Zongmi on Chan by Jeffrey Lyle Broughton (review)

78 Journal of Chinese Religions Buddhist monasticism, for the most part, has implied group practice and social interaction, in contradistinction to the sometimes solitary and socially secluded European varieties. As Robson’s introduction points out, monasticism derives from the Greek root “mono” or alone, yet Buddhist monasticism has from the start been an assembly or congregation (Sangha), or as metaphorically defined in the Commentary Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra (Dazhidu lun 大智度 論, T 25.1509.83a7-10) as a “cluster of trees” (in Chinese conglin 叢林). Equally, the Buddhist monastic rules vinayas were formulated in and through the interaction of monks and nuns with lay society, regulating the appropriate types of interactions, not limiting or forbidding them altogether. Misplaced assumptions have strongly influenced the study of Buddhist monasticism and need to be reassessed in light of specific cultural and historical differences. By complicating the traditional views of monks as world-renouncing figures as well as blurring the hard and fast lines between lay and monastic practitioners, the essays compiled here ask us to reevaluate the manner in which we view Buddhist monasticism and monasticism in general. The broad range of essay topics may well illuminate a variety of areas in need of better elucidation, yet at times the lack of a strong and precise thematic thread throughout makes it difficult to discern a clear goal for the volume as a whole. Regardless, by casting a broad net, the editors have brought together a variety of essays that should generate further questions in this area. While this work is relevant for Buddhist Studies, it is also valuable for anyone interested in East Asian culture or in the cross-cultural study of monastic institutions. YIFA, University of the West Zongmi on Chan JEFFREY LYLE BROUGHTON. Translations from the Asian Classics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2009. xv, 348 pages. ISBN 978-0-231-14392-9. US$45.00, £26.50 hardcover. In this important new contribution to the field of Chinese Buddhism, Jeffrey Broughton presents translations of two key texts on Chan authored by Guifeng Zongmi 圭峰宗密 (780841 ), one of the most eminent scholar-monks of the Tang 唐 dynasty. The translations are preceded by an introduction providing both context for the works and a summary of their contents. Book Reviews 79 The first text, known both as Zhonghua chuanxindi Chanmen shizi chengxi tu 中華傳心 地禪門師資承襲圖 and Pei Xiu shiyi wen 裴休拾遺問, is here titled the Chan Letter. The text began as an epistolary exchange between Zongmi and his closest lay disciple, the eminent official Pei Xiu (791-864), which accounts for the different versions of the title. Pei Xiu’s initial query stems from his observation that there are several different lineages of Chan, and his desire to understand “which are shallow and which profound” (p. 70). He asks Zongmi to write him a guide to four Chan lineages: the Northern, the Niutou 牛頭, and within the Southern lineage, the Hongzhou 洪州 and Heze 荷澤 sub-lines. In his response, Zongmi provides an historical summary of each line, and then evaluates their profundity. Zongmi himself was a member of the Heze lineage, and therefore presents its teachings as the pinnacle of Chan, characterized by an emphasis on “Knowing” (zhi 知). To clarify the distinctions between these approaches, Zongmi employs the simile of a clear jewel that reflects its surroundings, explaining how each lineage misunderstands the relationship between the jewel and the reflected colors. Only the Heze lineage correctly perceives the reflectivity of the jewel, and that colors are the manifestations of its innate brightness (p. 92). As it becomes clear in subsequent sections of the text, Zongmi knew that Pei Xiu was drawn to Hongzhou teachings and wanted to promote his own lineage in its stead. While in part this may have been a sectarian struggle over a prominent lay supporter, Broughton argues in his introduction that Zongmi likely saw Hongzhou as tending too far toward the “rhetoric of the original nature” with not enough emphasis on gradual practice (p. 20). The second text, the Chan Prolegomenon (Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu 禪源諸詮集都序) also concerns the classification of different Chan lineages, but because Zongmi is addressing a wider audience here his tone is less polemical. He also evaluates a greater number of Chan lineages. His...