MONK, OFFICIAL AND GENTRY: MULTIPLE WRITINGS OF JINGSHAN ANNALS AND THE REGIONAL SIGHT OF THE LATE MING BUDDHIST REVIVAL[1]
KeyWords: Jingshan Temple. Historical Narratives. Regional Society. Buddhist Revival in the Late Ming Dynasty.
The late Ming Dynasty (1573-1644) was one of the most creative periods in the history of Chinese religions and philosophies. Since its peak in the Tang Dynasty, Buddhism has witnessed a gradual yet apparent decline. Especially during the nearly 150 years from the end of Emperor Yongle’s reign (1424) to the beginning of Emperor Wanli’s reign (1572) (YÜ, 1998). The falling of Buddhism was undoubtedly mentally, with a closer inspection on the properties of the temples. Researchers reckoned that the decadence of Buddhism is also manifested in materiality (LI, 2019).
Since Emperor Wanli’s reign in the Ming Dynasty (1573), as Mr. Chen Yuan said, “Chan style was popular, literati and officialdom all talked about Chan, and monks all wanted to make friends with them.” (Chen, 1962, p. 129). Buddhism had shown a certain revival sign, whose ups and downs are accompanied by multiple reasons and manifestations. For that, different scholars hold different focuses. Among those, one more classic idea is Chün-fang Yü’s attention to the monk group. She believes that the innovative monks’ activities, who sought to transcend sectarian rivalries and doctrinal specialization in late Ming society, largely brought about a revival of Buddhism (Yü, 1981, 2020). Wu Jiang’s classic exposition shows the rise and fall of Buddhism depends on whether Buddhist activities expand beyond or retreat behind the boundaries set by the society (WU, 2008, p. 280). Dewei Zhang argues that observing whether Buddhist activities expand beyond or retreat behind the border is essentially an outcome to be accounted for rather than a cause. He also observed the up-and-down revival process of Buddhism from a political perspective. The variations in Emperor Wanli’s closeness to his mother Cisheng, and multiple factors such as the real-estate of temples, eunuchs, and scholars, all contributed significantly to the revival of Buddhism in the late Ming Dynasty. As well as its ups and downs, with the direction and pace of the Buddhist revival in the late Ming Dynasty, eventually determined by court politics (Zhang, 2020, p. 244).
Despite these classic ideas explaining the causes and status of the Buddhist revival through elitist and macro narratives, they inevitably come from a centralized or top-down perspective. As Chün-fang Yü discusses on Dewei Zhang’s idea, since politics cannot account for the renewal, what else is needed to round out the picture? (Yü, 2020, p. 6) Indeed, to attain a holistic picture of the Buddhist revival in the late Ming Dynasty, more personalized observations from a greater variety of perspectives may be required.
The compilation of local Buddhist records in regional societies provides rich material and a more intriguing perspective on this observation. Cao Ganghua noticed the informative nature of Buddhist chorography in the Ming Dynasty (Cao, 2011, p. 02). During the Late Imperial China, Chan monasteries gradually declined, and monks and laymen gradually took famous mountains as the main places to visit (Pan, 2000, p. 818.). “Annals[4] of famous mountains” became the main information for researchers to understand the famous mountain belief and the efforts of Chinese Buddhism to become the world Buddhist center since the late Ming Dynasty (Sheng, 2016, p. 307-315). However, the writing and changes of these annals contain rich historical background, local stories and group interaction processes, which researchers paid insufficient attention to. There is also a lack of in-depth case studies on the writing, compilation, and publication of religious books in the Ming Dynasty. Therefore, we pay attention to the Jingshan Temple in Hangzhou and the annals of Jingshan in Ming Dynasty.
Jingshan Temple in Hangzhou was ranked first among the “Five Mountains and Ten Temples”, fifteen famous temples in the Southern Song Dynasty (1127-1279), and was one of the sites where the Jiaxing Tripitaka[5] was engraved in the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644). Therefore, it occupied a significant position in the development of Buddhism. There are five existing annals of Jingshan compiled in the late Ming Dynasty, spanning precisely the 60-year up-and-down revival of Buddhism, from the early Wanli period to the Chongzhen period, while also covering writing by different regional groups, detailed, namely: Jingshan Collection (repr. in 2006) written by the monk Yuejiang Zongjing, which was re-engraved by the monk Zhengfan in the 4th year of the Wanli period in the Ming Dynasty (1576); Jingshan Annals compiled by the county magistrate Gao Zexun in the 13th year (1585) (GAO et al., 1585a); Volume 9 Jingshan Annals in Wanli Yuhang County Annals (1616, repr. in 1996); Jingshan Annals compiled by the gentry Song Kuiguang in the 4th year of the Tianqi period in the Ming Dynasty (1624) (repr. in 1996); and East and West Tianmu Mountain Annals: Jingshan written by Zhang Zhicai in the 9th year of the Chongzhen period (1636) (Zhang, 1636). These annals, not only rich in editions, but also provide diverse local records of Jingshan Temple from the perspectives of monks, local officials, and the gentry, offering the possibility to interpret and study the development of Buddhism in the late Ming Dynasty from the perspective of different editors. It also allows a novel outlook on the local social relationship network in the late Ming Dynasty from these annals. Driven by distinct demands, different groups of people have produced various annals of Jingshan in the same space during the same period, such that a glimpse of their respective backgrounds and motivations can be grasped from their works. Efforts are also made to understand the manifestation and trend of the Buddhist revival in the late Ming Dynasty from the perspective of action motivations and population interactions and migration in the context of regional society.
1 From The Monks’ PERSPECTIVE: The Writing and Re-Engraving of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection
Jingshan Collection narrates the history of Jingshan from the monks’ perspective. It was compiled by Yuejiang Zongjing, the 65th generation abbot of Jingshan Temple. It was re-engraved twice, in the 9th year of the Jiajing period (1530) and the 4th year of the Wanli period (1576), respectively. The existing version is the one re-engraved by the monk Zhengfan in the 4th year of Wanli (1576), whereas the first edition has been lost.
1.1 Yuejiang Zongjing and Jingshan Collection
Yuejiang Zongjing, the 65th generation abbot of Jingshan Temple, is an important figure in the development of the temple in the early Ming Dynasty. In the record of Hu Ying’s Pagoda Inscription for Chan Buddhist Yuanzhao, Yuejiang Zongjing was born in the 9th year of Hongwu (1376). He was appointed the abbot of Tianjie Temple, and later served as the abbot of Jingshan Temple for a total of ten years on Yao Guangxiao’s recommendation, a statesman and monk in the early Ming Dynasty (Song, 1996, p. 446-447). During his service at Jingshan Temple, Yuejiang Zongjing extended the temple and laid foundations for the rules and regulations of Jingshan Temple in the Ming Dynasty. Yang Fu wrote in his Record of the Extension of Wanshou Temple in Jingshan that “Yuejiang Zongjing hung a plaque on the mountain gate and inscribed the words ‘The Best Mount in all the Land’ in his handwriting” (SONG, 1996, p. 467), aligned to Zongjing’s vision of “The Best Mount in all the Land” for Jingshan Temple in the Ming Dynasty.
As shown in Figure 1, a mountain gate can be found with the words “The Best Mount in all the Land” by the side of the Tablet Pavilion in the center of the picture, which expressed this great hope and huge goal. During the Southern Song Dynasty, Jingshan Temple ranked first among the “Five Mountains and Ten Temples”, the official fifteen temples of the country, which exhibited remarkable status on the plaque. However, Jingshan Temple gradually declined into a local temple during the regime change from the Song Dynasty to the Yuan Dynasty as well as under the influence of the policy of “merging temples” in the 24th year of Hongwu in the early Ming Dynasty (1391) (He; Li, 2018, p. 100-105). Despite its “predominant” position in the local society, the influence of the temple did not extend beyond the scope of Yuhang County.[6] Therefore, the words “The Best Mount in all the Land” by Yuejiang Zongjing embody his attempts to restore the status of Jingshan Temple.
Figure 1
 |
The map of Jingshan in the 13th year of the Wanli period in the Ming Dynasty (1585).
Source: Jingshan Annals (Gao, 1585a, p. 3a-3b)
Jingshan Collection is a carrier of Yuejiang Zongjing’s vision. Hu Ying mentioned that “Zongjing’s works such as Jingshan Collection, Records of Yueqing, Poem of Zhongfeng Pure Land, and Shimen Quotations are all published across the country.” (SONG, 1996, p. 447). Jingshan Collection is both the local records of Jingshan Temple and a Yuejiang Zongjing’s personal piece. As described by Yang Fu, Zongjing invited the consort Mu Xin to inscribe for the temple (Song, 1996, p. 467) to establish a connection between Jingshan Temple and the Ming royal family. Although each abbot of Jingshan Temple has the experience of studying at Tianjie Temple since the 60th generation abbot, by Yao Guangxiao’s influence[7], there are no records of interaction between the abbot and the scholars of the Ming court or the capital after Zongjing. As a renowned monk in the southeast[8], Zongjing’s influence on Jingshan Temple arguably reached the pinnacle in the early Ming Dynasty. The status as a distinguished monk, coupled with the achievements of extending the temple, contributes to Zongjing’s vision of building “The Best Mount in all the Land”, which is reflected in the writing, compilation, and publication of the Jingshan Collection. This work is unquestionably an interpretation of the history of Jingshan Temple, while the publication and circulation of the classic can further the influence of Jingshan Temple invisibly.
To sum up, Zong Jing’s Jingshan Collection is an interpretation of the history of Jingshan Temple from a renowned monk’s perspective and acknowledges his own merits. Moreover, it is also a testament to the monk’s wish that Jingshan Temple can restore its status as “The Best Mount in all the Land”, behind which is Zongjing’s yearning for the vigorous development of Jingshan Temple in the early Ming Dynasty and for enhancing its influence and status.
1.2 The split of Jingshan Temple and the re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection in the 9th year of the Jiajing period (1530)
Jingshan Collection re-engraved by Zhengfan in the 4th year of the Wanli period (1576) recorded that:
In the middle of spring of the 9th year of the Jiajing period (1530), the county magistrate Yinsong entered the Jingshan Temple and prayed for longevity. In light of the desolate scenery, he grieved for and sighed at the mouldy moss. He inspected the temple carefully and discovered that the engraving plate of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection was severely damaged, and much information was lost. He then donated to support the repair of those records and encouraged monks to pass them on. In addition, the information of the abbots from the 68th to the 80th generation is supplemented in turn on the left. (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 79)
First, Jingshan Temple has shown signs of decline no later than the 9th year of the Jiajing period (1530). Studies on the history of Buddhism revealed that the policy of “forbidding Buddhism and promoting Taoism” in the Jiajing period profoundly impacted on Buddhism in the Ming Dynasty. The mid-Ming Dynasty was also a period in which Buddhism was considered weak and dark age (LAI, 2010, p. 40-44). It was during this period that Jingshan Temple was split up. Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals recorded that:
The ancestral places of ritual were consecrated by successive dynasties, both hillside plots and land were all granted by the emperor. From the Tang Dynasty to the Ming Dynasty, monks ate together. In the 6th year of the Zhengde period (1511), the head monk Huicheng divided the Temple into 18 houses, most of which were later demolished. Till nowadays, only three or four houses have remained. (Song, 1996, p. 563).
Limited by historical materials, it is impossible to deduce detailed information about the monk Huicheng. It is only known that under Huicheng’s leadership in the 6th year of Zhengde (1511), property in Jingshan Temple was divided into 18 segments, namely “18 houses”, which have been gradually demolished and abandoned. According to Li Wei’s research, among the large-scale temples in the Hangzhou area in the Ming Dynasty, “Fangtou” became a trend, which referred to the factional organization of generations of abbots in the temple. Li Wei believes that “Fangtou” implies the split of the temple. When “Fangtou” was formed, the property within the temple was divided. Afterwards, monks in each house started to seek benefits for themselves. All these resulted in the rapid deprivation of real estate and other property in the temple (LI, 2019, p. 60-67). From this perspective, the direct reason of the spilt of Jingshan Temple was the establishment of “Fangtou” which was known as “18 houses”, and the decadence of Jingshan Temple might also begin with its split.
Second, the re-engraving and continuous compilation of Jingshan Annals was the monks’ self-salvation in Jingshan Temple. The above materials mentioned that the engraving plate of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection was severely damaged, and much information was lost. As a result, Yin Song donated to fund the re-engraving of the classic. Jiaqing Yuhang County Annals noted that “Yin Song, a native of Dongguan, had served as the county magistrate of Yuhang from the 9th year of Jiajing (1530) to the 13th year of Jiajing (1534).” (Zhang et al., 1970, p. 269). Yin Song facilitated the re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection. In the re-engraved Jingshan Collection, the most significant aspect lies in that abbots’ information from the 68th to the 80th generation is supplemented. From this, what is deemed most highly by the monks of Jingshan Temple is still the monks’ factional inheritance, the emphasis of which highlights its long history and significance in Buddhist inheritance. Therefore, the re-engraved Jingshan Collection can be regarded, to a certain extent, as a kind of self-salvage for the monks of Jingshan Temple, who may wish to emphasize its history and inheritance to restore the Jingshan Temple.
1.3 The Jingshi problem and the re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection
After the re-engraving in 9th of the Jiajing period (1530), the monk Zhengfan re-engraved the Jingshan Collection once again. Inscriptions of Zhengfan’s Jingshan Collection in the 7th year of Wanli (1579) recorded that “Monk Zhengfan is the 11th grandson of Chan Master Dai’an.” (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 109). Zhengfan is the legal heir of the 60th generation abbot, Dai'an Puzhuang, who is also the legal heir of Tiantong Wenli under Lingyin Chongyue (Chan Master Songyuan). Lingyin Chongyue is regarded as the “Fangtou” of the “Songyuan House”, which was split from the Jingshan Temple. Simply put, Zhengfan is very likely to be the monk of the “Songyuan House” and his Jingshan Collection is the product after the split of the Jingshan Temple.
Zhengfan’s Jingshan Collection is a re-engraving of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection based on the manuscript of the Songyuan House. Fangyi’s Re-engraving of Jingshan CollFection Preface in the 4th year of Wanli (1576) recorded that
[…] during the first spring of the year, the presiding monk Zhengfan took charge of the redundant tasks in the main hall. Fangyi was anxious that the more time passed, the greater the loss would be. Therefore, he suggested that Zhengfan uncover the remaining manuscripts and fragments when there was no research and raise funds to hire craftsmen to re-engrave the manuscripts to get them preserved” (2006, p. 7-10). According to the inscription of the Jingshan Collection, Fangyi was also a monk, whose house branch was unknown. (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 01).
As stated by Fangyi, Zhengfan, the master monk of Jingshan Temple in the Wanli period, used to be responsible for the re-engraving of Jingshan Collection. He oversaw the Jingshan Temple and other affairs. However, in the 4th year of the Tianqi (1621), the general examples in Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals recorded that:
In the early years of Wanli, the monk Zongjing re-engraved the Jingshan Collection, which kept an account of the ancestral events. Only two or three pieces of them have remained until today. The classics being studied at present, such as Buddhist Tradition, Chuandeng Lu, Inheritance of Chan, Wudeng Huiyuan, and Eminent Monk Biography, are all hand-copied manuscripts left by Songyuan House and provide conditions for re-engraving. (Song, 1996, p. 315).
Combined with Fangyi’s Re-engraving of Jingshan Collection Preface and Yuejiang Zongjing’s life in the above records, Song Kuiguang’s statement that “Zongjing re-engraved the Jingshan Collection” shall be false. Nevertheless, Song Kuiguang mentioned that when he compiled the Jingshan Collection, he benefited from the manuscripts left by Songyuan House. Besides, Fangyi’s Re-engraving of Jingshan Collection Preface also recorded that “Zhengfan re-engraved it based on the manuscripts left by Songyuan House”. From there, it can be argued that the Songyuan House of Jingshan Temple possessed the copied manuscripts of the Jingshan Collection, which afforded the conditions for re-engraving.
In addition, the Jingshan Temple in the early years of the Wanli period may have been controlled by the Songyuan House. Li Wei (2019, p. 67-68) mentioned that, following “the policy of splitting the house and controlling the property” of the Ming Dynasty, there evolved a mode of rotating management of “Fangtou” in temples such as Jingci, Lingyin, Zhaoqing, and Shang Tianzhu. Limited by historical evidence, the exact situation after the implementation of the split policy is ambiguous. Yet, it is inferred from the overall trend of that time that Jingshan Temple was probably also adopting a mode of rotating management of “Fangtou”. At present, there only exists a hand-copied manuscript of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection preserved by Songyuan House, and Zhengfan was the master monk at that time. Therefore, it is highly likely that the Jingshan Temple had been split and the Songyuan House grasped the management of Jingshan Temple in the early years of Wanli.
The direct motivation for Zhengfan’s re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection is to highlight the history of the Jingshan Temple. Fangyi’s Re-engraving of Jingshan Collection Preface mentioned that
[…] these ancient collections are so old that engraved plates have been severely damaged, and the written words have been vague and imprecise for a long time. Zhengfan worried that the more time passed, the more these collections would lose, which will render the history of Jingshan Temple impossible to be verified. (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 7-10).
Zhengfan re-engraved the Jingshan Collection in the hope that research on the history of Jingshan Temple has concrete historical materials to build upon. Although Fangyi suggested that there were many typos in the Jingshan Collection (i.e., the character “鲁” written as “鱼”, and “亥” as “豕”), Zhengfan believed that “[…] the lost version was not used to prove something, and it was the legacy of ancestors. The descendants would not dare to comment on it. As such, I would follow it and consider it as genuine.” (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 7-10). For Zhengfan, the accuracy of the records in the Jingshan Collection was not the priority. Instead, he emphasized its status as an “ancestral relic”. In other words, Jingshan Collection is a kind of proof of the history of the Jingshan Temple at that time.
The re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection by Zhengfan is related to the problem of “Jingshi” of the Jingshan Temple, a quiescent chamber for monks, in the early Wanli year. Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals recorded that “[…] there only existed ancient Buddha halls in the Jiajing and Longqing period (1522-1572). What the monks craved was the “Jingshi”, and there were very few monks who did their utmost to practice Buddhism.” (Song, 1996, p. 568). Since the split of Jingshan Temple, the monks in Jingshan Temple had already lived in the “Jingshi” during the Jiajing period (1522-1566). Specifically, houses split from the Jingshan Temple developed individually in the form of small groups, which is the origin of the decadence mentioned earlier. Nevertheless, “[…] in the early years of Wanli, there were other Chan Masters such as Gudao, Yifeng, and Huayi building thatch rooms here” (Song, 1996, p. 568), which means non-Jingshan-originated monks began to develop in Jingshan. Li Wei’s research (2019, p. 69) also mentioned that there was a trend that external monks became abbots in major temples in Hangzhou area in the late Ming and early Qing eras. At that time, the other eminent monks’ arrival may have threatened the “Fangtou” of Jingshan. From Zhengfan’s perspective, his Jingshan Collection, and “Seven Founders and Eighty Generations of Abbots”, the factional inheritance it constructed, was to emphasize his monks’ legitimacy to reside in Jingshan. The re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection by Zhengfan reflected local monks’ stance of treating Jingshan Temple as their home ground. Particularly, the re-engraved Jingshan Collection was independently funded by the monks of the Songyuan House. Zhengfan led his disciples “[…] come back and donate to subsidize printing and circulation.” (YUESHAN, 2006, p. 109). As mentioned earlier on, Songyuan House had probably held the management of Jingshan Temple during the Wanli period, which further corroborated that the re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection was to emphasize the local monks’ legitimacy to propagate the factional inheritance in Jingshan.
In summary, from the local monks’ perspectives in Jingshan, the two re-engravings of Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection represent the self-expression and the shaping of the self-identity of the monk group. One was a crisis under the split of Jingshan Temple, and the other was related to the impact caused by the external monks’ arrival. The writing of the Jingshan Collection manifests monks’ response to the crisis and the efforts of these monks of the Ming Dynasty to maintain their faction.
2 From the perspective of local areas: Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals and Wanli Yuhang County Annals
In the 13th year of Wanli (1585), local officials compiled the Jingshan Annals under Gao Zexun’, then county magistrate of Yuhang. Later, in the Wanli Yuhang County Annals, Jingshan Annals were listed in a separate volume. Jingshan Annals received more official attention during the Gao Zexun period, although officials had been involved in the compilation before. For example, as we mentioned earlier, Yin Song facilitated the re-engraving of the Jingshan Collection. He did not participate in its compilation, while Gao and other officials joined in the direct compilation. As a result, the writing of Jingshan Annals was integrated into the system of local records.
Gao Zexun, with the courtesy name “Ruming” and the assumed name “Shenyu”, was born in Nanchang. He served as the county magistrate of Yuhang from the 8th year of Wanli (1580) to the 17th year of Wanli (1589). During his tenure, Gao Zexun primarily dealt with major events such as famine and floods. Together with another county magistrate, Lin Dalun, Gao Zexun was worshipped in the Memorial Temple in the 4th year of Longqing (1570), and was beloved by the local people (Gao et al., 1585a, p. 1a; Zhang et al., 1970, p. 272/293).
Influenced by Su Shi’s worship in the Ming Dynasty, Jingshan Temple also had special significance for Gao Zexun’s official career. In the Jingshan Annals, Gao Zexun mentioned that “I remembered that when Su Shi was an official in Hangzhou, he visited Jingshan three times. I stayed in Yuhang for six years but had not been there even once, which was not intended” (GAO et al., 1585a, p. 2a), explaining why he failed to visit Jingshan Temple at the soonest possible time. Based on Chen Wanyi’s studies, Su Shi was highly popular in the Ming Dynasty, as people believed that his poetry and prose contributed to the imperial examinations (Chen, 1988, p. 2-7). Actually, Su Shi was a paragon of a politically-engaged and important lay Buddhist scholar. What is more, he was well known for his poetry about Buddhist temples and work of arts picturing Buddha. Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals included many later works that appreciate Su Shi’s poetry and prose (Song, 1996, p. 538-539/542/545). Therefore, provided the influence of Su Shi’s three visits to Jingshan during his tenure, Jingshan Temple became a popular destination visited by many local officials and scholars in the late Ming Dynasty, with Gao Zexun being one of them. This also suggests that Jingshan Temple bears a new dimension of cultural symbolism.
The motivation behind Gao Zexun’s compilation of Jingshan Annals is mainly due to the frequent typos, as mentioned earlier. When Gao Zexun discussed his tour to Shangjingshan Temple (1585a, p. 4a-4b), he recorded that “[…] the Jingshan monks engraved the Jingshan Collection by hand, with many typos. Scholars were able to fix the typos and make up the missing information, allowing the Jingshan Annals to be passed on.” Judging from the above statement, Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals were edited and supplemented based on Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection. Specifically, the most deleted and modified part is the “Chan” chapter, namely, the abbots of Jingshan Temple’s condition. The “Founder” chapter merely records Guoyi, Wushang, and Faji Chan Master, whereas the “Abbot” chapter only retains Dahui Zonggao, Biefeng Baoyin, Dachan Lioming, Wuzhun Shifan, Yunfeng Miaogao, Wuwei Weilin, Yuansou Xingduan, and Huilin (Gao et al., 1585a, p. 7a-21a), which overall fell short of the “Seven Founders and Eighty Generations of Abbots” in Jingshan Collection. Furthermore, the monks’ factional inheritance was no longer the focus in Gao’s Jingshan Annals. Instead, sections on imperial edicts, landscapes, temples, and spirituality were annexed (Gao et al., 1585a, p. 1a-1b). The compilation and composition of Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals became closer to local records, weakening the monk history part of traditional Buddhist classics.
Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals was compiled by local county scholars, which involved a significant engagement of the local official system. In the “name list of compilation personnel”, besides Gao Zexuan, people such as the deputy county magistrate and the secretary were all included. “Deputy County Magistrate Zhang Anran was responsible for assisting the revision; other scholars on the list include Secretary Gao Yimo, Shen Xiang, Zhu Han, Huang Bao, Fang Xixu, Zhang Wenxing, Yu Jingyin, Sun Guizhi, Bao Zhou, Shen Huanran, and Chen Yuyao.” (GAO et al., 1585a, p. 1a-1b). The same group also participated in the compilation of another work Dongxiao Palace Annals edited by Gao Zexun in the 13th year of Wanli (1585) (Gao et al., 1585b, p. 1a-1b/4a). Therefore, it can be inferred that Gao Zexun mobilized specialized personnel to record the history of scenic spots of the county during his tenure, one output being the Jingshan Annals, which was also part of his political achievements.
Gao Zexun and the compilation personnel of Jingshan Annals had significantly influenced the compilation of Yuhang County Annals of the Wanli period. On the one hand, Volume 9 (i.e. Jingshan Annals) of Yuhang County Annals (Dai et al., 1996, p. 355), was edited by Li Changgeng and Shen Huanran. Concretely, Shen Huanran not only assisted in the compilation of Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals but also co-authored the inscription of Gao Zexun’s Memorial Temple with scholar Yu Jingyin (Zhang et al., 1970, p. 293). On the other hand, Volume 9 of Jingshan Annals (Dai et al., 1996, p. 355) was similar in structure to Gao Zexun’s Jingshan Annals, and was divided into Pictorial, Landscape, Temple, Chan, Poems, and Chronicles. In addition, Volume 10 of Wanli Yuhang County Annals was Dongxiao Annals, whereas Gao compiled Dongxiao Palace Annals.
In a nutshell, with Gao’s Jingshan Annals as a node, the writings of Jingshan Temple have entered the new perspective of local areas, with Gao’s Jingshan Annals itself starting to be imitated by later local officials. With Jingshan Annals included as a stand-alone volume in the Yuhang County Annals of the Wanli era, it was the first time that Jingshan Temple was presented in the official narrative of the Ming Dynasty. Although the Jingshan Annals have no longer been listed separately in the Yuhang County Annals anymore since then, it is undeniable that Gao’s Jingshan Annals and the Yuhang County Annals of Wanli transformed the writings of Jingshan Temple from the monks’ perspective to that of the local areas.
3 From the perspective of gentry: Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals and Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals
In the 7th year of Wanli (1589), Zibai Daguan and his disciple Mizang Daokai launched the Buddhist scriptures engraving activity for the Jiaxing Tripitaka in Miaode Temple of Wutai Mountain. Afterwards, “[…] the cold weather and remote location of Wutai Mountain made it very difficult for craftsmen to carry engraving materials back and forth, and they ended up being forced to move to Jingshan.” (Song, 1996, p. 405). Due to the geographical environment, the activity of engraving Jiaxing Tripitaka on stone was moved from Wutai Mountain to Jingshan Temple in the 21st year of Wanli (1593), latter known as the Jingshan Tripitaka. Buddhist scripture engraving activity brought new changes to Jingshan Temple. On the one hand, engraving-related monks, Buddhist recluses, and sacrifice providers have established new relationships with Jingshan Temple, along with changes in the internal factions of the temple. On the other hand, due to the influence of engraving Buddhist scriptures, some local gentry joined the sacrifice providers group for Jingshan Temple, which facilitated the restoration of its lower courtyards including Huacheng Reception Temple, injecting new vitality into the temple. During this period, Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals and Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals were engraved accordingly, ultimately forming the diverse historical narrative landscape of the Jingshan Temple in the late Ming Dynasty.
3.1 Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals
After the carving field of Jiaxing Tripitaka was moved southwards to Jingshan, the Jizhao House of Jingshan Temple became a place long managed by monks engaged in Jiaxing Tripitaka engraving. The Wanli Yuhang County Annals (DAI et al., 1996, p. 359-360) recorded that:
During the 22nd year of Wanli (1594), monks of Jizhao House wanted to abandon this place and move to another. Gentry such as Lu Guangzu and Feng Mengzhen leveraged the rent from the leased land to support Master Zibo Daguan. Consequently, this place became the field for engraving Buddhist scriptures on stones, hosted by Master Mizang Daokai and Chan Master Huanyu.
Lu Guangzu used to serve as the minister at the Ministry of Personnel, and Feng Mengzhen an official at Imperial Academy, both of whom were major supporters of the engraving activity in the early days (Song, 1996, p. 411-414). Mizang Daokai was the chief monk in charge of the engraving of Jiaxing Tripitaka in the early period, and Chan Master Huanyu was his successor (Chen, 2010, p. 188). According to Yuhang County Annals, in the 22nd year of Wanli (1594), the monks from Jizhao House planned to abandon this temple and seek a new one. It should be noted that Jizhao House was originally the “Fangtou” where Yuansou Xingduan, the 48th abbot of Jingshan Temple, ever lived. And Yuansou Xingduan’s successors, such as Fuyuan Fubao, the 57th abbot of Jingshan Temple, and Nanshi Wenxiu, the 62nd abbot, were both buried here. Through the acts of donation by Feng Mengzhen and another gentry, it can be inferred that Jizhao House has become a special ground for engraving Buddhist scriptures hosted by Zibai Daguan and his factions instead of the main venue for Yuansou Xingduan and his successors. Accordingly, a new sphere of influence was formed within Jingshan Temple.
By dint of these, the local clans and gentry who supported the engraving activity all engaged in the affairs of Jizhao House in Jingshan Temple. After Chan Master Huanyu passed away, the local gentry Wu Yong first invited Chan Master Tanju Kai to take charge of the engraving affairs in Jingshan Temple. Inviting Tanju Kai Master to Oversee Engraving Affairs recorded that:
All the preparatory work had been ready, but there was no one in the temple to preside over the book engraving, and the position of Master monk had been suspended for a long time. So, a whole bunch of influential people went to invite Chan Master to preside over the engraving cause in Jingshan Temple. (Song, 1996, p. 503).
According to Yuh-Neu Chen (2010, p. 189), the Yu clan in Jintan of Jiangsu province and the Shen and Zhou clans in Wujiang of Jiangsu were keen supporters of engraving affairs back in the period when engraving was carried out in Wutai Mountain. Those large families supported the engraving activity with undiminished enthusiasm even after the engraving fields were moved to the south. Significantly, the local clans in the Jiangsu province had also long participated in the selection and appointment of the master monk of Jizhao House. Miao Xiyong’s Inviting Chan Master Ziguang to Live in Jizhao House recorded that after Chan Master Tanju Kai, Miao Xiyong in Changshu of Jiangsu, Yu Yuli, Sun Yunyin, Yu Yude, Wang Maozheng in Jintan of Jiangsu, as well as He Xue and He Maozhao in Danyang of Jiangsu invited Chan Master Ziguang to take over the engraving affairs in Jingshan Temple (Song, 1996, p. 503). Chan Master Ziguang is Chan Master Huanyu’s disciple and belongs to the Zibai Daguan’s faction. With the intervention and support of the above-mentioned local clans in Jiangsu, the factional inheritance of Jizhao House in Jingshan Temple had always been sustained in the Zibai Daguan’s faction. Furthermore, “Miao Xiyong, together with Yu Yuli, He Xue, and other people, donated more than 200 liang of gold to purchase land in the mountain to back the monks.” (Song, 1996, p. 557). Undoubtedly, the major clans in Jiangsu had become the biggest sacrifice providers behind the Jizhao House in Jingshan Temple.
A plethora of engraving matters was recorded in Jingshan Annals by Song Kuiguang, who maintained a close personal relationship with the previous major clans in Jiangsu, who supported the engraving cause. A native of Changshu in Jiangsu province, Song Kuiguang, passed the imperial examination in the 40th year of Wanli (1612). His ancestor was an official in the Ministry of Punishments during the Xuande period (1426-1435), which explains the Song family’s considerable influence in the local area (Gao et al., 1688, p. 33). Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals, such as Volume 5 Preface, contained many records related to engraving affairs. Nevertheless, some of those records included engraving activities in the Wutai Mountain, which was not closely related to Jingshan Temple (Song, 1996, p. 408-409). That is to say, from the perspective of the Buddhist Temple annals, Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals breaks through the limitations of the temple itself. Yet, content related to engraving was not recorded in the latter Jingshan Annals after Song Kuiguang.
Song’s Jingshan Annals is the product of the specific event of engraving Buddhist scriptures on stones. According to Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals: General Examples, his Jingshan Annals results from the Jiaxing Tripitaka. “Many stone tablets were sent to the Jingshan Temple for engraving the Jiaxing Tripitaka and for its circulation. Requirements for engraving books were stringent and could not be adjusted at one’s discretion.” (Song, 1996, p. 315). As a record book circulating with the Tripitaka, Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals set the Ancestors as its first volume, emphasizing its Buddhist position. “Those who wrote about famous mountains often highlighted the scenery and tended to name the mountains after the names of renowned springs or stones. Jingshan is the best in the land, but it attaches great importance to Buddhism. Hence the ancestors were recorded in the first volume.” (Song, 1996, p. 315). Song Kuiguang intended to highlight the Buddhist Dharma of Jingshan Temple, which contrasts with Gao’s Jingshan Annals and Yuhang County Annals of Wanli. Moreover, according to Yuh-Neu Chen (2010, p. 187/200-201), around the 4th year of the Tianqi (1624), the monk group also participated in the engraving of Jiaxing Tripitaka, including the engraving affairs of Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals.[9] On the one hand, it demonstrates that the original monks of Jingshan Temple participated in the cause, in addition to those of Jizhao House. On the other hand, it also reveals that Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals itself is also a reflection of the changes in the course of engraving Jiaxing Tripitaka.
3.2 Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals
After Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals, Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annal was also a separate volume, but it was in the form of East and West Tianmu Mountain Annals: Jingshan. According to Ma Mengjing (2014, p. 6-8), Jingshan Annals, West Lake Annals, and East and West Tianmu Mountain Annals constituted a comprehensive local record delineating the landscapes in Hangzhou, known as the Overall Annals of West Lake of the late Ming Dynasty. Based on the framework of one lake and three mountains, these annals took the West Lake as their core and gradually extended to the Tianmu Mountain, the origin of the West Lake Mountain Range.
Figure 2
The cover of Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals, preserved at the National Archives of Japan
Source: Pic. from National Archives of Japan, call no.史193-0020(004).
According to Lu Yunchang’s Preamble of Engraving Jianshan Annals in the 9th year of Chongzhen (1636), “Jingshan Temple was named for its direct connection with the East and West Tianmu Mountains so that those who travelled to the Tianmu Mountains were always keen to figure out more about the Jingshan Temple.” (Zhang, 1636, p. 1a). Lu Yunchang stressed the features of the landscape in Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals. From the perspective of the landscape, Jingshan is also renowned for its connection with the two Tianmu Mountains. The previous Jingshan Annals, such as the one by Gao and Yuhang County Annals of Wanli, mentioned Jingshan Temple's development history and Chan Master Guoyi’s great contributions in founding the Jingshan Temple. However, Lu Changyun merely thought “they were a bit deliberate” (Zhang, 1636, p. 1b), which also reflected the intention of Zhang Caizhi’s Jingshan Annals to regard the Jingshan Temple as a part of the landscape sightseeing.
Zhang’s Jingshan Annals entirely disapproved of the practice of setting the Ancestors as the first volume in Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals. He mentioned in General Examples that:
Recently, some people who wrote Jingshan Annals, hypocritical and superficially unconventional, even listing the Ancestor as a separate chapter, whose status is made parallel the quotations of Chan Master. Moreover, the work Waihu recorded not only the call for papers but also the correspondence with officials. Annals such as Temple Property, Principle, and Land Tax seem to show their talents and virtues. It must be argued that these annals were used as an amulet in the temples and had to be done. However, if the Buddha has a spirit, he will secretly ridicule it. It is the same as the West Lake Annals and the East and West Tianmu Mountain Annals. I cannot forcibly agree with them. (Zhang, 1636, p. 1a).
Zhang possesses two main points of view. First, he believes that the Jingshan Annals as the record of mountains should be distinguished from Chan’s quotations and a clear boundary between Budda and Mountain should be defined. Second, from what Zhang’s Jingshan Annals recorded, there seem to be some conflicts between the mountain and temple property, which implies a dispute over the property of the temple. Zhang’s almost suppressing attitude isalso reflected in his compilation of the Jingshan Annals. There are seven volumes in the annals, none of which is related to the Chan Master or Monks’ faction. Volumes 5 to 7 are on literature and fine art related to the Jingshan tour, while Volumes 2 to 4 are related to the landscapes of Jingshan.
Zhang’s Jingshan Annals are linked to the nature of Buddhist scriptures in the late Ming era. Ma Mengjing’s (2013, p. 130) research pointed out that Hangzhou’s tourism culture was prevalent in the late Ming Dynasty, and it was fairly common to see landscapes and scenic sites highlighted in annals. He discussed that the local annals such as local records, mountain annals, and temple annals of the Ming and Qing dynasties not only could share the same authors but are also very similar in style. In the methods of shaping scenic sites, religion and tourism do not conflict. Instead, they may be interdependent. Are Jingshan Annals about the Jingshan Mountain or the Jingshan Temple? This question is raised in Huang Ruheng’s Narration for Jingshan Annals in Song’s Jingshan Annals: “Famous mountains could not compete with the emperors’ influence. Only Qingliang Mountain (in Shanxi Province), E’mei Mountain (in Sichuan Province), Putuo Mountain (in Zhejiang Province), and Feilai Mountain (in Hangzhou) were known to the world… Ever since the 1st abbot of Jingshan Temple in the Tang Dynasty, and till the 87th generation of the Chan Master Yuelin Jing, the Jingshan Temple and Shaolin Temple have become the two most notable temples of the world” (Song, 1996, p. 303). At least in Huang Ruheng’s opinion, the inheritance of the 87 generations of the Jingshan Temple faction had endowed it with more significance and value. From Song’s Jingshan Annals to Zhang’s Jingshan Annals, the writings of Buddhist temple annals present different tendencies, which may have been influenced by the tourism culture of the late Ming Dynasty. Although motivation and nature of compiling above two annals are distinct, they both expand the boundaries of Buddhist annals from the perspective of gentry. In the late Ming Dynasty, more people participated in the writing of Buddhism in different ways.
The annals of Jingshan Temple in the late Ming Dynasty have transformed from the monks’ history to local records which significantly increased the Buddhism participation and knowledge capacity. The so-called “history of monks” is essentially Zongjing’s Jingshan Collection, which emphasizes the Buddhist inheritance of the Jingshan Temple from the monks’ perspective, while constructing the existing faction of “Seven Founders and Eighty Generations of Abbots”. The two re-engravings, in the 9th year of Jiajing (1530) and the 4th year of Wanli (1576), respectively, are in essence an illustration of the construction of specific group identity and self-expression by the monks of Jingshan Temple in the face of the split of the temple in the Zhengde period and the “Jingshi” problem.
The so-called “local records” refer to the weakening of Buddhism in Jingshan Temple to a certain extent, and can be comprehended from two dimensions. Firstly, it highlights a sense of “locality”, with prominent representatives being the Jingshan Annals by Gao Zexun in the 13th year of Wanli (1585), and the Volume 9 Jingshan Annals in Wanli Yuhang County Annals. Both works simplify the part of factional inheritance of Jingshan, while introducing mountains, rivers, temples, and other contents, making it closer to the writings of local records thus becoming part of the regional framework. Secondly, specific historical events are associated with social trends. Song Kuiguang’s Jingshan Annals is the product of Jiaxing Tripitaka in the late Ming Dynasty. Its circulation with Tripitaka itself is also a testament to the revival of Buddhism in the late Ming Dynasty. Zhang Zhicai’s Jingshan Annals were the product of the engraving frenzy of tourism culture and scenic sites in Hangzhou in the late Ming Dynasty. Zhang’s Jingshan Annals included Jingshan Temple as a part of “Mountains and Rivers”, highlighting the “enjoyability” of Jingshan instead of the history or the inheritance of Buddhism.
In conclusion, the writings of Buddhist annals in the late Ming Dynasty present a multifaceted aspect, the outcome of the interweaving of historical events and various writing groups. The appearance of several annals during this period indicated that society was paying growing attention to Buddhism. Different writing groups, such as monks, local officials, and gentry, as well as the various versions of Jingshan Annals derived from them, were expressions of wishes and desires of different groups of people. They also exhibit the process of Buddhist historical records no longer being restricted to Buddhist sutras, but instead beginning to involve other external classics. Just because Buddhist historical records had gone to the local, Buddhism in the late Ming Dynasty was able to expand its participation in classic creation and gain a richer population base for gentry leaders, officials and normal people. Although the case of Jingshan Temple was particularly important in the late Ming Buddhist revival, due to its special relationship with the Tripitaka, this still suggests that the revival of Buddhism in the late Ming Dynasty was not only a structural reform inside Buddhism or a top-down reform in politics. It was also a diachronic active state achieved by individuals’ activities with distinct objectives in a specific area. The diversity of writing groups, writing methods, and content is an apparent manifestation of the expansion and extension of such a state to the local society.
MONJE, FUNCIONARIO Y NOBLEZA: MÚLTIPLES ESCRITOS DE LOS ANALES DE JINGSHAN Y LA VISIÓN REGIONAL DEL RENACIMIENTO BUDISTA DE FINALES DE MING
Resumen: Cuando se habla del renacimiento del budismo a finales de la dinastía Ming, los estudiosos echan en falta el estudio de ricos registros locales, regiones específicas y casos típicos. El templo de Jingshan, en Hangzhou, proporciona una muestra de este tipo. Una manifestación destacada del templo de Jingshan a finales de la dinastía Ming es la emergencia de todo un conjunto de anales. Diferentes grupos, como los monjes, los magistrados y la alta burguesía, participaron en la redacción de la historia de Jingshan de forma diacrónica en el mismo espacio. Las diferentes versiones de los Anales de Jingshan revelan el entrelazamiento de los acontecimientos históricos, las tendencias de la época y los deseos de varios grupos en distintas regiones, lo que arroja luz sobre el desarrollo que los registros históricos budistas empezaron a tener con otros clásicos ajenos al budismo en lugar de centrarse únicamente en los sutras budistas. Este proceso pone de manifiesto que el renacimiento del budismo a finales de la dinastía Ming es también un estado activo diacrónico alcanzado por las actividades de personas con diferentes propósitos en un área específica.
Palabras clave: Templo de Jingshan. Narraciones históricas. Sociedad regional. El renacimiento del budismo a finales de la dinastía Ming.
REFERENCES
CAO, G. Research on Buddist Chorography in Ming Dynasty. Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2011.
CHEN, W. The Late Ming Essays and the Literati's Life in late Ming Dynasty. Taipei: Da’an, 1988.
CHEN, Y. Buddhism Study of Yunnan and Guizhou Province in the Ming Dynasty. Beijing: Zhonghua Book, 1962.
CHEN, Y. The field of Buddhist and Secular Negotiations in the Ming Dynasty. New Taipei: Daoxiang, 2010.
DAI, R. et al. Wanli Yuhang County Annals. 1616. Repr. in: Listed Title Series of the Si Ku Quan Shu. Shibu, v. 210. Jinan: Qilu, 1996.
GAO, S. et al. Kangxi Changshu County Annals. National Library of China, call no. 地220.183/32, 1688.
GAO, Z. et al. Jingshan Annals. Japan Sonkeikakubunko Collection, 1585a.
GAO, Z. et al. Dongxiao Palace Annals. Japan National Diet Library, call n. 170-44, 1585b.
GU, F.; LIN, Y. Pingsheng Zhuangguan. Shanghai: Shanghai Guji, 2011.
HE, X.; LI, M. The Merging Movement of Buddhist Temples in Early Ming Dynasty. Nankai Journal (Philosophy, Literature and Social Science Edition), v. 265, n. 5, p. 100-113, 2018.
LAI, Y. General History of Chinese Buddhism. V. 12 Nanjing: Jiangsu Renmin, 2010.
LI, W. On the Evolution of the Economic Patterns of Buddhist Temples in Hangzhou (14-17 Century). Studies in World Religions, v. 176, n. 2, p. 58-73, 2019.
MA, M. Gazetteers of Famous Sites or Tourist Guidebooks: The Printing History of the Ming-Period Xihu Youlanzhi and Tourism in Hangzhou. New History, v. 24, n. 4, p. 93-138, 2013.
MA, M. Local Gazetteers and Travel Writing: The Combined Gazetteers of West Lake and Scenic Spot Gazetteers in Late Ming Hangzhou. Mingdai Yanjiu, v. 22, n.1, p. 1-49, 2014.
PAN, G. Chinese Lay Buddhism History. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2020.
SHENG, K. A History of Chinese Buddhist Faith and Life. Nanjing: Jiangsu Renmin, 2016. Translated by Leiden: Brill, 2020.
SONG, K. Jingshan Annals. 1624. Repr. in: Listed Title Series of the Si Ku Quan Shu. Shibu, v. 244. Jinan: Qilu, 1996.
WU, J. Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
XIA, S. Hangzhou Prefecture Annals. 1475. Repr. in: Listed Title Series of the Si Ku Quan Shu. Shibu, v. 175. Jinan: Qilu, 1996.
YAO, G. Preface to the Sayings of Nanshi Monk in Jingshan. Repr. in: Continuation of Tripitaka, v. 124. Taipei: Shin Wen Feng, 1983.
YÜ, C. The Renewal of Buddhism in China: Zhuhong and the Late Ming Synthesis. 1981. Repr. by New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2020.
YÜ, C. Review of ZHANG, D. Thriving in Crisis: Buddhism and Political Disruption in China, 1522-1620. H-Buddhism, H-Net Reviews, Oct. 2020.
YÜ, C.; DENIS, C. T.; FREDERICK. W. M. Ming Buddhism. Chapter. In: The Cambridge History of China. V. 8: p. 893-952. The Cambridge History of China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521243339.016.
YUAN, X. Jideng Lu. Repr. in: Continuation of Tripitaka, v. 147. Taipei: Shin Wen Feng, 1983.
YUESHAN, Z. re-engraved by Zhengfan. Jingshan Collection. 1576. Repr. In: BAI, H.; ZHANG, Z. Chinese Buddhist Temple Annals Series, v. 78. Yangzhou: Guangling, 2006.
ZHANG, D. Thriving in Crisis: Buddhism and Political Disruption in China, 1522-1620. New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2020.
ZHANG, J. et al. Jiaqing Yuhang County Annals. Shanghai, 1919. Repr. in Zhongguo fangzhi congshu Huazhong difang. V. 56. Taipei: Cheng Wen, 1970.
ZHANG, Z. East and West Tianmu Mountain Annals: Jingshan. National Archives of Japan, call no.史193-0020(004), 1636.