Qíyuán zhèng yí 祇園正儀
Correct Regulations for the Jeta Grove
A short regulatory-pastoral statement by Fúróng Dàokǎi 芙蓉道楷 (1043–1118), the Northern Sòng Cáodòng 曹洞宗 master celebrated for his severely ascetic monastic practice, articulating his programme for reformed monastic conduct in the spirit of the early-Buddhist Jeta-vana 祇樹給孤獨園 ideal
About the work
A one-juan short regulatory text, X63 n1233. Non-commentary; commentedTextid omitted. Structurally a brief manifesto or programmatic statement in which Dàokǎi sets out the severely minimalist monastic regime he intends to institute in his own assembly.
The text opens with a characteristic rhetorical framing: “To leave home is to weary of defilement and to seek liberation from birth-and-death; to rest the mind and cease thought, to sever panyuan 攀緣 [grasping] — this is called ‘leaving home’. How can one bury one’s whole life in ordinary material profit and advantage? One must truly let go of both ends and put down the middle; encountering sound and form should be like planting flowers on stone, seeing profit and fame should be like a speck in the eye.” The text then proceeds to Dàokǎi’s specific operational programme: a monastery that takes as its whole-year income only the produce of the monastery’s own fields, divided into 365 daily portions; no fund-raising outside the monastery; no fixed schedule of charitable donors; tea served only at the hall, not at personal quarters; simple food — rice-porridge if rice is insufficient, rice-water if porridge is insufficient.
Tiyao
Not a WYG text; no 四庫 tíyào exists. No editorial preface. The text is presented as Dàokǎi’s direct personal statement.
Abstract
Fúróng Dàokǎi (1043–1118, DILA A001539) was lay-surnamed Cuī 崔, native of Yíshuǐ 沂水 (modern Shāndōng), of austere and single-minded temperament. He studied as a lay Daoist adept in his youth, practising bì gǔ 辟穀 (abstention from grain), before converting to Buddhism and being ordained. Received dharma-transmission from Tóuzǐ Yìqīng 投子義青 in the Cáodòng lineage; held abbacies at Sīxiān dòng 仙洞, Xīluò Lóngmén 西洛龍門, Yǐngzhōu Dàyáng 郢州大陽, Suízhōu Dàhóng 隋州大洪, and finally Dōngjīng Shífāng Jìngyīn chányuàn 東京十方淨因禪院 from Chóngníng 3 (1104). Summoned by imperial invitation to the Tiānníng 天寧 monastery in Dàguān 1 (1107) and offered the imperial purple robe and the title Dìngzhào chánshī 定照禪師 — which he celebrated refused, for which refusal he was punished by being sent in lay dress to the Zīzhōu 緇州 internal exile, before being released and eventually granted the Huāyán chánsì 華嚴禪寺 near Fúróng Lake as private hermitage.
Dàokǎi’s refusal of the imperial purple robe was one of the most celebrated acts of monastic-state independence in Chinese Buddhist history, and the Qíyuán zhèng yí articulates the same austere-ascetic programme as manifesto. The text is among the earliest Chinese Buddhist specimens of what might be called “counter-regulatory” monastic literature — setting out a standard of practice more severe than what the mainstream qīngguī 清規 tradition was institutionalising. Died Zhènghé 8.5.14 (11 June 1118), aged 76.
Dating bracket: notBefore 1080 (Dàokǎi’s active teaching period begins after his post-Yìqīng retirement, ca. 1082), notAfter 1118 (his death). Probably late 11th or early 12th century. Catalog dynasty 宋.
Translations and research
- Schlütter, Morten. 2008. How Zen Became Zen. Hawai’i. Extensive treatment of Dàokǎi’s role in the Cáodòng revival and his relationship to imperial patronage.
- 石井修道 1987. 《宋代禪宗史の研究》. Daitō Shuppansha.
- Foulk, T. Griffith. 1999. “Sung Controversies Concerning the ‘Separate Transmission’ of Ch’an.” In Buddhism in the Sung.
Other points of interest
Dàokǎi’s principal dharma-heirs were Dānxiá Zǐchún 丹霞子淳 (1066–1119), the teacher of Hóngzhì Zhèngjué 宏智正覺 (1091–1157). The Cáodòng lineage through Dàokǎi → Zǐchún → Hóngzhì → (subsequently through multiple heirs) → Tiāntóng Rújìng 如淨 → Dōgen is the principal Cáodòng / Sōtō lineage-history that reaches Japanese Zen.
The Qíyuán zhèng yí’s austere programme of monastic self-sufficiency anticipates the later Japanese Sōtō monastic regulations tradition (particularly the Keizan-school 瑩山 formulations of the late Kamakura and Muromachi periods), where similar anti-patronage / anti-donative positions are developed systematically.