Tangut Chan Buddhism and Guifeng Zong-mi

Summary

The present paper is an attempt to introduce some of the unique source material covering the aspects of development of Chinese Chan and Huayan Buddhism in the Tangut State of the Great Xia.　Insofar, the author has been engaged in the study of the Tangut Chan manuscripts in St. Petersburg collection, which numbers up to 10,000 items.　A throughout survey of the Tangut collection, has revealed, that the Chinese Buddhist schools, current in Xi-xia, Huayen-Chan trend, represented with the school of Guifeng Zong-mi was predominant.　The present paper's main conclusion was that the Huayan-Chan lineage had not been interrupted after the Huichang Prosecution of Buddhism, but had certain development in the North-Western China and prosperous in Xi-xia at least until the mid. 12th century.　The author here goes in much detail concerning the basic shift from Shen-hui to Ma-zu, that occured within Huayan-Chan tradition in Xi-xia and earlier, in China proper, and brings about certian unique Tangut texts as the evidence for that process.　Thus the paper contains a translation of Tangut text The Mirror, notes on the‘Basic Intentions of the Hongzhou Masters’ and other lengthy references to the related Tangut texts, faximile reprint of a portion of the Tangut translation of Zong-mi Chan Preface, index of Tangut characters with the Chinese equivalents.

關鍵詞：1.Xi-xia　2.Guifeng Zong-mi　3.Chan　4.Huayan　5.The Mirror

The existence of two main branches within the framework of Tangut Buddhism has long been evident to the students of Tangut culture.　Among those branches, namely Chinese and Tibetan, the former was the first to appear on the territories, which since the end of the 10th century constituted the core of the Tangut state.

The sources contain scarce notes on the Chinese Buddhism being widespread beyond the North-Western frontiers of China in the time before the actual foundation of the Tangut kingdom.　Those notes, though quite vague, alongside the well-known facts concerning the substantial influence of Wutaishan and Dunhuang centers on the surrounding barbarian tribes, allow us to presume that Chinese Buddhist influence was to certain extent predominant during the early period of ‘Buddhist development’ of Northern barbarians.

Whatever the presumes might be, the exact nature of Tangut Buddhism still remains unclear, mostly due to the lack of adequate sources and difficulties implied by the Tangut language itself.　The present paper attempts to shed some light on the nature of Tangut Buddhist borrowings from China and thus to clarify some characteristics of Tangut Buddhism itself.　This task must be especially assigned to the Russian scholars, since Russia possesses the world biggest collection of Tangut manuscripts and woodblock printings delivered to St. Petersburg around 1905 by the expedition of P. K. Kozlov.　The collection, numbering up 10,000 items of mostly Buddhist texts has not yet been explored properly, thus the present paper is one of the first and therefore imperfect attempts of the study of the field[1]

The fundamental monograph of Prof.　Shi Jin-bo The brief history of Buddhism in Xi-xia in its final section contains an account of Chinese Buddhist schools popular in the Tangut state and is insofar the standard work in the related field and the future researches can probably add some new material, but not undermine its essentials.[2]

p. 367

According to Prof. Shi Jin-bo, several Chinese Buddhist schools were spread in the Tangut state, among them Tiantai, Chan, Huayen, Pure Land, and a variety of the so-called ‘Secret Teachings’ of both Chinese and Tibetan origin.[3]　This point of view is in some of its aspects erroneous, since the main criteria of the presence of Tiantai doctrines in Xi-xia is seen in the popularity of the Lotus Sutra, which by no means is a text exclusively peculiar to Tiantai, but rather to the whole of Far-Eastern and Central-Asiatic Buddhism.[4]　The other evidence considered by Prof.　Shi is the presence of a copy （or a number of copies） of Seng-zhao's work The Treatise of the Precious Womb,[5]　which is hardly related to the Tiantai tradition.　However the materials, preserved in St. Petersburg confirm Prof. Shi's opinion on the Chan and Huayen popularity in Xi-xia.　The texts, related to both traditions, are abundant in the St. Petersburg Tangut collection, thus the present paper will concentrate on the investigation into Tangut Chan and Huayen matters.[6]

The assumption of the wide popularity of Chan and Huayen in the Tangut state will be even more adequate, if we consider, that Huayen and its offsprings were probably the basic, if not the only representatives of Chinese Buddhism in Xi-xia.　A survey of the St. Petersburg Tangut collection demonstrates that among the treatises of the Chinese Buddhist schools the dominant position was occupied by the Tang dynasty Huayen and Chan works, especially those of Zong-mi and Pei Xiu.[7]

Concerning the early penetration of Chinese Buddhism into the Tangut parts during the period prior to establishment of the Tangut state, the Chinese sources contain almost no reliable information.　Nevertheless, several observations, that　

p. 368

seem to correspond with the later picture of Buddhism in Xi-xia, can be made.

The first to mention will be a report of the travel of a certain Indian monk Pu-hua to Wutaishan between 925～938.　This report bears a notion that the Tangut tribes residing in the area of Wutaishan, paid great reverence to the monastery and used to undertake pilgrimages to pay homage to the sacred place.[8]　The assumption of early familiarity of Tangut with the teachings of Wutaishan fits well to what we know about later stage of Buddhism in Xi-xia, i.e. substantial popularity of Huayen and Secret teachings.　The reverence of the Tangut towards Wutaishan during the early times, and thus their knowledge of the Secret teachings is confirmed with another, though indirect, evidence of Bu-kong's biography, which informs, that the Master of Esoteric Buddhism spent several years ‘sometimes entering through the passes, sometimes transforming the lands to the West of〔Yellow〕river.’[9]　Since during the reign of Tang Dai-zong（762～779）, to which the note refers, the Tangut ancestors──Dangxiang had already been resettled in the related area, they could well be objects of Bu-kong's ‘transforming’, thus becoming familiar with some sort of esoteric Buddhism.　This sort of borrowing Buddhist elements was not peculiar to the Tangut only, since the Khitan possessed basically same experience, establishing the Huayen esoterism as their national religion.

The origins of the Tangut Chan can be also traced deeper, than it was previously believed: information on Bao-tang Wu-zhu（保唐無住720～794）travels in North-Western China from the Notes on Transmitting the Dharma Treasure through Generations implies that at the period of 760's some sort of Buddhism was spread in the region of Helanshan, where the Tangut were already residing.　Concerning the late 8th century Helanshan Buddhism, little can be said: the doctrines of the lü（律）school and the teaching of Sichuan Chan of Rev. Kim（金和尚）seem to be known there.[10]　However, no evidence of later presence of　

p. 369

Sichuan Chan in Xi-xia has been discovered insofar, thus the above presuppositions are of little practical value.

One more circumstance to mention is the existence of a number of pre-Tang temples and monasteries in the areas of Eastern Tibet, adjacent to the Tangut lands.　The Tangut, often encountering various perils in their intercourse with the Eastern Tibetans, could also have experienced the impact of their temples, in which Chinese Buddhism was probably professed.[11]

As for the impact of Dunhuang in the early period nothing definite can be said, except for the long-lasting influence of Tan-guang, who seems to be the first to introduce Chinese Fa-xiang school into Hexi region.[12]　There is certain evidence, that Tan-guang's treatises were borrowed by the Tangut directly from Dunhuang, and maybe even from Tan-guang himself or through various mediators.[13]

Still, from the mentioned above, it is clear, that the blossoming of Buddhist culture in Xi-xia did not come all of a sudden, but was prepared through long preliminary period, during which certain elements of Buddhism were introduced to the Tangut.

Although huge in number, the Tangut collection in St. Petersburg is not fully representative of Tangut Buddhism, since it comes from the single source and is rather occasional in its original nature.　The existence of some important texts, that definitely circulated in Xi-xia, is not confirmed by the manuscript material itself and these treatises are known only through quotations in the extant texts.　Such is the case of the Treatise of Awakening the Faith in Mahayana or the Treatise of Ma-ming, whose Tangut translation is mentioned in other texts, but the text itself had not survived; Surangamasutra, Sutra of the Perfect Enlightenment, Deng-guan commentary on Avatamsaka-sutra, while the sutra itself　

p. 370

was well-known in Xi-xia, etc.

At the same time, a number of texts, relating to several Chinese traditions and yet not known in their Chinese originals was discovered in the Tangut collection.　Still, there exists another category of texts, that were probably compiled in Xi-xia in the mainstream of corresponding Chinese traditions and thus reveal the Tangut comprehension of the relevant doctrines.

As it was mentioned above, the treatises and standard works of the so-called Buddhist schools are not so numerous and for the most part relate to the traditions of Chan and Huayen and to the synthetic Chan-Huayen school of Guifeng Zong-mi（圭峰宗密780～841）.　To my mind, it looks necessary to give a brief report of Chan and Huayen texts, discovered in the Tangut collection in St. Petersburg.　The available texts will be distributed among the following groups.

Biographic and Historical Treatises

Insofar only one historical treatise has been discovered in St. Petersburg Tangut collection.　Its Tangut title is translated as The Essentials on the Transmitting of the Lamp 〔of Teaching〕, part three（in Chinese rendering: 《燈要三》）and is in fact an abridged reproduction of Song Notes on the Transmission of the Lamp of Teaching during the Jingde era.　The extant portion of the Tangut text corresponds to the 5th juan of Jingde, with some minor amendments.　The nature of those amendments is nothing but abbreviation of the Chinese version.　The Tangut text omits some of the personages originally present in Jingde.　The extant Tangut text contains the biographical notes on the first generation of Hui-neng students in the order slightly different from the Jingde original and omits the notes on Hebei Zhi-huang（河北智隍）and Bianchan Xiao-liao（匾襜曉了）of whom Jingde itself admits to have little reliable information.[14]　Thus the Tangut text in question is not in fact a mere translation of Jingde, but probably of another text and may even be considered an original Tangut compilation from different sources.

Although Jingde is sometimes considered a treatise of the Southern school of Chan, its Tangut version seems to lack any scholarly bias and is thus a collection　

p. 371

of anecdotes on prominent Buddhist personalities.　The existence of the Tangut version of jingde cannot be considered to be a testimony, confirming the existence of the Southern Chan in Xi-xia.　Being anyway a product of Chinese borrowings, the Essentials do not contain and likely never contained any data on the reception of Buddhism in any form in Xi-xia.　The general impression is that a Buddhist chronicle or any sort of historical treatise had never been compiled in Xi-xia.　Thus various historical notes, for the most part lapidary and hardly comprehensible, are scattered in different texts, which makes the task of bringing them together difficult.[15]　A Treatise on the Essentials of Contemplation’ compiled together by Vimalakirti and Avalokiteshvara contains a preface, where a lineage of Chan teachers is listed.　The doctrine of meditation, says the text, had been transmitted from Shakyamuni to Manjushri.　The latter transmitted the Dharma to the teacher｛Lü｝, named｛Gui｝ who handed it over to the teacher｛I-i｝, who in turn visited the Minyag（Tangut）state, where he had his teaching transmitted to the twenty Tangut Chan masters.　The meaning of this brief note is difficult for interpretation, but this looks to be the only truly historic note on Tangut Buddhism.　Of course, the texts, related to various vajrayana practices, contain their traditional lineages, but this fact has little to do with Chinese Buddhism.

Texts Related to the Guifeng Zong-mi Tradition

One of the most surprising characteristics of the Tangut Collection in St. Petersburg is relatively big number of treatises, related to the Huayen tradition, particularly to the line of the late Tang master Zong-mi, once the 5th patriarch of Huayen and at the same time of Heze Shen-hui Chan lineage.　The works of Zong-mi from Xi-xia are extant in both Chinese and Tangut versions.　Some of　

p. 372

them bear direct evidence that they were printed for the benefit of the living creatures sometime about mid 12 century, one of the copies even originating from the imperial residence of the king of Xia.[16]　Most of famous Zong-mi works circulated as woodblock editions and in big number of copies, that in itself is enough to confirm their substantial popularity.

However, as it is generally recognized, the school of Zong-mi did not survive long after its first patriarch and after Huichang persecution it had completely disappeared.　This viewpoint seems to contradict the reality of Tangut Buddhism and thus needs to be explained.

Alongside the works of Zong-mi himself, the Tangut collection lists several treatises, that seem to continue and uphold the Guifeng tradition.　These texts are of unknown origin and some of them may well be the produce of local Tangut Buddhist tradition, rather than translations from Chinese.　Recently the following works of Zong-mi and his school were discovered within the Tangut collection:

1.	Ｔhe sources of Chan （《禪源下》）[17]　──the abridged title of Zong-mi famous Chan Preface.　Only fragments of this woodblock edition, corresponding to the first and second part of the last juan of Zong-mi original text survived.
2.	A compilation bearing the title An Explanation to the Collection of Explanations of the Sources of Chan Truths （《諸說禪源集都序之解》）.[18]　The compilation consists of the first juan of Zong-mi Chan Preface preceded with the Explanation, which is in fact the preface of Pei Xiu （裴休 d. 860） composed at the time while which the latter was the prefect in Mianzhou （modern Shenxi）, not far from the famous Straw Hut Temple （草堂寺）, where Zong-mi found his final refuge and where his tradition was based.
3.	The Essence of the Preface to the Collection of Explanations of the Sources of Chan Truths （《諸說禪源集都序略文》）,[19]　which is a schematic commentary　 p. 373 on the Chan Preface.　The extant portion of the texts basically deals with the last chapter of the Chan Preface, where the sudden and gradual approaches to the enlightenment and the 10 fold scheme of arising delusions and purity of mind and attaining Buddhahood are discussed.[20]　The original Chinese tradition did not preserve this text, so it was probably composed at the Guifeng community, after it ceased its activities in China proper.
4.	The Notes on the Torch, Elucidating the Meaning of the Collection of Explanations of Chan Sources（《諸說禪源集都序發炬記》）.[21]　Little can be said concerning this text insofar, besides that it is an unknown, probably original Tangut, commentary on the Chan Preface.
5.	A text, bearing an abridged title The Chart of Passing and Receiving the Teaching, which is in fact a Tangut translation of Zong-mi The Chart of Passing and Receiving the Chan Teachings in China（《中華傳心地禪門師資承襲圖》）.[22]　This is a well-known work of Zong-mi, of whose Tangut versions the chapters on Bodhidharma doctrine of mind, criticism on the Northern and Hongzhou Chan lines and exposition of Zong-mi doctrine of mind have survived.　This text exists both in Chinese and Tangut versions.[23]

It is also important to mention, that all these texts, except for No. 3 are the woodblock editions, which presupposes their broad circulation.

These texts are important to demonstrate the continued existence of Zong-mi Chan in the Tangut state.　There might be several explanations of the fact of such continuation, one of them being the specific character of Buddhism in the North-Western regions of China.　The general assumption is that the whole of ‘Chinese Buddhism’ never existed as such, but was rather composed of a number of local traditions.　Thus, in different periods in different places flourished various traditions, sometimes contradicting each other and the general trend of the development of Chinese Buddhism.　The dissimilarity of local traditions was　

p. 374

exagerated by political impacts, e.g. by the warfare and territorial splits, that resulted in certain independence of a number of Buddhist centers, that conserved the Teaching in the earlier form as compared to the mainstream development.　This probably was the case of the North-Western China, whose Buddhism was crucial to Xi-xia Buddhist development.

The suppositions, concerning the peculiarity of the North-Western Buddhism, are not mere imagination.　A review of epigraphy sources, originating from the Straw Hut Temple, the abode of Zong-mi, demonstrate that there Guifeng lineage was upholded, both directly and indirectly, until the Ming time, and was particularly influential in the time of Jin Empire, when it was considered the Abode,where the robe and patra of Cao-xi （Hui-neng） had been transmitted, The resort of Chan and so on.[24]　Permanent warfare in the discussed area led to further separation of Guifeng line from the rest of the Chinese Buddhism and may have inspired the move of a number of Guifeng monks into Xi-xia, where they established their local tradition, which could further become the backbone of Tangut Buddhism itself.　Due to the breakdown of the active intercourse between Xi-xia and Song, further Buddhist impacts were ceased or reduced to a minimum, which could not produce any substantial influence on the outlook of Xi-xia Buddhism.

This idea can, to a certain extend, demonstrate the reasons why no Song Buddhist works, （besides an unknown version of a collection of Buddhist histories, described above） were discovered among the Tangut texts, not only in St. Petersburg, but in the other collections as well.　Although, none of the direct historical evidence of such process of the borrowing of Buddhism have been discovered insofar, the supposition does not seem unlikely, since such was the case of the establishing of Chinese Chan in Vietnam.[25]　The Buddhism of Liao seems to represent the same traits: being mostly Huayen-esoteric in its substance, it emerged under the predominant influence of Huayen-esoteric doctrine of Wutaishan.　This is clearly demonstrated by the surviving Khitan Buddhist texts.[26]　

p. 375

The Tangut possessed the same experience, since some of Tangut esoterism reveals close resemblance to that of the Khitan.[27]　In the Tangut case the Buddhist impact of China was more composite in nature: it included the trends of both Wutaishan and Guifeng, which shared common ground in particular reverence towards Huayen-jing, while one of them was esoteric and the other Chan oriented school.　Wutaishan also produced a sort of Chan, since a number of its masters in the various Records of Wutaishan are called ‘chan-shi’, but there exists only a scarce evidence on the nature of that Chan.[28]

The Tangut texts in St. Petersburg seem to reveal one more trait of the functioning of the Chinese Buddhism in Xi-xia: the Guifeng lineage there not only continued its existence, but also developed, absorbing and thus introducing into Xi-xia other Buddhist teachings.　Several treatises, which seem to represent the further development of Guifeng line are discovered among the Tangut texts in St. Petersburg.

Texts Related To Guifeng Tradition

In fact, the problem of the existence of Guifeng Chan is worth a separate discussion, but in this paper I would use both for the reasons of convenience and to denominate the whole of Tangut texts, which seem to refer in some way to Zong-mi's ideas.

Among the texts, related to the tradition of Zong-mi, but not connected with him personally, several must be mentioned.

The Mirror（《鏡》）.[29]This woodblock edition, of which pages 2～16　

p. 376

survived bears no colophon, so little of its origin can be said.　The date of publication may be established, as for other Tangut texts from the dead city of Khara-khoto, by the mid. 12th century, while the date of composition is uncertain.　The quotations within the text itself allow one thing for granted: the treatise was composed after 857, since this is the year of publication of Huangbo Xi-yun treatise The essentials of the Transmission of Mind Dharma by Pei Xiu, who turned to Huangbo after his years under Zong-mi.　The later text is occasionaly mentioned in“The Mirror”.

In general, Ｔhe Ｍirror is a detailed exposition of a number of Chan doctrines, accompanied with the critical notes by the author, therefore the title seems appropriate.　The author （or the translator） expounds a certain teaching, mentioning both its advantages and disadvantages, confirming his viewpoints mainly with the quotations from the Avatamsaka-sutra and the treatises of various Chan masters, for the most part the Sixth Patriarch and the Seventh Patriarch （probably implying Heze Shen-hui（686～760）, who was awarded this title by the imperial decree in 765）[30]　and other authorities, some of whom were not identified among the known personalities of Chinese Buddhism.　The identification of the Shen-hui as the Seventh Patriarch seems adequate, since Ｔhe Mirror definitely belongs to Huayen-Guifeng lineage: the texts is abundant in quotations from Huayen master Zhen-guan, the former Zong-mi teacher, Zong-mi himself, especially his Chan Preface, and Chan master Huangbo, who could be somehow related to Zong-mi school through Pei Xiu.

The structure of The Mirror resembles the scheme of Zong-mi Chan Preface.　The discussed doctrines were divided in The Ｍirror into several groups depending on their concepts of mind, emphasizing the basic unity of all doctrines and practices.　This quest for unity was characteristic to Zong-mi in his effort to construct, after the years of controversy, an uncontradictive whole of Buddhism, to reestablish the original Buddha teaching in its purity and harmony.　Thus, according to Zong-mi, each doctrine retained some truth, though being damaged　

p. 377

by certain false notions.　The fundamental method of Zong-mi was the consequent denial of the concepts of one school with the help of the concepts of another, which, to his mind, was somehow closer to the ‘perfect teaching’, refraining at the same time from development of his own viewpoint, which used to come forth at the very end of the exposition of the doctrines, as the ultimate truth.　This seems to be the approach of The Mirror in its classification of teachings as well, ending with the final big quotation from The Chan Preface as the conclusion of the treatise and the summon of the hierarchy of schools.

Besides the obvious connection with Zong-mi, the origins of The Mirror may be traced further, since the treatise incorporates into itself The treatise on the Two entrances and Four Practices, traditionally attributed to Bodhidharma.[31]　The extant portion of The Mirror contains the chapter on the Four Practices, while the first, now lost page, is likely to have contained the first part of treatise on the Two Entrances.　The treatise of Bodhidharma has already been studied by the scholars, more competent than myself, thus I refrain from any detailed analysis of it.

The Mirror separates three basic Chan doctrines.　They are: ‘the teaching of awakening the nature’, ‘the teaching on the tranquillity of mind’ and the third──‘the teaching of the pure mind and the absence of support〔to the mind〕’.　All three seem to relate to ‘Entrance through the Principle’ as expounded by Bodhidharma, since for all three the attainment of ‘peaceful mind’ is crucial.

The first of the above-mentioned teachings is based on the idea of the Sastra of the Awakening the Faith of Mahayana, that the dharmas, devoid of all characteristics, originate from the mind, which, in its turn, is defined as the realm of true reality and at the same time the source of purity and delusion.　This notion implies that the mind is essentially permanent and true.　However, due to the fundamental ignorance, characteristic of the mundane mind, this mind can produce various delusions.　Thus delusions are not a sort of a independent entity, but similarly with the ‘miraculous function’ of awakening are inherent to the mind. Ｔhe Mirror puts it the following way:“The miraculous function, delusions,　

p. 378

benefits and deeds, though〔mutually〕different, but do not differ from the mind in the state of delusion or enlightenment.　If you wish to become a Buddha, then you first must awaken the mind.　Therefore many of the ancient masters transmitted only this doctrine.”

Further The Mirror presents a lengthy quotation from Zong-mi Chan Chart, then turns to Avatamsaka-sutra and expounds the necessity that all living beings must possess an awakened basis of their minds, which is the foundation of attaining the enlightenment.　The Mirror reads: “Your condition〔of attaining enlightenment〕 abides in the ‘sphere of mind’.　Further, is it adequate to contemplate the fruit〔of the Thus Come〕, sphere〔of mind〕, enlightenment and all the rest as separate〔entities〕 or in unity?　If to contemplate them in unity, then the concentration will be attained, if separately, then nothing will come out〔of such contemplation〕.　Therefore, to win enlightenment, it is necessary to achieve the equal one-mind.”

To this starting portion of the Tangut text, the term ‘the sphere of mind’ seems crucial.　The content of this term here seems to coincide with the meaning Zong-mi used to attribute to it, i.e. the ‘mind-treasury’ as the totality of all dharmas, producing all the phenomena in the course of its development.　At the same time ‘the sphere of mind’ retains the initial purity of mind and is thus the source of Buddhahood.　The following passage from The Mirror seems to confirm this viewpoint: “If you wish to conceive it easily, the overwhelming world of dharmas resembles a drop of pure pearl, that is pure, shining, casts no shadows and possess no characteristics.　The overwhelming world of dharmas is in its foundation nothing, but equal true mind, which cannot be expounded by words, pure and free from births and deaths.”

Further the idea of ultimate identity of the living beings and Buddha:“If to understand the flowers of emptiness of the three worlds and〔the nature〕 of the illusory objects of apprehension, ......the basic delusions will thus cease.　This the enlightenment in itself.　The mind is Buddha, should we look for him outside?” Thus the ‘Buddha-nature’ was rendered as the foundation of all beings, their substance.　Thus all the doctrines, oriented on the realization of the fundamental nature of mind may all be related to the category of the ‘awakening of the nature’.　To confirm the viewpoint of unity of profane mind and Buddha, The Mirror　

p. 379

applies to the authority of Zhen-guan, someone〔Lushan〕master〔Shi〕and Chan Preface of Zong-mi.　In such an interpretation the doctrine of ‘awakening of nature’ is not a classical Chan notion, but exactly as an offspring of Huayen philosophy, whose understanding of the unity of mind and Buddha was based on the general ontology of Tathagatagarbha, ‘The Womb of the Thus Come’.

Another Zong-mi concept, used in The Mirror is that of the ‘miraculous function’ or ‘miraculous function of awakening’.　The ‘ti-yong’（substance-accidence 體用）concept was characteristic to both Tiantai and Huayen schools and to the whole of Chinese Buddhism.　But The Mirror seems to share Huayen and Zong-mi approach to the problem, emphasizing the ultimate unity of the substance and its appearance, i.e. accidence（function）and their mundane diversity.[32]

The second teaching, listed in The Mirror is the ‘teaching of the tranquillity of mind’.　At the beginning of the exposition of the doctrine, The Mirror turns to the authority of Bodhidharma: “Bodhidharma used to say: ‘The tranquilization of mind resembles the contemplation of the wall.’ Those, who seek perfection on this way get their mind abide in the true principle, be peaceful, pure, unconditioned, produce no discriminations. Bodhidharma's teaching on the tranquillity of mind is the source and the foundation of a variety of doctrines on the tranquillity of the mind.　There are three sorts of such teachings: the first is the teaching of contemplating the truth, the second──the sudden awakening, connected with the rise of concentration, the third──the pure mind, having no support〔for itself〕”. The first of these teachings connected with the crucial Chan concept of the ‘absence of discriminating thoughts’. The Mirror reads: ‘〔The absence of discriminations〕 is the contemplation of all the dharmas in their fullness and reality.　Though the discriminating thought is still present, there are no characteristics of discriminations（i.e. the phenomena are no longer perceived as separate entities, possessing independent self-nature.──K.S.）’.　The author of The Mirror had provided his own commentary to the above section: “Those, who seek perfection in this teaching, contemplate the dharmas in their oneness,　

p. 380

permanence and reality.〔The Dharmas〕do not arise and do not die, thus there is a notion of ‘samadhi of reality’, there is also talk of ‘one-action samadhi’” It seems, that the origin of the concepts of this part of The Mirror can also be traced to Zong-mi and the Southern school of Shen-hui, since it bears some resemblance with the concepts, formulated by Shen-hui in his Notes of the Great Master Heze, elucidating the Faith.[33]

Further The Mirror turns to the teaching of sudden enlightenment based on the rise of thoughts.　This doctrine is somehow connected with the Seventh Patriarch of The Mirror, which likely implies Shen-hui.　The Tangut text reads as follows: ‘When illusions rise, the enlightenment rises also, when illusions are extinguished, the enlightenment is also extinguished.　The extinguishing of both illusions and enlightenment is the truth in itself.’ The basic idea of this part of the text appears to coincide with Shen-hui's concept of eliminating of the clinging to enlightenment, which in itself is a sort of delusion.　This was the main contents of Shen-hui criticism towards the Northern school, and the author seems to fully appreciate it.[34]

The teaching of the pure mind, having no support for itself is discussed quite briefly: ‘If you rely on the active（i.e. deluded）mind follow the practices of the sages and profanes, this will not be the true way.　All the practices are called true, when the mind follows the path of the absence of support’.　Further it appears, that the discussed doctrine is in fact the teaching of the absence of discriminative mind and the so-called ‘awareness’（知）, or ‘spiritual knowledge’（靈知）, which is innate to the mind and appears in the moment of enlightenment.　This notion derives from Shen-hui──Zong-mi teachings and is rendered as one of the main characteristics of Zong-mi thought.　Generally, ‘awareness’ is not rational or discursive knowledge, but rather sort omniscience, which is originally present in the mind and manifests itself in the moment of awakening.[35]

p. 381

The described teachings probably relate to ‘the entrance of the principle’ of Bodhidharma treatise, on which The Mirror is actually based. Thus, the main disadvantage of all the teachings of tranquillity of mind is seen in the difficulty of proper understanding of the ‘true principle’.　The general conclusion brought out from the study of The Mirror is that the tranquil mind is preparatory for the attainment of the Buddhahood.　The higher stage of the same process of enlightenment is represented with the ‘teaching of awakening of nature’, which realizes the Buddha-nature, immanent to the mind.　Thus The Mirror seems to share Shen-hui's criticism of the Northern school for its emphasis on sole purification of mind, but still is somehow closer to Zong-mi, admitting the necessity of perfection of the various doctrines of mind with the ‘teaching of practices’.　This is supposed to result in the construction of a ‘perfect teaching’, comprised of all three branches.

The following part of The Mirror is a discussion on the doctrines of ‘awakening of the practices’, which is nothing, but a Tangut translation of Bodhidharma treatise on the two entrances and four practices.　However only the second part of the treatise, covering the four practices is rendered, and, what is more interesting, the name of Bodhidharma, frequent in other parts of The Mirror, is not mentioned in this section.　This might be considered the evidence, that in Xi-xia, or in the tradition to which the author of The Mirror belong, this treatise was not attributed to Bodhidharma, but was rather an anonymous work.

The Mirror is concluded with an exposition of the doctrine of full and perfect enlightenment.　The doctrine, discussed in The Mirror, is based on the commentary of someone master〔Shi-ye〕, of whom nothing is known, to the Sutra of Full Enlightenment.　However, judging from his theories, as explained in The Mirror, it will be reasonable to imagine him as the follower of Zong-mi.　According to〔Shi-ye〕, the basic step on the way of perfection is the attainment of true enlightened mind, which, in its turn, is based on faith and the perfection in six paramitas.　The harmony of these conditions allows the follower on the Way to realize his Womb of the Thus Come（Tathagata-garbha 如來藏）, which is the true mind, embracing the innate Buddha-nature and the variety of the practices of perfection.　If the perfection is correct, the ‘no-mind’ arises, which is rendered as the absence of discriminating thought.　All this results in the activation of the　

p. 382

‘awareness’, or ‘natural wisdom’, characteristic of every sentient being.　According to The Mirror, ‘the no-mind is the original purity of the true mind and.... insubstantiality of the deluded mind’.　The described state of mind corre- sponds with the ‘true mind’──one of the crucial items in Zong-mi system, which was appreciated by the author of The Mirror as well.　The no-mind and natural wisdom are the supreme states of mind, but their attainment must be accompanied with the fulfillment of the miraculous Buddha vows, otherwise the discriminating thought will arise again.　According to The Mirror, the Enlightened mind has three aspects: ‘The protection of all living beings from sorrow and suffering through the great compassion. The second──the attaining of the mind of the great wisdom.　A boddhisattva attains an equal concentration on the true Dharma......The third is the fulfillment of the variety of the benevolent practices, based on the great vows’. Only the coherence of all the three aspects is able to produce the ‘miraculous fullness’, which, to the mind of the compiler of The Mirror, is the actual fulfillment of the three described teachings: the awakening of nature, the tranquillity of mind, fulfillment of the practices.　These three doctrines resemble the three basements of a tripod: if one is missing, the whole structure is unstable. The Mirror reads: ‘If one〔of the three〕 legs is missing, the whole vessel does not exist.　If there is no awakening of nature, the true mind does not arise, and the practices result in exhaustion.　If the way of tranquillity of mind is not fulfilled, it is impossible to obtain the harmony of mind and learn the cessation of discriminating thoughts.　If the way of practices is neglected, the perfection ..... of wisdom will not be attained.　When the three ways are perfect, there arises the miraculous fullness.’ The Mirror is concluded with a large quotation from Chan Preface on the necessity of extinguishing the delusions and the final statement, that it was exactly the teaching of the fullness of three ways, that was preached by Bodhidharma.

The general impression, produced by a survey of The Mirror, is that its author was very close to Zong-mi both in his Buddhist education and in basic intention on constructing a harmonic whole, which was supposed to be the perfect teaching of Bodhidharma and thus of Buddha himself, liberated from the doctrinal and scholastic controversy.

It seems necessary to add to the above, that The Mirror follows Zong-mi's　

p. 383

idea of Tathagata-garbha in its enlightened aspect, as identical with the innate true mind, characteristic of every person.　Thus, the individual mind was declared to possess the true reality, which, in its turn, allowed the adepts to realize the Buddha-nature as their own nature.　This theory was probably a sort of scholastic foundation of the adequacy of the Chan practices and therefore contributed into the ‘harmony of Chan and the Teachings’, which appears to be the basic quest of The Mirror.　Zong-mi used to refer to this process of awakening of the true mind as ‘samadhi of true reality’, or ‘dhyana of the Purity of Tathagata’.　Both these terms are familiar to the author of The Mirror.

Another idea, frequent both in The Mirror and Zong-mi's writings, is that of ‘the awareness’, or natural wisdom, a specific sort of omniscience, arising as the ‘miraculous function’ of enlightenment. The Mirror to share this idea completely: ‘When the knowledge is extinguished, the supernatural wisdom manifests itself’.

Still one more notion, peculiar both to Zong-mi and The Mirror is that of the necessity of coherence of Chan and the teachings. The Mirror is quite clear in this point and supports its views with the ideas of Zhen-guan: ‘〔There are four ways to attain the enlightened mind〕.　The first-the absence of the words of wisdom, i.e. the awakening of the true knowledge of objects. （It corresponds with the teaching of awakening of nature──KS）.　The second ...... the true awakening of the enlightened mind, which manifests the pure intentions. （i.e. the way of tranquillity of mind──KS）.　The third is the harmony between the contemplation and wisdom, which fulfills all the practices. （i.e. the teaching of the practices──KS）.　The forth is the way of bodhi which from the strive towards the flower produces the perfect fruit. （i.e. the unity of all the three teachings──KS）.　Bodhidharma himself preached the three teachings of awakening of nature, tranquillity of mind and fulfillment of the practices.〔These three are〕 like the three legs of tripod──if one is missing, there is no entire 〔vessel〕’.　The essence of the three ways were the Chan methods of contemplation, supported with Huayen doctrines of Tathagata-garbha and Buddha-nature.

However, this running analysis of The Mirror is probably insufficient, thus I have supplied the present paper with the full translation of the text.

The above discussion on the contents and nature of The Mirror clearly demonstrates, that by mid. 12 century and earlier the tradition of Zong-mi,　

p. 384

originating from the Straw Hut Temple continued its existence and was quite wide-spread in Xi-xia.　The further development of this tradition could have changed its original minor status into the mainstream of proper Tangut Buddhism.　The evidence for this is provided by another Tangut compilation, bearing the title The Basic Intentions of the Masters of Hongzhou tradition（《洪洲宗師趣註開明要記》）,[36]　compiled by someone sramana〔Fa-yong〕from〔Yuanxiang〕.[37]　Neither the name, or the place have been insofar identified, which allows to suppose the native Tangut origin of the text.　This assumption is validated by the lack of any notes on translation in the text, which had been preserved completely.

To certain extend, this work is even more characteristic than the previous one, but its research has not been completed yet, thus I limit myself to a brief discussion of its basic topics.

As it is clear from the title of the text, it is devoted to the exposition of the teachings and doctrine of the lineage of Ma-zu Dao-i（馬祖道一）.　This school is known as the foundation of the ‘classical Chan’ of Song period and in the form of minor subdivisions remains dominant in Far-Eastern Mahayana until present time.

The doctrine of Ma-zu and his followers was first criticized by Zong- mi in Chan Chart in Chan Preface and the title ‘Hongzhou school’ was also first introduced by him.　The main aim of Zong-mi's polemics against Hongzhou followers was their insufficient understanding of the ‘ti-yong’ concept, which seemed crucial to Zong-mi as a Huayen thinker, and the resulting mistaking of delusion for enlightenment.[38]　The evidence of such misconceptions could be found in the recorded sayings of various Hongzhou masters, so Zong-mi was not in fact wrong, but his criticism could not have hindered the spread of Ma-zu teaching and the decline of Zong-mi's own tradition in China proper.

Somehow, after the collapse of Zong-mi Huayen-Chan teaching, a number of his students, including Pei Xiu turned to the fourth generation Ma-zu follower　

p. 385

Huangbo Xi-yun（黃蘗希運d. 850）.　Despite this shift of authority, the main intention of Zong-mi, i.e. the establishing of a harmonious teaching of Buddha experienced no damage and remained one of the motivations of former Zong-mi students.　Thus, the center of the ‘harmonizing’ activities could have been shifted from the decaying Shen-hui──Zong-mi line to the prosperous Ma-zu school, which had only to be reinterpreted through Huayen concepts, thus to form new ‘perfect teaching’ with the unchangeable Huayen background and Ma-zu appearance.　This reconstruction is only a supposition, which seems to be supported with the material provided by the extant Tangut text of Basic Intentions.　Compiled by an unknown master〔Fa-youg〕, this treatise bears evidence of an attempt to render Hongzhou teaching through the prism of Huayen philosophy.　The main emphasis was put on the doctrines of ‘principles and things’ and ‘changing and permanence of the true reality’.　While the concept of ‘principles and things’ is not exclusively characteristic of Huayen and appears sometimes in the writings of Hongzhou school itself, ‘the changing and permanence of the true reality’ is definitely one of the most famous Huayen doctrines.

The new rendering of Ma-zu through Huayen was artificial and quite difficult, as it appears from the Basic Intentions, which I would like now to discuss in brief detail.　My study of this text is not yet completed, so the results of the research must be considered preliminary.　Somehow, I consider them quite important to expose them in the present paper.

The basic Intentions is currently extant in full and brief copies. The brief one bears the title Basic Intentions of the Masters of Hongzhou lineage, while the full one adds to it : With the Notes explaining the most Important.　Only the full copy mentions the name of〔Fa-yong〕 as its compiler, thus it is possible to attribute to this author only the explanatory notes, which in fact contain all the Huayen philosophy.　The lengthy text thus consists of the sayings of Hongzhou masters and the notes of Fa-yong, while the brief one is limited to the Hongzhou sayings themselves, however identical with the lengthy version.　Due to the objectives of the present study, I would limit myself to the lengthy version.

Little insofar can be said concerning the date of the compilation of Basic Intentions.　The text, though preserved in its completeness, contains no direct　

p. 386

chronological data.　Among the known personalities of Chinese Buddhism only Baizhang Huai-hai（百丈懷海720～814）is mentioned, which allows to consider the text to be compiled sometime around early 9th century, thus being older, than The Mirror, discussed above.　The text also mentions the posthumous title of Ma-zu（i.e. The Great Tranquillity）, which was awarded to him in 788 by the imperial decree.　Thus the Basic Intentions appeared no earlier than 788.

The Basic Intentions start with a traditional explanation of the meaning of the word ‘Hongzhou’ and notes on Ma-zu's biography and appearance, which seem similar with all other records.[39]　Somehow notes on his early career are a bit different from traditional: Ma-zu is said to have taken monastic vows under someone vinaya master Yuan, who is mentioned only once.　The Chan contemplation was studied under Huairang Er-san, which probably stands for Nanyue Huairang（南嶽懷讓677～744）, who was Ma-zu actual master.　The process of Chan study is described in the following way: “〔Ma-zu〕 has obtained the mysterious seal of mind from Huairang Er-san and attained the awareness that everything completely〔possesses〕 true reality and acquired perfection.　After that his disciples appeared like clouds〔in their multitude〕”.　This note allows to suggest, that Ma-zu was represented as a follower of ‘sudden enlightenment and gradual perfection’, i.e. Guifeng tradition.　Fa-yong further notes: “The doctrine〔of Hongzhou〕 is in that, what all the living beings possess──the straight, clear and wise mind......since the Hongzhou masters elaborate the ‘straight’ teaching（of the intimate identity of the individual mind and Buddha-nature.──KS）, it is exactly them, who are the teachers, transmitting the most important.” Basing himself on the idea, that ‘everything is true’, i.e. each mental phenomenon contains in itself the completeness of Buddha-nature, Fa-yong sated“The people from the beginning do not have any misconceptions.”Thus the priority of Chan over doctrinal Buddhism in full accordance with Hongzhou views was declared.

As it was mentioned above, the text of Basic Intentions is a collection of records of the school split with a commentary.　Almost every time it is possible to reconstruct the original text, relying also on the brief version. The first part of　

p. 387

the text is an adequate exposition of Ma-zu's teaching.　The most interesting part starts with the statement of the necessity to study the ‘two main threads of the teaching──a man and the Dharma’.　This dichotomy was formulated by Zong-mi in Chan Preface, and its use in the Basic Intentions looks an indirect evidence of a certain connection between Guifeng line and the tradition of the Basic Intentions.　Zong-mi's formula is that ‘it is hard to approximate the Dharma through the people and easy to join the people through Dharma’.[40]　However the problem of men and Dharma is worth a separate discussion.　Briefly the meaning of the dichotomy is that to stress both the necessity of doctrinal learning, i.e. the Dharma, which is an unchangeable criteria of truth, regardless of the individual state of mind, and at the same time the crucial position of man, rendering the Teaching, i.e. the Chan master, transmitting the Dharma from mind to mind.　Thus the teacher and the Teaching constitute a non-duality, which in fact is a harmonious teaching.

Further Basic Intentions turn to the exposition of the interrelations of the substance and its manifestations, i.e. ‘virtue’ and ‘awards’.　The text reads: “〔If〕not to rely on the words of the ten thousand sages, what is then left to rest upon?”　The explanation of the compiler reads: ‘〔According〕 to the intention of the doctrine in question, 〔you〕 should not believe to what you hear and not to perfect the faith into the benevolent connections of the Buddha family.　The fruit of the heaven is thus achieved. Why?　The principle of Chan is the summon....of the Dharma treasure of the Buddhas of the three periods the heart of teachings of all the sages.’ The Basic Intentions further continues: everything is truth.　This expounds that the supreme vechile of the one-mind abides in its uniqueness, having no equal to itself.　The initial equality, the non-duality of top and bottom.　Addition: the question: ‘what is the single characteristic?[41]　〔The answer〕 : It is virtue.　Is it that the substance dwells in the five skhandhas?　If to consider it directly as a whole the substance is one in itself.　What it contains?　If the deeds originated from virtue, there would have been no virtue, originating from the　

p. 388

substance.　What is the ultimate sense of deeds and virtue?　The answer: ‘Substance and deeds are the purity.　The true substance is no subject to attachment and vice.　Thus there is the talk of virtue coming from the substance.　The manifested dharmas do nor have any discriminations between them and all are nothing but virtue, coming from the deeds.’[42]

To my mind, the most interesting portion of the above quotation is no the text in small caps, but rather the compiler's notes, that somehow demonstrate the close relation of Chan thinking to the whole of Chinese Buddhist philosophy, to which the problems of substance and non-duality represented crucial.　The lengthy discourse on the relations of the substance, virtues and deeds tends to elucidate the initial equality of all the phenomena through the Huayen concept of ‘ti-yong’.　The main idea of the Basic Intentions was to connect the Ma-zu notion that ‘everything is true’, i.e. every manifestation of the mind activity is ontologically valid, with traditional Huayen worldview and even to refer to the ‘ti-yong’ concept as to the foundation of Ma-zu thinking.　The most curious is that Zong-mi accused the Hongzhou line of misunderstanding of ‘ti-yong’（體用）concept, which was clear to him from their notion, that ‘everything is true’.　To Zong-mi mind the Hongzhou teachers did not discriminate between pure and deluded mind.　To avoid this, Fa-yong developed the idea of the so to speak double manifestation of the substance.　The first level of manifestation is the ‘deed’, while the ‘virtue’ is the manifestation of the latter, not of the substance itself.　Thus everything, pure or not, is related, directly or indirectly, to the initial purity.　Thus there appears a certain mediator between the initial purity and the worldly delusion, which are thus not separated, but understood in unity, and the purity of substance suffers no damage.　Thus ‘everything is true’ and ‘ti-yong’ are both established without any contradiction.　The development of such highly soophisticated doctrine was important not to the Hongzhou line, but rather to Zong-mi followers, trying to reestablish their teaching as a doctrinal basis of Chan.

Further on the Basic Intentions quotes the gatha of Baizhang.　Nothing resembling the Tangut gatha has survived in Baizhang extant texts.　Considering the nature of Baizhang's religious effort as a Chan adept, it is hard to imagine,　

p. 389

that he at all was concerned with the interrelations and scholastic issues of mutual dependence of the substance and phenomena.　More likely is that Baizhang's name was used for the purpose of authority.

The Basic Intentions read: ‘Thus baizhang uttered a gatha: i.e. explained different meanings in order and respectively demonstrated the totality of truth and turmoil.　If the substance, deeds and virtues are non-dual, then in their relation to Buddha, they are initially not existent.　The true mind is basically wise and tranquil,〔thus〕 the mind does not exist from the beginning.　The manifestations are non-dual, they are embraced by the deeds, liberated the substance, thus it is said, that everything is true.　By this reason two directions──substance and deeds are clear.　The existent〔that means〕that there is nothing, that is not the principle.　All dharmas〔I.E.〕the unchangeable principle possess the emptiness of form〔which is〕the virtue of following the causes.’　In this thesis it is quite easy to recognize the characteristic Huayen concept of the true reality, which remains unchanged, but yet subject to changes.　The existence of the dharmas is rendered through their participation in the true principle and thus from the point of view of the absolute, the dharmas are real, in their worldly mode they are empty and constitute the phenomenal plurality, the principle being manifested through their constant motion.　The dharmas thus retain their principal existence, which does not deny their phenomenal emptiness, and on the contrary.[43]　Only empirical being is thus an illusion of a special kind, the supreme existence of the true reality manifests itself through it.　The above quotations and discourses, however limited they may seem, offer some evidence to consider the Basic Intentions a Chan-Huayen text, contaminating the Chan practices with basic Huayen doctrines in order to construct a perfect teaching again.　Anyway, I would like refer to some more statements of the Basic Intentions to make the keynote idea clearer.　Elsewhere the Tangut text reads: ‘Foundation and the deeds do not deny each other following the self-nature is the ancient sample.〔Concerning〕the contradiction〔of the foundation and deeds〕someone said: Chan is the source.　Though Chan is the source, in case of following the way of perfection without the full contemplation of the doctrine, there would rise a　

p. 390

contradiction with the way of attaining〔enlightenment〕.　If only the practices are used does not that contradict with the secret seal of mind, transmitted by Bodhidharma?　The answer: ...If on the way of perfection, there is the complete contemplation of the Teaching, you will not see the characteristics of duality, because of the awareness, that everything is true.　That is the Dao.　As it was said before, the unchangeable basis contains no controversy.’　This part of the text clearly stresses the necessity of combination of doctrinal knowledge, that proves the adequacy of the Chan practices.　The Huayen concept of the true reality, which produces all the universe of phenomena, while remaining unchanged, was now used to support predominantly Chan concept of direct identity of mind with the Buddha.　Thus was the Huayen explanation of Ma-zu saying, that ‘Every meeting is Dao’.[44]

Some more phrases from the Basic Intentions seem to support the supposed proximity of this text to the Huayen tradition and conforms the spirit of establishing ‘the round teaching’: ‘The chan master Jue-hui attained the enlightened mind〔i.e.〕awakened outside the words（doctrinal teachings──KS）, but not relying on the words.　He became attached to what is outside the words and did not desire to follow the words.〔This is as if〕He opened his right eye, and left eye remained closed.〔that is to say that〕those, who follow only the words or exclusively what is outside the words, are equally unenlightened.　They lack a part of teachings, and this produced sin.　If to adhere to this strictly, there would be no one among the people, who would not possess perfect wisdom.’　This quotation continues further, expounding the doctrine of mutual assistance of Chan and the teachings in construction of the perfect unity.

To further demonstrate certain connection between the Basic Intentions and Huayen thought, I would like to refer to the following passage: ‘All the dharmas are the dharmas of the truth〔i.e.〕all the dharmas are of the dharmas of truth, but not the different dharmas, established through the division with the truth.　All the names are the names of the truth.　The origin from the single name is the name of total truth （total reality──KS）, but not the statement of the reality of various names, established through the division with the true reality.　For example, from　

p. 391

the single spice of wheat, ten thousand dishes are prepared, but all of them are the initial wheat.’ The general meaning of the above discussion is quite transparent: all the phenomena originate from the single true reality and their worldly existence depends on the connection with this reality, but not on the separation from it.　The above discussion reminds of Huayen concepts of the relationship between particular phenomena and total reality as they are rendered in Fa-zang Golden Lion of Huayen and Zong-mi's Chan Preface.　There is certain similarity in the parables themselves, though Zong-mi in his parable uses gold instead of wheat.[45]

The analysis of The Basic Intentions, even as brief as presented in this paper, will not be adequate, if the problem of relation of its main concepts to the doctrine of Heze Shen-hui is neglected.　Happily, the text itself offers some material on the problem: ‘Question: what is the dharma, transmitted in the line of the founding master heze?　The expounding words have always been known.　The living beings, though inquire into the〔nature〕of the true substance according to the contemplation, following the words, but not discriminate between white and black concerning the ‘precious seal of the great antiquity’,〔implying〕the non-duality of this（i.e. contemplation, following the words,）and the contemplation, following what is beyond the words.[46]　Are there any differences between the looks of Da-ji（大寂 Ma-zu）, establishing the realization of the self nature through the presence of external characteristics and the views of Heze?The answer is: ‘〔The differences〕both exist and not. Why? According to Da-ji, everything truly exists. Thus, there are no differences.　Question: The founding teacher Heze had accomplishments. Is there any true substance in that? From the point of view of presence（i.e. worldly existence of phenomena）sages and profanes exist. [Therefore] it is impossible to establish the enlightenment, what is the use of that? Reverend Sakya attained full and perfect enlightenment and won the mind of the dharma-realm.[47]　If once the full vision of self is acquired, self and Buddha will　

p. 392

have basically no difference.　The living beings are unenlightened and subject to retribution.　According to the law（rite──KS）, there are differences between the masters’.

Thus the Tangut text tries to demonstrate the ultimate unity of the doctrines of Ma-zu and Shen-hui, since both masters were dealing with the realization of the innate Buddha-nature, ever-present in the mind.　Thus, using the terms of The Basic Intentions, the two teachings are identical in substance, but differ in their accidence.　Thus a consequent line of Chan-teachings amalgamation is developed and the problem of establishing the ‘orthodox’ Chan is solved: the shift from Shen-hui to Ma-zu is regarded as having no principle significance, because both masters are equally true and teaching the same ‘Buddha-nature’.　This fact testifies, the intention of updating Zong-mi's views to changing reality of late Tang and Song Buddhism, and at the same time an effort to preserve the key function of Huayen philosophy.

Besides that, there is something, that makes Fa-yong's views different from Zong-mi's main intention: to the Master of Guifeng, Huayen philosophy served as a basis for further constructions, while for Fa-yong, it lost much of its original value and was preserved only in its explanatory function, but not as an ‘ultimate theory’ or constructive ideology.　There was no harmony of Chan and teachings anymore, Chan became dominant.　The evidence for that is that Huayen concepts on the Basic Intentions were attributed to Chan masters, but not to Huayen authorities──neither Zong-mi or anyone else are mentioned in the Tangut text.

Thus The Basic Intentions and The Mirror probably represent two lines of introduction of Guifeng line into Xi-xia and its activities in late Tang Song China.　The line of The Mirror is sort of orthodox school, retaining the authority of the primary Master and reverence to his works.　The tradition, represented with the Basic Intentions demonstrates less reverence, but more vitality in its effort to combine the original theory with the contemporary Chan reality.　The slight chronological difference between the two texts makes the scholar think, that exactly the two traditions we should talk about, rather than the chronologically different stages of the same process.　I am strongly inclined to denominate the tradition of the Basic Intentions as the ‘line Pei Xiu’, taking into consideration his Buddhist career first under Zong-mi and then after Huangbo.　This however　

p. 393

requires further detailed study of the Basic Intentions and of Occasional Notes by the chan Master Pei Xiu, which Tangut translation is also available in St. Petersburg.[48]