 |
| Ennin 圓仁 |
I
have an interest in travel journals and in particular those of bygone
eras. In the Buddhist context I enjoy reading the journals and
histories of past pilgrims who often travelled great distances on foot
in pursuit of the Dharma. I find this extremely inspiring as they
often went at great risk to arrive at their destinations, facing
numerous dangers and difficulties along the way.
Here I would like to take a look
at the life of Ennin 圓仁
(794-864), a
notable Japanese Tendai monk who lived during the Heian period 平安
(794-1185). He
lived about a century before Murasaki Shikibu, the author of the Tale
of Genji, was born.
In his teenage years he served
under Saichō 最澄
(767–822), the
founder of Tendai in Japan, who had recently returned from China. In
816 he received full bhikṣu precepts at Tōdai-ji in Nara at the
age of twenty-three. Two decades later Ennin applied for permission
to embark on the diplomatic envoy to China with Fujiwara no
Tsunetsugu. Formally his duty was to further study Tiantai 天台
(in Japanese
pronounced Tendai) doctrine in China, though it seems his real intent
was to study Mikkyō 密教
or esoteric
practices.
In
838 he arrived in Yangzhou, but not before having a dangerous voyage
at sea that nearly saw him shipwrecked. The following year he was
told by the local officials that visiting Mount Tiantai was
unacceptable given that he was part of a diplomatic mission, and not
a formal scholar. He was told he would have to leave with his fellow
countrymen. Nevertheless, he decided to stay behind albeit with a
word of strong caution from his superior in the envoy. The laws of
the Great Tang were much stricter than in Japan, he warned. This was
actually quite true given how travel throughout the country required
burdensome documentation, which in the case of Ennin often delayed
him considerably. The Tang empire employed intrusive levels of
policing.
Ennin was a member of the last
Japanese diplomatic mission to China during this period. There was
another mission planned in 894, though it was cancelled in the end
given the political circumstances in China. The Japanese court was
aware of the rapidly collapsing political situation on the mainland
and even received warnings from a compatriot monk there. In
any case, as some scholars have noted by the ninth century
Japan had already absorbed vast amounts of Chinese knowledge and
technology, and some even felt they had surpassed the Tang. The early
voyages to China in the seventh and eighth centuries
were motivated by a desire to acquire knowledge, technology and
religious institutions such as Buddhism, perhaps partially compelled
by political events on the mainland such as the joint Tang-Silla
conquest of the Korean peninsula in the 660s. By the ninth
century, however, diplomatic missions seem to have been more aimed at
securing Japan's position on the international scene. Nevertheless,
there were still new things to learn like Mikkyō which Ennin's
predecessor Kūkai 空海
(774–835) a few
decades prior had expressly studied in China under Huiguo 慧果
(746-805).
While in China Ennin studied
Sanskrit. He also received initiations into the Garbhakośadhātu
Maṇḍala and the Vajradhātu Maṇḍala as well as
other esoteric doctrines and practices. He also visited Mount Wutai
五臺山 where he engaged in
various practices. By 840 he was in the capital Chang'an where he
extensively studied esoteric subjects, in particular gaining
expertise in the susiddhi tradition. He also lived through the
persecution of Buddhism which started by 845 under Emperor Wuzong 武宗
(814-846). Ennin
recorded state directives which saw all Manichean priests executed.
There was a vast purge of Buddhism as well with countless monastics
defrocked and pulled out of their temples. Ennin made the wise
decision to leave, but not before putting on lay clothes and making
his way back to Japan via Korea, arriving home in 847.
Ennin is notable for being one of
the early patriarchs of the Japanese Tendai school, but also
specifically for this journey he took to China. His journal The Record of a Pilgrimage to China in Search of the Law
(入唐求法巡禮行記)
details his long journey in remarkable detail. There is actually a
translation of it by Edwin Oldfather Reischauer done in 1955. A recent extensive study in English was done by Jesse Dalton Palmer (see here).
Ennin's
journal is an extremely valuable first hand account and witness to
history. Besides detailing his religious activities and some
political developments that he personally lived through, he also
notes much of his daily activities – the food he ate, the things he
saw along the way, the conversations he had and the weather. The
human interactions he records are at times quite heart-warming.
For instance, Ennin had the good
fortune during his time in China to meet with a certain monk by the
name of Jingwen 敬文
who
had met Ennin's late master Saichō. One thing to note in the
following account is that he “writes” to Ennin although having
come to personally visit him. This is actually probably due to Ennin
at the time either speaking limited Chinese or because they spoke
mutually unintelligible dialects. It was common practice at the time
for educated people who did not speak a common dialect (or language
in the case of many foreigners who could read and write Classical
Chinese, but could not speak anything) to “converse by the brush”
(筆談).
天台山禪林寺僧敬文來相見。書云：“敬文住天台山禪林寺。隨師在此山中出家二十一夏。學《四分律南山鈔》，學天台《法花經》、《止觀》。去年十月初三日離寺至浙西。蘇州，知日本國有使進獻，有大和尚相從，故此尋訪。敬文又於童年時隨和尚行滿見最澄闍梨來取天台教門，爾後計已三十年，未得消息。適聞知澄大德已靈變，道門哀喪，當須奈何！無許，滿和尚卻來入天台山，滿和尚已亡化，經十六年。敬文忽聞二大德在，故此尋訪矣。”
A
monk from Chanlin-si on Mount Tiantai by the name of Jingwen came to
visit. He wrote, “I live at Chanlin-si on Mount Tiantai. I followed
my master to this mountain where I have been ordained for twenty-one
years. I study the Nanshan Commentary on the Four Part Vinaya.
I also study the Lotus Sūtra and Mohe Zhiguan of the
Tiantai School. Last year in the tenth month on the third day I
departed the temple and arrived in Zhexi. In Suzhou I came to know of
a Japanese envoy coming to make tribute with great monks accompanying
it. It was a result of this that I came to visit. I also in my youth
followed the monk Xingman and saw Master Saichō come to retrieve the
Tiantai doctrines. Since then I calculate thirty years have passed
and I had not heard any news. Hearing that the Great Master Saichō
has passed away, our school lamented his loss – whatever shall be
done! Unfortunately, Master Xingman went back to Mount Tiantai and he
already passed away some sixteen years ago. I suddenly heard of two
Venerables being here, so I came to visit.”
Stories
like this make Ennin's journal quite down to earth and touching. It
is amazing to think that at the time he could encounter a monk who
knew Saichō from three decades prior. The Buddhist world, at least
in the region they were in, might have been relatively close-knit,
the foreign monks being quite noteworthy and welcome visitors to the
community. The government sponsored monks from Japan were by no means
beggars and came with ample funds when they arrived in China. They
were also generally intelligent and educated individuals.
Ennin
also found himself welcomed by other foreigners in China. He received
advice from resident Silla expatriates (Koreans) in eastern China who
dissuaded him from proceeding to Mount Tiantai 天台山,
but instead head for Mount Wutai 五臺山,
the earthly abode of Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva. This presumably was a
practical concern given the restrictions placed on travelling to the
former. These Koreans also knew the whereabouts of other Japanese
monks in China, which likewise proved to be valuable information.
They even helped Ennin with transport and storage. They were on
familiar terms with the Japanese, perhaps largely due to their
trading network.1
The
Tang state likewise felt obliged to accommodate foreign students and
monks. It was through such projection of soft cultural power that
much of East Asia adopted Tang cultural forms including such things
as clothing, architecture, statecraft, religion and even food. The court in Japan, based on the Tang model, also legitimized its authority by virtue of emulating the Chinese superpower. Much
of what is considered traditional Korean or Japanese culture in the
present day was originally adopted from China during the Tang Dynasty
(618-907). China in this period served as a central model and
benefactor from whence civilization was exported to satellite
cultures which readily adopted Chinese ways, although simultaneously
many foreign cultural elements from India and Central Asia found
their way into mainstream Chinese culture, which in turn was passed
on to Japan and Korea.
While
speaking with (or writing to) Jingwen he asked about the number of
monks and abbots at Tiantai, which provides us with a picture of the
scale of the monastery complex at the time.
請益僧問：“未審彼天台國清寺幾僧幾座主在？”敬文答云：“國清寺常有一百五十僧久住，夏節有三百已上人泊。禪林寺常有四十人住，夏即七十餘人。”
I
asked, “I'm uncertain how many monks and abbots there are at
Guoqing-si at Tiantai?” Jingwen replied, “Guoqing-si usually has
150 monks in permanent residence and during the summer there are more
than 300 people who stay. Chanlin-si usually has forty people in
residence and during the summer there are more than 70 people.”
This
is useful as it provides an account of the population of
Tiantai in this period. The Tiantai school in China was influential
despite being located away from the center of power further west (see
Google Maps).
Nevertheless, as Suzuki Gyōken's 鈴木行賢 paper
“The Buddhism of Tang Chang'an and Tiantai” points out there were
some Tiantai teachers who spent time in Chang'an interacting with the
diverse new forms of Buddhism that were being received from India,
which naturally influenced them and the direction the school took.
Hence, despite the relative distance of Tiantai from Chang'an, it
still had a role to play in the upper echelons of Tang Buddhism. Despite the smaller monastic population, it remained an influential community.
When
Ennin travelled in China he was frequently delayed with bureaucratic
paperwork. The state during the Tang Dynasty had an extensive
bureaucratic corp that thought of themselves as parental figures to
the masses. Travel was restrictive even within major cities like
Chang'an the capital. Ennin felt inclined to include his own
petitions and answers in his journal (for a study of the policing as
related in the journal see here). Take for
example the following:
Ennin
[I] and the above individuals accompanied a tributary envoy in
Kaicheng 3 (838) in pursuit of the Buddha's teachings. In the third
month of this year we requested permission through Qingzhou to visit
Mount Wutai where we venerated the holy relics. Arriving here [in
China] we intend to study the holy dharma. We request residence in
the city monastery so we may seek teachers to study under. We humbly
request you handle the aforementioned matter. Sincerely – Ennin,
Japanese Monk Pursuing the Dharma, Kaicheng 5 [840], 8th month, 23rd day.
It was of course not all troublesome matters he had to contend with. He
also kept note of cultural events he encountered. He celebrated
Chinese New Years and recorded the details as follows.
【十二月】二十九日
暮際，道俗共燒紙錢。俗家後夜燒竹，與爆聲，道“萬歳”。街店之内，百種飯食，異常彌滿。日本國此夜宅庭屋裏門前到處盡點燈也。大唐不爾，但點常燈，不似本國也。寺家後夜打鐘，衆僧參集食堂禮佛。禮佛之時，衆皆下床，於地下敷座具。禮佛了，還上床座。時有庫司典座僧，在於衆前讀申歳内種
[種]用途賑，令衆聞知。未及曉明，燈前吃粥。飯食了，便散其房。遲明，各出自房，觀禮衆相，共禮謁。寺家設供，三日便休。
12th
Month, 29th Day. Evening – the monastics and the laity together
burnt paper money. The laity later in the night burnt bamboo and with
a popping sound say, “Wansui! [Banzai]” In the streetside shops
there are a hundred varieties of food and it is exceptionally full.
In Japan on this night people have lamps everywhere in the house,
courtyard, rooms and in front of the gate. The Great Tang is not so
as only a [single] lamp is kept illuminated all the time which is
unlike Japan. The temple and households later in the night strike
bells and the assembly of monks gather together in the dining hall to
venerate the Buddha. When venerating the Buddha the assembly all get
up from their chairs and set some cushions on the floor. After
venerating the Buddha they again take their seats. Then there were
the logistics and kitchen monks who read and outlined in front of the
assembly the various expenditures (?) for the year, making it known
to the assembly. Before it reached dawn a meal was consumed in
front of the lantern. After finishing eating the assembly all
dispersed to their rooms. At dawn each left their room to attend
rituals and together pay respects. Both temples and households set
out offerings and will rest for three days.
Another
interesting encounter he had was with a group of ministers on an
inspection tour. They sat down to have some tea and invited the monks
to join them. Naturally there was some curiosity on their part and
some questions were posed to the foreign monks.
相公對僧等近坐，問：“那國有寒否？”留學僧答云：“夏熱冬寒。”相公道：“共此間一般。”相公問云：“有僧寺否？”答云：“多有。”又問：“有多少寺？”答：“三千七百來寺。”又問：“有尼寺否？”答云：“多有。”又問：“有道士否？”答云：“無道士。”相公又問：“那國京城方圓多少里數？”答云：“東西十五里，南北十五里。”又問：“有坐夏否？”答：“有。”
The
minister sat close and faced the monks before asking, “Is it cold
in that country?”
The
student monk replied, “The summers are hot and the winters cold.”
The
minister said, “The same as here.”
The
minister asked, “Are there monasteries?”
“There
are many.”
Again
he asked, “How many temples?”
“3700
temples.”
Again
he asked, “Are there nunneries?”
“There
are many.”
Again
he asked, “Are there Daoist priests?”
“There
are no Daoist priests.”
The
minister again asked, “How many li
in circumference is the capital city of that country?”
“East-west
15 li. South-north 15
li.”
Again
he asked, “Are there summer retreats?”
“There
are.”
Assuming
this student monk is Japanese he is referring to Heiankyō 平安京
(Kyōto)
whose specifications were east-west 4.5km and south-north 5.2km,
which roughly approximates to the
estimate provided above, though Heiankyō was planned on a
rectangular grid so it was not square as suggested by the student
monk. It had become the capital in 794, initiating what historians
call the Heian period (794-1185). It is also notable that he states there are no Daoist masters in Japan given that in China and Korea alike there were such individuals.
The
details about food, weather, local conditions (famine for example)
and the customs he observed paint a rich narrative that brings the
late Tang Dynasty into vivid focus. More importantly perhaps are the
details he provides in 845 when the state under Emperor Wuzong, who
was something of a Daoist zealot, ordered a massive purge of Buddhism
from the country. The state lacized countless monastics, leaving them
stranded in the streets and forbidden from stepping foot in the
monasteries again as Ennin
reported. The state also appropriated monastic property for its own
purposes. More shocking was that the state also formally ordered the
execution of all Manichean priests in the country.
The
foreign monks in the Tang empire did not enjoy immunity. They were
finally ordered to disrobe and return home. Ennin had to comply, but
decided to smuggle out his contraband items at the risk of his own
life:
有敕云：“外國[僧]等若無祠部牒者，亦勒還俗遞歸本國者。”西國北天竺三藏難陀在大興善寺；南天竺三藏寶月兼弟子四人於中天[竺]成業，並解持念大法，律行精細，博解經論，在青龍寺：並無唐國祠部牒。新羅國僧亦無祠部牒者多。日本國僧圓仁、惟正亦無唐國祠部牒。功德使准敕配入還俗例。又帖諸寺，牒云：“有如僧尼不伏還俗者，科違敕罪，當時決殺者。”聞此事，裝束文書：所寫經論、持念教法、曼荼羅等，盡裝裹訖。文書兼衣服都有四籠。便買三頭驢，待處分來。心不憂還俗，只憂所寫聖教不得隨身將行。又敕切斷佛教，恐在路諸州府檢勘得實，科違敕之罪。
A
directive stated, “Foreign [monks] will also be forced to disrobe
and return to their home countries if they do not have documentation
from the Ministry of Rites.” North Indian Tripiṭaka Master Nanda
from the west countries was at Da Xingshan-si. South Indian Tripiṭaka
Master Ratnacandra and his four disciples had trained in middle
India. They understand and practice the Great Dharma. They are
meticulous in their practice of the Vinaya, and erudite in their
understanding of sūtra and śāstra. They are at Qinglong-si and
have no documentation from the Tang Ministry of Rites. There are also
many Silla monks who do not have documentation from the Ministry of
Rites. The Japanese monks Ennin and Yuishō also have no
documentation from the Tang Ministry of Rites. The state monastic
controller [功德使]
decreed laicization in our case. They also posted a document at the
temples: “If there be any monks or nuns who do not submit to
laicization, they will be deemed guilty of violating the directive
and at that time will be put to death.” Hearing about this, I
bundled my papers. I wrapped up in clothing all the sūtras,
śāstras, teachings and maṇḍalas I had copied. The documents and
clothes were altogether four baskets. I then bought three donkeys to
manage it all. In my mind I was not worried about disrobing. I just
worried that I would be unable to bring the holy teachings I had
copied. There was a directive again to dismantle Buddhism. I feared
on the roads I might be inspected by prefecture offices and they
would discover the truth, and that I would be guilty of violating the
directive.
Despite
the dangers, Ennin made it back to Japan in 847, carrying with him
584 texts, 21 religious implements as well as some paintings and
maṇḍalas.
The persecution of Buddhism that Ennin witnessed actually undermined the Tang dynasty itself, and was a sign of degenerating political processes as less respect was offered to the emperor and his court. Jesse Dalton Palmer notes (see pdf, 249):
The Huichang
persecution also damaged imperial legitimacy by forcing a stark
conflict between Tang officials’ divided loyalties to the imperial
system and to Buddhism. By creating a situation where many officials
ignored or disobeyed imperial commands in order to help monks, the
emperor effectively undermined his own sovereignty. Examples of this
kind of behavior are especially evident in the final section of
Ennin’s journal, when he was laicized and allowed to leave Changan
to journey back to Japan. Along the way, Ennin was aided by various
officials who continued to treat him as though he were a monk,
despite his lay status. The Sillan interpreter even risked much more
by hiding Ennin’s collected Buddhist materials until they could be
taken back to Japan. Ennin also reports that the regional commanders
completely ignored the emperor’s commands.
Within a few generations following Ennin's departure the Tang dynasty collapsed in 907. The purge of Buddhism highlighted divided loyalties among members of society. While the state held itself as the ultimate authority in the world, there were clearly still plenty of individuals with Buddhist inclinations who would disobey imperial directives. It was just such friction that originally led to the purge. Buddhism by the late eighth century had come to command vast amounts of land and wealth, which many elites saw as a risk to the authority of the court. There was of course corruption and ordinations for sale (they exempted one from forced labour), but the Buddhist project in China generally still respected the state and the imperial system as they were essentially beneficiaries of the court. The parallel in Japan is clear enough as well. Ennin despite having seen the wrath of a tyrant did not challenge the existence of such a system as he himself depended on the largely autocratic system in place in his homeland for his support. Notions of checks and balances to control tyranny were perhaps alien to him. However, when the state was favourable to Buddhism, the religion fluorished and received political perks. It was the same in both Japan and China.
Ennin had spent five years in Chang'an studying tantra, which was more than
Kūkai who had only spent half a year under Huiguo. It enabled him to
challenge the Shingon monopoly on estorica. Ennin had received
thirteen different initiations while in China, including that of the
Susiddhi Tantra, which Kūkai
had not received. His command of the esoteric teachings
enabled him to receive prompt recognition from the court in Japan, which in
turn halted the decline of Mount Hiei. He was further able to have
initiations sponsored for the throne and protection of the state,
which were first carried out at Enryaku-ji in 849.
After
850 he was invited to the palace to confer precepts unto the imperial
family and carry out rites. In 856 he performed an initiation for
Emperor Montoku 文德天皇
(826-858).
Mount Hiei was increasingly benefiting from Ennin's influence at court.
In 850 Emperor Montoku had Sōji-in built there which accommodated
fourteen monks whose function was to recite prayers to the emperor's birth star for the
well-being of the country. The Tendai
school in the same year was further authorized to perform annual
initiations as transmitted by Ennin from China, thus legitimizing the
new esoteric lineage within Tendai.
In
866, two years after Ennin died, the court conferred posthumous
titles to both Saichō and Ennin: Dengyō Daishi and Jikaku Daishi
respectively, which reflects the success of Ennin's endeavours at
court. This actually preceded Kūkai's honorary title of Kōbō
Daishi, which was conferred in 921.
In
respect to Ennin's own doctrinal ideas, he is perhaps unique for
classifying the Lotus Sūtra
as Mikkyō. He suggested this for two reasons. Firstly, the Lotus
Sūtra teaches Ekayāna (the
Single Vehicle, which asserts all beings inevitably can and must
achieve buddhahood), which according to him is a primary condition in
defining what constitutes Mikkyō. Śākyamuni Buddha in the latter
part of the sūtra also reveals himself to be the eternal Buddha,
which should be understood as Mahāvairocana Buddha in his opinion. Hence, while it
was a Mikkyō scripture, it is not "pure" like the
Mahāvairocana Sūtra
大日經
and
Vajraśekhara Sūtra
金剛頂經,
where secretive mantras, mudras and maṇḍala initiations are
provided. Consequently, the Lotus Sūtra
was considered only "esoteric in principle" 理密.2
Ennin's
journey marks the end of a period of formal Japanese missions to Tang China. In the preceding two centuries vast amounts of culture and
knowledge were imported from China and readily digested. By the ninth century there was much less need for such missions, but nevertheless
Buddhists in particular had compelling reasons to take the journey to
China. Ennin became an influential figure in Japanese Buddhism, but
beyond Buddhism his journal actually holds as much value as Marco
Polo's Livres des merveilles du monde,
if not more. It is a witness to a period in Chinese history written
while on the ground.
Incidentally,
the fact that it is written in Chinese, which was Ennin's second
language, is likewise important because it preserves conversational
Middle Chinese. There has been much written on that subject and I
will take a look at it in another post over at my other blog
Exploring Classical Chinese.
1 See
Tanaka Fumio 田中史生,
“Saigo no Kentōshi to Ennin no Nyūtō Kuhō” 最後の遣唐使と円仁の入唐求法
in Kentōshi Sen no Jidai Jikū wo Kaketa Chōjin-tachi
遣唐使船の時代 時空を駆けた超人たち (Tokyo,
Japan: Kadokawa Sensho, 2010), 190-210.
2 See
See Stanley Weinstein, "Aristocratic Buddhism" in The
Cambridge History of Japan Volume 2 Heian Japan (Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press, 1999), 479-485.
No comments :
Post a Comment