Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine

George A. Keyworth

Myriad sources ranging from Kuroda Toshio’s (1926–1993) groundbreaking methodological research about the exoteric-esoteric Buddhist institutional system (kenmitsutaisei 顕密体制) that governed the practice of Buddhism at the seven ‘great’ temples during the Heian – Nanbokuchō period (794–1392) to the remarkable Tengu zōshi emaki 天狗草紙絵巻 (Illustrated Scrolls of Tengu on Rough Paper) demonstrate how widespread and well-known the idea of the dual cultivation ofexoteric and esoteric Buddhist practice was in medieval Japan. We know from the sacred teachings documents (shōgyō聖教) from the libraries of three temples – Amanosan Kongōji (in Osaka), Shinpukuji (Nagoya), and Shōmyōji (Yokohama) – that catalogs were produced locally to classify meticulously copied ritual manuals, commentaries to exoteric and exoteric sūtras and commentaries, and other documents. In this article I introduce Kongōji as a prime example of how exoteric Buddhist texts were ritually employed there, followed by Zenne 禅恵 (alt. Zen’e 1284–1364) and his catalogs, and then present an overview of the sacred documents he marked as exoteric. I also explain why exoteric or ‘mainstream’ Buddhism must not be excluded from the study of the history of medieval Japanese Buddhism.

During the 740s in Japan, the emperor established Buddhist temples in nearly all the provinces, in which three Buddhist scriptures were chanted to avert natural disasters. Tōdaiji, in the recently constructed capital, was the head temple of a network of Temples of Bright Golden Light and Four Heavenly Kings to Protect the State. The principal Buddhist scripture followed in these temples was the Golden Light Sūtra, translated from Sanskrit into Chinese in Tang China at the beginning of the 8th century. This article investigates the history of an understudied example of one of these temples, called Bonshakuji. Emperor Kanmu (r. 781–806) repurposed it in 786 after the introduction from China of novel rituals to protect the state. It had among the most important Buddhist temple libraries, which came to rival perhaps only that of Tōdaiji through the 12th century.I also examine how and why scholar officials and powerful monastics, particularly those associated with the so-called esoteric Tendai and Shingon temples of Enryakuji and Miidera, and Tōji and Daigoji, respectively, utilized the library of Bonshakuji and older and novel state protection texts kept there to preserve early Japanese state-supported Buddhist worldmaking efforts long after that state had become virtually bankrupt.

Studies in Chinese Religions ISSN: 2372-9988 (Print) 2372-9996 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rstu20 Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine George A. Keyworth To cite this article: George A. Keyworth (2016): Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine, Studies in Chinese Religions, DOI: 10.1080/23729988.2016.1235662 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23729988.2016.1235662 View supplementary material Published online: 17 Oct 2016. Submit your article to this journal View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rstu20 Download by: [University of Saskatchewan Library] Date: 17 October 2016, At: 11:49 STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS, 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23729988.2016.1235662 Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine George A. Keyworth Department of Linguistics and Religious Studies, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY East Asian Buddhist apocryphal books have received signiﬁcant attention in recent decades, especially since the publication of Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Hawai’i University Press, 1990). It is by now well known that many apocryphal books were found in the so-called Library Cave (no. 17) of the Mogao Grottoes, near Dunhuang. What is much less well known – at least outside Japan – is that complete manuscript sets of the Buddhist canon have been preserved in Japan from the twelfth century, and these manuscripts are frequently copies of eighth-century editions. In this paper I provide a brief introduction to the fact that one of the most prominent Shintō shrines in Kyoto – Matsuo shrine – had its own Buddhist canon on site for 700 years before it was consigned to a Hokkeshū temple, Myōrenji, in 1857. Then I provide a brief overview of the contents of roughly 3500 surviving rolls, many of which preserve apocryphal Buddhist texts that seem to have circulated quite widely in late Tang-era (618–907) China and Japan. Finally, I try to evaluate why a Buddhist canon copied for Hata-clan kami, mostly from Tendaishū temple manuscripts in nearby Shiga prefecture, contains so many Chinese apocryphal books. Received 21 June 2016 Accepted 18 August 2016 KEYWORDS Apocryphal sūtras; Matsuo canon; ﬁve great Mahāyāna scriptures; Japanese manuscript canons Japanese manuscript collections of Buddhist scriptures provide one of the most valuable resources for the study of East Asian Chinese Buddhist literature. Despite admonitions from medieval Japanese historians like Kuroda Toshio 黒田俊雄 (1926–1993) and others to the contrary, it might still seem somewhat anachronistic that the Grand Shrine of Matsuno’o 松尾大社 (alt. Matsuo) – more commonly pronounced Matsuo – in Kyoto, Japan, which was one of the upper seven (or top) shrines in a list of 22 (nijūnisha 二十二社) that received ‘oblations’ (hanpei 班幣) from the imperial lineage during the [medieval] Heian period (794–1185) and retained distinction as a ﬁrst rank, imperial shrine (kanpei taisha 官幣大社) when so-called State Shintō (Kokka Shintō 国家神道) was institutionalized in 1871, had of a mostly manuscript (shosha 書写) Buddhist canon (issaikyō 一切経) on site for CONTACT George A. Keyworth george.keyworth@usask.ca University of Saskatchewan Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23729988.2016.1235662 © 2016 Institute of World Religions, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 2 G. A. KEYWORTH nearly 700 years.1 Sources ranging from six oﬃcial histories (Rikkokushi 六國史) to the registry of oﬃcial deities (jinmyōchō 神名帳) venerated at oﬃcial shrines (shikinaisha 式内社) in Procedures of the Engi Era (901–923, comp. 927 utilized after 967; Engishiki 延喜式) conﬁrm that, by the early tenth century in Japan, indigenous deities received ritual oﬀerings at more than 3000 shrines, and Buddhist scriptures and spells – or dhāraṇī (tuoluoni or zongchi, darani 陀羅尼 or sōji 總持) – were read or chanted in front of, or for, the kami (shinzen dokyō 神前読経) to alleviate natural and man-made disasters and to bolster the imperial and aristocratic clans.2 It also appears that all seven of the top-ranked shrines listed in Procedures of the Engi Era – Ise 伊勢, Iwashimizu 石清水 (Hachimangū 八幡宮), Kamo 賀茂 (alt. 鴨), Matsuo, Hirano 平野, (Fushimi 伏見) Inari 稲荷, and Kasuga 春 (the only one in Nara, and not Kyoto) – were actually kami shrine-temple complexes or jingūji 神宮寺 (alt. Jinguji 神供寺) with buildings to keep and read and/or recite scriptures, called Godokyōjo 御読経所.3 It makes a good deal of sense, therefore, that a signiﬁcant number of the scriptures and commentaries contained within the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex canon are stamped or sealed with the medieval designation for this collection: Matsuno’o issaikyō no nai 松尾一切經の内; it is probably instructive that we neither ﬁnd the kanji for kami shrine (sha 社 or gū [miya] 宮) or (Buddhist) temple (tera 寺). Compared with old Japanese manuscript Buddhist canons we know a lot more about and are comparatively easy to access, such as the Nanatsudera 七寺 (Nagoya) or Kongōji 金剛寺 (Ōsaka) canons, the Matsuo shrine canon seems incomplete. Whereas the Nanatsudera canon consists of 4954 rolls and the Kongōji canon has about 4500, despite signiﬁcant damage from water, humidity, insects, rats, and dust, only 3545 rolls (approximately 825 separate titles) of the Matsuo shrine canon survive today.4 What makes the Matsuo canon unusual is the number of colophons (okugaki 奥書). The Nanatsudera canon has 378 rolls with colophons (approximately 158 separate titles) with dates or marginalia; the Kongōji canon has about 230 rolls (103 titles) with colophons.5 Yet the Matsuo shrine canon has 1236 rolls (approximately 345 titles) with colophons that provide dates, collation information, scribes’ names, and evidence to tell us why both kami priests (kannushi 神主, negi 禰宜, etc.) and Buddhist monastics copied scriptures at sacred sites across the Kinki 近畿 region and beyond to be recited before the kami of Matsuo shrine-temple complex.6 I am particularly interested in colophons from the Matsuo shrine canon that reveal something about how and why indigenous, dubious, or apocryphal Sinitic Buddhist scriptures – those composed or compiled in literary Chinese in East Asia, rather than in Sanskrit or Middle Indic in India or central Asia – seem to have played a rather remarkable role in the ritual and liturgical phenomenon of kami worship in late Heian-era Japan (during the Insei period 院政期 [Cloistered Rule epoch], c. 1068–1156 or 1086–1192). In the ﬁrst section of this paper I introduce Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex. Next, I provide an overview of the contents of the Matsuo scriptures within the context of old Japanese manuscript canons (Nihon kosha issaikyō 日本古写一切経). Then, I provide a restricted group of fake and ‘genuine’ scriptures and dhāraṇī that were recited or chanted for Kamo shrine(s) in 735 to show the sort of Mahāyāna Buddhist literature that appears to have been copied for veneration of indigenous deities from the continent. I also explain what a medieval Japanese ‘canon’ consists of: (a) Xuanzang’s 玄奘 STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 3 (Genjō, c. 602–664) behemoth translation of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra in 600 rolls (Mahāprajñā-pāramitā-sūtra, Dabore boluomiduo jing 大般若波羅蜜多經)7; (b) the ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna sūtras (gobu daijōkyō 五部大乘經) – not ‘categories’ – according to Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗 (Tendai Chigi, 538–597)8; (c) many apocryphal or indigenous sinitic sūtras that support state protection (huguo, gokoku 護國) and oﬀer spells (dhāraṇī) to aﬀect individual and communal, this-worldly problems; and (d) several enormous – not necessarily Mahāyāna – compendia (e.g. *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra, trans. Bodhiruci 菩提流志 [II] et. al., c. 706–713, Dabaoji jing 大寶積經 or *Abhidharmanyāyānusāra-śāstra? Apidamo shunzheng lun 阿毘達磨順正理論). Rather than following the Record of Śākyamuni’s Teachings, Compiled During the Kaiyuan Era [713–741] (Kaiyuan shijiao lu 開元釋教錄, comp. 730) (henceforth Kaiyuan lu), which seems to have been considered the standard register on the continent, the Matsuo shrine scriptures, like the Nanatsudera and Kongōji canons, are arranged according to the Newly Revised Catalog of Buddhist Scriptures, Compiled During the Zhengyuan Era (785–805) (Zhengyuan xinding shijiao lu 貞元新定釋教録, comp. 800), hereafter Zhengyuan lu.9 Rolls 29 and 30 of the Nanatsudera edition the Zhengyuan lu have a colophon that is particularly instructive: it tells us three scriptoriums in Kyoto – Hosshōji 法勝寺, Fushimi, and Bonshakuji 梵釈寺 – were the source for checking manuscripts in twelfth-century Japan and that the Nanatsudera scriptures may have actually been copied on behalf of eight legendary kami shrines. Next, I provide a brief overview of apocryphal studies by way of the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra (Jin’gang sanmei jing, Geumgang sammae gyeong 金剛三昧經), a Sino-Korean apocryphon meticulously investigated by Robert Buswell.10 I also investigate a particular set of 16 vowed scriptures which share a lengthy colophon that outlines the Hata-clan shrine priests who sponsored these rolls between 1115 and 1118: ten of these 16 vowed scriptures are either considered apocryphal by modern scholars or have anonymous provenance. If we brieﬂy consider almost all scriptures with colophons that have dates copied between 1113 and 1165, then the number of fake scriptures copied for the kami of Matsuo and [six] sub-shrines (massha 末社) increases substantially and includes several scriptures that can certainly be considered apocryphal following Funayama Tōru’s 船山徹 three, clear-cut categories of ‘sūtras that became [Chinese] classics.’ I conclude with a brief discussion of some of the the ritual occasions and this-worldly outcomes – or beneﬁts (genze riyaku 現世利益) – apocryphal scriptures seem to have been used for at Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex. This analysis allows for a reexamination of some of the objectives researchers, including Robert Buswell and Koichi Shinohara, have used apocryphal scriptures to investigate and I question whether or not ‘the line between translating Indian sūtras and composing Chinese apocrypha is more diﬃcult to draw than often assumed.’11 Brief history of Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex Let me ﬁrst place Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex and the Matsuo scriptures in brief historical context. Matsuo shrine is one of the oldest shrines in Kyoto: Hata no Imiki no Tori 秦忌寸都理 established the shrine in 701 (Taihō gannen 大寶元年).12 There seems to be scholarly consensus that the Hata clan of well-to-do immigrants arrived in Japan – probably in the Chikuzen 筑前 region of Kyūshū 九州, ﬁrst – by the second half of the 4 G. A. KEYWORTH ﬁfth century from Silla 新羅, Korea.13 According to the early ninth-century genealogical compendium, Shinsen shōjiroku 新撰姓氏録 (Newly Compiled Records of Kinship Groups, c. 814–815), which was apparently compiled on behalf of the royal lineage in order to distinguish between immigrant – or barbarian (shoban 諸藩) – clans, those that claimed ancestral ties to the royal lineage (kōbetsu 皇別), and clans that can simply be classiﬁed with native heritage (shinbetsu 神別), the Hata clan primogenitor in Japan, Uzumasa no Kimi no Sukune 太秦公宿禰, could claim to have been 13 generations removed from the ﬁrst emperor of China: Qin Shi Huangdi 秦始皇帝 (260–210 BCE, r. 220–210 BCE Qin state).14 Ueda Masaaki refers to immigrant clans, including the Hata, in his research as toraisha 渡来者 – or kowatari 古渡 – or even naturalized citizens (kikajin 帰化人) in an attempt to utilize less jingoistic terminology than was used either during the early Heian era or in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when State Shintō jargon prevailed.15 Herman Ooms has proposed the term ‘allochthonous’ for clans like the Hata.16 By the turn of the eighth century the Kadono district (Kadono no koori 葛野郡) of Yamashiro (no Kuni) province 山城国, which roughly corresponds to Nishigyōku 西京区 and southern Ukyōku 右京区 (wards) today, could certainly be considered the home region of the Hata clan. Hata no Miyatsuko no Kawakatsu 秦造河勝 had founded the ﬁrst Buddhist temple in the region – a Hata clan temple – in 603, known today as Kōryūji 広隆寺 (alt. Uzumasadera 太秦寺, Kadonodera 葛野寺, or Hata no Kimidera 秦公寺, in the Uzumasa district of Ukyōku). Hata clan members appear to have owned much of the land in Yamashiro (no Kuni) when the decision was made to establish the new capital of Heiankyō in the late eighth century. This seems to explain why many of the most prominent shrines in Kyoto – upper and lower Kamo, Fushimi Inari, Iwashimizu (Hachimangū), Matsuo – and several Shingon temples (Kōryūji and Hōrinji 法輪寺, to name two) have deep ties to the Hata clan.17 I have yet to conduct the research in Japanese archives to learn more about the construction of the Godokyōjo mentioned earlier, or information pertaining to the annual ritual schedule (nenchū gyōja 年中行事) of the shrine during the medieval period. A Muromachi era (1337–1573) map reveals that the Godokyōjo once stood within the shrine compound where today people have their vehicles blessed (kuruma no harai 車の祓い) and there is now a parking lot. It may also be signiﬁcant to note that on the same map we ﬁnd a three-storied stūpa (sanjū no tō 三重塔) in what seems like the centre of the multiplex; toward the upper left corner of the map, just to the right of Tsukuyomi jinja 月読神社 (alt. Tsukiyomi) – a sub-shrine (massha 末社) of Matsuo still today – are four structures identiﬁed as a jingūji. According to Sagai Tatsuru 嵯峨井建, by the ninth century shrines dedicated to Buddhist deities – jingūji – were located within the grounds of medieval miyadera (oﬃcially designated as shikinaisha). Chinjusha 鎮守社 (tutelary or protective, chingo 鎮護, shrines) within Buddhist monastic compounds (garan 伽藍, qielanshen 伽藍神, lit. gods of the saṃghārāma) were structures to enshrine the kami.18 Shrine records indicate that the premodern kami shrine-temple complex was destroyed in early 1864 (Bunkyū 文久 4 /Genji 元治 1) and the monastics were forced to return to lay life three months later. It also appears that the principal image (honzon 本尊) was either a Kamakura era (1185–1333) ‘hidden’ (hibutsu 秘仏) statue of the bodhisattva Ākāśagarbha (Xukongzang pusa, Kokūzō bosatsu 虚空藏菩薩), which was removed and may have been donated to a cloister STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 5 at Daigoji 醍醐寺, or a statue of Mahāvairocana (Dapiluzhenafo, Daibirushana butsu 大毗盧遮那佛) within a Dainichidō 大日堂.19 Kawara 瓦 – roof tiles – inscribed with Sanskrit Siddhaṃ letters (shittan 悉曇字 or bonji 梵字) from the jingūji have also been excavated at the site. Our shrine is also celebrated because 21 of the oldest single-block wood statues of the kami of Matsuo (and sub-shrines) still exist today and are preserved on site within a special building called the Shinzōkan 神像館. There are three large statues: one older and one younger male Ōyamagui 大山咋神 (alt. Ōyamakui), the chief kami of Matsuo, and one female. The deities seem to be seated in the half-lotus position (hankafuza 半跏趺坐) and are almost certainly mishōtai 御正体. Literally ‘revered true bodies’ usually found in the form of drawings or mirrors evoking combinatory devotion to (Japanese or native) kami and (Indian and continental) buddhas and bodhisattvas (shinbutsu shūgō 神佛習合).20 An eminent Japanese art historian, Itō Shirō 伊東史朗, postulates that the larger Ōyamagui statue was commissioned by Enchin 円珍 (Chishō daishi 智証大師, 814–891), the Jimon 寺門派 patriarch and ﬁfth abbot of Enryakuji 延暦寺 on Mount Hiei 比叡山 (for a short time), before he departed for China in 853.21 Itō is less conﬁdent about the second, younger Ōyamagui mishōtai, but he is convinced that the female statue is Ichikishima Hime no Mikoto 市杵島姫命 (alt. Okitsushima).22 She is Ōyamagui’s wife and is enshrined at Matsuno’o as well. Two of the smaller eighteen kami statues are of particular interest because they bear inscriptions that tell us how Hata no Yorichika 秦頼義 – one of the primary sponsors of the Matsuo scriptures between 1127 and 1138 – had them commissioned in 1143 (Kōji 康治 2) by named artisans whom Itō thinks are Buddhist monastics. During the late Heian period there were seven shrines administered by Matsuno’o. In addition to Matsuo where Ōyamagui and Ichikishima are enshrined, Tsukuyomi shrine (which we encountered on the Muromachi era map) and Ichitani 櫟谷 (alt. Ichidata) shrine comprised the three chief medieval shrines of Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex.23 Munakata-sha 宗像社, Sannomiya-sha 三ノ宮社, Koromode-sha 衣手社, and Shidai shinsha 四大神社 round out the list to make seven sub-shrines.24 Hata no Yorichika commissioned a statue of Okitsushima Hime no Mikoto 奥津嶋姫命: the kami of Ichitani-Munakata shrines. Matsuo scriptures and old Japanese manuscript canons On 23 August 1993, Buddhist scriptures copied on behalf of Matsuo kami shrinetemple complex were rediscovered on the second ﬂoor of the treasury house (hōzō 宝蔵) that sits at the back of a stone garden at Myōrenji 妙蓮寺, a Hokkeshū 法華宗 temple, located today just west of Horikawa dōri, not far from Dōshisha university’s Shinmachi campus. Despite signiﬁcant damage and deterioration, 3545 rolls of mostly handcopied scriptures were found along with sacred works (shōgyō 聖教) – including several distinctive copies of the Lotus Sūtra (Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華経, Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra) – copied by the gentleman who had put the scriptures in the treasury house in 1857: Shimada Yasaburō 嶋田弥三郎.25 In 1997, Professor Nakao Takashi 中尾堯 from Risshō University 立正大学 and a team of researchers from universities in Kyoto published a catalog of the Matsuo shrine scriptures. Because only a handful of the scriptures are readily accessible at Myōrenji, and the rest are in museum 6 G. A. KEYWORTH and university archives with no digital (or microﬁche, as was once rumoured) edition of the contents of the Matsuo canon for scholars to utilize, almost no attention has been paid to the Matsuo scriptures.26 In contrast to the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex scriptures, the study of manuscript sinitic – or East Asian – Buddhist literature has ﬂourished in recent decades because, on the one hand, scholars from across the globe now have ready access to digitized manuscripts and manuscript fragments from the cache found in cave 17 of the Mogao grottoes 莫高石窟 with nearly 40,000 items near Dunhuang 敦煌, in Gansu province 甘肅省, China, held by libraries in the United Kingdom, France, and Japan. Chinese presses have also published facsimile editions of Dunhuang materials and of what remains in Russia and China.27 The discovery – or rediscovery, as the case may be – of old Japanese manuscript canons during the 1990s, on the other hand, from Nanatsudera, Kongōji, Natori shingūji 名取新宮寺 (Miyagi 宮城県), and Matsuo, as well as the release by Maruzen of DVDs of the entire contents of the Shōgozō 聖語藏 (from Tōdaiji 東大寺, in Nara), has prompted researchers to look ever more carefully at alternate editions of Buddhist literature that preserve copies which appear to be even closer to what the Kaiyuan era (c. 730) canon in China looked like than some of the Dunhuang manuscripts.28 Thanks to pioneering eﬀorts by members of the Academic Frontier Project of the International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies 国際仏教学大学院大学学術フロンティア実行委員会 (ICPBS) in Tokyo, directed by Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, 1206 texts and more than 5500 rolls, primarily of the manuscript set of the Buddhist canon from Kongōji (and some rolls from Nanatsudera), have been scanned into PDFs and can be searched onsite (only) in the ICPBS library. Colophons on Dunhuang manuscripts allowed Rong Xinjiang 榮新江 to conclude that the Dunhuang cache comprises the contents of an incomplete Buddhist canon in the library of the small Three Realms temple (Sanjie si 三界寺) during the tenth century, which explains, in part, why a monk named Daozhen 道真 supplemented it with apocryphal sūtras, Chan 禪宗 (Seon, Zen) texts, and other material expunged from the canon by the Chinese state during the eighth century.29 Colophons from the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex tell us that there were four stages in the process of copying scriptures for the institution. (1) Chief kami priests (kannushi) and third-rank aristocrats (Sukune 宿禰) Hata no Chikatō 秦親任 and his eldest son, Hata no Yorichika, had scriptures copied on behalf of seven shrines administered on site by the Hata clan between 1113/12/11 and 1138/7/10.30 (2) Between 1139 and 1143 monastics aﬃliated with the Godokyōjo at Matsuo especially from Enryakuji and Miidera 三井寺 (alt. Onjōji 園城寺) checked the scriptures vowed by Hata no Chikatō and Hata no Yorichika and added scriptures to the collection. (3) Ryōkei 良慶, the abbot of Myōhōji 妙法寺, a temple in the southern valley 南谷 of the jingūji precincts, vowed and added scriptures between 1159 and 1165. (4) Sometime probably during the early twelfth century rolls that had been bestowed to Kamo shrine(s) as part of a lecture series and ritual oﬀering (kaikō kuyō 開講供養) in 1063–1065 from Enryakuji monastics were added to the Matsuo canon. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 7 Table 1. Three vowed canons.a a Sponsor Hata no Chikatō 秦親任 Duration 1115–1122 Hata no Yorichika 秦頼親 1127–1138 Collated manuscripts 1139–1143 Ryōkei 良慶 1159–1174 Aﬃliation Chief Shrine Priest (kannushi) 神主 Chief copyists Chinshū 珍秀, Seiron 西詣, Nakahara Gaon 中原雅遠, Hanrai 範快, Yūhan 有範, Fujiwara Yorimori 藤原頼盛, Ijin 惟仁, Ryūson 隆尊 Chief Shrine Priest Sōsei 宗清, Jitsuei 実永, Seigon 靜嚴, 長暹, Chōkei 朝慶, Onjōji jikan ajari 園城寺次官阿闍梨, Eiun 睿運, Zōki 增喜, Rinshū 林秀, Sōbō 僧某 Enryakuji: Tōdō Minamidani Junkei[bō] Raisen 頼暹, Ringen 林玄, Chūgō 忠豪, Ryōshō 良曉 (Enryakuji), 東塔南谷春敬[房] Kenchi 賢智 (Enryakuji), Kanyū Enryakuji: Tōdō Kōenbō 東塔縁房寛裕, Ryōkei, Chōjin 朝尋, Sonyū Enryakuji: Saitōin Kitajakkōbō 西塔院北尊祐, Ryōga 隆賀, Shinkei 深慶, 寂光房 Juhan 壽範, Chūen 忠延, Enryakuji: Saitōin Tōrinbō 西塔東林房 Chōkaku 澄覺 (Miidera), Rinshū Miidera 林秀, Gyōjitsu 行実, Jōkan 乗 Kōryūji 鑑, Ryōhan 良範 (Miidera), Kannonji 観音寺 Chigyō 智行, Rin’i 林伊 Nankyō Shin’in 南京新院 Tanshū Asagogun Okudera 但州朝來郡奥寺住僧 Kiyomizudera 清水寺 Shitennōji 四天王寺 Abbot, Matsuo Minamidani Myōhōji Ryōnin 良仁, Ryōgon /Ryōgen 良嚴, Shunzō 俊增, Ryōki 良喜, 松尾南谷妙法寺 Benki 辯喜, Gōyū 豪有, Ryōkan 良寛, Seiryōji monk(s) 清涼寺僧 Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, ‘Matsuosha issaikyō’ chōsa hōkokusho, 46 and Nakao Takashi, “Myōrenjizō ’Matsuosha issaikyō‘ no hakken to chōsa.” There are also a signiﬁcant number of rolls from scriptures added during the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries, one of which I discuss in the conclusion.31 Table 1 lists the four principal vowed scripture-copying projects represented within the Matsuo shrine canon. The latest date that can be assigned to any scroll within the Matsuo shrine canon is 1468 (Ōnin 応仁 2. jun 閏 10.5), which makes a great deal of sense given the widespread destruction of signiﬁcant parts of Kyoto during the Ōnin war (1467–1477). In 1399 (Ōei 応永 6) and again in 1447 (Bun’an 文安 4), however, a signiﬁcant number of printed scriptures – some of which appear to be from the ﬁrst printing of the Chinese canon in 983 ([Taipingxingguo 太平興國 8], presumably brought back to Japan by Chōnen 奝然 [983–1016]) – were added to the collection. What is immediately conspicuous about the contents of Old Japanese manuscript canons – and Japanese manuscript editions of both the Kaiyuan lu and Zhengyuan lu as well – is that they do not mirror what can be found in printed canons. It is by now well known that the most obvious problem with printed scriptures is that these editions date from the tenth century (980s Shuban dazangjing 蜀版大藏經) – at the earliest. The Taishō canon, as is well known too, is primarily based on the second (extant) edition of the Korean (Koryŏ) Canon 高麗藏再雕版, which was printed at Haeinsa 海印寺 between 1236 and 1251. Even though it provides considerably more material from the so-called Rock-Cut Canon at Fangshan 房山石經 that preserves about 1300 rolls carved during the Tang dynasty, the recently published Chinese Buddhist canon (Zhonghua dazangjing 中華大藏經 Hanwen bufen 漢文部分) is not much more 8 G. A. KEYWORTH reliable.32 Therefore, it adds up that Old Japanese manuscript canons – Kongōji, Nanatsudera, and Matsuo shrine, to name three – do not have quite as many texts as the Taishō or Zhonghua dazangjing editions of the Zhengyuan lu postulate they should. Instead of 1258 titles in 5390 rolls, the Nanatsudera edition of the Zhengyuan lu has 1206 titles in 5351 rolls. The Nanatsudera edition of the Kaiyuan lu, which is copied from a manuscript dated to 735 (Tenpyō 天平 7) and was brought back to Japan by Genbō 玄昉 (d. 746; in China: 718–735), has 1046 titles in 5048 rolls, in contrast to the Taishō edition with 1076 titles in the same number of rolls.33 The Matsuo shrine canon closely reﬂects the Nanatsudera Zhengyuan lu. But, again, only 3545 rolls are extant.34 It has been suggested that rather than reﬂecting earlier editions of the contents of continental (Kaiyuan or Zhengyuan-era) Buddhist canons, these Old Japanese manuscript editions of the Kaiyuan lu and Zhengyuan lu expose the composition of Nara era (710–784) manuscript canons. According to Bryan Lowe, ‘almost every canon produced in the Nara period had a diﬀerent composition from those that preceded it and those that followed it.’35 Further analysis of speciﬁc rolls vowed to Matsuo shrine by Hata no Chikatō and his son Hata no Yorichika bolsters Lowe’s assertion. But there is also evidence that presents another side of the same proverbial coin. The principal ritual context within which we can view the Matsuo shrine canon is devotional and emulates the Nara-era practice of vowing particular scriptures – almost always from the Perfection of Wisdom genre of Mahāyāna Buddhist literature – or ‘complete’ collections of scriptures (issaikyō), copied as ‘vowed scriptures’ (gankyō 願経). Empress Kōmyō 光明皇后 (Kōmyō kōgō, alt. Tōsanjō 藤三娘, 701–760) is the most celebrated patron of gankyō projects in Nara Japan.36 The Kōmyō tenkō gogan no issaikyō 光明天皇御願一切経, also called the ‘First Day of the Fifth Month Canon’ (740/5/1), is considered to have been a copy of the Kaiyuan Era canon Genbō brought back to Japan from China in 735 with precisely 5048 rolls.37 We know that scriptures from this canon – or copies of it – were used by seven state-sponsored temples in Nara and shrines closely tied to the dissemination of the imperial cult and the Fujiwara clan 藤原氏 (e.g. Ise 伊勢, Kasuga 春日, and Kumano 熊野).38 By the ninth and tenth centuries, in addition to temples and shrine-temple complexes in Nara, Tōji 東寺, Enryakuji 延暦寺, and Miidera – in and around Kyoto – and at least ﬁve shrine-temple complexes (jingūji) at Tado 多度, Matsuo, Atsuta 熱田, Hiyoshi 日吉 (alt. Hiei), and Iwashimuzi were established and partially – if not fully – supported by the state, at ﬁrst, to perform shinzen dokyō for state liturgies according to the calendar set up by the ritsuryō 律令 system.39 Today, we call sites where kami are worshiped Shintō 神道 shrines. But, as Herman Ooms points out with regard to the deities of heaven and earth: Kami worship was a much wider phenomenon than the state institutional ritual system organized around jingi by the ritsuryō 律令 state, mentioned in the Taihō 大宝 Code’s Jingi-ryō (703). Only in the fourteenth century did ‘Shinto’ come to function as an umbrella for a great diversity of practices and beliefs one could call kami worship. The term refers to a belief in the action of the gods, but not to an institution that one could call ‘Shinto,’ which emerged only in the nineteenth century when Buddhism and Shinto were forcefully separated by the Meiji state (1868–1912).40 STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 9 Table 2. Extant manuscript canons in Japan and their contents.a Collection Shōsōin shōgozō 正倉院聖語藏 Hōryūji Ishiyamadera 石山寺 Kōyasan Kongōbuji 高野山金剛峯寺 Kongōji Nanatsudera Kōshōji 興聖寺 Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex Natori shingūji 名取新宮寺 a Contents 1000 rolls: Nara era (710–784) 4960 rolls: Heian era (794–1185) 927 rolls: Heian era; Ōtani university has 90 rolls 4644 items (jō 帖) 4296 rolls: Heian era Chūsonji canon 3568 rolls: manuscript Arakawakyō 荒川経 (Bifukumon’inkyō 美福門院経) canon; Heian-Kamakura (1185–1333) eras 2739 rolls: Chūsonji kinji issaikyō 中尊寺金字一切経 15 rolls: Konshi kinginjikōshokyō 紺紙金銀字交書経 4500 rolls: Heian (c. 1143–1186)-Kamakura era 4954: rolls late Heian (c. 1175–1178) 6000 rolls: Heian-Kamakura era 3545 rolls mostly Heian era with Kamakura and Muromachi (1336–1573) rolls 2979 rolls: Heian-Kamakura eras Ochiai Toshinori, “Higashi Ajia ni okeru bukkyō shahon kenkyū no genkyō to kenkyūhōhō,” 12–13; Ochiai Toshinori, Girard, and Kuo, “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon,” 370–72, lists slightly diﬀerent numbers, which I assume reﬂect more than a decade of research with these materials. See also the helpful, brief overview in Lowe, “Buddhist Manuscript Cultures in Premodern Japan,” 290. Emperors and aristocrats in Kyoto and environs during the Heian period almost certainly had copies of scriptures – and the whole canon, it seems – commissioned from Nara temples and shrine-temple complexes (i.e. Kasuga and Kōfukuji 興福寺), which, in turn, appear to have preserved something of the canon Empress Kōmyō authorized during the eighth century. Table 2 provides a concise survey of manuscript canonical materials we can study today. According to both Ochiai Toshinori and Akao Eikei 赤尾榮慶, most collections preserve, at least in part, material that was copied by imperial feat. The Fujiwara clan, and Fujiwara no Kiyohira 藤原清衡 (1056–1128), who sponsored the Chūsonji 中尊寺 canon, in particular, seems to have played a noticeably large roll in vowing Buddhist scriptures (see Table 2).41 Copied for the kami of Atsuta kami shrine-temple complex The advantage of the Nanatsudera version of rolls 29 and 30 of the Zhengyuan lu for determining which scriptures and commentaries were left out (buruzang mulu, funyūzō mokuroku 不入藏目錄) of the Buddhist canon during the eighth century in China – and, subsequently, Japan – has been distinguishable almost since the discovery of the Nanatsudera canon in 1990. Yet it is the colophon to these rolls studied carefully by Ochiai and Akao that interests me because it informs us that the seven-hall temple of Mount Tōen (Tōenzan Nanatsudera 稲園山七寺), a Chizan Shingonshū 智山真言宗 temple today, was part of Atsuta jingūji when governor of Owari 尾張 county, Ōnakatomi no Yasunaga 大中臣安長, vowed more than 300 rolls between 1175 and 1178; the work was interrupted in 1180.42 Ochiai seems to have been more interested in the fact that rolls 29 and 30 of the Zhengyuan lu were checked with manuscripts from Fushimi (in red to the left), Bonshakuji (with a black circle), and Fujiwara no Tadahira’s 藤原忠平 (880–949) Hosshōji (built in 925) (in red and to the right), which was signiﬁcantly enlarged and supported by Emperor Shirakawa 白河 (r. 1073–1087) in 1077.43 Collation notes are an important discovery in both the Nanatsudera and Matsuo canons. But the fact that rolls 29 and 10 G. A. KEYWORTH 30 of the Zhengyuan lu were vowed to 15 incarnations or manifestations (gongen 権現) of the principal kami of Atsuta, Yatsurugi no daimyōjin 八剱大明神, at sites including the Naikū and Gekū 内外宮 of Ise, three sites at Kumano (Hongū 本宮, Shingū 新宮, Nachi 那智), the three sages of Hiyoshi, and Tada, Tsushima 津島, and Nangū 南宮 shrines in the Owari region (Aichi prefecture) astounds me. Leaving aside that the scriptures and commentaries left out section of the Zhengyuan lu seems an odd choice to vow to kami this colophon suggests two revelations. First, both Nanatsudera and Matsuo canons were apparently copied for kami tied to the imperial lineage or centres of ritual power. And, it would appear, kami – or priests who fed (kuyō, gongyang, pūjā) them during the twelfth century – found authenticity and provenance of Buddhist scriptures to be an urgent matter. Apocryphal scriptures copied for the kami Buddhist scriptures deemed to be fake or spurious (weijing, gikyō 偽經), suspicious or doubtful (yijing, gikyō 疑經) – contrasted with authentic sūtras (zhenjing, shinkyō 真經) by medieval Chinese Buddhist bibliographers – played a special role in the ritual or liturgical recitation of Buddhist scriptures in front of the kami.44 One of the typologies of fake East Asian Buddhist scriptures (or apocrypha) proposed by leading twentiethcentury Japanese and Chinese scholars ‘based on doctrinal ﬁliations, social history, content, genre, and style,’ reviewed by Robert Buswell in Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, has been particularly relevant for researchers investigating the religious and social concerns of (actual) East Asian Buddhist individuals and communities: texts that advocate for state protection and oﬀer spells – or dhāraṇī (lengthy evocations either using Sinographs to render the pronunciation of Sanskrit or in actual Brāhmī or Siddhaṃ script) – to assuage this-worldly aﬄictions, achieve speedy salvation after death, or reveal the arrival of rescuers.45 According to a document found in the Shōsōin in Nara dated 735 (Tenpyō 天平 6), Record of Tribute by Kalyāṇamitras, Upāsakas, and Aristocrats (Chishiki ubasoku kōshinbun 知識優婆塞貢進文), three or four of the ten Mahāyāna sūtras recited in full (dokyō ichibu 読経一部) and four of the eight spells chanted (jūkyō 誦経) for the kami at [Upper] Kamo shrine 上賀茂社 in Kyoto were apocryphal scriptures or spells.46 Table 3 lists the scriptures; Table 4 enumerates the spells. Three of the indigenous scriptures are well known by researchers today: Book of Benevolent Kings, Book of Brahmā’s Net, and Book of Avalokiteśvara for Eminent Kings.47 Both the Book of Benevolent Kings and Book of Brahmā’s Net were copied for the Matsuo canon (rolls 592–593 and 1775–1776, respectively). Based on my research of the Matsuo, Nanatsudera, and Kongōji canons, we can add to this early list the following fake scriptures; rolls refer to the Matsuo canon: (a) Book of Original Acts that Serve as Necklaces for Bodhisattvas (Yingluo jing 瓔珞經): rolls 1555–1568; (b) Book of the Hero’s March or pseudo-*Śūraṃgama-sūtra (Shoulengyan jing 首楞嚴經): rolls 1656–1662; (c) Book of Consummate Enlightenment (Yuanjue jing 圓覺經): roll 1605; (d) Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna (Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論): roll 2152; Table 3. Scriptures recited for Upper Kamo shrine, 735.a Sūtra Lotus Golden Light Mahāparinirvāṇa Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Maitreya Book of Benevolent Kings Book of Brahmā’s Net Book of Avalokiteśvara of King Gao Heart Chinese /Japanese title Sanskrit title or info. Fahua jing /Hokkekyō 法華経 Jinguangming zuishengwang jing /Konkōmyōsaishōōkyō 金光明最勝王經 Dabore niepan jing /Daihatsunehangyō 大般涅槃經 Fangguang jing /Hōkōkyō 方廣經b Weimojie jing /Yuimakitsukyō 維摩詰經 Mile jing /Mirokukyō 彌勒經 Renwang boreboluomi jing /Ninnō hannya haramitsukyō 仁王般若波羅蜜經 Fanwang jing, J. Bonmōkyō 梵網經 Gaowang guanshiyin jing /Kōōkanzeonkyō 高王觀世音經 Bore boluomiduo xinjing /Hannyaharamitta shingyō 般若波羅蜜多心經 Saddharmapuṇḍarīka *Suvarṇaprabhāsottama-rāja Mahāparinirvāṇa n/a Vimalakīrtinirdeśa n/a n/a n/a n/a Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya Z no(s). T. no(s). 146, 148, 149 262, 263, 264 158, 159 664, 665 135 374 n/a n/a 150, 151 474, 475 See below See below 21 245 645 1484 2898 1361c 27 251 a STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS The Fangguang jing and Gaowang Guanshiyin jing are discussed in Makita Tairyō, Gikyō kenkyū, 305–25, 414–31 but I am still uncertain what speciﬁc scriptures these refer to. See below for discussion of the fake Maitreya sūtras. b This scripture is either Śrīmālādevīsiṃhanāda-sūtra (Shengmanshizi hou yisheng fangbian guangjing, Shōmanshishiku ichijō daihōbenhōkyō 勝鬘師子吼一乘大方便廣經, Z no. 66 / T no. 353) or Datong fangguangjing / Daitsūhōkōkyō 大通方廣經 discussed in Gikyō kenkyū. c Zhengyuan lu, Nanatsudera ed., only. Cf. Miyabayashi Akihiko and Ochiai Toshinori, “Nanatsudera ed. Zhengyuan xinding shijiao mulu juandi 29–30,” 116. 11 12 G. A. KEYWORTH Table 4. Spells recited for Upper Kamo shrine, 735. Spell *Amoghapāśa-dhāraṇī *Śūraṃgama-dhāraṇī Perfection of Wisdom spell Chinese /Japanese title Sanskrit title or info. Bukong juansuo tuoluoni jing /Fukūkensaku daranikyō 不空羂索陀羅尼經 *Amoghapāśa-dhāraṇī Foding tuoluoni /Butchō darani 仏頂陀羅尼 *Sitātapatra-dhāraṇī Bore tuoluoni /Hannya darani 般若陀羅尼 Prajñāpāramitā-dhāraṇī Probably the Heart Lotus spell Fahua tuoluoni /Hokke darani 法華陀羅尼 Ch. 26 Ākāśagarbha-dhāraṇī Ākāśagarbha-dhāraṇī Xukongzang tuoluoni /Kokūzō darani 虚空陀羅尼 Shiyimian tuoluoni Jūichimen darani 十一面陀羅尼経 *Ekādaśamukha-avalokiteśvaradhāraṇī Eight Buddha names spell Baming jing tuoluoni /Hachimyōkyō darani 八名經陀羅尼 n/a Seven buddha and eight bodhisattva names spell Qifo bapusa tuoluoni /Shichibutsuhachi bosatsu darani 七佛八菩薩陀羅尼 n/a Z no(s). T. no(s). 330 1096 507–7 945–7 531 1332 STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 13 (e) Book of Consecration (Guanding jing 灌頂經, Z no. 207 /T no.1331); (f) Book of Diving the Requital of Good and Evil Actions (Zhancha jing 占察經): roll 1543; (g) Book of Adamantine Absorption or *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra: rolls 1753–1754; (h) Book of Buddha Names Recited by Horse-Head (Hayagrīva) Rākṣasa (Matou luocha foming jing 馬頭羅刹仏名經) in 16 rolls: rolls 3509–3520. The Book of the Buddha Names Recited by Hayagrīva Rākṣasa has been studied by Kuo Liying 郭麗英 and received considerable attention when the Nanatsudera scriptures were rediscovered because a liturgy with this scripture remains an important practice within Shingon temples still today.48 What these ‘genuine’ and apocryphal scriptures and spells have in common is that they promote the recitation of dhāraṇī to provide immediate, this-worldly beneﬁts. The fact that these scriptures, which had presumably only been brought to Japan by Genbō months earlier, were recited at Upper Kami shrine suggests that the practice of shinzen dokyō began long before either the Matsuo or Nanatsudera canons were commissioned. It would appear that Record of Tribute by Kalyāṇamitras, Upāsakas, and Aristocrats provides a glimpse of the precedent for shinzen dokyō that was followed for centuries, perhaps until as late as the mid-nineteenth century. On studies of apocrypha and the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra Because the Greek word apokryphos means ‘hidden away’ or ‘secret,’ historians of the Hebrew Bible and the early Christian church and scriptures often refer to apocryphal literature in a Judeo-Christian context as ‘hidden books of the Bible.’ Our great teacher, Robert Buswell, published two landmark books on the topic of sinitic – or East Asian – Buddhist apocryphal literature in 1989 and 1990, respectively: The Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea: The Vajrasamādhi Sūtra, a Buddhist Apocryphon and the collaborative, edited volume, Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha.49 In the introduction to Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, Buswell recognizes both the etymology of the Greek word apokryphos, which refers to writings that are ‘hidden away’ or ‘secret’ in a socalled Western religious context, and the fact that in the Far East, scriptures deemed to be fake or spurious (weijing, gikyō), suspicious or doubtful (yijing, gikyō) – contrasted with authentic scriptures (zhenjing, shinkyō) by medieval Chinese Buddhist bibliographers – are anything but hidden or secret.50 Perhaps because the word ‘apocrypha’ often implies ‘hidden books’ in a comparative religious context we ought to follow Funayama Tōru 船山徹, who recently condensed the discussion of East Asian Buddhist scriptures into three, straightforward categories: (1) Chinese Buddhist translations (Kanyaku kyōten 漢訳経典); (2) compilations made in India, assembled in China (henshū kyōten 編輯経典); and (3) fake scriptures made in China (gisaku kyōten 偽作経典).51 Whether we call them apocryphal or fake, what seems to me to matter most is what Buswell also points out in the introduction to Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, ‘because these texts reﬂect their domestic authors’ own religious and social concerns, which were not directly addressed in translated Indian texts, they are of immense value in any accounting of the development of the non-Indian traditions of Buddhism.’ 14 G. A. KEYWORTH Buswell also evaluates typologies of fake sinitic Buddhist (or apocryphal) literature proposed by four of the most inﬂuential twentieth-century Buddhologists – Mochizuki Shinkō 望月信亨 (1869–1948), Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮 (1912–2011), Tang Yongtong 湯用彤 (1893–1964), and Mizuno Kōgen 水野弘元 (1901–2006) – as follows: The criteria used in developing these schemata vary according to the principal scholarly interests of the writer and are, accordingly, limited by those interests. Where Mochizuki, for example, uses doctrinal ﬁliations as a major criterion in his rankings of apocrypha, Mizuno and T’ang seem more concerned with genre and style, while Makita’s categories stem from his interest in social history. To understand the signiﬁcance of a particular apocryphon, however, we must remain simultaneously aware of its doctrinal content and genre, the motives underlying its composition, its target audience, its resonances with indigenous movements in religion and society, and its long-term eﬀects on the culture as a whole.52 I think one can safely assume that the particular apocryphon Buswell refers to is the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra, which he maintains was ‘written in Korea, sometime around AD 685, by an early adept of the nascent Sŏn tradition on the peninsula,’ whom Buswell calls Pŏmnang.53 The principal focus of Buswell’s research in his study of the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra concerns the early development of Chinese Chan and Korean Sŏn Buddhism. Early indigenous Chinese Chan texts have certainly turned up from the cache of manuscripts and manuscript fragments found in cave 17 of the Mogao caves near Dunhuang early last century, and, according to two ninth-century Tibetan Buddhist catalogs (the dkar chag ldan dkar ma [Dengjia mulu 登迦目錄] no. 254 and dkar chag ‘phang thang ma [Pangtang mulu 旁塘目錄] no. 233), the *Vajrasamādhi is one of nine Chan texts that was apparently translated into Tibetan rather early.54 The fact that evidence of the proliferation of apocryphal Buddhist literature has been conﬁrmed in Tibet, Dunhuang, and Korea seems to have led Buswell to make a powerful admonition which is pertinent to my research of the canon held by the Grand Shrine at Matsuo in Kyoto, Japan: Because of the dominant role played by China in the evolution of East Asian Buddhism, virtually by default the search for the origins of texts written in Chinese has been limited to China alone, to the neglect of other areas of East Asia where Buddhism also ﬂourished and where literary Chinese was also the principal vehicle of learned communication . . . In fact, it is becoming increasingly apparent that we ignore at our peril the place of the ‘peripheral regions’ – Tibet, Vietnam, Japan, and especially my main subject here, Korea – in any comprehensive description of ‘Chinese’ Buddhism.55 Since Nanatsudera and Matsuo canons were only discovered in 1990 and 1993, respectively, after the publication of The Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea and Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, Buswell could neither have known that both canons contain the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra nor how germane his caveats would be for future study of apocryphal East Asian Buddhist literature to investigate religious and social concerns tackled by Buddhist literature not directly addressed in translated Indian texts. Table 5 lists the rolls of the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra in the Matsuo canon. I wonder what Robert Buswell would make of the presence of both rolls of the *Vajrasamādhi in the Matsuo canon and the fact that these rolls have a long colophon vowing the merit from copying them to the Hata clan? STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 15 Table 5. *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra in Matsuo kami shrine-temple canon. Date Matsuno’o Canon Roll 1116.7.6 1753 1116.7.7 1754 Z. T. no. no. Chinese /Japanese title /roll /collated info. Sanskrit title and trans. info. 626 273 Jin’gang sanmei jing, Kongōsammaikyō 金剛三 *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra, apocryphal, ANON 421–439 昧經 (2) 1: 序品第一 MS Tōyō zasu gobō 東陽坐主御房 626 273 Jin’gang sanmei jing, Kongōsammaikyō 金剛三 Same as above 昧經 (2) 2: 真性空品第六 MS Tōyō zasu gobō What’s in an issaikyō? It is my contention that kami shrine-temple patrons vowed (apocryphal) dhāraṇī-sūtras to generate merit for this-worldly beneﬁts and rebirth in the next life. I have already mentioned that, above all other scriptures, it appears Xuanzang’s translation of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra in 600 rolls was the primary scripture recited before the kami at shrine-temple complexes in medieval Japan. Mahāyāna Buddhist literature is replete with directions for how to venerate what Gregory Schopen has referred to as the Cult of the Book in the Mahāyāna.56 Perfection of Wisdom scriptures repeatedly provide a litany of things one should do to a written copy of it. Sons or daughters from good families are instructed to make a written copy (xieshu 寫書, likhitvā pustakagatāṃ kṛtvā) of the Prajñāpāramitā and set it up in an untainted place, where they should decorate it with a rich variety of adornments (zhongzhong zhuangyan 種種莊嚴, pūjāpūrvaṃgamaṃ), and make oﬀerings and venerate it (gongyang gongjing 供養恭敬, pūjayiṣyati). Furthermore, the Buddha tells Kauśika that, among the Four Guardian Kings (sitian wang, shitennō 四天王, amid the limitless gods of the ten directions and kingdoms of the méga-trichiliocosme), those who have set out for complete, unexcelled enlightenment, will set their minds to come to the place where the written copy of the Prajñāpāramitā resides, and regard it with reverence (guanli 觀禮, prekṣiṣyante vandiṣyante). They will then worship it, bear it in mind, recite it, study and learn it, spread it, explain and point out its teachings, followed by a circumambulation of it, always keeping it on the right, followed by a bow to it with hands together (dusong shenshen boreboluomiduo gongyang gongjing zunzhong zantan yourao libai hezhang 讀誦甚深般若波羅蜜多供養恭敬尊重讚歎合掌, namaskariṣyantyudgrahīṣyanti dhārayiṣyanti vācayiṣyanti paryavāpsyanti pravartayiṣyanti deśayiṣyantyupadekṣyanyuddekṣyanti svādhyāsyanti).57 Medieval East Asians understood that this merit could then by used for preventing natural disasters, such as rainmaking or averting epidemics, or for subduing local deities – such as kami in Japan – to make them protectors of the faith. The ﬁrst 598 rolls (out of just over 3545) of the Matsuo canon covers Prajñāpāramitā literature; only 438 out of 600 rolls of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra survive in this canon today.58 Patrons in East Asia who were interested in accruing even more merit than from copying and vowing just Perfection of Wisdom literature copied ‘all the scriptures’ (yiie jing, issaikyō).59 Although it may seem trite for me to put it this way, beyond vowing the ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna scriptures, crucial [fake] dhāraṇī-sūtras, and then ﬁlling in the collection with the remains of the register in the Zhengyuan lu discussed previously, it appears that patrons were particularly interested in vowing as big scriptures or collections as they could aﬀord to pay scribes to copy. Let me ﬁrst clarify what I mean by the ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna scriptures. As I brieﬂy addressed earlier, colophons explicitly tell 16 G. A. KEYWORTH us old Japanese manuscript canons do not duplicate the ﬁve corresponding ‘sections’ or ‘categories’ of scriptures in the Taishō canon, for example. Rather, scriptures copied on behalf of shrines-temple complexes and temples ﬁrst vow the ﬁve great – or enormous – Mahāyāna scriptures ostensibly delineated by Tiantai Zhiyi: gobu daijōkyō. Appendix 1 provides a list of 16 distinct scriptures vowed by Hata no Chikatō between 1115/6/1 and 1117/7/15 that demonstrates both how the Matsuno’o issaikyō no nai comprises these ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna scriptures and that speciﬁc apocryphal scriptures formed an integral part of the initial vowing practice. What makes these rolls striking is that they all have the same, long colophon, translated as follows: Dear father Hata Sukune no Chikatō 親父秦宿禰頼任 Compassionate mother Ama Myōren 悲母尼妙蓮 Wife Nakatomi clan 妻中臣氏 Mother in Law Ama 外姑尼 Eldest son Gonkannushi Hata no Yorichika 一男權神主秦頼親 Daughter in Law Hata clan 姒婦秦氏 [Uncle Hata no Yoritsugū’s daugther] Second son Gonnegi Hata no Chikagen 二男權宿宜秦親元 Eldest daughter Hata no Taishi 女子秦太子 Tsukiyomi Negi Hata no Sōgen 聟月讀禰宜秦相真 Second daughter Hata no Nagago 一女子秦中子 Same for my third daughter 同三子 Uncle Hafuri Sukune Sōshin 伯父祝宿禰相真 Next uncle Negi Hata no Yoritsugū 次伯父禰宜秦宿禰宿頼継 Youngest brother Tsujiyomi Hafuri Hata Sukune Yorigen 舎弟月讀祝秦宿禰頼元 Next younger brother Gonhafuri Hata Sukune Yorijō 次舎弟權祝秦宿禰頼貞 Mokudai Ono zeyori 目代小野是依: Vow that the ritual power of copying [this scripture] [as] recorded here makes a bond with all [sentient] beings [living] in the upper, middle, and lower [realms], and including those beyond the Sāha world, will, in this world, have healthy bodies and everything they wish will be accomplished. In the next life they will be reborn in [a] Pure Land where they will together practice with Samantabhadra [bodhisattva]. 願以書寫力上錄并結緣上中下眾生惣至沙界外現世身堅固所願皆成就後生清淨土同修普賢行 Here is a list of the dated scriptures copied with this speciﬁc colophon: (1) Buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra, 60 rolls, trans. *Buddhabhadra, c. 418–422 (Huayan jing 華嚴經): 17 rolls, 1115/6/1–end of 1115; (2) Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, 40 rolls, trans. N. Dharmakṣema, c. 414–421 (Niepan jing 涅槃經): seven rolls, 1115/7.19–9/9; (3) *Jinaputrārthasiddha-sūtra, attrib. to, attrib. Sheng Xian 聖賢, c. 388–409 (Taizi xudana jing 太子須大拏經): 1116/8/21; (4) Book of the Secret Treasury of Great, All-Encompassing Buddhas (Dafangguang rulai mimizang jing 大方廣如來秘密藏經), two rolls, anonymous, c. 351–431: two rolls, 1116/9/5–9/10; (5) Book of Diving the Requital of Good and Evil Actions (Zhancha jing), apocryphal: 1116/9.21; (6) Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra, two rolls, trans. Zhi Qian 支謙, c. 223–228 (Weimojie jing 維摩詰經): one roll, 1116/9/29; (7) Buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra, 80 rolls, trans. Śikṣānanda 實叉難陀 699: eight rolls, 1117/5/1–6/19; STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 17 (8) Book of the Original Acts of Bodhisattva *Nāgadattā (Longshi pusa benji jing 龍施菩薩本起經), apocryphal, attrib. Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, c. 266–313: 1117/7/660; (9) Book Extolling the Merits of the Mahāyāna (Chengzan dasheng gongde jing 稱讚大經乘功德經), attrib. Xuanzang, 654: 1117/7/8; (10) *Mahallikāparipṛcchā (Longshi nü jing 龍施女經), attrib. Zhi Qian, c. 222–229: 1117/7/9; (11) *Vasu[n]dhārādhāraṇī-sūtra (Chishi tuoluoni jing 持世陀羅尼經), attrib. Xuanzang, 654: 1117/7/10; (12) Sūtra on the Buddha’s Preaching on the Gaṅgā River (Aṅguttara-nikāya, Uposatha-sutta, Fo shuo hengsui shuo huo jing 佛說恒水說或經), attrib. Faju 法炬, c. 290–307: 1117/7/11; (13) Book of the Eight Teachers (Bashi jing 八師經), attrib. Zhi Qian, c. 222–229: 1117/7/11; (14) *Mahānāradakassapa-jātaka [Mahākāśyapa] (Dajiaye ben jing 大迦葉本經), attrib. Dharmarakṣa, c. 266–313: 1117/7/11; (15) *Śuddhodanarāja-parinirvāṇa-sūtra (Jingfanwang banniepan jing 淨飯王般涅槃經), trans., Juqu Jingheng 沮渠京聲, c. 455: 1117/7/15; (16) *Śuda-sūtra (Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經), trans. Guṇabhadra, c. 435–443: 1117/7/15. We ﬁnd along with these 16 speciﬁc scriptures with this colophon another 20 scriptures (for a total of 36) with dated colophons to show that they were part of the ﬁrst stage of copying all the scriptures for Matsuo shrine-temple complex. It should be obvious that Buddhabhadra’s translation of the Huayan jing in 60 rolls is the ﬁrst of the ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna scriptures. As Bryan Lowe has also noted, often Śikṣānanda’s translation in 80 rolls was preferred or copied as well.61 Another 60 rolls of the *Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra (Daji jing 大集經) is recommended by Zhiyi: beginning on 1116/1/3 until 3/7, 21 rolls of this scripture can be dated to the initial stage of Hata no Chikatō’s copying project. Zhiyi also recommends another 30 rolls of material contained within the *Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra in the Taishō version, but separate in the Zhengyuan lu and Japanese manuscript canons: *Sūryagarbha-sūtra (Daji rizang jing 大集日藏經) and *Candragarbha-sūtra (Daji yuezang jing 大集月藏經), trans. Sengjiu et. al., c. 586–594. Both compilations have ten rolls each and were not added to the Matsuo canon by Hata no Chikatō, but instead by his son, Yorichika, in 1135/9/27, and later during the collation period in eleventh month of 1141. I have been unable to locate the ﬁnal ten rolls Zhiyi recommends: Daji dizang shilun 大集地藏十輸 (Daishū jizō jūshu). The third ‘great’ Mahāyāna scripture in the group of ﬁve is the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra (Dapin bore jing 大品般若經) in 40 rolls, trans. by Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什 in 404. Half of the 20 rolls of the Daibon hannyakyō were vowed to Matsuo between 1116/3/7–5/27 by Hata no Chikatō. Even though these rolls do not have the long colophon discussed above, these rolls clearly indicate that the copying was done at the Godokyōjo on site. I think it is highly likely that the fourth ‘great scripture,’ the Lotus Sūtra translated by Kumārajīva, from the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex was removed either by Mr. Shimada Yasaburō when the contents were transferred to Myōrenji or they simply deteriorated over time. The translation by Jñānagupta & Dharmagupta c. 601–602, 18 G. A. KEYWORTH Tianpin miaofa lianhua jing 添品妙法蓮華經, in seven rolls has been preserved, but without any colophons. Finally, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, which is included in the 16 scriptures with the long colophon, rounds out the list of ﬁve ‘great’ Mahāyāna scriptures. It also seems that, at least in the case of the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex, large Mahāyāna and non-Mahāyāna compendia were copied precisely because of their bulk. The only other enormous scripture Hata no Chikatō vowed is the *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra: 34 rolls of the 120 were copied between 1118/2/6 and 1122/5/9. Hata no Yorichika, who vowed scriptures between 1127 and 1138, sponsored several collections I ﬁnd somewhat surprising. Between 1138/5/29–7/1, he vowed the Ekottarāgama (Zengyi ahan jing 增一阿含經) with 51 rolls, the Saṃyuktāgama (Za ahan jing 雜阿含經) with 50 rolls in 1138/5/30–7/8, the *Mahāprajñā-pāramitopadeśaśāstra (Da zhidu lun 大智度論) with 100 rolls in 1138/6/27–8/6, and the *Lalitavistara (Fangguang dazhuangyan jing 方廣大莊嚴經) with 12 rolls on 1138/7/10. Ryōkei, the abbot of Myōhōji who vowed scriptures between 1139 and 1143, continued the process to have copied of the *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra copied for the canon and added large Abhidharma compendia like the *Abhidharma-nyāyānusāra-śāstra – mentioned earlier – on 11141/11/11. On indigenous scriptures vowed by Hata no Chikatō, Hata no Yorichika, and Ryōkei, c. 1115–1165, and Bonshakuji Of the 16 scriptures with surviving rolls that have the long colophon declaring the merit accrued from the copying to Hata no Chikatō and his family, the Book of the Secret Treasury of Great, All-Encompassing Buddhas, Book of Diving the Requital of Good and Evil Actions and Book of the Original Acts of Bodhisattva *Nāgadattā are clearly apocryphal.62 If we include all 36 scriptures with colophons that tell us they were vowed by Hata no Chikatō, however, then the list looks a lot more similar to the one we found in the Shōsōin document dated 735 with the list of scriptures and spells read and chanted for Kamo shrine(s). The *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra is, of course, there, as are the Book of Original Acts that Serve as Necklaces for Bodhisattvas dated 1116/7/10, [Amitāyus] Contemplation Sūtra (Guanwuliangshou jing 觀無量壽經) dated 1116/9/ 29, Book of Benevolent Kings dated the last day of 1117/4, Scripture of Events from Past and Recent Ages (Pālī *Theragāthā, Gulai shishi jing 古來世時經), Book Expounding the Descent of Maitreya and His Enlightenment (*Maitreyavyākaraṇa-sūtra, Mile xiasheng chengfo jing 彌勒下生成佛經) dated 1117/8/5, and the Guhyapa (named) Vajrapāṇi Assembly (Miji jingang lishi hui, Misshaku kongō rikishie 密跡金剛力士會, T nos. 310–3) of the *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra dated 1118/10/5–12/20. The Nanatsudera edition rolls 29 and 30 of Zhengyuan lu tell us that these scriptures were considered apocryphal. The colophon to these rolls strongly suggests that oﬃciates, priests, or monastics at kami shrine-temple complexes like Matsuo deﬁnitely read these prescriptive lists. Table 1 demonstrates that many rolls of vowed scriptures with colophons from Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex also tell us what collated editions scribes used to check the copying. Manuscripts deﬁnitely came from scriptoriums on Mount Hiei, in Nara, other shrine-temple complexes such as Fushimi, Kamo, and Gion 祇園. But the name Bonshakuji stands out – especially when we consider apocryphal scriptures in the STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 19 Matsuo canon. Both fake scriptures in the strict sense of the word as deﬁned recently by Funayama and in the broader sense of his second category – henshū kyōten – compilations made in India, assembled in China, along with large, commentarial compendia, were copied from Bonshakuji. The *Mahāratnakūṭa and *Mahāsaṃnipāta certainly fall into this category of fake apocryphal literature. Today, Bonshakuji is probably an Ōbaku 黄檗宗 [Zen] temple in Higashi-Ōmi, located southeast of Ōtsu, in Shiga prefecture. Saichō 最澄 (Dengyō Daishi 傳教大師, 767–822) converted it into a Tendai temple in the ninth century; by the early twelfth century Bonshakuji functioned as a branch temple (matsuji 末寺) of Onjōji (alt. Miidera). It and its well-known Naraera manuscript Buddhist canon were destroyed in 1163, when monks from Enryakuji set ﬁre to Bonshakuji, illustrating the extent to which sectarian enmity between the Sanmon 山門派 and Jimon Tendai traditions had escalated. The Matsuo kami shrinetemple complex canon contains a veriﬁable record of what this Tendai canon looks like and, alongside the Nanatsudera canon, its apparent status as the standard from which to copy scriptures in late Heian-era Japan. Conclusion: *Pravāraṇa-sūtra, 1558/8/21 I have investigated only a small portion of the Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex scriptures – those vowed primarily by Hata no Chikatō between 1115 and 1122 – in this paper to demonstrate that indigenous or apocryphal scriptures seem to have played a surprisingly signiﬁcant role in the ritual life of medieval Japanese Shintō-Buddhist syncretic religion. Throughout, I have referenced Robert Buswell, Makita Tairyō, and Ochiai Toshinori, whose landmark work on apocryphal East Asian Buddhist scriptures guides my research. Let me conclude not with another example of a colophon from the canon vowed during the twelfth century, but instead with one vowed on 1558/8/21. First, I need to brieﬂy mention one of the scriptures vowed by Hata no Chikatō: *Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka-sūtra (Beihua jing 悲華經), translated by Dharmakṣema c. 414–421, vowed between 1116/6/3–6/21 (rolls 1236–1241). This scripture is often mentioned as a source for the doctrine of the original (Buddhist) substance (honji as in honji suijaku 本地垂跡) of a principal kami in studies of Heian Japanese religion. One of the most interesting colophons in the collection of Buddhist scriptures vowed to Matsuo tells the story of the original (Buddhist) substance of a principal kami and an intimate encounter with Enchin, the Jimonha Miidera Tendai patriarch I mentioned earlier with regard to the mishōtai now on display in the Shinzōkan at the Grand Shrine of Matsuo. Roll 2557 of the Matsuo canon has a colophon dated 1558/8/21 for a copy of the (Mahāyāna) *Pravāraṇa-sūtra (Xinsui jing 新歲經), which speaks of the last day of the summer or rains retreat.63 The gist of the colophon reads as follows: Story of the original [Buddhist] substance of the eminent kami (plural) of this shrine. Since ancient times until now, informed people have been unaware that Chishō daishi 智証大師 (Enchin 円珍, 814–891) prayed and made a vow [to the deities of Matsuo shrine]. In response, a deity visited him in a dream, audibly chanting scriptures (or this scripture?). Already having passed through ten, minor (or intermediate) eons (antarā-kalpa) before accomplishing the Buddhist path (mārga), when he heard the eminent kami [of the river] chanting Namu Daitsuchisho butsu nyorai, he oﬀered a futotama (alt. futodama) and proclaimed, ‘Kami must acknowledge that the twenty-ﬁrst is Chishō daishi’s birthday.’ 20 G. A. KEYWORTH At that time Ākāśagarbha bodhisattva also proclaimed Namu Daitsuchisho butsu nyorai. Eiroku 1/8/21 for the preservation of all the scriptures held by the abbot of this place Shikoku Hasuikedanibō Gyōjūn’s collection of scriptures, on the occasion of the Mushibarai [Copied] for peace all under heaven and the Six bodhisattvas 当社明神御本地事, 自往古存知之人無之，然智證大御祈誓御夢想アリ，明神經唱テ言ク過十小劫已及得成佛道ト，于時大師明神江南无大通智勝佛如來ト御唱アリテ拝シ玉フト云云神必由申侍云ヘリ、又智證大師誕生之時，虛空ヨリ南无大通智勝佛如來御唱アリトイヘリ, Eiroku 永禄元年 (1558) 8.21 為惣代經所当住持四國蓮池谷坊僧堯順一切經虫払只獨也，為天下安全，六觀菩薩也 A mushibarai is an occasion for airing sacred treasures. This colophon, which extols recitation of Buddha Great Universal Excellence’s (Mahābhijñājñānābhibhū-buddha) name, from chapter 27 of the Lotus Sūtra, reconnects Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex with the legendary fame of Enchin, who probably commissioned the mishōtai for Matsuo in the ninth century, and suggests that this shrine probably maintained close aﬃliation with Miidera long after the scriptures were copied from originals held by Bonshakuji.64 The colophon also testiﬁes to the fact that Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex developed its own sub-shrines in other regions of Japan, in Kōchi prefecture on Shikoku. We also learn that long after the initial vowing of scriptures by Hata clan priests during the twelfth century these scriptures retained their prestige as the object of veneration and even airing on special occasions. Table 6 provides some rough guidelines within which to consider why these rolls I have discussed here were vowed when they were. Table 6. Synopsis of ritual celebrations in Heian Japan (nenchō gyōji 年中行事). Ritual celebration Ganjitsu no sechie 元日節会 Hagatame 歯固 Gosaie 御齋會 Toshigoi 祈年祭 Nehane 涅槃會 Kinen koku hōbei 祈年穀奉幣 Hanashizume 鎮花祭 Ōimi 多い見 (Rain) Jōshi no harau 上巳祓 Gokusui no en Shinkōsai 神幸祭 Minazugi harae 六月祓 Urabone 盂蘭盆會 Niiname 新嘗祭 /Daijōsai 大嘗祭 Tsuki na misai 月次祭 Mibutsumyō 御仏名 Ōharae 大祓 Mitama matsuri 御魂祭 Date of event (lunar calendar) 1.1 1.8–1.14 2.4 2.15 2.unﬁxed 3.31 Summer /fall 3.3 Brief description Imperial Vegetarian Festival Prayer for year’s harvest Nirvāṇa Sūtra Assembly Protection against contagious disease Mikoshi 神輿 travel outside the shrine by boat (funatogyo 船渡御) 6.misoka 晦日 (6.30) Great puriﬁcation of pollution 7.15 Obon festival rites Harvest thanksgiving 11 month 12.11 12.19–21 Buddha’s names assembly 12.misoka (12.31) Great puriﬁcation of pollution 4.20 STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 21 As Imre Galambos and Sam van Schaik recently pointed out, we must not forget that manuscripts provide information that printed materials simply cannot: [T]he study of manuscripts is, whether implicitly or explicitly, also a study of materiality. When we study a manuscript we must take into account the circumstances of its creation. These include individuals who created it, as well as the wider social norms that allowed it to come into being. We must also consider the physical elements that had to come together to produce the manuscript, including the paper, ink, and writing implement.65 I hope that I have been able to provide the reader with a convincing glimpse of the prominent role of apocryphal scriptures within the context of an issaikyō and their ritual use(s) at Matsuo kami shrine-temple complex. Please note just two additional concluding remarks about these scriptures, the site, and the environment within which scriptures were vowed to Matsuo. First, even though the Jimonha Tendai tradition is renowned for propagation of esoteric ritual systems in medieval Japan, there is almost no evidence of so-called esoteric ritual practice anywhere in this material. Rather, we clearly see Mahāyāna Buddhist literature utilized for purposes outlined in the scriptures, without the need of any guru or initiations. Second, let us remember Gregory Schopen’s admonition with regard to investigating Mahāyāna Buddhist literature in China (or East Asia) as a guide to learning something of value about Indian Buddhism, ‘It has often been unthinkingly assumed that developments in China kept pace with and, with some lead time, chronologically paralleled developments in India – that is, that the two somehow developed in tandem.’66 How much more so the case when it comes to indigenous East Asian Buddhist scriptures and how and when they were utilized in China, Korea, and Japan? It seems to me that apocryphal literature tells us a great deal about indigenous East Asian religion on the ground, where, at least in the case of kami shrine-temple complexes such as Matsuo, Kamo, and Fushimi Inari, apocryphal scriptures seem to have been vowed to address this-worldly concerns and problems, much as they are still used in Japan today. Notes 1. The word ‘oblation’ is borrowed from Ooms, Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan, 110–11. See also Kuroda, “Shinto in the History of Japanese Religion”; Nihon chūsei no shakai to shūkyō; “The Discourse on the Land of Kami (Shinkoku) in Medieval Japan”; “The Development of the Kenmitsu System As Japan’s Medieval Orthodoxy”; and “Buddhism and Society in the Medieval Estate System” and Masaaki, Kodai kokka to shūkyō, vol. 3, Ueda Masaaki chosakushū. 2. Sagai, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 105–10. Six National Histories, Rokkokushi, were sponsored by Fujiwara clan members and include: (1) Nihon shoki 日本書紀 (prehistory to 697; comp. 720); (2) Shoku nihongi 続日本紀 (697–791, comp. 797); (3) Nihon kōki 日本後紀 (793–833, comp. 840); (4) Shoku Nihon kōki 続日本後紀 (833–850, comp. 869); (5) Nihon Montoku Tennō jitsuroku 日本文徳天皇実録 (850–858, comp. 879); and (6) Nihon sandai jitsuroku 日本三代実録 (858–887, comp. 901). 3. For the term ‘multiplex’ see Grapard, “Institution, Ritual, and Ideology,” and his concise discussion in Shively and McCullough, eds., Cambridge History of Japan, ch.8. See also Nara National Museum, ed. Special Exhibit of Ancient Sutras from the Heian Period [平安古経展ーまぼろしの久能寺経に出会う], 170–62. On Engishiki and shrines serviced by the ‘center’ (737), and four classes of provincial shrines (2395), see Ooms, Imperial Politics G. A. KEYWORTH 22 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. and Symbolics in Ancient Japan, 16 and Grapard, “Japan’s Ignored Cultural Revolution”; Grapard, “Institution, Ritual, and Ideology,” 27. A signiﬁcant number of rolls were apparently lost between 1647 and 1854 because when 45 rolls were apparently repaired at Hōnenin 法然院 in 1631, a catalog was compiled listing 4712 rolls in 1647: Matsuno’o-sha miyadera issaizōkyō mokuroku 松尾社宮寺一切蔵経目録: Kyoto National Museum, ed. Eastward Expansion of Buddhism, 104–105 and Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, eds., Kyōto Myōrenji zō “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho, 32. Toshinori Ochiai et al., Manuscripts of Nanatsu-dera; Ochiai Toshinori, ed. Kongōji issaikyō no sōgōteki kenkyū to Kongōjiseikyō no kisoteki kenkyū: kenkyū seika hōkokusho,; Ōtsuka Norihiro, “Issaikyō shosha to butten mokuroku: Aichiken Shinshiroshi Tokuunji zō Heian koshakyō no bunseki kara Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuin daigaku gakujutsu furonntia Jikkō iinkai. Nakao Takashi, “Myōrenjizō “Matsuosha issaikyō” no hakken to chōsa”; Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho; Nakao Takashi, “Jōyō bunkazai ‘Matsuosha issaikyō’ no genpon kōsei.” All citations to the Matsuo shrine canon follow Nakao Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho. Sagai Tatsuru, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, in particular, devotes considerable attention to the particular practice of oﬀering copies of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra at shrines. Mujaku Dōchū’s 無著道忠 (1653–1745) encyclopedia, ch. 21, Mujaku Dōchū, Zenrin shōkisen, 590-91 cites Zhiyi’s Fahua xuanyi, 法華玄義 5, T no. 1716, 33: 28c–733a3, and provides this list of ﬁve Mahāyāna scriptures, see below. Cf. Lowe, “Contingent and Contested,” 240. Kyoko Tokuno, “The Evaluation of Indigenous Scriptures in Chinese Buddhist Bibliographical Catalogues”, 52, says the Kaiyuan lu ‘is generally regarded as the single most important bibliographical catalogue in terms of the role it played in the history of East Asian Buddhist canonical publications.’ She adds: ‘The content and organization of all successive canons from the late-Tang period [ninth through tenth centuries] on were based on this catalogue . . . especially signiﬁcant is its inﬂuence on the printed editions of the canon . . . since these became the basis for later canons produced not only in China but also elsewhere in East Asia”; see also 52–53, 71 n.97 and n.98; Storch, History of Chinese Buddhist Bibliography, 116, 28–29. Tokuno cites an entry in the thirteenth-century Fozu tongji 佛祖統紀 40, which says that ‘the 5,048 rolls [that the catalog contained] became the established number for the canon’: T no. 2035, 49: 374c3–5. She also points out that the Xu Zhengyuan shijiao lu says the Kaiyuan lu circulated widely and continued to do so during the four courts of emperors Xuanzong 玄宗 (r. 712–756), Suzong 肅宗 (r. 756–762), Daizong 代宗 (r. 762–779), and Dezong 德宗 (r. 779–805): T no. 2158, 55: 1048.a23–26. Buswell, Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea, 24. Koichi Shinohara, “Rethinking the Category of Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha,” 78. Ueda Masaaki, Torai no kodaishi, 54–55. Ibid., 46–47; Como, Weaving and Binding, 4–5, 16–17. Ueda Masaaki, Torai no kodaishi, 47–48 and Como, Shōtoku, 15–16. Of the 1182 kinship groups discussed in Shinsen shōjiroku, 326 clans – including the Hata, of course – were deemed immigrants or barbarians, whereas 335 could claim royal connections. Another 404 were ‘just’ natives. Ueda Masaaki 上田正昭, Torai no kodaishi, 46. Ooms, Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan, ch. 1–2. Como, Weaving and Binding, 20–21. Hata no Irogu 秦伊侶具 established Fushimi Inari Taisha, cf. Ueda Masaaki, Torai no kodaishi, 55–58. For the term ‘multiplex’ see Grapard, “Institution, Ritual, and Ideology,” and his concise discussion in Shively and McCullough, Cambridge History of Japan, ch.8. Sagai Tatsuru, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 17–20, sees a signiﬁcant diﬀerence between the STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 23 notions of a jingūji and a miyadera. He thinks that jingūji functioned in contradistinction to chinjusha 鎮守社. Chinjusha were shrines dedicated to kami on the grounds of eighthcentury Buddhist temples, whereas jingūji were shrines to Buddhist deities on the grounds of medieval eighth-century shrine complexes (shikinaisha 式内社). By the ninth century, however, what Grapard and others have called shrine-temple multiplexes (as in the 22 in the Engi shiki, see below) or miyadera developed. Itō Shirō, Matsuno’o taisha no shin’ei, 61–62 citing Matsuno’o jinjaki 松尾神社記 2 says it was given to Myōrenin at Daigoji 醍醐寺妙蓮院. On the signiﬁcant connections between Hata clan temples and shrines to Ākāśagarbha rituals – and primarily the Shingon tradition – see Ōwa Iwao, Hatashi no kenkyū, 198–200. Of special attention is the Shingonshū temple devoted to Ākāśagarbha veneration – Hōrinji 法輪寺 – nearby in Arashiyama 嵐山; this temple was founded by Hata clan members and was once known as Kadonoidera 葛井寺. Sagai Tatsuru 嵯峨井建, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 55–56 proposes that a Dainichidō was the principal image on site. Ibid., 305–10 suggests that Kamo 賀茂 / 鴨 shrine had a Dokyōjo with honzon 本尊 of Samantabhadra and a Gomadō 護摩堂 with, of course, Fudōmyōō 不動明王. Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 55–59. Sagai gives the date 1013 (Chōwa 長和 2); see pp. 55–56. Itō Shirō, Matsuno’o taisha no shin’ei, 56–57 and 84–85. I follow readings provided by a free pamphlet available at Matsuo Taisha (2014), Rakusaisō ujigami jōzō soshin Matsuosan 洛西総氏神醸造祖神松尾さん (Head Clan Temple in Western Kyoto to the Ancestral Deity for Brewing [Saké]). See Como, Weaving and Binding, 42 and Ueda Masaaki, Torai no kodaishi, 67 for alternate readings. Como, Weaving and Binding, 164, 188 points out that the Hata clan moved the Moon Deity to Tsukuyomi-sha by the Nara period. See Itō Shirō, Matsuno’o taisha no shin’ei, 68–69. Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho, 33. Shimada Yasaburō had another name: Yoshitada 義忠. Mr. Shimada was apparently a prominent lay devotee at Honnōji 本能寺 (the temple where Oda Nobunaga 織田信長 [1534–1582] had famously been forced to commit suicide), where he came to know Nagamatsu Nissen 長松日扇 (1817–1890), who is regarded as the founder of a preSōka Gakkai 創価学会-like lay Buddhist Lotus Sūtra chanting group devoted to the teachings of Nichiren 日蓮 (1222–1282) called Honmon Butsuryū-shū 本門佛立宗, coincidentally founded in 1857. Cf. Takeda Goichi, “Nagamatsu Nissen ni okeru kyōka katsudō no kenkyū: Shimada-shi to no kōryū wo chūshin to shite.” Shrine records indicate that the Godokyōjo was destroyed in early 1864 (Bunkyū 文久 4 / Genji 元治 1) and the monastics were forced to return to lay life three months later. I know of only two references in European language publications: Toshinori, Girard and Kuo, “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon,” 371, and Lowe, “Buddhist Manuscript Cultures in Premodern Japan,” 290. International Dunhuang Project (IDP), http://idp.bl.uk/, accessed on 3 March 2016; BnF: http://gallica.bnf.fr/, accessed 6 March 2016. IDP now has all the Pelliot chinois collection available online. Two particularly advantageous facsimile publications are Shanghai guji chubanshe, ed. Ecang Dunhuang wenxian [Dunhuang Manuscript Collections of the St. Petersberg Branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences], 17 vols; Shanghai guji chubanshe and Bibliothèque nationale de France, eds., Facang Dunhuang Xiyu wenxian, 34 vols. Note Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuindaigaku fuzokutoshokan, Taishōzō Tonkō shutsudo Butten taishō mokuroku Zantei daisanban. Robson, “Brushes with Some ‘Dirty Truths’: Handwritten Manuscripts and Religion in China,” 324–26, especially n.27, where Robson provides a nearly comprehensive survey of secondary literature on Dunhuang studies. Ochiai Toshinori, “The Digital Archives of Old Japanese Manuscripts”; http://koshakyodatabase.icabs.ac.jp/index_en.html. Accessed on 15 November 2015. There are eight extant manuscript sets of the Buddhist canon in Japan, which include: Nanatsudera 24 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. G. A. KEYWORTH issaikyō 七寺一切経, Chūsonji 中尊寺一切経, Kōshōji 興聖寺一切経, Saihōji 西方寺一切経, Natori jingūji 名取新宮寺一切経, Ishiyamadera 石山寺一切経, Matsuosha 松尾社一切経, and Shōgozō. https://my.vanderbilt.edu/shosoin/shogozo/ Accessed 15 July 2016. Cf. Iida Takehiko, “Shōgōzō kyōkan ‘Jingo keiun ni nen gogangyō’ ni tsuite” and Sakaehara Towao, Shōsōin monjo nyūmon. The ten DVDs released by Kunaichō Shōsōin Jimusho shozō Shōgozō kyōkan 宮内庁正倉院事務所所蔵聖語蔵経卷 cost between ¥900,000 and ¥1,400,000 (approximately USD8000 to USD14,000) per DVD. On the Shōgozō, see also Lowe, “Contingent and Contested”; “Buddhist Manuscript Cultures in Premodern Japan,” Rong Xinjiang, “The Nature of the Dunhuang Library Cave and the Reasons for its Sealing.” Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho. According to Nihon shoki, a decree passed in 684 eﬀectively standardized the aristocratic titles clan members could use into a set of eight (yakusa no kabane 八色の姓): (1) Mahito 真; (2) Ason 朝臣; (3) Sukune 宿禰; (4) Imiki 忌寸; (5) Michinoshi 道師; (6) Omi 臣; (7) Muraji 連; and (8) Inagi 稲城. Rank 4 (Imiki) was primarily used to denote immigrants (see below), whereas rank 2 (Ason) was primarily awarded to Fujiwara 藤原 and later Taira 平氏 and Minamoto 源氏 clan members. Note the nearly-Daoist meanings for several of these rank titles. Asuka Sango, “Buddhist Debate and the Production and Transmission of Shōgyō in Medieval Japan,” 243–44 for some possible contexts within which to view this practice and ritual exchange between Enryakuji and Kamo shrine(s). Lancaster, “The Rock Cut Canon in China.” Lothar Ledderose, “Changing the Audience”; Ledderose, Suey-Ling, and Sun 華孫, Buddhist Stone Sutras in China, Vol. 2; Ledderose, Buddhist Stone Sutras in China, Vol. 1 [山東省：第１卷。東平，平陰] certainly provides stunning new material for consideration. On Genbō and other Tang-era pilgrims to China, see Yoritomi Motohiro, Nicchū o musunda bukkyōsō: hatō o koete kesshi no tokai, 24–27. Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho, 299–312, which list the contents according to the Zhengyuan lu. Note that Nakao’s numbers are slightly diﬀerent (typically by one to three) from those listed in Gakujutsu Furontia jikkō iinkai, Hasshu issaikyō taishō mokuroku: e.g., T no. 945 is Z no. 499 in Nakao and 502 in the ICPBS catalog. Lowe, “Contingent and Contested,” 233–36. The ﬁrst ‘vowed’ set of copied scriptures in Japan is associated with a project Emperor Shōmu 聖武天皇 (r. 724–749) initiated as an apparently ﬁlial act to honor Emperor Monmu 文武天皇 (r. 697–707) in 728 (Jinki 神亀 5); the collection is known as the Nagayaō gankyō 長屋王願経. Empress Kōmyō 光明皇后 (Kōmyō kōgō, alt. Tōsanjō 藤三娘, 701–760) is, of course, the most celebrated patron of gankyō projects in Nara Japan. Ibid., 223–24 evokes 20 copied canons during the Nara period, as does Miyazaki Kenji 宮崎健司, “Nara jidai no shakyō 奈良時代の写経.” For an excellent summary of the practice of copying the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra or issaikyō on behalf of shrines’ kami (and buddhas or bodhisattvas) see Nara National Museum, Special Exhibit of Ancient Sutras from the Heian Period. Ochiai Toshinori, Girard, and Kuo, “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon,” 369; Akao Eikei, “Koshakyō shi kara mita Nanatsudera issaikyō: shoshigakuteki apurocchi o chūshin ni,” 791. The seven Nara temples are Tōdaiji 東大寺, Kōfukuji 興福寺, Gangōji 元興寺, Daianji 大安寺, Yakushiji 薬師寺, Saidaiji 西大寺, and Hōryūji 法隆寺. Sagai Tatsuru, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 51. On the ritsuryō system see Ooms, Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan and Toshio Kuroda and Grapard, trans., “The World of Spirit Paciﬁcation,”; Grapard, Protocol of the Gods; Grapard, “The Economics of Ritual Power.” Ooms, Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan, 166–67. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 25 41. Akao Eikei, “Koshakyō shi kara mita Nanatsudera issaikyō,” 789–95; Ochiai Toshinori, Girard, and Kuo, “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon,” 369. 42. “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon,” 370. Please note that the Kongōji canon was also apparently vowed to the daimyōjin of a chinjusha of Mount Kōya: Kōyasan Tennomiya 高野山天野宮. See rolls 003-33, 0073-001 (Z no. 73), 411–001, 411–001, 514–001 as examples in Ochiai Toshinori, Kongōji issaikyō no sōgōteki kenkyū to Kongōjiseikyō no kisoteki kenkyū. 43. Makita Tairyō et al., Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten, Vol. 1, 441, 59–65 ; Akao Eikei, “Koshakyō shi kara mita Nanatsudera issaikyō,” 797–809 and Miyabayashi Akihiko and Ochiai Toshinori, “Nanatsudera ed. Zhengyuan xinding shijiao mulu juandi 29-30,” 116 also notes that the catalog from Kiyomizudera of these rolls was checked. 44. Buswell, “Introduction,” 3–4. See also Tokuno, “Evaluation of Indigenous Scriptures,” 32. 45. Adapted from Buswell, “Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures,” 9–11. Buswell’s review (pp. 6–8) covers research by Mochizuki Shinkō 望月信亨 (1869– 1948), Tang Yongtong 湯用彤 (1893–1964), Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮 (1912–2011), and Mizuno Kōgen 水野弘元 (1901–2006). Mochizuki Shinko, Bukkyō kyōten seiritsu shinron; Tang Yongtong, Han-Wei Jin Nanbeichao fojiao shi; Makita Tairyō, Gikyō kenkyū; Kōgen Mizuno, Buddhist Sūtras. 46. Sagai Tatsuru, Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan, 281–82. On Dunhuang Chinese, Khotanese, and Tibetan editions of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra and the Hero’s March spell (C. Lengyan zhou, J. Ryōgonju 楞厳呪) or *Sitātapatra-dhāraṇī, which shows that Dunhuang editions postdate the Chinese – and Japanese manuscript versions of the spell and scripture – by roughly two centuries, see my “Relative Orthodoxy in Chinese Buddhism and the Book of the Hero’s March and Spell” paper delivered at the International Conference on Studies of Buddhist Manuscripts and East Asian Religious Manuscripts in 2014. A matter for research during June 2016 is to determine if Nakao’s assertion that only roll seven of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra (roll no. 1659) was copied by Hata Chikatō and his son, Hata no Yorichika can be substantiated. Cf. Nakao Takashi, “Myōrenjizō “Matsuosha issaikyō” no hakken to chōsa,” 9. There is good circumstantial evidence concerning the transmission and reception of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra in Japan that strongly suggests that the Kongōji Xu tuji manuscript reﬂects a Nara, rather than a Heian (or Kamakura) source text. Demiéville, citing Mochizuki, op. cit., in one of the longest and most carefully researched footnotes I have ever read, in his Le Concile de Lhasa of 1952, recalled that the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra ﬁrst came to Japan with the return of Fushō 普照, one of the monks of the Japanese delegation led by Tajihi no Mabito Hironari 丹墀真人広成 from 733 to 754, which ultimately brought the Vinaya master Jianzhen 鑑真 (Ganjin, 688–763) to Nara Japan. By 829, Gen’ei 玄叡 (d. 840), of the nascent Sanron school 三論宗, had written in his Daijō sanron daigishō 大乘三論大義抄 (Commentary on the Cardinal Principles of the Mahāyāna Three Treatises [School]) of debates that took place between Sanron and Hossō 法相宗 adherents regarding how the doctrines of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra both correspond and conﬂict with the teachings of Madhyamaka texts and the seminal Vijñaptimātratā-siddhi-śāstra. Empress Shōtoku 称徳 (r. 749–758) presided over these debates because her parents, Emperor Shōmu 聖武 (701– 756, r. 724–749) and Empress Kōmyō 光明 (701–760), had already abdicated and taken tonsure as royal patron monk and nun. Gen’ei records that the Empress declared the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra was an authentic sūtra, but apparently she was too late since, during the Hōki–era 宝亀 (770–781), an oﬃcial with a recent Buddhist mission to China, led by the monk Tokusei 徳清 (d.u.), which left Japan in 772 reported that a lay oﬃcial by the name of Fa Xiang 法詳 told Tokusei that the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra had been composed by Fang Rong 房融 (d. 705). Therefore, in 779, a petition to destroy the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra was circulated within the Buddhist temples in Nara. Only a monk by the name of Kaimyō 戒明 (d.u.), who had also just returned from China in 778, was able to rescue the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra from destruction by declaring that the Emperor of China had personally invited monks to explain 26 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. G. A. KEYWORTH this sūtra. Cf. Demiéville, Le concile de Lhasa, 43–45, n.3. See also Ch’oe Changsik [Pŏphye], Tonkōbon Ryōgongyō no kenkyū, 19–52, especially 49–52. Groner, “The Fan-wang Ching and Monastic Discipline in Japanese Tendai: A Study of Annen’s Futsū jubosatsukai kōshaku”; Orzech, Politics and Transcendent Wisdom. Li-Ying Kuo, “Sur les apocryphes bouddhiques chinois”; Kuo Li-Ying, “La récitation des noms de buddha en Chine et au Japon,” 688; Ochiai et al., Manuscripts of Nanatsu-dera. Buswell, Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea. “Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures,” 3–4. See also Tokuno, “Evaluation of Indigenous Scriptures,” 32. Buswell cites R. H. Charles, who says that in the early Judeo-Christian traditions, there were three reasons why books might be hidden or deemed secret. First, if they contained mysterious or esoteric wisdom inaccessible without separate initiation books could be labeled apocryphal. Second, the word carried an admonitory sense about books which were rebuked as secondary or questionable. Finally, the word came to be applied to what was false, spurious, or heretical. During Origen’s (185?–254?) time, books now commonly designated as Pseudepigrapha or ‘writings of falsely ascribed authorship’ were distinguished as the Apocrypha. Under the patronage of Constantine (r. 306–337), Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260–340 CE) and perhaps Jerome (340?–420) called the Apocrypha non-canonical, but still edifying books, libri ecclesiastici, as distinguished from the revealed libri canonici. The economic support Constantine provided allowed for signiﬁcantly greater attention to establishing a practical Christian canon during the fourth century, evidence of which can be seen in the codices that typically contain the four gospels and the Letters of Paul. Funayama Tōru, Butten wa dou kanyaku sareta no ka: suutora ga kyōten ni naru toki, 172–73. Buswell, “Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures,” 11. Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea, 23. Ibid., 17; Obata Hironobu, “Chibetto no zenshū to zō-yaku gikyō ni tsuite.” The nine Chan scriptures are (1) *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra; (2) Fawang jing 法王經 (T. 2883); (3) Commentary to the Fawang jing 法王經注釋 (na.); (4) *Śūraṃgama-sūtra; (5) Datong fangguang jing 大通方廣經 (T no. 2871); (6) Fanwang jing 梵網經 (T no. 1484); (7) Zuimiaoshengding jing 最妙勝定經 (n/a); (8) Maming pusa jing 馬鳴菩薩經 (T no. 1666); and (9) Chanding jing 禪定經 (n/a). Herrmann-Pfandt, Die Lhan Kar Ma Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texts, Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien, 137 cross references Tibetan editions with Chinese canon editions of the *Vajrasamādhi-sūtra. On Dunhuang and Tibetan editions of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra, see Keyworth “Relative Orthodoxy in Chinese Buddhism and the Book of the Hero’s March and Spell.” Buswell, Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea, 21. Schopen, “The Phrase sa pṛthivīpradeśaś caityabhūto bhavet in the Vajracchedikā: Notes on the Cult of the Book in the Mahāyāna.” This section comes from chapter 3, reverence for the stūpa of perfections, which holds immeasurable good qualities (gongyang sudubo pin 供養窣堵波品 [following Xuanzang], aprameyaguṇadhāraṇapāramitāstūpa-satkāraparivartastṛtīyaḥ), of the Sanskrit Aṣṭasāhaśrikā, P. L. Vaidya, Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, 42, which is cited in Kinnard, Imaging Wisdom, 122, and also cited in Schopen, “The Phrase sa pṛthivīpradeśaś caityabhūto bhavet in the Vajracchedikā.” There are several Chinese translations of the Aṣṭa, the two most well-known being the Xiaopin boreboluomi jing 小品般若波羅蜜經 2, T no. 227, 8: 544c4-7, by Kumārajīva, and Xuanzang’s rendition in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, Da bore boluomiduo jing 大般若波羅蜜多經 541, T no. 220 [4], 7: 780b1-10, which follows the Sanskrit text much closer. I have followed Xuanzang’s translation rather than Kumārajīva’s because the latter does not include the reference to a written book (likhitvā pustakagatāṃ). This passage is also partially translated in Conze, The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom, With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra, 113. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 27 58. Nakao Takashi and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji, “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho, 365. 59. Funayama Tōru, Butten wa dou kanyaku sareta no ka, 11–12, makes an important distinction between the East Asian Buddhist terms meaning ‘all the collected scriptures’ (yiqie jing, issaikyō), which he posits can be traced to the Taihe 太和 [3] reign period (c. 479) of the Northern Wei dynasty (386–534) and in use during the Northern and Southern Dynasties period (420–589), ‘collected scriptures’ (zhongjing, shukyō 衆經), used more prominently in southern China from the mid-sixth century on, and ‘canon’ (referring to the tripiṭaka) (da zangjing, daizōkyō), which was applied by the Tang (618–907) government. 60. Nattier, Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations. 61. Lowe, “Contingent and Contested,” 240. 62. Nanatsudera, Zhengyuan lu no. 1244 (not in T ed.), T no. 2157, 55: 1028c22-24, 1030a12, 1036b10, 1039b01. 63. Matsuda Kazunobu, “Sucoien korekushon no Shinsaikyō dankan ni tsuite” for a discussion of the provenance of a manuscript copy of the ‘Mahāyāna’ version of this scripture in the Schøyen collection from Khotan, which may very well fall into Funayama’s second category of apocryphal of fake scriptures. 64. T no. 262, 9: 22b19-c9, trans. in Hurvitz, Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, roll eight, ch. 27. 65. Galambos and van Schaik, Manuscripts and Travellers, 5–6, cited in Lowe, “Buddhist Manuscript Cultures in Premodern Japan,” 295, whose work I closely echo here. 66. Schopen, “The Mahāyāna and the Middle Period in Indian Buddhism,” 4. Acknowledgments This research is supported by an Insight Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. An earlier draft of this paper was delivered at the Association of Asian Studies annual conference in Seattle in 2016. I would like to express my thanks and gratitude to Rick McBride and Robert Gimello for their extremely helpful feedback. Disclosure statement No potential conﬂict of interest was reported by the author. Bibliography Abbreviations T Taishō shinshū daizōkyō. See Bibliography B. Z Zhengyuan xinding shijiao mulu. See Bibliography A. Titles in Japanese and (reconstructed) Sanskrit in Taishō canon follow Paul Demiéville et al., Répertoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais (Paris: Librairie d’Amerique et d’Orient, 1978). Lewis R. Lancaster and Sung-bae Park, eds., The Korean Buddhist Canon (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979) also provides translation and reconstructions for Sanskrit titles. A. Primary Sources Apidamo shunzheng lun 阿毘達磨順正理論 [*Abhidharmanyāyānusāra-śāstra (Saṃghabhadra), Abidatsumajunshōriron] 80 juan, translated by 玄奘 (Genjō, c. 602-664) 653-654, Z no. 1076 /T no. 1562. 28 G. A. KEYWORTH Bashi jing 八師經 [Book of the Eight Teachers, Hasshikyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Zhi Qian 支謙, ca. 222-229, Z no. 906 /T no. 581. Beihua jing 悲華經 [*Karuṇāpuṇḍarīka-sūtra, Hikekyō] 1 juan, translated by Dharmakṣema 曇無懺 ca. 414-421, Z no. 157 /T no. 157). Bore boluomiduo xinjing 般若波羅蜜多心經 [Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya-sūtra, Hannyaharamittashingyō] 1 juan, translated (or written by) Xuanzang 649, Z no. 27 /T no. 251. Chengzan dasheng gongde jing 稱讚大經乘功德經 [Book Extolling the Merits of the Mahāyāna, Shōsan daijō kudokukyō], 1 juan, translation attributed to Xuanzang 654, Z no. 287 /T no. 840. Chishi tuoluoni jing 持世陀羅尼經 [*Vasu[n]dhārādhāraṇī-sūtra, Jisedaranikyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Xuanzang 654, Z no. 547 /T no. 1162. Dabaoji jing 大寶積經 [Great Heap of Jewels Sūtra, *Mahāratnakūṭa-sūtra, Daihōshakkyō] 120 juan, translated by Bodhiruci 菩提流志 [II] et. al., ca. 706-713, Z no. 32 /T no. 310. Dabore boluomiduo jing 大般若波羅蜜多經 [Great Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra, Daihannya haramittakyō] 600 juan, translated by Xuanzang 659-663. Z no. 1 /T no. 220. Dafangguang rulai mimizang jing 大方廣如來秘密藏經 [Book of the Secret Treasury of Great, All-Encompassing Buddhas, Daihōkōnyorai himitsuzōkyō] 2 juan, likely apocryphal, Z no. 488 /T no. 821. Daji jing 大集經 [*Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra, Daishūkyō] 60 juan, translated by Sengjiu 僧就 et. al., 586-594, Z no. 68 /T no. 397. Daji rizang jing 大集日藏經 [*Sūryagarbha-sūtra, Daishū nichizōkyō] 20 juan, translated by Sengjiu et. al., 586-594, Z. 69 /T. 397-14. Daji yuezang jing 大集月藏經 [*Candragarbha-sūtra, Daishū gachizōkyō] 20 juan, translated by Sengjiu et. al., Z no.70 /T no. 397-15. Dajiaye ben jing 大迦葉本經 [*Mahānāradakassapa-jātaka (Mahākāśyapa), Daikashōhongyō], 1 juan, translation attributed to Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, ca. 266-313, Z no. 949 /T no. 496. Dapin bore jing 大品般若經 [Pañcaviṃśati-sāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra, Daibon hannyakyō] 40 juan, translated by Kumārajīva in 404, Z no. 3 /T no. 223. Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論 [Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna, Daijōkishinron] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no.741 /T no. 1666. Da zhidu lun 大智度論 [*Mahāprajñā-pāramitopadeśa-śāstra, Daichidoron] 100 juan, translated by Kumārajīva, ca. 402-406, Z no. 668 /T no. 1509. Fanwang jing 梵網經 [Book of Brahmā’s Net, Bonmōkyō] 2 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 645 /T no. 1484. Fangguang dazhuangyan jing 方廣大莊嚴經 [*Lalitavistara, Hōkōdaishōgongyō] 12 juan, translated by *Divākara 地婆訶羅 ca. 683-685, Z no. 141 /T no. 187. Fo shuo hengsui shuo huo jing 佛說恒水說或經 [Sūtra on the Buddha’s Preaching on the Gaṅgā River, Aṅguttara-nikāya, Uposatha-sutta, Gōsuikyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to attrib. Faju 法炬, ca. 290-307, Z no. 790 /T no. 33. Gaowang guanshiyin jing 高王觀世音經 [Book of Avalokiteśvara of King Gao] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 1361 /T. 2898] Gulai shishi jing 古來世時經 [Scripture of Events from Past and Recent Ages, Pālī *Theragāthā, Koraiseijikyō], 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 797 /T no. 44. Guanding jing 灌頂經 [Book of Consecration, Kanjōkyō] 12 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 207 /T no.1331. Guanwuliangshou jing 觀無量壽經 [(Amitāyus) Contemplation Sūtra, Kammuryōjubutsukyō] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 223 /T no. 365. Huayan jing 華嚴經 [Buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra, Kegongyō] 60 juan, translated by *Buddhabhadra, ca. 418-422, Z no. 95 /T no. 278. Huayan jing, 80 juan, translated by Śikṣānanda 實叉難陀 699, Z no. 96 /T no. 279. Jin’gang sanmei jing 金剛三昧經 [*Vajrasamādhi-sūtra, Geumgang sammae gyeong, Kongō sammaikyō] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 626, T no. 273. Jin’guangming zuishengwang jing 金光明最勝王經 [*Suvarṇaprabhāsottamarāja-sūtra, Konkōmyōsaishōōkyō] 10 juan, translated by Yijing 義凈 (635-713) 703, Z no. 159 /T no. 665. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 29 Jingfanwang banniepan jing 淨飯王般涅槃經 [*Śuddhodanarāja-parinirvāṇa-sūtra, Jōbonnō hatsunehangyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Juqu Jingheng 沮渠京聲, ca. 455, Z no. 912 /T no. 512. Kaiyuan shijiao lu 開元釋教錄 [Record of Śākyamuni’s Teachings, Compiled During the Kaiyuan Era (713-741)] 20 juan, compiled and edited by Zhisheng 智昇 (ca. 700-740) in 730, Z no. 1183 /T no. 2154. Longshi nü jing 龍施女經 [*Mahallikāparipṛcchā, Ryūsenyokyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Zhi Qian, ca. 222-229, Z no. 309 /T no. 557. Longshi pusa benji jing, 龍施菩薩本起經 [Book of the Original Acts of Bodhisattva *Nāgadattā, Ryūseibosatsu hongikyō] 1 juan, attributed to Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, ca. 266-313, likely apocryphal, Z no. 310 /T no. 558. Matou luocha foming jing 馬頭羅刹仏名經 [Book of Buddha Names Recited by Horse-Head (Hayagrīva) Rākṣasa, Battōrasetsu butsumyōkyō] 16 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 1167 /T n/a. Mile xiasheng chengfo jing 彌勒下生成佛經 [Book Expounding the Descent of Maitreya and His Enlightenment, *Maitreyavyākaraṇa-sūtra, Mirokugeshōjō butsukyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Kumārajīva, likely apocryphal, Z no. 230 /T no. 454. Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華経 [Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, Myōhō rengekyō] 7 (8) juan, translated by Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什 (344-413) 405/406, Z no. 146 /T no. 262. Niepan jing 涅槃經 [Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, Nehangyō] 40 juan, translated by [N.] Dharmakṣema ca. 414-421, Z no. 135 /T no. 374. Renwang boreboluomi jing 仁王般若波羅蜜經 [Book of Benevolent Kings, Ninnō hannya haramitsukyō] 2 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 21 /T no. 245. Shoulengyan jing 首楞嚴經 [Book of the Hero’s March or pseudo-*Śūraṃgama-sūtra, Shuryōgongyō] 10 juan, apocryphal (ca. 705-720), Z no. 502 /T no. 945. Taizi xudana jing 太子須大拏經 [*Jinaputrārthasiddha-sūtra, Taishishudainakyō] attributed to Sheng Xian 聖賢, ca. 388-409, Z no. 239 /T no. 171. Tianpin miaofa lianhua jing 添品妙法蓮華經 [Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, Tenmommyōhō rengekyō] 7 juan, translated by Jñānagupta 闍那崛多 & Dharmagupta 笈多 ca. 601-602, Z no. 149 /T no. 264. Weimojie jing 維摩詰經 [Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra, Yuimakitsukyō] 2 juan, translated by Zhi Qian 支謙, ca. 223-228, Z no. 151 /T no. 474. Xinsui jing 新歲經 [(Mahāyāna) *Pravāraṇa-sūtra, Shinsaikyō] 1 juan, translated by Tanwulan 曇無蘭 ca. 381-395, Z no. 995 /T no. 62. Yingluo jing 瓔珞經 [Book of Original Acts that Serve as Necklaces for Bodhisattvas, Yōrakukyō], 2 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 459 /T no. 1485. Yingwu jing 鸚鵡經 [*Śuda-sūtra, Ōmukyō] 1 juan, translation attributed to Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅, ca. 435-443, Z no. 825 /T no. 79. Yuanjue jing 圓覺經 [Book of Consummate Enlightenment, Engakukyō] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 472 /T no. 842. Za ahan jing 雜阿含經 [Saṃyuktāgama, Zōagongyō] 50 juan, translated by Guṇabhadra ca. 435-443, Z no. 771 /T no. 99. Zengyi ahan jing 增一阿含經 [Ekottarāgama, Zōichiagongyō] 51 juan, translated by Gautama Saṃghadeva 瞿雲僧伽提婆 397, Z no. 770 /T no. 125. Zhancha jing 占察經 [Book of Diving the Requital of Good and Evil Action, Senzatsukyō] 1 juan, apocryphal, Z no. 491 /T no. 839. Zhengyuan xinding shijiao lu 貞元新定釋教録 [Newly Revised Catalogue of Buddhist Scriptures, Compiled During the Zhengyuan Era (785-805)] 30 juan, compiled and edited by Yuanzhao 圓照 in 799 or 800, Z no. 1184 /T no. 2157. B. Modern Sources Akao Eikei 赤尾榮慶. 2000. “Koshakyō shi kara mita Nanatsudera issaikyō: shoshigakuteki apurocchi o chūshin ni 古寫經史から見た七寺一切經ー書誌學アプローチを中心に.” In 30 G. A. KEYWORTH Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, Okabe Kazuo 岡部和雄, Sueki Fumihiko 末木文美士 et. Al., eds., 789–810; Chūgoku Nihon senjutsu kyōten 中國日本撰述經典 [Scriptures and Commentaries Composed in China and Japan] Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha. Bock, Felicia Gressitt. Trans. Engishiki: Procedures of the Engi Era. Books I-V. Monumenta Nipponica Monograph Series. Tokyo: Sophia University Press, 1970. Buswell, Robert E., Jr. 1989. The Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea: The Vajrasamādhi-Sūtra, a Buddhist Apocryphon, Princeton Library of Asian Translations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. —, ed. 1990a. Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha. Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawai’i Press. —. 1990b. “Introduction: Prolegomenon to the Study of Buddhist Apocryphal Scriptures.” In R. E. Buswell, Jr., ed. 1–30; Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawai’i Press). Ch’oe Changsik [Pŏphye] 崔昌植 [法慧]. 2005. Tonkōbon Ryōgongyō no kenkyū 敦煌本楞厳經の研究 [Study of Dunhuang Editions of the *Śūraṃgama-sūtra]. Tokyo: Sankibō busshorin. Como, Michael. 2009. Weaving and Binding: Immigrant Gods and Female Immortals in Ancient Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. —. 2008. Shōtoku: Ethnicity, Ritual, and Violence in the Japanese Buddhist Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press. Conze, Edward. 1975. The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom, With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Demiéville, Paul. 1952. Le concile de Lhasa; une controverse sur le quiétisme entre bouddhistes de l’Inde et de la Chine au VIII. siècle de l’ère chrétienne, Bibliothèque de l’Institut des hautes études chinoises; vol. 7. Paris: Impr. nationale de France. Demiéville, Paul, Hubert Durt, Anna K. Seidel, and Académie des inscriptions & belles-lettres (France). 1978. Répertoire du canon bouddhique sino-japonais, édition de Taishō (Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō): [fascicule annexe du Hōbōgirin]. Éd. rev. et augm. ed. Paris: Librairie d’Amerique et d’Orient. Funayama Tōru 船山徹. 2014. Butten wa dou kanyaku sareta no ka: suutora ga kyōten ni naru toki 仏典はどう漢訳さらたのかースートラが経典になるとき [Making Sūtras into ‘Classics’ [jingdian]: How Buddhist Scriptures Were Translated into Chinese]. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten. Gakujutsu Furontia jikkō iinkai 学術フロンティア実行委員会, ed. 2006. Nihon genson hasshu issaikyō taishō mokuroku tsuke Tonkō bukkyō bunken 日本現存八種一切経対照目録 [付] 敦煌仏教文献 [Catalogue Comparing Eight Buddhist Canons Currently Available in Japan with Buddhist literature from Dunhuang]. Tokyo: Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuin daigaku. Galambos, Imre, and Sam van Schaik. 2012. Manuscripts and Travellers: The Sino-Tibetan Documents of a Tenth-Century Buddhist Pilgrim. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter. Grapard, Allan. 1988. “Institution, Ritual, and Ideology: The Twenty-Two Shrine-Temple Multiplexes of Heian Japan.” History of Religions 27 (3):246–269. —. 2000. “The economics of ritual power.” In John Breen and Mark Teeuwen, eds., 68–94; Shinto in History: Ways of the Kami (Richmond and Surrey, England: Curzon Press). Grapard, Allan G. 1984. “Japan’s Ignored Cultural Revolution: The Separation of Shinto and Buddhist Divinities in Meiji (Shimbutsu Bunri) and a Case Study (Tonomine).” History of Religions 23 (3):240–6. Grapard, Allan G. 1992. The Protocol of the Gods: A Study of the Kasuga cult in Japanese History. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Groner, Paul. 1990. “The Fan-wang ching and Monastic Discipline in Japanese Tendai: A Study of Annen’s Futsū jubosatsukai kōshaku.” In Robert E. Buswell, Jr., ed., 251–290; Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawai’i). Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. 2008. Die Lhan Kar Ma Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texts, Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien. Vol. 59, Beiträge zue Kultur - und Geistesgeschichte Asiens. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 31 Hurvitz, Leon. 1976. Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, Buddhist Studies and Translations. New York: Columbia University Press. Iida Takehiko 飯田剛彦. 2012. “Shōgōzō kyōkan ‘Jingo keiun ni nen gogangyō’ ni tsuite 聖語蔵経卷「神護景雲二年御願経」について” [On the Canon compiled in 769 for the Emperor in the Shōgōzō]. Shōsōin kiyō 正倉院紀要 34:210–161. Itō Shirō 伊東史朗, ed. 2011. Matsuno’o taisha no shin’ei 松尾大社の神影 [Matsuno’o Taisha Shrine: The Spread of Shinto Art from Ancient Times]. Osaka: Matsuno’o Taisha, Fukamoto Publishers. Kinnard, Jacob N. 1999. Imaging Wisdom: Seeing and Knowing in the Art of Indian Buddhism, Curzon critical studies in Buddhism. Richmond and Surrey: Curzon. Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuindaigaku fuzokutoshokan 国際仏教学大学院大学付属図書館. 2015. Taishōzō Tonkō shutsudo Butten taishō mokuroku Zantei daisanban 大正蔵・敦煌出土仏典対照目録暫定３版 [A Concordance to the Taishō Canon and Dunhuang Buddhist Manuscripts, Third Provisional Edition]. Tokyo: Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuindaigaku fuzokutoshokan 国際仏教学大学院大学付属図書館. Kuo, Li-Ying. 2000. “Sur les apocryphes bouddhiques chinois.” Bulletin de l’École française d’Exrême-Orient 87 (2):677–705. Kuo Li-Ying (郭麗英). 1995. “La récitation des noms de buddha en Chine et au Japon.” In Magara Kazuto 真柄和人, Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮 and Enomoto Masaaki 榎本正明, eds., 1262–1220; Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten: shiryōhen 中國撰述經典・資料篇 [Scriptures Compiled in China: Research Materials [16 roll Butsumyōkyō 佛名經] (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha). Kuroda, Toshio. 1981. “Shinto in the History of Japanese Religion.” Journal of Japanese Studies 7:1–21. —. 1996a. “The Development of the Kenmitsu System As Japan’s Medieval Orthodoxy.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23 (3–4):233–71. —. 1996b. “The Discourse on the Land of Kami (Shinkoku) in Medieval Japan: National Consciousness and International Awareness.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23 (3–4): 353–86. Kuroda, Toshio, and Suzanne Gay, trans. 1996. “Buddhism and Society in the Medieval Estate System.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23 (3–4):287–310. Kuroda, Toshio, and Allan Grapard, trans. 1996. “The World of Spirit Paciﬁcation: Issues of State and Religion.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 23 (3–4):321–352. Kuroda Toshio 黒田俊雄. 1990. Nihon chūsei no shakai to shūkyō 日本中世の社会と宗教 [Society and Religion in Medieval Japan]. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten. Kyoto National Museum, ed. 2015. The Eastward Expansion of Buddhism: Art of the Buddhist Canon; Feature Exhibition in Commemoration of the 100th Daizō-e Exhibition (Buppō tōzen: bukkyō no tenseki to bijutsu–tokubetsu tenkan dai hyakkai daizō-e kinen 仏法東漸：仏教の典籍と美術ー特別展観第100回大藏会記念). Edited by Consortium of Buddhist Universities and Colleges in Kyoto Kyoto National Museum. Kyoto: Kyoto National Museum. Lai, Whalen. 1990. “The Chan-ch’a ching: Religion and Magic in Medieval China.” In Robert E. Buswell, Jr., ed., 175–206; Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawai’i Press). Lancaster, Lewis R. 1989. “The Rock Cut Canon in China: Findings at Fang-shan.” The Buddhist Heritage: Papers delivered at the Symposium of the same name convened at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, November 1985. Lancaster, Lewis R., and Sung-bae Park, eds. 1979. The Korean Buddhist Canon: A Descriptive Catalogue. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press. Ledderose, Lothar. 2004. “Changing the Audience: A Pivotal Period in the Great Sutra Carving Project at the Could Dwelling Monastery near Beijing.” In John Lagerwey, ed., 385–410; Religion and Chinese Society Volume 1: Ancient and Medieval China (Hong Kong Chinese University of Hong Kong and École française d’Extrême-Orient). —, ed. 2014. Buddhist Stone Sutras in China: Shandong Province: Volume 1. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz. 32 G. A. KEYWORTH Ledderose, Lothar, Tsai Suey-Ling, and Hua Sun 華孫, eds. 2015. Buddhist Stone Sutras in China: Sichuan Province: Vol. 2. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz. Lowe, Bryan. 2014a. “Buddhist Manuscript Cultures in Premodern Japan.” Religion Compass 8/ 9:287–301. —. 2014b. “Contingent and Contested: Preliminary Remarks on Buddhist Catalogs and Canons in Early Japan.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 41 (2):221–253. Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮. 1976. Gikyō kenkyū 疑經研究 [Studies in Apocryphal Scriptures]. Kyoto: Jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo. Reprint, Makita Tairyō chosakushū: Gikyō kenkyū 牧田諦亮著作集第一巻：疑経研究 (Kyoto: Rinsen shoten, 2014), ed. Ochiai Toshinori. Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮, Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, Yang Zengwen 楊曾文, Yao Changshou 姚長壽, Naomi Gentetsu 直海玄哲, Kōfuku Kaori 幸福香織, Miyai Rika 宮井里佳, and Enomoto Masaaki 榎本正明, eds. 1994. Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten 中國撰述經典. Edited by Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮 and Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. 6 vols. Vol. 1, Nanatsudera koitsu kyōten kenkyū sōsho 七寺古逸經典叢書 [The Long Hidden Scriptures of Nanatsudera, Research series]. Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha. Matsuda Kazunobu 松田和信. 1999. “Sucoien korekushon no Shinsaikyō dankan ni tsuite スコイエン・コレクションの『新歳経』断簡について” [On Fragments of the Xunsui jing in the Schøyen Collection]. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究 48 (1):207–214. Miyabayashi Akihiko 宮林昭彦, and Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. 1998. “Zhengyuan xinding shijiao mulu juandi 貞元新定釋教目錄 29 30.” In Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮, A. Forte, Miyabayashi Akihiko 宮林昭彦, Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, et Al, eds., 59–128; Chūgoku Nihon kyōten shōsho mokuroku 中國・日本經典章疏目録 [Catalogues of Scriptures and their Commentaries in China and Japan] (Tokyo: Daitō shuppansha). Miyazaki Kenji 宮崎健司. 2011. “Nara jidai no shakyō 奈良時代の写経” [Hand-copied scriptures from the Nara period]. Critical Review for Buddhist Studies (Korea) 9 (6):9–46. Mizuno, Kōgen. 1982. Buddhist Sūtras: Origin, Development, Transmission. 1st English ed. Tokyo: Koosei Publishing Co. Mochizuki Shinko 望月信享. 1946. Bukkyō kyōten seiritsu shinron 佛教經典成立史論 [Studies on the History of the Composition of Buddhist Sūtras]. Kyoto: Hōzōkan. Mujaku Dōchū. 1963. Zenrin shōkisen 禅林象器箋 [Notes on Images and Implements from the Groves of Zen]. Kyoto: Seishin shobō 誠信書房. Nakao Takashi 中尾堯. 1996. “Myōrenjizō “Matsuosha issaikyō” no hakken to chōsa 妙蓮寺蔵「松尾社一切経」の発見と調査” [Investigation of the Discovery of the Matsuo Shrine [Buddhist] Canon, held by the [Sūtra] Repository of Myōren Temple]. Rissho daigaku bungakubu ronsō 立正大学文学部論叢 103:130–109. —. 1998. “Jōyō bunkazai “Matsuosha issaikyō” no genpon kōsei 重要文化財「松尾社一切経」の原本構成” [The Original Organization of the “Matsuo [Buddhist] Canon,” An Important Cultural Asset]. Rissho daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo nenpō 立正大学人文科学研究所年報 35 (3):12a–1a. Nakao Takashi 中尾堯, and Honmon Hokkeshū Daihonzan Myōrenji 本門法華宗大本山妙蓮寺, eds. 1997. Kyōto Myōrenji zō “Matsuosha issaikyō” chōsa hōkokusho 京都妙蓮寺蔵「松尾社一切経」調査報告書 [Written Report Investigating the Matsuo Shrine [Buddhist] Canon, held by Myōren Temple in Kyoto]. Tokyo: Ōtsuka kōgeisha. Nara National Museum, ed. 2015. Special Exhibit of Ancient Sutras from the Heian Period: Encountering the Legendary Kunōji Sutras Tenri, Japan: Tenri Jihōsha. Nattier, Jan. 2008. A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations: Texts from the Eastern Han 東漢 and Three Kingdoms 三國 Periods. Tokyo: The International Research University for Advanced Buddhology, Sōka University. Obata Hironobu 小畠宏允. 1975. “Chibetto no zenshū to zō-yaku gikyō ni tsuite チベットの禅宗と藏訳と偽経について” [On Tibetan Translations of Apocryphal [Chinese] Chan Scriptures]. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 23 (2):170–171. Ochiai, Toshinori, Antonino Forte, Tairyō Makita, and Silvio Vita. 1991. The Manuscripts of Nanatsu-dera: A Recently Discovered Treasure-house in Downtown Nagoya. Kyoto: Istituto italiano di cultura Scuola di studi sull’Asia orientale. STUDIES IN CHINESE RELIGIONS 33 Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, ed. 2007. Kongōji issaikyō no sōgōteki kenkyū to Kongōjiseikyō no kisoteki kenkyū: kenkyū seika hōkokusho 金剛寺一切経の総合的研究と金剛寺聖教の基礎的研究：研究成果報告書 [General Research on the Kongōji Manuscript Canon and a Basic Survey of the Kongōji Sacred Texts]. 2vols. Tokyo: Kokusai Bukkyōgaku daigakuin daigaku. —. 2009. “The Digital Archives of Old Japanese Manuscripts: Currrent (sic) Plans and Their Implementation.” International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies. —. 2010. “Higashi Ajia ni okeru bukkyō shahon kenkyū no genkyō to kenkyūhōhō 東アジアにおける仏教写本研究の現況と研究方法” [Buddhist Manuscript Research in East Asia: the Present Situation and Research Methods]. Critical Review for Buddhist Studies (Korean) 6:9–31. Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典, Frédéric Girard, and Li-Ying Kuo. 1996. “Découverte de manuscrits douddhiques chinois au Japon [Conférence prononcée par Monsieur Ochiai Toshinori].” Bulletin de l’École française d’Exrême-Orient 83:368–375. Ooms, Herman. 2009. Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan: The Tenmu Dynasty, 650-800. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. Orzech, Charles D. 1998. Politics and Transcendent Wisdom: The Scripture for Humane Kings in the Creation of Chinese Buddhism. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press. Ōtsuka Norihiro 大塚紀弘. 2009. “Issaikyō shosha to butten mokuroku: Aichiken Shinshiroshi Tokuunji zō Heian koshakyō no bunseki kara 一切経写書写と仏典目録ー愛知県新城市徳運寺蔵平安古写経の分析からー “ [Catalog of Buddhist Scriptures Copied in a Heian-Era Buddhist Canon from Tokuunji in Aichi Prefecture, Shinshiro City] Kokusai bukkyōgaku daigakuin daigaku gakujutsu furonntia Jikkō iinkai 国際仏教学大学院大学学術フロンティア実行委員会. Ōwa Iwao 大和岩雄. 1993. Hatashi no kenkyū: Nihon no bunka to shinkō ni fukaku kanyoshita torai shūdan no kenkyū 秦氏の研究ー日本の文化と信仰に深く関与した渡来集団の研究 [Study of the Hata Clan: Research of the Immigrant Population with Deep Connections to Japanese Cultic Practices and Culture]. Tokyo: Yamato shobō. Robson, James. 2012. “Brushes with Some “Dirty Truths”: Handwritten Manuscripts and Religion in China.” History of Religions 51 (4):317–343. Rong Xinjiang 榮新江. 1999-2000. “The Nature of the Dunhuang Library Cave and the Reasons for its Sealing.” Cahiers d’Extrême Asie 11:247–275. Sagai Tatsuru 嵯峨井建. 2013. Shinbutsu shūgō no rekishi to girei kūkan 神仏習合の歴史と儀礼空間 [History of Shintō-Buddhist Syncretism and Ritual Space]. Kyoto: Shibunkaku. Sakaehara Towao 栄原永遠. 2011. Shōsōin monjo nyūmon 正倉院文書入門 [Guide to the Literary Documents Contained in the Shōsōin]. Tokyo: Kadokawa gakujutsu shuppan 角川学術出版. Sango, Asuka. 2012. “Buddhist Debate and the Production and Transmission of Shōgyō in Medieval Japan.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 39 (2):241–273. Schopen, Gregory. 1975. “The Phrase sa pṛthivīpradeśaś caityabhūto bhavet in the Vajracchedikā: Notes on the Cult of the Book in the Mahāyāna.” Indo-Iranian Journal 17:147–181. —. 2000. “The Mahāyāna and the Middle Period in Indian Buddhism: Through a Chinese Looking-Glass.” The Eastern Buddhist 32 (2):1–25. Shanghai guji chubanshe 上海古籍出版社, ed. 1992-2001. Ecang Dunhuang wenxian 俄藏敦煌文獻 [Dunhuang Manuscript Collections of the St. Petersberg Branch of the Institute of Oriental Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences]. 17 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe. Shanghai guji chubanshe 上海古籍出版社, and Bibliothèque nationale de France, eds. 19942005. Facang Dunhuang Xiyu wenxian 法藏敦煌文獻 [Manuscrits de Dunhuang et d’Asie centrale conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale de France]. 34 vols. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe. Shinohara, Koichi. 2015. “Rethinking the Category of Chinee Buddhist Apocrypha.” Studies in Chinese Religion 1 (1):70–81. Shively, Donald H., and William H. McCullough, eds. 1999. The Cambridge History of Japan, Vol. 2, Heian Japan. Cambridge, England and New York: Cambridge University Press. 34 G. A. KEYWORTH Storch, Tanya. 2014. The History of Chinese Buddhist Bibliography: Censorship and Transformation of the Tripiṭaka. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press. Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎, Watanabe Kaikyoku 渡辺海旭, and et al., eds. Taishō shinshū dai zōkyō 大正新脩大藏經 [Revised version of the canon, compiled during the Taishō era]. 100 vols. Tokyo: Taishō Issaikyō Kankōkai, 1924–1935. Rpt., Rpt., Chinese Buddhist Electronic Texts Association 中華電子佛典栛會, CBETA Electronic Tripiṭaka Collection 電子佛典集成, Taipei: 1998-2014 or the SAT Daizōkyō Database: http://21dzk.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/SAT/ satdb2015.php?lang=en; accessed May, 2016. Takeda Goichi 武田悟一. 2009. “Nagamatsu Nissen ni okeru kyōka katsudō no kenkyū: Shimada-shi to no kōryū wo chūshin to shite 長松日扇における教化活動の研究 : 嶋田氏との交流を中心として” [Study of the Ediﬁcation Activity by Nagamatsu Missen and his Communications with Mr. Shimada]. Shūkyō kenkyū 宗教研究 82 (4):1264–1265. Tang Yongtong 湯用彤. 1938. Han-Wei Jin Nanbeichao fojiao shi 漢魏晉南北朝佛教史 [History of Buddhism during the Han-Wei, Jin, Northern and Southern Dynasties]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Reprint, 1955. Tokuno, Kyoko. 1990. “The Evaluation of Indigenous Scriptures in Chinese Buddhist Bibliographical Catalogues.” In Chinese Buddhist apocrypha, edited by Robert E. Buswell, Jr., 31–74. Honolulu, Hawaii: University of Hawai’i Press. Ueda Masaaki 上田正昭. 1998. Kodai kokka to shūkyō 古代国家と宗教 [Religion and the State in Ancient [Japan]]. Vol. 3, Ueda Masaaki chosakushū 上田正昭著作集. Tokyo: Kadokawa. —. 2013. Torai no kodaishi 渡来の古代史 [Ancient History of [Immigrants who] Crossed Over [to Japan]], Kadokawa sensho 角川選書 526. Tokyo: Kadokawa. Vaidya, P.L. 1960. Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, Buddhist Sanskrit Texts No. 4. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute. Yoritomi Motohiro 頼富本宏. 2009. Nicchū o musunda bukkyōsō: hatō o koete kesshi no tokai 日中を結んだ仏教僧：波濤を超えて決死の渡海 [Connections between Chinese and Japanese Buddhist Monks who Crossed the Surging Sea Prepared for Death], Zusetsu Chūgoku bunka hyakka 図説中国文化百華 08. Tokyo: Nōsan Gyoson bunkakyōkai. Zhonghua Canon Editing Bureau 《中華大藏經》編輯局, ed. Zhonghua da zangjing Hanwen bufen 中華大藏經漢文部分 [Chinese Buddhist Canon: Han Chinese Texts, Separated by Sections]. 106 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju chubanshe, 1984–1996.

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine

Apocryphal Chinese books in the Buddhist canon at Matsuo Shintō shrine

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS