Rising from the Margins: The Formation of the Institutional Features of Religious Organizations—A Case Study of the Development of Chan Buddhism and Pure Land Buddhism in the Early Tang Dynasty

Abstract

How are the institutional features of religious organizations formed? In seeking to explain religious change and development, an increasing number of sociologists of religion emphasize the importance of organizational features. However, few scholars have examined how these institutional features take shape during the early stages of religious organizations. Given that emerging religions often originate in marginalized contexts with scarce resources and limited support, this paper draws on the theory of interstitial space to analyze how such relatively unstructured and flexible environments—which provide greater freedom and adaptability for agents—affect religious development. The study finds that interstitial space fosters religious innovation and helps shape the institutional features of emerging religions. Furthermore, this paper proposes four explanatory mechanisms to illustrate how the interstitial space in multiple marginalized areas shapes the features of religious organizations. These mechanisms can shed light on the development of various religious sects, including Chan Buddhism and Pure Land Buddhism in the early Tang dynasty.

1. Introduction

Historically, religion has constituted an important dimension of human life and the search for the meaning of existence (Bellah 2011, pp. 1–5). Even today, according to the Pew Research Center’s 2010 Report on the Size and Distribution of Major Religious Groups in the World, over 80% of people worldwide identify themselves with certain religious affiliations (Pew Research Center 2012)1. In the sociology of religion, religious change is a core topic, which primarily discusses the changes in the scale, power, and importance of certain religions within a specific time and space.

In recent years, an increasing number of scholars, when explaining the strength and development of religions, emphasize the importance of the organizational features of religious institutions (Yanfei Sun 2019, 2026). This view posits that a series of institutional features, such as exclusivity, sect structure, and ways of production and life, have a profound impact on the rise and fall of religions (Kelley 1972; Beckford 1978; Snow and Machalek 1984; Smilde 2005; Finke and Iannaccone 1993; Stark and Finke 2000; Chaves and Gorski 2001; Snow et al. 1980). Some scholars have used this perspective to explain the explosive growth of Evangelical Protestantism in Latin America after World War II (Smilde 2005), and the rise of Christianity during the pandemics of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, attributing it to the close-knit social networks and mutual care among Christians, which made them more likely to survive the epidemics (Stark 1996).

However, although many studies discuss the impact of institutional features once they are formed, few have explored how the institutional features of religious organizations are initially formed or changed. Some scholars have discussed how religious organizations, when faced with competitive pressures, adopt strategies of learning from opponents and mimicking similar practices, thus leading to changes in their institutional features (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Yanfei Sun 2025, 2026). However, the formation of the initial institutional features differs from their subsequent change. This article aims to explore precisely this question: how are the institutional features of religious organizations formed in the first place?

The purpose of this study is to treat institutional features of religious groups as a phenomenon to be explained, focusing on the initial stages of religious movements and discussing how these features are generated in a historical context. Most emerging religions, often arise in marginal situations with limited resources and little external support. Not only are they at the margins of the religious ecology2, but they also face multiple forms of marginalization in the political and social environment. Taking into account the marginal status of emerging religions and their subsequent development, this paper builds on Michael Mann’s (1986, pp. 15–20) concept of interstitial space to develop a theory of how overlapping forms of marginality within such spaces carry transformative potential and shape the institutional features of emerging religious organizations.

The cases used to illustrate our theory are the Chan and Pure Land schools during the early Tang Dynasty (618–755). Although the theoretical framework and hypotheses are introduced at the outset in keeping with academic convention, the research itself originated from historical inquiry into the rise of Chan and Pure Land Buddhism in the Tang dynasty, from which the hypotheses were inductively derived.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Previous Research

Although few articles or monographs have studied the formation of the organizational institutional features of emerging religions, there are three categories of discussions that are quite enlightening.

The first category emphasizes the founding group of religions and their social strata. Max Weber, in his article “The Social Psychology of the World Religions”, pointed out that different social strata of religious carriers produced distinct religious ethics. The founding groups of the major world religions each have their own originating status groups, and the lifestyle and thought processes of them deeply influenced the ethics and ethos of their respective religions. Weber states:

“Confucianism was the status ethic of prebendaries, of men with literary educations who were characterized by a secular rationalism. Earlier Hinduism was borne by a hereditary caste of cultured literati, who being remote from any office, functioned as a kind of ritualist and spiritual advisers for individuals and communities. Buddhism was propagated by strictly contemplative, mendicant monks, who rejected the world and, having no homes, migrated. Early Islam was the religion of the warrior class, disciplined as a holy warrior brotherhood. Christianity began as a doctrine for itinerant artisan journeymen.”.

(Weber 1946, pp. 268–69)

The second category emphasizes the ecological environment and material resources necessary for the emergence of religion. Scholars, when studying the cultures and religions of native American tribes, concluded that the surrounding environment, including natural conditions, terrain, community habitats, climate, and natural resources, greatly influences various aspects of religious culture, including beliefs and rituals (Büttner 1974).

The third category emphasizes the role of state behavior and the relationship between church and state. scholars of state behavior and church–state relations argue that in the external environment where religions operate, the state is the most powerful actor, possessing the greatest coercive capacity and resources (Mann 1984; Gorski 1993; Zhao 2015). Its actions—whether supportive, suppressive, or indifferent—can profoundly shape religious development and the competitive strategies of different traditions (Yanfei Sun 2017, 2019, 2025, 2026).

After reviewing these three discussions, we face two questions: First, how can we incorporate the insights from these three perspectives into one theoretical framework that addresses our research questions? Second, we observe that most emerging religions, at their inception, find themselves in marginal, interstitial states: lacking economic resources, far from core urban areas, and lacking political support. Despite these challenges, emerging religions still manage to rise and grow in such environments. To theoretically respond to these two questions, we build on Michael Mann’s theory of interstitial space, while also trying to incorporate the three insightful perspectives discussed earlier.

2.2. From the Interstice to the Multiple Margins of Religious Networks

The English term “interstice” originates from the Latin word “interstitium”, which consists of the prefix “inter-” meaning “between,” and “-stes,” meaning “to stand.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “interstice” in two ways: one is the space between things, and the other is the gap or interruption in a normally continuous thing.

In the social sciences, the term “interstice” was first academically used and received attention in Michael Mann’s The Sources of Social Power. In his four-volume The Sources of Social Power, Mann provides a detailed and profound analysis of the history of social powers in human society. Mann argues that society is a multi-layered, overlapping spatial power network resulting from the intertwining, overlapping, and interaction of four kinds of power—ideological, military, economic, and political. Mann understands society as a network, consisting of a main structure and interstitial spaces. The main structure represents the dominant social powers and ruling institutions of a specific time, while interstitial spaces are the marginal areas that span multiple networks, often overlooked by rulers. In these shaded, marginal zones, the dominant authorities could exert only limited control. This means that organizations in these zones neither receive strong support nor face intense suppression from authorities. Mann believes that the overlapping marginal areas of these interstitial spaces continually resist the institutionalization of existing power networks, nurturing potential for social change, and creating new relationships and institutions. The reason for the intermittent emergence of change in interstitial spaces is that the penetration of power institutions is never complete, and institutionalization is never total, with the newly born institutions producing unexpected consequences for the old authorities (Mann 1986, pp. 15–16). Mann summarizes his view on social transformation as “interstitial emergence,” emphasizing that new potential arises in the gaps between the overlapping social networks (Figure 1).

Mann’s idea of “interstitial emergence” has drawn considerable scholarly attention and been developed into the concept of “interstitial space” (Medvetz 2012; Yanfei Sun 2017, 2026). Scholars argue that such spaces lie at the overlapping edges of multiple social networks and at the intersections of organizational fields, where organizations gain agency and room to maneuver (Morrill 2017). They can also be understood as areas outside the purview of any single state actor, situated in the gaps between jurisdictions, where actors enjoy greater freedom and flexibility that fosters dynamism and innovation (Yanfei Sun 2017; M. Zhou 2023). This line of work highlights how activities within these spaces can possibly generate new organizational forms and evolve into enduring institutions.

Scholars have further illustrated the generative potential of interstitial spaces through empirical studies. Calvin Morrill (2017), for instance, traced a paradigmatic shift in the U.S. legal system: whereas fewer than a dozen courts employed informal mechanisms such as mediation prior to 1970, by 2000 alternative dispute resolution (ADR) had been institutionalized across thirty-six states. Similarly, Erin Metz McDonnell (2020) examined how “islands of excellence” emerged within the Ghanaian bureaucracy, showing how small, efficient units embedded in an otherwise inefficient administrative environment managed to operate effectively despite external interference. Together, these cases underscore how actors situated in interstitial spaces can cultivate organizational innovations that not only withstand structural constraints but also lay the groundwork for durable institutional change.

After analyzing the concepts of interstitial space, let us return to the interstitial space of emerging religions. In The Sources of Social Power, Mann (1986, pp. 301–28) discusses the rise of early Christianity under the Roman Empire. He points out that early Christian believers and missionary networks found themselves in at least three forms of marginalization:

• Social Margins: Early followers were often from marginalized and conquered groups, including merchants, artisans, and urban slaves who were the main sources of Christian followers and had low social status;
• Political Margins: Politically excluded, including craftsmen, merchants, slave workers, freed slaves, and women, who had no political rights;
• Religious Ecological Margins: Early Christianity was suppressed and excluded in the religious ecology by the polytheistic religion that was supported and dominant in the Roman Empire3. For other emerging religions in similar interstitial situations to early Christianity, they faced a fourth form of marginalization:
• Economic Resource Margins: Due to a lack of stable support, emerging religions often had to find ways to secure resources, especially for their clergy or priests, who were typically not salaried.

Mann highlights the multiple overlapping margins experienced by emerging religions, with early Christianity as a representative example. Considering that Mann’s concept of interstitial space includes overlapping social class, political, economic resources, and religious ecological margins, this insight neatly connects with the three earlier discussed perspectives. Weber’s focus on the founding group (carrier) of religion and its social stratum highlights the social stratum of emerging religion’s followers, corresponding to the social class margins of interstitial space. Weber argued that the ethics and ethos of the social stratum of early followers deeply imprint on the religion. Ecological perspective which emphasizes the ecological environment and material resources for the rise of emerging religions, aligns with the economic resource margins of interstitial space. Scholars of ecology argue that the natural environment and the availability of resources (agriculture, handicrafts) influence the organizational features of religious institutions. Scholars focused on state behavior and church-state relations correlate with the political marginalization of emerging religions, which often lack political power and may face intense persecution or suppression from state actors, which in turn affects the organizational features adopted by the religious groups in question.

3. Analytical Framework and Hypotheses

Inspired by Michael Mann’s theory of interstitial space and incorporating insights from other sources, the authors propose the following analytical framework, as shown in the figure below (Figure 2):

Emerging religions, at their inception, are often embedded in marginal, vulnerable interstitial environments. This interstitial space is the overlapping space of multiple social networks, where multiple margins–including the political, social class, economic resources, and religious ecological margins–exist. Emerging religions often face environments that are geographically distant from core urban centers, lack political support from the government, with members chiefly coming from low social class backgrounds. Economically, they must find ways to obtain livelihood resources (either self-sustaining or relying on external donations). In terms of religious policies, they may face strict governmental control.

Another feature of emerging interstitial religions is their greater freedom and flexibility for innovation. The dominant authorities in each network often overlook the interstitial space located at the multiple margins, and their authority cannot extend to these spaces. For emerging religions, although resources are scarce and growth seems difficult, they can adapt to local conditions and strategically shape their organizational features within these multiple margins. Specifically, the political margin in which the emerging religion exists will shape the sect’s attitude toward secular politics; the social class margin will shape the social class distribution and cultural level of the monastic community; the economic margin will shape the methods of obtaining livelihood resources; and the religious ecological margin will shape the competitive strategy of the emerging religion. Based on the nature of interstitial space and its dialectical interaction with emerging religions, the authors have deduced several mechanistic hypotheses to show how the interstitial space in which emerging religions are situated shapes their organizational institutional features. These hypotheses are as follows:

Hypothesis 1.

The stricter the control over an emerging interstitial religion during its rise, the lower the social class and status group of its initial followers.

When an emerging religion faces strict religious control policies that purge monks or impose harsh regulations, the sect is likely to fear and avoid political power, choosing to preach in marginal areas such as forests or marketplaces. As a result, the followers of the new sect often come from the lower social strata, such as unregistered populations, mountain dwellers, or those in trades like merchants and artisans. On the other hand, those from higher social strata face greater societal pressure to convert to the emerging religion, making the cost of conversion higher and deterring them from joining.

Hypothesis 2.

The lower the status group of the initial followers of an emerging interstitial religion, the more it devalues textual religious practices and emphasizes non-textual religious practices.

When the initial monks and followers of an emerging religion are predominantly from the lower social strata, such as unregistered populations, mountain dwellers, or artisans, the sect will adapt to the cultural level of its followers. It lowers the cultural barriers, devalues the study of scriptures and doctrinal analysis, and emphasizes non-textual religious practices such as meditation, sitting in quiet contemplation, chanting, and devotional worship.

Hypothesis 3.

The more difficult it is for an emerging interstitial religion to obtain livelihood resources, the more likely it is to engage in productive activities itself.

When an emerging religion arises in harsh natural environments, such as forests, deserts, or barren lands, and lacks official or public donations, it faces significant survival challenges. In such situations, the sect may resort to self-sufficiency, engaging in physical labor, and integrate this activity into its religious practices.

Hypothesis 4.

The more an emerging interstitial religion is able to independently secure livelihood resources, the lower its willingness and likelihood to form an alliance with political authorities; conversely, the more it relies on external support for its livelihood, the higher its willingness and likelihood to form an alliance with political authorities.

When an emerging religion can sustain itself and secure its own livelihood, it is less likely to seek external resources. Given that too close a relationship with the state may lead to corruption and a loss of autonomy, the emerging religion’s willingness to align with political power decreases. However, when an emerging religion must rely on external donations for its livelihood, the higher the social class of its followers, the closer the sect will be to the power center, and the more likely it is to form an alliance with the state.

4. Research Cases and Method

The cases used to illustrate our theory are the Chan and Pure Land schools during the early Tang Dynasty. This article will offer an analysis of how the institutional features of these schools were formed, in light of our theory. But, first, we will very briefly review recent scholarship on the institutional formation of Chan Buddhism as well as Pure Land Buddhism in Tang to provide background and situate our study in the field.

4.1. Recent Research on Early Chan Buddhism

“Chan” is both a form of meditative practice and a lineage/Buddhist school that gradually spread in East Asia after the 7th century. It should be noted that monks of the Chan school do not necessarily support meditation, and may even oppose meditation. (Greene 2022, pp. 22–24, 205–48). Generally speaking, Chan emphasizes direct insight to achieve Buddhahood, with its practice focusing primarily on meditation, “agricultural Chan” (farming combined with meditation), and the application of prajna 般若 (wisdom). Its goal is to achieve awakening to one’s intrinsic nature through inner silence.

The field of Chan studies has undergone many changes since its inception. The discovery of Tang-era manuscripts in Dunhuang that disagree with traditional (Song Dynasty and later) accounts of the early Chan Lineage forced Japanese and Chinese scholars to completely rethink the received history of that lineage4, such as Hu Shi, Ui Hakuju, Sekiguchi Shindai, and Yanagida Seizan5.

We can generally form the following impression of the history of early Chan Buddhism: The lineage story of Bodhidharma began (or at least cannot be traced back to an earlier period) in the late 7th century. At that time, the disciples of a monk named Faru 法如 (638–689) wrote an epitaph claiming that Faru had received the secret oral teachings transmitted from the Buddha through a series of Indian teachers to the Tripitaka Master Bodhidharma6. The epitaph states that Bodhidharma brought these teachings to China and passed them on to Huike 慧可, then to Sengcan 僧璨, Daoxin 道信 (580–651), Hongren 弘忍 (600–674), and finally to Faru (McRae 1986, p. 85)7. It is very likely that Faru’s disciples fabricated this lineage. They selected the Indian monk Bodhidharma and his disciple Huike from the Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 (644), and used them as a convenient connection to India. The connections between Huike, Sengcan, and Daoxin were almost certainly fabricated with the aim of linking Faru to Bodhidharma (Jinhua Chen 2002)8. Unfortunately, apart from knowing that they were in Shaolin Temple and that they fabricated a secret oral lineage traceable to India, we know very little about Faru and his disciples.

Daoxin and Hongren did exist in history, as evidenced by the “Biographies of Eminent Monks Continue” from the same period. The points of contention are whether Daoxin and Hongren led a monastic community and whether their monastery could be called a Chan temple. Ui Hakuju 宇井伯壽, a prominent historian of Chan, assumed that because the documents unearthed in Dunhuang prove that the line of succession from Daoxin to Hongren to Faru/Shenxiu 神秀/Huineng 慧能 is established, the monastic community he headed on East Mountain in Huang-mei must have been a Chan school monastery (Ui 1935, pp. 81–90). But T. Griffith Foulk argued that the concept of a sectarian “Chan monastery” does not appear in any historical records until the late tenth century (Foulk 1993). My view is that we should acknowledge the scholarly disagreements: the term “Chan temple” indeed did not emerge until the late Tang, but Daoxin and Hongren did in fact lead a fairly sizable monastic community in the Huangmei 黃梅 region.

The next phase in the formation of the Bodhidharma lineage myth centers on a monk-disciple named Shenxiu (606–706). Shenxiu rose to prominence in Yuquan temple 玉泉寺 and spent the final six years of his life in Luoyang and Chang’an, enjoying the patronage of Empress Wu. His followers successfully claimed that Shenxiu, like Faru, was the sixth-generation heir in the Bodhidharma transmission. One of Shenxiu’s notable disciples—a monk named Puji 普寂 (651–739)—is said to have traveled to Shaolin Monastery and established a “Hall of the Seven Ancestors” to honor the six patriarchs of the Faru lineage plus his own teacher, Shenxiu. Puji also arranged for the original six biographies compiled by Faru’s disciples to be edited so that, in this sixth generation, his teacher Shenxiu’s biography would stand alongside Faru’s. The resulting text, called the Chuan fabao ji 传法宝记, has survived and was discovered in Dunhuang in the early part of this century. The version we now possess, goes to great lengths to place Shenxiu on an equal footing with Faru and to argue that Shenxiu succeeded Hongren after Faru’s death (Yanagida 1971, pp. 329–403).

The next phase in the formation of the Bodhidharma lineage chart is familiar to all Western scholars of Chinese Buddhism, thanks to Philip Yampolsky’s translation of the Platform Sūtra and Hushi’s seminal study of Shenhui 神會, the critic of the Northern School. It is well known that Shenhui argued the true sixth patriarch of the “Southern School” was not Shenxiu of the Northern School but his own teacher, Huineng. Shenhui had clearly recognized the Northern School’s usurpation of the Faru lineage and deliberately imitated its strategy to secure legitimacy for his own line (McRae 1986, pp. 8–10). Shenhui criticized Puji’s editing of the Chuan fabao ji, he exposed the internal contradictions in the lineage claims of the Chuan fabao ji and seized the opportunity to argue that the true sixth patriarch was neither Shenxiu nor Faru, but Huineng (Foulk 1993).

4.2. Recent Academic Research on Early Pure Land

The Pure Land 凈土 belief originated in the northwestern regions of India and Gandhara and was introduced to China around the 6th century (Jones 2019, p. 6). However, Pure Land Buddhism, as a sect, was born in China. It emphasizes faith in the Buddhist teachings and the practice of chanting Amitabha Buddha’s name. The goal is to be reborn in the Western Pure Land at the time of death. During the Tang Dynasty, and it was commonly referred to as the “Nianfo sect 念佛” (The Sect of Chanting Buddha’s Name)9 (Yuan et al. 1986).

A fundamental question about Pure Land is whether the Pure Land faith in China can be regarded as a sect/school. Western scholars questioned whether the Pure Land sect in China constitutes a sect, and hold that a sect requires an unbroken lineage of teacher–disciple transmission and a stance of exclusivity in pursuit of orthodoxy—much like Chan Buddhism (Sharf 2002; Getz 1994, p. 4). Chinese scholars, by contrast, argue that Pure Land has already become an intellectual movement, and when a considerable number of people are practicing a unique doctrine, it can legitimately be called a school (Yangjiu Chen 2008, p. 270; Jianhuang Chen 2009, pp. 92–102)10.

We can generally form an impression of the early Pure Land Buddhism: Through the activities and doctrines of Huiyuan 慧远, Tanluan 昙鸾, and Daochuo 道绰 from the 5th to the 7th century, ideas similar to those of the Pure Land belief began to emerge. Huiyuan delved deeply into the method of contemplating the Buddha taught in the Guan wuliang shou jing 观无量寿经, which instructed him to regard Amitabha Buddha as the exemplar of all Buddhas and focus on contemplating on him. He presided over some of the earliest gatherings of believers, with the aim of worshiping Amitabha Buddha and seeking rebirth in the “Western Paradise”. Later traditions venerate him as the founding patriarch of the Pure Land belief in China.

The integration of End-of-the-Dharma thought into Pure Land discourse can be situated between Tanluan and Daochuo (542–609, 542 AD was the year when Tanluan passed away, and 609 AD is said to be the time when Daochuo began to specialize in the practice of the Pure Land). As Charles Jones (2021) has noted, Tanluan does not yet reflect this influence, presenting the “difficult path” and the “easy path” as equally available options. Daochuo, however, reinterpreted this framework by invoking scriptural models that periodize Buddhist history into the “Correct Dharma,” “Counterfeit Dharma,” and “End of the Dharma.” On this basis, he contended that in the final age the difficult path was no longer practicable, leaving reliance on the Pure Land as the sole viable means of salvation.

The shortcoming of Daochuo lies in not providing a clear method for practicing the Pure Land Dharma (Chappell 1976, pp. 272–76). It was Shandao who clearly and comprehensively pointed out that ordinary sentient beings can rely on the power of Amitabha Buddha’s vows and use specific cultivation methods to be reborn in the Pure Land11 (Jones 2019, pp. 20–25). Shandao’s most significant contribution lay in embedding Pure Land devotion into the daily lives of ordinary residents of Chang’an, attracting merchants, artisans, and laborers into its fold and thereby providing the Pure Land community with a stable economic base. According to the Xin xiu Jingtu wangsheng zhuan 新修凈土往生傳, Shandao widely promoted the practice of reciting Amitābha’s name in the capital; it records that monks, nuns, and lay devotees in Chang’an and neighboring regions recited the Amitābha Sūtra hundreds of thousands of times, and that practitioners chanting the Buddha’s name from fifteen thousand to one hundred thousand times daily were beyond reckoning 京華諸州僧尼士女, 誦阿彌陀經十萬至三十萬遍者, 念阿彌陀佛日得壹萬五千至十萬遍者, 不可知數 (CBETA 2025.R1, X78, no. 1546, p. 164a8-11).

4.3. Research Method of This Article

The authors select early Tang’s Chan and Pure Land as research cases because both Chan and Pure Land originated as emerging sects at the fringes of the Tang Empire. Chan grew in the Dabie Mountains 大別山 at the border of Hubei and Anhui, while Pure Land emerged in the Lüliang Mountain 呂梁山 range in Shanxi and in the urban Chang’an. In the early stages of their development, both sects faced similar situations: they did not receive political protection, their development was primarily among lower social classes, and the monks did not even have formal ordination certificates. In many ways, both Chan and Pure Land emerged at the margins of the Tang Empire, in terms of the religious ecology, political sphere, as well as social class and geography.

The sources for our study include primary sources such as epitaphs, inscriptions, and records of statues, as well as internal Buddhist texts such as monastic biographies, travel diaries, and doctrinal writings, as well as external sources such as official histories, notes, novels, travel records, poems, and collected works. We also rely on secondary research, which consists of authoritative works from both Chinese and international scholars12.

The primary materials used in this article mainly come from: Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 (Dao 2014), Song gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳 (Zan 1987), Fozu tongji jiaozhu 佛祖統紀校註 (Zhi 2012), Guanghong ming ji 廣弘明集 (Seng 1990), Lengqie shizi ji 楞伽師資記 and Chuan fabao ji 傳法寶記 in 初期の禪史 (Yanagida 1971), Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集 (Song 2008), Jiu tangshu 舊唐書 (Liu 1975), Xin tangshu 新唐書 (Ouyang 1975), Tang huiyao 唐會要 (P. Wang 1960).

5. Institutional Features of Chan and Pure Land

Chan Buddhism emphasized both meditation and farming, devalued doctrinal studies. Pure Land Buddhism focused on chanting Amitabha’s name, devalued textual study, crosscut various social classes, and had a strong presence in urban centers. These “institutional features” of both Chan and Pure Land were already evident during their early development (

Table 1. Comparison of Institutional features of Early Chan and Pure Land Buddhism.

	Attitude Toward Doctrinal Studies	Main Social Classes of Monks and Followers	Source of Livelihood	Attitude Toward Political Power
Early Chan	Devalues	unregistered populations, peasants, illegal monks	Farming Chan	Stay out of politics, keep distance
Early Pure Land	Devalues	Merchants, eunuchs	Supported by temple donations and lay devotees	Stay out of politics but stay appropriately close

).

5.1. Institutional Features of Early Chan

Early Chan had three notable institutional features:

1. Broad Accessibility and Open to All Disciples: Many scholars argue that the principal contribution of Daoxin and Hongren lay in simplifying meditative practice by dispensing with complex techniques and the requirement of mastering corresponding doctrinal or philosophical knowledge, thereby rendering Chan practice accessible to a broader audience. (McRae 1986, pp. 134–47; Faure 1986, p. 111; Sharf 2002; Poceski 2015, pp. 81–85; Greene 2022, p. 212). For instance, in Hongren’s monastic community, “in secrecy the disciple presents his insight; if it accords with Dharma, the master transmits it in strict confidence, never disclosed to the outside world. 密來自呈, 當理與法. 猶遞為秘重, 曾不昌言” (Yanagida 1971, p. 420). Hongren allowed disciples to achieve enlightenment through meditation with little need to study scriptures. This process was private and not restricted to certain disciple. Daoxin and Hongren broadly opened the doors of Dharma transmission to their disciples, with low entry requirements, attracting many monks to study under them. The Chuan fabao ji 傳法寶紀records, “by the time of Hongren, Faru, and Shenxiu, they opened the gates of Dharma transmission wide to their disciples—without regard for each disciple’s intelligence or capacity for insight. 及忍、如、大通之世, 則法門大啟, 根機不擇” (Yanagida 1971, p. 420).

2. Devaluation of Doctrinal Studies, Promotion of Less Study and More Meditation: Daoxin and Hongren emphasized a practice known as the Dongshan method 東山法門, which promoted a transmission of the Dharma from mind to mind, without relying on classic texts and scholarly study of scriptures. The Faru xingzhuang bei 法如行狀碑 recorded Hongren’s philosophy: “The transmission from India was originally without written words, those who enter this gate receive it solely by mind-to-mind transmission. 天竺相承, 本無文字. 入此門者, 唯意相傳. In the Datong chanshi bei 大通禪師碑, written by Zhangshuo 張說 for Shenxiu, it says, “If one seeks to define it by name or concept, the subtle truth of the Dharma is distorted; if one attempts to express it in words, its essence is veiled. Though the Buddha willed to transmit this wondrous teaching, he could do so only through his unsurpassed virtue over countless kalpas, gradually conveying the seal of the Dharma—or, in a single instant, by directly enlightening one to Buddhahood 名相入焉妙本乖, 言說出焉真宗隱, 故如來有意傳妙道, 力持至德, 萬劫而遙付法印, 壹念而頓授佛身”. Dufe 杜朏’s Chuan fabao ji 傳法寶紀 also records, “The Master, discerning their readiness to enter the Way, skillfully revealed the teaching, and in that very instant their minds entered the Dharma realm… Bodhidharma of India, lifting his robe to guide the deluded, stilled their speech and freed them from reliance on sutras and treatises. 大師知堪入道, 乃方便開示, 即時其心入法界……天竺達摩, 褰裳導迷, 息其言語, 離其經論” (Yanagida 1971, p. 415). This suggests that the monastic community of Hongren de-emphasized scriptural teachings, believing that the “profound Way” does not originate from scriptures but requires a deliberate departure from textual study to achieve sudden enlightenment in a single moment of realization.

3. Engagement in self-sufficient labor: As for China, the early monks who separated from their original families and entered monastic life as a novice (chujia 出家) had no constant source of economic income, so farming was and remained a prerequisite for their livelihood. In the Gaoseng zhuan 高僧传, it is recorded that when Dao’an 道安 was conscripted to labor in the fields and farmhouses for as long as three years, performing his duties and toil without ever showing a trace of complaint 驅役田舍, 至于三年, 執勤就勞, 曾無怨色 (CBETA 2025.R1, T50, no. 2059, p. 351c5-7). When Faxian 法显 was a novice monk in his teens, he once cut wheat in the fields with dozens of novice classmates 嘗與同學數十人, 於田中刈稻 (CBETA 2025.R1, T50, no. 2059, p. 337b27-28). This shows that as early as the Sixteen Kingdoms period (304–439 AD), novice monks were engaged in agricultural activities. In Daoheng’s 道衡 Shibo lun 釋駁論, he mentioned the criticisms made against monks by the public opinion at that time: “As for the monks, their pursuit of gain allows no respite. Some cultivate fields and gardens like farmers; some engage in commerce and trade, competing with others for profit; some rely on medical arts to disregard cold and heat; some employ ingenious but heterodox practices to sustain their livelihood; some tell fortunes through physiognomy and astrology, making reckless pronouncements of good and ill; some use devious means to ingratiate themselves with those in power and cater to the fashions of the day, living off the labor of the common people. 至於營求孜汲, 無暫寧息, 或墾殖田圃, 與農夫齊流, 或商旅博易, 與眾人競利或矜恃醫道輕作寒暑, 或機巧異端, 以濟生業, 或占相孤虚妄論吉凶, 或詭道假權要射時意, 坐食百姓” (Seng 1990, p. 35). The explanation of Daoheng is that “the body needs cloth to wear because it has no hair and feathers, and the belly is not a Lagenaria that does not need to be fed, and it does not mean producing and possessing more than one’s need to an extreme, but indicates a situation that when the year is rich, they take enough from the people, and when the time is tough, they exert themselves to be economically autonomous” (Seng 1990, p. 36). Those monks also needed living supplies and therefore had to rely on farming to achieve self-sufficiency (Wang and Xiao 2023). However, it is worth noting that during the Sixteen Kingdoms and Northern and Southern Dynasties, those generally engaged in agricultural labor were limited to novice monks and monks who were forced to do so for a living. But even the most legitimate means of making a living failed to gain the understanding and respect of public opinion and still suffered criticism.

The most groundbreaking aspect of Chan Buddhism lay in its encouragement of monks to engage in agricultural work and its integration of farming into spiritual practice, thereby granting legitimacy to monks’ participation in agricultural activities. “Agricultural Chan” in a strict sense only emerged in the ninth century with Baizhang Huaihai 百丈懷海 and the Baizhang qinggui 百丈清規. However, the initial seeds for Chan monastics engaging in self-sufficient productive labor appeared during the periods of Daoxin and Hongren.

The Fourth Patriarch Daoxin 道信 in 625 AD, he began to “ensconce 安居” and preaching and spreading the Dharma in the mountainous region of Huangmei 黃梅. This settlement rapidly expanded the Chan monastic institutions and regulations, which was conducive to the growth of the monastic community. The Chuan fabao ji records that Hongren was dull in character. The other monks who practiced with him often made fun of him, but he remained silent and did not respond. Hongren often worked diligently, and Daoxin particularly valued him性木訥沈厚, 同學頗輕戲之, 終默無所對. 常勤作役, 以體下人. 信特器之 (Yanagida 1971, p. 386). Yanagida Seizan also explained that it mentions: “Exerting one’s strength as an offering, so that the Dharma companions may have what they need役力以申供养, 法侣资其足焉, labor, as a practice of focused mindfulness, contains not only religious significance but also serves to meet the living needs of Chan monks. This is the origin of the monastic practices of later Chan communities” (Yanagida 1971, p. 388). The Tan jing壇經 also mentions that after Huineng 慧能 joined Hongren’s community, he was sent to work with the assembly. Hongren assigned Huineng to the rice-pounding room, where Huineng spent over eight months operating the pestle (Yampolsky 1967, p. 128). The view that the monastic communities of Daoxin and Hongren engaged in self-sufficient productive activities, serving as the institutional prototype (precursor) of “agricultural Chan”, is supported by Chinese Buddhist scholars such as Du Jiwen 杜继文 and Ren Jiyu 任继愈 (Du and Wei 1993, pp. 66–69; Ren 1995). The agricultural self-sufficiency, which could include chores such as pestle-operating 舂米 and other forms of daily maintenance work, not only freed the monks from having to rely chiefly on lay donations for their sustenance—unlike their Indian Buddhist counterparts—but also established a tradition independent of government administration and legal intervention. In our analysis, these practices are significant not as direct precursors of the later institution of “agricultural Chan”, but because they reveal how early Tang Chan communities in the mountains, lacking state support or urban patronage, relied on self-sufficient labor for survival. We interpret them as an institutional prototype that laid the groundwork for the later codifications of “agricultural Chan”.

Thus, when Chinese Buddhism was persecuted by the government during the Tang Dynasty in 842, Chan Buddhism was able to survive more easily than doctrinal Buddhist traditions because it was more economically autonomous from the government than those other traditions (Green 2013).

5.2. Institutional Features of Pure Land Nianfo Sect

The Pure Land Nianfo sect had several prominent organizational institutional features:

1. Low Entry Barriers to Practice, Devaluation of Buddhist Doctrines, Emphasis on Chanting Amitabha’s name: Pure Land’s most notable feature was the emphasis on the practice of chanting Amitabha’s name. Daochuo believed that the era had entered the end of the Dharma age, with people’s minds being shallow and dull, and thus prior Buddhist practices were difficult. He advocated for the practice of Nianfo, as it was the most suitable practice for the time, and even those with limited wisdom could, through continuous chanting before death, overcome obstacles and be reborn in the Western Pure Land. The “way of the sages” (shengdao 聖道), which Daochuo equated with both the “path of difficult practice” (nanxing dao 難行道) and “self-power” (zili 自力) would not work. Only the “way of rebirth in the Pure Land” (wangsheng jingtu 往生淨土), which corresponded to the “path of easy practice” (yixing dao 易行道) and other-power (tali他力) answered the conditions of the Decadent Dharma (T.1958.47:13c6ff). Subsequently, Shandao went even further. He reinterpreted the shinian jingtu 十念净土 as ten verbal chants. Starting from Shandao, chanting Amitabha’s name became the central practice (Jones 2019, pp. 21–22).

2. The monastics of the Pure Land recitation tradition and their Dharma transmission did not rely on estate economies or self-sufficient labor but instead depended on the donations of urban lay believers, accumulating wealth gradually. According to historical records, the economic model of Shandao’s monastic community closely aligned with the commercial economy of Tang-era urban centers. Unlike the Huayan 華嚴, Yogācāra 唯識, and Tiantai 天臺 schools, which managed monastic estates, Shandao’s community primarily sustained itself through alms-seeking and lay offerings. This financial model provided greater liquidity in economic affairs, as it was supported by lay patronage rather than being tied to immovable assets such as monastery lands. This flexibility proved particularly crucial in later periods, allowing the Pure Land school to navigate political and social upheavals more effectively.

3. The Pure Land school broadly opened the path of Dharma transmission, promising rebirth in the Pure Land to people from all walks of life. Earlier Pure Land beliefs and various commentators generally held that only sages could attain rebirth in the Western Pure Land. For example, Huiyuan 慧遠 maintained that within the nine grades of rebirth 九品往生, only the upper and middle six grades of bodhisattvas and sages could enter the Western Pure Land (J. Zhang 2010). However, as Pure Land recitation Buddhism developed, it gradually became more accessible to the common people, with Shandao playing a pivotal role in this transformation. Shandao introduced the doctrine that all nine grades, including ordinary beings, could attain rebirth. He even declared that the most degraded of beings, those who spend countless lifetimes in evil, are yet capable of birth in the Pure Land (T.1753.37:249a24–249b5; Jones 2019, p. 23) This significantly expanded the audience of the Pure Land school, making Amitābha recitation Buddhism the most popular and grassroots-oriented sect within Chinese Buddhism.

4. Dependence on External Support, with Early Collaboration with the Royal Family: The Nianfo sect’s reliance on Amitabha’s vow and external alms was not only reflected in the hope for salvation through the recitation of his name but also in their dependence on lay donations for livelihood. In his later years, Shandao appeared to have recognized that the development of such sects relied on the protection and support of political power, so he deeply involved in the construction of the Longmen Grottoes 龍門石窟 promoted by Emperor Gaozong and Empress Wu Zetian. Shandao was appointed by Wu Zetian to oversee the construction of the giant Buddha at the Longmen Grottoes13.

6. The Multiple Margins of Interstitial Space and the Formation of Institutional Features of Chan and Pure Land

6.1. Formation of Institutional Features of Early Chan

The formation of the organizational institutional features of early Chan can be attributed to the fact that Daoxin and Hongren’s monastic community was situated in a multiple-margin interstitial space. Politically, the Jiangnan 江南 region during the early Tang Dynasty was not stable; it had to avoid involvement with rebels and escape from official suppression of monks. In terms of religious ecology, most monks in the community had no ordination certificate and were not legally recognized monks, hiding in the mountains and avoiding the government’s crackdown on unauthorized monks. Economically, the community was located in the southern foothills of the Dabie Mountains, living on whatever nature provided, with little food or clothing, forcing the monks to engage in agricultural labor, which traditional Buddhism disdained. In terms of social class, the monks mostly came from unauthorized monks, wandering monks, and unregistered populations, even some who were not yet registered in the household registration system, thus belonging to the lower social strata.

Chan‘s hiding in the southern foothills of the Dabie Mountains, and later its tendency to gather in forests, relying on farming Chan for self-sufficiency, was due to the frequent wars in the Jiangsu and Zhejiang regions during the early Tang, combined with the official crackdown on monks by Emperor Gaozu 唐高祖 of Tang. To avoid the turmoil, Chan monks took refuge in the mountains, where it was inconvenient for them to rely on state or popular donations. Practicing farming Chan thus became the only viable option for sustaining themselves.

In previous research, Du and Wei (1993, p. 67) has suggested an explanation: they believe that Daoxin’s move from his long-time residence in Jiangxi to Qizhou 蘄州 in the north was motivated by safety concerns. In the sixth year of the Wude era 武德六年 (623), the rebel leader Fu gongzhi 輔公祏 openly rebelled and declared himself emperor in Danyang. Daoxuan recorded the impact of this rebellion on Buddhism: “In the seventh year of the Wude era, Fu gongzhi crossed the Yangtze River and did not follow the emperor’s orders. The royal army launched a campaign, and the region was pacified. Five thousand monks were safe 武德七年, 輔公祏跨有江表, 未從王政, 王師薄伐, 吳越廓清, 僧眾五千, 晏然安堵” (Liu 1975, vol. 56). Du commented, “At that time, the Buddhist monks in Jiangnan had to avoid involvement with rebels and escape official crackdowns, struggling in the interstitial spaces”. After the turmoil in the late Sui Dynasty, Daoxin’s community increasingly faced instability, with various factions attacking one another. The region of Yuzhang 豫章 and Qianzhou 虔州 became a battleground. According to the Jiu tangshu, it was only after Zhang Shanan 張善安 took control of Yuzhang from the forces of Xiao Xian 蕭銑 and submitted to the Tang that Jiangxi regained some stability (Liu 1975, vol. 56). But by the sixth year of Wude (623), after Fu gongzhi’s rebellion, Zhang shanan also joined the rebellion. Daoxin, at that time, was residing at the Dalin Monastery 大林寺 in Mount Lushan 廬山, right in the heart of the turmoil. For Daoxin, the entire Jiangnan area, including the eastern parts of Hubei, was embroiled in war and no longer safe. One option was to cross the Yangtze River and take refuge in the Dabie Mountains 大別山. Daoxin had already practiced in the Wangong 皖公 Mountain in the Dabie Mountains area when he was in his teens (CBETA 2025.R1, T50, no. 2060, p. 606b5-7), so he was somewhat familiar with the area’s geography and customs. He could have gone to the region of Shuzhou 舒州, where he was most familiar, but at the time, Li xiaogong 李孝恭 and Lijing 李靖 were stationed at Shuzhou 舒州, with military operations taking place there. As Shuzhou was the front line between the Tang army and Fu gongzhi, Daoxin could not go to Shuzhou. Therefore, the most logical choice was to move north across the Yangtze to Qizhou, an area located on the northern edge of the Dabie Mountains, which was also the closest to Mount Lushan.

On the other hand, the Daoxin monastic community’s decision to hide in the mountains may have also been influenced by the tense political-religious relations. In the ninth year of Wude 武德九年 (626), just over a year after Daoxin arrived in Qizhou, the Minister of History, Fuyi 傅奕, submitted a memorial to Emperor Gaozu, advocating for the swift regulation of Buddhism, including confiscating temples and converting them to other uses. Emperor Gaozu immediately passed on Fuyi’s criticisms to various monks for rebuttal, and a series of rebuttals followed, with the most famous being by Minister Xiaoyu 蕭瑀 and Falin 法琳, author of Po Xie Lun 破邪論. However, Emperor Gaozu still issued his Edict on the Regulation of Buddhism and Daoism 沙汰佛道詔, which, according to Weinstein (1987), appeared to target both Buddhism and Daoism but was actually almost exclusively directed against Buddhism, citing real or fabricated accusations. It is clear that such an edict would have forced monks outside official temples to flee, seeking refuge in the mountains.

Once they took refuge in the mountains; however, they faced the problem of how to sustain the community. To solve the problem of acquiring sustenance and even expanding the monastic community, Daoxin’s implementation of farming Chan became a necessary organizational reform. Daoxin advocated for farming Chan and required all monks to engage in agricultural activities, a significant innovation at the time14. The practice of farming Chan, which solved the problem of food in the chaotic Sui-Tang period, attracted many monks and unregistered populations. Du and Wei (1993, pp. 55–59) noted, “During the transition from Sui to Tang, the number of people seeking refuge in Buddhist monasteries greatly increased, and many did not hide their motivation for food and clothing. Monasteries, including official ones, had been severely damaged, and the monks fled, with surviving temples barely able to sustain themselves.” This is reflected in the Xu Gaoseng Zhuan 續高僧傳, where even many high monks mentioned that securing food was of primary importance for survival. As mentioned in The Biography of Tanqian 曇遷傳, monks at the end of the Northern Zhou dynasty found themselves caught between war and famine, with “wandering monks from all directions relying on heaven and earth for sustenance 四方遊僧, 寄食天地”. Similarly, The Biography of Hongzhi 弘智傳 states, “The foundation of life lies in food, grain serves to sustain the body, and By means of food, one nourishes and sustains the body 有生之本, 以食為命, 假糧粒以資形” (CBETA 2025.R1, T50, no. 2060, p. 642a21-22). While Daoxin’s advocacy of self-sufficient practice at the Shuangfeng Mountains 雙峰山 may not have been widely accepted by monks supported by official temple provisions, it indeed provided a means of livelihood for the ever-moving and expanding monastic community.

Chan’s monastic community, consisting mostly of wandering monks, unregistered populations, hunters, and small farmers, was rooted in the southern Dabie Mountains at the junction of the Jianghuai and Yangtze River plain regions, where many unregistered populations and wandering monks congregated, making them the primary target group for missionary work. It should be noted that the low social status of the Chan monk community was only the case in the early days of Chan. In the late Tang Dynasty and the Song Dynasty, Chan monks, as elite Buddhist monks, had close interactions with local rulers and officials15. Chan’s devaluation of doctrinal studies and emphasis on meditation and farming Chan stemmed from the local population’s low cultural level, with many illiterate or unable to engage in deep doctrinal study. Thus, the religious practices had to be adapted to the cultural level of the local people.

From the geographical and ecological perspective of Qizhou Huangmei 蘄州黃梅, it was highly conducive to hiding unregistered populations and wandering monks. Qizhou Huangmei is located on the southern foothills of the Dabie Mountains, a mountain range that divides the North China Plain from the middle reaches of the Yangtze River. Qizhou Huangmei, along with the neighboring regions of Huangzhou and Shuzhou, formed a natural highland area, providing a space for shelter and cultivation in the mountains and forests. To the north and east, Qizhou is surrounded by the Dabie Mountain range, with hills and ridges undulating across the area. William Rowe (2006) discussed the special ecological features of this region, which connects the plains and Dabie Mountains, noting that historically, areas like Macheng 麻城, Huangmei 黄梅, and Hong’an 紅安 often gathered many unregistered populations and wandering monks, with frequent violent incidents and conflicts between the mountain people and the townspeople. In fact, after the turmoil of the late Sui Dynasty, the Jianghuai 江淮 region (especially Qizhou) became a place where many unregistered populations sought refuge. According to research by Weng, the data he uses comes from the Jiu Tangshu · Dilizhi 旧唐书·地理志, specifically the household and population figures listed under the categories of “former jurisdiction” (jiu ling 旧领) and “Tianbao jurisdiction” (Tianbao ling 天宝领), in the 13th year of the Zhenguan era 貞觀十三年 (639), the population density of Huainan Dao was 2.73 people per square kilometer (Weng 1990), while Qizhou had a density of 3.95 people per square kilometer. The total population of Qizhou’s four counties was 39,678, averaging about 10,000 people per county (Weng 1995). By the 12th year of the Tianbao era 天寶十二年 (753), Qizhou’s population had risen to 186,488, with a density of 18.58 people per square kilometer, and an average of over 40,000 people per county (Weng 1995, p. 32). In stark contrast, during the same period (639–753 AD), the population of the Guannei Dao 关内道 increased by only 164%, while the Huainan Dao 淮南道—which included Qizhou—experienced a remarkable population growth of 487%. However, the records in the Jiu Tangshu · Dilizhi, are not without problems. Guodong Dong 冻国栋 (Guodong Dong 1993, p. 23) points out that although the Dilizhi claims to base its figures on the household registration of the 12th year of Tianbao (752), it actually incorporates data from later periods, even including household numbers from the Zhenyuan 贞元 era. For instance, in Jiu Tangshu, Jingzhou 景州 in Hebei Dao notes 11,003 households and 57,532 individuals, but Jingzhou was only established in the second year of Zhenyuan (786), so it should not have appeared in the Tianbao census. Similarly, Xinzhou 信州 in Jiangnan East Dao had 40,000 households, but Xinzhou was established in the first year of Qianyuan 乾元 (758) under Emperor Suzong, These records reflect some unreliability in the way population data was recorded in official Chinese historical sources. However, Dong Guodong also acknowledges that despite certain inaccuracies, the Jiu Tangshu · Dilizhi is, from a historiographical standpoint, the most original source available. Therefore, it remains the primary reference for historical data due to its relatively high degree of reliability. From the data, it is clear that Qizhou’s population grew nearly Four times over more than a hundred years. Dong Guodong points out that while a substantial increase in the actual population, especially in household numbers, was a fact during the early Tang Dynasty, it is also a fact that the official household registration figures controlled by the government were significantly lower than the true population count (Guodong Dong 2002, pp. 141–42). This dramatic growth is likely due to the large number of unregistered populations who hid in the population data before the 13th year of Zhenguan, with them and their descendants gradually integrated into the official household registration system. The significant population growth in Qizhou suggests the presence of a substantial unregistered population there, supporting the notion that the Huangmei East Mountain area was likely a hub for socially marginalized groups. However, we must also point out that the explanation linking Qizhou’s growth to hidden unregistered populations is a historical inference and not the definitive conclusion.

The issue of unregistered populations persisted throughout the early Tang Dynasty. In the sixth year of Wude (623), the Tang da zhaoling ji 唐大詔令集 records Edict on Reducing Corvée Labor recorded: “Between the Jianghuai and Lingnan regions, the roads are remote and difficult, and the land is vast and sparsely populated. Many displaced people have drifted here, and they are especially in need of relief and care 江淮之間, 爰及嶺外. 塗路懸阻, 土曠人稀. 流寓者多, 尤宜存恤 (Song 2008, p. 578).” In the second year of Zhenguan (628), frost and flooding devastated nearly all prefectures, except for Junbin 君賓, which retained abundant grain reserves. As a result, people from Puzhou 蒲州, Yuzhou 虞州, and elsewhere fled to Dengzhou 鄧州 in search of food 贞观二年, 天下諸州並遭霜澇, 君賓一境獨免, 當年多有儲積, 蒲、虞等州戶口, 盡入邓州逐食 (Liu 1975, p. 4783). During Wu Zetian’s reign, more than half of the registered households had fled or gone missing, resulting in reduced rents and levies and leaving the state with insufficient revenue 今天下戶口, 亡逃過半, 租調旣減, 國用不足 (Liu 1975, p. 2867). Many fugitives sought refuge in mountains and marshlands. In regions such as Shu (modern Sichuan) and Jianghuai, large groups of fugitive households even formed rebel bands known as the “Guanghuo robbers 光火贼” and “mass bandits 群盗”. At the time, Di renjie 狄仁杰 warned: “Now that famine has struck Guandong, the people of Shu and Hanzhong are fleeing in large numbers. South of the Jianghuai, heavy taxation and corvée labor remain unrelenting. If the people cannot live in peace, they will band together as outlaws. Once the foundation of the state is shaken, the consequences will be dire方今關東饑饉, 蜀、漢逃亡, 江、淮以南, 徵求不息. 人不復業, 則相率爲盜, 本根一搖, 憂患不淺 (Liu 1975, p. 2890).” Tang poet Wang fanzhi 王梵誌 described the migration of unregistered populations in his poem, “Throughout the land, there were innumerable wanderers and displaced persons, numbering at least half the population. Fleeing war and corvée labor, they took refuge across north and south, temporarily joining others’ bands or attaching themselves to local associations. They roamed solely for the sake of survival, heedless of household registers or military service 天下浮逃人, 不含多壹半. 南北擲蹤藏, 班他暫歸貫. 遊遊自覓活, 不愁應戶役”. According to Tang zhangru 唐長孺’s research, this poem was written during the early reign of Empress Wu zetian 武則天 (Li 2001). In the first year of the Zhengsheng 证圣 era (695), Liqiao 李嶠 proposed measures to address the problem of fugitives: “I suggest dispatching censors to supervise and inspect, issuing prohibitions to prevent flight, extending benevolence to pacify them, employing expedient measures to manage them, and instituting regulations to unify their administration. Only then can the fugitives be induced to return to their places of origin 臣以爲宜令御史督察檢校, 設禁令以防之, 垂恩德以撫之, 施權衡以御之, 爲制限以一之, 然後逃亡可還 (P. Wang 1960, p. 1561)”. During the reign of Emperor Xuanzong, widespread flight again occurred. Many who owed corvée labor evaded their obligations through deception, alarming the court. In response, Yuwen rong 宇文融 submitted a set of practical proposals to investigate fraud and to track down fugitives. Xuanzong approved these suggestions and appointed Yuwen Rong to carry them out 時天下戶口逃亡, 免役多僞濫, 朝廷深以爲患. 融乃陳便宜, 奏請檢察僞濫, 搜括逃戶. 玄宗納其言, 因令宇文融充使推勾 (Liu 1975, p. 3217). These sources illustrate that household flight was a persistent and serious social problem from the founding of the Tang through its peak, spanning the Wude, Zhenguan, Wu Zetian, and Xuanzong eras. The issue was particularly acute in the Jianghuai region, where Qizhou was located.

According to the monastic biographies in the history of Chan, most members of Daoxin’s monastic community were unauthorized monks (Ibuki 2015), many of whom were wandering monks without ordination certificates. This situation corresponds with the gathering of unregistered populations and wandering monks in the region. In the early Tang Dynasty, because the court strictly controlled the number of monks and strengthened the ordination system, those without official ordination were considered illegal. From the perspective of Tang law, Daoxin’s and Hongren’s monastic communities were illegal associations16. Daoxin’s disciple Hongren likely never received official ordination, and later disciples such as Faru 法如, Shenxiu 神秀, and Huineng 慧能 did not receive ordination and enter official temples until several years after leaving Qizhou Huangmei. Atsushi Ibuki argues that even Shenxiu did not receive full ordination until around the age of sixty. If that is the case, then most of the other disciples would not have been officially ordained monks. Ibuki further suggests that the reason they waited decades after entering monastic life to take their precepts was not due to a lack of ability or bad luck, but rather because they were dissatisfied with the state-sponsored Buddhism of the time and had not been incorporated into the existing, government-regulated Buddhist establishment (Ibuki 2015, p. 275). However, another case outside the Chan tradition shows that in mid–early Tang China, the monastic community was quite permissive about whether a monk had fully ordained 具足戒. Chen jinhua 陈金华 investigated two biographical sources—those of Yan Chaoyin and Cui Zhiyuan—and found that Fazang very likely never received full ordination, but only the bodhisattva precepts 菩萨戒. This suggests that some of the greatest architects of the medieval Chinese Buddhist landscape may never have been fully ordained in the vinaya sense (Jinhua Chen 2007, pp. 91–118).

The phenomenon of unauthorized ordination was widespread in the early Tang Dynasty, with some even condoning or protecting these unauthorized ordinations (Du and Wei 1993, pp. 59–60). Large numbers of unauthorized monks, like those in Daoxin and Hongren’s community, emulated unregistered populations, hiding in the mountains and forests. Tang huiyao 唐會要 remarks that “The excessive numbers of monks and nuns stemmed largely from unauthorized private ordinations 其僧尼踰濫之源, 皆緣私度 (P. Wang 1960, p. 843).” While Xin Tangshu records Liqiao 李峤’s warning under Wu zetian that “privately ordained Daoists now number in the hundreds of thousands … Now many adult men are entering the religious life; those who should serve as soldiers have all become Daoists/monks. How then can the state secure its military manpower and tax revenues 今道人私度者幾數十萬……今丁皆出家, 兵悉入道, 征行租賦, 何以備之.” (Ouyang 1975, p. 4370) These accounts suggest that unauthorized ordination was rampant, the official figures significantly underrepresent the actual scale of the monastic population, particularly the illicit clergy who often intersected with displaced populations. While privately ordained monks and unregistered populations originated from distinct spheres of marginality, the two groups converged and merged in the “interstitial space.” It was in these interstitial mountain spaces that these two groups came together, sustaining new types of communities through self-sufficient labor. Our argument is therefore that these different forms of marginality intersected and fused, collectively shaping the low-status, resilient institutional character of Early Chan. We stress again that this is an interpretive framework, not a definitive historical narrative, but it allows us to illustrate how multiple forms of marginality coalesced to shape the institutional features of early Chan communities.

Chan (especially the later Southern Chan) displayed a political attitude of non-involvement, keeping a distance from the central government. Unlike sects such as Huayan or Esoteric Buddhism, which made efforts to become state religions, Chan’s monasteries and many temples were established in the mountains far from the core cities. Its monks and followers came from marginalized groups like unregistered populations, mountain people, wandering monks, and small farmers. For Southern Chan, abandoning this foundational base to align with the royal family and aristocracy would not be a rational development strategy, as it would tie the fate of the community with that of the state, leading to mutual prosperity or ruin (J. Zhou 2017).

The Northern School of Chan constituted another example of dependence on imperial authority. It rose and fell in tandem with the fortunes of the central court. According to the Lengqie Shizi Ji, while the organizational features of Northern School Chan differed markedly from those of the early Chan communities led by Daoxin and Hongren, Shenxiu’s strategy of aligning with the elite cannot be viewed as a total repudiation of early Chan. Hongren pointed out that the practice of the Chan path required retreat from the distractions of urban life in order to cultivate figures of true substance. Yet once such individuals had matured, their ultimate purpose was to serve the needs of the state and the imperial court (Yanagida 1971, pp. 268–70).

The interaction between the Northern School of Chan Buddhism and members of the aristocracy began with Master Shenxiu. After Shenxiu and his monastic community entered the capital, they received extraordinary honors and recognition from the royal court. Empress Wu Zetian personally greeted him taking the role of a disciple, performing the solemn rites reserved for a teacher. Shenxiu was permitted to ride in the empress’s palanquin into the palace hall and even to receive prostrations from the sovereign herself. Following Shenxiu, the Northern School placed its primary emphasis on spreading the Dharma among emperors, high officials, and distinguished aristocrats, thereby forming political alliances with the throne and noble families. For example, Master Jingjue 凈覺, author of the Lengqie shizi ji, was a disciple of Xuanze 玄賾, who in turn was Shenxiu’s dharma-brother. Jingjue was a member of the Wei clan of Jingzhao 京兆韋氏 and the younger brother of Empress Wei, consort of Emperor Zhongzong唐中宗 (r. 705–710). Another prominent figure was Master Zhili 智力 of Huiju 慧矩 Monastery in Mount Heng 恒山. Zhili was the younger brother of the wife of Li Shouli, the Prince of Bin邠王, a cousin of Emperor Xuanzong. According to the Stele Commemorating the Virtues of Master Zhili of Hengyue 恒嶽智力禪師影堂紀德碑, “his grandfather, father, and uncles all held high court positions, wearing court robes and jade pendants. His elder sister was married to Prince Bin, making him a close relative of Emperor Xuanzong. He often moved about within the palace precincts, freely entering and exiting the royal court 祖、考、季父皆從容爵位, 鳴玉拖紳. 姊為邠王妃, 實與玄宗近屬. 每優遊宮禁, 飛息帝闈.” Zhili later studied under Shenxiu’s dharma-brother, the monk Lao’an 老安, and long resided at Ximing Monastery. Similarly, Houmochen Yan 侯莫陳琰, whose dharma name was Zhida 智達, studied the Dharma under both Lao’an and Shenxiu. He descended from an illustrious aristocratic family of the Guanlong 关陇 region, being the great-great-grandson of Houmochen Chong 侯莫陳崇, a renowned general of Western Wei and Northern Zhou (Long 2017). Thus, several prominent Northern School masters—Jingjue, Zhili, and Zhida—were themselves scions of powerful aristocratic families.

However, once the Northern School of Chan became bound to the elites of the metropolitan centers, its fortunes rose and fell in tandem with those of the Tang aristocracy. After the An Lushan Rebellion, although Northern Chan monks such as Guangde 廣德, Tanzhen 曇真, Hongzheng 宏正, Chengzhou 澄沼, and Fanning 法凝 continued to reside in major official monasteries of the Eastern Capital—including Jing’ai 敬愛寺, Weiguo 衛國寺, and Shengshan 聖善寺—and maintained close ties with powerful ministers like Wang Jin 王縉 and Zhang Yanshang 張延賞, the devastation of war left the monastic community in a precarious state. The Jiu Tangshu (Uighur Biography) records: “When the Uighurs first arrived in the Eastern Capital after the suppression of the rebels, they acted with wanton cruelty. Fearing them, men and women alike fled to the two towers of Shengshan Monastery and White Horse Monastery. The Uighurs set fire to the towers, killing tens of thousands; the flames burned for weeks without ceasing回紇至東京, 以賊平, 恣行殘忍, 士女懼之, 皆登聖善寺及白馬寺二閣以避之. 回紇縱火焚二閣, 傷死者萬計, 累旬火焰不止.” A Dunhuang document (p. 3608) likewise notes: “Monasteries throughout the realm have been converted into military camps; in the monasteries, there is no food left for monks天下寺舍, 翻作軍營, 所在伽藍, 例無僧飯.” As Ge (1995, p. 186) has observed, the An Lushan Rebellion was devastating for Buddhism. For Northern Chan, located at the epicenter of the conflict, the destruction was all the greater compared with the Southern School, which was relatively removed from the war zone. Reliance on political power, in times of turmoil, only exposed Northern Chan to deeper losses.

The Northern Chan school constitutes an exceptional case within the framework of this paper: though it originated in the Eastern Mountain of Huangmei in Qizhou, from the moment Shenxiu and Lao’an won the favor of Empress Wu Zetian, it rapidly underwent a process of elitization. Many monks of the Northern Chan school came from aristocratic families. Their prestigious backgrounds gave them privileged access to elite society, and through their connections with emperors, nobles, and aristocratic great clans, they were able to secure resources, prestige, and political protection. The case of Northern Chan demonstrates that a tradition emerging from the social margins did not necessarily retain its grassroots character; once favored and supported by ruling elites, it could quickly shift toward elitization. Yet, in the broader history of Chan, imperial patronage was not in itself a sufficient condition for such transformation. During the reigns of Emperors Dezong, Shunzong, and Xianzong, the court also favored Southern Chan and even endorsed it as the legitimate lineage of Chan17, but Southern Chan did not undergo a comparable process of elitization. This divergence may be explained by two factors. First, when Northern Chan masters such as Shenxiu and Lao’an received imperial patronage, the sect was still in its formative stage, with many of its organizational features not yet fixed. By contrast, when Southern Chan gained imperial favor under Huineng’s third-generation successors such as Huaihui 懷暉 and Weikuan 惟寬—more than a century later—the sect’s institutional features had already taken shape. Second, Northern Chan’s rise coincided with the height of Tang power, when alliance with the throne and aristocracy yielded substantial political and material support. By the time Southern Chan gained imperial recognition a century later, the Tang dynasty was already in decline, and reliance on the imperial family or court aristocracy could provide only limited backing.

6.2. Formation of Institutional Features of Pure Land Nianfo Sect

Daochuo 道綽 and Shandao 善導’s monastic communities, during their initial stages, were also embedded in a multiple-margin interstitial environment. Politically, they emerged from the Maitreya Pure Land belief, which was deeply influenced by the Maitreya faith and the apocalyptic thought of the end of Dharma and several rebellions. The early Pure Land practice began in Shanxi 山西, far from political power, and lacked support from high-ranking officials or aristocracy. Economically, they had no temple estates or large-scale monastery economies like those operated by centralized sects in Chang’an, and could only rely on alms and donations from the urban marketplaces. In terms of social class, most of the monks and followers came from the urban marketplace and had low social status.

The rise of Nianfo in China has a long historical and cultural background. Many scholars have pointed out that Maitreya and Amitabha faiths, as well as the Sanjie sect 三阶教, all originated from the prevalent end-of-Dharma thought at the time (Yabuki 1927; Lin and Zhang 2014). The Sanjie sect, the Maitreya uprising at the end of the Northern Wei, and the Pure Land school founded by Daochuo and Shandao can all be seen as products of the influence of end-of-Dharma ideology. The so-called “end-of-Dharma” thought is both a Buddhist historical prophecy and an apocalyptic theory similar to Western messianism, combining a view of historical decline and a belief in a savior figure18. The ideology of the end of Dharma presupposes that the world will fall into the “five defilements” once it begins19, the Sanjie sect, and the Amitabha Nianfo sect are all influenced by the end-of-Dharma ideology, sharing a highly similar conceptual framework. They set up a dual opposition between the present, where the Dharma is in decline, and the future, where the savior will emerge. All three sects emphasize the corruption and disorder of the end-of-Dharma age and assert that their own practices are the easiest to achieve Buddhahood in this period. Maitreya and Amitabha faiths both share the concept of “other-power,” with a focus on rebirth in a Pure Land after death, but with the former looking to Maitreya’s Pure Land in Tushita Heaven, and the latter aiming for rebirth in Amitabha’s Western Pure Land. Scholars like Tsukamoto Zenryu have pointed out the similarities between Maitreya and Amitabha faiths, suggesting that Maitreya belief gave rise to the Amitabha Nianfo sect (Tsukamoto 2004). Geographically, the areas of Maitreya belief closely overlap with the regions where Amitabha Nianfo sects grew, particularly in Shanxi and Hebei20.

As mentioned before, the influence of the End of the Dharma thought on Pure Land thought occurred during the period between Tanluan and Daochuo (542–609 AD, 542 AD was the year when Tanluan passed away, and 609 AD is said to be the time when Daochuo began to specialize in the practice of the Pure Land, see Charles Jones 2021, chap. 3). The notion of the “End of the Dharma” in Chinese Buddhism was first articulated by Huisi慧思 (515–577) (Sheng 2009, p. 45). In his Li shiyuan wen 立誓愿文 he stated, “True Dharma will last five hundred years, the Semblance Dharma a thousand years, and the End of the Dharma ten thousand years” (T. 46. P. 786ff). Faced with the coming of the End of the Dharma, Huisi made a great vow—he pledged that, even at the End of the Dharma, he would nevertheless save sentient beings and ensure the enduring presence of the True Dharma. Huisi’s period of transmitting the Dharma coincides exactly with our estimate (542–609 AD). Another factor that likely had a profound impact on Daochuo was the Northern Zhou’s anti-Buddhist campaign. In the third year of Jiande 建德 (574), Emperor Wu of Northern Zhou issued an edict abolishing Buddhism—Daochuo was then thirteen. In the sixth year of Jiande (577), Buddhism was again banned in the former Northern Qi 北齐 territories; Daoxuan happened to be in Taiyuan, in that region, and was sixteen at the time. Thus, when Daochuo entered the monastic life at fifteen, he personally experienced the pain of persecutions. Furthermore, in the late Northern Wei period, with war and natural disasters all around, In such an historical context, it is all too easy to be influenced by End-of-the-Dharma thought. According to the reckoning of the Northern Qi Buddhist master Fashang 法上 (495–580), when the Age of the End of the Dharma began, Daoxuan was exactly fifty years old (Makita 1995 ). Therefore, Daochuo began to seek a way to save all sentient beings. He had previously practiced meditation and adhered to precepts under the guidance of Chan Master Huizan, but he always found it difficult to fulfill his wish to relieve beings in the Dharma-ending Age (Michihata 1985). Finally, at the age of 48, Daochuo read the inscription of Tanluan in Xuanzhong Temple and thus converted to the Pure Land Buddhism.

In the field of research on the Pure Land and Maitreya traditions, apart from those mentioned above, some Japanese scholars have also made important contributions: Hisao Inagaki 稻垣久雄 (1929–2021) stands as one of the foremost translators and interpreters of Pure Land sutras and their commentaries. In his later work, The Three Pure Land Sutras: A Study and Translation from Chinese (Hisao 2000, pp. 388–91) offers exhaustive philological notes and contexts for the Wuliangshou jing 无量寿经, Guan Wuliangshou jing 观无量寿经, Amituo jing 阿弥陀经, explained how the early Chinese exegesis of classics shaped the Pure Land thought. Inagaki’s analyses extend beyond textual translation to the visual realm: his The Amida Sutra Mandala (Hisao 1995) assembles richly illustrated editions of the Amituo jing, arguing that mandala imagery not only reflects Amitābha’s vows but also encapsulates Maitreya’s eschatological promise by situating the future Buddha within a continuum of Pure Land cosmologies. Through these works, Hisao underscores connections and fluid boundaries between Pure Land soteriology and Maitreya’s coming-Buddha doctrine. Yabuki Keiki 矢吹庆辉’s pioneering doctoral dissertation, Sanjie sect zhi yanjiu 三階教之研究 (Yabuki 1927), remains the foundational study of this Sui-Tang heterodox movement. Drawing extensively on Dunhuang manuscripts, Yabuki maps the Sanjie sect’s doctrinal corpus—its unique blend of Maitreya messianism, Pure Land practice, and apocalyptic calendrical thought—and situates it within broader Chinese Buddhist debates on “end-times” practice. He demonstrates that the Sanjie sect equated its founder Xinxing 信行’s three-stage path (shengxing 圣行, shixing 师行, and jieshi 界时) with entry to Maitreya’s “three realms,” effectively grafting the Dharma-ending onto a Maitreya-centered soteriology. His work remains indispensable for understanding how medieval Chinese Buddhists negotiated the overlapping promises of rebirth in Amitābha’s Pure Land and Maitreya’s future realm.

The above discussion leads to a new question: Why do Maitreya belief, Amitabha Nianfo sect, and the Sanjie sect share similar ideological origins and geographical areas, but later have such different developmental outcomes? The Sanjie sect were repeatedly banned and eventually disappeared after the reign of Emperor Xuanzong (Yabuki 1927). Maitreya belief, which was popular during the Northern Wei and Northern Zhou dynasties, gradually declined after the Tang Dynasty and became part of folk beliefs. However, the Amitabha Nianfo sect grew significantly during the middle and later Tang Dynasty. The reason for the vast differences in the development of these three sects can likely be attributed to their relationship with the ruling political powers, or more specifically, to the political-religious dynamics that shaped their development (

Table 2. Comparison of Maitreya Faith, Sanjie sect, and Amitabha Nianfo Sect’s Attitudes Toward Political Power and Their Consequences.

	This-Worldly or Otherworldly Focus	Attitude Toward Political Power	Political Power’s Attitude Toward the Sect
Maitreya Faith	Both this world and the other world	Criticizes governments that do not adopt Buddhism as the state religion	Supported it during the Empress Wu 武後period, but banned it after Emperor Xuanzong 唐玄宗 of the Tang Dynasty
Sanjie sect	Both this world and the other world	Critical	Repeated ban after Emperor Yang of Sui Dynasty 隋煬帝
Amitabha Nianfo Sect	The other world	Accepts but avoids political discussion	Permit its unfettered development and extend support

).

Maitreya faith, the Sanjie sect, and the Amitabha Nianfo sect all stem from the same end-of-Dharma ideology, but what sets the Amitabha Nianfo sect apart is its complete disengagement from both the present world and politics. The Amitabha Nianfo sect focuses on rebirth in the Western Pure Land, and thus, in the Tang Dynasty, was often mocked by Chan as a “religion focused solely on sending people to their death” (Yangjiu Chen 2008). In contrast, Maitreya faith and the Sanjie sect had strong political aspects, often critical of the state. Maitreya faith was frequently associated with rebellious groups, leading to several armed uprisings during the Northern Dynasties (Yinggang Sun 2011), while the Sanjie sect became increasingly suspicious to rulers because of its cross-regional economic network, that is, the “endless storehouse 無盡藏”21, and thus was seen as a potential threat by the ruling elite.

Thus, the attitudes of the ruling political powers toward these three sects were very different:

(1) The ruling powers held in dread the Maitreya sect adherents who had taken up rebellion. Accordingly, throughout the Northern and Southern Dynasties and the Sui and Tang periods, the court swiftly mustered its forces to quell any insurrections by the Maitreya faithful. (2) Secondly, the ruling powers regarded the Sanjie sect with apprehension, for it commanded an extensive economic network throughout the realm as well as latent rebellious strength. From the reign of Emperor Yang of Sui onward, successive rulers could not endure such networks beyond the reach of central authority and repeatedly moved to suppress them, ultimately bringing the Sanjie sect to extinction. (3) The ruling powers both employed and feared the Maitreya faith prior to any open rebellion, for it was at once a source of legitimacy and a latent cause of insurrection. Thus, rulers sought to manipulate it: Empress Wu incorporated the title Cishi 慈氏, referring to Maitreya, into her sovereign epithet “Cishi Yuegu Jinlun Shengshen Huangdi 慈氏越古金輪聖神皇帝,” and declared herself a descendant of Maitreya in the Dayun Jing 大雲經 and Baoyu Jing 寶雨經 (Forte 1976). Subsequently, Emperor Xuanzong issued the Edict Prohibiting Deception and Sorcery 禁斷妖詐等敕 to suppress and forbid Maitreya Buddhism. (4) The Pure Land school posed the least danger to the ruling powers, which contained no political philosophy nor critique of the present world, emphasizing only the recitation of the Buddha’s name and the performance of repentance and prayers in daily life. As such, it was not regarded as a threat to the authorities, who permitted its unfettered development.

The development of these three sects was heavily influenced by the political-religious relationships—specifically, their attitudes toward politics and how the state responded to them. As Weinstein (1987) emphasized in his book Buddhism in the Tang Dynasty, the relationship between politics and religion in the Tang Dynasty was always controlled by political power. When the central government targeted the Sanjie sect and Maitreya sects for suppression, they were unable to resist, and their growth could not be sustained. In contrast, the Pure Land sect was tolerated by the government because of its non-political stance, which was one of the main reasons it flourished during the middle Tang Dynasty.

On the other hand, the Pure Land tradition’s institutional characteristics—its lack of concern for worldly affairs and its absence of political critique—were largely shaped by the dynamics of politics and religion relations. The belief in Amitābha’s Pure Land is not inherently apolitical, nor does it lack the capacity for political mobilization. The development of the Jōdo Shinshū tradition in 15th- and 16th-century Japan illustrates the potential of Pure Land belief to incite large-scale political mobilization (as seen in the Ikkō Ikki uprisings) and to offer critical political ideologies.

The reason Pure Land monks resided in official monasteries while simultaneously taking to the streets to preach, encouraging laypeople to make donations, and rooting themselves in the urban marketplace was due to the origins of the Daoxin-Shandao monastic community. This community first emerged in the Lüliang Mountains 呂梁山 and the bustling marketplaces of the capital region. Unlike the Sanjie sect and Sanlun schools 三論宗, whose leaders were invited into the capital by emperors or high-ranking officials, Shandao 善導 entered the capital on his own and spread his teachings through grassroots efforts. Consequently, the Shandao monastic community began its missionary work among the lower-class urban populace. The urban lower and middle classes primarily comprised merchants, butchers, laborers, and servants, groups traditionally regarded as low-grade ordinary beings (xiapin fanfu 下品凡夫) by earlier Buddhist schools. These individuals were cast outside the sphere of political authority, and were regarded by religious traditions as scarcely capable of salvation. However, in order to propagate its teachings in the urban marketplaces, Pure Land Buddhism embraced them.

The Pure Land movement was particularly active in Shanxi 山西 and the capital region of Chang’an, attracting followers from all walks of life, including the lowest social strata. Records indicate that Daochuo sat facing the West each day, reciting the name of Amitābha Buddha as many as seventy thousand times. He widely encouraged his followers to engage in the same practice, employing beans to keep count. The most diligent accumulated eighty to ninety Dan (石, medieval Chinese measurement units) of beans, those of moderate practice fifty Dan, and even the least diligent gathered thirty Dan. (Yangjiu Chen 2008, p. 233). Daochuo’s zealous propagation of his teachings won him numerous followers in Shanxi. Records note that in the counties of Jinyang, Taiyuan, and Wenshui, all men and women above the age of seven recited the name of Amitābha Buddha (Weinstein 1987, p. 71; X. Wang 2015).

The Shandao monastic community embed Pure Land devotion into the daily lives of ordinary residents of Chang’an, attracting merchants, artisans, and laborers into its fold and thereby providing the Pure Land community with a stable economic base. The Fozu Tongji 佛祖統紀 records that “Wherever Master Shandao went, people hastened to make offerings, providing him with abundant food, garments, and other necessities of life. Yet he never partook of them himself. The finest provisions he distributed among the multitude and offered to his disciples, while he himself consumed only the poorest fare, sufficient merely to sustain the body (善導) 所行之處, 爭申供養, 飲食衣服, 四事豐饒, 皆不自入. 好食送大眾, 供養徒眾, 唯食粗惡, 才得支身” (CBETA 2025.R1, X78, no. 1546, p. 163c21–23). According to the Xin xiu Jingtu wangsheng zhuan 新修凈土往生傳, Shandao widely promoted the practice of reciting Amitābha’s name in the capital; it records that monks, nuns, and lay devotees in Chang’an and neighboring regions recited the Amitābha Sūtra hundreds of thousands of times, and that practitioners chanting the Buddha’s name from fifteen thousand to one hundred thousand times daily were beyond reckoning 京華諸州僧尼士女, 誦阿彌陀經十萬至三十萬遍者, 念阿彌陀佛日得壹萬五千至十萬遍者, 不可知數. (CBETA 2025.R1, X78, no. 1546, p. 164a8-11). In 1989, an epitaph discovered in the western outskirts of Chang’an marked the tomb of Bao Baoshou 包寶壽 beginning with the inscription: “The late Lord Bao, reciter of Amitābha’s name and chanter of the Amitābha Sūtra, of the Great Tang 大唐故念彌陀佛誦彌陀經行者包府君.” The epitaph suggests that Bao Baoshou’s ancestors were officials, but by his generation, the family had likely turned to commerce. His grandfather and father hailed from Jinling in Wu Prefecture and rejected worldly status and official titles. Bao Baoshou himself was described as someone who “wandered in search of poetry and study, traveled through the lands of Qin, longed for and admired Chang’an, and eventually took up residence in the capital 尋詩講讀, 遊詣秦川, 慕戀長安, 便居京兆” (Y. Zhang 1999). Though the epitaph does not explicitly state it, the fact that Bao’s family had the financial means to travel and settle in Chang’an without holding official positions strongly indicates a commercial background.

Pure Land Buddhism downplayed doctrinal studies and emphasized reciting Amitābha’s name, believing that vocal invocation alone was sufficient for rebirth in the Western Pure Land. This focus stemmed not only from doctrinal reasons but also from the limited literacy of artisans, merchants, and laborers. The emphasis on chanting was thus an adaptation to the lower education levels of these social groups. Several Buddhist biographies provide insights into the social composition of Pure Land followers, reflecting the strong presence of merchants, artisans, and laborers. Volume 28 of the Fozu TongJi 佛祖統紀, Wangsheng ebei zhuan 往生惡輩傳, specifically records numerous cases of individuals who abandoned their evil ways and attained rebirth through chanting Amitābha’s name. One account describes a butcher from Chang’an, who was angered by Shandao’s preaching, as it led many people to abandon meat consumption. In a fit of rage, the butcher entered the monastery armed with a knife, intending to kill Shandao. However, Shandao revealed a vision of the Pure Land to him, which moved him to repentance. He climbed a tall tree, fervently chanting Amitābha’s name, and upon falling to his death, a celestial heavenly child was seen emerging from the crown of his head 長安京姓本為屠, 因善導和上勸人念佛, 滿城斷肉京嫉之持刀入寺, 興殺害意. 導指示西方現凈土相即回心發願上高樹念佛, 墮樹而終, 眾見化佛天童子從其頂門而出 (CBETA 2025.R1, T49, no. 2035, p. 288c10-14)”. Butchers, as a profession, had traditionally been entirely excluded from Buddhist salvation. However, under Shandao’s teachings, even such individuals were accepted into the faith and considered capable of attaining rebirth in the Pure Land. This transformation was made possible by Shandao’s doctrine that all nine grades of beings, including the lowest sinners, could be reborn in the Pure Land. This significantly expanded the reach of Pure Land Buddhism, making it the most populist and grassroots-oriented Buddhist sect.

Pure Land Buddhism maintained a careful balance in its relationship with political power. While it avoided seeking official recognition as a state religion, it still aimed to garner support from the ruling elite. This approach stemmed from the social composition of its followers, who mainly came from the urban lower classes. During the mid-to-late Tang period, eunuchs and the guards (Shence 神策) army officers were increasingly drawn from the ranks of merchants and artisans. Although eunuchs held official ranks, they differed from traditional scholar-officials in that they originated from non-elite backgrounds. Emperor Xuanzong 唐玄宗 granted eunuchs extensive administrative authority, far exceeding their traditional role in the palace. From the reign of Emperor Suzong 唐肅宗 onward, eunuch influence continued to rise, culminating in their control over the Shence Army, which provided a major avenue for social mobility for merchant families. Many Shence army soldiers were the sons of wealthy merchants in Chang’an. For example, Wang Chucun 王處存, a military governor during Emperor Xizong 唐僖宗’s reign, came from a family of Shence army soldiers with vast wealth (Jiu tang shu 舊唐書, vol. 182). Eunuchs and the Shence army thus formed a crucial link between Pure Land Buddhism and the Tang imperial court. The reason why Fazhao 法照, a famous Pure Land monk, was called to the Inner Dojo and allotted to live in Zhangjing Temple 章敬寺, where eunuchs made offerings, was because of the potential relationship between the Pure Land beliefs and the eunuchs. According to the Fozu tongJi: “During Emperor Daizong’s reign, in the palace at Chang’an one frequently heard the sound of chanting Amitabha’s name coming from the northeast. He sent envoys to investigate, and they traced it to Taiyuan. There they indeed found the master’s vigorous proselytizing, so they brought him into the imperial precincts. He instructed the attendants of the court in the recitation of the Buddha’s name, including the method of the Five Assemblies of Chanting 代宗於長安宮中常聞東北方有念佛聲, 遣使尋之至於太原, 果見師勸化之盛. 遂迎入禁中, 教宮人念佛, 亦及五會” (CBETA 2025.R1, T49, no. 2035, p. 264a22-25). It is unlikely that Emperor Daizong personally heard Fazhao’s Five-Assembly chants 五会念佛 while alone in the palace. A more plausible scenario is that palace eunuchs—already familiar with Fazhao and his gatherings—occasionally practiced his nianfo chanting within the palace grounds. The emperor happened to overhear them and became intrigued. He then summoned Fazhao to court to teach chanting to palace attendants and arranged for him to reside at Zhangjing Temple 章敬寺.

To sum up, the Pure Land sect developed a political attitude of non-involvement with secular politics, lacking a critical political stance. This was because Pure Land emerged from the end of Dharma ideology, deeply influenced by Maitreya Pure Land beliefs. After the political suppression of Maitreya beliefs and the Sanjie sect 三階教, the political attitude of Amitabha Nianfo sect 念佛教 shifted to one of avoidance and non-involvement. Furthermore, the followers of the Amitabha Nianfo sect were mostly from the lower social classes, such as merchants and common people. Compared with the Southern Chan tradition, Pure Land Buddhism relied more heavily on external donations and displayed a greater tendency to seek support from aristocrats, eunuchs, and the imperial household.

7. Conclusions: How Interstitial Space Shapes the Institutional Features of Religious Organizations

The case studies of Chan and Pure Land Buddhism in early Tang demonstrate that as emerging sects situated in interstitial spaces, these traditions were shaped by multiple overlapping margins. Their early adherents often belonged to the lower social strata, lived far from political centers, lacked political influence, and had no stable means of livelihood, finding themselves at the intersection of social class, political exclusion, economic hardship, and religious marginalization. These interstitial conditions played a critical role in shaping the institutional features of the religious groups.

This paper proposes four hypotheses to explain the formation of the institutional characteristics of interstitial religions, using theory as a lens to interpret historical complexity. Focusing on Chan and Pure Land Buddhism in the early Tang period, the study finds that the cases of these two traditions partly confirm and support the hypotheses, while also challenging them.

Hypothesis 1.

The stricter the control over an emerging interstitial religion during its rise, the lower the social class and status group of its initial followers.

In the case of Chan, Tang imperial policy of strict religious control and crackdown on unauthorized monks, exemplified by Emperor Gaozu’s edict on regulation, created a restrictive environment. Chan’s response was to hide in the southern foothills of the Dabie Mountains, a region serving as a natural refuge. This geographical marginality provided a space to avoid state control. Consequently, the monastic community consisted of unauthorized monks, wandering monks, and unregistered populations, often not yet registered in the household registration system. This directly reflects lower social strata and evasion of state obligations.

For Pure Land, the movement emerged from Maitreya Pure Land belief, which was deeply influenced by the Maitreya faith and the thought of the end of Dharma and several rebellions. Early Pure Land practice began in Shanxi, far from political power. Its monks and followers mostly came from the urban marketplace and had low social status, including merchants, butchers, laborers, and servants. Shandao’s teachings made plain that the way of salvation through Pure Land faith encompassed all beings, even those stained by killing, of corrupt conduct, and repeatedly given to evil deeds. The stricter control (political margin) and geographical distance (religious ecological/socio-economic margin) forced emerging religions to seek adherents among those least visible or valuable to the state, thereby shaping the composition of their followers in terms of social status. This is a direct consequence of operating in interstitial spaces where state power is weak or hostile.

Hypothesis 2.

The lower the status group of the initial followers of an emerging interstitial religion, the more it devalues textual religious practices and emphasizes non-textual religious practices.

For Chan, with followers predominantly from unregistered populations, peasants, and illegal monks, the practice adapted accordingly. Daoxin and Hongren de-emphasized scriptural teachings and promoted transmission outside of texts, focusing on mind-to-mind transmission, and abandoning textual studies. This was an adaptation to the local population’s low cultural level, with many illiterate or unable to engage in deep doctrinal study. They emphasized meditation and farming Chan.

Similarly, for Pure Land, whose followers were largely urban lower and middle classes, merchants, butchers, laborers, and servants, Daochuo and Shandao devalued textual study, emphasis on chanting Amitabha’s name. This focus stemmed not only from doctrinal reasons but also from the limited literacy of artisans, merchants, and laborers. The social class margin (low literacy levels) directly constrained the type of religious practice that could gain widespread adoption. This led to an innovative adaptation in interstitial spaces: simplifying religious practice to emphasize accessible, non-textual methods, which in turn broadened their appeal and facilitated growth among marginalized groups.

We want to emphasize similarities between Chan and Pure Land Buddhism with respect to Hypotheses 1 and 2, while emphasizing their differences with respect to Hypotheses 3 and 4. Both sects originated in interstitial spaces under strict state control and with predominantly low-status followers, and both adapted by devaluing textual learning and developing accessible religious practices.

Where they diverge is in their economic and political trajectories. Chan Buddhism, constrained by scarce resources in marginal locations, developed farming as a mode of self-sufficiency. This reduced reliance on donations, which in turn enabled a strategy of political non-involvement and institutional autonomy. By contrast, Pure Land Buddhism, centered in urban settings, relied more heavily on lay and elite donations, which made it more susceptible to state intervention and more inclined to form alliances with political authorities.

Hypothesis 3.

The more difficult it is for an emerging interstitial religion to obtain livelihood resources, the more likely it is to engage in productive activities itself.

Chan communities faced significant resource difficulty, being located in the southern foothills of the Dabie Mountains, living on whatever nature provided, with little food or clothing. It was inconvenient for them to rely on state or popular donations due to frequent wars and official crackdown. In response, Daoxin’s implementation of farming Chan became a necessary organizational reform and the only viable option for sustaining themselves. Chan Buddhism further endowed the practice of combining farming and meditation 农禅 with doctrinal legitimacy, holding that physical labor could be unified with spiritual cultivation, thereby lessening the criticism directed at monks engaged in agricultural work.

As a comparative example, early Quaker followers engaged in furniture handicraft, and became famous for their Shaker-style furniture. In the 18th and 19th centuries, after Quakers moved from England to North America, they began producing and selling sets of furniture, which became their main source of income. They valued craftsmanship and purity, viewing their handmade products as offerings to God and as the highest ex-pression of devotion (Harrison 1948). The economic resource margin (scarcity of traditional support like state patronage or lay donations in remote areas) acted as a powerful selective pressure, forcing these emerging groups to innovate their economic models. Self-sufficiency became an institutional feature born out of necessity, which then conferred an advantage (independence from government) that allowed them to survive persecutions more effectively. This highlights the adaptive capacity fostered by interstitial conditions.

Hypothesis 4.

The more an emerging interstitial religion is able to independently secure livelihood resources, the lower its willingness and likelihood to form an alliance with political authorities; conversely, the more it relies on external support for its livelihood, the higher its willingness and likelihood to form an alliance with political authorities.

For Chan, agricultural self-sufficiency not only freed the monks from having to rely chiefly on lay donations, but also established a tradition independent of government administration and legal intervention. This economic independence allowed Chan to maintain a political attitude of non-involvement, keeping a distance from the central government. This was a rational development strategy to avoid tying its fate to the state, as exemplified by the Northern School’s decline due to its dependence on imperial authority.

In contrast, the Pure Land Nianfo sect depended on the donations of urban lay believers, accumulating wealth gradually. Its financial model provided greater liquidity, supported by lay patronage rather than being tied to immovable assets. This reliance on external support led Shandao to become deeply involved in the construction of the Longmen Grottoes promoted by Emperor Gaozong and Empress Wu Zetian, overseeing the giant Buddha construction. This demonstrates a willingness to collaborate for support. The use of eunuchs as intermediaries also shows a strategic, albeit indirect, engagement with political power. As a comparative example, the Jodo Shinshu sect in Japan shifted from leading Ikki uprisings (self-sufficiency/resistance) to being honored by Tokugawa Ieyasu (alliance with political power). This hypothesis reveals a crucial strategic choice primarily based on the consideration of the economic realities of interstitial space. Economic autonomy (or lack thereof) directly influences the political posture and institutional development of emerging religions. Those that can sustain themselves independently are less susceptible to state co-optation and can maintain a more autonomous institutional identity. Those reliant on external patronage are more likely to seek alliances, which can lead to both growth and potential corruption or loss of autonomy. This highlights the dynamic interplay between economic and political margins in shaping institutional features.

To clarify falsification conditions, we also specify that:

H1 would be contradicted if an interstitial religion under strict state control drew followers primarily from elite classes.

H2 would be contradicted if a movement with predominantly low-status followers nonetheless adopted a text-centered practice.

H3 would be contradicted if groups facing severe livelihood constraints did not engage in productive activities to sustain themselves.

H4 would be contradicted if groups achieving economic self-sufficiency consistently sought political alliances, or if highly dependent groups consistently avoided them.

It should be noted that being on the margins does not necessarily hinder development (Lu 2010). On the contrary, the overlapping marginalities of interstitial space often provide emerging religions with fertile ground for growth. Interstitial space—often characterized by less structural constraints—offers religious actors greater freedom and flexibility to innovate and adapt. Emerging religions in the interstices are likely to thrive, while institutionalized religions that align closely with political power may become stagnant or corrupt. In the competitive religious landscape, established institutions often face challenges. This is especially true during times of profound social change, when marginalized religious movements can surge and expand rapidly. For example, in Western Europe the Protestant Reformation saw the rise of Lutheranism and Calvinism; in the United States, the Mormon Church flourished amid westward movement; and in China, Chan and Pure Land Buddhism experienced a major growth in the mid- and late Tang Dynasty. Remarkably, such shifts in religious power can unfold within the span of just one or two centuries.