Bodhisattva and Daoist: A New Study of Zhunti Daoren 準提道人in the Canonization of the Gods (2024)

1. Introduction

Zhunti Daoren, a character in the Ming (1368–1644) novel Canonization of the Gods (hereafter Canonization), embodies both ordinariness and extraordinariness. The character’s ordinariness is evidenced by his sporadic appearances between Chapters 61 and 84,1 with most illustrated editions of Canonization omitting depictions of Zhunti Daoren. However, the character’s extraordinariness lies in his unique position as one of the hierarchs of the “heterodox” Xifang jiao 西方教 (literally, the religion of the West). Furthermore, despite his limited appearances, Zhunti Daoren is a fleshed-out figure (at least, not a flat character), having an integral function in the plot and contributing to the relevant protagonist.

Despite the lack of dedicated studies on Zhunti Daoren in non-Chinese languages, his significance was initially recognized by the French missionary Henri Doré (1859–1931) (Doré 1915, pp. 303–11) during the late Qing (1644–1912) and early Republican periods (1912–1949).2 Doré’s approach integrated folktales gathered through fieldwork with the narrative of the novel, culminating in a reconstruction of the mythological background of the Buddhist deity Zhunti (Cundī 準提).3 Another pivotal scholar in this field is Ts’un-yan Liu, whose seminal work Buddhist and Taoist Influences on Chinese Novels delves into the correlation between Zhunti Daoren and Cundī Bodhisattva (Liu 1962, pp. 6–7). Following Liu’s lead, scholars such as Wei Juxian 衛聚賢 (Wei 1982, pp. 221–22) and Zeng Qinliang 曾勤良 (Zeng 1984, pp. 72–76) pursued research on Zhunti Daoren, and their works concur with Liu’s assertion that Zhunti Daoren in Canonization embodies Cundī in Buddhism. More recently, Yamash*ta Kazuo 山下一夫 (Yamash*ta 1999, p. 250) and Chen Xingyu 陳星宇 (X. Chen 2012, pp. 167–72) have analyzed the relationship between Zhunti Daoren and Xifang jiao, as well as the interplay between the Zhunti cult and Pure Land Buddhism during the late imperial era. Further scholarly attention to Zhunti Daoren is evident in the works of Jin Dinghan 金鼎漢 (Jin 1993, pp. 55–56), Chen Liao 陳遼 (L. Chen 1987, p. 72), Pan Baiqi 潘百齊 (Pan 2000, p. 188), and Xue Keqiao 薛克翹 (Xue 2016, pp. 234–37), all of whom have contributed to the study of the mythic quality of Canonization.

In general, the scholarship on Zhunti Daoren predominantly revolves around the figure’s affiliation with Buddhism and Daoism, and the linkage to the Pure Land belief. Specifically, with respect to the issue of affiliation, there are three distinct perspectives: “Zhunti Daoren as a Buddhist deity”, “Zhunti Daoren as a Daoist deity”, and “Zhunti Daoren as the Panchen Lama”. This divergence can be ascribed to the multifarious academic orientations of the researchers and the deep-seated symbolic implications represented by the figures in mythological narratives.

In his A Stylistic Study of Chinese Novels of Gods and Demons (Zhongguo shenmo xiaoshuo wenti yanjiu 中國神魔小說文體研究), Feng Ruchang 馮汝常 (R. Feng 2009, pp. 164–217) presents three principal characteristics of God-Demon figures grounded in semiotics—the conceptual image (yinian xingxiang 意念形象), the cultural significance (wenhua yiyi 文化意義), and the informational function (xinxi gongneng 信息功能)—which are clearly aligned with the three different interpretations of Zhunti Daoren’s identity (see Figure 1).4 Building upon Feng’s theoretical framework, the study conducts a meticulous review of the three hypotheses concerning Zhunti Daoren’s identity/affiliation. This process not only re-contextualizes this literary figure but also contributes to the investigation of the origins of characters in Canonization.5 Furthermore, the research delves into the intricate relationships among Zhunti Daoren, Jieyin Daoren, and Xifang jiao, proposing that Zhunti Daoren’s role as a hierarch in Xifang jiao, alongside Jieyin Daoren, is more likely to have been influenced by the Pure Land transformation of the Zhunti cult in late imperial China than any connection with Guanyin. This perspective offers a unique insight into the development of the Ming–Qing Zhunti cult.

2. Zhunti Daoren as a Daoist Deity

The portrayal of characters in novels of gods and demons is shaped by two literary environments (wenxue huanjing 文學環境). The first is the micro textual environment (wenben xiaohuanjing 文本小環境), which pertains to the specific time and space in which the characters of the novel exist (R. Feng 2009, p. 183). In fact, irrespective of any profound implications that transcend the text, the foundation of these characters relies on the author’s characterization, which establishes the conceptual image.6 Scholars advocating Zhunti Daoren as a Daoist deity, such as Chen Liao and Pan Baiqi, primarily base their arguments on textual analysis, asserting that Chanjiao 闡教 (literally, the religion of elucidation), Jiejiao 截教 (literally, the religion of interception), and the enigmatic Xifang jiao are all attributed to Daoism, which leads to the natural conclusion that Zhunti Daoren is a Daoist deity crafted by the author (Pan 2000, pp. 183–86; L. Chen 1987, p. 74). Put simply, both Zhunti Daoren and Jieyin Daoren are designated as “Daoren” 道人 (Daoist), a term exclusively reserved for Daoist figures, whereas Buddhist characters should be referred to as “Bodhisattvas”, “Buddhas”, or “Arhats” (L. Chen 1987, p. 72). Looking through this lens, the scholars have identified numerous examples in the novel, such as Zhunti Daoren’s initial appearance in Chapter 61, “Yin Hong Is Killed by the Taiji Diagram” (taijitu yinhong jueming 太極圖殷洪絕命):

As he lifted his sword to behead Ma Yuan, Heavenly Master heard someone shouting behind him, “Brother of the Way! Have mercy on the life under your sword”.

He turned and saw a man in Daoist robes with a yellowish face, two coils of hair, and a short beard. The man greeted him politely.

“Where do you come from and what can I do for you, my friend of the Way?” Heavenly Master asked as he returned his greeting.

文殊廣法天尊舉劍纔待要斬馬元, 只聽得腦後有人叫曰: 道兄劍下留人! 廣法天尊回顧, 認不得此人是誰: 頭挽雙髻, 身穿道服, 面黃微須. 道人曰: 稽首了! 廣法天尊答禮, 口稱: 道友何處來? 有甚事見諭?

(Z. Xu 1992, p. 112)

The depiction of Zhunti Daoren in “Daoist robes” with “a yellowish face, two coils of hair, and a short beard”, addressing the Heavenly Master of Outstanding Culture (wenshu guangfa tianzun文殊廣法天尊) as “brother of the Way” and being referred to as “friend of the Way”,7 clearly demonstrates that Zhunti Daoren belongs to Daoism.

The terms “Daoist robes”, “true guest of the Way”, and “great immortal”, all seem to point to Zhunti Daoren’s affiliation with Daoism.

While inferring the author’s intent based on the text holds validity, the disregard for the social and cultural background often results in substantial biases in comprehension. Regardless of the affiliations of Chanjiao, Jiejiao, and Xifang jiao, the contention that Zhunti Daoren should be categorized as a Daoist deity relying on the term “Daoren” alone is highly questionable. As a matter of fact, “Daoren” first appeared in Zhuangzi’s 莊子 “Floods of Autumn” (Qiushui 秋水), denoting individuals of exceptionally high moral character (F. Wang 1964, p. 141). It was later employed in the “Biography of Jing Fang” (Jingfang zhuan 京房傳) of the History of the Former Han Dynasty (Hanshu 漢書) to signify a thaumaturge (fangshi 方士) (Ban 1962, p. 3164). This change indicates that within the cultural context of early China, “Daoren” was not exclusively associated with Daoism (Yang 2009, pp. 305–7).

The subsequent introduction of Buddhism to China as a foreign religion led to the assimilation of "Daoren" into Buddhist lexicon. This absorption can be attributed to the strategic adoption of pre-existing traditional terminologies and designations, a significant facet of early Buddhist translation activities. For instance, in the “Biography of Gu Huan” (Guhuan zhuan 顧歡傳) of the History of the Southern Qi (Nanqi shu 南齊書) (Xiao 1972, p. 935), monks are addressed as “Daoren”. The practice of using “Daoren” to refer to Buddhist monks was even assimilated into the Turkic languages, becoming a fixed appellation (S. Li 2006, p. 53).

Although the development of Buddhist translation activities led to the establishment of specific titles for Buddhist monks, the practice of referring to Buddhists as “Daoren” continued to endure. This phenomenon was particularly notable during the Ming and Qing dynasties, where it became fashionable among the social elite to adopt “so-and-so Daoren” as an art name (Hao 號). This group of self-identified “Daoren” intellectuals included individuals affiliated with Daoist or Buddhist traditions, as well as those who were not aligned with either religious affiliation. Consequently, while “Daoren” is linked to Daoist beliefs in certain instances, it predominantly serves as a non-religious designation, akin to the term “Shanren” 山人 (Mountain Dweller) which reflects a free-spirited mindset rather than a literal abode in the mountains (B. Feng 2008, pp. 10–26). Furthermore, “Daoren” conveys an additional meaning in Ming–Qing literary works. For example, Chapter 8 of The Plum in the Golden Vase (Jinpingmei 金瓶梅) contains the following passage:

The foreman of the lay workers (daoren 道人) from the temple arrived early in the morning, at the fifth watch, bearing with him the sutras that would be used in the liturgy. He prepared the consecrated space in which the ceremony would be held and hung up Buddhist effigies.

道人頭五更, 就挑了經擔來, 鋪陳道場, 懸掛佛像.

(Anonymous 2013, p. 164)

“Daoren” in this context denotes a menial laborer who performs miscellaneous tasks in the temple (Wang and Ye 1993, p. 728). A parallel usage can be also discerned in Chapter 36 of the Journey to the West (Wu 2012, p. 152).

In light of this, it is apparent that without establishing a substantial nexus to Daoism, the specific reference of “Daoren” to Daoist adherents remains indeterminate. Nonetheless, bracketing the issue of “Daoren” does not impede our exploration of the Daoist elements in the cult of Zhunti. Within the existing body of scholarship, the Zhunti cult has frequently been construed as being solely Buddhist or as a quintessential representation of Chinese Esoteric Buddhism (hanchuan mijiao 漢傳密教) (Lan 2013, p. 46). However, the Japanese Esoteric Buddhism expert Osabe Kazuo 長部和雄 (1907–1990) posits that Daoist elements were already evident in the translations of Cundī Dhāraṇī as early as the Tang Dynasty (618–907) (Osabe 1975, p. 45). Related clues can also be discerned in the renditions by Śubhakarasiṃha (Shanwuwei 善無畏, 637–735) and Amoghavajra (Bukong 不空, 705–774) (Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 1983, T20, no. 1078, p. 187a7–11; T20, no. 1076, p. 179b19–20; T20, no. 1076, p. 179c2–6).

The Dunhuang manuscript Talismans and Seals of Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva (Guanshiyin pusa fuyin 觀世音菩薩符印), dating from the Five Dynasties period (907–960), contains an entry titled “The Heart Seal of the Buddha–Mother of the Seventy Million Buddhas” (Qijuzhi fomu xinyin 七俱胝佛母心印). Li Xiaorong 李小榮 (X. Li 2003, pp. 317–18) claims that this seal is an outgrowth of the Ritual of the Great Cundī Dhāraṇī: the Heart of the Buddha–Mother of the Seventy Million Buddhas (Qifo juzhi fomuxin dazhunti tuoluoni fa七佛俱胝佛母心大準提陀羅尼法), which exhibits pronounced Daoist influences. While a specific visual representation of this seal is absent in the manuscript, an image entitled “The Seal of the Sanskrit Cundī Mantrā” (Fanwen zhuntizhou yin 梵文准提咒印, Figure 2) is documented in the temple gazetteer of the Great Fragrant Hills (Da xiangshan 大香山) in Tongchuan 銅川, Shaanxi Province (Hou and Zhang 2008, p. 32). The gazetteer explains that this seal has been used for healing and exorcism since the Tang Dynasty, and there are many related miraculous tales.8

Subsequently, in late imperial China, the “Unity of the Three Religions” (Sanjiao heyi 三教合一) movement further facilitated the amalgamation of the Zhunti cult with Daoism, with the Heart Sutra of Zhunti (Zhunti xinjing 准提心經) representing a notable outcome of the syncretism. This text was compiled by Wu Haiyun 吳海雲 (n.d.), a disciple of the Qing Dynasty bibliophile Wu Zhao 吳焯 (1676–1733). While similar to the majority of the ritual manuals pertaining to the Zhunti cult circulated during Ming–Qing times, which are excerpts from the renowned Collection of Essentials for Realization of Buddhahood in the Perfect: Penetration of the Exoteric and the Occult Teachings (Xianmi yuantong chengfo xinyao ji 顯密圓通成佛心要集),9 this scripture is distinctive due to its absence from the Buddhist canon. Instead, it is included in the Collected Works of Zhang Sanfeng (Zhangsanfeng quanji 張三丰全集) within the Essentials of the Daoist Canon (Daozang jiyao 道藏輯要).

In 1906, the abbot of the Two Immortals Chapel (Er’xian an 二仙庵) in Chengdu augmented the original eight volumes of the Collected Works of Zhang Sanfeng with the Commentary on the Poetry of the Rootless Tree (Wugenshu ci zhujie 無根樹詞註解) and the Wish-Fulfilling Jewel (Ruyi baozhu 如意寶珠)which encompasses the Heart Sutra of Zhunti. This editorial endeavor, as interpreted by Guo Xuyang 郭旭陽, was motivated by Sichuan’s (Chengdu) role as a vibrant center for Tibetan Buddhism. The incorporation of texts such as the Heart Sutra of Zhunti was a strategic move to attract new adherents, a factor essential for the survival and development of Daoism. This maneuver underscores Daoism’s adaptability, particularly during the period referred to as the “Unity of the Three Religions” (Guo 2011, pp. 12–16). Hsieh Shu-wei 謝世維 also emphasizes that the emergence of the Heart Sutra of Zhunti demonstrates that the Zhunti cult transcends the boundaries of Buddhism and is embraced by various traditions, including Daoism (Hsieh 2018, p. 224).

The character of Zhunti Daoren, born out of these circ*mstances, not only transcended the literary domain but also deeply permeated the sociocultural fabric of local society (Liu 1962, Ⅶ). As per the record from the gazetteer of the Weibao Mountain 巍寶山 in Dali 大理, there were once two statues of Zhunti Daoren: one was enshrined as the principal deity in the Zhunti Pavilion (Zhunti ge 準提閣), while the other served as an attendant, accompanying the Supreme Venerable Sovereign (Taishang laojun 太上老君) in the Qingxia Monastery (Qingxia guan 青霞觀) (Weishan 1989, pp. 22–26).

Another example can be found in the village of Quyang Qiao曲陽橋 in Hebei. Owing a great debt of gratitude to Zhunti Daoren, the villagers established a shrine to worship him and instituted festivals commemorating his arrival on 25 February and his defeat of the malevolent peaco*ck spirit, Kong Xuan, on November 15. A sculpture of Zhunti Daoren riding a peaco*ck was also erected around the late Ming or early Qing period (see Figure 3),10 functioning as what Japanese folklorist Yanagita Kunio 柳田國男 (1875–1962) calls a “monument” (kinen butsu 記念物) (Yanagita 1985, pp. 26–27). This “monument” attests to the authenticity of the folktale and witnesses how Zhunti Daoren gradually transformed the local religious landscape.

A final noteworthy point comes from A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms, compiled in the 1930s by Lewis Hodous (1872–1949) and William Edward Soothill (1861–1935). Under the entry for the character “準”, it is indicated that “[Zhunti] in China [is] identified with Marīcī 摩里支 or 天后 Queen of Heaven” (Hodous and Soothill 2014, p. 405). Due to the substantial influence of the dictionary, it has been frequently cited by scholars to prove the connection between the Zhunti cult and the belief in the Mother of the Big Dipper (Doumu 斗姥). This information, however, turns out to be a longstanding misconception in Western Sinology originating from the works of Samuel Beal (1825–1889) and Henri Doré, which erroneously equate Zhunti with Marīcī, Doumu, and Guanyin (Beal 1871, p. 412; Doré 1915, pp. 303–11).

3. Zhunti Daoren as a Buddhist Deity

The characterization in supernatural novels, specifically within narratives that feature divine and demonic figures, is deeply influenced by the overarching literary conventions and cultural milieu from which they derive (wenxue yuanliu dahuanjing 文學源流大環境). This context dictates that these characters inevitably carry cultural significance that extends beyond the confines of the text (R. Feng 2009, p. 183). In Wolfgang Iser’s sense, a God-Demon character can take on a form only by being literally inserted into the real world. This insertion contains a selection from a variety of social, historical, and cultural systems that exist as referential fields outside the text (Iser 1993, p. 4).

The character of Zhunti Daoren is an interesting example. Although he is labeled as a “Daoren”, Liu points out that the term “Zhunti” is not of Chinese origin, but rather a transliteration of the Sanskrit word “Cundī” (Liu 1962, p. 6). Moreover, the descriptions of Zhunti Daoren in the novel also serve as crucial evidence supporting the claim that he is, in fact, conceived from the very image of Cundī Bodhisattva, who was widely venerated in late imperial China.11

They are both depicted with “eighteen arms”,12 adorned with “necklaces of gems”, and holding “vases”, “vajras”, and “pennants”. Additionally, Xue (2016, p. 236) suggests that the use of “fish intestines” in the novel likely refers to a precious sword, aligning with Cundī’s sword in the third hand to his right.

The materials presented above are highly compelling. However, a further rarely acknowledged yet indispensable clue that should be considered in demonstrating the relationship between Zhunti Daoren and Cundī Bodhisattva is the ambiguous background of the character. I therefore summarize the basic information of several figures in Canonization who are believed to be of Buddhist origin (see Table 1 and Table 2).

Based on Table 1, it is clear that among the four figures, only Zhunti Daoren lacks designation regarding the place of enlightenment and mount. The subsequent alteration of his mount to a peaco*ck was simply a narrative response to the subplot involving the subjugation of Kong Xuan, devoid of any inherent connection to the novel’s underlying background. This raises the question of why the author conspicuously omitted the specification of Zhunti Daoren’s basic information. Table 2 offers an explanation: the author actually drew upon the backgrounds of the corresponding Buddhist deities when conceptualizing these characters.

As Gimello (2004, pp. 225–26) expounded, Cundī was spread into China with minimal information about her background, as no stories were told about her, no accounts were given of her history, and no specific geographical or cosmographical domains were assigned to her. She was placed in no particular “family” or array of buddhas and bodhisattvas and was accorded no particular doctrinal significance. Nor was she associated with any particular system of Buddhist thought. The lack of foundational information presents a challenge: there is no established reference point for characterizing Zhunti Daoren. However, owing to the strong connection between the Zhunti cult and Pure Land Buddhism during the Ming and Qing dynasties (as we will see later), many followers of Zhunti regarded the Pure Land as their ultimate destination. Consequently, the author simply provides an ambiguous description of Zhunti Daoren as hailing from the Western Pure Land (xifang jile zhixiang 西方極樂之鄉) without further elaboration.

4. Zhunti Daoren as the Panchen Lama

The significance of characters in a novel lies not only in being the subjects and actors of the story, but also in propelling the plot and contributing to the overall development of the narrative (the informational function, so to speak) (R. Feng 2009, p. 183). In response to Wei’s assertion of “Zhunti Daoren as the Panchen Lama” (Wei 1982, pp. 221–22), critics underscore the absence of Tibetan Buddhist characteristics in both Zhunti and Jieyin, leading to the conclusion that Wei’s hypothesis is far-fetched (P. Wang 1987, p. 8; Li and Yin 2007, p. 161). Although this criticism has its merits, it concentrates solely on isolated story fragments and neglects the broader narrative. In contrast, by integrating Zhunti Daoren, Jieyin Daoren, and Xifang jiao into the novel’s whole storyline, Wei’s perspective actually unveils their roles in the layout of the narrative framework.

In Canonization, the historical event of King Wu’s campaign against King Zhou (Wuwang fazhou 武王伐紂) is employed as a metatext, serving to establish the primary backdrop for the conflict between Jiejiao and Chanjiao in the Eastern World (dongtu 東土). Upon his initial appearance in Chapter 61, Zhunti Daoren asserts his affiliation with Xifang jiao from the Western Pure Land. The juxtaposition of the “Western Pure Land” against the “Eastern World” unmistakably signifies Xifang jiao as a “foreign force” within the narrative. Yet, this “foreign force” is treated with profound reverence by the multitude of immortals in the Eastern World and is even accorded deference by the heads of Chanjiao, the Primeval Lord of Heaven (Yuanshi tianzun 元始天尊) and the Supreme Venerable Sovereign. The two hierarchs of Xifang jiao also willingly engage in warfare between the two religions, which redefines the preceding “civil war (conflict)” as a “mixed war”.

As per Wei’s (1982, p. 221) interpretation, the Eastern World subtly represents China and the Western Pure Land is suggestive of India. Despite this, ancient Chinese history scarcely documents instances of Indian leadership or collectives involved in Chinese political affairs. The notable exception is the fifth Dalai Lama, Lobsang Gyatso (1617–1682), who, in Wei’s view, is associated with India because of the longstanding Chinese belief about the “Indian” origins of Buddhism.

The narrative further thickens with the “Biography of Wu Sangui” (Wusangui zhuan 吳三桂傳) in the Draft Qing History (Qingshi gao 清史稿). It chronicles the fifth Dalai Lama’s plea to Emperor Kangxi 康熙 (1654–1722) to cease hostilities and show mercy to Wu Sangui (1608–1678), a rebel against the Qing with the aspiration to found his own dynasty (E. Zhao 1977, p. 12845). The quashing of Wu’s rebellion might be seen as a “civil war”, and the Dalai Lama’s intervention as the involvement of a “foreign force”. Following this line of inquiry, and adding another layer of complexity, the oblique references to Jieyin Daoren and Zhunti Daoren could possibly be alluding to the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama, respectively. Thus, Wei’s perspective, when viewed from this angle, is not entirely baseless.

Of course, Wei’s opinion raises several concerns. For instance, Canonization was published during the Ming Dynasty, whereas the historical event of the Dalai Lama interceding on behalf of Wu Sangui took place in the early Qing. Additionally, within the reincarnation system of Tibetan Buddhism, the Dalai Lama is considered to be the incarnation of Avalokiteśvara, rather than Amitābha. Similarly, the Panchen Lama is believed to be the incarnation of Amitābha, as opposed to Cundī, thus calling into question the proposed correlations.

5. Zhunti Daoren and Pure Land Buddhism

The interconnections among Zhunti Daoren, Jieyin Daoren, and Xifang jiao, as well as the correlation between the Ming–Qing Zhunti cult and Pure Land belief, have previously been studied in the works of Liu (1962, pp. 6–7) and Yamash*ta (1999, pp. 241–62). These scholarly inquiries are unanimous in asserting that, irrespective of the connotations of Chanjiao and Jiejiao, the term Xifang jiao unequivocally alludes to Buddhism, particularly Pure Land Buddhism, while Jieyin Daoren symbolizes Amitābha Buddha; furthermore, given the widespread prevalence of Pure Land Buddhism during the Ming and Qing periods, the parallel portrayals of Zhunti Daoren and Jieyin Daoren undoubtedly reflect the amalgamation of the Pure Land belief and the Zhunti cult (X. Chen 2012, p. 172). Yamash*ta (1999, pp. 260–61) further highlights that the foundation of this fusion is grounded in the intimate relationship between Guanyin, one of the “Three Saints of the West” (Xifang sansheng 西方三聖), and Zhunti: “Originally, Guanyin could have been considered a companion of Jieyin, but she has already assumed the role of the Immortal of Merciful Navigation in Chanjiao, so Zhunti, who is close to her, has assumed Guanyin’s responsibilities”.

The figure of Jieyin clearly represents Amitābha Buddha in this context, while Zhunti refers to Cundī Bodhisattva. Meanwhile, it is also worth noting that within Chinese Buddhism the “Three Saints of the West” traditionally encompass Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara, and Mahāsthāmaprāpta (Da shizhi 大勢至). However, here, Zhunti conspicuously supplants Guanyin as one of the saints. Thus, as proposed by Yamash*ta, one may inquire whether the interplay between the Zhunti cult and Pure Land Buddhism can be attributed to Zhunti’s role as a “substitute” for Guanyin. In the absence of a definitive answer in Buddhist scriptures, our recourse lies in understanding the perspectives of Ming–Qing contemporaries on the status of Zhunti in the Pure Land tradition. The Qing epigrapher Wang Chang 王昶 (1725–1806) included the following commentary on Zhunti in his Anthology of the Essence of Bronze and Stone (Jinshi cuibian 金石萃編):

The Cundī Method of Developing One’s Wisdom (Zhunti huiye 準提慧業) in the Ming-Dynasty Buddhist Canon attaches special emphasis to the function of the six-syllabled Sanskrit incantation, which differs from the teachings of Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara, and Mahāsthāmaprāpta. It is likely that, based on the teachings of the Western Pure Land, the Dharma Prince Mahāsthāmaprāpta and his fellow disciples guide believers who chant the name of Amitābha Buddha to the Pure Land. There, they are joined by fifty-two Bodhisattvas, of which Cundī is one.

明藏經有准提慧業以六梵字為用, 與無量壽及觀世音大勢至所說不同. 蓋西方之教, 大勢至法王子與其同門攝念佛人歸於淨土,至有五十二菩薩, 故准提亦其一耳.

(C. Wang 2000, p. 19)

The Cundī Method of Developing One’s Wisdom is no longer extant. However, the author’s juxtaposition of Cundī with Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara, and Mahāsthāmaprāpta, elevating Cundī as one of the fifty-two Bodhisattvas in the Pure Land realm, signifies the deity’s distinct and independent position within the Pure Land tradition in late imperial China, instead of being merely a “substitute” for Guanyin. Sir Reginald Johnston (1874–1938), a British diplomat who served as the tutor and adviser to Puyi 溥儀 (1906–1967), the last Emperor of China, similarly believed that there was no canonical basis for conflating Zhunti with Guanyin or regarding the former as a substitute for the latter (Johnston 1913, p. 279).13 Thus, it is my contention that the amalgamation of the Zhunti cult and the Pure Land belief was not rooted in Zhunti’s association with Guanyin; rather, it arose from Ming–Qing adherents of Zhunti leveraging Pure Land Buddhism’s theories and practices to reform the Zhunti cult. This transformative endeavor is crystalized in the Cundī Method of Purifying One’s Karma (Zhunti jingye 準提淨業), one of the era’s seminal Zhunti scriptures.

Influenced by this trend, some Ming–Qing Pure Land biographies document cases of practitioners who habitually recited the Zhunti incantation during their lifetimes but ultimately sought rebirth in the Pure Land. This phenomenon is evident in the entry on “A Girl of the Wu Family” (Wushi nü 吳氏女) in the Compendium of Pure Land Sages (Jingtu shengxian lu 淨土聖賢錄):

A girl of the Wu family, from Taicang, was born in a meditation position. As she grew older, she embraced the Buddhist faith with unwavering devotion and demonstrated exemplary filial piety, eschewing the pursuit of a household life. When advised otherwise, she adamantly pointed to the sky as a solemn pledge. Initially engaging in the study of the meaning of characters under the tutelage of her peers, she later delved into the recitation of Buddhist scriptures, achieving a profound understanding of their essence. She devoutly worshiped day and night. She then had a dream in which a deity bestowed upon her the Sanskrit Cundī Mantrā. Utilizing the Sanskrit characters, she miraculously cured a person afflicted with malaria, who immediately recovered. In another dream, she received a revelation regarding her destiny, disclosing her past incarnation as a distinguished monk in the Song Dynasty and her return to fulfill her filial duties, with the prophecy that she would gain enlightenment at the age of twenty-three. In the fourth year of the Chongzhen period, at the age of twenty-three, she secluded herself in a chamber, dedicating herself to the Pure Land practice. Towards the end of midwinter, she exhibited signs of a minor ailment and composed a verse urging her parents to persevere in their practice. At noon, she requested to wear a jade ring and then passed away while lying on her right side.

吳氏女, 太倉人. 生時趺坐而下. 稍長, 皈心佛乘, 事親孝, 不願有家, 人或勸之, 輒指天為誓. 初從昆弟析諸字義, 已而誦佛經, 悉通曉大意. 朝夕禮拜甚䖍. 俄夢神授以梵書準提呪, 有病瘧者, 以梵字治之, 立愈. 嘗於夢中得通宿命, 自言曾為宋高僧, 此來專為父母, 年二十三當成道果. 崇禎四年, 年二十三矣, 閉關一室, 專修淨土. 仲冬之末, 示微疾, 作偈辭世, 勉親堅修勿懈. 日方午, 索玉戒指佩之, 右脅而逝.

(Manji shinsan dainihon zokuzōkyō 1975–1989, X78, no. 1549, p. 312c9–16)

In addition to Pure Land biographies, analogous examples can also be observed in local gazetteers, such as the tale of Liu Chongqing 劉崇慶 (n.d.) in the gazetteer of Guangfeng 廣豐 (modern-day Shangrao 上饒):

Liu Chongqing, a Provincial Graduate of Yongfeng, had a fondness for the philosophy of Chan Buddhism and recited the Great Cundī Mantrā every morning regardless of the weather, without interruption for over twenty years. In his later years, he became an Instructor in the Confucian School of Lushan. One day, while bedridden, he saw a radiating white light in the room, within which the image of Great Cundī appeared for several days. As he neared the end of his life, he vividly saw the Bodhisattva present a white object resembling a full moon, seemingly with the intention of welcoming him. Liu promptly sat up, recited the Great Compassion Mantrā, and passed away.

永豐孝廉劉崇慶, 雅好禪理, 每晨起持大準提咒, 寒暑不輟, 垂二十餘年. 晚授魯山學博. 一日臥病, 見室中放白毫光, 現大準提相者數日. 將逝, 惺然見菩薩出一白物如滿月, 恍示以接引之意. 劉遽起趺坐, 誦大悲咒訖而逝.

(Gu 1975, pp. 2172–73)

In this particular case, Zhunti takes on the role of an ambassador to the Pure Land, a duty more often assumed by Amitābha, Avalokiteśvara, and Mahāsthāmaprāpta. Nevertheless, as is widely recognized, the ultimate goal of Esoteric Buddhism is the “attainment of Buddhahood in this very body” (Jishen chengfo 即身成佛), as opposed to “rebirth in the Pure Land” (Wangsheng jingtu 往生淨土). Yet works such as the Cundī Method of Purifying One’s Karma unequivocally advocate that, while chanting the Zhunti incantation, practitioners should aspire to achieve rebirth in the Pure Land. This undoubtedly represents the Pure Land transformation of the Zhunti cult, which is exactly why Zhunti is juxtaposed with Jieyin and becomes the hierarch of Xifang jiao (xifangjiao zhu 西方教主) in Canonization.

6. Conclusions

Zhunti Daoren undeniably occupies a pivotal yet frequently disregarded position in Canonization. The character’s significance is derived from the potential to provide an insight into the author’s overall conception. Therefore, the interpretations of his identity/affiliation have generated divergent perspectives, essentially constituting an exploration of the various attributes associated with one symbolic figure.

Although both the hypotheses of “Zhunti Daoren as a Daoist deity” and “Zhunti Daoren as the Panchen Lama” possess some degree of credibility, it is the connection with Cundī Bodhisattva in Buddhism that seemingly provides the most persuasive linkage to Zhunti Daoren. The attribution of Zhunti Daoren as the hierarch of Xifang jiao, standing shoulder to shoulder with Jieyin Daoren, can be traced to the amalgamation of the Zhunti cult and Pure Land Buddhism during the Ming and Qing dynasties. This fusion, however, did not primarily arise from the strong tie between Zhunti and Guanyin; rather, it was a consequence of the Pure Land transformation of the cult of Zhunti in late imperial China. Therefore, instead of viewing the emergence of the literary character Zhunti Daoren as mere capricious invention by the author, it deserves to be acknowledged as a creation deeply ingrained in discerning observation and a comprehensive understanding of the intricate religious tapestry of the era.14

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Notes

References

1. Anonymous. 2013. The Plum in the Golden Vase; or, Chin P’ing Mei. Translated by David Tod Roy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
2. Ban, Gu 班固. 1962. Hanshu 漢書 [History of the Former Han Dynasty]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. [Google Scholar]
3. Beal, Samuel. 1871. A Catena of Buddhist Scriptures from the Chinese. London: Trübner & Co. [Google Scholar]
4. Chen, Liao 陳遼. 1987. “Daojiao he fengshenyanyi” 道教和封神演義 [Daoism and the Canonization of the Gods]. Jilin daxue shehui kexue xuebao 吉林大學社會科學學報 [Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition] 5: 70–75. [Google Scholar]
5. Chen, Xingyu 陈星宇. 2012. “Fengshenyanyi zhong zhuntidaoren xingxiang yu zhuntixinyang” 封神演义中准提道人形象与准提信仰 [The Image of the Zhunti Daoist in the Canonization of the Gods and the Cult of Zhunti]. Zongjiaoxue yanjiu 宗教学研究 [Religious Studies] 1: 167–72. [Google Scholar]
6. Doré, Henri. 1915. Researches into the Superstitions of the Chinese. Translated by Martin Kennelly. Shanghai: Tusewei, vol. VII. [Google Scholar]
7. Feng, Baoshan 馮保善. 2008. Qingfeng zhebuzhu de jimo yu paihuai: Mingqing shanren shiren qunluo de wenhua jiedu 青峰遮不住的寂寞與徘徊: 明清山人詩人群落的文化解讀 [The Unconcealed Loneliness and Wandering of the Azure Peaks: A Cultural Interpretation of the Poet Communities among the Hermit Scholars of the Ming and Qing Dynasties]. Shanghai: Shanghai yinyue xueyuan chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
8. Feng, Ruchang 馮汝常. 2009. Zhongguo shenmo xiaoshuo wenti yanjiu中國神魔小說文體研究 [A Stylistic Study of Chinese Novels of Gods and Demons]. Shanghai: Sanlian shudian. [Google Scholar]
9. Fowler, Sherry. 2017. Accounts and Images of Six Kannon in Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. [Google Scholar]
10. Gimello, Robert. 2004. Icon and Incantation: The Goddess Zhunti and the Role of Images in the Occult Buddhism of China. In Images in Asian Religions: Texts and Contexts. Edited by Phyllis Granoff and Koichi Shinohara. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, pp. 225–56. [Google Scholar]
11. Gu, Lansheng 顧蘭生, ed. 1975. Guangfeng xianzhi 廣豐縣志 [Gazetteer of Guangfeng]. In Zhongguo fangzhi congshu 中國方志叢書 [Collection of Chinese Local Gazetteers]. Taipei: Chengwen chubanshe, vol. 265. [Google Scholar]
12. Guo, Xuyang 郭旭陽. 2011. “Yanyonghe chongkan zhangsanfengji kaoshu” 閻永和重刊張三丰全集考述 [A Study of Yan Yonghe’s Reprint of the Complete Works of Zhang Sanfeng]. Wudang xuekan 武當學刊 [Journal of Wudang Studies] 1: 12–16. [Google Scholar]
13. Hirsch, Eric Donald. 1967. Validity in Interpretation. London: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
14. Hodous, Lewis, and William Edward Soothill. 2014. A Dictionary of Chinese Buddhist Terms. New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
15. Hou, Xiongguan 侯雄覌, and Musheng Zhang 張木生, eds. 2008. Shaanxi yaoxian daxiangshan zhi 陝西耀縣大香山志 [The Gazetteer of the Great Fragrant Hills in Yao County, Shaanxi]. Tongchuan: Yaozhou quwei shizhiban. [Google Scholar]
16. Hsieh, Shu-wei 谢世维. 2018. Daomifayuan—daojiao yu mijiao zhi wenhua yanjiu道密法圓—道教與密教之文化研究 [Syncretic Traditions of Daoism and Esoteric Buddhism: A Study on Daoist and Esoteric Buddhist Cultures]. Taipei: Xinwenfeng chuban gongsi. [Google Scholar]
17. Iser, Wolfgang. 1993. The Fictive and the Imaginary: Charting Literary Anthropology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. [Google Scholar]
18. Jin, Dinghan 金鼎漢. 1993. “Fengshenyanyi zhong jige yu yindu youguan de renwu” 封神演義中幾個與印度有關的人物 [Several Characters in the Canonization of the Gods Related to India]. Nanya yanjiu 南亞研究 [South Asia Studies] 3: 52–59. [Google Scholar]
19. Johnston, Reginal. 1913. Buddhist China. London: Soul Care Publishing. [Google Scholar]
20. Kircher, Athanasius. 1987. China Illustrata. Translated by Charles Don Vantuyl. Muskogee: Indian University Press. [Google Scholar]
21. Lan, Jifu 藍吉富. 2013. Zhunti fa hui 準提法彙 [The Collection of Cundī Dharma]. Xinpei: Quanfo chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
22. Lei, Tianyu. 2016. A Study of the Cult of Zhunti in the Ming–Qing Literature. Master’s dissertation, National University of Singapore, Singapore. [Google Scholar]
23. Lei, Tianyu. 2023. Always Being with Her Practitioners: A Study of the Diversified Devotional Practices of the Cult of Zhunti 準提 in Late Imperial China (1368–1911). Journal of Chinese Religions 51: 207–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Li, Jianwu 李建武, and Guixiang Yin 尹桂香. 2007. “Bainian fengshenyanyi yanjiu pinglun” 百年封神演義研究評論 [Commentary on the Past Century of Research on the Canonization of the Gods]. Zhongnan minzu daxue xuebao 中南民族大學學報 [Journal of South-Central Minzu University (Humanities and Social Sciences)] 4: 159–63. [Google Scholar]
25. Li, Li’an, Zikai Zhang, Zong Zhang, and Haibo Li. 2011. Sida pusa yu minjian xinyang 四大菩薩與民間信仰 [The Four Great Bodhisattvas and Popular Religions]. Shanghai: Shanghai renmin chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
26. Li, Shuhui 李樹輝. 2006. “Shilun hanchuanfojiao de xijian” 試論漢傳佛教的西漸 [An Examination of the Westward Spread of Chinese Buddhism]. Xinjiang shifan daxue xuebao 新疆師範大學學報 [Journal of Xinjiang Normal University (Edition of Philosophy and Social Sciences)] 4: 50–53. [Google Scholar]
27. Li, Xiaorong 李小榮. 2003. Dunhuang mijiao wenxian lungao 敦煌密教文獻論稿 [On Dunhuang Esoteric Buddhism Manuscripts: A Collection of Essays]. Beijing: Renmin wenxue chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
28. Liu, Ts’un-yan. 1962. Buddhist and Taoist Influences on Chinese Novels. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. [Google Scholar]
29. Lü, Jianfu 呂建福. 2011. Zhongguo mijiao shi 中國密教史 [The History of Esoteric Buddhism in China]. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
30. Meulenbeld, Mark. 2015. Demonic Warfare: Daoism, Territorial Networks, and the History of a Ming Novel. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press. [Google Scholar]
31. Osabe, Kazuo 長部和雄. 1975. “Sokuten Bukō jidai no Mikkyō” 則天武后時代の密教 [Esoteric Buddhism in the Era of Empress Wu Zetian]. Mikkyō bunka 密教文化 [Esoteric Buddhism Culture] 111: 45. [Google Scholar]
32. Pan, Baiqi 潘百齊. 2000. “Lun fengshenyanyi de daojiao wenhua hanyun” 論封神演義的道教文化涵蘊 [The Daoist Cultural Implications in the Canonization of the Gods]. Mingqing xiaoshuo yanjiu 明清小說研究 [Journal of Ming-Qing Fiction Studies] 2: 182–90. [Google Scholar]
33. Shen, Hong 沈泓. 2011. Neihuang nianhua zhilü內黃年畫之旅 [The Journey of Neihuang New Year Paintings]. Beijing: Zhongguo shidai jingji chubanhe. [Google Scholar]
34. Shimasaki, Ekiji 島崎役治. 1932. Ajia taikan 亞細亞大觀 [Panorama of Asia]. Dairen: Ajia shashin taikansha, vol. 9. [Google Scholar]
35. Studholme, Alexander. 2002. The Origins of Oṃ Manipadme Hūṃ: A Study of Kāraṇḍavyūha Sūtra. Albany: State University of New York Press. [Google Scholar]
36. T. Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新修大蔵経 [Taishō Tripitaka]. 1983. Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎, Watanabe Kaigyoku 渡辺海旭, et al. 100 vols. Reprint. Taipei: Xinwenfeng chuban gongsi.
37. Tada, Kōshō 多田孝正. 2014. Tendai Bukkyō to Higashi Ajia no Bukkyō girei 天台仏教と東アジアの仏教儀礼 [Tendai Buddhism and Buddhist Rituals in East Asia]. Tokyo: Shunjūsha. [Google Scholar]
38. Tao, Siyan 陶思炎. 2011. Jiangsu zhima 江蘇紙馬 [Jiangsu Paper Horses]. Nanjing: Dongnan daxue chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
39. Wang, Chang 王昶. 2000. Jinshi cuibian 金石萃編 [Anthology of the Essence of Bronze and Stone]. In Zhongguo lidai shike ziliao huibian 中國歷代石刻資料彙編 [Compilation of Chinese Stone Inscriptions Across Historical Periods]. Beijing: Beijing tushuguan chubanshe, vol. 4. [Google Scholar]
40. Wang, Fuzhi 王夫之. 1964. Zhuangzi jie 莊子解 [Interpretation of Zhuangzi]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. [Google Scholar]
41. Wang, Guiyuan 王貴元, and Guigang Ye 葉桂剛. 1993. Shi ci qu xiaoshuo yuci dadian 詩詞曲小說語辭大典 [The Comprehensive Dictionary of Terms in Poetry, Lyrics, Drama, and Novels]. Beijing: Qunyan chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
42. Wang, Pinpin. 1987. Investiture of the Gods (‘Fengshen yanyi’): Sources, Narrative Structure, and Mythical Significance. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. [Google Scholar]
43. Wei, Juxian 衛聚賢. 1982. Fengshenbang gushi tanyuan 封神榜故事探源 [Exploring the Origins of the Stories in the Canonization of the Gods]. In Zhongguo gudian xiaoshuo yanjiuziliao huibian 中國古典小說研究資料彙編 [Compilation of Research Materials on Chinese Classical Novels]. Edited by Chuanyu Zhu 朱傳譽. Taipei: Tianyi chubanshe, vol. 285. [Google Scholar]
44. Weishan yizu huizu zizhixian xianzhi bianweihui bangongshi 巍山彝族回族自治县县志编委会办公室. 1989. Weibaoshan zhi 巍寶山志 [The Gazetteer of the Weibao Mountain]. Kunming: Yunnan renmin chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
45. Wu, Cheng’en. 2012. The Journey to the West. Translated by Anthony C. Yu. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, vol. 2. [Google Scholar]
46. X. Manji shinsan dainihon zokuzōkyō 卍新纂大日本続蔵経 [Manji Newly Compiled Continuation of the Japanese Tripitaka]. 1975–1989. Edited by Kawamura Kōshō 河村孝照. 90 vols. Tokyo: Kokusho Kankōkai.
47. Xiao, Zixian 蕭子顯. 1972. Nanqi shu 南齊書 [History of the Southern Qi]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. [Google Scholar]
48. Xinke zhongbojing xiansheng piping fengshenyanyi 新刻鐘伯敬先生批評封神演義 [New Edition of Mr. Zhong Bojing’s Critique on the Canonization of the Gods]. 1994, In Guben xiaoshuo jicheng 古本小說集成 [Compilation of Classical Novels]. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe, no. 4. vol. 78.
49. Xu, Dao 徐道. 1995. Lidai shenxian yanyi 歷代神仙演義 [Comprehensive Mirror of Successive Divine Immortals]. Shenyang: Liaoning guji chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
50. Xu, Zhonglin 許仲琳. 1992. Creation of the Gods. Translated by Zhizhong Gu 顧執中. Beijing: New World Press. [Google Scholar]
51. Xue, Keqiao 薛克翹. 2016. Shenmo xiaoshuo yu yindu mijiao 神魔小說與印度密教 [The Novels of Gods and Demons and Indian Tantric Buddhism]. Beijing: Zhongguo dabaikequanshu chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
52. Yamash*ta, Kazuo 山下一夫. 1999. “Fengshenyanyi xifangjiaozhu kao” 《封神演義》西方教主考 [A Study of the Hierarch of Xifang jiao in the Canonization of the Gods]. Yuanguang xuebao圓光學報 [Yuan Kuang Journal of Buddhist Studies] 3: 242–62. [Google Scholar]
53. Yanagita, Kunio 柳田國男. 1985. Chuanshuo lun 傳說論 [On Legends]. Translated by Xiang Lian 連湘. Beijing: Zhongguo minjian wenyi chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
54. Yang, Sen 楊森. 2009. “Lüetan fojiaotu cheng daoren he daojiaotu cheng daoren” 略談佛教徒稱道人和道教徒稱道人 [Brief Discussion on Daoren in Buddhism and Daoism]. In Fojiao yishu yu wenhua guoji xueshu yantaohui lunwenji 佛教藝術與文化國際學術研討會論文集 [Proceedings of the International Academic Symposium on Buddhist Art and Culture]. Edited by Binglin Zheng 鄭炳林. Xi’an: Sanqin chubanshe, pp. 282–311. [Google Scholar]
55. Zeng, Qinliang 曾勤良. 1984. Taiwan minjianxinyang yu fengshenyanyi zhi bijiaoyanjiu 台灣民間信仰與封神演義之比較研究 [A Comparative Study of the Popular Religions in Taiwan and the Canonization of the Gods]. Taipei: Huazheng shuju. [Google Scholar]
56. Zhang, Jian 張箭. 2013. “Fengshenyanyi renwu zhi qiyi zuoqi quankao” 封神演義人物之奇異坐騎全考 [A Comprehensive Study of the Unique Mounts of the Characters in the Canonization of the Gods]. Changjiang wenming 長江文明 [Yangtze River Civilization] 2: 49–64. [Google Scholar]
57. Zhang, Wenliang 張文良. 2015. Riben dangdai fojiao 日本當代佛教 [Contemporary Japanese Buddhism]. Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe. [Google Scholar]
58. Zhao, Er’xun 趙爾巽. 1977. Qingshi gao 清史稿 [Draft Qing History]. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, vol. 474. [Google Scholar]
59. Zhao, Wenlian 趙文濂. 2006. Guangxu zhengding xianzhi (光緒)正定縣志 [The Gazetteer of Zhengding County in the Guangxu Period]. Nanjing: Jiangsu guji chubenshe. [Google Scholar]