The life of Daoxuan according to others and in his own words

This book focuses on the life of Daoxuan that revealed by the monk himself and that penned down by others. More importantly, it sets out to see why this monk is so linked to and respected in the field of vinaya. Is it because a great number of his works are devoted to that subject, or simply that he lives up to the vinaya stipulations? Furthermore, it is one of the key tasks of this study to explore why Daoxuan was the first Chinese monk ever to define hufa as an ideal that monks should aspire to and installed it as one of the ten categories of the eminent monks in his Xu gaoseng zhuan. Daoxuan, at a certain point, even went on to declare the hufa as the most prominent among the ten ideals in regards to the survival of the Buddha-dharma. What is his understanding of hufa, and since it is so greatly viewed, what does Daoxuan to hufa?

Similarly, it is intriguing that Daoxuan was the first monk to cite evidence from Sifen lü nearly two centuries after its introduction into China and considered this text to be Mahāyāna. What were the reason(s) behind his move? Why was it him and not anyone else? Also central to this study is to understand why Daoxuan was the first monk to introduce the recitation of Yijiao jing, supposedly the last instructions of the Buddha, to be conducted alongside the full ordination ceremony. To answer all these questions, this research seeks to explore the life of Daoxuan as recorded in the works of others as well as in his own words.

Identifying the largest number ever of books pertaining to the life of Daoxuan, classifying the sources, comparing and contrasting, highlighting the origins of the sources, establishing his extant works, giving conclusions, and offering conjectures are the ways that the present book fulfils its overriding aim: to enhance the understanding of the life of Daoxuan. Through this study, we see Daoxuan emerge from the sources as a diligent student, a tireless traveller, a Mahāyāna-aspired vinaya master, a prolific writer, and an indefatigable hufa monk. Each of these portrayals defines a separate aspect of his life; however, it is only when they are viewed through the hufa perspective that the seemingly independent facets of his life become coherent, so does our understanding of Daoxuan.

The Life of Daoxuan Part I

### Introduction

In addition to writing many biographies himself, the Tang Buddhist master Daoxuan 道宣 (596-667) 1 has been the subject of countless works by other authors. Yet, ever since its composition in 988 CE, one textthe Song gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳 (The Biography of Eminent Monks Composed in the Song; hereafter SGSZ) 2 has overshadowed all others as a source for the historical reconstruction of the life and career of Daoxuan, regardless of the fact that many other sources have the potential to enrich our understanding and provide different perspectives. For instance, the author, Zanning 贊寧 (919-1001), does not present the major events of the master's life in chronological order. This is hardly surprising as Daoxuan lived through the fall of the Sui Dynasty 隋 (581-619) and the rise of the Tang Dynasty 唐 (618-907), which makes even identifying the precise year of a particular event problematic. However, the inclusion of unsourced and contradictory accounts also casts doubt on SGSZ's credibility, while a lack of clarity in certain sections allows for multiple interpretations that inevitably cloud our understanding of Daoxuan's life. More importantly, SGSZ either glosses over or totally omits some of the most important aspects of the master's life and work.

First, SGSZ's appraisal of Daoxuan as a lüshi 律師 (vinaya master) seems to rest solely on his renowned expertise in that field and his extensive commentaries on the subject. Second, the text barely touches upon either the prominent position that hufa 護法 (literally, 'to protect the Buddha-dharma') occupies in Daoxuan's works or the master's own hufa activities. Third, Daoxuan's efforts to promote vinaya, including his determination to prove that Sifen lü 四分律 is Mahāyāna and his construction of a full ordination platform, are largely ignored. 1 Traditionally, in China, a child is considered to be one year of age on the day of his or her birth. Hence, as we shall see later, even though Daoxuan was born in 596 and died in 667, his age at the time of his death is invariably given as seventy-two, not seventy-one. 2 Daoxuan's entry in the Song gaoseng zhuan is at T50.2061j14.790b7-791b26. See my translation and study of this entry at II. 5 64-81. Details of the reference convention I followed are at 282. These peculiarities of SGSZ mean that it is of little help when attempting to answer several crucial questions. Should Daoxuan be hailed as a vinaya master simply because he lived his life in strict accordance with vinaya principles and wrote a large number of studies on the subject? Why was he the first monk to define hufa as an ideal to which other Buddhists should aspire, and why did he choose it as one of ten categories into which he grouped eminent monks in his Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 (The Continued Biography of Eminent Monks; hereafter XGSZ)? 3 Why did he attempt to prove that Sifen lü is Mahāyāna, and why had no previous monks felt the need to do this in the two centuries since it had been translated into Chinese? And why did he recommend recitation of Yijiao jing 遺教經supposedly the Buddha's final instructions to his followersin the full ordination ceremony?

Considering these problematic issues with the most widely referenced source for the reconstruction of the life and career of Daoxuan, not to mention his unparalleled importance in the history of Chinese Buddhism, there is clearly an urgent need for a much more comprehensive approach to the study of the master's life that acknowledges the vast panoply of primary sources that pertain to him. This book is an attempt to meet that need. wealth of often neglected descriptions and self-descriptions pertaining to the life of Daoxuan in order to emphasize their inherent discrepancies and inconsistencies, as well as the broad range of perspectives that developed with regard to this seminal figure. Hence, while I have attempted to incorporate as many works as possible, my focus is firmly on primary materials, rather than issues raised by modern scholars. This approach highlights the gradual evolution of Daoxuan's life story from his own time onwards.