.
P.319
1.Introduction
Toward the end of his life Vinaya Master
Dao-xuan (596-667) of the Xi-ming- si temple appears
to have shown an unusual interest in miracle
stories.(2) A part of this interest crystallized in
a collection of Chinese Buddhist miracle stories
called the Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu
("Collected records of Three Treasure miracles in
China") completed on the 20th day of the sixth month
of the first year of the Lin-de period (664). In the
colophon attached to this work Dao-xuan mentions the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin "recently compiled" by Vinaya Master
Dao-shi of the Xi-ming-si temple. Dao- shi was known
as a close collaborator of Dao-xuan, and the
existing version of his Buddhist encyclopedia
Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains a large number of thematic
collections of Chinese Buddhist miracles. In a
separate article, I have compared the contents of
Dao-xuan's miracle story collection Ji shen-zhou
san-bao gan-tong lu and the miracle story sections
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. (3) Virtually all the
stories contained in Dao-xuan's work are found in
Dao-shi's encyclopedia; blocks of material found in
the same subsection in Dao-xuan's work are also
generally found as blocks of corresponding material
in different parts of the encyclopedia, though
somewhat mysteriously the name of Dal-xuan's work is
not mentioned in the corresponding Fa-yuan zhu-lin
passages. (4) The Fa-yuan zhu-lin generally mentions
the sources from which the passages were excerpted
in the encyclopedia. The evidence in this general
comparison of the content of the two works pointed
to the likelihood that Dao-shi had relied on
Dao-xuan's work, either in the form known to us
today, or in an earlier form available to him, in
compiling his encyclopedia.
This systematic survey of the relationship be-
tween the Ji shen-zhou
P.320
san-bao gan-tong lu and the corresponding sections
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin resulted in another minor
discovery. Whereas the Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels to
other parts of the Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu
are found in blocks of corresponding material though
untitled and unattributed, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels to the last two titled collections (ie.,
the Rui-jing lu ["Records of Scripture Miracles"]
and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu) in the third fascicle
of the ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong-lu are found
scattered in a number of different parts of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin.(5) Furthermore, the encyclopedia
notes the source from which each of the incorporated
items has been taken individually, using the basic
format used extensively in its numerous collections
of miracle stories. This information concerning the
sources from which each item in the collection has
been taken enables us to reconstruct the manner in
which these two collections in the third fascicle of
the Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu were put
together by Dao-xuan. In this paper I would like to
pursue this line of investigation further by
focusing on the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and examining
its sources through its Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels.(6)
2.General observations
An examination of the sources mentioned in the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels to the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu reveals the following basic facts:
i) By far the largest number of stories in this
collection appear to have been taken from the
Ming xiang ji, a collection of miracle stories
compiled by Wang Yan sometime after the year
479: nos. 2-10, 15-19, 21-24, 27, 28, [30]. (7)
The case of Hui-da (no. 30) is unusual: there is
a long story about Hui-da in the Ming xiang ji
fragment preserved in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin (juan
86, 919b-920b), but that story is different from
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story, which is
paralleled closely elsewhere in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin (juan 31, 516c-517a). (8)
ii) The other source that is explicitly identified
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels (or, to be more
precise, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin entries on the same
subjects) is the Gao-seng zhuan: no. 1, 3-5,
11-12, 13, 18-20, 22, 26, [30]. In the 19th
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin the story
P.321
of the monk seen by He Chong (corresponding to
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story no. 14) is said
to be based on the Gao-seng zhuan, but no
corresponding material is found in the Gao-seng
zhuan. The story about Hui-da (the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story no.30) again is unusual: it is
said to be based on the Gao-seng zhuan in
the 31st fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin, but the Gao-seng zhuan story about
Hui-da is obviously not the source of the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story. Seven out of 13
cased mentioned here are taken from the "miracle
workers" section of the Gao-seng zhuan (9th and
10th fascicles).
iii)Comparison of cases where the Shen-seng gan-
tong lu stories have parallels both in the Ming
xiang ji and the Gao-seng zhuan, ie., stories
numbered 3, 4, 5, 18, 19, 22, 30 in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu, reveals the following
facts :
In cases no. 4, 5, and 18, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels mention only the Ming xiang ji as source,
though parallel stories are also told in the
Gao-seng zhuan, which probably used the Ming xiang
ji, an earlier work, as its source.(9)
In cases nos. 3. 19, and 22, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
contains stories paralleling the Shen- seng gan-tong
lu in more than one place, and in one place the
source of the story is said to be the Ming xiang ji,
and in another, the Gao-seng zhuan. In two cases,
nos. 19 and 22, comparison of the contents of these
parallels with the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, however,
indicates that the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version is
based on the Ming xiang ji. In the case of item no.
3, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin material that gives the
source as the Gao-seng zhuan is in fact a
straightforward copy of the Gao-seng zhuan
biography; the passage that gives the source as the
Ming xiang ji is a shorter version of the same
account; the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story is an even
shorter version and it is not possible to determine
whether it is an abbreviated version of the Ming
xiang ji or the Gao-seng zhuan account.
The case of the story no. 30 about Hui-da is an
exception. As noted above, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
contains a passage on this monk that is explicitly
said to be based on the Ming xiang ji (919b-920b)
and there is also a biography of this monk in the
Gao-seng zhuan. Yet, the version of the story about
Hui-da that is found in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
is clearly different from these stories and
represents an independent
P.322
tradition. Moreover, this Shen-seng gan-tong lu
story is also given in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin without
indicating the source (516c-517a).
As a whole these relationships suggest that in
cases where the material in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu can be shown through their Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels to be related both to the Ming xiang ji
and the Gao-seng zhuan, the material appears to be
more directly based on the Ming xiang ji. Only in
one case, that of story no.3, is there the remote
possibility that the immediate source of the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story might have been the
gao-seng zhuan rather than the Ming xiang ji.
iv) In one case, story no. 14, which is about a
famous statesman He Chong and a strange monk,
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin states that the story is
taken from the Gao-seng zhuan, but I have so far
been unable to identify this passage in that
work. For its Ming xiang li parallel see below.
To summarize, the collection of miracle stories
about "supernatural monks" that is found at the end
of the Ji shen-zhou san-bao qan-tong lu (Shen-seng
gan-tong lu) was compiled by Dao-xuan by collecting
relevant stories from Wang Yen's collection of
miracle stories Ming xiang ji and supplementing it
with a small number of stories taken from the
Gao-seng zhuan. The subjects of the stories which
were unquestionably taken from the Gao-seng zhuan
and not from the Ming xiang ji are as follows: An
shi-gao (no.1), Fo-tu-deng (no.11), dao-an (no.12),
Shan Dao-kai (no.13) , Bei-du (no.20) , Tan-shi
(no.26), Bao-zhi (no.29). With only two exceptions
(nos.1 and 12) these stories were taken from the
"miracle workers" (shen yi) section of the Gao-seng
zhuan and these monks were well-known figures. Since
the central figures in the stories taken from the
Ming xiang ji were often not very well-known,
Dao-xan might have felt that his list of
"supernatural monks" taken from the latter needed to
be expanded by including stories about other
better-known figures.
3. The relationship between the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
In addition to the clarification of the sources
Dao-xuan must have
P.323
used in compiling the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, the
examination of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels results
in a number of complex observations concerning the
relationship between the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. We have noted that in almost
all cases, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallel is
accompanied with a note specifying the source from
which it is taken, but the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
story does not indicate its source. (10) This fact
appears to exclude the possibility that Fa-yuan zhu-
lin parallels were based on the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu: unless there existed a version of the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu which specified the sources in detail
and this version was available to Dao-shi, the
editor of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, he would have found
it difficult to specify the sources of individual
stories in detail. As I examined elsewhere, the
passages in a Fa-yuan zhu-lin that parallel the main
body of the Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu,
except the two last collections titled the Rui-jing
lu and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, appear as
collected bodies of material without any
accompanying notes specifying their sources. This
relationship, in connection with other even more
unambiguous evidence, indicates that these parallels
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin were in fact dependent on the
Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu. (11) If the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin material corresponding to the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu was similarly dependent on the
latter, it would probably have appeared in the same
form as a collected body of material without the
notes specifying the sources for each of the items
included in it. Excluding the possibility that the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallesl were dependent on the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu, we are left with two other
possibilities for explaining the relationship
between the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and its Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallels: either the former is directly
based on the latter, or both are independently based
on a third source, or, more probably, a group of
sources.
The Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels to the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu appear in the number of places scattered
throughout the encyclopedia. Since we have excluded
the possibility that these parallels may have been
dependent on the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, we might not
be far from wrong if we assume that these parallel
stories existed in scattered sources and were
collected into one body of work only when Dao-xuan
compiled the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. Dao-xuan might
have collected
P.324
these stories either from the FA-yuan zhu-lin or
from the original sources from which the FA-yuan
zhu-lin parallels were themselves taken. It is
significant that a number of these parallel stories
appear together in small groups of stories in the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin and are found in different places in
the encyclopedia. This seems to point to two
possibilities: these stories may have been found
together in the original sources, and both Dao-xuan
and Dao-shi copied these stories together as blocks
of materials into their respective works; or these
small groups of stories were first collected
together by Dao-shi, and Dao-xuan relied on these
smaller collections in compiling the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu. The situation might have been a complex
one. Thus, some of the parallel material might have
been collected by Dao-shi as a part of his effort to
compile the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, and Dao-xuan might have
usde these collected stories in compiling the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu; other parallels between
groups of stories collected in different parts of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
might have resulted accidentally by virtue of the
fact that the same body of material was copied into
these two works independently. If we can identify
one or more groups of stories among the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallesl which can be shown to have serves
as the immediate source of the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu, then we may be able to throw considerable light
on the manner in which collections of stories about
"supernatural monks" developed and ultimately
resulted in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
These small groups of stories, consisting of
stories paralleling those in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu, are found in the following parts of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin: the Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories nos. 13,
14, 17, 18, 19, 24, 26, 27 are found in the 19th
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin; nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
19 in the 28th fascicle, no.11, 20, 26, 29, 30 in
the 31st fascicle, and nos. 7, 8, 9, 22 in the 42nd
fascicle; no.21 and 28 in the 17th fascicle. Thus,
only in six cases, out of the thirty total stories
included in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallels are found in isolation: the
parallel to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story no.1 is
found in the Fa-yuan Zhu-lin, juan 57, that to no.10
in juan 56, that to no.12 in juans 18 and 16, that
to no.15 in juan 33, that to 16 in Juan 52, and that
to no.23 in juans 5 and 13. (12) I will examine
these groups in some detail, looking for clues that
P.325
might enable us to determine their nature more
precisely.
i) Parallels in the 19th fascicle
The largest number of stories (eight)paralleling
those in the "Shen-seng gan-tong lu" are found in
the miracle stories section of the 19th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, a section that bears the title
of "Paying Respect to Monks" (jing seng). The table
of contents at the beginning of the miracle stories
section of the 19th fascicle lists ten stories, but
there seems to be some confusion in the text: the
second half of the story about Fa-an, mentioned
seventh in the table of contents, is a separate
story about Hui-yuan of the Chang-sha-si temple in
Jiang-ling. (13) Furthermore, the tenth item in the
table of contents, "sacred monks in the mountains in
China") (Shen-zhou zhu-shan sheng-seng), appears to
be a separate list of mountain hermits consisting of
at least four independent stories. Although it is
not explicitly identified in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
this material is virtually identical with one
section of Dao-xuan's Shi-jia fang-zhi, which
according to its colophon was compiled in the first
year of the Yong-hui period (650).(14)
The note attached at the end of the third story
states that the three previous stories were taken
from the Liang gao-seng zhuan; another note at the
end of the story about Hui-quan, eighth according to
the table of contents, but ninth if we count the
Hui-yuan story as an independent story, states that
the six preceding stories were taken from the Ming
xiang ji. If we follow the manner in which the
stories are itemized in the table of contents, the
sixth story counting back from the story about
Hui-quan will be the story about the extraordinary
monk who appeared to He Chong, ie., the third story
according to the table of contents, which according
to the note attached at the end was taken from the
Liang gao-seng zhuan; if we count the story about
Hui-yuan as an independent item, the sixth story
counting back from the note about the Ming xiang ji
will be the fourth in the table of contents, ie.,
the story about the extraordinary monk who was seen
in Mt. Lu. In the present form of the text, the two
notes indicating the sources for the stories appear,
therefore, to have followed the latter possibility
and counted the story about Hui-yuan as an
independent story. However, as we shall show later,
the third story about the extraordinary monk seen by
He Chong is not found in the Liang gao-seng zhuan;
it was
P.326
probably based on a story in the Ming xiang ji. It
is possible, therefore, that this story (no.3) was
in fact the first of the six stories from the Ming
xiang ji identified by the note after Hui-quan's
story.
These confusions in the organization of the text
indicate that the present from of the text might
have evolved through editorial changes that were
made on more than one occasion. It is, however,
difficult to determine the earlier forms of the text
precisely.
A more general explanatory note ("shu yue") is
found at the very end of the miracle story sevtion
of the 19th fascicle, and this note mentions the
Ming-seng zhuan in 30 juans, the Liang gao-seng
zhuan in 15 juans (sic), the Tang gao-seng zhuan in
40 juans (sic) as well as "many other historical
records" as sources for stories about superior
monks. The note also states that many stories of the
same kind about superior monks were included in
other parts of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. Thus, the
sources for the main body of the material collected
in this 19th fascicle collection of miracle stories
are specified in detail by the notes on the Liang
gao-seng zhuan and the Ming xiang ji and the long
note at the end again specifies the sources, this
time for the entire collection including the two
last entries, in very general terms. This
organization of notes appears to indicate that this
group of miracle stories consisted originally of the
stories taken from the Gao-seng zhuan and the Ming
xiang ji, in the order in which they appear in the
text. This original collection might have grown in
stages, and the confusion about the number of
Gao-seng zhuan and Ming xiang ji stories might have
occurred at some point in this development. It is
also possible that the confusion occurred when the
notes specifying the sources of these stories
arranged in the present form were written at some
later stage. At some further point, probably after
the order of the stories was fixed and the notes on
the sources were written, one more story about
Hui-ming (source not mentioned) taken from the
Gao-seng zhuan and a section on mountain
hermits taken from the Shi-jia fang-zhi were added
at the end. (15) At this point a general comment
intended to refer to the whole collection may have
been added at the very end in the form of a long
note and the present form of the collection may have
been established.
The nature of this miracle story collection in
the 19th fascicle becomes clearer as we examine
parallels between this collection and
P.327
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
The miracle stories section in the 19th fascicle
begins with the story about Tan-shi that is said to
be based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography. A
biography is Tan-shi appears in the "miracle
workers" section of the Gao-seng zhuan (10th
fascicle, 392bc), but there are some significant
differences between the two accounts of this monk:
their phraseology is quite different; the Gao-seng
zhuan biography states at the end that it is unknown
how he ended his life, whereas the story in the 19th
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin ends with a
statement that his body did not change over ten
years after his death. The Gao-seng zhuan biography
was faithfully reproduced elsewhere in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin (juan 31, 517c-518a). (16) I am not at this
point convinced that the account in the 19th
fascicle is in fact directly based on the Gao-seng
zhuan biography. It is significant, therefore, that
this short version of the story parallels closely
the story of Tan-shi that is found in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu (story no.26). At some points the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version is slightly more
abbreviated.
The miracle story segment of the 19th segment of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin then continues with stories
about subjects that correspond to those of the
stories nos. 13 (Shan Dao-kai), 14 (He-chong's
monk), 17 (a monk at Mt. Lu), 18 (Zhu Seng-lang), 19
(Zhu Fa-xiang) in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu in the
same order.
Again the story about Shan Dao-kai appears twice
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, first here in the 19th
fascicle and then later in the 46th fascicle. Both
passages are explicitly said to be based on the
Gao-seng zhuan, but the version that appears in the
19th fascicle is an abbreviated version that
parallels the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version (no.13)
closely; the passage in the 46th fascicle is a
direct copy of the Gao-seng zhuan biography
("miracle workers section", 9th fascicle, 387bc)
The same story about He Chong and a strange monk
appears in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin, 19th fascicle, where the source is given as
the Gao-seng zhuan. But apparently there is a
mistake here and the story is not found in the
Gao-seng zhuan. Another version of this same story
is found in the 42nd fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
(616ab), where its source is said to be the Ming
xiang ji (note in 617a7). (17) This version of the
story in the 42nd fascicle contains
P.328
numerous parallels in phraseology with the version
in the 19th fascicle, but the two versions also
diverge significantly at a number of points. (18)
The version of this story in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu is exactly identical to that in the 19th
fascicle, and is either a copy of it, or the two
versions are based on a common unknown source which
contained the text in exactly this form. Since the
Ming xiang ji story is given in a different form in
the 42nd fascicle, that common source was probably
not the Min g xiang ji itself. (19)
The story about a supernatural monk at the
Lu-shan mountain similarly appears in both the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the 19th fascicl of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin, taken from the Ming xiang ji.
Though the two versions are obviously related with
each other, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version is slightly
more detailed than the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version
(no.17)
The situation of the story about Seng-lang is
more complex. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin version which
gives the source as the Ming xiang ji parallels
roughly the story in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
(no.18), but there are some significant differences:
for the most part the two passages mention the same
topics and describe them in a similar manner; at a
number of points the same expressions are used,
though at many others the same point is made with
differently phrased sentences. The two versions
diverge in content toward the end of the story.
The Gao-seng zhuan contains a biography of
Seng-lang ("exegetes" section, juan 5, 354b), and
this biography touches upon the same topics as those
mentioned in the stories in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and
the Shen-sen gan-tong lu, but the wording is often
quite different, the order in which the topics are
mentioned is also slightly different, and the
biography is longer, mentioned is also slightly
different, and the biography is longer, mentioning
other topics and giving a little more detail on some
of the topics. Gao-seng zhuan biographies are
frequently based, either in their entirety or in
parts, on Ming xiang ji stories. Thus, it is
conceivable that all three versions are ultimately
based on the Ming xiang ji story. The version in the
19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, which
explicitly mentions the Ming xiang ji, may have
reproduced the original Ming xiang ji story most
faithfully; the Gao-seng zhuan version made use of
other sources and expanded the Ming xiang ji story.
There seems to be something distinct about the
Shen-seng gan-
P.329
tong lu version of the story of Seng-lang. It
mentions a miracle story about a well, not mentioned
either in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version or in the
Gao-seng zhuan biography, and ends with a comment
about the contemporary state of Seng-lan's temple,
giving the name of the temple as "Shen-tong si".
Both the Gao-seng zhuan biography and the version in
the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin mention the
same location by the phrase, "Master Lang's valley"
(land gong gu). The story about the well is absent
in these versions.
Dao-xuan appears to have been well-acquainted
with this temple called the Shen-tong-si. He
mentions the name of this temple associated with
Master Lan in Mt. Tai-shan (ref., Gao-seng zhuan,
354b8, 9) in four of his Xu gao-seng zhuan
biographies (Fa-zan: 506c-507a, Tan-qian: 573b,
Seng-yi: 647a, Fa-an: 652a). The passage in Fa-zan's
biography gives an extended account of this temple,
stating that the temple was originally called
"Master Lan's temple (Lan-gong si)" but that in the
third year of the Kai-huang period (583) Emperor
Wen-di of the Sui dynasty gave it the namne
"Shen-tong si (miracle temple) " on account of
miracles that occurred frquently there. This passage
describes many of these miracles, including the
story of the miraculous well mentioned in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version of the story of
Seng-lang. The passage also states that although the
temple was over 400 years old, the Buddha image
looked brightly colourful as if it were new (507a7,
8). This description suggests that Dao-xuan had
visited the temple himself. Seng-yi's biography
gives a detailed description of the seven images in
the temple, and states that the practice of keeping
the temple gate open was continued "up to the
present" (647a10). These passages again suggest that
Dao-xuan had visited the temple in person, and that
he might later have shaped the story about Seng-lang
in the shen-seng gan-tong lu on the basis of
information obtained an his visit there. Two
possibilities emerge concerning the relationship
between the version of Seng-lan's story in the 19th
faxicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and that in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu: either Dao-xuan based his
account on the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version but changed
its phraseology occasionally and expanded it with
other information available to him, or both Dao-shi
and Dao-xuan based their respective accounts
directly on the Ming xiang ji original, Dao-shi
reproducing the
P.330
originally more or less faithfully and Dao-xuan
revising it, using a few pieces of new information.
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Fa-xiang
(no.19) has two parallels in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin:
the parallel passage in the 19th fascicle gives the
Ming xiang ji as its source and is closer to the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version; the passage in the
28th fascicle gives the Gao-seng zhuan as it source
and is clearly an abbreviated copy of Fa-xiang's
biography there.
The next entry in the miracle stories section
of the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is the
story about FA-an, a student of the famous Hui-yuan
of Mt. Lu-shan. This entry is followed by a story
about Hui-yuan of the Chang-sha-si temple of
Jiang-ling. The story about Fa-an is not found in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. The story about Hui-yuan
of the Chang-sha-si temple is found the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu (no.27).
The passage about Hui-yuan of the Chang-sha-si
temple in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin gives the source as
the Ming xiang ji and it is identical with the
corresponding passage in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
The same story appears again in the 97th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, and the source is again said to
be the Ming xiang ji. Though the passage in the 97th
fascicle tells umnistakably the same story, it tells
the story with more details, revealing that at least
in this case the Fa-yuan Zhu-lin quoted from the
Ming xiang jo rather freely, depending on contexts
--unless the Ming xiang jo rather freely, depending
on contexts -- unless the Ming xiang ji contained
two versions of the same story, or two rather
divergent versions of the Ming xiang ji existed and
were available to Dao-shi. Otherwise we must
conclude that either the 19th fascicle version is an
abbreviation of the Ming xiang ji original or, less
likely, the 97th fascicle version is an elaboration
of the latter. It is thus quite significant that th
e Shen-seng gan-tong lu version is identical with
the 19th fascicle version. The identity again points
to a close relationship between the 19th fascicle
collection fo miracle stories and the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu.
The Fa-yuan zhu-lin continues with the story
about Hui-quan that corresponds to the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story no.24. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin, 19th
fascicle gives the Ming xiang ji as the source for
its story about Hui-quan's experience with a strange
disciple. The comparison of that passage with the
corresponding story in the Shen-seng gan-tong
P.331
lu reveals that the two stories are closely related
with each other, but again the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
version is more detailed. At the end of the story,
for example, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version states,
"Quan was alive in the twentieth year of the
Yuan-jia era (443/4) in Qiu-quan"; the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu says briefly, "Toward the end of the
Yuan-jia era (yuan-jia mo; around 453/4?) Quan was
still alive in this world". The Gao-seng zhuan does
contain a biography of Hui-quan.
The next story that appears in the miracle story
section of the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
is that of Hui-ming. Though the text does not
mention the source, this passage on Hui-ming is
based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography of the same
monk ("meditation masters section", juan 11, 400b).
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu also gives a short story
about Hui-ming (no.28), but it is an entirely
different story, and a rough parallel to that story
exists in the 17th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
where it is said to be based on the Ming xiang ji. I
suspect that a rather complex set of circumstances
may lie behind this item in the miracle story
section of the 19th fascicle. If the story existed
in its present form when the main body of the
miracle story collection in this fascicle was
compiled, why was it not included in the first part
of the collection listing the stories taken from the
Liang gao-seng zhuan? Its location after the "six
stories" from the Ming xiang ji might indicate that
in an earlier stage of this collection, e.g., in an
earlier draft that must have been available to
Dao-xuan as well as Dao-shi (assuming that Dao-shi
used a source prepared by someone else when he
prepared the present form of the miracle story
collection in the 19th fascicle), the Ming xiang ji
story of Hui-ming appeared at this point, and that
Dao-shi or some other person who edited and produced
the present form of the text replaced it with a
different story about a monk of the same name taken
from the Gao-seng zhuan. The reference to the source
may have been omitted at this point since the
Gao-seng zhuan materials were given earlier, and the
editor knew that the version of Hui-ming story that
he adopted was not taken from the Ming xiang ji. It
may also be significant that the Hui-ming who
appears in the Gao-seng zhuan story was a monk who
lived in the mountain cave in Mt. Chi-cheng near Mt.
Tian-tai. Mt. Chi-cheng and Mt. Tian-tai are
mentioned prominently in the first story in the
collection of mountain monks in the long section
that follows.
P.332
The miracle stories segment of the 19th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin continues with several other
biographies of "supernatural monks" who lived in
various sacred places in China. As I have noted
earlier this section appears to have been copied
from the sixth section of Dao-xuan's Shi-jia
fang-zhi.
The above review of the material in the 19th
fascicle results in some further refinement of the
basic hypothesis concerning the origin of this
collection that I presented earlier. In my original
hypothesis I suggested that the original collection
consisted of the first two stories from the Gao-seng
zhuan which was then followed by six or seven
stories from the Ming xiang ji, with the story of
Hui-ming added later. The detailed investigation of
the story of Hui-ming reveals that it too may have
been originally from the Ming xiang-ji. This would
suggest that the original collection may have
consisted of two stories taken from the Gao-seng
zhuan, ie., the stories about Tan-shi and Shan
Dao-kai, that were placed at the beginning of the
group and then followed by eight stories taken from
the Ming xiang ji, ie., stories about He Chong and a
strange monk, the supernatural monk at Mt. Lu,
Seng-lang, Fa-xiang, Fa-an, Hui-yuan, and Hui-quan
and Hui-ming.
The evidence examined above suggests that there
probably was a close relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the parallel stories in
the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. For
example, both in the case of the story about the
strange monk who appeared to He Chong (no.3) and the
story about Hui-yuan of the Chang-sha-si temple
(no.7a), the passage found in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu and that found in the miracle story collection of
the 19th fascicle are identical, and closer
examination i ndicates that each of these identical
passages probably was an abbreviated version of a
more detailed Ming xiang ji story found elsewhere in
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
The sequence of the stories between the second
and sixth in the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin and the 13th and 19th in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu is also rather remarkable; the stories
about Shan Dao-kai, He-chong's monk, a monk at Mt.
Lu, Zhu Fa-xiang are found one after another in the
same order in both works. (20) The fact that the
items included in these two parallel sections
include those taken from two sources, ie., the
Gao-seng zhuan and the Ming xiang
P.333
ji may be very significant. The Ming xiang ji
stories that constitute the main body of the these
parallel sections may have existed in this order in
the original, and the identical order in the miracle
stories collection of the 19th fascicle and the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu might thus have reproduced the
order in the original sources independently. Yet,
this would not explain why the Shan Dao-kai story
taken from a different source, ie., the Gao-seng
zhuan, is placed immediately before these stories
based on the Ming xiang ji both in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu and the 19th fascicle miracle story
collection. We have seen above that the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin contains two versions of stories about this
monk, both of which were based on the Gao-seng zhuan
and that it is the 19th fascicle version that
parallels the Shen-seng gan-tong lu closely. The
stories about Shan Dao-kai in these two works must
have been closely related with each other. This
parallel with regard to the Shan Dao-kai story,
therefore, suggests that there might have been a
more direct relationship between the two works. This
story about Shan Dao-kai must have been grouped
together along with the other stories taken from the
Ming xiang ji at some point, either by Dao-shi when
he compiled the 19th fascicle collection, which was
then copied by Dao-xuan, or by someone who prepared
the source used by Dao-shi when he compiled the 19
fascicle collection.
Thirdly, one might also note that in five cases,
ie., the stories about Tan-shi, Shan Dao-kai, the
monk seen by He Chong, Fa-xiang, and Hui-yuan, the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains two passages on the same
subject, one in the 19th fascicle and the other
scattered in many places in the encyclopedia. In all
these cases, the version in the 19th fascicle is the
one noticeably closer to that in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu. (21)
We have suggested earlier, primarily on the
basis of the fact that notes indicating the sources
for each stories appear in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, that
parallel stories in the miracle story sections of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin could not have been based on the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. Some of the parallel miracle
stories in the 19th fascicle provide further
evidence confirming this basis hypothesis. The
analysis of the story about Seng-lan's temple in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu indicated that Dao-xuan's
version incorporated information possibly gathered
by him on his visit to the temple, and that this
information is not found in the version in
P.334
the 19th fascicle, which otherwise parallels
Dao-xuan's version rather closely. At least in this
case, it appears that the version in the 19th
fascicle was composed earlier and that Dao-xuan's
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version was produced by
copying it faithfully for the most part but also
adding a few other pieces of information. In three
cases we have noted that the version of the story
found in Dao-xuan's Shen-seng gan-tong lu is more
abbreviated than that in the miracle story section
of the 19th fascicle (stories about Tah-shi, the
monk in Mt. Lu, and Hui-quan). In all these cases,
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin versions specify the sources of
these stories either as the Gao-seng zhuan or the
Ming xiang ji. It would be more natural to assume at
least in these cases that the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
versions are more faithful reproductions of the Ming
xiang ji original, and that the more abbreviated
version produced by Dao-xuan resulted when Dao-xuan
abbreviated these materials slightly as he
incorporated them into his collect ion. (22)
These observations suggest two possible ways in
which the miracle story section in the 19th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
might have been related with each other: (1) the
collection in the 19th fascicle might have been
produced first, and Dao-xuan might have copied it
into the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, abbreviating some of
the stories and adding some detail to the Seng-lang
story; or (2) there existed a common source, perhaps
a draft collection of miracle stories prepared at
the Xi-ming-si temple, on which both the 19th
fascicle collection and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
were based. In this case there was no direct
relationship between two collections, and the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin collection might well have come into
being after Dao-xuan's collection had been written.
Since we have no direct access to the common
source posited in the second hypothesis, it is
difficult to choose between the two hypotheses on
the basis of the evidence available to us. In fact,
the circumstances in which the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu were produced might have
been very comples. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin must have
been compiled over a long period of time, and a
mumber of drafts must have been made for each
section of the encyclopedia; as the abbot of the
Xi-ming-si, Dao- xuan probably had access to these
early drafts and may have made use of them in
compiling
P.335
his own works. Conversely, collections of historical
sources and records compiled by Dao-xuan, such as
the Guang hong-ming ji and the Xu gao-seng zhuan,
must have been prepared over a long period of time,
and a large body of material must have been
developed for this purpose; these material must have
been used by Dao-shi in compiling the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin. It is thus possible that a large collection
of historical documents existed at the Xi-ming-si
that was used freely both by Dao-xuan and Dao-shi.
If this were the case, a collection of miracle
stories might well have existed as a part
of this large collection of historical materials,
and Dao-xuan as well as Dao-shi might have been
responsible for collection these materials. Dao-shi
might have used such a collection of miracle stories
to produce his draft which later became the core of
the miracle story collection in the 19th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, and Dao-xuan at some later
point might have compiled the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
by expanding this draft.
Whatever the immediate circumstances that lie
behind the compilation of the miracle stories in the
19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu, the above analysis of the
parallels between the two collections indicates that
the core of the 19th fascicle collection existed as
an independent collection before Dao-xuan compiled
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and that in fact this
collection can be characterized as an antecedent to
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu later compiled by
Dao-xuan, who expanded its contents drastically.
ii) The 28th fascicle
The miracle stories section of the 28th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin ("shen yi" [supernatural and
extraordinary events]) begins with a table of
contents that lists 18 items. According to the notes
attached at the end of the 2nd, 8th, 16th, and 17th
stories, the collection consists of two stories
taken from the Liang gao-seng zhuan, six stories
from the Ming xiang ji, eight stories from the Tang
gao-seng zhuan, one story from the Ming bao ji, and
one final section consisting of a variety of
miracle stories taken from a number of sources. The
second story in the Gao-seng zhuan section is about
FA-xiang, the subject of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
story no.19. Stories corresponding to the
P.336
Shen-seng gang-tong lu nos.2 (Zhu shi-xing), 3
(Qi-yu), 4 (Fo-diao), 5 (Jian Tuo-le), and 6 (Di
Shi-chang) are found as stories 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in
the miracle story section of the 28th fascicle, and
constitute the main part of the six stories in that
collection that had been taken from the Ming xiang
ji. (23)
We have seen that the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
story about the monk FA-xiang is based on the Ming
xiang ji version that appears in the 19th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. The story about this monk in
the 28th fascicle (story no.2 in that collection) is
based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography and not on the
Ming xiang ji story. Thus, though this story happens
to appear in the 28th fascicle immediately before
the list of six Ming xiang ji stories, which
contains the other five parallesl with the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu, it was not this version of the tory of
Fa-xiang in the 28th fascicle that Dao-xuan used in
compiling the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. The parallel
materials in the 28th fascicle are thus all stories
that are explicitly attributed to the Ming xiang ji.
In two other cases, the stories of Zhu Shi-Xing
(Shen-seng gan-tong lu,no.2; the 28th fascicle no.3)
and of Di Shi-chang (Shen-seng gan-tong lu, no.6;
the 28th fascicle, no.7), the versions in the 28th
fascicle are significantly different from those of
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
contains elsewhere versions identical (with minor
differences in the case of the Zhu Shi-Xing story)
to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu versions in the 18th
and 54th fascicles respectively. In both cases the
28th fascicle versions are longer than the other
versions in the FA-yuan zhu-lin.
The story about Zhu shi-xing in the 18th
fascicle is found among the group of six stories
that are said to have been taken from the Ling
gao-seng zhuan and other miscellaneous records
(418b28). Thus, the two stories about Zhu shi-xing
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin appear to have been taken
from two different sources, and unlike the case of
Fa-xiang examined above, Dao-xuan made use of the
Gao-seng zhuan biography rather than the Ming xiang
ji story in compiling his Shen-seng gan-tong lu
entry.(24)
The source of the story about Di Shi-chang in
the 54th fascicle is not indicated, but since Di
Shi-chang was not a monk and the Gao-seng zhuan does
not include any story about him, it may be safe to
P.337
assume that both the 28th and 54th fascicle stories
on this figure were ultimately based on the Ming
xiang ji. There is a possibly that Dao-shi compiled
the 54th fascicle version of the story of Di
shi-chang by simply copying down Dao-xuan's story in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. That may explain why the
54th fascicle entry on Di Shi-chang lacks the note
on its source. (25) If this happens to be the case,
it is possible that it was the 28th fascicle version
of Di Shi-chang's story that Dao-xuan had used
earlier to compile his story on this figure in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. Since the original Ming xiang
ji version is lost, it is not possible to determine
whether the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version was an
independent summary based directly on the Ming xiang
ji, or it was based on the 28th fascicle version of
the story, which claims to have been based on the
Ming xiang ji.
Qi-yu's story (no.3) appears in two places in
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, in the 28th and 61st fascicles.
The story in the 61st fascicle is said the based on
the Gao-seng zhuan and it is in fact a copy of the
Gao-seng zhuan biography. The Shen-seng gan-tong lu
version appears to be a summary of the 28th fascicle
version or, very possibly, its source, the Ming
xiang ji story of Qi-yu.
The version of the story about Fo-diao that
appears in the 28th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
is for the most part identical to the Gao-seng zhuan
biography. The latter must have copied this story
about Fo-diao from the Ming xiang ji. The Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story is an abbreviated version of the
Ming xiang ji story and is shorter than the version
in the 28th fascicle. Again its source could have
been the 28th fascicle or the Ming xiang ji itself.
The story of Jian Tuo-le in the 28th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is slightly more detailed
than the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version of this
story. Apparently, this longer version of the Ming
xiang ji story also served as the basis of the
Gao-seng zhuan biography, which is found in the
"miracle workers" section (juan 10, 388c-389a).
The parallel between the set of five stories
that are found side by side in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu and another set of five stories
similarly found side by side in the same order in
the 28th fascicle is rather striking. It implies
either that the two passages are directly related to
each other or that the two passages are drawn from a
common source and
P.338
reflect the organization in the source faithfully.
We have shown above that the note in the 28th
fascicle identifies the source for all these five
stories as the Ming xiang ji. Interestingly, the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version of the first of these
five stories, the story about Zhu Shi-xing, is based
on the Gao-seng zhuan, while the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu version of the other four stories appears to have
been based on the Ming xiang ji (or possibly another
work that reproduced the Ming xiang ji version of
these stories).
If we leave the question of the curious
situation about the Zhu Shi-xing story aside for the
moment, the possibility that the Ming xiang ji might
have been the common source from which the two sets
of four stories were drawn independently cannot be
dismissed without careful examination.
Since the Fa-yuan zhu-lin gives the Ming xiang
ji frequently as the source for passages excerpted
there, this work must have existed in its entirety
at the time Dao-shi compiled this encyclopedia and
he must have had access to it. An examination of the
two other groups of stories attributed to the Liang
gao-seng zhuan (ie., the Gao-seng zhuan compiled by
Hui-zhao) and the Tang gao-seng zhuan (ie., the Xu
gao-seng zhuan compiled by Dao-xuan) in the miracle
stories section of the same 28th fascicle indicates
that material was taken from these sources in blocks
and that the order of the stories in the sources was
preserved in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin quotations. (26)
Since the Ming xiang ji is now lost, we cannot know
the order in which the Ming xiang ji stories were
arragned. Yet, it is quite possible that these six
stories were similarly taken from the Ming xiang ji
as a block, and thus preserve the order in which
these stories were found in the original work. If
this was the case, then the fact that the same body
of material is found in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
arranged in the same order does not necessarily
indicate that a direct relationship existed between
the 28th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. We have seen above that by
far the largest number of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
stories taken from the Ming xiang ji; the
majority of these stories taken from the Ming
xiang ji are also found one after another forming
blocks of stories taken from that source. The block
of stories between the Shen-seng gan-tong lu nos.
3-10, for example, all appears to have been
ultimately based
P.339
on the Ming xiang ji. Each of the two texts may thus
have copied the overlapping body of material from
the Ming xiang ji directly, and thus independently
inherited the order in which the stories were
arranged in the Ming xiang ji.
The fact that the story about Zhu Shi-xing
drawn from two different sources appears in the same
position in the parallel sequence of five stories in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the miracle story
collection in the 28th fascicle,is more difficult to
explain. If we assume that the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu version was directly dependent on
the collection in the 28th fascicle, we must also
assume that Dao-xuan replaced the story there, based
directly on the Ming xiang ji, with a summary of the
Gao-seng zhuan biography of the same monk.
(27) It is also possible that Dao-xuan did not
depend on the miracle story collection in the 28th
fascicle when he compiled the corresponding section
of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, and the parallel in
the position of the Zhu Shi-xing story does not
reflect direct borrowing from that source. The
identical position of the Zhu Shi-xing story in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu might have resulted from a
different process. Dao-xuan appears to have begun
his collection in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
with two stories taken from beginning sections
of the GAo-seng zhuan: the An Qing story was taken
from his biography in the first fascicle, the first
part of the secton on "translators", and the Zhu
Shi-xing story was taken from the fourth fascicle,
again the first part of the section on "exegetes".
(28) We might therefore assume that Dao-xuan began
his work with these Gao-seng zhuan biographies. He
would also have had available to him the Ming xiang
ji; now, if we assume that the Zhu Shi-xing story
appeared in the Ming xiang ji in the same position
as it occupies in the 28th fascicle, we have the
possibility that Dao-xuan kept his version based on
the Gao-seng zhuan biography and then continued with
the rest of the Ming xiang ji stories. (29)
The evidence in the parallels between the 28th
fascicle and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories does
not enable us to state definitively whether the
latter was directly dependent on the former, or the
two collections were independently based on the Ming
xiang ji (and the Gao-seng zhuan in the case of the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu) and the parallels were
largely accidental.
P.340
iii) The 31st fascicle
The 31st fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
contains materials on two topics: one on hermits
("qian-dun" [hidden and withdrawn) adepts) and the
other on monsters ("yao-guai]. The miracle story
collection attached to the section on hermits
contains a number of stories related to stories in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu: Fo-tu-deng (31st fascicle
no. 3; Shen-seng gan-tong lu, no.11), Bei-du (no.2;
no.20) , Tan-shi (no.5; no.26), Bao-zhi (no.11;
no.29), and Liu Sa-he (no.1; no.30). The sources for
the stories included in this collection which
comprises 13 stories are indicated in the usual
fashion: the first 11 stories are said to have been
based on the Liang gao-seng zhuan; (30) the 12th
story on the Yuan hun zhi; the 13th item, described
as miscellaneous records taken from the Sou-shen ji
and other sources in the introductory table of
contents (516c20, 21), contains a number of stories
based on the Shen-sian zhuan, You-ming lu, Shu-yi
ji, and sou-shen yi ji. All the stories that offer
parallels to the stories in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu are found among materials taken from the Gao-seng
zhuan. Though three of the parallel stories are
found together at the beginning of the first miracle
story collection in the 31st fascicle (Liu Sa-he,
Bei-du, Fo-tu-deng), the corresponding stores are
found scattered in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. The
other two stories found scattered in the 31st
fascicle (Tan-shi and Bao-zhi) are also found in
positions that appear rather arbitrary in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. If there was any direct
relationship between the stories in the 31st
fascicle and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, the
relationship must have been one between individual
stories rather than between blocks of stories.
The story of Fo-tu-deng in the 31st fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is identical to that in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin also has
another passage in the 61st fascicle, where the
source is also given as the Gao-seng zhuan, and in
fact the passage is a copy of the Gao-seng zhuan
biography. The Fo-tu-deng story in the 31st fascicle
and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu appear to be based on
the Gao-seng zhuan biography, but are much shorter
and the stories paralleling those in the Gao-sen
zhuan biography are presented in different order.
P.341
The situation is somewhat similar in the case of
the story about Bei-du. The version in the 31st
fascicle parallels loosely the Shen-senggan-tong lu,
though in this case the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version is
considerably more detailed and the phraseology is
quite different even in sentences describing the
same events. As in the case of Fo-tu-deng, there is
again a story about Bei-du in the 61st fascicle.
This passage is identical with the Gao-seng zhuan
biography and also is explicitly said to have been
copied from the Gao-seng zhuan.The shorter Shen-seng
gan-tong lu and 31st fascicle story may be
ultimately based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography,
though they also contain information not found in
the Gao-seng zhuan biography (e.g., reference to
Kumarajiva).
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Tan-shi is
brief, and we have shown above that it probably is a
slightly abbreviated version of the story about this
monk in the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
The story about Tan-shi in the 31st is a faithful
copy of the Gao-seng zhuan biography.
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Bao-zhi
appears to be rather different from the one in the
31st fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, which is
directly based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography.
It is probably significant that the same story
about Liu Sa-he/Hui-da is found in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu (no.30) and in the miracle story
collection in the first half of the 31st fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin (no.1). If we follow the variant
reading of the note attached to Bao-zhi's story, the
editor of the miracle story collection in the 31st
fascicle identified the source ofthis story about
Liu Sa-he as the Gao-seng zhuan. But this story
about Liu Sa-he included in the 31st fascicle is
clearly different from his biography in the Gao-seng
zhuan ("meritorious works" section,juan 13, 409a-410
a). (31) I have examined this material in some
detail in my earlier study and suggested that this
31st fascicle/Shen-seng gan-tong lu version might
have been the source that Dao-xuan used in compiling
his biography of Hui-da in the Xu-gao. Seng zhuan.
(32)
Though all the stories examined here, except
the story about Liu Sa-he/Hui-da, are probably
ultimately based on Gao-seng zhuan biographies, the
relationship between the two versions examined here
P.342
and the original Gao-seng zhuan biographies appears
to be diverse. In the case of the stories about
Fao-tu-deng and Bei-du, the stories in the 31th
fascicle and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu appear to
have been directly related to each other. (33) In
the cases of Tan-shi and Bao-zhi, the version of the
stories found in the 31st fascicle was directly
taken from the Gao-seng zhuan, and there is no
evidence suggesting any relationship with the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu version. The stories of Liu
Sa-he/Hui-da in these two sources are obviously
related to each other: since this version of the Liu
Sa-he/Hui-da story is not found anywhere else, and
there were many other versions of Liu Sa-he/Hui-da
stories known to Dao-xuan and Dao-shi, we may assume
that the stories in the 31st fascicle and the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu were probably intimately
related to each other. Since the identification of
the source of this story in the 31st fascicle as the
Liang gao-seng zhuan is obviously faulty, the source
for this story might well have been unknown to
Dao-shi when he compiled this story might well have
been unknown to Dao-shi when he compiled this
section of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. This would mean that
in this case we need to suspend our general
assumption that the Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels
accompanied by a source note was not based on the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. Dao-xuan appears to have been
deeply interested in Liu Sa-he/Hui-da's story, and
it is quite conceivable that it was he who prepared
the original version and that the 31th fascicle
version was simply a copy of that story produced by
Dao-shi. If this was the case, it shows that
Dao-xuan played an important role in developing the
common body of miracle stories that was later
utilized both by Dao-xuan and Dao-shi. But there is
no conclusive evidence, and the relationship could
conceivably been the reverse: in that case it was
Dao-shi who wrote the original, and as in the case
of other parallels it was Dao-xuan who copied the
story in Dao-shi's collection.
To summarize, in three cases there appears to
have been a direct relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the miracle stories in the
collection attached to the 31st fascicle of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin. These are the stories about
Fo-tu-deng, Bei-du, and Liu Sa-he. Except for the
special case of the Liu Sa-he story, the 31st
fascicle versions of the stories probably existed
first, and Dao-xuan used them in compiling the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
P.343
iv) The 42nd fascicle
The 42nd fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin that
collects passages on feasting monks is accompanied
with a section on miracle stories. This collection
consists of six stories that were taken from the
Ming xiang ji (the story about He Chong that we have
commented on in discussing the He Chong story in the
19th fascicle, followed by the stories about the nun
Zhu Dao-rong, Yan Gong-ze, Teng Bing, Zhu Fa-jin,
and Gunavarman) and one story taken from the Liang
gao-seng zhuan that is appended at the end ( the
story about Dao Lin.) (34) Five of the stories taken
from the Ming xiang ji appear to be related to the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories: the story about Yan
Gong-ze. Teng Bing, Fa-jin, He Chong's monk, and
Gunavarman (nos. 7, 8, 9, 14, and 22 respectively in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu (35)). The stories about
yan Gong-ze, Teng Bing, Fa-jin appear side by side
in the same order both in the miracle story
collection in the 42nd fascicle and the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu.
The relationship between the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu stories nos. 7, 8, 9 and their counterparts in
the 42nd fascicle is relatively simple. They tell
the same stories, in more or less the same words,
though the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version appears to
be more abbreviated. The text of the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story about Yan Gong-ze (given as Que
Gung-ze in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin version) (no.7) has
one slightly unusual feature: whereas the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu stories are generally given without
nothing their sources, this story states explicitly
that a story on this subject appears in the Ming
xiang zhuan (432a24), which I take to mean the Ming
xiang ji. The parallel version in the 42nd fasciclel
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin (616bc) which is said to have
been taken from the Ming xiang ji is a good deal
longer. The stories about Teng Bing (no.8) and Zhu
Fa-jin in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu are closer to
their counterparts in the 42nd fascicle of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin, though here again the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu stories are slightly shorter. Again the
close relationship between these two sets of stories
in the two works might indicate that they are
directly related to each other; it might also
indicate that these sets of stories were
independently taken as blocks of stories from the
Ming xiang ji.
P.344
The case of the story about Gunavarman is
somewhat more comples. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains
three passages on this monk: two of these passages,
one in the 22nd fascicle and another in the 36th
fascicle, are said to be based on the Gao-seng
zhuan; and the passage in the 42nd fascicle is said
to be based on the Ming xiang ji. Gunavarman's
biography is preserved in the Gao-seng zhuan, and
the comparison with this original reveals that the
Gunavarman passage in the 22nd fascicle is an
abbreviated copy of the Gao-seng zhuan biography.
The short passage in the 36th fascicle appears to be
less directly based on the Gao-seng zhuan biography.
The quotation from the verses that he left at the
time of his death parallels one section of the
fuller version given in the Gao-seng zhuan biography
(342a27-b1) , but here again there are some
significant differences: the order of the second and
third verses is the reverse of that in the Gao-seng
zhuan version, and there are other minor differences
of phraseology. (36) The 42nd fascicle of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin mentions the Ming xiang ji as the
source of its Gunavarman stories. The relationship
between the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about
Gunavarman and the Gunavarman story in the 42nd
fascicle might be clarified, if, for example, we can
show that the two versions are more closely related
with each other than with the Gao-seng zhuan
biography. I will here attempt to clarify the
relationship between these three versions by
focusing on the story about Gunavarman's death.
All three versions describe the death of
Gunavarman by mentioning that he looked as if he had
entered in to a state of meditation, that he left
parting verses, that he attained the status of
"once-returner", and that a creature as long as over
one pi (9m? )appeared.
The story in the 42nd fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin gives the date of Gunavarman's death as the
18th day of the ninth month of the eighth year of
the Yuan-jia period (431), and tells two stories.
The first story relates that Gunavarman died in a
meditative posture, and nothing in his appearance
changed. Some said that he was in a state of deep
concentration. Only when people found his testament
(yi shu) under the mat, which said that he had
attained the rank of "once-returner" (erguo), did
they know that he had ended his life. All of his
disciples who were at his side smelled fragrant
incense. The second story is about the extraordinary
creature. Over 200 people in the capital gathered
P.345
outside the temple building that night to hear the
recitation of scriptures. Toward the morning, a
cloud-like substance ("yun qi") appeared in the
southwestern sky, and suddenly a creature appeared,
one pi in length, twisted itself around the corpse,
and then disappeared. After these two stories, the
passage notes that before his death Gunavarman
prepared 36 verses and gave them to his disciple(s),
saying that these verses should be sent to Indian
monk(s). The "testament" left under the mat and the
verses appear to be understood to be two separate
documents here.
The Gao-seng zhuan biography gives the date of
Gunavarman's death as the 28th day of the ninth
month of the eighth year of the Yuan-jia period and
states that on that day, before finishing his
mid-day meal, Gunavarman return to his residence.
When his disciples went there later, he had
unexpectedly already passed away. Before he died
Gunavarman had prepared his testament (yi wen) in
the form of a verse consisting of 36 lines. This
document described the story of his life (?
Yin-yuan) and certified that he had attained the
rank of "once-returner" After sealing this testament
himself, he gave it to his disciple A-sha-lo, saying
that after he died the disciple should show it to
Indian monks, and to monks in China as well. After
Gunavarman had ended his life, attendant monks
placed the body in a sitting posture on a bed, and
his face looked as if he were in the state of
concentrated meditation. The biography gives the
number of monks and laymen who gathered at the time
of Gunavarman's death as over 1,00 0, and says that
they all smelled strong fragrance. The creature they
saw is described as "something that looked like a
dragon or snake" (zhuang ruo long-she), and this
long creature is said to have arisen at the side of
the corpse and gone up straight into the sky. Nobody
could say what this creature was. The story of the
cremation and funeral then follows. the text of the
testament is said to have been translated by many
monks into Chinese, and the translated text is at
the end of the biography.
The story of Gunavarman's death is told in
significantly different ways in the story included
in the 42nd fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and in
the biography in the third fascicle of the Gao-seng
zhuan. It is particularly noticeable that whereas
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin story states that Gunavarman
died in the meditative position, and someone said
that
P.346
he was in a state of meditation, the Gao-seng zhuan
separates the story about Gunavarman's death from
the statement about the way he looked after his
death. According to this biography, we do not know
how he died and it was some time later, when his
disciples placed him on a bed, that it was noted
that from his facial expressions he looked as if he
were in a state of meditation. Furthermore, whereas
the "testament" which stated that Gunavarman had
attained the rank of the "once returner" and the 36
verses appear to be two separate documents in the
account given in the 42nd fascicle, in the Gao-seng
zhuan the two are clearly identified as one
document.
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Gunavarman
describes his death as follows: he died in a
meditative position, and did not rise from this
position for many days. Under the mat "testamental
verses" (yi jie) consisting of over 30 verses were
found, which stated that he had attained the rank of
the "once returner" (37) At that time over 200
people gathered, and they all saw a creature, over
one pi long, twist itself around the corpse and
disappear in the southwestern direction. This story
is clearly closer to the story in the 42nd fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and in fact appears to be an
abbreviated version of that story.
The comparison of the three versions of the
Gunavarman's story leads to the following conclusion
: the story about Gunavarman in the 42nd fascicle
must have been based on the Ming xiang ji as its
note states and not on the Gao-seng zhuan biography
as is the case of the two other parallel stories
given elsewhere in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. In the
passage in the 42nd fascicle Gunavarman's name is
transcribed slightly differently into Chinese
characters, and this may have been the form in which
the name was originally written in the Ming xiang
ji. In the Shen-seng gan-tong lu Gunavarman's name
is transcribed in the same way as in the Gao-seng
zhuan biography. Nevertheless, the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu appears to have been based on the Ming
xiang ji itself or on the passage in the 42nd
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
I commented earlier on the story about the
extraordinary monk seen by He Chong (no. 14), noting
that the version of this story that appears in the
19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is identical
with the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version. The 42nd
fascicle version appears to be a more faithful
reproduction of the original Ming xiang ji version.
(38)
P.347
There is little doubt that all the stories that
parallel the Shen-seng gan-tong lu in the 42nd
fascicle were in fact taken from the Ming xiang ji
itself as indicated in the attached note. The
evidence reviewed above does not enable us to
determine whether the Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories
corresponding to them were directly based on this
material collected in the 42nd fascicle, or whether
they were independently taken from the original
stories in the Ming xiang ji itself. The comment in
Yan Gong-se's story mentioning its source as the
Ming xiang zhuan is not found in the same form in
the 42nd fascicle version, but it could have been
based on the generalized note on sources in
Dao-shi's collection in the 42nd fascicle. (39) He
Chong's story in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu appears
to be based on the 19th fascicle version and not on
the 42nd version. If this supposition is correct,
then at least in this case the 42nd version. If this
supposition is correct, then at least in this case
the 42nd fascicle version and the 19th
fascicle/Shen-seng gan-tong lu versions of the story
might have been independently drawn from the Ming
xiang ji original. We have noted that the parallel
in the sequence of the three stories about Yan
Gong-ze, Teng Bing, and Fa-jin does not constitute a
positive clue that enables us to determine the
relationship between the relevant sources.
v) The 17th fascicle
The first half of the 17th fascicle of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains two separate miracle story
collections, one associated with Saman-tabhadra and
the other with Avalokitesvara.(40) The collection
associated with Samantabhadra consists of four
stories and the first three of these stories are
said to have been taken from the Ming xiang ji. The
first two stories are both about ceremonies
associated with Saman-tabhadra images held during
the Da-ming period of the Song dynasty, in which a
strange monk appeared. These two stories may have
existed as one story in the Ming xiang ji original,
and in the second story the name of the strange monk
is given as Hui-ming. These two Ming xiang ji
stories, either in the form in which they appeared
in the Ming Liang ji or in the form in which they
were excerpted from it for the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
together appear to have been the source of the story
in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu on Hui-ming (no.28).
The third story
P.348
in the Samantabhadra miracle story collection in the
17th fascicle is a story about Dao-jiong, and the
first half of this story (408c28-409a10) parallels
the story in the Shen-seng gan-ton lu on Dao-jiong
(no.21, 433c).(41)
Since the two entries in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu appear separately as stories nos. 28 and 21, the
two stories must have been copied separately by
Dao-xuan, either from the Ming xiang ji itself or
from the material prepared for the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
The fact that the material treated as two entries in
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is used by Dao-xuan to tell one
story about Hui-ming might indicate that it was the
Ming xiang ji original that he used in preparing the
abbreviated version for the Shen-seng gan-t ong lu.
vi) Isolated parallels
There are six cases of stories in the Shen-seng
fan-tong lu that have parallels in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin that exist as isolated stories. By this I
mean that they are the only parallel stories to the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu in their respective Fa-yuan
zhu-lin sections. According to notes in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin, two (Shen-seng gan-tong lu nos. 1 and 12)
of these are based on the Gao-seng zhuan and the
four others (shen-seng gan-tong lu nos., 10, 15, 16,
and 23) on the Ming xiang ji. In addition, in the
two cases of Zhu Shi-xing and Di Shi-chang
(Shen-seng gan-tong lu nos.2 and 6) , parallel
stories appear in one of the five groups of parallel
stories (the miracle story collection in the 28th
fascicle), but upon closer examination, the exact
parallel to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories turns
out to be located elsewhere in isolation (in the
18th and 54th
fascicle). The Zhu Shi-xing story in the 18th
fascicle is said to have been based on either the
Liang gao-seng zhuan or other miscellaneous records,
and the source of the Di Shi-chang story is not
indicated. These cases properly belong to the
category of isolated parallels, but they have been
discussed in some detail earlier. Zhu Shi-xing's
story appears in a group of six stories attributed
to the same sources in the 18th fascicle, and since
other stories in this group appear in Dao-xuan's
other collection at the end of the Ji shen-zhou
san-bao gan-tong lu titled Rui-jing lu, it may have
existed as a part of a
P.349
group of stories prepared by Dao-shi and later used
by Dao-xuan. We have suggested that Di Shi-chang's
story in the 54th fascicle that appears in isolation
might in fact have been copied from the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu after this work had been compiled by
Dao-xuan.
The story about An Qing in the 57th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is said to have been based on
the Gao-seng zhuan, and a comparison of its contents
with that of the Gao-seng zhuan biography of An Qing
("translators" section, juan 1, 323a-324b) indicates
that it is indeed an abbreviated version of that
biography. The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about An
Shi-gao (no.1) appears to be an extensively
rewritten version focusing on two episodes, and
since the relevant portion of the Gao-seng zhuan
biography is also included in the abbreviated
version in the 57th fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
it could have been based on either one of the two
sources.
The story about Dao-an is found in two places in
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin: in the 16th fascicle
(406c-407b) where it is said to be based on the
Liang gao-seng zhuan and in the 18th fascicle (418a)
where it is said to have come from the Liang
gao-seng zhuan or other historical records. The 18th
fascicle story is a short account of a vision in
which Pindola affirms the validity of Dao-an's
commentaries, and the same story is told in the long
account as a part of a longer story in the 16th
fascicle (407a 3-8).(42) the 16th fascicle story on
Dao-an is an abbreviated version of the Gao-seng
zhuan biography. (43) The Pindola story in the 18th
fascicle is told here as a part of a longer passage
on the same subject, which reproduces the
corresponding passage in the Gao-seng zhuan
faithfully (353b17-c12). The Shen-seng gan-tong lu
story about Dao-an is also an abbreviated version of
the gao-seng zhuan, even shorter than that of the
16th fascicle, and contains passages that had also
been copied into the story in the 16th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. (44) But the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu story also occasionally refers to passages in the
Gao-seng zhuan biography that were not copied into
the 16th fascicle version, (45) suggesting that
Dao-xuan may have based his summary directly on the
Gao-seng zhuan biography.
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Li-Heng
(no.10) is an abbreviated version of the Ming xiang
ji story in the 56th fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin. The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about the
nun
P.350
honoured by Huan-wen (no.15) is virtually identical
to the parallel Ming xiang ji story in the 33rd
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin (545a) . The
following story in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, which
tells the story about a monk who appeared to Du Yuan
(story no.16) tells exactly the same story as the
Ming xiang ji story in the 52nd fascicle (677b), but
the sentences are shortened at many points.
Parallels to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about
the two sisters with the surname Lun (no.23) appear
twice in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin in the fifth and the
22nd fascicles and in both cases the source is
identified as the Ming xiang ji. The 22nd fascicle
version (453b) is exactly identical to the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu version of the story; the fifth fascicle
version (304ab) tells the same story slightly more
elaborately.
These isolated parallels provide us with a few
significant pieces of evidence that are directly
relevant for our investigation. The story about
Dao-an in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu appears to have
been prepared independently from that of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallel in the 16th fascicle. In all other
cases considered here, the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
stories could have been based either on the Gao-seng
zhuan or Ming xiang ji original directly or on the
excerpts in the FA-yuan zhu-lin. It is notable that
in the cases of the 33rd fascicle story about the
nun honoured by Huan Wen and 22nd fascicle story
about the two nuns with the surname Lun, the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin stories and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
stories are identical; in the case of the story of a
monk who appeared to Du Yuan, the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu story is also very similar to the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
story. (46) In the case of the stories about the two
nuns with the surname Lun, another more elaborate
version of the same story attributed to the same
original source appears elsewhere in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin. (47) We have seen earlier that this occurs
with other parallel stories as well.(48)
The examples we have discussed above indicate
that there is a close relationship between the two
identical (or nearly identical) versions of the same
stories in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin : one of these versions was dependent on the
other, or they shared a common unknown source. In
cases like the 19th fascicle parallels, where there
are reasons to believe that the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu was directly based on the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
versions, these close
P.351
parallels lead us to the conclusion that Dao-xuan
built upon a smaller body of material that had been
prepared by Dao-shi, or even by Dao-xuan himself at
an earlier point. In some other cases, as in the
case of the Di Shi-chang story, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
version that parallels the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
closely might well have been copied from the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu itself. This would be the
exception to the general pattern in the isolated
parallels, where, except for the case of Dao-an,
there is a distinct possibility that the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu version might have been directly based
on the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
vii) Concluding comments
This survey of the relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories and their Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallels results in a number of tentative
conclusions:
(a) We have noted earlier that the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu was compiled by collecting a group of
stories from the Ming xiang ji and adding several
others from the Gao-seng zhuan. It may be
significant that the majority of the paralleled
stories in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin appear in groups in
the small miracle story collections that are
scattered throughout the different parts of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin. In some cases the stories in these
parall smaller collections appear in the same order
as those in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. This
phenomenon can be explained by either one of two
basic hypotheses: either the order of these stories
is derived from their order in the Ming xiang ji
or there was some intimate relationship between
these groups of stories in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. In this second case,
since the absence of source notes in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu suggests that Dao-shi probably did not
copy from the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, we must assume
that it was Dao-xuan who used the materials prepared
for the miracle story sections of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin. It is also possible that the body of
material Dao-xuan used was prepared by both Dao-xuan
and Dao-shi and later used by both in compiling
their respective collections. Since the Ming xiang
ji is now lost, we cannot rule out either of these
two possibilities definitely. It is also possible
that even if the order of these stories was
ultimately based on the Ming xiang ji original, the
parallel versions between the
P.352
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and Fa-yuan zhu-lin may
nevertheless be directly related; the original order
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin might have then been copied
into the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
(b) The evidence in the 19th fascicle suggests
that the collection of stories about "supernatural
monks" in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu developed in
stages over a period of time. In my other study in
which I commented briefly on the nature of other
collections in the Ji shen zhou san-bao gan-tong lu,
I noted that some of the miracle collections in the
Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu appear to have had
a similar history, and that some of the earlier
versions of these collections are preserved in a
variety of works compiled by Dao-xuan. In compiling
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, Dao-xuan appears to have
used a small collection of miracle stories, now
preserved, possibly in a revised form, in the 19th
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. Dao-xuan and
Dao-shi worked together in preparing a variety of
collections of miracle stories, and in the case of
the collection of "supernatural monks" it might have
been Dao-shi who preserved the earlier form of the
collection in his encyclopedia.
(c) The parallel stories in the 28th, 42nd, and
17th fascicles of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin are all
originally Ming xiang ji stories. Since the Ming
xiang ji itself is lost, it is difficult to
determine whether the Shen-seng gan-tong lu stories
were taken directly from the Ming-xiang ji or from
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin collections (or draft versions
of these miracle story collections). The fact that
the miracle story collections in the 28th, 42nd, and
17th fascicles do also contain a small number of
stories from the Gao-seng zhuan and that those
stories that are parallels to material in
Shen-seng gan-tong lu are nonetheless all from
Ming-xiang stories seems striking.(49) Since the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu itself contains several
stories from the Gao-seng zhuan and the parallels
to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu in the 19th fascicle of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin are both from the Ming xiang ji
and Gao-seng zhuan, it is not sufficient to argue
that the heavy reliance of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
accounts for the fact that parallel stories in these
fascicles are from the Ming-xiang ji. As an
alternative explanation I would suggest that it is
possible that the absence of Gao-seng zhuan stories
among the parallels in the 28th, 42nd, and 17th
fascicle is to be explained in this fashion: the
Ming xiang
P.353
ji stories that appear in the Fa-yuan fascicles 28,
42 and 17 and in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
circulated in a independent form, perhaps as an
anthology of Ming xiang ji stories (what I have
called the "draft version" of the miracle story
collections above). This would have been available
to both Dao-shi and Dao-xuan. They would have used
this "anthology" independently of each other and
come up with the same list of closely related
stories.
(d) The parallel stories in the 31st fascicle
are all said to be Gao-seng zhuan stories, though in
one important case about Liu Sa-he/Hui-da, the
existing Gao-seng zhuan story is entirely different
from that in the 31st fascicle, and the only
parallel to it is found in the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu. There was obviously an important direct
relationship between at least this one story in the
31st fascicle and Shen-seng gan-tong lu version of
the story. I have also noted that there appears to
be some close relationship in two other parallel
stories, those of Fo-tu-deng and Bei-du. This would
suggest that Dao-xuan relied either on the 31st
fascicle collection of miracle stories or an earlier
draft version of this collection in compiling the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
The miracle story collection in the 31st
fascicle contains excerpts from a variety of
sources, but no Ming xiang ji stories are included
there. In the light of the fact that the parallels
in the 28th, 42nd and 17th fascicles were all Ming
xiang ji stories, this concentration of the parallel
stories from the Gao-seng zhuan in the 31st fascicle
collection suggests that many of the stories that
were eventually incorporated into the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu might first have circulated as two
independent groups of stories: an anthology of Ming
xiang ji stories (see point c, above) and an
anthology of Ming-xiang ji stories. If Dao-xuan did
not take his stories directly from the Ming xiang ji
and the Gao-seng zhuan, he might have relied on two
such separate summary collections of miracle
stories: each of these summary collections might
have some intimate relationship with the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin miracle collections under examination here.
(e) The cases where close parallels between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin appear
in isolation also suggested that there might have
been some direct relationship between many of these
parallel stories.
P.354
A general hypothesis emerges from the discussion
here: the collection of "supernatural monks" that is
found in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu probably evolved
gradually over a period of time. The parallel
collections in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin might represent
in many cases earlier stages in this development.
The Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallel collections may have
been prepared without the specific intention of
compiling a larger collection of "supernatural
monks" in the end. A similar development appears to
lie behind the other collection attached at the end
of the Ji Shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu, the
Rui-jing lu. Thus, the effort to develop miracle
story collections carried out by Dao-xuan and
Dao-shi appears to have been a many sided and
complex one, but the evidence indicates that they
worked closely with each other, and the parallel
materials in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin enable us to
reconstruct some aspects of this massive project in
broad outline. I have noted in my earlier article
that the main part of the Ji Sh en-zhou san-bao
gan-tong lu appears to have been used by Dao-shi in
ompiling the corresponding sections of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin. The evidence in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu,
on the other hand, suggests that Dao-xuan used the
relevant sections of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin or possibly
the materials that had been prepared earlier and are
reproduced in their earlier forms in these sections.
This evidence is of interest to us not only in the
light it throws on the development of miracle story
collections in medieval China, but also for what it
can tell us about the manner in which the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin, an important medieval Buddhist
encyclopedia, came into being.
APPENDIX I
Content of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and their
sources indicated in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
1. An shi-gao. FYZL, juan 57 (719c-720b): GSZ (An
Qing), Juan 1 ("translators", 323a-724b).
2. Zhu Shi-xing. FYZL, juan 28 (491a): Ming xiang
ji. Another passages, FYZL, juan 18 (418b): "GSZ
or other records" (GSZ passage: juan 4,
"exegetes", 346bc).
3. Qi-yu. FYZL, juan 28 (491bc): Ming xiang ji.
Another passage, FYZL, juan 61 (744abc): GSZ,
juan 9 ("miracle workers", 388abc)
P.355
4. Fo-diao.FYZL, juan 28 (491c-492a): Ming xiang ji.
Ref., GSZ, juan 9 ("miracle workers", 387c-388a).
5. Jian Tuo-le. FYZL, juan 28 (492c): Ming xiang ji.
Ref. GSZ, juan 10 ("miracle workers", 388c-389a).
6. Di Shi-chang. FYZL. Juan 28 (492ab): Ming xiang
ji. Another passage, FYZL, juan 54 (694c-695a):
no source indicated.
7. Yan Gong-ze. FYZL, juan 42 (616bc): Ming xiang
ji.
8. Teng Ping. FYZL, juan 42 (616bc): Ming xiang ji.
9. Zhu Fa-jin, FYZL, juan 42 (616c): Ming xiang ji.
10.Li Heng (Chang). FYZL, juan 56: Ming xiang ji.
11.Fo-tu-deng. FYZL, JUAN 31 ( 517bc ): GSZ, juan 9
("miracle workers", 383b-387b). Another passage,
FYZL, juan 61 (744c-746c): GSZ, ibid.
12.Shi Dao-an.FYZL, JUAN 16 (406C): GSZ, juan 5
("exegetes", 351c-354a). Another passage, FYZL,
juan 18 (418a): "GSZ or other records."
13.Shan Dao-kai. FYZL, juan 19 (428b ): GSZ, juan 9
("miracle workers", 387bc) (this FYZL version is
abbreviated but closer to the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu version). Another passage, FYZL, juan 46
462abc): GSZ, ibid. (closer to the GSZ original).
14.He Chong's monk. FYZL, juan 19 (428b): "GSZ: (no
parallel is found in the GSZ which mentions the
name in 326a and 360c). Ref., FYZL, 42 (616ab):
Ming xiang ji (according to my reading of the
note in 617a7).
15.Huan Wen's nun. FYZL, juan 33 (545a): Ming xiang
ji.
16.Du Yuan's monk. FYZL, juan 52 (677b): Ming xiang
ji.
17.The monk at Mt Lu. FYZL, juan 19 (428b): Ming
xiang ji.
18.Zhu Seng-lang.FYZL, juan 19 (428bc): Ming xiang
ji. Ref., GSZ, juan 5 ("exegetes" 354b)
19.Liang Fa-xiang. FYZL, juan 19 (428c): Ming xiang
ji. Another passage, FYZL, juan 28 (491a): GSZ,
juan 7 ("reciters of scriptures", 406c).
20.Bei-du.FYZL,juan 31 (517b) : GSZ,juan 10("miracle
workers" 390b-392b). Another passage, FYZL, JUAN
61 ( 746C-748B ): GSZ, ibid. ( closer to the GSZ
original)
21.Shi Dao-jiong.FYZL, juan 17 (408c505a):Ming xiang
ji (parallel
P.356
in the first half). Other passages: FYZL, juan
(567c): Liang gao-seng zhuan: FYZL, juan 65
(784c-785a) (no source indicated). The Rui-jing
lu also contains a story on this monk (426c).
22.Gunavarman (Qiu-na-ba-mo) , FYZL, juan 42
(616c-617a). Other passages, FYZL, juan 22 (452c)
and juan 36 (571c-572a): GSZ, juan 3 (344a).
23.The two nuns with the surname Lun. FYZL, JUAN 22
(453B): Ming xiang ji. Another passage, FYZL,
juan 5 (304ab): Ming xiang ji.
24.Shi Hui-quan. FYZL, juan 19 (429ab): Ming xiang
ji.
25.Liu Ning-zhi. No. parallel story. The Ji
shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu, juan 1 (411b9-15)
contains another unrelated story on this figure.
The FYZL parallel to this Ji shen-zhou san-bao
gan-tong lu story is found in juan 40 (601c).
Another unrelated story about him in the FYZL,
juan 91 (956a).
26.Shi Tan-shi. FYZL, juan 19 (428ab): GSZ, juan 10
("miracle workers", 392bc) . Another passage,
FYZL, juan 31 (517c-518a) (closer to the GSZ or-
iginal).
27. Shi Hui-yuan. FYZL, juan 19 (428c-429a): Ming
xiang ji. Another passage, FYZL, juan 97
(1003c-1004): Ming xiang ji.
28. Shi Hui-ming. FYZL, juan 17 (408c1-8, 12-18):
Ming xiang ji. Ref. FYZL, juan 19 (429b): GSZ,
juan 10 ("meditators", 400b) (source not
mentioned in the FYZL passage).
29.Shi Bao-zhi. FYZL, juan 31 (519b-520a): GSZ, juan
10 ("miracle workers", 394a-395a).
20.Shi Hui-da. FYZL, juan 31 (516c-517a). Another
passage, FYZL, 86(919b-920b): Ming xiang ji. Ref.
GSZ, juan 13 ("meritorious works", 409b-410a).
APPENDIX II : The sequence of the Ming xiang ji
stories
If we follow the notes in the corresponding
Fa-yuan zhu-lin passages, the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
depended directly or indirectly on the Ming xiang ji
for the following stories: nos. 2-10l; nos. 14-19;
nos. 21-24; nos. 27-28. Some of these stories are
found side by side in the same order in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin: nos. 2-6 in the juan 28, nos. 2-7; nos.,
7-9 in juan, 42, nos., 3-5; nos., 14, 17-19, 24 in
juan 19,
P.357
nos. 2-7, 8. These parallesl might indicate that the
two sources were directly related to each other,
that is, that Dao-xuan may have had access to the
coresponding Fa-yuan zhu-lin materials, either in
the present form or in the form of earlier drafts.
There is, however, another possibility.
The order in each of the corresponding passages
in the two works may simply reflect the order in
which these materials appeared in the Ming xiang ji
independently. If Dao-xuan based his collection
directly on the Ming xiang ji and took the materials
in blocks of stories, the order in which these
stories appear in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, at
least in the sections where the Ming xiang ji
stories are listed in sequence, may preserve the
order in the Ming xiang ji faithfully. If Dao-shi
also copied the Ming xiang ji materials in discrete
units of stories and reproduced them in the miracle
story sections of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, the order of
the stories in these units would again reproduce the
order in the Ming xiang ji original. If both
Dao-xuan and Dao-shi, who appear to have worked
closely together, excerpted materials from the Ming
xiang ji in the manner described above,the parallels
in the order of stories in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin would not constitute
meaningful evidence indicating a direct relationship
between these two works. The parallels in the order,
on the other hand, would constitute a valuable piece
of evidence that might enable us to reconstruct the
order in which the fragments of the stories from the
Ming xiang ji, now preserved in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
appeared in the original text.
In each of the 19th, 28th and 42nd fascicles,
the section of the Ming xiang ji stories contain a
few additional stories beyond those that have
parallels in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. In some
cases these stories are about figures other than
monks, and therefore it could naturally be assumed
that their absence in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
simply means that they might have been dropped from
the body of material Dao-xuan was collecting when he
compiled that work on "supernatural monks". A closer
examin ation of the sequence of these stories might
throw some light on the relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu, its Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels, and the Ming xiang ji.
The first block of stories, nos. 2-10, consists
of the five stories that
P.358
are paralleled in the FA-yuan zhu-lin, fascicle 28
(Zhu Shi-xing, Qi-yu, Fo-diao, Jian Duo-le, Di
Shi-chang), followed by three stories paralleled in
the 42nd fascicle (Yan Gong-ze, Teng Bing, Zhu
Fa-jin) and one final story whose parallel is found
in the 56th fascicle (Li Heng). In the 28th fascicle
the sequence of stories from the Ming xiang ji
begins with the story of Zhu Shi-xing and ends with
that of Song Cheng-de, which follows the story about
Di Shi-chang. In the 42nd fascicle the set of
stories fro m the Ming xiang ji begins with that of
He Chong, followed by the story about Dao-rong, and
that story is then followed by the stories about Yan
Gong-ze, Teng Bing, and Gunavarman. If the stories
in the set of Ming xiang ji in the 28th fascicle
miracle stories were followed by that in the 42nd
fascicle in the original Ming xiang ji, as the
organization of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu suggests,
the story about Song Cheng-de must have appeared in
the Ming xiang ji original at the end of the section
reproduced elsewhere in the 28th fascicle set, but
since Dao-xuan was collecting stories about monks,
he must have disregarded this story. Similarly the
section of the Ming xiang ji stories in the 42nd
fascicle begins with the stories about He Chong and
the nun Dao-rong and then continues with the series
of stories that parallel those in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu. These stories about He Chong and the
nun Dao-rong may have appeared in the Ming xiang ji
original in this position.It is again understandable
why Dao-xuan dropped the story about the nun
Dao-rong.
But the story about He Chong is a story about an
extraordinary monk, and in fact Dao-xuan included
this story in his collection later (story no.14). We
have noted earlier that the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
storythat parallels the Shen-seng gan-tong lu is
found in the 19th fascicle where it is explicitly is
said to have been taken from the Gao-seng zhuan.
Perhaps there is more truth in this note than we
suspected, and in fact there existed a shorter
version of the story about He Chong in a source
other than the Ming xiang ji, though we have not
been able to identify it in the Gao-seng zhuan
itself. If this was the case, it is possible that
Dao-xuan did not copy this story in the Ming xiang
ji when he prepared the materials to be taken from
there into the Shen-seng gan-tong lu. He might not
have done so simply because the story centers around
a secular figure He Chong. Later, on a different
occasion, he might
P.359
have collected a different version of this story
from another source, and placed it at a different
point in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu from that of the
Ming xiang ji material that stood close to this
story in that source.
Li Heng's story appears in isolation as the only
Ming xiang ji story in the miracle story collection
in the 56th fascicle. Thus, it is possible that the
story might have appeared immediately after that of
Fa-jin in the original Ming xiang ji in the same
place as in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, but that the
story was copied as a single story by Dao-shi and
placed in the 56th fascicle by Dao-shi, leaving no
clues as to its original location.
The Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels to the second
group of the Ming xiang ji stories that appear side
by side in the Shen-seng gan-tong gan-tong lu (nos.,
14-19) are all found in the 19th fascicle. The story
about He Chong in the 19th fascicle is said to have
been based on the Liang gao-seng zhuan, and is
followed by a series of six Ming xiang ji stories
(stories about the monk at Mt. Lu, Seng-lang,
Fa-xiang, Fa-an, Hui-yuan, Hui-quan) . The corres-
ponding section of the Shen-seng gan-tong lu begins
with the hestory of He Chong, is followed by the two
stories not paralleled in the 19th fascicle, the
stories of the nun worshipped by Huan Wen, and of
the monk seen by Du Yuan, and then continues with
the stories about the monk at Mt. Lu, Seng-lang, and
Fa-xiang that are paralleled in the 19th fascicle
collection. It is possible that the original Ming
xiang ji passage began with the story about He
Chong, contained the stories about Huan Wen's nun
and Du Yuan's monk included only in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu passage, and ended with the stories
about Fa-an, Hui-yuan, and Hui-quan, which appear
only in the 19th fascicle collection. The 19th
fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin is devoted to the
section of "paying respect to monks" (jing seng).
Thus, the absence of the passage about Huan Wen's
nun in this section of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin poses no
difficulty. Even if the story were there in the
original Ming xiang ji passage, it would have been
natural for Dao-shi to have dropped it from the
material he was coping as being uns uitable for his
purposes. The story about Du Yuan's monk is about a
miraculous appearance of a monk, and it would be
more difficult to explain its absence in the 19th
fascicle if it were a part of the original Ming
xiang ji text. The same story about Du Yuan from the
Ming xiang ji is given in slightly more
P.360
detailed form in the 25nd fascicle. Here the Du Yuan
story is given as the first of four stories about
lay Buddhists. It is thus possible that the story
about Du Yuan was known as a story about lay
believers, and that was the reason why Dao-shi
excluded it from his list of miracle stories related
to the topic of "paying respect to monks".
The story about Fa-an is missing from the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu; those about Hui-yuan and
Hui-quan are found at later points separately and in
the reverse order in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
(stories nos.27 and no.24 respectively). If the
stories of Hui-yuan and Hui-quan had appeared in the
Ming xiang ji original at the position in which they
appear in the 19th fascicle, at the end of the
series of stories copied into the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu from this source, it would be difficult to
explain why they were placed elsewhere in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. The stories may have appeared
later and separately in the original Ming xiang ji,
and the 19th fascicle collection might have added
these stories to a body of stories taken together
from an earlier part of the Ming xiang ji. This is a
speculative hypothesis, but the relative positions
of the stories about Hui-yuan and Hui-quan suggest
that Ming xiang ji stories found together in various
miracle story collections in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin may
not necessarily have come from the same passage in
the Ming xiang ji. At least in compiling the
collection in the 19th fascicle Dao-shi, or the
author of the material he used, appears to have
collected stories from different parts of the Ming
xiang ji and may have placed some of them in a
sequence not necessarily paralleling that of the
original. There is also the other possibility that
it was the Shen-seng gan-tong lu that changed the
order of stories from the Ming xiang ji original.
For our purposes, however, the important conclusion
is that the order of the stories in the two
collections could not have been entirely dependent
on the order in the original. If the order of
stories in these collections did not simply reflect
that in the Ming xiang ji original in every case,
then the existing parallels in many cases might
suggest a direct relationship between the two works.
Parallel stories to the Shen-seng gan-tong lu
stories nos. 21-24 are found in fascicles
17(Dao-jiong), 42(Gunavarman), 22(two sisters with
the surname Lun) , 19(Hui-quan) . The Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story no.25 about Liu Ning-zhi was
probably taken from the Ming xiang
P.361
ji, but the Fa-yuan zhu-lin does not contain its
exact parallel. The Dao-jiong passage in the 17th
fascicle is preceded by two other stories from the
Ming xiang ji. The Gunavarman story in the 42nd
fascicle is preceded by five Ming xiang ji stories,
the stories about He Chong, the nun Zhu Dao-rong,
Yan Gong-ze, Teng Bing, and Fa-jin(50) We have
seen that the stories about Yan gong-ze, Teng
Bing, and Fa-jin appear in a sequence of Ming xiang
ji stories that are found together in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu. In the Shen-seng gan-tong lu this
sequence is then-interrupted with three stories from
the Gao-seng zhuan (Fo-tu-deng, Dao-an, Shan
Dao-kai) and then followed by the sequence of the
Ming xiang ji stories found in the 19th fascicle. If
the stories about Yan Gong-ze, Teng Bing, Fa-jin and
Gunavarman were found together in the same sequence
in the Ming xiang ji original as in the 42nd
fascicle, and if Dao-xuan based his collection
directly on the Ming xiang ji and preserved the
original sequence of the stories in this work, then
why did Dao-xuan insert the series of other Ming
xiang ji stories found elsewhere, in the 19th
fascicle, between the Fa-jin and Gunavarman stories?
The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story no.27 is about
Hui-yuan and the story no.28 is about Hui-ming. I
have pointed out elsewhere that the Hui-ming story
in the present form of the 19th fascicle is based on
the Gao-seng zhuan, but that it might originally
have been a Ming xiang ji story similar in form to
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version of the story.(51)
In the 19th fascicle the story about Hui-yuan is
followed by one about Hui-quan and then by one about
Hui-ming. In the Shen-seng gan-tong lu the story
about Hui-quan appears earlier (no.24), and the
story about Hui-yuan (no.27) is followed by that
about Hui-ming (no.28). At least one of these
collections must have departed from the order of
these stories in the original Ming xiang ji.
The evidence reviewed above showed significant
discrepancles in the order in which the Ming xiang
ji stories appear in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. Thus, it would be inappropriate
to attempt to reconstruct the original order in
which these stories appeared in the Ming xiang ji,
and conversely parallels in the order of stories may
in some cases indicate that Dao-xuan copied the
stories from the Fa-yuan zhu-lin or its immediate
source. It is, however, also possible that some of
the groups of the stories that appear side by side
P.362
in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
preserved the original grouping and order of stories
in the Ming xiang ji. In the absence of the original
Ming xiang ji, it appears to be impossible to
determine whether this was in fact the case and
furthermore to identify which of the groups does in
fact preserve the original form more faithfully.
Since both the Shen-seng gan-tong Lu and the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin are both thematic collections of
miracle stories, it might be more appropriate to
assume that Dao-xuan and Dao-shi collected stories
from each source rather freely and that the order of
stories from the same source was not generally
preserved in their collections. If we follow this
assumption, then the extensive parallel in the
grouping and ordering of the Ming xiang ji stories
in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
indicates that the former was heavily dependent on
the latter. Smaller collections of parallel stories
in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin could then be interpreted as
representing the earlier stages of the project that
collected similar stories about "supernatural monks"
that eventually culminated in the compilation of the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu. Under this assumption,
Dao-xuan and Dao-shi will be shown to have been even
closer collaborators than was suggested to be the
case under a more conservative assumption adopted in
the main body of the paper. A large set of small
groups of miracle stories taken from the Ming xiang
ji and the Gao-seng zhuan may have been prepared by
Dao-xuan and Dao-shi, and they may have used these
groups of stories freely in compiling their
respective collections.
LIST OF CHINESE CHARACTERS
An Qing 安清
A- sha-lo 阿沙羅
An Shi-gao 安世高
Bao-zhi 寶誌
Bei-du 杯度
bu xin fo-fa, xing-hai seng-ni 不信佛法刑害僧尼
Chang-sha-si 長沙寺
Cheng De-du 程德度
Chi-cheng 赤城
P.363
Da-ming 大明
Da-tang nei-dian lu 大唐內典錄
Dao-an 道安
Dao-jiong 道冏
Dao-lin 道琳
Dao-shi 道世
Dao-xuan 道宣
Di Shi-chang 抵世常
Du Yuan 杜願
er-guo 二果
Fa-an 法安
Fa-hsiang 法相
Fa-jin 法進
Fa-yuan zhu-lin 法苑珠林
Fa-zan 法瓚
Fo-diao 佛調
Fo-tu-deng 佛圖澄
Fu Jian 符堅
Fukui hakushi soju kinen toyobunka ronshu 福井博士頌
壽紀念東洋文化論集
Gao-seng zhuan 高僧傳
He Chong 何充
Huan-wen 桓溫
Hui-da 慧達
Hui-ming 慧明
Hui-quan 慧全
Hui-yuan 慧遠
Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu 集神州三寶感通錄
Jian Tuo-le 犧陀勒
Jiang-ling 江陵
Jing fo 敬佛
Jing seng 敬僧
Jiu-quan 酒泉
Juan 卷
Kai-huang 開皇
Kunaicho 官內廳
Lan 蘭
P.364
Lan-gong si 蘭公寺
Lan-gong gu 蘭公谷
Li-dai zhong-jing ying -gan xing-jing lu 歷代眾經應感興敬錄
Li Heng 李桓
Liang gao-seng zhuan 梁高僧傳
Lin -de 麟德
Liu Ning -zhi 劉凝之
Liu Sa-he 劉薩河
Lu 盧
Lun 倫
Lu-shan 盧山
Ming 明
Ming xiang ji 冥祥記
Ming xiang zhuan 冥祥傳
Ming bao ji 冥報記
Ming-seng zhuan 名僧傳
Pi 匹
Qi-yu 耆城
Qian-dun 潛遁
Qin 秦
Quan 全
Que Gung-ze 闕公則
Rui-jing lu 瑞經錄
Ryukogu shidan 龍谷史壇
San-bao gan-tong lu 三寶感通錄
Seng-lang 僧朗
Seng-yi 僧意
Shan Dao-kai 單道開
Shen-zhou zhu-shan sheng-seng 神州諸山聖僧
Shen yi 神異
Shen-seng gan-tong lu 神僧感通錄
Shen-tong-si 神通寺
Shen-xian zhuan 神仙傳
Shi-jia fang-zhi 釋迦方志
Shih Tao-sun 釋道遜
Shu-yi ji 述異記
P.365
Shu yue 述曰
Song 宋
Sou-shen ji 搜神記
Sou-shen hi ji 搜神異記
Sui 隋
Tai-shan 泰山
Taisho 大正
Taisho Daizokyo 大正大藏經
Takao Giken 高雄義堅
Tan-qian 曇遷
Tan-shi 曇始
Tang gao-seng zhuan 唐高僧傳
Teng Bing 滕並
Tsukamoto hakushi soju kinen bukkyoshigaku ronshu
塚本士頌壽紀念佛教史學論集
Wang Yan 王琰
Wen-di 文帝
Xi-ming-si 西明寺
Yamazaki Hiroshi 山崎宏
Yan Gong-ze 閻公則
Yao-guai 妖怪
Yi shu 遺書
Yi wen 遺文
Yi wen, yi juan 遺文一卷
Yin-yuan 因緣
Yong-hui 永徽
You-ming lu 幽冥綠
Yuan hun zhi 冤魂志
Yuan-jia 元嘉
Yuan-jia mo 元嘉末
Yun qi 雲氣
Zhan-lu wu-shu, shi shi yi yu-hai 斬戮無數, 時始亦遇害
Zhu Dao-rong 竺道容
Zhu Fa-jin 竺法進
Zhu Fa-xiang 竺法相
Zhu Seng-lang 竺僧朗
Zhu Shi-xing 朱士行
P.366
Zhuang ruo long-she 狀若龍蛇
NOTES
1) The research for this paper was carried out with
the assistance of a grant from the Social
Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada.
2) Dao-xuan's works on miracles are
discussed in Yamazaki Hiroshi."Toseimeiji dosen
risshiko". Fukui hakushi sju kinen toyobunka
ronshu. 1960, pp.694-707; "To no dosen no kantsu
nitsuite", Tsukamoto hakushi soju kinen
bukkyoshigaku ronshu, 1961, pp. 895-906; Takao
Giken, "Kantsu setsuwashu to shite mitaru
sampokantsuroku, "Ryukoku shidan, 26(1940) ,
pp.1-12.
3) Dao-xuan's Collected Records of Three Treasure
Miracles in China (Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong
lu): Some Exploratory Notes" to be published in
the festschrift for Hajime Nakamura edited by
V.N.Jha, Poona University (Indian Book Centre.
Delhi).
4) The only exception is the material corresponding
to the five stories in 428abc and 429c-430a in
Dao-xuan's work. The source for Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallels to these stories is given as the
San-bao gan-tong lu, obviously an abbreviated
form of Dao-xuan's work, the Ji shen-zhou
san-bao gan-tong lu (421abc).
5) The Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains,though in this
fragmentary manner, parallel materials to
virtually all items that are found in these two
collections. There are only a few exceptions:
no. 27 "Shih Tao-sun" in the Rui-jing Lu; no.25
"Liu Ning-zhi" in the Shen seng gan-tong lu.
This fact that even in the case of these two
collections at the end of the Ji shen-zhou
san-bao gan-tong lu parallel materials are found
scattered in a number of places in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin appears to support the basic hypothesis
that both Dao-xuan and Dao-shi drew from the
same basic body of sources in compiling the
respective sections of their work.
6) The Rui-jing lu was also incorporated into
Dao-xuan's catalogue of Buddhist works, Dao-tang
nei-dian lu, with a different title Li-dai
zhong-jing ying-gan xing-jing lu. In another
paper tentatively titled "The source Analysis of
the Rui-jing lu", I am examining this
collection, following the same basic procedure
of identifying the sources through Fa-yuan
zhu-lin parallels.
7) Althoug the items included in the Shen-seng gan-
tong lu are not numbered in the original text I
have given each story a number based on the
order in which it appears. For further comments
on the Ming xiang ji, see my "Two sources of
Chinese Buddhist biographies: stupa inscriptions
and miracle stories", in Minks
P.367
and Magicians: Religious Biographies in Asia,
edited by myself and Phyllis Granoff, Oakville,
Ontario: Mosaic Press, 1988, p.205, n., 56.
Although the Fa-yuan zhu-lin does not appear to
have preserved the parallel to the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu story about Liu Ning-zhi (no.25), it
contains two passages that mention this name in
40th and 91st fascicles (601c and 956a
respectively). The 40th fascicle story is a part
of a longer text, reproduced in the first
fascicle of the Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu
with the title, Zhen-dan shen-zhou fo she-li
gan-tong lu (the parallel passage is found in
411b9.15), The 91st fascicle contains a story
about Guo Quan, taken from the Ming xiang ji.
Guo Quan was the father-in-law of Liu Ning-zhi,
and the story is about an apparition of Guo
Quan, which appeared and requested that a feast
involving thirty monks be held for him. This
story may have been in some way related to the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Liu Ning-zhi;
this story is about a strange monk, to be shown
later to have been Pindola, who appeared to Liu
Ning-zhi and predicted that he would have a
severe illness. If the two stories are related
and taken from the same source, it would mean
that the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story no.25 was
also taken from the Ming xiang ji.
8) I have discussed the case of Hui-da in some
detail in my article, "Two sources of Chinese
Buddhist biographies: stupa inscriptions and
miracle stories", cited above.
9) I am excluding the material on Seng-lang from
this calculation. Seng-lang is the subject of
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu story no.18 and in the
51st fascicle of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin an entirely
different story about him is given with a note
indicating that the story is based on the
Gao-seng zhuan. I have not been able to identify
the source of this different story in the
Gao-seng zhuan. The Gao-seng zhuan (354b) tells
a story paralleling the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu story no.18. but the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
parallel (juan 19, 428bc) to this Shen-seng
fan-tong lu material mentions the Ming
xiang ji and not the Gao-seng zhuan as its
source (429a29).
10) The Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Yan
Gong-ze specifies its source as the Ming xiang
zhuan (432a24).
11) For further details see my article, Dao-xuan's
Collected Records of three Treasure Miracles in
China (Ji shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu): Some
Exploratory Notes" to be published in the
Nakamura festschrift.
12) One of the parallel stories about Dao-an
(no.12) is found in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, juan
18. We shall see below that a story about Zhu
Shi-xing is also found in there in juan 18,
though of the two stories about Zhu Shi-xing
that are found
P.368
in the Fa-yu an zhu-lin, this story in the 18th
fascicle appears to be less directly related to
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version. The miracle
story collection attached to the 18th fascicle
contains a number of stories that parallel the
materials found in the Rui-jing lu.
13) According to the note given in the Taisho
edition, the Ming edition listed the story about
Hui-yuan as a separate item in the table of
contents.
14) The parallel passage is found in T. Vol. 51,
972c20-973a18. As I shall comment briefly below
this final section in the 19th fascicle of the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin is followed by a long note
mentioning the Ming-seng zhuan, the Liang
gao-seng zhuan, and the Tang gao-seng zhuan and
numerous historical records as sources. Since
the section to which this note is attached was
in fact taken from a work not mentioned in this
note, and since the note appears at the end of
the entire section of miracle stories of the
kind listed in this secton.
15) As we shall discuss in some detail below, the
story about Hui-ming might originally have been
a Ming xiang ji story. In that case the editor
of the present form of the 19th fascicle miracle
story collection replaced it with the Gao-seng
zhuan story about a monk with the same name.
16) There is some confusion in the notes
identifying the sources for the miracle story
collection in the first half of the 31st
fascicle. The Fa-yuan zhu-lin in the Korean
edition of the canon, reproduced in the Taisho
Daizokyo, leaves the sources for the first ten
stories in this section unidentified; all other
editions used for listing variant readings in
the Taisho edition appear to give the correct
reading, identifying the source for these
stories as the Gao-seng zhuan. Further details
on this point are given below in the discussion
of parallel materials in the 31st fascicles.
17) There appears to be some confusion conceming
the context of the miracle story section of the
42nd fascicle. The story about He Chong appears
at the beginning of the collection, and it is
possible that the later note after the story
about Gunavarman, indicating that the preceding
five stories were taken from the Ming xiang ji,
may not apply to the He Chong's story. As I
shall discuss in greater detail below, when I
examine the parallel material in the 42nd
fascicle, I have tentatively concluded that
there has been a mistake in the counting of the
stories, and that in fact all six stories
preceding the Gunavarman stories must have come
from the Ming xiang ji.
18) One hypothesis concerning the source of this
story in the 19th fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin is that it was based ont the Ming xiang
ji story reproduced more
P.369
faithfully in the 46th fascicle; the note at the
end giving the source of this and the two
preceding stories as the Gao-seng zhuan should
have been placed at the end of the preceding
story about Shan Dao-kai; the "six stories"
mentioned at the end of the story about
Hui-quan should have included this story about
Ho Chong's encounter with an extraordinary monk
(Perhaps the story about Hui-yuan of the
Chang-sha-si temple was added by someone later).
19) I shall comment further on the relationship
between different versions of the story of the
monk who appeared to He Chong later in
discussing the parallel materials in the 42nd
fascicle.
20) There may also be some significance in the fact
that all except one (Hui-quan's story) of the
other parallel stories are found in the same
order in the two works: Tan-shi's story (no. 1
in the 19th fascicle; no.26 in the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu), Hui-uan's story (no.7a; no.27),
Hui-ming's story (though the stories are
different they are found as no.9 and no.28 in
the two works). Hui-quan's story is found as
no.8 and 24 in the two sources.
21) The others stories about Tan-shi, Shan Dao-kai,
and Fa-xiang are more faithful reproductions of
the Gao-seng zhuan biographies; those about the
monk seen by He Chong and Hui-yuan are based on
the Ming xiang ji.
22) In the case of the story about Tan-shi, the
original Gao-seng zhuan story is found in the
10th juan of the biographical collection
(392bc). The story about Tan-shi in the 19th
fascicle for the most part is identical to that
in the Shen-seng gan-tongl lu (no.26). Though
this story is drastically abbreviated and is
also quite different in phraseology from the
Gao-seng zhuan original, one sentence in the
19th fascicle version that is not found in the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu (bu xin fo-fa. xing-hai
seng-ni [ "He did not believe in Buddhist
teaching and harmed monks and nuns"], 428a280
may have been a restatement of the corresponding
sentence in the Gao-seng zhuan original (zhan-lu
wu-shu, shi shi yi yu-hai ["He massacred
numerous people. At that time Tan-shi also was
captured for execution"] 392b13). If this is the
case, it would probably mean that it was the
19th fascicle version that first abbreviated the
Gao-seng zhuan biography and that Dao-xuan
further abbreviated that version slightly in
producing the Sh en-seng gan-tong lu version.
Since the otherwise virtually identical versions
written by Dao-xuan and Dao-shi are so clearly
different from the Gao-seng zhuan original, it
is unlikely that the two versions were produced
independently by rewriting the Gao-seng zhuan
original.
23) One last story in the section of the stories
taken from the Ming xiang ji in the
P.370
28th fascicle is about Cheng De-du of Song.
24) The Gao-seng zhuan biography of Zhu Shi-xing is
found in the 3rd fascicle of that work (346bc).
The comparison of the 18th fascicle story with
the Gao-seng zhuan original indicates that the
former was an extensively abbreviated and
rewritten version, but the sentence that the
people uttered when they saw the corpse that
remained whole after cremation and that then
caused the corpse to shatter into small
fragments is called in the same way "a spell"
(zhou) in the 18th fascicle version as in the
Gao-seng zhuan biography (Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
418b10; Gao-seng zhuan, 346c11). As we shall
examine in detail elsewhere, the 18th fascicle
of the Fa-yuan zhu-lin contains a number of
stories that parallel stories included in the
Rui-jing lu. This might mean that the 18th
fascicle had existed as an earlier collection
and that Dao-xuan used the abbreviated version
of the Zhu Shi-xing story found in that
collection in compiling the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu story on this monk. It might be
significant in this context that the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story about Dao-an (no.12)
is different and more detailed than the 18th
fascicle version of the story on the same monk
(418a).
These are extensive parallels in content
between the Ming xiang ji version in the 28th
fascicle and the Gao-seng zhuan version,
indicating that Hui-zhao relied on the Ming
xiang ji version heavily in compiling the
Gao-seng zhuan biography, but the sentence that
caused the relic to shatter is not called a
spell (zhou) in the Ming xiang ji version
preserved in the 28th fascicle of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin (491b4). This word might have been added
by Hui-zhao when he compiled the Gao-seng zhuan
biography. If this was the case, its presence in
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu version (431c2) points
again to its close relationship with the 18th
fascicle and Gao-seng zhuan versions.
25) This example may be offered as a minor piece of
evidence indicating that the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu was known to Dao-shi and that the work even
at this stage lacked notes indicating the
sources of the stories included. If this was the
case, then our initial hypothesis that the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels that indicate their
sources in detail could not have been based on
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu is strengthened.
26) The two stories that are grouped together at
the beginning of the 28th fascicle as stories
taken from the Liang gao-seng zhuan are found
side by side in the seventh fascicle of the
Gao-seng zhuan ("reciters of scriptures", nos. 1
and 2). The eight stories attributed to the Tang
gao-seng zhuan are found in the following places
in the sources: Hong-ming (Gao-seng zhuan, 12th
fascicle, no.14,
P.371
408a); Fa-xian (Gao-seng zhuan, 13th fascicle,
no.12, 411b); Ru-an (Xu gao-seng zhuan, 27th
fascicle ["self-immolators"], no.5 681a-682b),
Fa-an (Xu gao-seng zhuan, 25th fascicle,
no.25,651c-652b) Hui-kan(Xu: gao-seng zhuan,
25th fascicle. no.26 652bc); Zhuan-ming (Xu
gao-seng zhuan, 25th fascicle, no.27, 652c-653a)
; Gu-yi (Xu gao-seng zhuan, 25th fascicle,
no.29, 653ab) ; Fa-shun (Xu gao-seng zhuan,
653b-654a) .There appears to have been some
confusion about the first two stories in this
list which were in fact taken from the Gao-seng
zhuan and not from the Xu gao-seng zhuan as the
note at the end of the eight stories indicates.
But the other six stories were actually taken
from the latter source and they were taken as a
block from the 25th fascicle for that work.
27) We have seen above in the discussion of
parallels in the 19th fascicle that the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story of Hui-ming is based
on the Ming xiang ji, but that the story about
the same monk in the 19th fascicle that appears
immediately after the body of six stories taken
from the Ming xiang ji is based on the Gao-seng
zhuan. In this case, we were inclined to believe
that the Ming xiang ji story about Hui-ming may
originally have been found immediately after the
body of six stories taken from the same source
in the material that Dao-shi used in compiling
the miracle story collection in the 19th
fascicle, but that for a reason unknown to us
Dao-shi must have replaced that story with a
different story based on the Gao-seng zhuan
biography.
28) The Zhu Shi-xing story is in fact the first
story in the section on "exegetes". Except for
the story about Dao-an (no.12 and based on the
5th fascicle of the Gao-seng zhuan), the stories
in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu that are based on
the Gao-seng zhuan appear in the same basic
order as they appear in the Gao-seng zhuan: the
Fo-tu-deng and Shan Dao-kai stories (nos. 11 and
13) appear side by side in that order at the
beginning of the 9th fascicle of the Gao-seng
zhuan ("miracle workers" section, part 1); the
Bei-du story ( no.20 ) appears in the tenth
fascicle of the Gao-seng zhuan ("miracle
workers" section, part 2). It might also be
significant that the biographies of An-qing, Zhu
Shi-xing, and Fo-tu-deng occupy the first
position in the respective sections of the
collection, "translators", "exegetes", and
"miracle workers". The biography of Hui-da,
though its content is different from that of the
Hui-da story in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, also
occupies the first position in the "promoters of
meritoriou s works" section.
29) Earlier in discussing the case of the Shan
Dao-kai story in the 19th fascicle, I argued
that the fact that stories from two different
soureces are found side by side in the same
order in the 19th fascicle and the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu suggested
P.372
that the Shen-seng gan-tong lu was directly
dependent on the Fa-yuan zhu-lin. In that case,
the relationship between the two Shan Dao-kai
stories was clear: they were both from the
Gao-seng zhuan and clearly related with each
other. In the case of the Zhu Shi-xing story
under examination here, the two stories about
Zhu Shi-xing in the two works are clearly
different and drawn from two different sources.
Thus, the parallel in the order of the stories
does not necessarily indicate a direct
relationship between the 28th fascile collection
and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
30) I have followed the reading of the note
attached to story no. 11 on Bao-zhi that
according to the ntoe 5, p.520a of the Taisho
edition was found in the Song, Yuan, Ming, and
the Kunaicho library editions. The note reads
"the above 11 stories were taken form the Liang
gao-seng zhuan". The text reproduced in full in
the Taisho editiion is based on the Korean
edition. According to this text, the note
attached to Bao-zhi's stories reads "this one
story was taken from the Liang gao-seng zhuan",
indicating that only the story about Bao-zhi was
taken from this source. This would leave the
source for the first ten stories in this miracle
story collection unidentified. Although the
notes concerning the sources are frequently
confused and leave the sources for some stories
unidentified, I believe that the variant reading
in the Song, Yuan, Ming, and the Kunaicho
library editions is more likely to have
preserved the original form of the text.
31) The subject is there identified as monk Hui-da.
32) "Two sources of Chinese Buddhist Biographies:
stupa inscriptions and miracle stories", ibid.,
173-176.
33) Or, the two versions were related to each other
through a common source. The fact that they are
more similar to each other than to the
corresponding Gao-seng zhuan biographies
indicates that their common source, if it
existed, could not have been these biographies.
It must have contained the versions of the these
stories must closer to those in the 31st
fascicle and the Shen-seng gan-tong lu.
34) The table of contents at the beginning of the
miracle story collection in the 42nd fascicle
mentions six stories althogether, but there are
actually seven stories in the collection: for
some reason the story about Fa-jin (616c) is not
mentioned in the table of contents. The note
that is found at the end of the story about
Gunavarman states that "the above five stories
were taken from the Ming xiang ji". Thus, if we
follow the main text of the collection and count
the story about Fa-jin as one independent
story, there are in fact six stories in the
miracle story section ahead of the note attached
to the Gunavarman story and none of these
stories
P.373
is accompanied with an independent note
specifying the sources. If we follow the note
after the Gunavarman story and the present form
of the entire text strictly, the first story in
the miracle story section, the story about He
Chong, will be left unidentified as to its
source. If we follow the list given in the table
of contents, on the other hand, and count five
stories from the Gunavarman story, the story
about He Chong will be included in the list of
stories taken from the Ming xiang ji. The notes
in the miracle stories sections of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin generally identify the sources of the
stories included in a thorough manner, though
there are frequent confusions regarding the
number of stories to which these notes refer. It
is possible that these notes may have been
prepared at the same time as the initial table
of contents, and in the case of the miracle
story collection in the 42nd fascicle, the
editor who prepared the table of contents and
the notes on sources may have miscalculated the
number of stories included in this collection.
It is also possible that the story about Fa-jin
was inserted into the text after the table of
contents and the notes on the sources were
completed (though the parallel with the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story to be commented on
below makes this a less likely possibility). I
have here assumed tentatively that all the six
stories preceding the Gunavarman story must have
been based on the Ming xiang ji.
35) The name of Gunavarman is transcribed
differently in the two works.
36) There appear to have been different versions of
the verse, called "yi wen", in Gao-seng zhuan,
348c8, 341b25; "yi wen, yi juan" in the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin, juan 36, 571c29; and yi shu, in the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin, juan 42, 617a2; the Gao-seng
zhuan biography itself gives a variant version
of the two verses 342b7 in an earlier quotation
in 340c9.
37) I am adjusting the punctuation of this passage
(433c13) in the Taisho edition in the light of
the parallel passage in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin
story (617a2)
38) There is some room from complex speculaltion
concerning the relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the 42nd fascicle
story about the monk seen by He Chong. It is
conceivable, at least in theory, that the
shorter version of the story about the monk seen
by He Chong in the 19th fascicle was based on
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, which in turn
produced this shorter version on the basis of
the 42nd fascicle version of the story. We have
proposed a similar hypothesis in the case of the
story about Di Shi-chang earlier. In the case of
the Di Shi-chang story, the longer version in
the 28th fascicle is explicitly said to have
been taken from the Ming xiang ji and it is the
shorter version in the 54th fascicle that is
identical with the Shen-seng gan-tong lu and
lacks the source note in the
P.374
Fa-yuan zhu-lin. In the case of the monk seen by
He Chong, again the longer version in the 42nd
fascicle is identified as based on the Ming
xiang ji, if our assumption about the mistake in
the note after the Gunavarman story is correct.
We have pointed out earlier that there is some
confusion in the source notes in the 19th
facicle collection of miracle stories and that
although the note afte the 19th fascicle story
about He Chong states that the story was taken
from the Gao-seng zhuan, that sory is not found
in the Gao-seng zhuan, and is more likely to
have been based on the Ming xiang ji. We can
speculate that the confusion concerning the
source of the He Chong story in the 19th
fascicle might have started because the version
included there was in fact a copy of the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu story which had originally
been inserted there without any indication of
its source. As the case of 54th fascicle story
on the Di Shi-chang suggests, the Shen-seng
gan-tong lu original which Dao-shi used might
not have indicated the sources of the stories
included there. If this was the case, the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu summary of the story about
the monk who appeared to He Chong might first
have been compiled by summarizing either the
42nd fasccle version of this story or the
original Ming xiang ji story.
Other evidence examined above, however,
suggests rather strongly that the miracle story
collection in the 19th fascicle must have
existed, at least in its skeleton, earlier than
the Shen-seng gan-tong lu, and that the latter
must have copied the parallel stories from the
19th fascicle collection. In the case of the
story about Hui-yuan of the Chang-sha-si temple,
for example, the 19th and 97th fascicle versions
of the story are both identified as being based
on the Ming xiang ji (though the 19th fascicle
version is not mentioned in the table of
contents and the exact identity of the "six
stories" taken from the Ming xiang ji mentioned
in the note after Hui-quan's story remains
somewhat unclear). Dao-shi appears to have made
occasionally two different summaries of the same
Ming xiang ji stories, and the 19th and 42nd
fascicle versions of the story of the monk seen
by He Chong might also have been produced in the
same manner. This is the assumption I adopted in
my discussion of the 19th fascicle parallels,
and this assumption enables us to explain the
relationship between the parallel stories in the
19th fascicle more coherently. The other
possibility, however, cannot be conclusively
excluded from consideration.
39) At an earlier stage in the compilation of the
material for the miracle story collection in the
42nd fascicle these notes might have existed in
a more cumbersome form as notes attached to each
story, and the Yan Gong-ze passage in the Shen-
P.375
seng gan-tong lu might have accidentally
preserved this earlier form of the note.
40) These collections form the last part of the sec-
tion on "paying respect to the Buddha" (jing fo,
381b-411c). The second half of this long section
is divided into subsections on Amitabha worship,
Maitreya worship, Samantabhadra worship, and
Avalokitesvara worship. In the Taisho edition of
the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, the first two of these
subsections, those on Amitabha and Maitreya
worship, are made up of a segment consisting of
quotations from scriptures and another on
miracle stories. The Atmitabha subsection is
found 397b-401c, and the first segment from
397b-399b contains general comments and passages
quoted from scriptures; the second segment is
found in 399b-401c and it is a collection of
Chinese Buddhist miracle stories. The Maitreya
subsection similarly consists of the general
segment found in 402a-406a and the Chinese
Buddhist miracle story segment in 406a-408b. The
subsection on Samantabhadra and Avalokitesvara
worship, however, curiously consist only of the
miracle story segment, 408b-409b and 409b-411c
respectively. The heading for the Samantabhadra
subsection is accompanied by a note stating that
since the present time has entered the Age of
the Declined Teaching, there rarely are any who
contemplate this bodhisattva and that for this
reason scriptural passages are not recorded in
this subsection and only four miracle stories
are given. No such note is found in the
beginning of the Avalokitesvara subsection.
41) I discussed the relationship between the
Gao-seng zhuan biography of Dao-jiong and the
Ming xiang ji story on this monk which appears
to have been used as its source in some detail
in my earlier article, "Two sources of Chinese
Buddhist biographies: stupa inscription and
miracle stories", ibid., 136-139.
42) This passage in the 18th fascicle is identical
with the passage on Dao-an in the Rui-jing lu,
426b27-c6.
43) The beginning section of the fascicle 16 story
(406c2-8) is an abbreviated version of the
beginning section of the Gao-seng zhuan
biography (351c3-21) . The Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
406c9-14 reproduces the Gao-seng zhuan,
352a15-20; Fa-yuan zhu-lin, 406c15-407a3, the
Gao-seng zhuan, 352b17-c6; the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
407a3-27 the Gao-seng zhuan, 353b17-c12; and the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin 407a27-b13 the Gao-seng zhuan,
354a1-18.
44) E.g.432c14-17 corresponds to Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
406c10-14, which reproduced the Gao-seng zhuan,
351c16-20; 432c17-18 to the Fa-yuan zhu-lin,
407a29-c1 and the Gao-seng zhuan, 354a3-6;
432c20-26 to the Fa-yuan zhu-lin 407a15-24 and
the Gao-seng zhuan, 353b29-c9.
P.376
45) The story refers to Mt.Wang-wu (432c13; ref.,
ref., Gao-seng zhuan, 352a9) and the incident in
which Dao-an advised the Former Qin ruler Fu
Jian (reign: 357-385) against the excursion into
the South (432c28; ref., Gao-seng zhuan,
353a27-17).
46) The case of the exact parallel between the
Dao-an story in the Rui-jing lu (no.2 and the
18th fascicle version of the story about this
monk is relevant to this point.
47) In the case of the story about Dao-an, another
version of the Gao-seng zhuan also apperas
elsewhere in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin in the 16th
fascicle.
48) There are four unambiguous examples in the 19th
fascicle: Tan-shi (no.26, the other version in
juan 31, both from the Gao-seng zhuan); Shan
Dao-kai (no.13, the other version in juan 46,
both from the Gao-seng zhuan); He Chong's monk
(no.14, the other version in juan 42, both
probably from the Ming xiang ji), Hui-yuan
(no.27, the other version in juan 97, both from
the Ming xiang ji). In the 31st fascicle there
are two such examples: Fo-tu-deng (no.11,
fascicles 31 and 61, both from the Gao-seng
zhuan) and Bei-du (no.20, though here there are
some differences between fascicle 31 and the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu versions; the other
version is found in the 61st fascicle; both
versions are based on the Gao-seng zhuan).
49) The first two stories in the 28th fascicle
collection and the last story in the first 42nd
fascicle collection are based on the Gao-seng
zhuan. The last story in the 17th fascicle
collection, the story about Pu-ming, is said to
be based on the Tang gao-seng zhuan, but there
appears to have been a mistake here, and the
story is found in the 7th fascicle of the
Gao-seng zhuan, 497b. The 28th fascicle
collection also contains eight stories from the
Xu gao-seng zhuan.
50) As I noted above, the fact that the note after
the Gunavarman story states that the five
preceding stories were taken from the Ming xiang
ji suggests that one of the six stories before
the note, possibly the first story about He
Chong, was not from the Ming xiang ji.
51) This in turn may have been an abbreviated
version of the longer Ming xiang ji version now
preserved more faithfully in the 17th fascicle.
P.377
Summary
Toward the end of his life, Vinaya Master
Dao-xuan (596-667) showed great interest in miracle
stories. This maniferted in a collection of Chinese
Buddhist pieces of this genre called the Ji
shen-zhou san-bao gan-tong lu the last fascicle of
which contains "The Recards of Supernatural Monks
Miracles" (Shen-seng gan-tong lu). In the present
paper, the author aims at examining the sources of
those "Records" through the parallel found in Vinaye
Master Qao-shi's encyclopedia Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
An analysis of the sources mentioned in the
Fa-yuan zhu-lin parallels to the Shen-seng gan-tong
lu leads to the general conclusion that Dao-xuan
compiled his miracle stories about "supernatural
monks" by collecting relevant stories from Wang
Yen's Ming xiang ji and supplemently it with a small
number of stories taken from the Gao-seng zhuan. It
furthermore results in a number of complex
observations concerning the relationship between the
Shen-seng gan-tong lu and the Fa-yuan zhu-lin.
Detailed comparative examination of the Fa-yuan
zhu-lin fascicles 19, 28, 31, 42 and 17 corroborates
the hypothesis that the collection of "supernatural
monks" found in the Shen-seng gan-tong lu has
evolved gradually over a period of time. Parralel
collections in the Fa-yuan zhu-lin, poobabely
prepared without the specific intention of compiling
a larger collection of "supernatural monks" in the
end, might represent in many cases earlier stages in
this development. The effort to develop literary
collections carried out by Dao-Xuan and Dao-shi
appears to have been a many sided and complex one,
but the evidence indicates that they worked closely
with each other.
P.378
An enquiry into the sequence of Ming xiang ji
stories (Appendix II) shows even more clearly that
they may have have had prepared a large set of small
groups of miracle stories taken from the Ming xiang
ji and the Gao-seng zhuan,and used these groups of
stories feely in compiling their respective
collections, the Fa-yuan zhu-lin and Shen-seng
gan-tong lu.
P.379
提要
道宣律師 (西元五九六∼六六七年 )晚年對感應故事
頗有興趣，編輯了一部 [ 集神州三寶感通錄 ]，將 [ 神僧
感通錄 ] 一篇收入末卷。本文則比較該篇與道世律師所撰
[ 法苑珠林 ]，透過相同的故事，探索神僧感通錄的資料來
源。
在分析法苑珠林相同故事註明的出處後，筆者大致上獲得
的結論是：道宣編輯神僧感通錄是從王琰冥記搜集相關故事
，再用少數高僧傳故事來補充。同時也觀察出神僧感通錄和
法苑珠林若干複雜的關係。進而詳細比較研究法苑珠卷一九
、二八、三一、四二、一七，足以證實，神僧感通錄是在相
當一段時間內才逐漸編成的，而法苑珠林相同的故事，最初
恐怕是為了組合一部篇幅較大的神僧故事集而準備的，多處
可能反應整個搜錄過程中較早的階段。道宣、道世致力於類
書、集子的編輯，看來是多方面而且複雜的過程，但是二人
顯然密切合作。
至於附錄二， 冥祥記故事次的研究更進一步顯示， 這
兩位律師似乎參考了冥祥記和尚僧傳，來準備一套內分多組
的感通故事，而在分頭編纂神僧感通錄及法苑珠林時，對這
些資料自由加以利用。