CHAPTER 6 A Preliminary Study on the Buddhist Thought of Huisi, the Tiantai School Pioneer: Questions regarding Early Tiantai Thought

Zhang Fenglei 張風雷

Nāgājuna (c. 150–250 AD), the founder of the Madhyamaka school in ancient India, was esteemed as the first patriarch of the Tiantai School in Chinese Buddhism. The second patriarch is Master Huiwen 慧文1 of the Northern Qi Dynasty, and the third is Master Huisi 慧思 (515–577 AD). However, in reality founder of the Taintai school was Master Zhiyi 智顗 (538–598 AD).2 Zhang’an Guanding 章安灌頂 (561–632 AD), a student of Zhiyi, was to first to propose the lineage of the early Tiantai School in the “Origins” section of Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀.3 Such a viewpoint was further consolidated and strengthened by later generations. Through the formation of a lineage, espe­ cially the one that regarded Nāgājuna as the initial founder, it was Guanding’s intention to establish the orthodoxy of the Tiantai School rather than describe

1 Huiwen’s last name was Gao 高 before he became a Buddhist. His dates are unclear. Accord­ ing to the Biography of Huiwen in the fascicle 6 of Fozu tongji 佛祖統紀 by Zhipan 志磐 in the Southern Song Dynasty, he was active during the reigns of Emperor Xiaojing 孝靜 of the Eastern Wei Dynasty and Emperor Wenxuan 文宣 of the Northern Qi Dynasty (534–559 AD) See details in T 49: 178. 2 Previously Zhiyi’s dates were thought to be 538–597 AD However, according to Chen Yuan’s 陳垣 Ershi shi shuorun biao 二十史朔閏表, Yang Zengwen 楊曾文 argued that the date of Zhiyi’s death was 24th day of the eleventh month of the 17th year of Kaihuang era during the reign of Emperor Wen of the Sui Dynasty, that is, 598 AD See Yang Zengwen, “Guanyü zhon­ gri Tiantaizong de jige wenti” 關於中日天臺宗的幾個問題 (Questions about the Tiantai School in China and Japan), Dongnan wenhua 東南文化 (Southeast Culture), 1994 (2): 78. However, it is problematic that Yang inferred that Zhiyi was born in 539 AD given that he lived till the age of sixty. It is clear that sixty years before the 17th year of Kaihuang era of the Sui Emperor Wen is the 4th year of Datong era of Emperor Wu of the Liang Dynasty (538). Thus, Yang is wrong to infer the birth Zhiyi as 598 minus 60 equal 539. For further research, see Zhang Fenglei, “Zhizhe dashi de shishou yü shengnian” 智者大師的世壽與生年 (The lifetime and the birth year of Master Zhiyi), Zhengfa yanjiu 正法研究 (The Study of the True Dharma), vol. 1, published by the Mount Putuo Institute for the Study of Buddhist Culture 普陀山佛教文化研究所, pp. 152–154. 3 Mohe zhiguan 1a, T 46: 1.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���5 | doi ��.��63/9789047427971_008 Questions Regarding Early Tiantai Thought 107 the actual situation of historical development. In fact, it is impossible that Huiwen in the era of Eastern Wei and Northern Qi Dynasty could have suc­ ceeded Nāgājuna. Even in the early historical materials of the Tiantai School, the successional relationship between Huiwen and Huisi is unclear.4 However, it is generally acknowledged in the Buddhist historical materials that Zhiyi succeeded Huisi. Huishi of Nanyue no doubt played the most important role among the pioneers of Tiantai thought before Zhiyi. According to Buddhist history,5 Huisi was surnamed Li before he became a monk. He was born on 11th day, eleventh month, 515 AD in Wujin county, Ruyang prefecture, Nanyu (today located east of Shangcai county, Henan province). He became a monk when he was fifteen years old. Later, he travelled around the area of Yanzhou (now in Hao county, Anhui province), and Xinzhou (now Huaiyang, Henan province). He studied medication and Mahāyāna Buddhism with different masters. He determined to go south because several monks tried to poison him. He arrived at Yingzhou (now Xinyang, Henan province)6 in 553 AD He was invited to lecture on Mahāyāna by the governor of Yingzhou and

4 In the first section of the Mohe zhiguan, Guanding simply states “the Nanyue school inher­ ited from Master Huiwen” (T 46: 1). Daoxuan 道宣 said that Huisi “turned to Huiwen for Dharma and inherited the orthodox” in the biography of Huisi, fascicle 17 of Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳. He also mentioned that after Huisi learned the “Lotus Samādhi,” he “went to see Master Jian 鑒, Zui 最 and others, and expressed what he understood. They were all delighted to hear his explication.” (T 50: 562c–563a). In the biography of Zhiyi, Guanding stated that “Huisi followed Master Jiu 就 as well as Master Zui (T 50: 564b). Zhanran 湛然 proposed the so-called “the successive relationship of nine masters” (Ming 明, Zui, Song 嵩, Jiu, Jian, Hui 慧, Wen文, Si 思, Yi 顗) in the first part of fascicle 1, Zhiguan fuxing zhuan hongjue 止觀輔行傳弘決 (T 46: 149a–b). In Nanyue Si dashi lishi yuanwen 南嶽思大師立 誓願文, which is said to be authored by Huisi himself, Huisi said only roughly that “ he trav­ eled around the territory of Qi to learn Mahāyāna with different Masters” and he “stayed in Henan and studied with different Masters during the ages of twenty to thirty-eight.” (T 46: 787) He did not mention the exact names of these Masters such as Huiwen. Accordingly, although Huisi used to follow Huiwen, the successive relationship was not as simple and close as “in the same strain” as claimed by later generations. 5 The early historical materials referred here include Nanyue Si dashi lishi yuanwen by Huisi; Guanding’s Sui Tiantai zhizhe dashi biezhuan 隋天臺智者大師別傳; “Huisi’s biography” and “Zhiyi’s biography” in Daoxuan’s Xu gaoseng zhuan17, and Zhanran’s Zhiguan fuxing zhuan hongjue 1, the first part. 6 Huiyue 慧嶽 argued that Yingzhou where Huisi had been is modern-day Wuchang county, Hubei province. (Shi Huiyue, 1995, Tiantai jiaoxue shi 天臺教學史, the 6th edition. Taipei: Zhonghua fojiao wenxien bianzhuanshe 中華佛教文獻編撰社, p. 32. This is a misunder­ standing because there were two areas with the same name of Yingzhou in the Southern and Northern Dynasties. While “Yingzhou of the Southern Dynasty” was located in Wuchang