Appleton

Gentz, Joachim

Jin, Rusha

2026-05-21T14:35:58Z

2026-05-21

This study is organised around the overarching question of why Jingxi Zhanran (711–782) is called the ‘Tiantai Master of Commentary’. Focusing on one of Zhanran’s key works, the Zhiguan fuxing chuanhongjue (hereafter ZFCJ), a commentary on one of the Tiantai School’s foundational texts, the Mohe zhiguan (hereafter MHZG). The study examines his commentarial enterprise and how exactly it contributed to the Tiantai school. The central inquiry of this study is: What does it mean to be the ‘Tiantai Master of Commentary’? The inquiry rests on two key premises: Zhanran’s mastery of Buddhist exegesis and his interpretations contributed to the continuity and development of the Tiantai tradition. To examine this, the study explores four sub-questions: 1.What made Zhanran a commentator, and why does the ZFCJ matter within his corpus? 2.What are Zhanran’s commentarial approach and methods? 3.How can Zhanran’s exegesis support the Tiantai tradition? 4.What does Zhanran’s case tell us about the Chinese Buddhist commentarial tradition? The four chapters of this study address the questions outlined above. Chapter One contextualises the creation of the ZFCJ, situating it among Zhanran’s other works and establishing its aim to preserve the correct understanding of the MHZG. It argues that while the ZFCJ may not be entirely original, it reflects a deep engagement with and transmission of Tiantai teachings. Chapters Two and Three analyse Zhanran’s commentarial techniques, showing his thorough explication of the MHZG and his systematic approach to interpreting Zhiyi’s exegesis. These chapters highlight Zhanran’s ability to reinforce Tiantai authority by skilfully integrating external sources and demonstrating his deep doctrinal knowledge. Chapter Four examines how Zhanran builds upon and extends Zhiyi’s commentarial methods by looking at his systematisation of Zhiyi’s exegetical principles in the MHZG, revealing his understanding of the hermeneutical process that bridges ‘text’ and ‘meaning’. Building on this analysis, the chapter explores the nature of commentarial methods and considers how the creative dimensions embedded within them should be understood. This study not only contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of Zhanran and the ZFCJ, and the intellectual history of Tiantai tradition in Chinese Buddhism, but also, through this case of a successful commentator who addressed complex issues with skilful exegesis, enriches our appreciation of how an individual could actively participate in and influence broader intellectual communities through commentarial creation. Furthermore, it offers a paradigm and raises noteworthy issues for future studies of Chinese Buddhist commentarial literature, which are meaningful to commentarial studies but also to cultural studies and religious studies more broadly.

https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/44733

https://doi.org/10.7488/era/7248

en

The University of Edinburgh. College of Humanities and Social Science. School of Divinity

‘Why “Determine” The Zhiguan fuxing chuanhong jue in the Landscape of the Buddhist Commentarial Tradition’, Studies in Chinese Religions, October 2025, 1–13

‘What Is Other than “Us”: iii The Non-Buddhist Sources in the Chinese Buddhist Commentary Zhiguan fuxing chuanhong jue’, Journal of the European Association for Chinese Studies 5 (2024): 207–23

Zhanran

Commentarial

Tiantai

Exegesis

Zhiguan fuxing chuanhong jue (ZFCJ)

ZFCJ

Explain, interpret, and convince: Zhanran and his commentary Zhiguan fuxing chuanhong jue

Thesis

Doctoral

PhD Doctor of Philosophy