3.1. Knowledge Production and Chinese Leishu
In China, the interplay between knowledge production and book publication has played a pivotal role in shaping its historical and intellectual legacy, contributing to the broader scholarly tradition of East Asian book culture. Rooted in history, China’s tradition of knowledge production spans millennia, encompassing philosophical treatises, scientific breakthroughs, and resonant artistic creations across diverse cultures. Books, particularly the encyclopedias and reference compendia known as
leishu, have assumed a central and transformative role within this narrative.
Leishu is a genre of Chinese literature that consists of various topics or subjects organized systematically. They typically provide a compilation of information, facts, and ideas on a wide range of subjects. But unlike the “encyclopedias” of the West,
leishu often do not include detailed explanations or discussions but rather act as references or catalogs of knowledge on a systematized range of topics (
Wilkinson 2000, p. 601). In a sense, they may be more closely aligned with what we term “anthologies,” although in their intended comprehensiveness they are also congruent with the term “encyclopedia” (
Zurndorfer 2013, p. 505). Given the vast scope of Chinese
leishu, there arose a need not just for financial resources and materials but also for well-structured administrative offices to supervise their creation. As a result, the majority of Chinese
leishu were sponsored by the state. However, instances of private or commercial editions arose, particularly during late imperial China, coinciding with advancements in printing techniques and economic growth.
The origins of Chinese
leishu can be found in antiquity, with early examples seen during the Western Han Dynasty (206 BCE-9 CE). It can be argued that the earliest manifestation of
leishu can be traced to the centuries preceding the Common Era, seen in the various lexicons that have their most famous representative in the
Erya 爾雅 (
Approaching the Refined). The earliest example of what can be legitimately placed in the genre is the
Huang lan 皇覧 (
The Emperor’s Mirror), produced in the early third century under imperial auspices, although the work no longer exists. Between the third century and the eighteenth, over 600
leishu were produced, although only 200 or so are extant (
Wilkinson 2000, pp. 602–3). As time passed, these collectanea could no longer maintain a semblance of comprehensiveness, leading to an increase in specialization that increased their pragmatic value as educational and pedagogic texts. The conceptual refinement of
leishu gained momentum during the Tang Dynasty (618–907), an era marked by remarkable intellectual advancements and a burgeoning interest in systematic knowledge organization.
The emergence of block-printing techniques, pioneered during the Song Dynasty and developed in the Ming Dynasty, marked a transformative juncture. During the Song Dynasty and later periods, the heightened emphasis on comprehensive knowledge categorization coincided with the evolution of encyclopedic works into more structured and systematic formats, aided by the advent of woodblock printing technology. During the late Ming Dynasty (1506–1644), a notable era of publishing expansion, particularly in commercial publishing, encyclopedias emerged as favored choices among published works. They surged in popularity, eclipsing even the classics, philology, biographies, and numerous other literary genres (
Schonebaum 2016, p. 23). After 1550, the infusion of New World and Japanese silver into the Ming economy collectively propelled the acceleration of text distribution and the subsequent spread of knowledge. This expansion broadened its influence beyond China’s borders, reaching audiences previously constrained in access (
Elman 2007, p. 135). The Qing Dynasty witnessed a continuation of this genre, with scholars and compilers producing a diverse array of encyclopedic works that spanned subjects as varied as history, literature, philosophy, medicine, and technology. The largest collection of books in Chinese history, the
Siku Quanshu 四庫全書 (
Complete Library in Four Sections), serves as a remarkable illustration.
Within the broader landscape of Chinese encyclopedias, Buddhist
leishu occupies a distinct and significant role in the realm of knowledge production and dissemination, aligning with the “Cult of the Book” as defined by Gregory Schopen that underscores the worshiping of written texts within the early Mahayana scriptures (
Schopen 1975). Buddhist
leishu refers to a specialized category of
leishu that focuses exclusively on Buddhist topics. There are two primary categories that can be identified within Buddhist
leishu in China: the Buddhist canon and other Buddhist compendia. Notably, the former stands as the most comprehensive compilation of scriptures, texts, and teachings that hold authoritative status within various Buddhist traditions, often encompassing complete works. This category includes a wide array of writings, ranging from sutras (Buddha’s discourses) and vinaya (monastic regulations) to abhidharma (philosophical analyses). The latter category is characterized by its focus on systematic organization and categorization of Buddhist knowledge, frequently involving citations and references from a variety of sources. This approach aims to enhance accessibility and comprehensibility for practitioners and scholars alike. While the Buddhist Canon is unquestionably the most important source for the sacred texts and teachings of Buddhism, it can be less accessible and more specialized, primarily intended for practitioners and scholars deeply engaged in Buddhist studies. Buddhist
leishu, on the other hand, offer a more user-friendly, comprehensive, and accessible overview of Buddhist literature for a broader audience. Therefore, in many contexts, Buddhist
leishu may be considered more representative of Buddhist literature for educational, reference, and general knowledge purposes. However, the Buddhist Canon remains the ultimate authority in matters of religious doctrine and practice within Buddhism.
As
leishu started to branch off in different directions, they came to acquire an increasing authority that led them to becoming central textual repositories for educational texts that became important reference aids for passing the civil service examinations, a function that made them indispensable to elite society. This specialization of
leishu also extended to the Buddhist world. The compilation of Buddhist
leishu in China started approximately during the period of the Southern and Northern Dynasties (420 to 589). One of the notable early instances of Buddhist
leishu in China is the
Jinglü Yixiang 經律異象 (
Strange Tales of Sutras and Vinayas) attributed to Baochang 寶唱 (466–518) of the Southern Liang 梁 Dynasty (502–557). The tradition of compiling Buddhist
leishu persisted into the medieval period. One of the most notable and comprehensive Buddhist leishu from this era is the
Fayuan Zhulin 法苑珠林 (
Forest of Jewels in the Garden of the Dharma) by Daoshi 道釋 (?-683). The
Fayuan zhulin is divided into 100 “units” (
bian 篇) which are subdivided into numerous “sections” (
bu 部) (
Nienhauser 1986, p. 372). With the increasing sophistication of the genre, the issue of comprehensiveness would remain, but it would be “localized” within various areas of specialization. To use the Buddhist example, the “specialized”
leishu of the
Fayuan zhulin itself attempted a comprehensive treatment of contemporaneous Buddhist doctrine. The compiler so endeavored by appending his own explanations to the numerous quotations from translated Buddhist works as well as non-canonical native Chinese works. This was not the first Chinese Buddhist work to make use of quotations from other translated Buddhist works, but in its comprehensiveness and dedicated structure it is unparalleled, and it remains the work that most faithfully represents the genre of
leishu in a contemporaneous Buddhist context. It draws its foundation from another of Daoshi’s earlier Buddhist compilations, the
Zhujing Yaoji 諸經要集 (
Essentials of the Various Sutras Collection). Another significant contribution to the Buddhist
leishu tradition was made by Zhipan 志磐 (1220–1275), who authored the
Fozu Tongji 佛祖統紀 (
Chronicle of the Buddhas and Patriarchs), a comprehensive work that chronicles the lineage of buddhas and patriarchs in a systematic manner. In late imperial China, particularly during the eighteenth century, collectanea evolved into what resembled a “miniature library,” encompassing a wide spectrum of knowledge. This compilation included not only esteemed literary and philosophical works but also a lower-brow range of illumination texts and esoteric writings. In the context of Buddhism, Buddhist
leishu continued to play a vital role in disseminating Buddhist teachings, facilitating the preservation of Buddhist knowledge, and providing a comprehensive understanding of Buddhist philosophy and practices within the broader literary landscape of imperial China.
Taking this broad perspective of leishu, we can perceive a similar phenomenon in the case of the Chan school. The Jingde chuandeng lu consist of a collection of biographies of the patriarchs and teachers of the Chan school, starting with the seven buddhas of the past and including in total 1701 Indian and Chinese patriarchs in the Chan school as it contemporaneously imagined itself. In its comprehensiveness, it very much resembles a historical reference work of the Chan school without directly claiming itself as such. The biographies contained in this text would go on to become the source text of gong’an literature and practice as it developed in China, Korea, and Japan. It is from this work that influential gong’an texts such as the Congrong lu 從容録 (Book of Equanimity), the Bianyu lu 碧巖録 (The Blue Cliff Record), and the Wumen guan 無門關 (The Gateless Barrier) would take their inspiration. Starting with the Jingde chuandeng lu and including all of its derivative textual collections, these sources can all be considered part of the Hangzhou Buddhist/intellectual legacy. It will be remembered that this is one of the works that Welter isolates as one of the foundational texts in the “reimagning” of Buddhism in the Wuyue Kingdom—the former name for the area inclusive of Hangzhou. This places the Jingde chuandeng lu squarely in the intellectual orbit of Hangzhou, standing as a testament to Hangzhou’s central role in knowledge production across Buddhist traditions, and particularly in the case of the Chan school. This is precisely what distinguishes Hangzhou from other cultural centers as it served as the launch pad for Chan Buddhism’s spread to the rest of East Asia, taking Hangzhou Buddhism’s unique formulation which helped in large part to form the basis of orthodoxy in Korea and Japan.
The two most central figures in the formation of Japanese Zen—Eisai 栄西 (1141–1215) and Dōgen 道元 (1200–1253)—respectively, the founders of the Japanese Rinzai 臨濟 and Sōtō 曹洞 schools of Zen, both made pilgrimages to the Hangzhou/Ningbo region where they received their definitive experience and dharma transmission (
Welter 2022b, p. 52). On the latter of two trips to China, Eisai remained in China for five years and studied under the Chan master Xu’an Huaichang 虛庵懷敞 (c.1125–1195) on Mt. Tiantai 天台 in present day Zhejiang 浙江 province, and then followed his master to the prominent Jingde Monastery in Hangzhou, where Eisai received Xu’an’s Dharma transmission. Dōgen also made two trips to China, and on his second stay he attained enlightenment at Mt. Tiantong 天童, located in present-day Ningbo 寧波, the great port city in Zhejiang province, and part of the same cultural sphere as Hangzhou. These two Japanese figures extended the Hangzhou cultural legacy in the form of the “new Buddhism” to Japan, where it divided into the Japanese Rinzai and Sōtō schools, which, although divided into two distinct schools with diverging practices, both nonetheless accepted the
Jingde chuandeng lu as authoritative as well as the doctrinal infrastructure associated with it. These two pilgrims demonstrated what Steven Heine described as the need of “venturing beyond conventional geographical and societal boundaries to explore novel approaches to Buddhist theory and practice” (
Heine 2023, p. 1). That these two figures spent time on Mt. Hiei 比叡山—often termed the “womb” of Japanese Buddhism—before traveling to the Hangzhou/Ningbo region to have their definitive experience and bring back new models demonstrates the vitality of the tradition that developed in the Hangzhou region starting at the end of the Five Dynasties and continuing through the Southern Song.
An interesting nexus between Hangzhou’s intellectual legacy as seen in the “new Buddhism” as well as knowledge production in the tradition of encyclopedic reference works like
leishu can be seen in the development itself of the
Jingde chuandeng lu. Welter, in his careful and fertile study of Hangzhou Buddhist culture, looks to Yang Yi’s 楊億 (974–1020) editing strategies as it relates to this text (
Welter 2022c, p. 31). Yang, an eminent literatus of the Song court, was enlisted to edit and prepare the work, which included the appending of prefaces that codified teachings that were to become central Chan ideals. One of Yang Yi’s central ideas found in the preface is “a separate practice outside the teaching” 教外別行, a concept that would go to the very heart of the Chan school’s identity and what helped to distinguish its unique and direct claim to the true Dharma of the Buddha. Welter argues that Yang’s advocacy of Chan as “a separate practice outside the teaching” represented a central literary model and convention of Song civilization. Welter also notes that Yang’s editing strategy for the
Jingde chuandeng lu can be considered in the continuum of the compilation strategies of Song emperors. He writes, “Yang Yi’s strategy for the
Chuandeng lu may be highlighted with the compilation strategies of the Song emperors. Emperor Taizong sponsored great Song encyclopedic works…” (
Welter 2022a, p. 34).
3 Looked at in this way, one can see the
Chuandeng lu as representing a kind of Buddhist
leishu in that it stands as a collectanea of various Zen anecdotes that would go on to serve as a fount of Chan authority going forward, both in China and the rest of East Asia. In addition, the Buddhist works sponsored by Taizong, such as Zanning’s
Song gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳, also are comprised of a collection of entries intended to categorize knowledge and stand as a reference work. It is then perhaps not surprising that what became considered to be the “Four Great Books” of the Song are comprised of three
leishu and one literary anthology, three of which were initiated by Taizong himself (
Kurz 2001, p. 302). This trend toward classification of knowledge highlighted the power concomitant with the codification of knowledge during the Song both in the Buddhist world and beyond. And it was Hangzhou and the Jiangnan region that played such an important part in this process, with Kurz going so far as to say “the remarkable fact remains that the transmission of texts from the Tang to the Song took a detour through the south (
Kurz 2001, p. 313).” In addition, it is not only the
Chuandeng lu and
Song gaoseng zhuan that can be interpreted within the genre of
leishu but the Buddhist canon as a whole, something we will consider below.