Viewing the Two Teachings as Distinct yet Complementary: Gushan Zhiyuan’s Use of Parallelisms to Demonstrate the Compatibility of Buddhism and Ancient-style Learning

Journal of Chinese Religions 38 (2010) 1 Viewing the Two Teachings as Distinct yet Complementary: Gushan Zhiyuan’s Use of Parallelisms to Demonstrate the Compatibility of Buddhism and Ancient-style Learning DOUGLAS SKONICKI National Tsing Hua University In several essays dating from the early eleventh century, a monk of the Tiantai 天台 tradition of Buddhism named Gushan Zhiyuan 孤山智圓 (976-1022) described his youthful interest in Confucianism.1 In these essays, Zhiyuan related how, despite being entrusted to a Buddhist monastery at the age of eight, he secretly continued his Confucian studies until being afflicted with a serious illness during his adolescence. The onset of this illness, together with the admonitions he received from his dharma master, prompted Zhiyuan to reconsider his priorities and temporarily redirect his intellectual efforts towards Buddhism. He subsequently embarked upon a rigorous engagement with Tiantai doctrine, and became one of the leading proponents of the “Off Mountain” (shanwai 山外) position within the sect.2 Yet, while Zhiyuan would emerge as an influential Buddhist theorist, and play an important role in early Song Tiantai sectarian disputes, he never completely abandoned his interest in Confucianism, and he continued to write on Confucian topics throughout his adult life. 1 Zhiyuan provided descriptions of his early interest in Confucianism in his “Biography of the Master of the Mean” (Zhongyongzi zhuan 中庸子傳) and his “Thanking Assistant Wu for Composing the Preface to Chapters from an Idle Life” (Xie Wu sicheng zhuan Xianju bian xu shu 謝吳寺丞撰閑居 編序書). For a detailed biography of Zhiyuan, see Wai Lun Tam, “The Life and Thought of a Chinese Buddhist Monk Zhiyuan (976-1022 C.E.),” 133-215. 2 For an account of the dispute between Shanjia 山家 and Shanwai proponents in the early Song, see Andō Toshiō 安藤俊雄, Tendai-gaku: konpon shisō to sono tenkai 天台学：根本思想とその展開, 329-71; Wai Lun Tam, 30-104; Chi-wah Chan, “Chih-li (960-1028) and the Formation of Orthodoxy in the Sung T’ien-t’ai Tradition of Buddhism,” 41-216; Chi-wah Chan, “Chih-li (960-1028) and the Crisis of T’ien-t’ai Buddhism in the Early Sung;” Brook Ziporyn, Evil and/or/as The Good: Omnicentrism, Intersubjectivity, and Value Paradox in Tiantai Buddhist Thought, 312-23; and Pan Guiming 潘桂明 and Wu Zhongwei 吳忠偉, Zhongguo Tiantaizong tongshi 中國天台宗通史, 453-537. 2 Journal of Chinese Religions Zhiyuan was particularly drawn to the theories propounded within Ancient-style Learning (guwen 古文), a Confucian intellectual and literary movement established by Han Yu 韓愈 (768-824) in the Tang dynasty (618-907). Zhiyuan’s embrace of Ancient-style Learning is intriguing, because both Han Yu, and many of his followers in the Song, espoused strong antiBuddhist views, and even called for the elimination of Buddhism from China. In this article, I examine Zhiyuan’s conception of the relationship between Confucianism and Buddhism in an effort to explain both why he supported Ancient-style Learning ideas and how he dealt with the anti-Buddhist polemics of its adherents. I draw upon Zhiyuan’s collection of literary writings, the Chapters from an Idle Life (Xianju bian 閑居編), as the primary source for my examination of his views on these two issues. Scholarship on Zhiyuan’s conception of Confucianism has for the most part adopted one of two approaches, which have failed to adequately account for Zhiyuan’s nuanced understanding of Ancient-style Learning and his reasons for promoting it. The first approach has examined Zhiyuan’s conception of the relationship between Buddhism and Confucianism without paying sufficient attention to his specific interest in Ancient-style Learning. The scholars employing this approach have focused on Zhiyuan’s general attitude towards the two teachings; however, they by and large have not taken note of the specific arguments he advanced to reconcile his interest in Ancient-style Learning with the anti-Buddhism that featured prominently within the movement.3 The second approach has interpreted Zhiyuan’s interest in Ancient-style Learning from a literary historical perspective. That is, the focus of such studies has been on Zhiyuan’s use of the distinctive Ancient-style Learning literary style, and not on the arguments he made to demonstrate that Buddhism and Ancient-style Learning were compatible.4 3 Studies adopting this approach include: Pan Guiming, “Cong Zhiyuan de Xianju bian...