dialectics. What Farong advocates is to achieve a breakthrough into the pure, non-discriminating illumination of śūnyatā (emptiness). Thus, the Jueguan Lun does not stand in total opposition to the East Mountain teaching or Northern school, as some previous studies have concluded. On the other hand, much of modern scholarship has focused on Farong’s idea of no-mind in the Jueguan Lun, which has become an ideological link between the Ox-Head school and the Southern school. Historically, Zongmi criticized Farong’s teaching for being nihilistic and for not acknowledging the non-empty aspect of the mind in terms of the tathāgatagarbha (rulaizang) tradition. Nevertheless, the notion of no-mind became quite popular and eventually replaced the early notion of no-thought (wunian) in the classical period of Chan.
K
KANHUA CHAN
Literally, “Chan of observing the key phrase.” It is a form of meditation practice that contemplates the crucial phrase or “punch line” (huatou) of a gong’an, such as the “no” (wu) in the gong’an of “Does a dog have Buddha-nature?” The most famous advocate of this kanhua Chan was Dahui Zonggao, the Chan master of the Linji school in the Song dynasty. Using the gong’an (“public cases”) or guze (“old examples”) of encounter dialogues from the stories of those great Chan masters of the Tang dynasty as a means to challenge students and trigger their enlightenment became a fashion in various Chan schools, even before the time of Dahui. From the early 11th century, the Song Chan masters had already started to compile various gong’an collections, or anthologies, with their own commentaries to facilitate the use of gong’an for instructing students. While the kanhua Chan could be seen as a further development of the Song gong’an practice, and Dahui’s teacher Yuanwu Keqin might be regarded as a precursor of the kanhua Chan, recent study of Dahui reveals that his kanhua Chan was distinctive from all previous forms of gong’an practice in a number of ways.
Dahui was the first Chan master to teach his students to contemplate intensively a single word or phrase (huatou) of a gong’an in kanhua practice. He also introduced a corresponding method of contemplating the huatou, which focuses on a student’s doubt generated by the huatou and emphasizes that, by shattering the doubt, a person can be led to the great moment or experience of enlightenment. Although Dahui’s kanhua Chan shared with his precursors the intuitive and non-conceptualizing way of using gongan, for Dahui, meditation on huatou had become the only practice that could lead to enlightenment and therefore was almost exclusive to all other Buddhist practices. Some scholars have seen Dahui’s kanhua Chan as a reaction to the formalizing tendency of Chan in the Song. It has also been viewed as the culmination of a long process of evolution in Chan, which extended Chan’s subitist rhetoric to pedagogy and practice. Some more recent studies suggest, however, that the success of the Caodong school’s silent illumination approach in elite circles presented a great challenge to the Linji school and became an underlying cause for Dahui’s development of the kanhau Chan.
Dahui did express his criticisms of several heretical tendencies in Chan. Among them was his attack on the silent illumination Chan (mozhao Chan) of the Caodong school, which culminated in Dahui’s contemporary, Hongzhi Zhengjue. Dahui discredited the silent illumination Chan’s treatment of stillness and sitting meditation as an end in itself, rather than a means, and held its de-emphasis on the actualizing of inherent enlightenment (benjue) as simply canceling out enlightenment. Many of Dahui’s criticisms were eloquent and influential, but they were not all accurate or without exaggeration. For instance, Dahui seemed right when he criticized the tendency to abandon all uses of words. However, the silent illumination Chan did not completely forsake all words. The fact that Hongzhi himself was the author of poetic commentaries on 100 gong’an cases is just one of the many noticeable examples showing the silent illumination Chan’s more sophisticated attitude toward the use of words. On the other hand, not all historical materials confirm the sectarian-political reasons for Dahui’s attack on the silent illumination Chan. There were reports of the good relationship between Dahui and Hongzhi even after Dahui’s attack, just as there were other reports of the good relationship between the masters of Caodong and Linji during the Song, which limits political interpretations about the competing schools and masters.
KILLING THE BUDDHA
Many of the sayings of Linji Yixuan collected in the Linji Lu sound very radical and iconoclastic if not blasphemous. The most famous among these sayings is the following: “If you meet a Buddha, kill the Buddha (fengfo shafo). If you meet a patriarch, kill the patriarch (fengzu shazu). If you meet an arhat, kill the arhat. If you meet your parents, kill your parents. If you meet your kinfolk, kill your kinfolk. Then you will attain liberation, being not entangled with things.” It is common sense that killing is not ethical in the entire Buddhist tradition. However, if the reader understands the context of this saying, killing is symbolic and cannot be understood literally. It is a kind of language that the figure Linji uses to shock his students away from their unnecessary attachment to any external things, including those things under names such as Buddha, patriarch, arhat, and so forth. The purpose is to help students avoid being tied by new ropes even if these ropes are from the teachings of Buddhas and patriarchs, since the teachings are just provisional expedients and cannot be substantialized and reified. Any attachment to them creates new bondage and does not help to liberate. The students cannot realize their enlightenment by seeking after external things, including Buddhas and patriarchs.
This is the traditional interpretation. It cannot be ignored that these sayings of Linji, and almost the entire Linji Lu, sound more iconoclastic than many other Chan masters’ sayings in the Tang period and became popular in Song Chan. The iconoclastic approach was too radical for the Buddhist Middle Way even though it often involved correct criticisms of institutions. Chan iconoclastic sayings were in fact parasitic on Chan institutions, including all its teachings; this was particularly true of Linji Chan. The advantage of viewing these sayings as a kind of linguistic strategy, as a kind of shock therapy, or as a kind of innovative rhetoric is that it could reconcile the use of these sayings with the fact that the Linji school continued to make use of its institutions and became stronger rather than demolishing them. After all, Linji himself did not call for the actual destruction of Chan institutions.
