English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

According to traditional doxography, three “schools” (zong 宗) of Vinaya exegesis arose in the early Tang, represented by three scholar-monks and their commentaries on the Fourpart Vinaya (Sifen lü 四分律). These three monks were Fali 法礪 (569–635) of the Xiangbu School 相部宗, Daoxuan 道宣 (596–667) of the Nanshan School 南山宗, and Huaisu 懷 素 (634–707), of the Dongta School 東塔宗. While these three are not the only Vinaya exegetes who were active during this period, they are thought to be particularly influential, and are known to have developed competing interpretations of the Vinaya and other doctrinal points, including the concept of jieti 戒體, typically translated as either the “essence of the precepts” or as “the substance of the precepts.” This “substance” is the dharma that was thought to be gained by someone upon “receiving the precepts” (shoujie 受戒) in a properly performed ordination ceremony, and was also thought to help one act in accordance to the rules that they had pledged to follow. In this paper, I will outline some of the differences in the interpretation of this concept between the three above-mentioned exegetes in their respective commentaries, and the main points of debate among them. Though this topic has already been dealt with to a certain extent in Sakaino Kōyō’s 境野黄洋 Shina bukkyōshi kōwa 支那仏教史講話, this paper finds that these three scholars similarly criticize an interpretation based on the Chengshi lun, traditionally used by interpreters of the Four-part Vinaya.

Doctrinal Debate in Tang-dynasty Vinaya Commentaries: The “Substance of the Precepts” in the Works of Fali, Daoxuan, and Huaisu