Skip to content

Sinitic Buddhism in the Tangut State

Pages 157 - 183


One can observe that Sinitic Buddhism was the first to penetrate into Tangut society, and first as the ideology of the ruling elite. The growth of the Buddhist intercourse further resulted in the Tangut appropriation of the contemporaneous form of the Buddhist teaching current in the Northern China. This teaching might be provisionally defined as “Perfect Teaching”, an open system which was capable of accommodating various teachings and practices on the basis of Huayan thought. This variety included the traditions of both Sinitic and Tibetan origins. The “Perfect Teaching” had been originally imported from the Liao, but later developed into a paradigm on the basis of which the “whole” of the Tangut Buddhism emerged sometime closer to the end of 12th century. As the few available dates of publication or “distribution” of the texts suggest, the processes of appropriation of both Sinitic and Tibetan forms of Buddhism were almost simultaneous. The openness of the “Perfect Teaching” had probably been responsible for the flexibility of Xixia Buddhism and its further continuity even after the fall of Xixia. By the same token, one probably ought to partially reconsider the commonplace understanding of Tangut Buddhist history as a struggle between Sinitic and Tibetan forms of Buddhism, but rather think of them a complementary parts of a uniform system.

漢傳佛教在西夏本文章介并總結筆者幾年對西夏的漢傳佛教研究成果. 文章主要討論黑水城出土文獻之間的華嚴佛教資料來源和特色, 并提出西夏與遼關係的假設. 主要內容可以總結如下: 西夏漢傳佛教的主要因素是晚唐華嚴思想.此思想傳入西夏的來源乃是遼代華嚴 “圓教”信仰. “圓教”特色是它在華嚴 “四法界”和 “一心”思想的基礎上創造了能過容納各種佛教修行法門的“圓融系統.” 現存的西夏文獻確是顯露如上特色: 大部份漢傳佛教文獻有共同思想主題, 內容上於遼代 “圓教”頗為相似.因此遼佛教曾為西夏佛教系統的模式. “圓教”思想體系具有一種彈性, 西夏晚期其能夠容納各種藏傳密法,以保證其在元初的生存和發展

Renmin University of China, Institute of Chinese Classics 中國人民大學國學院

1 Henceforth, the terms “Xixia texts” and “Tangut texts” equally refer to texts both in Tangut and in Chinese discovered on former Tangut territory and chronologically pertaining to the Xixia period or to its immediate aftermath. When specific Tangut or Chinese texts are discussed, their linguistic affiliation is indicated. Most of the quotations from traditional Buddhist sources, if not otherwise specified, are based on CBETA edition of 2011 (Taishō stands for the texts originally included into the Taishō Tripiṭaka, ZZ represents texts originally from the Shinsan Zokuzōkyō and Jiaxing zang), with my punctuation. Tangut characters are provided were necessary, and Tangut transcription (according to Hwang-cherng Gong phonetic reconstruction) is provided only where it is imperative for discussion. Usually, the Tangut transcriptions are provided for personal names, place names and specific terms; long titles and quotations are presented in original Tangut writing and “reconstructed Chinese”. “Reconstructing Chinese” implies rewriting the Tangut phrases in accordance with Chinese grammar in cases where the original Chinese is unavailable. This intends to provide readers unfamiliar with the Tangut language with some insight into the actual Tangut manner of writing. “Reconstructions” and translations are all by the author, if not otherwise specified. The materials in this article were first analyzed in some of my previous publications, summarized in footnotes 4 and 5. The article owes its origins to a paper presented in May 2013 at Foguang University, for a Conference on Perspectives of Chinese Buddhism. Some of the results presented above were discussed in a less concise form in: K. Solonin, K. Solonin, “Chan Contemplation” in the Tangut Buddhism,” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 7 no. 2 (2014), pp. 203–245.

2 E. I. Kychanov, Каталог тангутских буддийских памятников Института востоковеденияРоссийской Академии наук [Catalogue of the Tangut Buddhist Texts from the Collection of the Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences] (Kyoto: University of Kyoto Press, 1999).

3 The most famous and frequently studied of these inscriptions is definitely the stele now known as “Chongxiu Huguo si Ganying ta bei” (重修護國寺 感應塔碑). It was first studied by the local scholar-official Zhang Shu 張澍 (1776–1847) in 1804, who determined that it belongs to the period of Tangut domination over Liangzhou. Zhang published his findings in 1837 (“Shu ‘Xixia Tianyou Minan bei’ hou” 書西夏天佑民安碑後, included in Yangsu tang wenji 養素堂文集, juan 19; see also Ruth Dunnell, The Great State of White and High: Buddhism and the State Formation in Eleventh-Century Xia (Honolulu: University of Hawaii'i Press, 1996), pp. 87–116. Since Zhang's findings remained generally unavailable to Western scholars, French sinologist G. Deveria was eventually credited with the identification of the stele as a Tangut monument (See: N. A. Nevskij, “Очерк истории тангутоведения” [A sketch of the History of Tangutology], in: Тангутская филология [Tangut Philology], vols. 1–2 (Moscow: GRVL, 1960), vol. 1, pp. 19–32). The text of the stele was later studied from various angles by both Western and Chinese scholars, serving as one of the sources for Nishida Tatsuo's reconstruction of Tangut grammar. For Nishida's English translation see Nishida Tatsuo 西田龍雄, Seika go no kenkyū 西夏語の研究, (Tokyo: Zayūhō kankōkai, 1964), vol. 1, pp. 67–176. Another English translation by Ruth Dunnell is to be found in The Great State of White and High: pp. 120–132; the political and ethnic implications of the text are discussed on pages 132–144; on similar subject see also: K. B. Kepping, “The famous Liangzhou bilingual stele: A new study” (T'oung Pao, vol. 84, no. 4/5 (1998), pp. 356–379). Chinese versions of both Chinese and Tangut text of the inscription were reproduced on different occasions by Chen Bingying 陳炳應 and Luo Fucheng 羅福成; see Shi Jinbo 史金波, Xixia Fojiao shilüe 西夏佛教史略 (Yinchuan: Ningxia renmin chubanshe 1988), pp. 241–254.

4 For this “contextual” approach see: K. J. Solonin (К. Ю. Солонин), Обретение Учения:Традиция Хуаянь-Чань в буддизме Тангутского государства, [Appropriation of the Teaching: Huayan-Chan tradition in the Tangut state], (С-Петербург: Изд-во С-ПетербургскогоУниверситета, 2007); for another attempt to treat several Tangut texts of Sinitic origin in their mutual relationship, see K. J. Solonin, “The Glimpses of Tangut Buddhism” in: Central Asiatic Journal, vol. 52, no. 1 (2008), pp. 64–127). This contextual approach requires a combination of linguistic, historical and religious analysis, thus allowing an adequate contextualization into the broader framework of East Asian Buddhism. This combined approach allows for insights “beyond the language”: If a text is, for instance, in Chinese it does not necessarily have to belong to the realm of Sinitic Buddhism, but can very well be of Tibetan origin. Apart from solving linguistic problems, a correct identification of the origins of the texts discloses broader contexts of cultural exchange in Northern China from the 10th to the 13th century. For a discussion of this view see: Shen Weirong 沈衛榮, “Preface” 前言 in: Wenben zhongde lishi 文本中的歷史 (Beijing: Zhongguo zangxue chubanshe, 2012), pp. 6–7. Shen seems to limit himself to the Chinese texts from Khara-Khoto; however this approach is even more justified for research involving the relationship between texts in Tangut, Tibetan and Chinese. Another attempt to place Tangut civilization within a broader cultural context can be seen in: Yang Fuxue 楊富學 and Chen Aifeng 陳愛峰, Xixia yu zhoubian guanxin yanjiu 西夏與周邊關係研究 (Lanzhou: Gansu minzu chubanshe, 2011).

5 I am touching upon this subject in greater detail in K. J. Solonin, “The ‘Perfect Teaching’ and the Liao Sources of Tangut Chan Buddhism: A Study of Jiexing zhaoxin tu”, Asia Major, vol. 26, no.1 (2013), pp. 79–120; ibid, “Buddhist Connections between the Liao and Xixia: Preliminary Considerations”, The Journal of Song-Yuan Studies, forthcoming.

6 N. A. Nevskij did not pronounce any judgment on the relationship between Sinitic and Tibetan Buddhism in Xixia. Nishida Tatsuo spoke about a “defeat” which Sinitic Buddhism suffered at the hand of the Tibetans during the final years of the Xixia. Recently Ruth Dunnell published a survey of Buddhism in Xixia, where she had briefly touched upon the relationship between “esoteric” and “exoteric” Buddhism among the Tangut. Dunnell correctly observes that in the Tangut case “Tibetan” does not directly equate with “esoteric”, whereas “Chinese” does not necessarily mean “exoteric” and that the Tangut discriminated between both teachings. The relationship between Sinitic and Tibetan is better described through the paradigm of “established modes” of Buddhism (i.e. the Huayan-Chan tradition, in K. J. Solonin's interpretation) current in Northern China, which served as doctrinal “bedrocks” for the Indo-Tibetan tantric innovations of the later period. See: Ruth Dunnell, “Esoteric Buddhism under the Xixia: 1038–1227”, in: Charles Orzech, Henrik Sørensen and Richard Payne (eds.), Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia (Leiden: Brill, 2011), pp. 465–470.

7 The view that Buddhism in the Tangut lands and adjacent Amdo and Khams areas was dominated by some Sinitic version of this religion seems to be corroborated by the Blue Annals of 'Gos lotsāwa: that is, dGe-ba-gsal (Blo-chen-po), one of the promoters of the “rekindling the flame of Dharma” in Tibet, studied the vinaya and other teachings in Minyag-yul, i.e. Xixia. These activities probably took place before the actual establishment of the Tangut state, but well after the Tangut became firmly settled in the Ordos area. The same paragraph mentions that the area adjacent to the Dantig Mountain was populated by yogins adhering to the teaching of “sudden enlightenment”. (G. Roerich, The Blue Annals, I am referring to the modern Russian edition: Гой-лоцзава Шоннубал, Голубые Анналы (St. Petersburg: Eurasia Press, 2001: pp. 57–58).

8 Shi Jinbo, Xixia Fojiao shi lüe, p. 91.

9 The Tiansheng Law Code contains several entries on monastic institutions, one of which being particularly important for the present discussion. The candidates for leadership positions of monastic communities (Tangut, Chinese or Tibetan speaking) were required to be able to explain “Prajñāpāramitā,” “Vijñānavāda”, “Madhyamaka”, “Hundred Dharmas” (i.e. Mahāyāna Abhidharma)”, “Avataṃsaka“ and “Awakening of Faith in Mahāyāna“ (existence of any Tangut translation for this text is problematic). Most of the texts pertaining to these subject matters are actually discovered among the Khara-Khoto findings. The list of mandatory texts for the members of Tangut-Tibetan communities included: Sūtra of the Humane King on the State Protection, Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti, “Chapter on the Vows of Samantabhadra”, “Scripture on the Thirty Five Buddhas” (there are several texts which can be identified with this title), Buddhamatri Prajñāpāramitā, “Gatha of the State Protection”, “Chapter on the Universal Gate of Avalokiteśvara”. Mandatory texts for the Chinese communities included: Sūtra of the Humane King on the State Protection, “Chapter on the Vows of Samantabhadra”, “Scripture on the Thirty Five Buddhas”, “Gatha of the State Protection”, Uśnīśavijaya dhāraṇī, Buddhamatri Prajñāpāramitā, “Chapter on the Universal Gate of Avalokiteśvara”, “Great Ritual” (unidentified), Mahāmāyūrīvidyārāja sūtra, Gatha of the Great Vow (unidentified) and “Laudation to Śakyamuni”.

10 The publication of, for instance, the recorded sayings of the Tang Chan master Nanyang Huizhong is dated 1189, while the Mahāmudrā succession had probably been established in 1152. See K. J. Solonin, “Xixia Dashou yin zakao” 西夏大手印雜考, in: Shen Weirong 沈衛榮 (ed.), Hanzang Foxue yanjiu: wenben, renwu tuxiang he lishi 漢藏佛學研究: 文本, 人物, 圖像和歷史 (Beijing: Zangxue chubanshe, 2013), pp. 235–267.

11 I deal with the problem of Tangut “official Buddhism” versus “popular Buddhism” in: K. J. Solonin (Suo Luoning 索羅寧), “Xixia Fojiao zhi ‘xitong xing’ chutan” 西夏佛教之 “系统性”初探 in: Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究 2013, no. 4, pp. 22–39.

12 This date is established on the basis of the following calculation: Dafanggang Fo Huayan jing haiyin daochang shizhong xingyuan chanpian lichan yi 一行慧覺及其《大方廣佛華嚴經海印道場十重行願常徧禮懺儀》 by Yixing Huijue preserved the lineage of Huayan masters in the Great Xia. This list contains, among others, the name of the State Preceptor Lubu Zhiyun (魯布智雲國師). This name also emerges next to one of the images on the famous engraving, representing the translations of the sūtras under imperial supervision. The imperial title from the engraving is identified as one belonging to Bingchang; thus the activities of Lubu Zhiyun are dated to his reign period. Lubu Zhiyun is second in the line of succession, precceded by the State preceptor Xianbei Zhenyi (鮮卑真義國師); thus the intial translation of the Huayan jing into Tangut might be dated to the early period of Bingchang's reign, or even to the preceeding period of Liangzuo 諒祚. Huayan suishu yanyi chao and Zhu Fajie guanmen are mentioned as the main texts transmitted within the Great Xia Huayan lineage. See below, note 15.

13 Zongshun 宗舜, in “Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian zhi hanwen Fojiao wenxian xukao” 俄藏黑水城文獻之漢文佛教文獻續考 in: Dunhuang Yanjiu 敦煌研究, 2004, no. 5, pp. 90–93, identified several fragments of Northern Song Chan compilations, e.g. the Foyin chanshi xinwang zhan liuzei chu lunhui biao 佛印禪師心王戰六賊出輪回表 by Liaoyuan Foyin 了元佛印 (1032–1098). According to Zongshun, this text is close to another compilation, namely Jiashan Wuai chanshi xiangmo biao 夾山無礙禪師降魔表 (currently available as an appendix to Biyan lu 碧巖錄).

14 The existence of the “Huayan School” as well of other “schools” of Chinese Buddhism had been taken for granted by Shi Jinbo 史金波 in his Xixia fojiao shilűe. Shi's observations are solidly grounded in the textual sources, but his conclusions are the result of the popularly accepted views on the history of Buddhism in China.

15 Heritage of the Tangut Huayan in Yuan China and related scholarship are discussed in K. J. Solonin (Suo Luoning 索羅寧), “Yixing Huijue jiqi ‘Dafanggang Fo Huayan jing haiyin daochang shizhong xingyuan chanpian lichan yi”’ 一行慧覺及其《大方廣佛華嚴經海印道場十重行願常徧禮懺儀》 in Taida Foxue Yanjiu 台大佛學研究, vol. 23 (2012), pp. 1–76.

16 The only textual indication that Dunhuang had any impact on the formation of the Tangut Buddhism is evident from the Tangut translation of the Platform Sūtra (discussion of the texts and list of related research literature see in: K. J. Solonin, “The Fragments of the Tangut Translation of the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch Preserved in the Fu Ssu-nien Library, Academia Sinica”, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, vol. 79, no. 1 (2008), pp. 167–183). The problem is that the translation of the Platform Sūtra represents a marginal dimension of Tangut Buddhism, which evolved along different lines. See: K. J. Solonin, “The Glimpses of Tangut Buddhism”, Central Asiatic Journal, vol. 52, no. 1 (2008), pp. 66–125.

17 As far as I am aware, there has been no specific study of the Tangut Foming jing 佛名經. A brief article by Yu Guangjian 于光建 and Xu Yuping 徐玉萍, “Wuwei bowuguan cang 6721 hao Xixiawen fojing dingming xinkao” 武威博物館藏 6721 號西夏文佛經定名新考, Xixia xue 西夏學 vol. 8 (2011), pp. 151–152 only identifies the text and does not discuss or compare the Tangut text with the Dunhuang versions. See also: Fang Guangchang 方廣錩, Zhongguo xieben Dazangjing yanjiu 中國寫本大藏經研究 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2006). The Tangut texts on the repentance ritual of the thirty five Buddhas, in fact, do not even mention them.

18 Ruth Dunnell, The Great State of White and High, p. 39.

19 The original text is reproduced in Li Fanwen 李範文 (ed.), Xixia yanjiu 西夏研究, part IV (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 2007), p. 878; this edition is a reproduction of original text by Luo Fuchang. There are other transcriptions of the text with minor deviations from each other.

20 This event was probably connected with Bukong's successful repulsion of the Tibetan attack on Wuwei earlier during Xuanzong's reign, by chanting the Sūtra of Humane Kings and of secret spells, which later led to the custom of building Vaiśravaṇa shrines in military encampments (for details, see: Fozu tongzai 佛祖歷代通載, T49, #2036, pp. 597a2–4). For the details of establishing the bodhimaṇḍa see: Feixi 飛錫, “Datang gu dade kaifu yitong sansi hongluqing Suguo gong Daxingshan si Guangzhi sanzang heshang zhi bei” 大唐故大德開府儀同三司試鴻臚卿肅國公大興善寺大廣智三藏和上之碑, in: Shi Yuanzhao 釋圓照, Daizongchao seng Sikong Dabianzheng Guangzhi Sanzang heshang biaozhi ji 代宗朝贈司空大辨正廣智三藏和上表制集, juan 4, (Taishō 52) #2120, pp. 848c24–28. The preface to this collection of Bukong's documents explicitly mentions that Bukong's activities had been divided between “entering the passes and transforming Hexi”.

21 Details see in: K. J. Solonin (Suo Luoning 索羅寧), “Yixing Huijue jiqi Dafanggang Fo Huayan jing haiyin daochang shizhong xingyuan chanpian lichan yi“.

22 Of course, in this equation only the texts published in Xixia should strictly count: imported Song and Jin materials are only indirect indications that a form of Sinitic esoterism was current in the Tangut state during the 12th and 13th centuries. For now it would suffice to mention that among the texts published in Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian 俄藏黑水城文獻 (vol. 2, Shanghai: Shanghai guiji chubanshe, 1996) one can mention the Chinese text [Foshuo] Pubian guangming qingjing shisheng ruyi baoyinxin wunengsheng damingwang dasuiqiu tuoluoni jing 普遍光明清淨熾盛如意寶印心無能勝大明王大隨求陀羅尼經 (Taishō 1153), translated by Bukong; Renwang huguo banruo boluomiduo jing 仁王護國般若波羅密多經 (Taishō 0246) by Bukong; Foshuo Dacheng sheng wuliangshoujueding Guangming wang Rulai tuoluoni jing 佛說大乘聖無量壽決定光明王如來陀羅尼經 (Taishō 937), translated by Fatian 法天 (Northern Song), as well a few unattributed texts. Further details in: L. N. Men'shikov (Л. Н.Меньшиков), Каталог китайской части фонда П. К. Козлова из Хара-Хото [Catalogue of the Chinese part of P. K. Kozlov's Collection from Khara-Khoto] (Москва: Наука 1984); also: Fang Guangchang, “Ningxia Xixia Fota chutu hanwen fodian xielu” 寧夏西夏方塔出土漢文佛典敘錄 (CBETA, version 2011, ZZ 7 #0065), as well as the 6th volume of Ecang Heishuicheng wenxian, where the attribution of the texts, colophons and other related information are collected. Even a brief scan of Kychanov's Catalogue returns the texts of Sanshiwu Fosui lichan yaoyu 三十五佛隨禮懺要語 (Catalogue, #103 匚蚩剛菜呈蘸挖遵爬, more correct translation will be: 依三十五佛懺罪要語. The text probably is a work of Sino-Tibetan Buddhism: according to the colophon, the text was composed by famous Dehui (開羈), a major proponent of Tibetan Buddhism in Xixia, probably on the basis of Bukong's original text); another Tangut text pertaining to the “repentance of thirty-five Buddhas” is: 菜鍍助秀圳圳泖詩匚蚩剛菜蘸挖蝴頷 (Catalogue, #513; Chinese: 佛說如來一切總持三十五佛懺罪法事) probably another version of Bukong's Foshuo sanshiwu fo lican wen (佛說三十五佛禮懺文, Taishō 326, Tangut text “edited” during Renxiao's reign). Pubian guangming qingjing shisheng ruyi baoyinxin wunengsheng damingwang dasuiqiu tuoluoni jing 普遍光明清淨熾盛如意寶印心無能勝大明王大隨求陀羅尼經 (translated by Bukong, Taishō 1123); Foshuo Shisheng guangda weide xiaozai jixiang tuoluoni jing 佛說熾盛光大威德消災吉祥陀羅尼經 (Bukong's translation); Foshuo Daqian guotu jing 佛說守護大千國土經 (Taishō 0999, originally translated by Shihu, 施護, Northern Song); Foshuo Shengyaomu tuoluoni jing 佛說聖曜母陀羅尼 經 (Taishō 1303, original translated by Fatian, 法天, Northern Song). A Sinitic connection of Tangut esoteric Buddhism manifests itself in the Tangut part of the Kozlov holdings. According to Kyĉanov's listings (actually, reproducing those of Nishida in the 3rd volume of Seika bun Kegon kyō), such Tangut texts as 菜鍍鈿儔齒巴疹豎吭舂 (Catalogue 259, Chinese: 佛說聖星母陀羅尼契經, Tangut text “edited” during Renxiao's reign) corresponds to Foshuo shengyaomu tuoluoni jing 佛說聖曜母陀羅尼經 (Taishō 1303, translated by Fatian, Northern Song, attested in the Chinese part of Khara-Khoto collection). These are scattered indications of the continuity of Sinitic esoterism in the Tangut state.

23 Dunnell (“Esoteric Buddhism under the Xixia: 1038–1227”) suggests that the Chinese esoteric texts travelled to Xixia with Kaobao zang (開寶藏): the version of the Buddhist Canon purchased by the Tangut emperors from the Song court. This observation is clearly based on Shi Jinbo's accounts of Tangut imperial purchases of the Canon from the Song. However, none of the inscriptions and memorials on which Shi Jinbo bases his judgment, confirm that it was Kaibao zang, and not just a big collection of Buddhist texts, which had been imported by the Tangut court. “Dazang jing” is a formulaic expression; by this token, the formula “zhuan dazang jing 轉大藏經”, which often occurs in the colophons of Tangut texts, merely means “reciting the sūtras”. Thus, the provenance of each of the Northern Song texts should be studied with care in order to clarify their particular route to Xixia.

24 Buddhism of the Helanshan area (賀蘭山) and its possible influence on the formation of Tangut Buddhism is discussed in: K. J. Solonin, Обретение Учения: Традиция Хуаянь-Чань вбуддизме тангутского государства Си-Ся [Appropriation of the Teaching: Huayan Chan tradition of Tangut Buddhism] (St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Press 2007), pp. 67–71. Here the author specifically discusses the data on Helanshan Buddhism available from traditional Chinese Buddhist sources since the Tang dynasty. The most prominent is the account of Baotang Wuzhu (保唐無住, 714–774) travels in the Helanshan area during the era of the Lidai Fabao ji 歷代法寶記. This prominent master of Sichuan Chan sojourned in the Helanshan area during the years 757 and 758. Records from the Lidai Fabao ji clearly demonstrate that some form of Chan Buddhism had been current in the area. (See: K. J. Solonin, Обретение Учения, pp. 68–69; J. Broughton, “Early Chan Schools in Tibet” in: R. Gimello, P. Gregory (eds.), Studies in Chan and Hua-yen: Studies in East Asian Buddhism 1 (Honolulu: University of Hawaii'i Press, 1983). Although the records from the Lidai Fabao ji relate to the period earlier than the one referred to in the Blue Annals, the two texts seem to agree on the fact that some form of Chan had been current in the north-western region.

25 “The Inscription commemorating the burying of the śarīra by the Great Xia” mentions that the Buddha relics had been delivered by Xitian dashi 西天大士. This term supposedly represents Indians (Shi Jinbo, Xixia Fojiao shi lüe, p. 223). Another important indication of the relationship between Xixia and “India” is the Ming period “Imperially authorized stele inscription from Baojue si” (Chici Baojue si beiji, 敕賜寶覺寺碑記). The text mentions the Tangut State preceptor Yandan's (燕丹國師) voyage to India in search of the Dharma during the reign of Qianshun. See: Yang Fuxue 楊富學 and Chen Aifeng 陳愛峰, Xixia yu zhoubian guanxin yanjiu, pp. 214–215 and Dunnell, The Great State of White and High, pp. 79–82.

26 As far as I can tell, Shi Jinbo does not specifically address the local “religious heritage” (as opposed to the temple building, cults etc.) of Tangut Buddhism in his Brief History of Tangut Buddhism. For a more recent study of the relationship between Khotan and Xixia see: Chen Wei 陳瑋, “Gongyuan 10–11 shiji Ling-Xia dangxiang ji Xixia yu Yutian guanxi shi yanjiu” 公元 10–11 世紀靈夏党項及西夏與于闐關係史研究 in: Du Jianlu 杜建錄 (ed.), Xixia xue lunji 西夏學論集 (Shanghai: Shanghai guiji chubanshe, 2012), pp. 100–105; see also: Rong Xinjiang 榮新江, Guiyi jin shi yanjiu 歸義軍史研究 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1996).

27 Apart from the obvious facts of the Uighur participation in the Buddhist translation project, Shi Jinbo talks about Uighur influences in a generalizing manner; for a more detailed account see: Yang Fuxue and Chen Aifeng, Xixia yu zhoubian guanxin yanjiu, pp. 155–194. Here the authors indicate several aspects where, in their opinion, the Uighur influence had been most prominent: the translation of the Chinese Buddhist scriptures into Tangut (pp. 165–166 et passim, where the Tangut translator Bai Zhiguang 白智光 is identified as a Uighur), various aspects of Buddhist art, especially the usage of colours and specific motifs identifiable in Uighur cave temples, etc.

28 The scholars seem to rely on Wu Guangcheng's assertion in Xixia Shushi 西夏書史 that Lady Mocang confined the Uighur monks into Chengtian temple in order to translate the sūtras. See, for instance, Dunnell, The Great State of White and High, p. 54.

29 The problem of the tu influences on the formation of the Tangut culture and statehood is discussed at length by Lü Jianfu 呂建福 in his Tuzu shi 土族史 (Beijing: Shehui kexue chubanshe 2002). The author generally traces the origins of the Tangut ruling house to the Toba family of the Northern Wei, and concludes that many of the historical figures from the Tangut and Yuan history, including Yanglian Zhenjia, in fact belong to the tu ethnic group. Buddhism of Helanshan area and its possible influence on the formation of Tangut Buddhism is discussed in: K. J. Solonin, Обретение Учения: Традиция Хуаянь-Чань в буддизме тангутского государства Си-Ся, pp. 67–71. Here the author specifically discusses the data on Helanshan Buddhism available from traditional Chinese Buddhist sources since the Tang dynasty.

30 Suo Luoning, “Xixia Fojiao zhi xitong xing chutan”.

31 A paragraph from the famous Liangzhou stele inscription is particularly noticeable in this respect. The paragraph reads: 戾俱串王杖絃厏撾筒,汦菅膘啊,彶旦工工,娟杖木;沮朸袁丌杖韋厏撾筒,護獨媚手,熟稚謫謫,汌糊絨。 In reconstructed Chinese, the passage reads: 坎性雖上古不變, 而風起搖動,波浪湯湯,常不止;真體雖本來不變,而隨緣凝滯,惱禍沉沉,永不息, i.e.: “Although the nature of the water had never changed since the ancient times, when the wind starts blowing the waves come into motion and never stop; although the true nature never changes, it follows conditions and gets attached [to the forms], and is drowned by affection and sufferings, which never cease”. This paragraph is clearly related to the famous Huayan tenet of the “true reality” which never changes, but adapts to the causes and conditions. For a discussion of the paragraph, see: K. J. Solonin, “Xixia Fojiao zhi xitong xing chutan”, pp. 29–30.

32 Details in: K. J. Solonin, “The Liao Buddhism and the Formation of Tangut Chan Buddhism” in: I. F. Popova (ed.), Тангуты в Центральной Азии [Tanguts in Central Asia] (Moscow: Vostochnaya Literatura, 2012), pp. 400–410; K. Solonin, “The ‘Prefect Teaching’ and Liao sources of Tangut Chan Buddhism: A study of Jiexing Zhaoxin tu“, Asia Major vol. 26, no.1; K. J. Solonin, “The Teaching of Daoshen in Tangut Translation: The Mirror of Mind,” in: R. Gimello, Fr. Girard and I. Hamar (eds), Avataṃsaka Buddhism in East Asia: Huayan, Kegon, Flower Ornament Buddhism. Origins and Adaptation of a Visual Culture (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2012), pp. 137–185. The term “yuanzong” was representative of the Huayan teaching at least since the Northern Song: this was the denomination used by the Korean princely monk Ŭich'ŏng (Yitian 義天, 1055–1101) in his collection of various Huayan texts Yuanzong wenlei 圓宗文類.

33 For preliminary considerations concerning the “perfect teaching” in the Liao see in: K. J. Solonin, “The “Perfect Teaching” and for comments about its structure, see: K. J. Solonin, “The Teaching of Daoshen in Tangut Translation: The Mirror of Mind.” The nature of the “Perfect Teaching” and of its major constituents – the “perfect revealed” and “perfect esoteric”– is discussed among others by Endō Junichirō: Endō Junichirō (遠藤純一郎), “Kenmitsu entsū jōbutsu shin'yō shū ni okeru kenmitsukan” 《顯密圓通成佛心要集》に於ける顯密觀, Rengeji butsugaku kenkyūjo kiyō 蓮花寺佛學研究所紀要, no. 1 (2010), pp. 63–90. Liao Daozong's personal association with the promotion of these teachings and of the Huayan doctrine as expressed in the Shi Moheyan lun 釋摩訶衍論 (Taishō 1668) is mentioned in a number of extant Liao works, e.g. in the famous Xianmi Yuantong Chengfo xinyao ji 顯密圓通成佛心要集 (Taishō 1955) by Liao esoteric master Daoshen 道㲀, (1056?–1114?), as well as in various commentaries to the Shi Moheyan lun composed during the late Liao (e.g.: Shi Moheyan lun tongxuan chao 釋摩訶衍論通玄鈔, by Zhifu 志福, details in K. J. Solonin, “Buddhist Connections between the Liao and Xixia: Preliminary Considerations”.

34 The issue of Liao borrowings in Xixia is discussed several publications: K. J. Solonin, “Khitan Connection of Tangut Buddhism” in: Shen Weirong et al. (eds.), Humanity and Nature in Khara-Khoto area (Beijing: Renmin University Press, 2007); idem, “The Glimpses of Tangut Buddhism”, pp. 66–127; idem, K. J. Solonin, “The “Perfect Teaching”: Possible Liao Sources of Tangut Chan Buddhism: A Study of Jiexing zhaoxin tu” in: Asia Major vol. 26, no.1 (2013), pp. 79–129; also: idem, “Chanzong zai Liao yu Xixia: yi Heishui cheng chutu Jiexing zhaoxin tu he Tongli Dashi Jiujing yicheng yuanming xinyi wei li” 禪宗在遼與西夏:以黑水城出土《解行照心圖》和通理大師《究竟一乘圓明心義》為例, in: Yixue 怡學 (ed.), Liao Jin Fojiao yanjiu 遼金佛教研究, (Beijing: Jincheng chubanshe 2012).

35 Buddhism in the Liao has received substantial scholarly attention. Among the more recent works dealing with Liao materials from an angle relevant for the present research one should note: Masaaki Chikusa 竺沙雅章, Sō Gen Bukkyō bunkashi kenkyū 宋元佛教文化史研究, together with the works of Endo Junichiro, mentioned throughout this article. Apart from this, Lű Jianfu 呂建福 devoted several paragraphs in the third volume of his Zhongguo mijiao shi 中國密教史 to the exposition of Liao esoteric Buddhism (Lű Jianfu 呂建福, Zhongguo mijiao shi 中國密教史, vols. 1–3 (Taibei: Kongting shuyuan, 2010). Recently a two volume collection of essays on the Buddhism during the Liao, Jin and Yuan was published in China: Huang Xianian 黃夏年 (ed.), Liao, Jin, Yuan Fojiao yanjiu 遼金元佛教研究, vols. 1–2 (Zhengzhou: Daxiang chubanshe, 2012), followed by another edited volume: Yixue 怡學 (ed.), Liao Jin Fojiao yanjiu 遼金佛教研究. See also: Henrik Sørensen, “Esoteric Buddhism under the Liao” in: Charles Orzech, Henrik Sørensen and Richard Payne (eds.), Esoteric Buddhism and the Tantras in East Asia, pp. 456–465.

36 See: K. J. Solonin, “Yixing Huijue jiqi Dafanggang Fo Huayan jing haiyin daochang shizhong xingyuan chanpian lichan yi”.

37 Among these, important texts are Cijue chanshi quanhua ji 慈覺禪師勸化集 (TK–132, Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian, vol. 2, pp. 82–126; see: Li Hui 李輝 and Feng Guodong 馮國棟, “Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian Cijue chanshi quanhua ji kao“ 俄藏黑水城文獻《慈覺禪師勸化集》考” in: Dunhuang xue 敦煌學, 2004, no. 2; Zhenzhou Zhanglu Liao Heshang jiewai lu 真州長蘆了和尚劫外錄 (TK–133, Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian, vol. 2, pp. 127–165; for an edited version of the text and its comparison with others see: Shi Huida 釋慧達, “Xinjiao Heishui cheng ben Jiewai lu“ 新校黑水城本《劫外錄》 in: Zhonghua Foxue xuebao 中華佛學學報, 2002, no. 6, pp. 127–172. The dating of Cijue's Collection is complicated: Men'shikov (pp. 263–264) dates the publication to the Northern Song period (third Chongning 崇寧 year, i.e. 1104). However, the text includes the compilations by Liao scholar-monk Lang Sixiao 郎思孝, active during the Xingzong reign period (1031–1055). This implies a longer gestation of the text discovered in Khara-Khoto. See: Feng Guodong 馮國棟 and Li Hui 李輝, “Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian Liao dai gaoseng Shanhai Sixiao zhuzuo kao” 《俄藏黑水城文獻》遼代高僧山海思孝著作考 in: Xixia xue 西夏學, no.8 (2011), pp. 274–277. Another study on this monk not mentioning the Khara-Khoto materials would be Nokami Shunjō 野上俊靜, “Ryōdai gakusō Shiryokyo ni tsuite” 遼代學僧思孝 について in: Bukkyō shigaku kai 30 isshūnen kinen ronshū 佛教史學會 30 周年記念論集, vol. 12 (1980), pp. 295–305. In fact, Sixiao was not a Chan monk, but rather a learned follower of Huayan and esoteric Buddhism, and the inclusion of his sermons into the Cijue collection indicates his importance for the Liao and Jin periods. In his survey of Chinese texts recovered from Khara-Khoto, Zongshun identified several fragments of Northern Song Chan compilations, e.g. Foyin chanshi xinwang zhan liuzei chu lunhui biao 佛印禪師心王戰六賊出輪回表 by Liaoyuan Foyin 了元佛印 (1032–1098). According to Zongshun, this text is close to another compilation Jiashan Wuai chanshi xiangmo biao 夾山無礙禪師降魔表 (currently available as an appendix to Biyan lu 碧巖錄). Foyin's career, at least as it is presented in Xu chuandeng lu 續傳燈錄 and other sources, have been connected with the South. However, he holds the honorific “Yunju shan” 雲居山 attached to his name, indicating a close relationship with the North. The text Xinwang zhan liuzei chu lunhui biao is a ritual text, and not a classical Chan “recorded saying”. (Zongshun 宗舜, “Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian zhi hanwen Fojiao wenxian xukao”, pp. 90–93).

38 Details on Daoshen and “Perfect Teaching” in K. J. Solonin: “The Teaching of Daoshen in Tangut Translation: The Mirror of Mind”, pp. 137–187.

39 Details on the Khara-Khoto texts by Tongli can be found in K. J. Solonin, “Chanzong zai Liao yu Xixia: yi Heishuicheng chutu Jiexing zhaoxin tu he Tongli Dashi Jiujing yicheng yuanming xinyi wei li”. This volume also includes a paper by Li Hui 李輝 confirming the identity of Tongli, known from Khara-Khoto texts on the famous Liao master. Tongli is otherwise known for his sūtra carving activities on Fangshan. For examples see Chen Yanzhu 陳燕珠, Fangzhan shijingzhong Tongli dashi kejing zhi yanjiu 房山石經中通理大師刻經之研究 (Taibei: Huiyuan wenjiao jijinhui, 1993), pp. 38–52; see also Ren Jie 任傑 “Tongli dashi dui Fangshan kejing shiyede zhongda gongxian” 通理大師對房山刻經事業的重大貢獻 in: 呂鐵鋼 Lü Tiegang ed., Fangshan shijing yanjiu 房山石經研究 vols. 1–3 (Hongkong: Zhongguo fojiao wenhua yanjiusuo, 1999) vol. 3, pp. 117–131.

40 Several Chinese texts were identified as Liao commentaries to the Shi Moheyan lun or texts directly inspired by it. Text TK–74, known by its abbreviated title Long lun (龍論) is in fact an abridged version of Shi Moheyan lun zanxuan shu 釋摩訶衍論贊玄疏 (ZZ–45 no. 772) by the Liao monk Fawu 法悟. This discussion can be followed in Zongshun 宗舜, “Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian zhi hanwen fojiao wenxian niti kaobian” 《俄藏黑水城文獻》之漢文佛教文獻擬題考辨 in Dunhuang yanjiu 敦煌研究, no. 1 (2001).

41 The title of one of the Khara-Khoto texts (Tang 349, #7211, Catalogue #491) 棲開槌菜塢衡吭舂劣呈損連渲 can be read as Da Fangguang Fo Huayan jing suishu yan yi ji 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義記 (possible translation for 渲 are zhu 註 (注) and chao 鈔). The text of the extant paragraph coincides with the Suishu yanyi chao by Chengguan, but the combination of the body text with the commentary indicates a proximity with Xianyan's Huayan jing tanxuan jueze 華嚴經探玄抉(決)擇. As is often the case with Tangut texts, the number of juan in the Tangut text corresponds with neither of the possible originals.

42 A printed copy of this text is available from Khara-Khoto, the title being Zhu xinyao famen 註清涼心要 (TK–186 Zhu Qingliang xinyao 注清凉心要註心要法門, Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian 俄藏黑水城文獻, vol. 1 (Shanghai; Shanghai guji 1996). The text had been edited by Fang Guangchang (方廣錩) and included into the CBETA edition (ZZ 7, #58). In his introduction to the text, Fang Guangchang quotes his oral communication with Iriya Yoshitaka 入矢義高, who believed that the Khara-Khoto text was a Liao edition. Although the reasons of Iriya's conclusion are probably speculative, this consideration is important for the further discussion.

43 Original: Tang 349, #7211, Catalogue #491. As Masaaki Chikusa has shown, Chengguan's Extended Commentary had been an extremely authoritative text in the Liao, and produced its own research literature. See Chikusa Masaaki (竺沙雅章), “Ryōdai Kegon shū no ichi kōsatsu—omoni shinshutsu Kegon shū tenjaku no bunken gaku teki kenkyū” 遼代華嚴宗の一考察─主に進出華嚴宗典籍の文獻學的研究 in: Ōtani daigaku kenkyū nenpō 大谷大學研究年報. This paper is reproduced in: Sō-Gen Bukkyō bunkashi kenkyū 宋元佛教文化史研究 (Tokyo: Kyūkoshoin, 2000), pp. 139–141; 153–156 et passim. Chengguan's works current in the Liao had further influenced the development of Huayan thought during the Yuan (ibid, p. 158). The currently available Chinese version of Suishu yanyi chao is based on a Korean text, which in turn might have been imported from the Liao. On the basis of his examination of the Suishu Yanyi chao, Chikusa determined that two versions of the text circulated in the Liao during the 11th century. The publication dates of the texts had been separated by several decades, and the latest of them (“B version” in Chikusa's terminology) became later the foundation of the Korean edition, which had in turn been the standard for the reproduction of the text throughout East Asia, including China and Japan. See Sō Gen Bukkyō bunkashi kenkyū for details.

44 K. J. Solonin, “Xixia wen Yuanxin jing kao” 西夏文《圓心鏡》考, Zhongguo Chanxue, no. 7 (2014). Master Tongyuan is mentioned as one of the propagators of Liao Chan Buddhism in the famous Da'an inscription (i.e. “Da'an shan Lianhuayu Yanfu si Guanyintang jibei” (大安山蓮花峪延福寺觀音堂記碑)). For the translation of the text, together with a review on previous scholarship, see K. J. Solonin, “The “Prefect Teaching” and Liao sources of Tangut Chan Buddhism: A study of Jiexing Zhaoxin tu.”

45 For a study of the text see K. J. Solonin, “Chanzong zai Liao yu Xixia: yi Heishuicheng chutu Jiexing zhaoxin tu he Tongli Dashi Jiujing yicheng yuanming xinyi wei li”.

46 Shanzui gou Xixia shiku 山嘴溝西夏石窟 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 2007), vol. 2, figure 29 being a reproduction of the original text; vol. 1, p. 56. Chinese transcription by Sun Changsheng.

47 Baisi gou Xixia Fangta 拜寺溝西夏方塔 (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe 2005), pp. 164–169 contains reproductions of the original texts, and pp. 169–172 a transcription by Fang Guangchang.

48 Da Fangguang Yuanjue xiuduoluo liaoyi jing lüe shu, juan shang zhi er 大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經略疏卷上之二 (TK–251), Ecang Heishuicheng wenxian, vol. 4, p. 321. A superficial study confirms that the Khara-Khoto and Baisi gou fragments belong to the same edition.

49 Shanzui gou Xixia shiku: vol. 1, pp. 58–62 contains a transcription of the text, vol. 2, figs. 36–43 is a reproduction of the original text. The editor concludes (vol. 1, p. 62) that this is a unique Tangut text, however my search revealed that the texts is fully congruent with the corresponding fragments of Zongmi's original work.

50 K. J. Solonin, “Chan Contemplation” in the Tangut Buddhism,” pp. 235–236.

51 Tang. 359 #46; Catalogue # 301

52 Fozu Lidai Tongzai 佛祖歷代通載, CBETA, vol. 49, no. 2036, pp. 725b7–c12.

53 Ecang Heishui cheng wenxian, vol. 4, p. 358. Only a fragment of a woodblock scroll with the first juan of the text has survived. However, even a brief overview of the text demonstrates that the Khara-Khoto edition might have been substantially different from the currently available text (T46 #1995). The extant part of the Xixia text apparently belongs to the introduction of the original edition (it contains the opening colophon indicating the authorship), but omits the whole exposition of “exoteric teachings” and the discussion on “Perfect Teaching” found in the modern version of text. The extant part starts with: 自欲持誦陀羅尼密呪者 … followed by the explanation of and instructions for the mantra of “the seal of pure dharmadhātu” (jing fajie yin zhou 凈法界印呪), “the mantra of bodily protection” (hushen zhenyan 護身真言), “six characters mantra” (liu zi zhou 六字呪) and finally the Fomu Zhunti (佛母准提). The Xixia text corresponds with the 994a20–994c14 of the modern CBETA edition. The major difference is that the commenting paragraphs, constituting the bulk of the modern text are completely omitted from the Xixia edition, which appears to be little more than a laconic ritual manual and list of dhāraṇī, whereas all Buddhist theory and meditation instructions are missing. The modern text of Xianmi Yuantong Chengfo xinyao is also of Tangut origin: it had been included into the Buddhist canon by Guanzhuba (管主八), a Tangut senglu 僧錄 in Hangzhou during the Yuan. This confirms that Daoshen's work in Xixia circulated in both complete and abridged versions.

54 K. J. Solonin, “Chanzong zai Liao yu Xixia”: the text contains indirect quotations from Xianmi Yuantong Chengfo xinyao ji by Daoshen.

55 Zongmi had been known in Xixia as kjwi xjow 頻劂 a transcription of the Chinese “Guifeng”, or sjɨ 'jɨj 完應, a translation of the Chinese caotang 草堂; and djɨj źjɨr 材羈, translation of the Chinese dinghui 定慧.

56 For the discussion and critical reproduction of the text, see: Nie Hongyin 聶鴻音, “Xixia wen Chanyuan zhuquan jidu xu yizheng” 西夏文《禪源諸詮集都序》譯證, (parts 1–2) in: Xixia xue 西夏學, no. 5 (2010) and no. 6 (2011); also K. J. Solonin, “The Glimpses of Tangut Buddhism”. Nie's observations demonstrate that the Tangut text The Chan Preface is in some instances different from the presently available Yuan period version. The layout of the woodblock publication features a table of contents not available in present-day editions. One can speculate that the Tangut text reproduces the Liao version of the text.

57 For details on its publication, see: K. J. Solonin, “Tangut Chan Buddhism and Guifeng Zongmi”.

58 K. J. Solonin, “По поводу тангутских Чань-буддийских текстов из собрания СПбФ ИВ PAH”.

59 Л. Н. Меньшиков, Каталог китайской части фонда П. К. Козлова из Хара-Хото [L. I. Men'shikov, Catalogue of Chinese Fragments of the P. K. Kozlov Fund from Khara-Khoto], p. 267, #228.

60 For a preliminary linguistic study of the text, see: Zhang Peiqi 張珮琪, “Chutan Xiayi Zhushuo Chanyuan jidu xu ji Zhushuo Chanyuan jiduxu ganwen” 初探夏譯《諸說禪源集都序》及《諸說禪源集都序幹文》 in: Xixixa yuwen yu Huabei zongjiao wenhua guoji xueshu yantaohui 西夏語文與華北宗教文化國際學術研討會 (Proceedings of the International Conference on the religious culture of northern China and of the Xixia). Taibei: Academia Sinica and Foguang University, 2009.

61 Further details in K. J. Solonin, “The “Perfect Teaching”: Possible Liao Sources of Tangut Chan Buddhism: A Study of Jiexing zhaoxin tu”.

62 One such example might be a Tangut text known as 項狁謂 Chinese: Guanxin shun 觀心順. Nishida Tatsuo had originally identified this text as the translation of Guanxin lun 觀心論 by Tiantai Zhiyi. This identification had been reproduced by Kychanov (Catalogue 317, Tang 167 #6775). In fact, this text is a collection of Mahāmudrā meditation manuals, which is clear from Kychanov's own exposition of its contents. In the majority of the cases there are other marker terms which allow clearer identification of the origins of the texts. On the complex nature of Tangut Buddhist terminology, which incorporated both Sinitic and Tibetan elements, see: Nishida Tatsuo 西田龍雄, Seika bun Kegon kyō 西夏文華嚴經 (Kyoto: University of Kyoto Press, 1976–1978), vol. 1, pp. 8–13; also Nie Hongyin 聶鴻音, “Xixia Fojiao shuyu de laiyuan” 西夏佛教術語的來源 in: Xixia wenxian lungao 西夏文獻論稿 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2012), pp. 253–255.

63 K. J. Solonin, “The Fragments of the Tangut Translation of the Platform Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch Preserved in the Fu Ssu-nien Library, Academia Sinica” in: Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, vol. 79, no. 1 (2008), pp. 163–185.

64 K. J. Solonin (Солонин К.Ю.), “По поводу тангутских чань-буддийских текстов изсобрания СПбФИВРАН” [Concerning Tangut Chan Buddhist texts from the Holdings of IOS RAS] in: Петербургское востоковедение. [Petersburg Journal of Oriental Studies] 7 (1995), pp. 390–412.

65 For a study of this text see Sun Bojun 孫伯君, “Ecang Heishuicheng Damo dashi Guanxin lun kaoshi” 俄藏黑水城《達摩大師觀心論》考釋 in: Xinhuo xiangchuan 薪火相傳: Shi Jinbo xiansheng 70 shou lunwenjin 史金波先生 70 壽論文集 (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 2012), pp. 266–304. One of Sun's major observations is the proximity between Heishuicheng text and one of the versions from Pelliot's Dunhuang collection (P. 4646).

66 K. J. Solonin, “The Chan teaching of Nanyang Huizhong (?–775) in Tangut Translation” in: Nathan W. Hill (ed.), Medieval Tibeto-Burman Languages IV (Leiden: Brill, 2012), pp. 267–347. The identification of this text as of an original Tangut compilation in “The Glimpses of Tangut Buddhism” is incorrect.

67 K. J. Solonin, “Xixia Hongzhou wenxian zai kao” 西夏洪州文獻再考 in: Zhongguo Chanxue 中國禪學, no. 6 (2012).

68 Baiyun Shizi also composed a book of Chan poetry found under the same cover with the Tangut translation with the Collection of Virtious Behavior (德行集) by Baiyun Qingjue, the founder of the White Cloud sect during the Northern Song. Thus, Sun Bojun observed that Baiyun Shizi might have been some kind of patriarch of the White Cloud sect in Xixia. She connects his activities with the period following the demise of Xixia, whereas Kychanov – on the basis of the same textual fragments – speculates on a possibility of a pilgrimage by the Tangut monks to some kind of a White Cloud sect sanctuary. Despite these speculations Baiyun Shizi's text listed above demonstrates no intellectual or dogmatic proximity with the known White Cloud texts, but is in tenor with the Huayan Chan teaching of Chengguan and Zongmi. For a review of the problem, see K. J. Solonin, “Xixia wen Baiyun Shizi Sanguan jiumen chutan” 西夏文白雲釋子《三觀九門》初探, in: Xixia xue 西夏學, no. 8 (2011), pp. 9–22.

69 This compilation is included into the Catalogue (#669, Tang 398, ##2609, 2610) as tsji na phij xieəj śjā dzjiij nioow śjwiw śioo 劾嶇掄嚏侍伻護獨蚌 as a woodblock printed book, originally consisting of three juan, of which only the second and the third have survived. The major difficulty is identifying the place and personal names mentioned in the title. Catalogue translates the title as Henan Pei Xiu Chanshi suiyuan ji 和南裴休禪師隨緣集, and provides a partial translation of the colophon. Nishida Tatsuo originally left the place name untranslated. However, the Tangut tsji na 劾嶇 cannot be read as “Henan”, a more adequate reading being “Ji-na.” Due to the lack or corroborative evidence, there is no possibility of reading the place name with certainty. However, I suspect that the place name is the Tangut transcription of the word Zhina 支那, i.e. indianized denomination of China. The personal name 掄嚏 can be read as “Pei Xiu”, or biqiu 比丘. Catalogue at one point provides the reading “Bixing”, where Kychanov treats it as a place name. However, the Tangut translation of Zongmi's Chan Preface features yet another version of the Tangut transcription of Pei Xiu's name, and nothing is known of Pei Xiu's “Recorded Sayings”.

70 Considering all this, I use “Bi Xie” as a tentative reading. The text is rather long (about 90 “butterfly” pages) and considerably damaged; the parts which I was able to preliminary scrutinize consist of several sections: “Dazhong wenda” 大眾問答 (Questions and Answers by the Disciples), śjwa śjɨ &eegr;wuu tji 壯闊迴豬, etc. In this last title two first graphs evade adequate translation, whereas 迴豬 can be rendered as yűliu 語留, in the sense of “recorded sayings” (yűlu 語錄. The contents of the paragraph confirm this identification. For a preliminary translation of the fragments, see K. J. Solonin (K. Солонин), Обретение Учения: Традиция Хуаянь-Чань в буддизме тангутского государства Си-Ся, pp. 90–93.

71 L. N. Men'shikov (Л. Н. Меньшиков), Каталог китайской части фонда П. К. Козлова из Xapa-Xomo, TK–241 and 242, pp. 270–272.

72 Bensong's other work Huayan qizi jingti fajie guan sanshi song 華嚴七字經題法界觀三十門 contains a brief biographical entry on the master, mentioning that he had been active in the Kaifeng area during the Shenzong emperor's Yuanfeng 元豐 era (1078–1085), Northern Song. Other than that, Wansong Xingxiu informs that Bensong was a famous master of his time, but that his collected sayings had never been put down. However, Dr. Wang Song from Beijing University informed me that parts of the Chinese original had survived in Japan.

73 Nie Hongyin 聶鴻音, “Huayan Sanjie kao” 華嚴三偈考, in: Xixia xue 西夏學, no. 8 (2011), pp. 1–9.

74 For a summary of previous research into the life and activities of Yixing Huijue, see K. J. Solonin, “Yixing Huijue jiqi Dafanggang Fo Huayan jing haiyin daochang shizhong xingyuan chanpian lichan yi”, pp. 1–10.

75 ZZ 74 #1470, pp. 140b13–15. A detailed discussion of the contents of this paragraph is to be found in: K. J. Solonin, “Xixia Fojiao zhi xitong xing chutan”, p. 37.


Export Citation