Where Linji Chan and the<i>Huayan jing</i>meet: on the<i>Huayan jing</i>in the<i>essential points of the Linji</i>[Chan]<i>lineage</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juefan Huihong’s 覺範惠洪 (1071–1128) Linji zongzhi shows that eminent statesmen and contemporary Chan monastics during the twelfth century in China interpreted the core teaching strategies of several Linji Chan patriarchs – especially Linji Yixuan 臨濟義玄 (d. 866) and Fenyang Shanzhao 汾陽善昭 (980–1024) – through the Buddhāvataṃsaka-sūtra (Huayan jing 華嚴經, T nos. 278–279), and with special consideration for Mañjuśrī and ṛṣi (seera) in the Gaṇḍavyūha (Ru fajie pin 入法界品) chapter, Bhīṣmôttaranirghoṣa 毗目仙人. Huihong was certainly influenced by the writings of the highly admired ‘Two Shuis’ – Changshui Zixuan 長水子璿 (964–1038) and Jinshui Jingyuan 晉水淨源 (1011–1088) – and by his close confidant, Zhang Shangying 張商英 (1043–1122), who visited Mount Wutai circa 1088 and recorded his journey in Xu Qingliang zhuan 續清涼傳 (Further Record of Mt. ‘Chill Clarity,’ T. 2100). In this article I reconsider the central role the Huayan jing and the cult of Mañjuśrī play in the core teachings of the Linji Chan lineage with particular attention to how current Song dynasty, rather than late Tang (618–907) era, readings and uses of the Huayan jing underscore the enduring significance of this seminal Mahāyāna Buddhist scripture and Mount Wutai as a sacred space in the history of Chinese Chan Buddhism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".