MYSTERY AND SECRECY IN THE CONTACT OF DAOISM AND BUDDHISM IN EARLY MEDIEVAL CHINA

MYSTERY AND SECRECY IN THE CONTACT OF DAOISM AND BUDDHISM IN EARLY MEDIEVAL CHINA

Friederike Assandri

Introduction

The following discussion of some aspects of mystery and secrecy in the encounter of Buddhism and Daoism in China refers to a specific time and place; namely the environment of the capital Chang’an 長安 of the late sixth and early seventh century.

The empire, which had been divided for more than three centuries, was united in 589 under the short rule of the Sui Dynasty. The long period of division had allowed much regional diversity of religion. It had seen what has been called “the Buddhist conquest” of China (Zürcher 1959): the spread and acceptance of the foreign religion of Buddhism in all levels of Chinese society. Buddhism had introduced new ways of thinking, new ways of interpreting old questions, as well as new conceptions regarding the universe and the human sphere. It had also brought new soteriological conceptions, most influential maybe the idea of universal salvation, and that of the compassionate Bodhisattva, who renounces to personal salvation in order to save all beings. While Buddhism was embraced enthusiastically and became very influential in the intellectual, social and political field, it never held a monopoly. A counterweight was provided by Daoism, which developed during the same period from different, rather unconnected religious movements, which were oftentimes limited only to relatively small master-disciple groups, into an institutionalized religion, which stood up in the environment of the court as the autochthonous alternative to Buddhism. The movement of the Celestial Masters (tianshidao 天師道), founded in 142 CE in Sichuan 四川, had spread first to northern China, and after 311 and 317 from there to the south. In Jiangnan 江南 in the south, the ‘revelations’ of the Shangqing 上清 and Lingbao 靈寳 scriptures in 364-370 and ca. 400 respectively had added much to the scriptural lore of Daoism; their sophisticated message and form assured that Daoism would spread into the highest echelons of society. Competition with Buddhism created a need to integrate the various, often contending religious movements that related their origins back to Dao into a unified religion. In this process of integration, different traditions vied for positions within a hierarchical initiation order.

The spread of Buddhism and Daoism to all social levels, from common people to the highest levels of imperial administration, including the emperors, made Buddhism and Daoism forces to be reckoned with. Imperial administration in the north as well as in the south took measures to control the religious communities.

Furthermore, with the fall of Han 漢 Dynasty (206 BCE-220), the established concept of the “son of heaven” as legitimization of the emperor had become untenable in many ways. The “Son of Heaven” of the Han, just like Heaven itself, was one. The Six Dynasties period (220-589) instead saw many contemporary “sons of heaven”, different emperors in a fragmented “empire.” Thus new legitimization strategies for those in power were needed. Buddhism and Daoism were both ready to offer these, adding further complexity to the interplay of worldly powers and representatives of Daoism and Buddhism. This complex interplay forms the background of the following considerations of “secret” as a contact zone on the philosophical and epistemological level as well as of the discussion of the role of secrecy on the social level.

Secret as a “blank space” and interface of transfer: The “dark” (xuan) in the Daode jing

What has been termed the notion of secret (Reichling and Stünkel 2011:1) as a “blank [that is, etymologically “white”] space” (Reichling and Stünkel 2011:10), is comparable to what has been called “black” (xuan 玄) space of “mystery” in the context of the interaction of Buddhism and Daoism in early medieval China. The term xuan is defined in the Shuowen jiezi 說文解字 [Explaining Simple Graphemes and Analyzing Compounds] dictionary as “hidden, dark and distant, far” (youyuan 幽遠) and as “black with a red tinge” (黑而有赤色者). While the chromatic image seems to be diametrically opposed, the following discussion shall show how conceptions associated with the term “xuan” correspond to this understanding of the notion of “secret” in many of its connotations, and how particularly the concept of “secret as a blank space” can be fruitfully employed in the analysis of the interaction between Buddhists and Daoists. The arguably most influential use of the term “xuan” in the early Chinese literature appears in the Daode jing 道德經 [The Classic of the Way and Its Power]. The Daode jing has been a foundational text of Daoism, read and interpreted in a great variety of religious and philosophical contexts throughout more than two millennia. Furthermore, it was highly esteemed by many Buddhists since the early time of the introduction of Buddhism to China; so much so, that some influential Buddhists employed its terminology to convey Buddhist conceptions; prominent examples are Zhi Dun 支遁 (314-366), Kumārajīva (344-413) and Sengzhao 僧肇 (ca. 378-413). In the sixth and seventh centuries CE, it was the Daode jing as well that offered concepts and terminology, which Daoists and Buddhists employed to construct, or “frame”, their teachings concerning the “mystery/secret”.

The Daode jing employs the term xuan, dark, to denote “the mystery” in reference to Dao 道, in particular to its “unknowable” aspect. In terms of content, Dao in Daoism is epistemologically indefinable and it is at the same time origin, ontological substance, and underlying rule of all being. While xuan is used as a reference to Dao, semantically it is not identical, because the term Dao is charged with a multitude of concrete associations, whereas xuan leaves the “space” much more “blank,” or better “dark.” As a descriptive term, xuan thus refers to the “blank space” that mystery or secret represents. 道可道，非常道。名可名，非常名。無名天地之始；有名萬物之母。故常無欲，以觀其妙；常有欲，以觀其徼。此兩者，同出而異名，同謂之玄。玄之又玄，衆妙之門。 The Dao, which can be spoken of is not the eternal Dao, The name, which can be named is not the eternal name.

Without name—this is the beginning of heaven and earth

Having a name—this is the mother of the myriad things. Therefore:

Eternally without desires—contemplate its marvels (妙)

Eternally with desires— contemplate its manifestations

These two come out from the same [source] but have different names.

The same [source] we call “mysterious.” (同謂之玄) Mysterious and again mysterious (玄之又玄): The door to all subtleties (眾妙之門) 知者不言，言者不知。塞其兑，閉其門，挫其銳，解其分，和其光，同其塵，是謂玄同。故不可得而親，不可得而踈；不可得而利，不可得而害；不可得而貴，不可得而賤。故為天下貴 。 Those who know do not speak;

Those who speak do not know. Block the passages,

Shut the doors,

Let all sharpness be blunted, All tangles untied,

All glare tempered.

All dust smoothed.

This is called the mysterious leveling (是謂玄同).

He who has achieved it cannot either be drawn into friendship or repelled,

Cannot be benefited, cannot be harmed,

Cannot either be raised or humbled,

And for that very reason is highest of all creatures under heaven (故為天下貴). These two passages (emphasis mine), mention two essential characteristics of the mystery (xuan):

1. It is intrinsically linguistically not definable and epistemologically not knowable.

2. Yet it can be “grasped” or “achieved” by “those who rid themselves of desires” or “block the passages etc.”

Thus, while mystery remains always hidden, there are individuals who have managed to “grasp” the mystery. These perfected beings are practitioners of some kind of cultivation. Furthermore, the notion of “honored by the world,” suggests an association with high position or even the sage ruler. The point of this excursion into early meanings associated with xuan or mystery as a descriptive term for Dao is to underscore that while the term refers to the “unknowable” and “unspeakable” mystery, there existed the concept that this unknowable mystery could be reached through some kind of bodily or contemplative practice. In Daoism, reaching the mystery was associated with worldly power, the ability to establish social and political order, and with the quest for physical immortality. A paragon example of this association might be the Yellow Emperor – emperor and Daoist adept, who in an ever growing lore was associated with the secret Daoist teachings also of later times, including longevity practices.

2. Strategies of dealing with Mystery: The epistemological level.

Mystery as the epistemological indefinite: The Xuanxue interpretation of the mystery (xuan)

While some early trends of thought in Daoism, expressed for example in the Xiang’er 向爾 and Heshanggong 河上公 commentaries to the Daode jing, interpreted xuan concretely as Heaven, the xuanxue 玄學 (Mystery Learning) trend of thought, exemplified maybe best by the genial scholar Wang Bi 王弼 (226-249) in his commentary to the Daode jing, established the concept of mystery, unknowable, for the term xuan:

玄者冥也。默然無有也。始母之所出也。不可得而名。故不可言。同名曰玄。而言［同］謂之玄者。取於不可 得而謂之然也。［不可得而］謂之然。則不可以定乎一玄而已。［若定乎一玄］則是名則失之遠矣。故曰玄之又玄也。衆妙皆從同［玄］而出。故曰衆妙之門也）

The [term] “dark” [xuan, mysterious] is taken for that [aspect of the ultimate principle] which cannot be designated as being thus [and nothing else]. Should one designate it as being thus [and nothing else], it would definitely not be permitted to define it as one [specific] dark. If one were to define it as being one [specific] dark and nothing else, this would be a definition, and that would be far off the mark. That is why [[[Laozi]]] says “dark and again dark.” 15 This epistemologically indefinite xuan became a space, which Buddhists and Daoists would claim equally, and where they competed for showing the best way to reach it. Socially, xuanxue was explored in an environment of the intellectual elite, with pure conversations, qingtan 清談 or xuantan 玄談 (mystery conversations) being one of the popular past-times. It was this milieu, where also early Buddhists mixed in and which would prove one of the major vehicles to spread and adopt Buddhist teachings in the Chinese elite and intelligentsia.

Inscribing the blank space of the Mystery: The Buddhist appropriation of the expressions “xuan” and” xuan zhi you xuan” of the first chapter of the Daode jing. From Zhi Dun 支遁 (314-366) to Kumārajīva (344-413) and Sengzhao 僧肇 (384-414), to Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智頤 (538-597) and Jizang 吉藏 (549-623), prominent Buddhists referred to the Daode jing and employed its terminology; Kumārajīva even produced a commentary to the Daode jing. Zhi Dun, “the most famous gentry monk of the capital” (Zürcher 1959, 106) and a major player in the qingtan meetings of the social elite, employed the Daode jing term chongxuan 重玄 (twofold mystery or twofold “dark”) in several occasions as a reference to “what could not be described” – the epistemologically indefinite blank space of the secret.18 In his foreword to a copy of the Mahāprajnāparamitā sutra, Zhi Dun describes prajnāparamitā, the highest wisdom, with the terms zhongmiao 衆妙 and chongxuan, both referring to the end of the first chapter of the Daode jing:

夫般若波羅蜜者。衆妙之淵府。群智之玄宗。神王之所由。如來之照功。其爲經也。至無空豁廓然無物者也。無物於物。故能齊於物。無智於智。故能運於智。是故夷三脱 19於重玄。齊萬物於空同。明諸佛之始。盡群靈之本無。登十住之妙階。趣無生之徑路.20

“The Prajnāparamitā is the deep treasure of ‘All Wonders’, the mysterious origin of all wisdom. It is the path followed by the spiritual rulers, the (mystic) reflection achieved by the Tathāgatha. As a scripture, it is that which (teaches) the empty expanse of the highest non-being, the tranquil absence of things. It realizes the absence of things in the things (themselves) and therefore it is able to equalize all things; it (realizes) the absence of knowing in knowing (itself) and therefore is able to make knowing function.”21 Therefore it levels the three gates of liberation in the Twofold Mystery, and equalizes the ten-thousand things in empty equality. It explains the beginning of all Buddhas, and it exhausts the original non-being of the spiritual realm, it climbs the wondrous steps of the ten stages [of Bodhisattvahood] and it brings one quickly ahead on the way of non-becoming.22

Sengzhao is said to have written a commentary to the Daode jing, but this attribution is not beyond doubt. See Tang Yongtong 1938, vol. 1: 332. 18 Compare for example Guang Hongming ji T 2103, 30, 351; see also Lu Guolong 1993, 14.

19 This refers to three gates of liberation mentioned in Prajnāparamitāsutra (Maheboreboluomi jing 摩訶般若波羅蜜經 , T 223, see e.g. ibid., 24, 392c17) as meditation on non-substantiality 空解脫, / meditation on signlessness 無相解脫, / meditation on desirelessness 無作解脫 (or 無願，無造) (Muller, 1995 term 三脫 and 三解脫門). Note that the last term could be also interpreted as meditating on what is not produced (i.e. the transcendent).

20 Daxiaopin duibi yaochao xu diwu 大小品對比要抄序第五, cited in Chu sanzang jiji, T 2145, 55a14-18. Compare Zürcher 1959, 124 for a translation and discussion of this foreword.

Another example of the use of the term chongxuan recorded in the Chusanzang jiji T 2145 is a foreword by an unknown author to the commentary on the Shou lengyan sanmei jing 首楞嚴三昧經 (Śūraṅgamasamādhisūtra), written by Zhi Dun. (Shoulengyan sanmeijing zhu xu dijiu 首楞嚴三昧經注序第九, T 2145, 49a7-13). Also in some of Zhi Dun’s poems, we find the term chongxuan used in reference to an absolute or ultimate truth; see for example the poems Yonghuaishi wu shou:詠懷詩五首 inGuang Hongming ji 廣弘明集 [Extended Collection on the Propagation and Explanation (of Buddhism)], T 2103, 350b16-21.

21 Zürcher 1959, 124. 22 Daxiaopin duibi yaochao xu diwu 大小品對比要抄序第五, cited in Chu sanzang jiji, T 2145, 55a14-18.

This short passage exemplifies how a Buddhist author related new content, the concept of prajnāparamitā, to extant well known notions of “mystery” from the Daode jing. The fact that xuan, the mystery, was conceived as epistemologically indefinite certainly facilitated this endeavor to “inscribe” the new alongside the old in the mystery. However, the author claims that it is the Buddhist text, which offers the way to reach this mystery. “Mysterious and mysterious again”: Madhyamika logic and the Daode jing

Little more than a century later, we find a further process of “inscribing” the blank space of the mystery. Possibly beginning with Kumārajīva and Sengzhao, a specific method of reaching insight into the “mystery,” namely the dialectics of the tetra lemma, were inscribed in the term chongxuan, referring to the sentence xuan zhi you xuan 玄之又玄 [“mysterious and mysterious again”] of the first chapter of the Daode jing. The tetra lemma consists of a series of four statements, each negating the previous one, so that in the end a negation of all possible statements about the nature of being (or any other argument a debater would chose) is achieved:

•All dharmas are being (you 有)

•All dharmas are nonbeing (wu 無)

•All dharmas are being and nonbeing (yi you yi wu 亦有亦無)

•All dharmas are neither being nor nonbeing (fei you fei wu 非有非無)

The logic of the tetra lemma originated in India. In Buddhism, it was used to a great extent by Nāgārjuna (ca. 150-250 CE), the foremost philosopher of the Mādhyamika School, in refuting propositions of his opponents, but also as a tool to reach insight into that which is beyond any definition, the unknowable. Kumārajīva had translated Nāgārjuna’s hagiography into Chinese in 401 (Longshu pusa zhuan 龍樹菩薩傳 (Biography of Nāgārjuna Bodhisattva) T 2047), as well as two treatises ascribed to him, the Mādhyamaka-kārikā

[[[Zhonglun]] 中論 (Treatise of the Middle Way)] and the Dvādaśanikāya-śāstra [Shi’ermen lun 十二門論 (Twelf Gates Treatise)]. These two treatises, together with the Śāta-śāstra [[[Bailun]] 百論, (Treatise of the Hundred Verses)], constitute the three treatises (sanlun 三論 ), which the Chinese designation of the Mādhyamika school (sanlunzong 三論宗) refers to. With the introduction of these writings, the logic of the tetra lemma became popular in China. As an intellectual tool, this logic must have been considered as a major advance over the traditional Chinese logic, which worked on the basis of two propositions (true and false/ being and non-being), and juxtaposed these as paradox in the context of describing the Dao, or the mystery.

With the Daode jing continuing to play a major role in intellectual life in general, and as a source of the debates on the nature of being and the question of the relation of non-being and being in particular, it is not too surprising that also Kumārajīva produced a commentary to the Daode jing. One fragment of Kumārajīva’s commentary to the Daode jing (48.3) suggests that he used the logic of Mādhyamika with its characteristic double negation in his interpretation:

羅什曰：損之者無贏而不遣，遣之至乎忘惡。然後無細而不去，去之至乎忘善。惡者非也，善者是也，既損其非，又損其是，故曰損之又損。是非俱忘，情欲既斷，德與道合，至於無為。己雖無為，任萬物之自為，故無不為也。

“’Diminishing them’ means that there is no coarse thing that is not cast away so that this casting away gets to the point of forgetting about evil. Thereupon there is no fine thing that is not eliminated so that this eliminating gets to the point of forgetting about good. Evil is what is to be rejected, good is what is to be approved. Having diminished what is to be rejected, he will also diminish what is to be approved. That is why [the text] says ‘diminishing this [the one], and then again diminishing that [the other]’. Once [things to be] approved and [things to be] disapproved are both forgotten, the feelings and desires are cut off. [Then] one’s [[[own]]] capacity harmonizes with the Dao to the point of reaching non-interference. Although oneself is ‘without interference’, one brings to fruition the other entities’ own activities, that is why there ‘is nothing that is not done’.”

The sentence commented here, “diminishing and diminishing again” (損之又

損) (Daode jing 48), has the same structure as the sentence “dark and dark again” (玄之又玄) in the first chapter of the text, from which the name Twofold Mystery (chongxuan xue 重玄學) is derived. Unfortunately, no commentary of Kumārajīva to the first sentence of the Daode jing has survived. However, the term chongxuan appears as a designation for “the ultimate mystery”, with reference also to the sentence 48.3 from the Daode jing in an essay by his disciple Sengzhao, the Niepan wuming lun 涅槃無名論 (Essay on Nirvana not Having a Name) .:

夫群有雖衆。然其量有涯。正使智猶身子。辯若滿願。窮才極慮。莫窺其畔。況乎虚無之數。重玄之域。其道無涯。欲之頓盡耶。書不云乎。爲學者日益。爲道者日損。爲道者爲於無爲者也。爲於無爲而曰日損。此豈頓得之謂。要損之又損之。以至於無損耳。

„With regard to ‘all being’, although [the things] are many, their number is limited. But still, even if someone would have wisdom like Śāriputra and talent of speech like Pūrņamaitrāyaņīputra, if he used his talents to the fullest and exhausted his thinking [capacities] completely, he still could not see these limits. How much more [is this valid] for the category 25 of empty non-being, the realm of chongxuan.26 This Dao has no limits, how could one realize it fully in one moment? Is it not said in the Laozi: ’Learning means to increase every day. Practicing the Dao means diminishing every day’? He who practices the Dao is the one whose action is non-action. Action through non-action this is why it says ‘daily diminish’. How could that be a name for a ‘sudden obtaining’? One has to diminish and diminish again, until one reaches a point where there is nothing to diminish. “ 27 The first example demonstrates how Kumārajīva inscribed the method of the tetra lemma in his reading of the text of the Daode jing, and the second example suggests that this reading was also correlated to the mystery (xuan), and that the term chongxuan, derived from the first chapter of the Daode jing, was utilized in this context.28 Mystery as a contact zone of philosophy in 6th and 7th century.

In the following centuries, the term chongxuan continued to be used frequently by leading Buddhists as well as by Daoists.29 Thus, for example, the influential

25Shu 數, number, is used here in the sense of the Buddhist term fashu 法數, which designates the different categories used in Buddhist teaching, like for example the five skandhas, the three worlds, etc. Cf. Mair 2010, 231ff.

26The expression 重玄之域 [the realm of Twofold Mystery] is also used by Cheng Xuanying 成玄英 in his commentary to Laozi 25. See Meng Wentong 2001, 427. 27Zhaolun, T 1858, 160b ; Sengzhao refers here to Daode jing chapter 48.

28Compare also Sengrui 僧睿 (352-436), “Shi’ermen lun xu” 十二門論序 [Preface to the Twelve Gate Treatise] in: Chusanzang jiji, 11, Nr. 4 (T 2145, 11, 77c22). Here the term liangxuan 兩玄, “two mysteries,” is used, citing Kumarajiva’s translation of the Shi’ermen lun (T 1568, 159b16), also with reference to Daode jing 1, synonymous to the term chongxuan. See Robinson 1967, 208-209 for a translation of the preface. 29 Thus we find in the Daoist Kaiyan mimizang jing 開演秘密藏經 [[[Scripture]] on Opening up the Most Secret Storehouse] (DZ 329, 5-902b), which corresponds to chapter 9 of the Benji jing 本際經, the expression “令諸學者入重玄趣“ [to let all educated men enter the objective of Twofold Mystery]. Also in the Taishang dongxuan lingbao sanyuan yujing xuandu daxian jing 太上洞玄靈寳三元玉京玄都大獻經 [[[Great Offering]] in the Capital of Mystery on (Mount) Jade Capital for the (Days of the) Three Principles], DZ 370, a text dated to the Six Dynasties period, we find the expression “open the gate of all subtleties, penetrate the realm of Twofold Mystery” (闢眾妙之門

洞重玄之境)”

In Buddhism, Sengzhao speaks in his Zhaolun (T 1858, 160b20) of 重玄之域 (op. cit.); Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智頤 (538-597)in his Miao fahua lianhua jing wenju 妙法蓮花經文句 [Phrases of the Lotos sutra], T 1718. 9a.126c19) writes: “to reach from the first stage [of the bodhisattva-path] the tenth stage is called ‘skillfully entering the ten stages, entering the Gate of Twofold Mystery’” (從初地至十地名善入.十地入重玄門. Jizang, in his Fahua xuanlun 法華玄論 (T 1720, 3.

384c25) has: “to completely understand the wondrous principle of Twofold Mystery” (盡重玄之妙

理); in his Fahua yishu 法華義疏 (Commentary on the Meaning of the Lotos Sutra), T 1721, No.

10, 587b21, he says: “Now I explain the Twofold Mystery” (今明重玄).

Tiantai zhiyi (538-597) in his short exposition on the Weimo jing 維摩經 (Vimalakirti sutra) uses the term chongxuan particularly often, frequently in parallelism with Buddhist terms that refer to the ultimate mystery as well, as in the following example: “this is entering the Buddhawisdom, entering the gate of twofold mystery, the sea of the dharma world of emptiness” (ji ru fohui ru chongxuanmen xukong fajiehai 即入佛慧入重玄門虚空法界海). Like in many other examples, also here the use of the term chongxuan parallel to the term fohui 佛慧 underscores a general assumption that the secret or mystery that man would try to grasp or obtain through spiritual practice was assumed to be the same in both traditions. The characteristic of the Chinese language, and possibly the early use of terminology derived from the Daode jing in translating and explaining Buddhist texts, might have contributed to this impression. However, this assumption of a possibly identical or at least equally indescribable secret, the ultimate oneness of mystery, did not lead to an easy identification of the two teachings. On the contrary – bitter competition ensued. The issue was rather pragmatic: it focused on the question whose way and teachings on how to obtain the mystery were more efficient and profound. Thus, at least in the early medieval contacts between Buddhism and Daoism, the underlying unity or oneness of the unknowable mystery, which representatives of both religions presupposed, offered on the one hand the possibility of identification and concrescence, yet at the same time it brought about an embittered competition. This constellation was aggravated by practical issues of competition for imperial patronage and lay support, which probably also involved the question of economic subsistence of the clerics and temples. The drive towards concrescence, which resulted from the assumption of an identical one ultimate mystery, and which facilitated the mutual adoption of many concepts, practices and even institutions between Buddhists and Daoists, was countered by a drive to distinction, defining separate entities and differences, in the competition of the religions on the social level. The process of contacts in relation to the blank space provided by “secret” or

“mystery” thus cannot be characterized as a simple or one-way process, where one religion is “subdued” or “dominated” by another. Instead, a multilevel dynamic interplay evolved.

The “literary” contact zone: early Tang Daoist chongxuan commentaries to the Daode jing and the Buddhist Jizang’s Sanlun xuanyi. The earlier representatives of xuanxue who discussed with the Buddhists were not adepts of the Daoist religion, they were literati laymen. Xuanxue was one of the four subjects (ru 儒 Confucian studies, xuan 玄 Mystery Studies, wen 文 Literature, and shi 史 History) taught at the imperial university of the Liu Song 劉宋 (420-479).

It seems that Daoism in the third and fourth centuries did not quite reach the intellectual and administrative elite of society yet. However, between the fourth and fifth centuries, Daoists, predominantly in the environment of the southern capital, started a development of integrating different, often esoteric sects and traditions into an institutionalized religion, which differentiated itself from the “foreign” Buddhists. In the fifth and sixth centuries this Daoism gained more and more support also in the intellectual and social elite as the third “teaching” next to the Rujiao 儒教 and Buddhism. The prominent Buddhist author Jizang 吉藏 (549-623), in his Sanlun xuanyi 三論玄義 [[[Profound Meaning of the Three Treatises]] (T 1852)], describes debates around the interpretation of the Daode jing among the intelligentsia during the southern dynasties. In an interesting passage he refutes an imaginary opponent’s claim that the Chinese “three mysteries” (sanxuan 三玄), the three books of central focus in Mystery Learning — Daode jing 道德經, Zhuangzi 莊子, Yijing 易經 [[[Book of Changes]]] — should be called the “inner teaching” (neijiao 内教), i.e., counted as part of the Buddhist teaching, with the argument that Buddhism is superior because it employs tetra lemma logic:

問伯陽之道道曰太虛。牟尼之道道稱無相。理源既一則萬流並同。什肇抑揚乃諂於佛(此王弼舊疏以無為為道體)。答伯陽之道道指虛無。牟尼之道道超四句。淺深既懸。體何由一。 Question: “The Dao of Boyang [[[Laozi]]] is termed “Great Emptiness” [[[taixu]] 太虛]; the Dao of Śākyamuni is called “without marks” [[[wuxiang]] 無相]. Since the principle is essentially one, the myriad tendencies are all the same. When Kumārajīva and Sengzhao criticized [[[Daoism]]] and praised [[[Buddhism]]], they only wanted to flatter Buddhism.”

[[[Jizang]] remarks here]: This must refer to Wang Bi’s old commentary, which took nonaction as the substance of Dao [daoti 道體].

Answer: “With regard to the Dao of Laozi, it points to empty nonbeing; the Dao of Śākyamuni [instead] surpasses the realm in which the tetra lemma can be applied. [With this] there is already a distinction [with regard to the two teachings] of superficial and profound, how could the substance be the same?” The discussion in the Sanlun xuanyi continues however, with the opponent claiming that what is called the “Mystery” in the Daode jing equally surpasses the tetra lemma:

問牟尼之道道為真諦。而體絕百非。伯陽之道道曰杳冥。理超四句。彌驗體一。奚有淺深(此梁武帝新義。用佛經以真空為道體)。答九流統攝。七略該含。唯辨有無。未明絕四。若言老教亦辨雙非。蓋以砂糅金。同盜牛之論(周弘政張機並斥老有雙非之義也)。 Question: “The Dao of Śākyamuni is the Dao of the absolute truth and the substance is beyond the hundred negations [baifei 百非] . The Dao of Laozi is termed “the mysterious”; its principle surpasses the tetra lemma. Examining this again, their substance is one — how could there be [a distinction in] superficial and profound?”

[[[Jizang]] adds]: This refers to the new interpretation of emperor Wu of the Liang (464-549); he used Buddhist sūtras and took true emptiness for the substance of the Dao.

Answer: “If we take together everything the nine currents [of philosophy say] and everything that is contained in the Seven Summaries (bibliography) Qilue 七略, they all discuss only being and nonbeing; they have not yet explained [something that] surpasses the tetra lemma. To say that the Daode jing contains the twofold negation is like mixing gold with pebbles, just like in the story of the thief of the cows.”

[[[Jizang]] remarks that both Zhou Hongzheng and Zhang Ji criticized the theory that Laozi had used the twofold negation.] This excerpt suggests that there was an ongoing discussion about the Daode jing and Mādhyamika dialectics in the south, in which the aristocrats like Zhou Hongzheng 周弘正 (496-574) and Zhang Ji 張機 (n.d.) as well as emperor Wu of the Liang 梁武帝 (464-549) were involved, and that there must have been voices of an assumption of one underlying truth – the mystery. Jizang’s argument of superiority of Buddhism regards the tetra lemma as a way to reach this mystery (which he claims is Buddhist), not as an essential quality of mystery.

This discussion about the way of tetra lemma logic to reach the mystery and the question if it was or was not present in the Daode jing in Jizang’s text was possibly still a discussion among adherents of Buddhism. However, Daoists took up the issue as well. By the 6th and 7th centuries, we find a trend of thought called chongxuanxue 重玄學 among initiated Daoist clerics, mainly in the capital Chang’an. These Daoists employed the logic of the tetra lemma in their interpretation of the Daode jing, exemplifying it on the expression xuan zhi you xuan 玄之又玄 (mysterious and mysterious again) of the first chapter. One of the most important representatives of this intellectual trend in Daoism, Cheng Xuanying 成玄英 (7th century), a Daoist cleric active in Chang’an during the early Tang dynasty, engaged quite explicitly in the discussion about the interpretation of the Daode jing in terms of Mādhyamika dialectics. In his exposé to his commentary to the Daode jing, he defines Twofold Mystery with reference to the tetra lemma: 所言玄者， 深遠之名， 亦是不滯之義， 言至深至遠， 不滯不著， 既不滯有， 亦不滯無， 豈唯不滯於滯， 亦乃不滯於不滯， 百非四句， 都無所滯, 乃曰重玄. “Mystery” is a name for what is profound and far; it also implies the meaning of nonattachment. It denotes the ultimate profoundness and the ultimate distance, no attachments and no clinging; when there is no attachment to being and no attachment to nonbeing.

[Then, one is] not only not attached to attachment but also not attached to “nonattachment.” Thus, the hundred negations and the tetra lemma [leave the adept with] no attachments whatsoever. This is called “twofold mystery.” “Twofold mystery” in this interpretation designates a method like the tetra lemma used in Buddhist Mādhyamika. Cheng refers explicitly to the terminology of the Mādhyamika School with the technical terms “hundred negations” and tetra lemma; terms that his Buddhist contemporary Jizang used to describe the superiority of Buddhism in the passage cited above.

In his commentary to Daode jing 32, Cheng discusses the sentence “the Dao is eternally without name” (道常無名) and says: 虛通之理， 常淇然凝然，非聲非色， 無名無字， 寂然獨立， 超四句之端，恍惚希夷， 離百非之外， “this principle of empty pervasion is eternally deep and still, it is neither form nor sound, neither personal name nor style; solitary, it alone surpasses the logic of the tetra lemma, vague and indistinct it goes beyond the hundred negations.” Also in his commentary to Daode jing 79, he refers explicitly to the four propositions and the hundred negations in connection to Twofold Mystery:

言體道聖人，竟智冥符， 能所俱會， 超玆四句， 離彼百非， 故得久視長生。 ….. for the sage who embodies the Dao, the objects of knowing and his wisdom mysteriously fit. The potential [of knowing] and that what he knows are both united; thus he surpasses these four propositions and goes beyond those hundred negations; that is how he attains everlasting life. These excerpts document how both Buddhists and Daoists employed “the Mystery”, and the “Twofold Mystery” to inscribe a new logic, a new way of thinking, on the “mystery” – with the Buddhists claiming they had devised the superior way (namely tetra lemma logic) to approach the Mystery, and the Daoists claiming that they had intended this particular process of reasoning from the outset. Both was possible logically only on the basis of an underlying assumption that ultimate mystery or truth was one.

In this respect, there are similarities with the xuanxue movement. Yet, in the xuanxue context epistemological considerations guided the discourse on mystery, while in the above examples there are underlying soteriological considerations: the method of the tetra lemma was a way to reach the mystery. Different from the literati engaged in xuanxue, the proponents of chongxuan xue were ordained Daoists who represented the institutionalized Daoism in the capital, which had entered into a fierce competition with Buddhism. This competition concerned believers from the emperor to the common people, social and financial resources, in particular imperial patronage, as Daoism in the capital adapted to a more and more state sponsored system of larger authorized temples. This competition brings us to the second aspect: secrecy.

3. Strategies of dealing with Mystery

Secrecy on the social level.

Mystery, theoretically at least, was recognized to be one. The ways however, to reach this mystery, were many. And oftentimes at least in Daoism they were secret. Possibly, the association of obtaining mystery and reaching eternal life favored secrecy in social practice, because common sense would suggest that physical immortality cannot and should not be obtained by all, because this could potentially disturb a natural balance in “this” world. It is noteworthy here, that the Buddhist promises of bliss in heavenly paradises like the ones of Amitābha or Maitreya, are promises that by the same line of reasoning can be obtained by all, and the same is true for the goal of liberation in Nirvana; both goals refer to an “after-life,” but not to the life in this world. The Daoist proposition instead potentially influences life in this world. Therefore, I would argue that in the context of Daoist soteriology, the restriction of access to essential teachings to initiated adepts (esoterism) and secrecy in the social practice of transmission of these teachings was not only a habit, but a necessary consequence of the Daoist soteriological proposition. In fact, it seems that many of the early medieval Daoist movements were in their origin esoteric, centered around a master and a revelation, handed down selectively to initiated adepts. The Shangqing texts are the most evident example, yet also the Lingbao texts and other less well known scriptures were usually handed down from master to disciples. Even in the Celestial Master’s (tianshi dao 天師道) tradition, which instituted a parish organization, registers and texts were handed to disciples esoterically and in a hierarchic initiation order. Buddhism instead, from the time it reached Chinese soil, was open for all. Promising ways to universal salvation for all beings, its texts were freely preached.

When in the 5th century the adherents of these religions began to include also more and more the intellectual and administrative elite, the clash of esoteric and exoteric systems engendered dynamics which would change both religions over the coming centuries. Material aspects of Secrecy in Daoism

The secrecy of the Daoist teachings was an inherent part of their attractiveness – they were something special, something which not everybody could obtain, but which possibly precisely because of this secrecy, was attractive and sought after. The southern tradition of Daoism had grown out of oftentimes esoteric master–disciple lineages. It produced the most sophisticated and most voluminous scriptural tradition of Daoism at the time. The esoteric transmission assured that the Daoist scriptures remained at least to a great part within the circles of masters and their disciples, and only few outsiders gained access to the scriptures. In fact, even the sometimes wholesale cooption of Buddhist concepts, terms and texts, especially in the Lingbao scriptures went largely unnoticed for more than a century. In practical terms, the exclusivity and esoteric characteristics of Daoist scriptures were reinforced by a complex system of initiation. The adept, in order to gain access to a scripture, had to show his spiritual advancement and he had to present the master with certain offerings, the pledge offerings. Access to the scriptures, according to this model, depended therefore on spiritual and material conditions.

While the spiritual conditions are hard to pinpoint concretely, also because they certainly depended on individual judgments of the master, the material conditions were regulated in a quite straightforward manner. Texts as well as ritual manuals contain specific lists of pledge offerings required for transmission. These offerings include rice, firewood, writing utensils and other items of practical use, but also gold, money, and bolts of silk (which during Six Dynasties were also used as a currency ).

The institution of these offerings goes back to an oath, with which the adept vows to keep the received teaching secret and only reveal it to few if any worthy recipients. As the bibliographic chapter 19 of the third-century Baopuzi documents, there were also certain time lapses for transmission required, which further restricted diffusion and thus enforced the exclusivity of the texts even more. The vow would be accompanied by blood and hair of the adept, or else by the offering of certain precious and presumably hard to obtain objects, like golden or jade figurines. Such material offerings in the context of a covenant or oath between Master and disciple are mentioned in early Daoist texts, like for example the Huangdi jiuting shendan jingjue, 黄帝九鼎神丹经诀 [[[Canon]] and Instructions for the Divine Alchemy of the Nine Caldrons of the Yellow Emperor (DZ 885)], a text belonging to the Taiqing 太清 (Great Clarity) tradition, and dating most probably to Han Dynasty:

傳授之法。具以金人一枚重九兩。金魚一枚重三兩。投東流水為誓。金人及魚皆出於受道者也 …若天晴無風。可受之。受之共飲白雞血為盟。並傳口訣。合丹之要。及投金人金魚於水。 With regard to the method of transmission, in all cases it is required that a golden figure of 9 liang [~ 125,28g] and a golden fish of 3 liang [~41,76g] weight shall be casted into a river that flows east. The golden figure and the golden fish have to be provided by the one who receives the Dao. ... if the weather is clear and no wind arises, the scripture can be transmitted. At the transmission, master and adept drink the blood of a white cock for the covenant. Furthermore oral instructions are transmitted about the essentials of alchemy (cinnabar-preparation). Then the golden figure and the golden fish are cast into the water.

Another example of offerings in the context of a blood-oath is cited in Baopuzi (4. 83): 金丹:….黃帝以傳玄子，戒之曰，此道至重，必以授賢，苟非其人，雖積玉如山，勿以此道告之也。受之者以金人金魚投於東流水中以為約，唼血為盟，無神仙之骨，亦不可得見此道也。 The Jindan (Golden Elixir) says: The Yellow Emperor transmitted it to the Dark Son and admonished him: ‘this Dao is extremely important; you can transmit it only to worthies. If there are no such persons, then this Dao can not be transmitted, even if someone should accumulate as much jade as a mountain. Those, who receive it have to throw a golden figurine and a golden fish in water that is flowing east, and one has to drink blood for the covenant; who does not have the bones of an immortal is not allowed to see this Dao.’

Offerings of hair and blood were eventually replaced by “pure” offerings of silk and gold. Some scriptures emphasize that gold and silk are replacements for the older requirement of a blood oath to pledge secrecy.59 They emphasize that the offerings serve to show the sincerity of the student and to provide for ceremonies; however, there are also explicit warnings that Masters should not use the offerings for their own ends.60 The presence of such warnings in many texts suggests that there might have been a need for them—that there were actually masters who did use the pledge offerings to enrich themselves.61 Since proper transmission of the texts was of major concern in Daoism, many texts in the Daozang detail the rules for transmission of texts, including lists of pledge offerings. Even a random sampling of such lists62 shows firstly, that in

59 In Lu Xiujing’s (406-477) Taishang dongxuan lingbao shoudu yi, DZ 528, 1, offerings of silk and gold are explained as replacements of the offerings of blood and hair required in older forms of the blood-oath (covenant): 《玉訣》云：令真文五符處丹青中間，以為落髮歃血之盟也。 青以代髮，丹代歃血之盟誓，真人不傷神損德， 故以代之爾 。 [That the True scripts of the five talismans are placed between cinnabar and green silk, is because they represent the cutting of the hair and smearing the mouth with blood of the older forms of covenants. The true being does not harm his body, therefore one uses (silk and cinnabar) to replace hair and blood.]

Compare further Raz 2012, 111.

60 The Wushang biyao 無上必要 [[[Essence]] of the Supreme Secrets], DZ 1138, an encyclopaedia dating to the last quarter of the 6th century, cites in chapter 34 the 洞玄自然經: [[[Scripture]] on Spontaneity from the Cavernous Mystery]:

太上曰：法信以營齋，供養經道香油，為一切作福田及施散山林寒棲道士、世間窮厄六

疾者，法師不得私用，其罪甚重，誤人學道，學道之士慎之，慎之！

Taishang said: Pledge offerings serve to manage the zhai-Ritual, to support and nourish the scriptures, the Dao, incense and oil (for lamps), this is for all the blessed fields, extending also to alms giving for Daoists who live as hermits in mountains and forests, and to the poor and destitute in the world who suffer the six sicknesses, the dharma master is not allowed to use them for his private ends, the fault of this is extremely severe, it interferes falsely with people studying the Dao, students of Dao, beware! Beware!

The same chapter cites also an otherwise unknown text Dongzhen gaosheng jinxuan jing 洞真高聖金玄經 [[[Scripture]] of the Golden Mystery of the High Sage of the Cavern of the Perfected] saying:

凡經師之受盟物，當施散於寒窮，救貧病之急厄，拯山川之餓夫，營神靈之公用，若私 割以自贍，貪溢以為利者，則經師之七祖受長考於地獄，身入風刀。

[When Scripture Masters receive pledge offerings, they have to give them as alms to the poor and destitute, to save the grave danger of poverty and sickness, and to save the starving in the forests and mountains, to manage the spiritual efficacy for public use, if there is one of them who selfishly divides [the offerings] in order to enrich himself, and greedily exaggerates [in partaking of the offerings] for his own ends, then the seven ancestors of this Scripture Master receive eternal

investigation in hell, he himself will receive the “wind knife” (i.e. the approach of death).]

61 The decidedly economic dimension of the pledge offerings has been pointed out already by one of the pioneers of the research on the southern schools of Daoism in early medieval China, Michael Strickmann 1977, 21-26.

62 Two examples shall suffice to make the point: Taizhen jiuzhen mingke 太上九真明科 [The Sworn Code of the Nine Zhenren], DZ 1409, authored sometime between the 4th and the 6th centuries, a text of the Shangqing tradition says:

玄都上品第二篇曰：傳《大洞真經三十九章》於後學者，誓以上金十兩，銅二十五斤，

金鈕五雙，金魚、玉龍各一枚，青絲一兩，纏鈕為盟.

[The second part of the upper chapters of the Mysterious Capital says: In order to transmit the 39 verses of the Dadong zhen jing to students, one has to do the covenant with 10 liang (~139,2g)

several cases the required offerings for transmission of texts were so substantial, that they certainly excluded adepts from the less privileged classes. They further suggest that these offerings might have been a substantial income for the Daoist Master—keeping in mind that apart from gold and coins, also silk was used as a currency in early medieval China.

Secrecy in the Contact Zone 1: Soteriology, ultimate truth and the material question

The Daoist system of secrecy and esoteric transmission of scriptures, in the inner logic of Daoism, especially with a view to its soteriological proposition of immortality, was logically sustainable and reasonable. It guaranteed the exclusivity of the scriptures and their soteriological teachings, and in addition contributed possibly substantially to the livelihood of the Daoist Master. Yet, how did the system fare when it came in direct contact with the exoteric ways of Buddhism? Was this system sustainable in the contacts with Buddhism, especially with a view to the assumption that the ultimate truth of both teachings was one?

The Buddhist model of universal salvation during early medieval times continued to gain support. One factor in this development might have been the exoteric nature of this teaching, which allowed an easier spread in the whole

good gold, 25 jin (~ 5568g) of bronze (or copper), five pairs of golden buttons, a golden fish and a jade dragon, 1 liang (~13.92g) blue silk-threads, which shall be wound around the gold buttons, as a pledge.]

The Taishang dongshen sanhuang yi 太上洞神三皇仪 [[[Ritual]] of the Three Sovereigns], DZ 803, a text belonging to the Sanhuang/Dongshen tradition, written probably in the early Tang Dynasty contains the following list of pledge offerings (p. 1b): 白绢四十尺，金三两，白银三两，真丹二两，米五斗，薪二束，手巾九条，刀子九口，澡盆澡盘各一，黄素四十尺，金镮六双，绛纹三十尺，银镮一双，朱五斤，紫绫四十尺，碧丝五两，黄布八十尺，黄纸一百张，黄笔一双，金刀一口，五方彩三丈九尺，东青九尺，南绛三尺，西白七尺，北皂五尺，中央黄一十二尺，皆用纹。右二十一件，某受三皇一部法信 。 [40 foot white Juan-silk, 3 liang gold, 3 liang silver, 2 liang real cinnabar, 5 pecks of rice, 2 bundles of firewood, 9 kerchiefs, 9 knifes, a bathtub and a washing bowl, 40 foot (= 1 bolt) of yellow Juan-silk, 6 pairs of golden rings, 39 foot red patterned silk, 1 pair of silver rings, 5 jin of red ink (the term zhu is unclear F.A.), 40 foot (1 bolt) of purple damask-silk, 5 liang green silk threads, 80 foot (2 bolts) yellow cloth, 100 sheets of yellow paper, one pair of yellow brushes, a golden knife, 3 zhang and 9 foot purple damask silk, 5 liang green silk threads, 80 foot (2 bolts) of yellow cloth, 100 sheets of yellow paper, a pair of yellow brushes, a golden knife, 3 zhang and 9 foot of colored silk in the colors of the five directions: 9 foot green for the east, 3 foot red for the south, 7 foot white for the west, 5 foot black for the north and 12 foot yellow for the middle, all made of patterned silk. These 21 items are the pledge offerings for transmission of the Sanhuang scriptures. ]

society, which in turn then served to give clout to the movement in form of wide support of the people. Beginning with the Lingbao scriptures of the early fifth century, we find evidence that the Buddhist concept of universal salvation was adopted also by Daoists. It is by now well known that especially the Lingbao Scriptures unabashedly incorporated Buddhist concepts into their teachings. It seems that in a first stage of adaptation of Buddhist exoteric conceptions in Daoism, the claim of universal salvation was adopted without giving up the requirement of secrecy altogether. Thus, for example, the Lingbao Duren jing 靈寳度人經 [[[Scripture]] of Salvation of the Lingbao], claims on one hand the universal nature of the salvation, as in the following passages: 說經十遍，枯骨更生，皆起成人。是時，一國是男是女，莫不傾心，皆受護渡，咸得長生。

“When he expounded the scripture for the tenths time….At once the whole kingdom, male and female, inclined their hearts to the Dao. All received protection and salvation. All achieved long life.” Or, in the same text, ; 仙道貴生無量度人

“The Way of transcendence values life, providing limitless salvation for humanity.”

Yet, we also find the stanzas:

有秘上天文，諸天共所崇。泄慢墮地獄，禍及七祖翁。

“One, who is able to keep this text of the highest heavens secret, will be honored in all of the heavens alike. Those who leak it or are remiss will fall into the earth prisons and disaster will reach even to the heads of their seventh generation ancestors.”

These and other passages in the text indicate that the claim of providing universal salvation did not overwrite the esoteric characteristics of the texts and the secrecy that accompanied the transmission of the sacred Daoist scriptures. However, the adoption of the concept of universal salvation and the presence of Buddhism with its exoteric, easily accessible scriptures – scriptures, which the epistemological and philosophical discourse of Daoists and Buddhists claimed to contain the same ultimate truth – must have posed a challenge to the established Daoist ways of secret transmission of scriptures. One major question was certainly tied to the material question: why give expensive pledge offerings to receive Daoist scriptures, when Buddhist scriptures were for free? The issue of pledge offerings and secrecy in the diffusion of scriptures in Daoism in relation to the exoteric model of scriptural diffusion of Buddhism was addressed in a passage in the Taishang dongxuan lingbao zhihui dingzhi tongwei

jing 太上洞玄靈寶智慧定志通微經, [Most High Lingbao Scripture on Wisdom,

Fixing the Will and Penetrating the Sublime (DZ 325)], which originated around 400 as part of the original Lingbao scriptures. The context of the passage is an elaborate explanation of the previous career of a Perfected called Fajie, 法解, “he who explains the teaching” , and his former wife, which affirms that both have reached insight into ultimate truth. Fajie and his wife are then equated with the Perfected of Mysterious Truth of the Left and Perfected of Mysterious Truth of the Right respectively – thus assigning a [previous] female gender to the Perfected of Mysterious Truth of the Right. Later on in the text, we learn that “the disciples of this (female) Perfected of Mysterious Truth of the Right are called Sramanas and laymen” (youxuan dizi,sngmen jushi 右玄弟子，桑門居 士); thus the text refers here to the Buddhists, identifying the two Perfected with Buddhism and Daoism respectively.

The Heavenly Worthy explains the different rules of transmission:

天尊於是告右玄真人曰：卿受此經，可擇其人傳，不須法信。又告左玄真人曰：卿受此經，當依冥典法信，所用金錢，紋繒等物，皆令如式。….

The Heavenly worthy told the Perfected of Mysterious Truth to the Right: When you receive this scripture, you can choose the people to whom you transmit it, you do not need to [request] pledge offerings. Furthermore, the told the Perfected of mysterious truth to the left: When you receive this scripture, you have to conform to the secret ceremonies and pledge offerings, the gold, money, silk and these things all have to conform to the regulations.

However, the Daoist Perfected of Mysterious Truth to the Left does not readily accept this difference in scriptural transmission, where his scripture can be transmitted only with pledge offerings, and the Buddhist can give the same scripture away freely:

左玄真人心疑不平，因白天尊曰：右玄真人受此經文，不須信物，而反見使頓責如許，經法是一同，即有二異，其可解乎。

The Perfected of the Mysterious Truth to the Left remained with a doubt in his heart and was not tranquil [about his issue], therefore he addressed the Heavenly Worthy:

“The perfected of Mysterious Truth of the right, when receiving this scripture, does not need pledge offerings, but on the contrary [I ] see that [you] have arranged [my] responsibilities like this, since the teaching of the scripture is one, how can there be these two differences, can you explain it?” 天尊曰：非為偏也、子未知乎。眾兆不同，心心各異，故開二塗，其歸一也。所以爾者，右玄弟子，桑門居士，居士普行乞求，破惡以為法橋，能有施者，福報萬倍。故今授經，不重責信。卿今弟子，縱使分衛，以乞求度人，人無與者，更益彼罪，信心無表，何由得度。今故制以法信。法信之報，報在無量，如經無盡，不妨右玄布施福也。

The Heavenly Worthy answered: “It is not, that I am biased, you do not understand. The many beings are not all the same, each mind is different; therefore I open two ways, [ultimately] they come down to one. This is so, because the disciples of the

Mystery of the Right are Śramanas [[[Buddhist monks]]] and Lay Buddhist followers; the lay followers71 go around everywhere begging, [they take] breaking the evil as the bridge of the teaching [for salvation], if there are people that donate [danapatis], the blessed rewards [for this] are 10.000 fold. That is why when I give him the scripture today, I do not additionally oblige him [to give] pledges. Your disciples, even if they live on alms and want to save the people by begging for alms, the people who do not give, they add to their guilt, their devotion has no [way to] manifest itself, so how could they “cross over” [to salvation]. Now this is why I have established the pledge offerings. The reward of the pledge offerings, this reward is limitless, just like the scriptures are limitless; it does not interfere with the blessings of alms giving of the Mystery of the Right.

emperors) treasure and practice, who receives it has in addition to offer five fen of good gold, five liang of white silk threads in order to propitiate (? the term cui 脆, literally brittle, is unclear. FA) the spiritual efficacy of the Original Elders of the Five Directions. Silk cloth according to one’s age, up to an age of 120 years, one should count the number of years plus one; dukes and princes should [offer] one bolt [for each year of their life], middle class people one zhang, and poor people one foot. These three things can absolutely not be amiss. Are they amiss and one receives [the scripture] nevertheless, the blame is on him who receives, the increase and decrease among them (in the quantity of the silk) has to be measured according to poverty or wealth.] 71 The use of the term jushi, lay followers, seems unclear – it should be the monks, not the lay followers, who go around begging. Possibly the Daoist text does not distinguish between monastic and lay Buddhists, throwing both into the same category of “Buddhists” – as “the other”. 天尊又曰：右玄弟子施居士者，是能减割施財與人，福報萬倍，萬倍有盡。左玄弟子齎信受經，此為信道，則是施財於道，是故福報如經無盡。左玄真人雖奉教旨，心猶未體福報如經無盡之理，理復云何。

The Heavenly Worthy further said: The Disciples of the Mystery of the Right give alms and are lay followers, thus they can diminish, divide and offer wealth to other people, the ten-thousand-fold reward is limited.

The Disciples of the Mystery of the Left offer pledges to receive scriptures, this is the way of the pledges, this is giving wealth to the Dao, therefore the blessed reward is like the scriptures without limits.

The perfected of the Mystery of the Left, even though he received the instruction, in his heart he still did not fully understand the principle of the blessed rewards being unlimited like the scriptures. How can this principle be said again?

天尊知其心念，即語大賢：卿有疑耶，無所嫌也。所以云福報如經無盡也，何以故。譬卿得此經，寫治一通，傳與一人、十人、百人、千萬人、千億萬人不可計。人人寫一通、一通無限量通，彌布無外。卿本猶存法信之報，如此無盡。假令卿今以一金萬金，從師受經，後得福報如經無盡，隨復永無耗竭，恐弟子中脫有未悟，為近譬耳。

The Heavenly Worthy knew his thoughts, so he told the Sage: Your doubt has not been relieved yet. Why did I say: ‘The blessed rewards are as unlimited as the scriptures?’ [I said it to] illustrate that if you obtain this scripture, and you write and study it once, and you transmit it to one person, ten persons, one hundred persons, ten million persons, thousands of ten-thousands of people, so many that it is uncountable. Each of these writes it once, [as long as each person only copies the text] once, there are no limitations to the number [of such transmissions], so the [[[scriptures]]] are spread everywhere. If you originally keep the pledge offering reward, this is like this without limits. So if you today take one [piece of] gold or ten thousand [pieces] of gold, [as offering it in order to] receive the scripture from a teacher, later on you will get the blessed rewards like the scriptures without limits. And following this again, forever without end.

This long passage reflects presumably the doubts, which must have risen as a result of the combination of a claim to universal truth on one hand and the contacts of esoteric and exoteric models of scriptural diffusion on the other hand. Why should Daoists be required to offer expensive pledge offerings for a teaching, that claimed to lead to the same truth as the Buddhist teaching, which was freely available? The answer to this doubt is presumably intended to establish the ultimate superiority of the Daoist esoteric system of scriptural diffusion. It shows that the pledge offerings were conceived as a material reward and that a master could “regain” his initial expense for obtaining a scripture by transmitting it and receiving pledge offerings himself. This material aspect is differentiated from the “rewards of believing in the Dao”, which make the adept intelligent etc., which are discussed separately in the text. This relatively early discussion of the respective advantages of the exoteric and esoteric models of diffusion originated most probably at a time, when the competition between Buddhism and Daoism had not yet reached the stage of open debate and confrontation. Daoist scriptures co-opted Buddhist tenets, teachings and concepts, and as the example showed even engaged in an evaluation of the respective methods of the two teachings, in scriptures, which were accessible only to other Daoists, but not to Buddhists.

The interaction with the “other” religion was therefore not in an open “contact-zone”, but on “home ground”, in an environment, where only fellow believers, i.e. Daoists, had access. However, this should change fast, and in the early medieval period direct open confrontations between representatives of both religions should become more and more frequent.73

Secrecy in the Contact Zone 2. The attractiveness of secrecy and its shortcomings in the environment of the court One important platform for open confrontations between Daoists and Buddhists was the environment of the court, where representatives of both religions began to compete for the same clients, including the emperor.

Daoist representatives of chongxuan xue and Buddhists representatives of the sanlun and tiantai schools, whose efforts to inscribe their respective teachings in the mystery met in the “literary” contact zone as discussed above, were also the ones with particularly close ties to the court and the elite in the capital.74 Addressing this audience, which included the emperor, Buddhism and Daoism had originally two different, both powerful, strategies. Buddhism, in China prevalently Mahayana Buddhism, offered an exoteric model of universal salvation. All the emperor had to do was sponsor the sangha, so the sangha could do its mission work, and people would become not only enlightened (which might have been of minor interest for the emperor), but also

天尊曰：既能信道，用信道故，故能信經，减損身口，以用受經，財報無盡，故謂無 量，加得信道之福。信道之福，令人精神聰明，智慧如經無盡。

[The Heavenly Worthy said: Since you can believe in the Dao and use pledges to the Dao, therefore you can believe in the scripture, decrease body and food in order to receive the scripture; the reward of wealth has no end, therefore it is called limitless, in addition you get the blessing of believing in the Dao. The blessing of believing in the Dao, it makes man’s spirit intelligent and his wisdom endless like the scriptures.]

73 For a discussion of the development of the Buddho-Daoist confrontations in early medieval China see Kohn 1995 and Assandri 2004: 36-67. 74 The most important representatives of the chongxuan philosophy in Daoism were active in the capital and the environment of the court (Assandri 2009, 27-47), also Jizang and Tiantai Zhiyi had close ties to the courts of their times (cf. Weinstein 1987, 10-11 and 1973, 283-284).

morally good and content.75 Going one step further, the emperor —provided he did sponsor the Buddhists— was identified as a Buddha himself, bringing universal salvation and deserving adoration and reverence. The teachings in this model were accessible to all; a panacea extending from peasants to princes. Daoism instead proposed secret methods to gain and immortality and power to rule well and bring about Great Peace. These teachings were not to be shared and imparted only to a few initiated. Reaching the Dao by way of secret teachings, knowledge and methods would bring both, personal immortality, and power to rule and successfully practice good government. These two aspects, power and immortality, were emphasized variedly, some emperors sponsored Daoists to create elixirs, some emperors inquired teachings relating to good governance from Daoists, some did both.

For the rulers, who were sometimes initiated also into the secret Daoist scriptures, both teachings, the esoteric and the exoteric one, must have been attractive; both had their merits. In fact, during medieval times emperors usually had contacts to Daoist masters and Buddhists at the same time. Considering the respective advantages and necessities of exoteric and esoteric models in this context might prove a useful tool to understand the dynamics involved. If we 75 Compare for an early example Zhi Dun’s introduction to his “Eulogy on an image of the Buddha Sakyamuni”, in Guang Hongming ji, T 2103, 15, 195c-196b, translated in Zürcher 1959, 177-179. Compare further Jülch 2011, 79 and 72-74.

start our inquiries from the question of an emperor’s needs, we can discern that both models catered to different needs, and were thus both useful and complementary. While both religions offered access to the realm of the unseen, enlisting powerful support from various deities, the exoteric Buddhist concept of universal salvation offered a way to “transform” the people and thus bring “Great peace” to the empire, whereas a secret Daoist teaching could offer personal strength and power, not to forget longevity in this world, to an emperor – which also would result in “Great Peace.” As stated above, the soteriological proposition of Daoism was intrinsically geared as a benefit for a few, the secrecy with which the teachings were imparted could not be done away with.

Yet, in the social realities of the ongoing competition with Buddhism, this same secrecy had certain disadvantages. With the development of public court debate as a forum for representatives of Buddhism and Daoism to propagate and discuss their teachings – a forum which gained importance during Six Dynasties period and Tang times – it actually proved to be a severe handicap.

A court debate between Daoists and Buddhists in early Tang was a major event held before hundreds of guests, including the emperor.81 The tradition of religious court debate, which is traceable back through most of Nanbeichao 南北朝 time, should be seen in close relation to the formation of Daoism as an entity that presented itself in competition to Buddhism at court.

This competition probably played a role as a catalyst in the integration process of Daoism: Whereas in reality there were different traditions, different schools and different claims to having the most potent, most original scriptures within Daoism, at the same time Daoism in the environment of the court found itself to stand up against Buddhism as the Daoism, comparable to the Buddhism (which also at the time held different teachings). It is noteworthy that many Daoist Masters involved in the systematization and integration of Daoism had participated in debates with Buddhists. In the various records of court debates from the Six dynasties and early Tang, it becomes obvious that the Daoists were limited to present the Daode jing, the Zhuangzi or similar other texts which did not require secrecy in public propagation.83 Their most potent and most sophisticated texts – the Shangqing scriptures, which also in the internal Daoist hierarchy were considered the highest and most valuable scriptures, could not be preached or revealed in public. A Daoist text from the 5th century confirms this dilemma:

道家經之大者，莫過五千文，大洞玄真之訪也。...。五千文是道德之祖宗，真中之真，不聞穢賤，終始可輪讀，敷言妙義，則王侯致治，齋而誦之，則身得飛仙，七祖護慶，反胎受形，上生天堂，下生人中王侯之門也，皆須口訣。洞真道欲稱，可誦之以致雲龍，不得人間詠之。人間詠之，大魔王敗之也。(lines 44-52) „As far as the importance of the Daoist Sutras is concerned, nothing is superior to the Classic in 5000 words (i.e. the Daode jing), and the [texts of] the visits of the Mysterious Perfected [collected in the] Great Cavern [of Dongxuan 洞玄 (Mystery Cavern) and Dongzhen 洞真 (Cavern of the Perfected)].84 … The Daode jing is the ancestor of Dao and De, the truth in the truth, it knows neither impurity nor commonness, beginning and end can be constantly recited and its wonderful meaning can be proclaimed, thus kings and lords can govern. If it is recited in ritual, one can obtain to become a flying immortal. … About the Dao of the Cavern of the Perfected (Dongzhen): If one wants to perfect it, one may recite [the Dongzhen texts] in order to call down cloud dragons, but one may not recite [this text] among men. If one recites it among men, one will be destroyed by the great demon king. …”85 The restrictions with regard to transmission and spread of the Shangqing scriptures might have been one of the major underlying reasons for inscribing the method of the tetra lemma into the text of the Daode jing; it allowed representatives of Daoism to present their teachings, which included exoteric models of universal salvation, with the text of the Daode jing, a text which was

[Declarations of the Perfected DZ 1016], started a great polemical debate with his Yixia lun 夷夏論 [Treatise on Barbarians and Chinese] (in Hongming ji, T 2103, 6 and 7).

83 Compare Assandri 2004 and 2009. 84 The Chinese text 大洞玄真之訪 is enigmatic or corrupt at this point. The sentence might well refer to the Dadong zhen [[[jing]]] 大洞真經, or Shangqing dadong zhenjing 上清大洞真經, a major text from the Shangqing tradition, that was said to have been transmitted by Perfected in nightly visits – the term fang 訪 might be interpreted as a reference to these. However, this interpretation leaves the term xuan unaccounted for, and since the text further on refers to the Daode jing, the Dongzhen texts and the Dongxuan texts, it might well be that xuan and zhen refer not to Perfected transmitting scriptures, but concretely to the Dongxuan and Dongzhen sections of the Daoist Canon, and that there is a copyist error, and we should emend a second dong before zhen 大洞玄[[[洞]]]真之訪. 85 Taiji zuoxiangong Qingwen jing 太極左仙公請問經, 1, S 1351, line 44-55. (In: Wang Chengwen 1998, 197. See Assandri 2004, 558.)

not restricted with regard to public propagation, and which had a longstanding pedigree as a subject of public debate. Yet, even if the new interpretations of the Daode jing, proposed by Daoists who were active in the environments of the court, allowed to present Daoist soteriological teachings to some extent in public debate, the disadvantage of the secrecy of Daoist scriptures, and the resulting limitation for their texts to be presented at court, must have been felt as a severe problem.

We find a reflection of this issue in the Benji jing 本際經, a Daoist scripture closely related to the chongxuan philosophy, whose manuscripts form almost a quarter of the Daoist texts found in Dunhuang, attesting to its popularity at the time. This text claims the potential of universal salvation deriving from the efficacious texts of Daoism, and explicitly avows the esotericism of the earlier scriptures. It addresses two different aspects of the dilemma of secrecy: In chapter five, we find an interesting scene in the heavens. Lord Lao – presumed author of the exoteric Daode jing, rebukes the deity Fusang dadi 扶桑大帝, ruler of the immortals, after Fusang had asked him to share his teachings with the lower ranking immortals to open up the ways to the highest mysteries for them:

時老君怡然更貌，含笑而答太帝君曰：帝君所寶玉清隱書， 上清高旨， 神真虎文，太清神丹， 琴心要誦，唯深隱秘， 不使中仙所聞， 而乃見勤授此下仙道德之奧乎？ 其可解耶？ At this point Lord Lao showed a friendlier bearing. He smiled and answered Lord Great Emperor [[[Fusang]]]: “The secret scriptures of Jade Clarity which you, Lord Emperor, treasure, the eminent decrees of Highest Clarity, the prayer texts of Divine Perfection, the potent cinnabar of Great Clarity (太清) , the Scripture of the Inner Luminants of the Yellow Court (黃庭内景經) – if you want to recite them, you only do it in deepest secrecy! You never let immortals of medium rank hear them, yet now you call on me and urge me to teach the profound subtleties of Dao and virtue to these low ranking creatures? How do you explain that?” Fusang excuses himself, referring to the restrictions of secrecy imposed on the scriptures related to his teachings: 大帝謝曰：薄德盲能，位當於此，非不念傳後學，而威禁難達.

“Being of poor virtue and little capability, my position has to be like this. It is not that I do not think of transmitting [these texts] to less gifted students, but the severe prohibitions [to divulge the scriptures to the uninitiated] are hard to oppose. This section of the Benji jing draws attention to the internal Daoist polemics against the secrecy and esotericism. Esotericism of course did not only keep non-Daoists away from the scriptures, but also Daoists, because not every scripture was accessible to every Daoist. It is in this context quite plausible that initiated members of one tradition did not consent to show their scriptures to members of other Daoist traditions – their rancor is reflected in this passage. This inner-sectarian esotericism had to be certainly resolved in the context of a Daoist religion that presented itself as a unified institutionalized religion. It eventually was resolved in the form of a hierarchical initiation order within Daoism, however, this process involved inner-Daoist competition for the higher ranks within this order – and it is this competition which is reflected in the cited passage from the Benji jing.

On a different occasion, the same text also addresses the question of esotericism towards outsiders, the issue of esoteric initiation, in a rather straightforward manner: In the first chapter, Zhang Daoling raises the question about the practicalities of transmitting the sūtra to men: 正一真人三天法師白天遵曰:。。。若將來時有善男子女人來詣師門， 求欲清受， 不審傳授其法云何？天尊答云：傳此經者， 不須法信， 當觀其心， 具十善願， 便可授之。 “The Perfected Man of Orthodox Unity, Master of the Three Heavens (Zhengyi zhenren santian fashi) [i.e. Zhang Daoling] said to the Heavenly Worthy: ‘…… If in the future good men and good women come to ask me to be their teacher, and they desire to receive [this teaching], it is not [yet] clear how to transmit this method.’ The Heavenly Worthy answered: ‘To transmit this sūtra, you do not need any pledge offerings, you have to look at their minds, they have to have ten good vows, then you can transmit it.”

This statement shall serve to underscore wider implications of the question of esotericism vs exotericism. The pledge offerings, which as we have seen above could be rather substantial, presumably assured an income to the Daoist Master. At the same time, like an expensive price tag of a luxury item, they assured the exclusivity of the scriptures. Renouncing openly to this practice would have opened the circle of possible recipients of the scripture: the originally esoteric Daoist teaching now was open to all, in line with the claim of offering universal salvation to all beings.

This rejection of pledge offerings in the milieu of the Daoists in the capital of the Sui and Early Tang, as expressed in the Benji jing cited above, indicates a shift towards exotericism of this particular Daoism – a shift that was in line with the soteriological proposal of universal salvation and with the need of the Daoists to propagate their teachings on a public stage. At the same time, it suggests also that the means of existence of the Daoist priests must have come from another source than before: instead of relying on payments made by disciples, the subsistence of the Daoists could have been guaranteed by statesponsorship of temples. In fact, the biographies of the Daoist masters called representatives of chongxuan xue all mention that they lived in the big state sponsored temples. Daoxuan 道宣 (596-667), in his Fo Dao lunheng remarks that Daoist initiated into the Sanhuang wen 三皇文 [[[Scriptures]] of the Three Sovereigns] would receive land-allotments from the emperor.95 The required text of Sanhuang wen would be changed into the Daode jing eventually96 – responding to the fact that Laozi was regarded as ancestor of the Tang. Daoist Masters, renouncing to independent income from pledge offerings, would have become more dependent – and controllable - from the court or the imperial administration. At the same time, also the control of admission to the circles of adepts – a control that was in the hands of the Daoist Masters before, could be switched largely to other agents or institutions, like the imperial administration. All of this fits well with the concept of an emerging state-sponsored Daoism; in fact Daoism became the first religion of the state in Tang dynasty. It implies a rather drastic change in the social and economic structures of Daoism in that period.

teaching, (9) make all beings gain interest in the [way of salvation of the] Dao, and (10) that their own heart is immovably set on these intentions. See P 3371, lines 209-217, in: Wan Yi 1998, 391.

95 Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng T 2104, 3, 386a26.

96 Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng, T 2104, 3, 386b8.

Yet, we have to beware to think this was a change that encompassed “all” of Daoism. In spite of early Tang scriptures from the chongxuan environment calling for open transmission and arguing against secrecy, ritual compendia of Tang dynasty continue to list the pledge offerings required for initiation into different scriptures. Therefore it seems that esoteric scriptures continued to be esoteric, even if in the emerging state sponsored form of Daoism other, mostly newer, exoteric scriptures were propagated. And the esoteric scriptures kept their attractiveness: Ritual compendia confirm that the esoteric scriptures were tied to the highest ranks in the internal Daoist hierarchy.

The above remarks underscore that even though there was a clear need for exoteric teachings in Daoism in order to compete efficiently with Buddhism and in order to be able to become the state religion it did become under the Tang, the esoteric sides were not lost at all. Secrecy and secret scriptures continued to be attractive for Daoists and outsiders. Obviously, the nature of secrecy is such that it resists scholarly inquiry to a large extent, precisely because it is kept secret. Only in rare cases, like in the heated competition of the early Tang between Buddhists and Daoists, a period where many changes happened, which involved also aspects of secrecy, do we get glimpses of the issue; most of it remains hidden.

While today we have access to the secret scriptures of early medieval Daoism in the Daoist Canon, we need to keep in mind that the printing of this canon dates to 1926 only. Earlier editions of the Daoist canon were generally limited to Daoist monasteries and the imperial library – the emperor and the initiated Masters. And even after the printing, and recently digitalizing, of the Daoist canon, anthropological studies refer that Daoists today use texts which are handed down secretly, sometimes orally only, and which are not contained in the Daoist canon. All of this points to the fact that secrecy in Daoism never lost its attractiveness. Exoteric teachings were needed in the competition with Buddhism, and they were developed, yet they did not completely supersede the esoteric teachings, testifying to the lasting attractiveness of secrecy in Daoism. Bibliography

A. Primary Sources

T: Taishō Shinshū Daizōkyō. 大正新修大藏經 . 100 vol. Tokyo: Taishō issai-kyō kankō kai, 1929-1934. DZ: Zhengtong Daozang 正統道藏. The numbers follow the work-numbers in Schipper & Verellen 2004.

Bailun 百論 (Śāta-śāstra), T 1569. Bailun shu 百論疏, by Jizang 吉藏. T 1827. Baopuzi neipian 抱朴子内篇 (Inner chapters of the Book of the Master Who Embraces Simplicity), by Ge Hong 葛洪. ed. Zhuzi jicheng 諸子集成, vol. 8. Bejing: Zhonghua shuju. 1986 (1954). See also DZ 1185.

Baozang lun 寶藏論, T 1857. Benji jing 本際經: Daozang: Benji miao jing 本際妙經, DZ 1111, corresponding to chapter 2, and Kaiyan mimizang jing 開演秘密藏經, DZ 329, corresponding to chapter 9. Editions based on Dunhuang manuscripts: Wu Ch’i-yü. 1960. Wan Yi 萬毅. 1998. Ye Guiliang 葉貴良. 2010.

Bianzheng lun 辯正論 (Disputing what is Correct), by Falin 法林. T 2110. Chen shu 陳書, by Yao Siqing 姚思慶. In: Ershiwu shi, vol. 3. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1986. Chu sanzang jiji 出三藏記集, by Sengyou 僧祐, T 2145. Chuanshou jingjie yi 傳授經戒儀, DZ 1238. Chuanshou sandong jingjie fa lu lüeshuo 傳授三洞經戒法籙略說, by Zhang Wanfu 張萬福, DZ 1241. Daban nieban jing 大般涅槃經 (Nirvana Sutra), T 374.

Da fangguang fo huayan jing shu 大方廣佛華嚴經疏, by Chengguan 澄觀, T 1735. Daode jing 道德經, see Laozi zhu Daode jing yishu 道德經義疏, by Cheng Xuanying 成玄英. In: Meng Wentong, 2001: 342-538. Daode zhenjing guangsheng yi 道德真經 廣聖義, by Du Guangting 杜光庭, DZ 725. Daode zhenjing qushan ji, 道德真經取善集, by Li Lin 李霖, DZ 718. Daode zhenjing zhu 道德真經注, by Li Rong 李榮. In: Meng Wentong 2001: 553-672. Fahua xuanlun 法華玄論, by Jizang 吉藏, T 1720.

Fahua xuanyi shiqian 法華玄義釋籤 by Zhanran 湛然, T 1717. Fahua yishu 法華義疏, by Jizang 吉藏, T 1721. Guang Hongming ji 廣弘明集, by Daoxuan 道宣, T 2103. Hongming ji 弘明集, by Sengyou 僧祐, T 2102. Huangdi jiuting shendan jingjue, 黄帝九鼎神丹经诀, DZ 885. Huayang Taoyinju neizhuan 华阳陶隐居集, (Literary Works of Tao, the Hermit of Huayang), by Fu Xiao 傅霄, DZ 300. Jiankang shilu, 健康實錄 (True Records of Jiankang), by Xu Song 許嵩, ed. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1987. Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng 集古今佛道論衡, by Daoxuan 道宣, T 2104.

Jiu Tang shu 舊唐書, by Liu Xu 劉煦 et al. In: Ershiwu shi, vol. 5. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1986, vol. 5. Kaiyan mimizang jing 開演秘密藏經, see Benji jing, DZ 329. Laozi Daode jing yishu kaiti 老子道德經義疏開題, by Cheng Xuanying 成玄英. In: Meng Wentong 2001: 544-552. Laozi zhu 老子注, by Wang Bi 王弼, ed. Zhuzi jicheng, Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1986, vol. 3. Lishi zhenxian tidao tongjian, 歷史真仙體道通鋻, by Zhao Daoyi 趙道一, DZ 296. Lingbao wufu chishu zhenwen 靈寳五符赤書真文, (Yuanshiwulao chishu yupian zhenwen tianshu jing 元始五老赤書玉篇真文天書經), DZ 22. Longshu pusa zhuan 龍樹菩薩傳, T 2047. Lotos sutra: see Miaofa lianhua jing and Zheng fahua jing.

Maheboreboluomi jing 摩訶般若波羅蜜經 (Prajnāparamitā-sutra) T 223 Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經, T 262. Mimi zang jing 秘密藏經, see Kaiyan mimizang jing and Benji jing. Miaofa lianhua jing wenju 妙法蓮華經文句, by Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗, T 1718. Nan shi, 南史 (History of the Southern Dynasties), Li Yanshou 李延壽. ed. Ershiwu shi. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1986, vol. 4. Nirvana Sutra: see Daban nieban jing Prajnāparamitā-sutra: see Maheboreboluomi jing Qingwen jing 請問經, Dunhuang Manuscript S 1351, in: Wang Chengwen 1998: 156- 199. Sandong zhunang 三洞珠囊, by Wang Xuanhe 王懸河. DZ 1139. Sanlun xuanyi 三論玄義, by Jizang 吉藏. 1.) T. 1852.

2.) Han Yanjie 1987. Santian neijie jing 三天内解經. DZ 1205.

“Shi’ermen lun xu” 十二門論序, by Sengrui 僧睿, in: Chusanzang jiji, T 2145, 11, 77c. Shi’ermen lun 十二門論 (Dvādaśanikāya-śāstra), T 1568. Shiermenlun shu 十二門論疏, by Jizang 吉藏, T 1825. Shilaozhi 釋老志 (Chronicle of [the affairs of] Buddhism and Daoism), chapter 114 of Wei shu. Shoulu cidi faxin yi. 受籙次第法信儀, DZ 1244. Shuowen jiezi 說文解字, Duan Yucai 段玉裁, Shuowen jiezi zhu 説文解字注. Shanghai: Guji chubanshe, 1981.

Taishang dongshen sanhuang yi 太上洞神三皇仪, DZ 803. Taishang dongxuan lingbao sanyuan yujing xuandu dayu jing 太上洞玄靈寶三元玉京玄都大獻經, DZ 370. Taishang dongxuan lingbao shoudu yi 太上洞玄靈寶授度儀, by Lu Xiujing 陸修靜, DZ 528. Taishang dongxuan lingbao zhihui dingzhi tongwei jing 太上洞玄靈寶智慧定志通微經 , DZ 325. Taizhen jiuzhen mingke 太上九真明科, DZ 1409. Weimo jing xuanshu 維摩經玄疏, by Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗, T 1777. Weimo jing lueshu 維摩經略疏, by Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗, T 1778. Wei shu 魏書, by Wei Shou 魏收. In: Ershiwu shi, vol. 3. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, 1986. Wushang biyao 無上必要. DZ 1138. Xiaodao lun 笑道論, by Zhen Luan 甄鸞, in Guang Hongming ji ,T 2103, 9, 143c20152c17. Xin huayan jing lun 新華嚴經論, by Li Tongxuan 李通玄, T 1739. Yao xiu keyi jielu chao 要修科儀戒律鈔, DZ 463. Yuanshiwulao chishu yupian zhenwen tianshu jing 元始五老赤書玉篇真文天書經, DZ 22. Yuanshi wuliang duren shangpin miaojing sizhu 元始無量度人上品妙經四諸, DZ 87. Zhaolun 肇論, by Sengzhao 僧肇, T 1858. Zheng fahua jing 正法華經, T 263. Zhongguanlun shu 中觀論疏, by Jizang 吉藏, T 1824. Zhonglun 中論 (Mādhyamaka-kārikā), T 1564. Zhuangzi shu, ed. Guo Qingfan 國慶藩.Zhuangzi jishi 莊子集釋. In Zhuzi jicheng, vol. 3. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1986. Vol. 3. B. Secondary Literature Ames, Roger T. and David Hall. 2003. Daodejing. Making This Life Significant. A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine Books, Random House. Assandri, Friederike. 2004. Die Debatten zwischen Daoisten und Buddhisten in der frühen Tang-Zeit und die Chongxuan-Lehre des Daoismus. (The Debates between Daoists and Buddhists in the Early Tang and the Chongxuan Teaching of Daoism). PhD thesis, University of Heidelberg 2002. Ann Arbor: UMI, 2004, no. 3111333. Assandri, Friederike. 2005. “Understanding Twofold Mystery: Daoism in Early Tang as mirrored in the FDLH (T 2104) and Chongxuanxue. ” In Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32:3 (September 2005): 427-440. Assandri, Friederike. 2008. “Laozi’s Eclipse and Comeback: The Narrative Frame of the Benji jing’”in: Journal of Daoist Studies, 1 (2008): 1-27. Assandri, Friederike. 2009. Beyond the Daode jing, Magdalena: Three Pines Press. Assandri, Friederike. 2009a. “Inter-religious debates at the courts of the early Tang: An introduction to Daoxuan’s Ji gujin Fo Dao lunheng (T. 2104). ” In From Early Tang Court Debates to China’s Peaceful Rise, ed. by F. Assandri and Dora Martins. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press: 9-32. Assandri, Friederike. 2012. “Diebstahl von geistigem Eigentum im frühen mittelalterlichen China?” In: Lena Henningsen und Martin Hoffmann, Hrsg. Tradition, Variation, Plagiat. Tagungsband DVCS, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz: 243258. Barrett, Timothy. “The Advent of the Buddhist Conception of Religion in China and its Consequences for the Analysis of Daoism,” Sungkyun Journal of East Asian Studies. Vol.9, No.2, 2009: 149-165. Bollee, Kees W. 1987. Secrecy in Religion. Leiden: Brill. Bokenkamp. 1997. Early Daoist Scriptures. Berkley & Los Angeles: University of California Press Bokenkamp, Stephen. 2004. “The Silkworm and The Bodhi Tree: The Lingbao Attempt to Replace Buddhism in China and Our Attempt to Place Lingbao Taoism. ” In Religion and Chinese Society: Volume 1, Ancient and Medieval China, edited by John Lagerwey, Hongkong and Paris: Chinese University of Hongkong and École francaise del éxtreme orient: 317-339. Bumbacher, , Stephan-Peter. 1995. “Cosmic Scripts and Heavenly Scriptures: The Holy Nature of Taoist Texts,” Cosmos 11.2: 139-153. Bumbacher, Stephan-Peter. 2000. Fragments of the Daoxue zhuan. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Bumbacher, Stephan-Peter. 2012. Empowered Writing. Exorcistic and Apotropaic Rituals in Medieval China. St. Petersburg, FL: Three Pines. Engelhard, Ute. 2008. “Huangdi”, in Fabrizio Pregadio. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Taoism. London & New York: Routledge: 504-506. Han Yanjie 韓延傑. 1987. Sanlun xuanyi jiaoshi 三論玄義校釋. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Herrou, Adeline. 2013. A World of Their Own. Daoist Monks & Their Community in Contemporary China. St. Petersburg: Three Pines Press. Holcombe, Charles. 1994. In the Shadow of the Han. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Hou Xudong 侯旭東. 1998. Wu liu shiji beifang minchong fojiao xinyang 五六世紀北方民衆佛教信仰. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe. Hurvitz, Leon. 1956. Wei Shou. Treatise on Buddhim and Taoism. A Translation of the original Chinese Text and the Annotations of Tsukamoto Zenryu. Kyoto: Jimbunkagaku Kenkyusho. Jülch, Thomas. 2011. Die apologetischen Schriften des buddhistischen Tang Mönchs Falin. München: Herbert Utz. Kohn, Livia. 2004. The Daoist Monastic Manual. A translation of the Fengdao Kejie. New York: Oxford University Press. Kohn, Livia. 1991, Taoist Mystical Philosophy: the Scripture of Western Ascension. Albany: SUNY. Kohn, Livia. 1995. Laughing at the Dao. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kohn, Livia, and Michael LaFargue. 1998. Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching. Albany: SUNY. Lu Guolong 盧囯龍. 1993. Zhongguo chongxuan xue 中國重玄學. Beijing: Renmin zhongguo chubanshe. Mair, Victor. “What is Geyi after all, ” in: Philosophy and Religion in Early Medieval China, ed. By Alan Chan and Yuet-keung Lo, Albany: SUNY 2010: 227-264. Meng Wentong 蒙文通. 2001. Daoshu jijiao shizhong 道書輯校十种. (vol. 6 of Meng Wentong wenji 孟文通文集) Chengdu: Bashu shudian. Most, Glenn. ed. 1999. Commentaries – Kommentare. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Muller, Charles. 1995. Digital Dictionary of Buddhism. Established 1995, updated monthly. URL: http://www.buddhism-dict.net/ddb/ . Nickerson, Peter. 1997. “The Great Petition for Sepulchral Plaints”, in: S. R. Bokenkamp, Early Daoist Texts. Berkeley: University of California Press: 230-274. Pelliot, Paul. 1912. “Autour d'une traduction sanscrite du Tao Tö King” T'oung Pao 13: 351-430. Pregadio, Fabrizio. 2008. The Routledge Encyclopedia of Taoism. London & New York: Routledge. Pregadio 2006. Great Clarity. Daoism and Alchemy in Early Medieval China. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Rao Zongyi 饒宗一. 1956. Laozi Xianger zhu jiaojian 老子想爾注 校箋. Hongkong: Tong Nam. Raz, Gil. 2012. The Emergence of Daoism. Creation of Tradition. New York: Routledge. Reichling, Philipp and Knut Martin Stünkel. 2011. [Käthe Hamburger Kolleg ‘Dynamics in the History of Religions’, Focus Group “Secret”]: “Secret as zone of contact- Results of a work in progress,” Manuscript dated 9.9.2011. Robinet, Isabelle. 1977. Les commentaires du Tao tö king jusqu'au VIIe siècle. Memoires de l’institut des hautes etudes chinoises. Paris: Collège de France, Institut des hautes etudes chinoises. Robinet, Isabelle. 1998. “Later Commentaries: Textual Polysemy and Syncretistic Interpretations.” In Lao-tzu and the Tao-te-ching, ed. by Livia Kohn and Michael LaFargue. Albany: SUNY: 119-142. Robinson, Richard. 1967. Early Mādhyamika in India and China. Madison: Wisconsin University Press. Roth, Harold D. 1997. “Evidence for Stages of Meditation in Early Taoism” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 60, No. 2: 295-314. Rothschild, Norman Harry. 2010. “Empress Wu and the Queen Mother of the West”, Journal of Daoist Studies 3: 29-56. Saso, Michael. 1978. The Teachings of Taoist Master Chuang. New Haven: Yale University Press. Schipper, Kristopher and Verellen, Franciscus. 2004. The Taoist Canon. A Historical Companion to the Daozang. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sharf, Robert H. 2002. Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism. A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Sheng, Angela. 2013. “Determining the Value of Textiles in the Tang Dynasty. In memoriam of Professor Denis Twitchett (1925-2006)” in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 23.2: 175-179. Strickmann, Michael. 1977. “The Mao Shan Revelation, Taoism and Aristocracy.” In T'oung Pao 43. 1: 1-64. Strickmann, Michael. 1979. “On the Alchemy of T´ao Hung-ching.” In: Holmes Welch and Anna Seidel ed. Facets of Taoism. New Haven and London: Yale University Press: 123-192. Stuckrad, Kocku von. 2006. “Die Esoterik in der gegenwärtigen Forschung: Überblick und Positionsbestimmung.” Zeitenblicke 5, Nr. 1, [04.04.2006], URL http://www.zeitenblicke.de/2006/1/Stuckrad; Tang Yongtong, 湯用彤. 1938. Han Wei Liang Jin Nanbeichao fojiaoshi 漢魏兩晉南北朝佛教史. 2 vol. Taibei: Shangwu yinshuguan. Wagner, Rudolf G. 1999, “Exploring the Common Ground: Buddhist Commentaries on the Taoist Classic Laozi” In: Glenn Most, ed., Commentaries – Kommentare. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht: 95-120. Wagner, Rudolf G. 2003. A Chinese Reading of the Daodejing. Albany: State University of New York Press. Waley, Arthur. 1977 (1934). The Way and Its Power. London: Unwin. Wan Yi 萬毅. 1998 “Dunhuang daojiao wenxian Benji jing lu wen ji jieshuo 敦煌道教文獻本際經錄文及解説. In Daojia wenhua yanjiu 13, ed. by Chen Guying: 367-484. Wang Chengwen 王承文. 1998. “Dunhuang ben Taiji zuoxiangong qingwen jing kaolun 敦煌本太極左仙公請問經考論. ” In: Daojia wenhua yanjiu 道家文化研究, 13. Beijing: Sanlian: 156-199. Wang Chengwen. 2002. Dunhuang gu lingbao jing yu Jin Tang daojiao 敦煌古靈寳經與晉唐道教. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Wang, Helen and Valerie Hansen ed. “Textiles as Money on the Silk Road”, Special Issue of the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol 23.2, April 2013. Wang Ka 王卡. 1993. Laozi Daode jing Heshanggong zhangju 老子道德經河上公章句. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Watson, Burton. 1964. Chuang Tzu. Basic Writings. Columbia: Columbia University Press. Weinstein, Stanley. 1987. Buddhism under the T’ang. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Weinstein, Stanley. 1973. “Imperial Patronage in the Formation of T'ang Buddhism,” in: Wright, A. and Twitchett, D., ed. :Perspectives on the T'ang. New Haven: Yale University Press: 265-307

Wu Ch’i-yü. 1960. Pen-tsi King. (Livre du terme originel). Paris: Centre national de la recherché scientifique. Xiong, Victor Cunrui. 2006. Emperor Yang of the Sui Dynasty: His Life, Times and Legacy. Albany: SUNY. Ye Guiliang 葉貴良. 2010. Dunhuang ben Taiji zhenyi benji jing jixiao 敦煌本《太玄真一本际经》辑校, Chengdu: Bashu shushe. Zürcher, Erik. 1959. The Buddhist Conquest of China. Leiden: Brill. Ziporyn, Brook. 2009. Zhuangzi. The essential writings with selections from traditional commentaries. Indianapolis: Hackett.