Péngzhé zhíbiàn 蓬折直辨
A Direct Disputation Against the Bending Reed by 妙蓮 (Miàolián, 撰)
About the work
A single-fascicle Southern-Sòng polemical refutation of Tiěwēng Shǒuyī’s 鐵翁守一 Zhōngnán jiāyè 終南家業 (KR6k0219), by Shàngwēng Miàolián 上翁妙蓮 (妙蓮) of Língzhī 靈芝寺, the Língzhī-school’s institutional descendant of Yuánzhào 元照. The opening parenthetical title-gloss reads bǐ jì qūzhé gù dāng zhíbiàn 彼既曲拆故當直辨 — “since they twist things [obliquely], it is necessary to dispute directly.” The “péngzhé” 蓬折 (“bending [like a] reed”) of the title is a metaphor for Shǒuyī’s Zhōngnán jiāyè whose doctrinal positions Miàolián takes to be crooked.
Prefaces
The opening paragraph dates the work’s genesis: *“At the beginning of Chúnyòu [淳祐 = 1241–1252], when at the abbot’s quarters of Cāngzhōu I suddenly obtained the Zhōngnán jiāyè and on first sight of the title was overcome with admiration — ‘I never thought our school had so fine a thing!’ — but on opening the scroll and reading the opening chapter, [I found] that this is in fact the house-ruining son (壞家之子). The very topicstatement says: ‘Our patriarch promoted vinaya by taking miàoguān 妙觀 (subtle contemplation) as foundation’ — but [our patriarch’s] support is only the vinaya’s passages on guānniàn duìzhì 觀念對治 (contemplative attention as counter-measure) etc., which still belong to the Hīnayāna guān; he therefore drags in wéishì miàoguān 唯識妙觀 (Yogācāra subtle contemplation) as harmonising-conduit, and makes that the foundation of vinayapromotion. I do not know — was our patriarch promoting vinaya or promoting guān? If you say vinaya, why has vinaya no foundation [of its own]? If you say guān, why call it vinaya-promotion?”
Abstract
The Péngzhé zhíbiàn mounts a Língzhī-school defence of the self-sufficiency of the Nánshānlǜ doctrine of jiètǐ against Shǒuyī’s incorporation of miàoguān / wéishìguān as the doctrinal foundation. Miàolián’s central thesis: the Língzhī line — i.e. Yuánzhào’s Sìfēn lǜ xíngshì chāo zīchí jì (KR6k0167) and Yèshū jìyuán jì (KR6k0173) — already incorporates a circular-and-real (yuánshí 圓實) reading of vinaya within the Mahāyāna yīfóchéng 一佛乘 framework, and to drag in Yogācāra miàoguān as a separate foundation is both unnecessary and doctrinally distortive. The disputation walks line-by-line through Shǒuyī’s opening (Jiàoguān cuōyào) and refutes each move. Composition is bracketed by Shǒuyī’s Zhōngnán jiāyè (1239–) and the colophon to the present work which is dated 1254 (寶祐二年); notBefore–notAfter are accordingly set 1241–1254. The companion polemic, less detailed and more aphoristic, is KR6k0222 Péngzhé zhēn. Together they form one of the most polemically-charged exchanges within Southern-Sòng Lǜzōng history.
Translations and research
No substantial secondary literature located.
Other points of interest
- The exchange between Shǒuyī (KR6k0219 Zhōngnán jiāyè) and Miàolián (this work + KR6k0222 Péngzhé zhēn) is one of the rare Southern-Sòng intra-Vinaya doctrinal controversies preserved in both directions in the Xùzàngjīng.
Links
- CBETA online: https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/X1111
- 妙蓮 DILA
- Kanseki DB