牧雲和尚七會餘錄

Mùyún héshàng Qīhuì yúlù 牧雲和尚七會餘錄

Supplementary Record of the Seven Assemblies of Chán Master Mù-yún by 通門 (說), 行瑋 (等編)

About the work

Six-juan yǔlù-supplement (yúlù 餘錄 “surplus record”) of Mùyún Tōngmén 通門 牧雲通門 (1599–1671), compiled (biān 編) by his dharma-heir Yúnxíng Xíngwěi 行瑋 děng at Gūsū Xīhuáshān Xiùfēngsì 姑蘇西華山秀峯寺 in Sūzhōu. The Kanripo catalog entry — following standard CBETA-index convention — titles the work 牧雲和尚七會語錄, but the internal mùlù header, the juǎnshǒu 卷首 title on every juan, and the juǎnwěi 卷尾 colophon-line all read 牧雲和尚七會餘錄 without exception: this is the supplementary record, not the main Qīhuì yǔlù 七會語錄 itself. The “seven assemblies” (qī huì 七會) refer collectively to Mùyún’s seven successive abbacies — Sìmíng Qīzhēn 四明棲真, Jiāhé Méixī 嘉禾梅溪, Pòshān 破山, Zhènjiāng Hèlín 鎮江鶴林, Míngzhōu Tiāntóngsì 明州天童寺, Gūsū Xiùfēng 姑蘇秀峯, and Shíhú Gǔnán 石湖古南 — whose shàngtáng sermons form the spine of the main Qīhuì yǔlù (not in Kanripo). The present yúlù collects the residue: shàngtáng and xiǎocān material omitted from the main cutting, interview-style shìzhòng 示眾 and shìyǔ 示語, letters, fóshì 佛事 (Buddha-services), and three juan of jì 偈 verse. Non-commentary; commentedTextid omitted. Printed as Jiāxīng Canon J26 B184 (base leaves 0541a–0569b).

Abstract

Author. Mùyún Tōngmén, lay surname Zhāng 張, native of Chángshú 常熟, born Wànlì 26.12.01 (27 January 1599) and died Kāngxī 10.11.15 (15 December 1671) aged 73 per the Tiāntóngsì zhì 天童寺志 juan 3. 31st-generation Línjì (Yángqí sub-branch), dharma-heir of Mìyún Yuánwù 密雲圓悟 (1566/7–1642) — thus dharma-brother of Pòshān Hǎimíng 破山海明, Fèiyǐn Tōngróng 費隱通容, Wànrú Tōngwēi 萬如通微, Shíqí Tōngyún 石奇通雲 (whose yǔlù is KR6q0405), and Yǐnyuán Lóngqí 隱元隆琦 (whose yǔlù follows at KR6q0414). For his biography, seven-abbacy sequence, and hào variants (Wòān 臥菴, Gǔnánmén 古南門, Chùsǒu 樗叟), see the person-note at 通門. His own literary collection, a fourteen-juan biéjí compiled by Máo Jìn 毛晉 (1599–1659) of Jígǔgé 汲古閣, Chángshú, is preserved separately as KR6q0212 Mùyún héshàng Lǎnzhāi bié jí (J31 B267).

Compiler. Yúnxíng Xíngwěi 雲行瑋 is named in the juǎnshǒu 卷首 of each juan as the head compiler (“Gūsū Xīhuáshān Xiùfēngsì ménrén Xíngwěi děng biān 姑蘇西華山秀峰寺門人(行瑋)等編”). Xíngwěi is one of the ten named dharma-heirs of Mùyún in the Wǔdēng quánshū 五燈全書 juan 67 Línjì-line roster, serving as acting abbot at Xiùfēngsì 秀峯寺 at the time of compilation. His zì Yúnxíng 雲行 follows the standard Mìyún-line biézì 別字 convention (yún 雲 marking 通-generation descent, as with Xíngzhèng 行正 = Shānfū 山夫 at KR6q0405, and Xíngjiā 行嘉 = Xuějiāo 雪嶠). As the head compiler of one of Mùyún’s two canonical post-mortem collections (the other being the Máo Jìn bié jí), Xíngwěi occupies the same slot for Mùyún that Xíngzhèng occupied for Shíqí Tōngyún: the zhuàngyuán 掌院 heir who curates the master’s textual legacy at the final abbacy-seat.

Dating. No preface, no postface, no colophon, no dated cutting-statement survives in the Jiāxīng imprint — an unusual feature that distinguishes this from KR6q0403, KR6q0404, and KR6q0405, each of which carries multiple front and back prefaces with explicit cutting-dates. The dating must therefore be inferred from internal evidence. Juan 2 contains four shàngtáng sermons from Mùyún’s Tiāntóng abbacy — a Tiānwáng kāiguāng 天王開光, a Zǔshī kāiguāng ānzuò 祖師開光安座 in two parts, and a Hùfǎ ānzuò + Qiélán ānzuò — all consecrating newly re-built Tiāntóngsì subsidiary halls under Mùyún’s supervision. Tōngmén’s Tiāntóng abbacy ran from Shùnzhì 14 dīngyǒu (1657) through Shùnzhì 15 wùxū (1658) per the Tiāntóngsì zhì, inheriting the seat vacated by the Fèiyǐn / Mùchén controversy. The Tiāntóng kāiguāng sermons therefore post-date 1657; a first-juan shàngtáng opens with “jìdé qùnián shàng Tiāntóng, bīnggē hū qǐ Jiāngguān zǔgé 記得去年上天童兵戈忽起江關阻隔” — “I remember last year when I ascended to Tiāntóng, warfare suddenly broke out and the Jiāngguān passes were blocked” — a vivid reference to the Qīng counter-offensive against Zhèng Chénggōng 鄭成功 following the 1659 attempted siege of Nánjīng, which places that shàngtáng in 1660 (Shùnzhì 17, gēngzǐ). notBefore = 1656 conservatively (a Tiāntóng transition-period margin around the latest datable content in j.2); notAfter = 1671 (Mùyún’s death, terminus ante quem for any master-text). A tighter notAfter would likely be c. 1665–1668 (the compilation-at-Xiù-fēng horizon, bracketed by Xíngwěi’s Xiùfēng tenure in the late 1660s), but without a cutting-date statement the safer bracket is kept at the master’s jìjì 寂滅 year.

Contents by juan. Per the mùlù: (j.1) shàngtáng 上堂 + xiǎocān 小參 + yècān 夜參 + pǔshuō 普說 + shìzhòng 示眾, and sub-sections shìyǔ 示語 (“instructions in speech”) and chánjìng xuánzhǐ 禪淨玄旨 (“the profound essentials of Chán and Pure Land”); (j.2) shìzhōng yǔyào 室中語要 (“key-statements in the room”), shū 書 (letters), dáyǔ 答語 (answers), and the Tiāntóng kāiguāng / ānzuò shàngtáng; (j.3) xiàngzàn 像讚 and fóshì 佛事 (Buddha-services — funerary, rùkān 入龕, qǐkān 起龕, chàyàn 插燄 torch-lighting, zǎhún 灑渾 purifying-sprinkling, shāoyáo 燒窯 cremation-ignition, jiānggǔ 將骨 ash-gathering); (j.4) jì 偈 (upper); (j.5) jì (middle); (j.6) jì (lower) — the closing juan with shìyǔ verses for monastics, nuns, and lay-disciples. The chánjìng xuánzhǐ block in j.1 is the single most thematically distinctive section: it develops a Chán–Pure Land syncretic position founded on readings of the Wéimójié jīng (“suí qí xīn jìng zé Fótǔ jìng 隨其心淨則佛土淨”) and the Léngyán jīng (“dàn píng xīndì zé yīqiè shìjiè jù píng 但平心地則一切世界俱平”), aligning Mùyún with the late-Míng zhuànxīn 轉心 Chán–Pure Land synthesis of Yúnqī Zhūhóng 雲棲祩宏 and Hànshān Déqīng 憨山德清 against the hardline anti-Pure Land position sometimes attributed to his dharma-uncles in the Mìyún line.

Tiyao

Not applicable — this is a Jiā-xīng-canon imprint (J26 B184), not a WYG text. The text preserves no preface, postface, or colophon of its own; dating and compilation-circumstances are reconstructed under Abstract from internal shàngtáng and juǎnshǒu evidence alone.

Translations and research

• Jiang Wu, Enlightenment in Dispute: The Reinvention of Chan Buddhism in Seventeenth-Century China (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008). Mù-yún is discussed at pp. 102, 166–69 (his 1638 polemic exchange with Hàn-yuè Fǎ-zàng 漢月法藏 over bǎn-xiāng 板香 orthodoxy), and pp. 213–15 (his Tiān-tóng interregnum abbacy of 1657–58 between the Fèi-yǐn and later Dào-mǐn incumbencies).
• Jiang Wu, Leaving for the Rising Sun: Chinese Zen Master Yinyuan and the Authenticity Crisis in Early Modern East Asia (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015). Mù-yún is a recurrent presence (index entries), particularly in the reconstruction of the Tiān-tóng succession-dispute of 1657–58 and the Sū-zhōu / Xiù-fēng lay-Chán network in the 1660s.
• Hsuan-Li Wang 王萱立, “Gushan: The Formation of a Chan Lineage during the Seventeenth Century and its Spread to Taiwan” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 2014). Mù-yún’s disciples in the Mín region and the Gū-shān 鼓山 sub-lineage are contextualized in ch. 3.
• Liào Zhào-hēng 廖肇亨, 《忠義菩提：晚明清初空門遺民及其節義論述探析》 (Taipei: Zhōng-yāng yán-jiū-yuàn Zhōng-guó Wén-zhé yán-jiū-suǒ, 2013). Ch. 4 treats Mù-yún’s Sū-zhōu circle and his lay-literatus correspondents as a node in the late-Míng / early-Qīng loyalist yí-mín Chán-network.
• No complete Western-language translation of either the Qī-huì yǔ-lù or the present Qī-huì yú-lù exists. Selected gāthā from juan 4–6 appear in Beata Grant, Eminent Nuns: Women Chan Masters of Seventeenth-Century China (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2009), pp. 47, 72 (parallel passages for the nun Bǎo-chí Jì-zǒng 寶持繼總, Mù-yún’s close contemporary).

Other points of interest

• Title discrepancy — the 語錄 / 餘錄 problem. The Kanripo/CBETA catalog title 牧雲和尚七會語錄 is an erratum or standardizing shorthand: no internal title-string in the Jiāxīng imprint reads yǔlù 語錄. Every juan header and closing-colophon reads yúlù 餘錄 (“surplus/residual record”). This is a textual-critical fact worth preserving: the present work is explicitly the supplement to a main Qīhuì yǔlù (which is separately cut in the Jiāxīng Canon under a different B-number and is not in Kanripo under its own textid), not the main yǔlù itself. The pattern (main yǔlù + separate yúlù supplement + bié jí literary collection) is the same three-part post-mortem literary-monument structure that appears in simplified form in KR6q0212 (the bié jí branch) and, for other Mìyún-line masters, in the combined quánlù 全錄 of KR6q0405 (Shíqí Tōngyún).
• No-preface, no-colophon as datum. The complete absence of front or back prefaces, postfaces, xíngzhuàng or tǎmíng appendices in this yúlù — in sharp contrast to every other yǔlù imprint in the Mìyún-line J26 cluster (KR6q0402, KR6q0403, KR6q0404, KR6q0405) — suggests that the yúlù was cut as a companion-volume to the main Qīhuì yǔlù and the prefatorial apparatus was carried in that main volume rather than replicated here. The supplementary-cutting hypothesis is the economical explanation for the absence; the alternative (that all prefaces were lost in transmission) is poorly supported by the otherwise-complete Jiāxīng block. This observation matters for anyone using the Jiāxīng Canon entry in isolation: the apparent bibliographic poverty of B184 is misleading — the full prefatorial context survives in the companion yǔlù block.
• Tiāntóng 1657–58 and the succession-dispute context. Mùyún’s four Tiāntóng shàngtáng in j.2 — the Xiǎotiāntóng zǔshī kāiguāng shìzhòng 小天童祖師開光示眾 in particular — invoke a Zhèntái Zhānggōng 鎮臺張公 as dream-recipient of a vision of “the ten old gǔzhuī 古錐 patriarchs” whose seat Mùyún is now re-consecrating. Zhèntái 鎮臺 is Míng–Qīng military-governor terminology (zǒngbīng 總兵 / zhènshǒu 鎮守 grade); Zhānggōng must be one of the Qīng regional commanders in the Zhèdōng / Míngzhōu prefecture in the late 1650s. The dream-patronage motif (regional commander has dream → abbot consecrates newly-restored ancestor-hall) is a characteristic Mìyún-line restoration-economy pattern also visible in Shíqí’s Xuědòu rebuild (KR6q0405 Abstract) and Fèiyǐn’s Jīnsù / Tiāntóng tenure. That the Tiāntóng ancestor-hall required this level of reconstruction in 1657–58 confirms the severity of damage to Tiāntóng after the Fèiyǐn / Fǔzōng controversy of 1654–55 and the Mùchén transition.
• Chán–Pure Land syncretism in the Chánjìng xuánzhǐ block. The sub-heading Chánjìng xuánzhǐ 禪淨玄旨 at the end of j.1 is unusual for a strict Mìyún-line yǔlù — the Mìyún-line public-polemic stance, especially in Fèiyǐn Tōngróng’s generation, tended to a zhǐtí 直提 pure-Chán position hostile to open Pure Land accommodation. Mùyún’s position here is closer to his Yúnqī Zhūhóng / Hànshān Déqīng late-Míng predecessors, and closer to the subsequent Xīnhài 辛亥 (1671) Gǔshān 鼓山 Chán-Pure Land synthesis documented by Hsuan-Li Wang. This doctrinal positioning — within the Mìyún line but softer on Pure Land than Fèiyǐn — is a distinctive feature of Mùyún’s corpus and should be read in dialogue with the Chán-Pure Land material preserved in KR6q0212 Lǎnzhāi bié jí.

Links

• CBETA
• Related Mùyún Tōngmén volumes in Kanripo: KR6q0212 《牧雲和尚嬾齋別集》 (J31 B267, 14-juan bié jí compiled by Máo Jìn); KR6q0164 (Mùyún contributed a harmonizing-verse set to the ox-herding compilation).
• Related Mìyún-line yǔlù in Kanripo: KR6q0402 《破山禪師語錄》; KR6q0403 《費隱禪師語錄》; KR6q0404 《萬如禪師語錄》; KR6q0405 《雪竇石奇禪師語錄》; KR6q0414 《隱元禪師語錄》 (to follow).