ornamenting the departed stephen f. teiser Ornamenting the Departed: Notes on the Language of Chinese Buddhist Ritual Texts his essay originated in a concrete problem of philology I encoun­ T tered early in my study of liturgical manuscripts from Dunhuang: how to understand the meaning of the word zhuangyan 莊嚴, “to orna­ ment.” The word appears consistently in what I believe to be a crucial phrase in medieval Buddhist liturgies, the locution in which merit cre­ ated by the performance of good deeds is transferred to the benefici­ aries of the ritual. The phrase (here used twice) typically reads: Gathering these many good acts and unlimited excellent causes, we use them first to ornament the deceased [in] the spirit road where they have been reborn. We pray that their spirits be reborn in a pure land, that their consciousness be seated on a lotus platform, that they bid farewell to the five impurities, and that they forever escape the six heavens [of desire]. We further take these excellent good acts and offer them to ornament the sponsors of the rite and their family. We humbly pray that their minds be like the clear moon, always bright in spring and summer, and their bodies be­ come the sturdy pine, unchanging in fall and winter.” 總斯多善無 限勝因先用莊嚴亡者所生魂路. 惟願神生淨土識坐蓮臺長辭五濁之中永 出六天之外. 又持勝善奉用莊嚴齋主眷屬等. 伏願心同朗月春夏恆明體侶 貞松秋冬不變.1 My problems were fundamental, beginning with how to construe the meaning of the word zhuangyan. The standard encyclopedic diction­ aries for classical Chinese, spoken Chinese, and Chinese Buddhist terms provided different suggestions about how to interpret the word: it could mean “serious” or “seriously,” “to ornament” or “to decorate,” “to be endowed with virtue,” or “to prepare,” “to array,” or “to establish.”2 1 The liturgy, contained in the middle of an untitled formulary of prayers, is entitled “A Piece for Deceased Parents” 亡父母文. The formulary is on the verso side of the scroll S. 1441; an identical liturgy is contained on P. 3825; edited in Huang Zheng 黃徵 and Wu Wei 吳偉, Dunhuang yuanwen ji 敦煌願文集 (Changsha: Yuelu shushe, 1995), pp. 61–62. 2 Cai Jinghao 蔡鏡浩, Wei Jin Nanbeichao ciyu lishi 魏晉南北朝詞語例釋 (Nanjing: Jiangsu guji chubanshe, 1990), pp. 379–80; Ciyi 慈怡 et al., eds., Foguang dacidian 佛光大辭典, 2d edn. (Gaoxiong: Foguang chubanshe, 1988–89), pp. 4776b–77a; Hirakawa Akira 平川彰, Buk- 201 stephen f. teiser In addition to questions of meaning, there were sociolinguistic ques­ tions about what strata of language and society the word comes from. Recent scholarship has emphasized the significant place of vernacular Chinese expressions in early translations of Buddhist scriptures from Indian languages, and some opinions regarded the word zhuangyan as an early vernacular term. Was the use of the word in ritual manuscripts a case of Buddhist authors incorporating the spoken language into their text, a practice we know occurred in the translation of canonical sˆtras, vinaya texts, and treatises? Other interesting problems were raised by textual variation: my survey of other manuscript sources revealed a host of other expressions (for example, zixun 資勳), most of which mean “to help” or “to assist,” used in place of this one in exactly the same ph(r)ase of the rite. This essay is intended to honor the memory of Denis C. Twitch­ ett. The subject — the paying of tribute to teachers and ancestors — is, of course, intentionally chosen. But beyond that, the questions raised herein are intended to honor Denis’s insistence on the thorough criti­ cism of primary sources, close attention to questions of language, and the importance of bringing the study of manuscripts and other excavated materials to bear on our knowledge of traditional China.3 THE PROBLEM The Dunhuang corpus, now believed to number upwards of 50,000 individual manuscripts scattered across collections in Europe, Asia, and North America, contains several hundred individual pieces of liturgy. ky± Kan-Bon daijiten 佛教漢梵大辭典 (Tokyo: Reiyˆkai, 1997), no. 3155.20, pp. 1015b–16a; Li Weiqi 李維琦, Fojing ciyu huishi 佛經詞語匯釋, Wei Jin Nanbeichao hanyi Fojing yuyan yanjiu congshu 魏晉南北朝漢譯佛經語言研究叢書 (Changsha: Hunan shifan daxue chuban­ she, 2004), pp. 398–405; Luo Zhufeng 羅竹風 et al., eds., Hanyu dacidian 漢語大辭典 (Hong Kong: Sanlian shudian; Shanghai: Shanghai cishu chubanshe, 1986–1993) 9, p. 428a; Mochi­ zuki Shink± 望月信亨, Bukky± daijiten 佛教大辭典, rev. edn. ed. Tsukamoto Zenryˆ 塚本善 隆 (Tokyo: Sekai seiten kank± ky±kai, 1954–1963), pp. 2607a–9b; Morohashi Tetsuji 諸橋 轍次, Dai Kan-Wa jiten 大漢和辭典 (Tokyo: Taishˆkan shoten, 1984–1986), no. 31035.59; Nakamura Hajime 中村元, Bukky±go daijiten 佛教語大辭典 (Tokyo: T±ky± shoseki, 1975), pp. 717d–18a; Zhang Qiyun 張其昀, ed., Zhongwen dacidian 中文大辭典, rev. edn. (Taipei: Huagang chuban youxian gongsi, 1979), no. 31795.178; Zhang Yushu 張玉書 et al., eds., Peiwen yunfu 佩文韻府 (Taipei: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1967), p. 1474b; Zhongguo dacidian bianzuanchu 中國大辭典編纂處, ed., Guoyu cidian 國語辭典 (Taipei: Taiwan Shangwu yin­ shuguan, 1966), p. 2742a. 3 I would like to express my gratitude to three colleagues who read earlier drafts closely and generously provided important comments: Chen Jinhua 陳金華, Funayama T±ru 船山徹, and Robert Sharf. I also thank others who provided helpful comments and corrections: Timothy H. Barrett, Stephen Bokenkamp, Chen Huaiyu 陳懷宇, Chi Limei 池麗梅, Paul Copp, Benja­ min Elman, Thomas Hare, Michael J. Hunter, Martin Kern, Victor H. Mair, Susan Naquin, Stuart H. Young, and Jimmy Yu. 202 ornamenting the departed Ascertaining the precise number of extant liturgies depends on what one counts as a liturgical text: a complete physical manuscript, scroll, or booklet; a text explicitly titled “ritual text” (zhaiwen 齋文, or some­ times yuanwen 願文 [“prayer text”]); a formulary of individual pieces; or an individual piece designed to be used on a specific liturgical oc­ casion. The most recent modern collation, Huang Zheng’s 黃徵 and Wu Wei’s 吳偉 Dunhuang yuanwen ji 敦煌願文集, which determines its sample using all of these criteria and more, runs to 984 pages. Com­ posed and copied by monks in Dunhuang, the liturgies were used in a wide range of rituals conducted by monks, including funerals and memorial services for laypeople, monks, and nuns; preparatory feasts for the cultivation of posthumous merit; healing rituals; rituals pray­ ing for safe childbirth; blessings for a wedding; prayers for the safety of sons serving in the army; animal funerals; rituals celebrating the lantern festival (usually 1/15); rituals celebrating buddha’s birthday (usually 2/8); rituals celebrating the ghost festival (yulanpen hui 盂蘭盆 會 on 7/15); and prayers to accompany the dedication of temples, the commissioning of statues, and the copying of sˆtras. Most of the datable manuscripts were put together in the eighth through tenth centuries, when the Tibetan kingdom and then the Zhang 張 and Cao 曹 families ruled Dunhuang and other important towns in the Hexi corridor. The texts provide an unparalleled window onto Chinese ritual practice dur­ ing these centuries. The serious study of Buddhist liturgy is still in its infancy.4 Hence this essay, part of a larger project on Dunhuang materials, remains ten­ tative and exploratory. The importance and breadth of the field of study can hardly be overstated: imagining an afterlife and providing comfort for the ancestors was probably the most important role of Buddhism in Chinese history. It was certainly the arena in which most Chinese people over the centuries encountered Buddhist ideas and engaged in Buddhist practice. Buddhist ritual went through many stages of develop­ ment in China. Most of the sources for the early stages of this religious realignment are lost to us, since aside from purely monastic liturgies contained in vinaya sources (most dating from the early­fifth century) and polished literary pieces written by famous literati (assembled in Guang hongming ji 廣弘明集 [664] and similar collections), few materi­ 4 Helpful studies focusing on the earlier and later stages of Buddhist liturgy, respectively, are Kamata Shigeo 鎌田茂雄, Chˆgoku no Bukky± girei 中國の仏教儀禮 (Tokyo: Daiz± shup­ pan, 1986); and Marcus Günzel, Die Morgen- und Abendliturgie der chinesischen Buddhisten, Veröffentilichungen des Seminars für Indologie und Buddhismuskunde der Universität Göt­ tingen 6 (Göttingen: Seminar für Indologie und Buddhismuskunde, 1994). 203 stephen f. teiser als concerning religious practice survive. It is likely that over the long term, the main profit to be derived from the study of Dunhuang liturgies will lie in establishing a base­line for documenting religious practice as it was managed by lower­level Buddhist monks — a window into the rituals for laypeople performed by the local town priest. Beginning in the Song dynasty with the liturgies of Zunshi 遵式 (964–1032) and oth­ ers, surviving sources for the study of Chinese Buddhist liturgy become more numerous. The materials collected in the late Ming by Zhuhong 祩宏 (1535–1615) together with handbooks for daily ritual services (titled Recitations for Morning and Evening Services [Zhaomu kesong 朝暮課 誦]) compiled down to the present offer rich sources for the historical study of these traditions. In other articles I have argued that this genre of text can profit­ ably be defined by reference to the performance of the rituals it was designed to accompany.5 The best way to make sense of a liturgy is, in short, to analyze the relationship between the language of the text and the steps of the ritual. I have divided the longer liturgies into eight sections based on my interpretation of set phrases and different styles of language in each section. For present purposes the content of such texts can be described as prefatory sections (sections 1–5) that set forth general Buddhist principles and the specific ritual occasion at hand; (6) a section containing the crux of the ritual in which the merit produced by the prior ritual action is transferred to or bestowed upon the beneficiary, summed up by the word zhuangyan, “to decorate,” “to ornament,” or “to benefit”; (7) a section praying for specific benefits, such as rebirth in a pure realm or a return to good health; and (8) a concluding section of benedictions.