Historiography or Hagiography: A Study on the Lineage of Daoxin: Fourth Patriarch of Chan School

Abstract

The concept of lineage is very important in the study of Chan School (Chanzong) 禪宗. It is because belonging to a lineage indicates that a Chan practitioner has received transmission, which connects all the way back to Śākyamuni Buddha. Chan scholar Faure said: “It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that everything in Chan revolves around the patriarchal lineage”.Faure （1991: 11) Chan Masters and their disciples have faithfully associated themselves with their lineage, tradition, and meditation methods. Contemporary scholars of Chan studies tend to doubt the authenticity of the lineage of the early Chan patriarchs, particularly the lineage between the Third patriarch Sengcan 僧璨 and Fourth patriarch Daoxin 道信. This thesis takes issue with such doubt by re-examining the lineage between Sengcan and Daoxin. Based on a close survey on both Buddhist and non-Buddhist materials as well as newly found archeological excavation, this thesis concludes that the lineage between Sengcan and Daoxin is genuine. This study also addresses a methodological issue. In my view, the distinction between historiography and hagiography cannot be equated to distinction between history and legend. More precisely, I would argue that hagiographical materials should not be rejected of their historical value simply because they are regarded as “hagiography.” In my research, I found that the materials considered as “non-historical” texts or hagiography of later years, like Records of Lamp (Denglu) 燈錄, by the modern scholars, agree with the facts in the recent archeological findings. I may not be able to resolve all the related issues regarding the lineage of early Chan, because it is impossible to exhaust all the related historical records and texts completely. I hope that my study will be able to throw in some new light regarding the following: 1) The modern scholars’ skepticism on some of the existing texts/documents of the early Chan schools shows that cautious attitude on the study of these texts is necessary, especially towards the nature and genre of texts/documents, as well as the obscurity of the records; 2) To show that there is a possible legitimacy of the lineage between Sengcan and Daoxin through analyzing various Chan and non-Buddhist history texts, archaeological findings and their meditation methods.