45

A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan
Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System
LAN Jih-chang*

Abstract
When Japan, during the Kamakura (1180–1333) and Muromachi (1336–1573)
periods, imported Zen 禪 Buddhism from Song (960–1279) and Yuan (1279–
1368) China, it not only continually dispatched Zen monks on pilgrimages toChina to seek materials for transmitting sectarian doctrine, but also introduced Zen temple architecture and monastic discipline to Japan, established
the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery 五 山 十 剎 system of government temples,and developed Five Mountain 五 山 literature. This system of government
temples is believed to have imitated the Song system of government templesof the same name. Moreover, it is the best example of Sino-Japanese culturalinteraction in the field of Buddhism.
In contrast with the ample materials we have on the operation of theJapanese system of the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery government temples,
we lack sufficient materials to determine the time and impetus of the Songsystem of Five Mountain, Ten Monastery government temples and are at aloss to give a detailed accurate account of the Song system. Among the many
views in circulation, the view most accepted by modern scholars is that Shi
Miyuan 史 彌 遠 proposed to the court to establish this system of government
temples during the reign of Emperor Ningzong (r. 1194–1224) of the Southern
Song dynasty. But this theory comes down to us from Song Lian 宋 濂(1310–1381) of the early Ming dynasty, and no Song or Yuan sources
mention this matter. Moreover, no Japanese Five Mountain Zen monks touchon this matter in any of their writings. Hence, whether Shi Miyuan actually
proposed this system of government temples is a topic worth revisiting.
This paper discusses whether Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain,
Ten Monastery system from the vantage point of materials related to Shi
Miyuan and observations of Japanese Zen monks, and it reaches the conclusion that it is not credible that Shi Miyuan proposed the system to the court.
Key words: Shi Miyuan, Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries,
system of appointing abbots, government temples

	  * Faculty of the College of General Education, Hungkuang University, Taiwan

46

1

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

Introduction

When the shogun Ashikaga Yoshimitsu 足利義滿 (1358–1408) visited Tōji
Temple in Kyoto in 1382, he met with the monk Gidō Shūshin 義 堂 周 信(1325–1385) and asked about the establishment of the Five Mountains andTen Monasteries of Kyoto. Shūshin said that they were established by theprevious shogun. He added that the Five Mountains were, in order of precedence, first, Kenchō Temple 建長寺 in Kamakura and Nanzen Temple 南禪寺
in Kyoto; second, Engaku Temple 圓覺寺 in Kamakura and Tenryū Temple 天
龍 寺 in Kyoto; third, Jufuku Temple 壽 福 寺 in Kamakura; fourth, Kennin
Temple 建仁寺 in Kyoto; fifth, Tōfuku Temple 東福寺 in Kyoto; and that later
Jōchi Temple 淨 智 寺 and Jōmyō Temple 淨 妙 寺 in Kamakura and Manju
Temple 萬 壽 寺 in Kyoto were added to the ranking to give Kamakura andKyoto each five temples designated as Five Mountain temples. Yoshimitsu
then asked whether China also had Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries.
Shūshin replied that Japan’s Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system wascopied from China, and that China’s Five Mountains were, in order, Jingshan
Temple 徑 山 寺, Lingyin Temple 靈 隱 寺, Tiantong Temple 天 童 寺, Jingci
Temple 淨 慈 寺, and Ayuwang Temple 阿 育 王 寺.1 Later in 1386, when
Yoshimitsu met Shūshin in Shōkoku Temple 相國寺 in Kyoto, he asked about
making Shōkoku Temple, his family temple, into the sixth mountain on parwith the Five Mountains. Shūshin replied that ever since the days of the Songdynasty, there have been only Five Mountains, and that the term “SixMountains” would be unheard of. But during the Yuan dynasty, he said,
Dalongxiang Jiqing Temple 大龍翔集慶寺 in Nanjing was placed over the Five
Mountains. Hence, he suggested elevating the status of Nanzen Temple above
the Five Mountains and making Shōkoku Temple one of the Five Mountains.
This would certainly be acceptable.2 From that point on, the five temples
serving as the Five Mountains in Kamakura and the five temples serving as
the Five Mountains in Kyoto remained fixed, with each Five Mountain
1 See Gidō Shūshin, Kūge nichiyō kufū ryakushū 空 華 日 用 工 夫 略 集 (A Short
Collection of Kūge’s Daily Thoughts), in vol. 3 of Zoku shiseki shūran 續史籍
集覧, ed. Kondō Heijō 近藤瓶城 (Tokyo: Chikafuji Shuppanbu, 1930), vol. 3, p.
58. See also Kageki Hideo 蔭 木 英 雄, Kunchū Kūge nichiyō kufū ryakushū:
Chūsei zensō no seikatsu to bungaku 訓注空華日用工夫略集: 中世禅僧の生活と文 学 (An Annotated Edition of A Short Collection of Kūge’s Daily Thoughts:
The Lifestyle and Literature of Medieval Zen Monks) (Kyoto: Shibunkaku
Shuppan, 1982), p. 272.
2 Gidō Shūshin, Kūge nichiyō kufū ryakushū, vol. 4, p. 16. Yoshimitsu built the
Shōkoku Temple as the final resting place of Hino Nobuko 日野宣子, the wifeof his wife’s uncle. Thus did Yoshimitsu come to know about the Zen sect.
For the details of this story, see Imaeda 2001, pp. 471–482.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 47

temple serving as the head of a nexus of local temples, the whole forming ahuge Buddhist network.
The military governments of the Kamakura and Muromachi bakufu 幕府
assiduously introduced Chan (= Japanese Zen, 禪) Buddhism from China:
Japanese Zen monks continuously went on pilgrimages to China to study
Chan Buddhism, some at the foot of a high-ranking priest, others byengaging in the affairs of a temple. They copied the architecture style ofChinese Five Mountain temples. And they took notes on the preaching andrituals of the temple, which they brought back to Japan for reference. The
Japanese thus gradually built the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system ofgovernment temples. The process by which Japan imported this system quintessentially characterizes Sino-Japanese cultural interaction during the Songand Yuan periods.
The Japanese Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system began imitating the
Chinese system in the Song period, and the Song Five Mountain, Ten
Monastery system was said to originate when Shi Miyuan (1164–1233)
proposed such a system to the Southern Song court. Song Lian (1310–1381),
in volume 2, “Inscription for the Stupa in Which Gufengde, Abbot and Chan
Master of the Jingci Temple, Was Interred” 住持淨慈禪師孤峰德公塔銘, in his
Record of Protecting the Law, wrote,
In the past, each abbot would take his seat and preach the law, so that
there might be compassion in benefits conferred. There was never any
ranking associated with the seating. In the Song period, Shi, Prince ofWei, petitioned the throne to establish a system of Five Mountains andTen Monasteries, like what commoners call government agencies. Those
who serve in these government temples must follow the discipline of asmall monastery and wait until their good reputations are apparent. Thenthey will be promoted step by step, up as far as the famous Five
Mountains, much like a government official might become a general or
minister. Thus, human compassion might flourish, so that nothing can be
added thereto. Ecclesiastics and laity often admire such compassion, but
unless one enters the priesthood and removes oneself far from the webof ordinary relations, such compassion is not easy to attain.3
This passage mentions several key points: The first is that Shi Miyuan
proposed to the court the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system of govern3 Jiaxing Edition of the Tripitaka 嘉 興 藏, vol. 21, p. 623. Throughout I use theWeb edition of the Jiaxing Edition of the Tripitaka and the Taishō Revised
Tripitaka 大 正 藏, found on the website of the Chinese Buddhist Electronic
Text Association 中華電子佛典協會, http://www.cbeta.org/cd/index.htm.

48

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

ment temples. The second is that the Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries
were to be like government agencies and serving in the Five Mountains andTen Monasteries was like being a bureaucrat—one had to undergo rigorous
examination. The third is that to be an abbot, one had first to serve in a smallmonastery, be examined and promoted to a large monastery, and eventually bepromoted to the abbotship of one of the Five Mountains. The process wasmuch like a Confucian student’s serving as a government official and eventually becoming a general or minister. Just as being a general or minister was
the highest attainment for a government official, so being the abbot of one of
the Five Mountains was the highest attainment for a monk. Unless one
excelled above the ordinary run of monks, one could hardly attain the level ofan abbot at one of the Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries.
The theory that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery
system became received opinion after the beginning of the Ming period(1368–1644), and over the last hundred years, scholars who discuss the Five
Mountains and Ten Monasteries all assume this theory as the basis of theirviews. But in another work, “Inscription for the Stupa in Which Jueyuan, theFourth Chan Master of the Tianjie Temple, Was Interred” 天界善世禪寺第四代
覺原禪師遺衣塔銘序, in volume 1 of his Record of Protecting the Law, Song
Lian wrote,
The according of stupas to the good was not settled practice in the Sui
and Tang dynasties. Monks simply followed the discipline of the monastery. Even in the Song dynasty, when grand temples flourished, monasteries were still not ranked hierarchically. Just the large monastery in thecapital was made the head of all the other monasteries. Only after theSong capital was moved south was the system of the Five Mountains
and Ten Monasteries instituted south of the Chang River, and weremonks elevated on the basis of qualifications. And yet the monasteries at
Huangmei and Caoxi were not included among them. Hence, Chanmonasteries increasingly departed from the past.4
There is a gap of over seventy years from when the Southern Song instituted
the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system to when Shi Miyuan proposed theFive Mountain, Ten Monastery system. Song Lian, in his memorial inscriptions for two Chan masters, has this much of a time discrepancy in what hewrites. Was he unaware of the discrepancy?
One does not encounter mention of Shi Miyuan’s proposal of the Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery system in any official records of the Song or Yuan
dynasties, nor in any biographies or collected works of Chan monks, not even
4 Jiaxing Edition of the Tripitaka, vol. 21, p. 601.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 49

in the collected works of Japanese Five Mountain Zen monks. Mujaku Dōchū
無著道忠 (1653–1745), in “Distinctions, the Five Mountains” 區界 ・ 五山 (inNotes on the Manifestations of Zen), quoted from “Inscription for the Stupa
in Which Jueyuan, the Fourth Chan Master of the Tianjie Temple, Was
Interred,” but clearly omits any mention of the “Inscription for the Stupa in
Which Gufengde, Abbot and Chan Master of the Jingci Temple, Was
Interred.” Mujaku Dōchū, it appears, did not regard the view that Shi Miyuan
proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system as credible.
Most modern scholars who discuss the Chinese and Japanese Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery systems accept the theory that Shi Miyuan
proposed the system. Indeed, this theory serves as the beginning of discussionof this topic. Yet from the Song to the Qing dynasty, Chinese and Japanesescholars and Chan and Zen monks held the opposite view. In this essay I
wish to discuss whether the view that Shi Miyuan proposed the system iscredible.

2

Shi Miyuan’s Connection with Buddhism

Shi Miyuan’s career in politics spanned the reigns of the Southern Songemperors Ningzong 寧宗 (r. 1194–1224) and Lizong 理宗 (r. 1224–1264), andhe came to power in 1208. At first he served as Vice Director in the Ministryof Rites. The grand councilor at the time, Han Tuozhou 韓侂冑 (1152–1207),
instigated a war with the Jin state in 1206, a war that ended in defeat. A year
later, at Emperor Ningzong’s suggestion, Shi Miyuan plotted to kill Han
Tuozhou, and in 1208 he himself became grand councilor. This was Shi
Miyuan’s first step on the road to power. In 1224 Emperor Ningzong fell
critically ill, whereupon Shi Miyuan placed Lizong on the throne and killed
the Prince of Ji 濟 王, the heir designated by Emperor Ningzong. He retained
political control up until his death in 1233. If Shi Miyuan had indeed
proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system, he must have done so
between 1208 and 1224.
Song Lian did not indicate whether Shi Miyuan proposed the Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery system to the court of Emperor Ningzong or that ofEmperor Lizong, but Tian Rucheng 田 汝 成 (1503–1557), in volume 3 of his
West Lake Excursions 西 湖 遊 覽 志, wrote that the Five Mountain system wasestablished in 1220 during the reign of Emperor Ningzong. Hence, scholars
maintain that this system was instituted during the reign of Emperor
Ningzong, mainly because Emperor Lizong revered Neo-Confucianism, andbecause soon after Emperor Lizong’s death, Southern Song was conquered by
the Mongols. The timeframe was too short, and the political situation at court
too chaotic, for the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system to be establishedduring the reign of Emperor Lizong. Because the timeframe is inappropriate

50

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

and the bits of evidence one can adduce too few, scholars do not think that
the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system was instituted during the reign ofEmperor Lizong. That leaves the reign of Emperor Ningzong and the period
from 1208 to 1224 as the most reasonable timeframe. From Shi Miyuan’s rise
to power (1208) to the fall of the Southern Song dynasty (1279) is a periodof more than seventy years. It ought to be possible to find materials on theoperation of the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system during this timeframe.
Hence, even though materials are scarce on the establishment of the Five
Mountain system of government temples, most scholars think that it was
during the Jiading era (1208–1224) of Emperor Ningzong’s reign that Shi
Miyuan proposed and established this system.5
In addition, scholars are also led to affirm the theory that Shi Miyuan
proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system by the connection that
Shi Miyuan’s family had with Buddhism. Zongjian 宗 鑑, in “Zhilian” 智 連,
volume 7 of his The Orthodox Lineage of the Buddhist Tradition 釋門正統 (ca.
1237), wrote that when Zhilian was the abbot of Yanqing Temple 延 慶 寺, ahigh-ranking official once came to discuss the Chan discipline.6 This official,according to Zhipan 志磐 in A Chronicle of the Patriarchs of Buddhism 佛祖
統 紀 (1269), volume 16, was Shi Miyuan’s father, who, while living in the
countryside, practiced Chan Buddhism and also discussed Chan discipline anddebated the import of the Garland Sutra 華 嚴 經 and the Sutra on the
Perfection of Wisdom 般 若 經. Moreover, Zhilian, after he passed away, wassaid to be reincarnated as Shi Miyuan,7 and for a while, monks at the time
regarded the belief that Shi Miyuan was the reincarnation of Zhilian as abeautiful story. After Shi Miyuan passed away, Chan Master Shitian Faxun 石
田法薰 (1171–1245) made an offering to his soul.8
Moreover, Shi Miyuan’s family were members of the educated elite of
Ningbo and maintained good relations with Chan and Tiantai-learning 天台學
monks. Yanqing Temple, in present-day Ningbo, was ranked in the Ming
dynasty as the second best of the teaching-monastery Five Mountains 教院五山,9 and was also the temple where Siming Zhili 四明知禮 (960–1028) developed Tiantai learning. Both The Orthodox Lineage of the Buddhist Tradition
and A Chronicle of the Patriarchs of Buddhism were collections of biographies of monks written and edited by Tiantai-learning monks, and they eval5678Ishii 1987, p. 396.
The Buddhist Canon, Continued 續藏經, vol. 75, p. 343.
Taishō Revised Tripitaka, vol. 49, p. 231.
The Buddhist Canon, Continued, vol. 70, p. 354a. On the connection of Shi
Miyuan’s family with Buddhism, also see Ishii 1987, pp. 395–399.
9 For changes in the ranking of Yanqing Temple, see Noguchi 2005, p. 277.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 51

uate Shi Miyuan quite positively. And yet in every passage concerning Shi
Miyuan’s dealings with the monks, there is no mention of the Five Mountain,
Ten Monastery system.
In addition, the late Song lyricist Zhou Mi 周 密 (1232–1298), in his
Miscellaneous Observations from Guixin Street 癸 辛 雜 識, includes several
lyric poems about Shi Miyuan’s family. For example, volume 1 of the
supplementary collection includes “An Appreciation of Shi Hao” 史 浩 傳 贊,and volume 2 includes “The Prince of Wei [Shi Miyuan] Appreciates theFamous Vessel” 衛王惜名器, “The Career of Shi Songzhi” 史嵩之始末, “The
Revenge of Songzhi” 嵩 之 起 復, and “Shi Zhaizhi” 史 宅 之. Shi Hao (1106–1194) was Shi Miyuan’s father, Shi Zhaizhi (1205–1249) was his son, and Shi
Songzhi (1189–1257) was his nephew. These lyric poems give a straightforward appraisal of members of Shi Miyuan’s family, but Zhou Mi said not aword about any proposal to establish a Five Mountain, Ten Monastery
system, an event too considerable to overlook.
The greatest difficulty in discussing when the Five Mountain system ofgovernment temples was established is that materials are scarce, that the Songliterature seldom mentions the Five Mountain government temples. According
to what we know at present, the earliest use of the term “Five Mountains”
was by the Southern Song scholar Lin Xiyi 林 希 逸 (1193–1271), who, in“Inscription for the Stupa in Which the Former Abbot of Tianzhu Temple andMonastery Monk Was Interred” 前天竺住持同菴法師塔銘 (volume 21 of Zhuxi
Yanzhai ji shiyi gao xuji), wrote, “Qiantang 錢 塘 went to Tianzhu Temple 天竺 寺, the head of all teaching temples. Monks of this temple were held in
esteem comparable to that of monks of Shuangjing 雙 徑 of the Five
Mountains.”10 By function, temples in the Song period were divided into
meditation temples 禪寺, teaching temples 教寺, and discipline temples 律寺.
This passage is saying that Qiantang entered Tianzhu Temple, the head of allteaching temples. Its rank was like that of Jingshan Temple 徑 山 寺, the headof the Five Mountain meditation temples. Jingshan Temple was also called
Jingwu 徑 塢. Hence it also had the name Shuangjing 雙 徑. Lin Xiyi was apresented scholar during the reign of Lizong of the Southern Song. Thus, his
statement indicates that during the reign of Lizong, temples and monasteries
in the Southern Song period were already grouped as meditation-temple Five
Mountains 禪寺五山 and teaching-temple Five Mountains 教寺五山, but he did
not indicate which were the other four temples of the meditation-temple Five
10 Wenyuange 文 淵 閣 copy of the Siku quanshu 四 庫 全 書 (Complete Library of
the Four Branches of Literature) (photographic reproduction, Taipei: Taiwan
Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986), vol. 1185, no. 124 in the collections section, p.
765.

52

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

Mountains or specify why there were Five Mountains for both meditation
temples and teaching temples.
Records from the Song period on the Five Mountain government temples
are exceeding rare. Only in the Yuan period do records start listing thetemples in the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system. For example, Cheng
Tinggui 成廷珪 (fl. 1338), in “To Siming Mengtang” 寄四明夢堂噩禪師兼簡用
堂上人 (volume 3 of The Poems of Cheng Tinggui 居竹軒詩集), wrote,
The Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries are luxuriant, high, andprecipitous.
And I really love my brook-side hut, hidden in the foliage.
The old disciples of Huaihai now have an opportunity.
For an itinerant revered monk is a rare sight nowadays.
No one talks about Maonü escaping civil strife or officials sounding out
the complaints of the people.
One only sees Japanese monks inquiring about the Buddhist law.
I talk with Mr. Geng, and we fondly recollect together.
With white clouds in a blue sky throughout the day, what is there toworry about?11
This poem indicates that Japanese monks who went to China to meditate andstudy had to have the Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries on their itinerary.
In addition, Xie Yingfang 謝 應 芳 (1295–1392) of the Yuan dynasty, in“Mourning Rigong, Head of Dalin Monastery” 悼大林菴主日公 (volume 17 of
Turtle Nest Compositions 龜巢稿), wrote,
The peak of Mt. Xiong’er has a returning guest.
We meet again, wearing the old meditation robes.
The Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries all spread the word.
No one hastens the lingering clouds to fly away from the lofty pinnacle.12
From these two examples, one can see “Five Mountains” and “TenMonasteries” being combined into a set phrase, but examples of the use of“Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries” are still quite rare.
From these limited materials, we can draw the following inferences:
References to the Five Mountains began during the reign of Emperor Lizong(r. 1224–1264) of the Southern Song dynasty, or possibly as early as the reign
11 Wenyuange copy of the Siku quanshu, vol. 1216, no. 155 in the belles lettres
section, p. 333.
12 Wenyuange copy of the Siku quanshu, vol. 1218, no. 157 in the belles lettres
section, p. 421.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 53of the Emperor Ningzong (r. 1194–1224). From Lin Xiyi’s inscription, we caninfer that meditation temples and teaching temples in the Five Mountainsystem of government temples appeared at the same time, but only in the
Yuan dynasty did people start referring to the Five Mountains and Ten
Monasteries together. Even if Song Lian’s statement were true that Shi
Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system, he could nothave proposed the Five Mountains and the Ten Monasteries together.

3

Government Temples Were Not Government Agencies, and Monks
Were Not Bureaucrats

The view that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain system of government temples includes the notion that government temples became government agencies and that the monks became bureaucrats. In one of his writings,
Song Lian mentions that monks must first serve in small monasteries andgradually be promoted to larger monasteries, with the Five Mountain government temples being the culmination of their careers, just like bureaucrats
working in government agencies.
In the Song dynasty, temples varied in the manner in which they selected
their abbots. Some openly elected their abbots. Some relied on recommendations to appoint their abbots. Some brought in their abbots from the outside.
Some selected their abbots by secret ballots. For some temples, the government appointed abbots. The Five Mountain government temples all had theirabbots appointed by the government. Scholars believe that government
temples were equivalent to government agencies, that the monks in government temples were just like bureaucrats, and that the government appointed
outstanding monks in the government temples to be abbots. This is the reason
that scholars cite Song Lian’s inscription. However, the appointment system
was used for all Song government temples. It was one way in which thegovernment controlled temples and monasteries. It was not an outcome of thegovernment’s viewing them as government agencies. If the appointment
system were an indication that temples and monasteries had become government agencies, the system should have already appeared during the Northern
Song period (960–1127). The reign of Southern Song Emperor Ningzong (r.
1194–1224) is rather late in the game to consider making the Five Mountain
government temples into government agencies.
For a monk, after leaving the secular world, first to cultivate himself ina local temple, then to move around until reaching a metropolitan temple, andfinally to move to a major temple near the central government seems like thenatural order of things. But except for a few well-known ecclesiastics who
could exercise their talents as the abbot of a large or first-rate temple, mostmonks ended up in local temples. In fact, absent the recommendation of a

54

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

powerful backer, it was difficult to enter a large temple and become its abbot.
Though one can find examples of monks who gradually moved from small
temples to the Ten Monasteries and later became the abbot of a Five
Mountain government temple, such examples were rare, too rare to form thebasis of expectations for the progression of a monastic career.
In addition to general activities, the most important obligations of monks
at government temples during the Song dynasty were praying for the wellbeing of the imperial family, carrying out intercessions by an assembly ofmonks in response to natural disasters, burning incense and praying, andpraying for the imperial family prior to engaging in group meditation. In fact,
the regulations for monks during the Song and Yuan dynasties even specified
the formulas and wording for prayers for the imperial family. These activities
were monks’ regular functions, and they were not limited to the Five
Mountain government temples. To take these activities as indicating thatmonks were bureaucratized is an exaggeration of the facts.
Classified Regulations and Laws to the Qingyuan Era 慶 元 條 法 事 類,
completed in 1202, was a record of the laws and regulations from the beginning of the Southern Song (1127) to the Qingyuan era (1195–1200). Twovolumes of this work are devoted to policies regulating monastic life.
Covered in great detail are the proper way to test the sutras, how to obtain apermit to enter monastic life, passports for travel, and the duties of theabbot.13 Yet throughout these two volumes, there is no mention of standards
for evaluating abbots; much less is there any basis for asserting that government temples became government agencies and that monks became bureaucrats.
From the Six Dynasties period (222–589) on, there were organizations ofmonk officials managing the affairs of monastic discipline. Though monk
officials are equivalent to government officials, they have never been
included in the lists of officials in the history books. Among organizations ofmonk officials, the closest thing to government agencies was the Commission
for Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs 宣政院 during the Yuan dynasty.14 The Yuan
court instituted the commission to manage affairs relating to monks and nuns,
13 Classified Regulations and Laws to the Qingyuan Period 慶元條法事類 originally consisted of 80 volumes, of which only 36 remain. Volumes 51 and 52
are titled Daoism and Buddhism 道 釋 門. Volume 50 covers the maintenanceand transmission of doctrine, confines for testing the sutras, monastic names
and tonsures, monk ordination, and abbots, and gives illuminating references.
Volume 51 covers traveling, presenting registers of monks to the government,
oaths, death, and miscellaneous transgressions, and gives illuminating references.
14 See Song Lian 1976, p. 2193.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 55

and although the monks on the commission were equivalent to officials, there
were both ordained and lay commissioners working together on the commission, and none of them had high positions. Nonetheless, government temples
in general were not equivalent to government agencies, nor were the monks
serving at such temples ever regarded as public servants, nor did the lists ofofficials in the history books reserve any space for notable ecclesiastics.
During the reign of the Hongwu emperor (r. 1368–1398) of the Ming
dynasty, Jiqing Temple in Dalongxiang was renamed Tianjie Chan Temple 天界禪寺, and it was given a lintel tablet recognizing it as “the best Chan gathering in the empire.” To manage monastic life in a systematic way, thegovernment established a Buddhist Bureau 善 世 院 within the Tianjie Chan
Temple and set up a Central Buddhist Registry 僧 錄 司, and in the registry it
established departments and divided duties in order to systematically manage
the monks and nuns of the entire nation.15 Talented monks took up positions
within the bureau, and such monks were indeed the equivalent of bureaucrats.
Indeed, the Hongwu emperor even treated these monks as bureaucrats, forthey engaged in diplomatic missions with countries where Buddhism was
highly regarded. The Hongwu emperor thus gave such monks importantduties when it served his purposes.16 For example, in 1372 Zhongyou Zuchan
仲 猷 祖 闡 and Wuyi Keqin 無 逸 克 勤 (1321–1397) were sent on a diplomatic
mission to Japan.17 While they were there, Ashikaga Yoshimitsu wanted thesetwo Chan masters to transmit Buddhist doctrines to Japan, and he invitedthem to serve as abbots at Tenryū Temple. They refused, saying that theydared not remain in Japan to propagate Buddhist doctrines in Japan without
the Ming emperor’s permission. Chan monks of the Ming dynasty, comparedwith those of the Song and Yuan dynasties, were notably more bureaucratized, and their sense of mission for promoting culture abroad was considerably diminished.18
15 Song Lian, in “Sending Off Chan Master Juechu on His Way to the Lower
Chang River” 送覺初禪師還江心序 (vol. 8 of his Record of Protecting the Law),wrote that the Buddhist Bureau established the positions of director 統 領,
associate director 副統領, educational assistant 贊教, and conversion preceptor
紀 化 in order to systematically administer the well-known mountains, etc.,
within the empire. See the Jiaxing Edition of the Tripitaka, vol. 21, p. 670.
16 See Ueda 2011, pp. 68–99.
17 For the course of the mission, see Song Lian, “Epitaph for the Burial Moundof Monk Yuanpu of Jiqing Teaching Temple in Kangzhou” 杭州集慶教寺原璞
法 師 璋 公 圓 塚 碑 銘 (vol. 2 of his Record of Protecting the Law) and “Sending
Off Wuyi Keqin on His Visit to His Parents before Undertaking His Mission”
送無逸勤公出使還鄉省親序 (vol. 8 of his Record of Protecting the Law).
18 See Ueda 2011, pp. 188–190.

56

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

If we compare the statements and actions of Song and Ming monks, we
can see that Tianjie Chan Temple had indeed become more like a government
agency by the Ming period, and that the monks of this temple had indeed
become more bureaucratic. Yet the Central Buddhist Registry instituted at
Tianjie Chan Temple was a government agency managing Buddhist monks
throughout the nation. There are also other means to see how government
temples became more like government agencies. Pursuing these hints will
broaden our understanding of the bureaucratization of government temples
during the Ming dynasty.
In “The Testing of Monks” 僧家考課 (volume 27 of Wanli ye huo bian),
the Ming scholar Shen Defu 沈 德 符 (1578–1642), when discussing abbot
vacancies in temples and monasteries of the two Ming capitals, mentions thatmonks were tested in assemblies by a director from the Ministry of Rites, thatthey were examined on their ability to write eight-legged essays 八 股 文, thatthose who performed well were selected to be abbots, that abbots wereselected on their ability to write eight-legged essays without regard toseniority, education, or comportment, that abbots were ranked like officials,
and that changes in positions in temples and monasteries were described as
promotions, as in documents pertaining to personnel changes among officials.
Shen Defu lived toward the end of the Ming dynasty, and he thus observed
the temples and monasteries of the two Ming capitals to resemble government agencies. Very likely the development of this change began at the
beginning of the Ming dynasty. Song Lian quite possibly was contrastingmonks of Ming times, who had engrained in them bureaucratic tendencies
typified by the Central Buddhist Registry, with the monks of government
temples during Song and Yuan times.

4

The Flow of Information between China and Japan during theSong and Yuan Dynasties

There are temporal inconsistencies between Song Lian’s two memorial
inscriptions and the time when the Five Mountains were established. Thoughlater scholars did not accept the view that the Five Mountains were established after the Song dynasty fled south, their views are consistent with thisview. Ninkū Jitsudō 仁空実導 (1309–1388), a Japanese monk of Jōdō Sect 淨
土 宗, West Mountain School 西 山 派, in his New Precepts for Study andComportment 新學行要鈔, mentions that the Southern Song emperor Gaozong
高 宗 (r. 1127–1162) set up meditation, teaching, and discipline temples, andthat for each type of temple he instituted the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery
system.19 Since this is the first mention that the three types of temples each
19 Taishō Revised Tripitaka, vol. 74, p. 785. For portions of the Taishō Revised﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 57

instituted the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system, we can surmise that thesystem began during the reign of Emperor Gaozong.
Though prior to Song Lian there was no mention of which temples theFive Mountains included or the order of their ranking, Zhou Mi, in “YanTemple” 閻寺 (in his Miscellaneous Observations from Guixin Street, volume
2 of the supplemental collection 別集), recounts how the Emperor Lizong built
the Gongde Monastery 功 德 院 for his Honored Consort Yan. In this account,he mentions all the benefits that the emperor conferred on Yan Temple: “Forthe Five Mountains before him, nothing was out of the question.”20 The “Five
Mountains before him” refers to Jingci Temple 淨慈寺, Lingyin Temple 靈隱寺, and the three Tianzhu Temples 天 竺 寺, all five of which were inHangzhou. The Ming writer Shen Defu, in his “Testing of Monks,” confirms
this reference.21 Zhou Mi (1232–1298) lived during the late Song and early
Yuan dynasties. When a writer of the time writes about a matter of his own
time, it stands to reason that what he writes is accurate. Well, in that case, theterm “Five Mountains,” during the late Song period, referred, it would
appear, to the five great monasteries in Hangzhou.
Moreover, the Japanese monk Kūkoku Myōō 空 谷 明 應 (1327–1407), in
volume 1 of Quotations of Jōkō, Preceptor of the Realm [i.e., Kūkoku Myōō]
常光國師語錄, recorded that Fan Zhongyan 范仲淹 recommended Chan Master
Chenggu 承 古 as the resident head of Jianfu Temple 薦 福 寺, in Raozhou,
Jiangxi Province. He noted that Suzhou had Five Mountains, and that Jianfu
Temple was originally ranked third among them, but after Chan Master
Chenggu became the resident head of the temple, it became ranked as
number one.22 Kūkoku Myōō, after becoming a monk, studied under MusōSoseki 夢 窗 疎 石 (1275–1351) and, in terms of renown, is often mentioned
with Zekkai Chūshin 絕 海 中 津 (1336–1405). When he obtained his information, Suzhou, during the Northern Song period, already had five temples
known as the Five Mountains, and Jianfu Temple in Raozhou had risen inrank from number three to number one. One can see that, though he was alittle off as far as places were concerned, reports reaching Japan at the time
were different from Song Lian’s information. It thus seems that prior to theend of the Yuan dynasty, Suzhou and Hangzhou both had five temples known
as the Five Mountains.
The earliest reference to the Five Mountains nearly as it is presently
Tripitaka about Japanese Buddhism, I referred to the SAT Saizōkyō Text
Database (http://21dzk.l.u-tokyo.ac.jp/SAT/).
20 Zhou Mi 1988, p. 295
21 Shen Defu 1959, p. 688.
22 Taishō Revised Tripitaka, vol. 81, p. 21.

58

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

conceived occurs in the conversation between Gidō Shūshin and Ashikaga
Yoshimitsu. The three Tianzhu Temples were excluded from the Five
Mountains, and in their place appeared Jingshan Temple in Hangzhou,
Tiantong Temple in Mingzhou 明州, and Ayuwang Temple in Mingzhou. Thereis no question that Jingshan Temple should be included in the designation, but
why were two temples of Mingzhou included? Mingzhou is the present-day
city of Ningbo. Japanese monks coming to Song or Yuan China left Hakata in
Kyushu by ship and first entered China at Ningbo. Hence, Ningbo is no lessimportant than Hangzhou. In its intercourse with Song China, Japan firstrecognized Ayuwang Temple late in the Heian period (794–1192). For
instance, the general Taira no Shigemori (1138–1179) sent the monk Myōden
to Mingzhou to donate gold to Ayuwang Temple. During the Kamakura
period, Minamoto no Sanetomo 源實朝 (1192–1219) sent a large ship to visit
this temple. As for Tiantong Temple, it was the first temple at which Japanesemonks stayed. For example, Eisai 榮 西 (1141–1215) entered Song China to
study under Chan Master Xu’an Huaichang 虛庵懷敞 at Tiantong Temple, andDōgen 道 元 (1200–1253) also studied at Tiantong Temple, under Tiantong
Rujing 天 童 如 淨 (1163–1228). Numerous Japanese monks spent time at
Mingzhou. Hence, we can infer that the two temples at Mingzhou were more
important than the three Tianzhu temples.23 In addition, the painting Famous
Monasteries of the Great Song Empire 大 宋 名 藍 圖, painted by a Japanesemonk during the Jiading era (1208–1224) of Emperor Ningzong’s reign,
includes Jingshan Temple, Lingyin Temple, and Jingci Temple in Hangzhou;
Tiantong Temple and Ayuwang Temple in Mingzhou; Jinshan Temple 金山寺
in Zhenjiang; and Daochang Temple 道 場 寺 in Heshan, Huzhou.24 Such
23 See Kimiya 1977, pt. 4, “Southern Song and Yuan Dynasties,” chap. 2, “MonksEntering Song China, Monks Settling in Song China, and the Transmission ofCulture” 入宋僧・歸化宋僧と文化の移植, pp. 334–362.
24 This painting is also called Illustrated Explanation of the Five Mountains of
the Great Song Empire 大 宋 五 山 圖 說, but in addition to the Five Mountains,
the painting also depicts Jinshan Temple in Zhenjiang, Bishan Temple 碧山寺
in Mingzhou, and Wannian Temple 萬 年 寺 on Mt. Tiantai. Hence, using thename Famous Monasteries of the Great Song Empire is more appropriate. The
text in the painting has been thought to be composed by Dōgen, Enni 圓爾, orGikai 義 介, but since the text contains a reference to the painting Years of
Ordination 夏 臘 圖, which is recorded as having been composed sometime
during the Jiading period (1208–1224), we can eliminate Dōgen and Enni.
Scholars have yet to agree on whether Gikai painted this work. On the date of
the text, see Shimizu Kunihiko 清水邦彥, “A Study of Five Mountains and Ten
Monasteries, Held by Daijō Temple” 大乘寺藏 「 五山十剎圖」 考, Hikaku
minzoku kenkyū 23 (2009), no. 3: 152–160. For the text itself, see Lan Jifu
1990, pp. 589–592.

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 59changes in the composition of the Five Mountains provides evidence that
there were repeated vicissitudes in the prestige of temples during the Songand Yuan dynasties, although these changes were also viewed differently fromthe different perspectives of Chinese and Japanese observers.
From the news it received in interactions with China, the Japan sidedeveloped two different views. Kokan Shiren 虎關師鍊 (1278–1346) said thatthe monks of Lingyin Temple met in the Zhizhi Hall and decided on the
ranking of the Five Mountains. Now, Lingyin Temple was always ranked
below Jingshan Temple. Why would the monks of Lingyin Temple decide theranking of the Five Mountains? Mujaku Dōchū thought that since Lingyin
Temple was within the city of Hangzhou, Jingshan Temple was outside of thecity, and Lingyin Temple was close to the imperial residence, it was naturalfor Lingyin Temple to be given the right to determine the ranking. Mujaku
Dōchū also gave an example. Though Shōkoku Temple, located in hills northof Kyoto, was ranked second among the Five Mountains, because it was thefamily temple of the shoguns of the Muromachi bakufu, who set up aprebend in the Rokuon building to manage the affairs of the Five Mountains,
Shōkoku Temple was given the privilege of managing these affairs.25 Lingyin
Temple had similar circumstances.
Though Kokan Shiren’s view was not adopted later, the issue is why heused this information. Kokan Shiren had profound knowledge of literary
Chinese and was the most Sinified Zen monk of his time. He studied Song
Neo-Confucianism under Yishan Yining 一 山 一 寧 (1247–1317), wrote acollection of poetry entirely in Chinese, and wrote the first Japanese collection of biographies of monks, An Account of Buddhism to the Genkō Era[1321–1324] 元 亨 釋 書. When he met a Chinese monk coming from Yuan
China to Japan, he would discuss with him Song culture and new scholarly
trends, and he had extensive conversations with Sesson Yūbai 雪 村 友 梅(1290–1347).26 Yet for all of his knowledge about China and his many
opportunities to converse with Chinese monks, Kokan Shiren never heard any
news that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system tothe court.
What Kokan Shiren said appears in volume 1 of Mujaku Dōchū’s Notes
on the Manifestations of Zen. In this volume Mujaku Dōchū records Kokan
25 Mujaku Dōchū 1990, p. 39. Dōchū’s quotation of the Kokan Shiren passage
leaves doubts. According to the manner in which Dōchū quotes Kokan Shiren,
the whole passage should be what he said, but Shōkoku Temple was established after Kokan Shiren. Hence, I think that the first half of the passage
quotes Kokan Shiren and the second half is Dōchū’s explication.
26 For two detailed discussions of Kokan Shiren, see Tamamura 2003, pp. 203–210,
and Chisaka 2002, pp. 61–99.

60

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

Shiren’s words and Song Lian’s “Inscription for the Stupa in Which Jueyuan,
the Fourth Chan Master of the Tianjie Temple, Was Interred,” yet he omits
Song Lian’s “Inscription for the Stupa in Which Gufengde, Abbot and Chan
Master of the Jingci Temple, Was Interred.” By means of these editorial decisions, Mujaku Dōchū indicated that the latter work is not reliable, that is, thatthe view that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system
to the court is not credible.
Somewhat later than Kokan Shiren, Mugan Soō 夢巖祖應 (d. 1314) noted
another view. In “On the Outstanding Mountains” 秀峰說 (in The Drought andRain Collection 旱 霖 集), he stated that the Five Mountain system was established by Qian Chu 錢 俶 (929–988), King of Wuyue 吳 越, during the Five
Dynasties period (907–960), and that later rulers continued it.27 Shun’oku
Myōha 春屋妙葩 (1311–1388), a disciple of Musō Soseki, also held the viewthat King Qian Chu established the Five Mountain system.28 Mugan Soō once
taught Kokan Shiren. In addition, he also studied the Confucian classics forover thirty years and later lectured on Mencius in Kyoto. As a student of
Neo-Confucianism, he was held in high repute. In sum, the view of Mugan
Soō and Shun’oku Myōha, that the Five Mountain system was already established in the Five Dynasties period, was relatively well accepted in Japan atthat time. In the literature on Sino-Japanese interaction, there thus were twoviews as to the origin of the Five Mountain system, and neither of theseviews mentions Shi Miyuan.
Kokan Shiren’s view that the monks of Lingyin Temple met and determined the Five Mountains was not accepted at the time, and the views of
Mugan Soō and Shun’oku Myōha, which reach all the way back to the Five
Dynasties period or the Northern Song period, seem too far back to be credible, but there are relevant sources. The Southern Song literatus Mou Yan 牟巘 (1227–1311), in “Inscription for the Stupa in Which the Chan MasterLongyuan Was Interred” 龍源禪師塔銘 (in volume 24 of his Collection of Mou
Yan’s Works 牟氏陵陽集), wrote,
The Chan master’s family was from Siming and Shouguo, but they
moved to Kaishou. When the governor and son of Grand Councilor Shi
met the master, the two of them got along very well. The governor gave
up his temporary residence and together with the master went into busi27 Mugan Soō 1973, pp. 851–852.
28 “The one who originally instituted the Five Mountains in the empire was the
king of Wuyue. Emperor Taizu of the Song did not change the system, and thegreat Yuan emperor also kept it” (Shun’oku Myōha, Quotations of Chikaku
Fumyō, Preceptor of the Realm 智 覺 普 明 國 師 語 錄, vol. 3, in Taishō Revised
Tripitaka, vol. 80, p. 666).

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 61

ness selling rabbit garments. He said, “How nice if I could quietly live
out my days in the temple at Siming.” Before long, the seat at Daochang
Temple fell vacant. The various mountains in Liangzhe nominated ahorde of candidates, who came to the temple. For this mountain was aTang monastery, and ever since the Xining era when the great poet Su
Shi visited Daochang Temple and wrote a number of poems, its fame has
been greater than the Five Mountains.29
Grand Councilor Shi was Shi Miyuan. Daochang Temple was located in
Heshan. Though it has always been listed as one of the Ten Monasteries,
according to this passage, after Su Shi published the poem “A Visit to
Daochang Temple in Heshan” 遊道場山何山 during the Northern Song Xiningera (1068–1077), the temple increased in estimation, even surpassing the Five
Mountains in notoriety. Well, can we understand this passage as indicatingthat the notion of the Five Mountains already existed during the reign of theNorthern Song emperor Shenzong (r. 1067–1085), and that Daochang Temple
was among the Five Mountains?
During the Song and Yuan dynasties, the private sector in Japan had
frequent contact with China, and numerous monks from the Japanese Five
Mountains visited China. Eisai entered Song China twice. He first entered
China in 1168 from Ningbo and went on a pilgrimage to Mt. Tiantai. He later
entered China in 1187 and, owing to instability, only went to Mt. Tiantai. He
studied Chan Buddhism under Chan Master Xu’an Huaichang at Wannian
Temple and went with him to Tiantong Temple, where he entered the priesthood. After he returned to Japan, he established the Rinzai School 臨 濟 宗 of
Buddhism. Eisai’s disciple Dōgen in 1223 left Japan from Hakata and entered
China at Ningbo. At Tiantong Temple he studied Chan Buddhism under Chan
Master Tiantong Rujing, and he left us a vivid description of his conversations with his master, A Record from the Baoqing Era (1225–1227) 寶 慶 記,
composed in what was already the reign of Emperor Lizong. Rujing could
become the abbot of Tiantong Temple only with help from Shi Miyuan, andin A Record from the Baoqing Era, Dōgen records a conversation in which
Rujing discussed the Five Mountains, but there is no mention that Shi
Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain system to the court.
Moreover, when the Yuan court attacked Japan, the Kamakura bakufu
organized prayer assemblies of monks to pray for the protection of Japan, andall over Japan, Song Chinese participated in such activities. Regardless ofwhether they came to Japan before or after the fall of the Song dynasty, these29 Wenyuange copy of the Siku quanshu, vol. 1188, p. 217.

62

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

Chinese united with the Japanese to resist the Yuan invasion.30 This showsthat even under conditions of war, interactions between Japan and China
continued.
There were also Chinese who went to Japan to proselytize. For example,
after Lanxi Daolong 蘭溪道隆 (1213–1278) arrived in Japan, Hōjō Tokiyori 北條時頼 (1227–1263) recognized his talents and appointed him as founder 開山
祖師 of Kenchō Temple 建長寺 in Kamakura. Lanxi Daolong brought to Japan
relevant Song books, monk discipline, and temple architecture. He thus had aprofound influence on the development of Buddhism in Japan. For anotherexample, Yishan Yining originally went to Japan under orders from Kublai
Khan to encourage the Japanese to submit to the Yuan court, but he took
advantage of the opportunity to remain in Japan to proselytize. He also introduced Neo-Confucianism to Japan. Thereafter, Neo-Confucianism gradually
took root among Japanese monks.
There were also Japanese monks who went to Yuan China of their own
accord to study. The first monk to study in Yuan China was Sesson Yūbai, adisciple of Yishan Yining. He stayed in China for twenty-three years, traveling to twelve provinces and writing “An Account of Carrying Out the Way”
行 道 記, about what he saw and heard in China. In his literary accomplishments, he was the equal of Yuan literati.31
Musō Soseki’s disciple Gidō Shūshin and Zekkai Chūshin had great
respect for Ming literature. Taking advantage of the fact that Zekkai Chūshin
was being sent as an envoy to China, Gidō Shūshin asked Song Lian to write
the gravestone epitaph for Musō Soseki.32 Gidō Shūshin’s influence includes
informing Ashikaga Yoshimitsu about the Chinese Five Mountain, Ten
Monastery system, and suggesting that Yoshimitsu reorder the ranking of theFive Mountains and place Nanzen Temple in Kyoto over the Five Mountains.
As the above discussion clearly shows, though there was a brief war
between China and Japan during the Yuan dynasty, generally speaking,throughout the Song, Yuan, and Ming dynasties, merchants and monks of thetwo countries were in continual contact.33 In view of Japan’s ample opportu30 See Ihara 2009, chap. 4, “The International Aspect of Medieval Temples andthe Diplomatic Efforts of Monks” 中世寺院の国際性と外交僧, pp. 189–195.
31 On Sesson Yūbai’s experience in Yuan China, see Tamamura 2003, pp. 369–374;
Ono Katsutoshi, “A Japanese Monk in Fourteenth-Century Chang’an: Sesson
Yūbai” 十四世に長安を踏んだ日本僧: 雪村友梅のことども, in Ono Katsutoshi
Hakushi Shōju Kinenkai 1982, pp. 533–574; and Imatani 1994.
32 See Song Lian, “Epitaph for the Japanese Preceptor of the Realm Musō Soseki”
日 本 夢 窗 正 宗 普 濟 國 師 碑 銘, in vol. 2 of his Record of Protecting the Law(Jiaxing Edition of the Tripitaka, vol. 21, pp. 628–629).
33 See Kimiya 1977, “Monks Entering Yuan China and the Transmission of﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 63

nities for observing developments in China, if Shi Miyuan did indeed propose
the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system to the court, the Japanese would
surely have mentioned that fact in their reports. To think otherwise defies
common sense.

5

Conclusion

During the Song and Ming dynasties, Japan imported Chan Buddhism
from China, copied its Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system, and sought toestablish a base to transmit Chan Buddhism to the east. Japanese temples
could foster a system in which they had power equal to that of the aristocracy and the military clans, they could create organizations of monk-soldiers,
and they could develop centrally organized command structures. Chinese
temples did not develop any of these structures. Thus, Japan consciously
borrowed temple architecture, monastic discipline, Buddhist assembly rituals,
etc., with the result that it seems that at this time China and Japan both hadformally similar Five Mountain, Ten Monastery systems of government
temples. However, these similar architectural styles, similar monastic disciplines, and meditative practices derived from the same tradition were structured differently and also functioned differently. It is correct to understand theJapanese Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system as a system of governmentlike agencies functioning in a bureaucratic manner. But Chinese government
temples were different from government agencies, and Chinese monks were
not the equivalent of bureaucrats.
From sources we can discern four views of the origins of the Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery system: Mugan Soō’s view that King Qian Chu
established the system during the Five Dynasties period, Kokan Shiren’s viewthat the monks of Lingyin Temple met and decided on the system, and Song
Lian’s views that the Southern Song emperor Gaozong established the systemand that Shi Miyuan proposed the system to the Southern Song court. Yet
because we have inadequate sources, we cannot arrive at a settled theory of
the system’s origin. This is the most reasonable conclusion to be drawn inassessing the information flowing between China and Japan during the Songand Yuan dynasties.
Current received opinion affirms that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery system to the Southern Song court, but this view
appeared as late as the time of Song Lian. During the Song and Yuan dynasties, no sources said a word about Shi Miyuan’s alleged proposal. The information flowing between China and Japan during the Southern Song period
indicates that Japanese Chan monks at Five Mountain temples did not accept
Culture” 入元僧と文化の移植, pp. 444–485.

64

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

the view that Shi Miyuan proposed the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery
system.
In medieval interaction between China and Japan, the Song and Yuan Five
Mountain government temples had a profound influence on Japanese Five
Mountain government temples. In modern interaction between China andJapan, Japanese Five Mountain temples have been linked with Song and Yuan
Five Mountain temples. These Japanese Five Mountain buildings have been
well preserved, but the Chinese Five Mountain buildings have been reduced
to rubble—a vast difference. Because we lack adequate sources about theSong and Yuan Five Mountain system of government temples, scholars haveused the Japanese system to reconstruct the Chinese system, and amid thiswork the view that Shi Miyuan proposed the system has reappeared. As
mentioned above, there are four records of when the Five Mountain, Ten
Monastery system was established, but nowadays one sees scholars
discussing only the view that Shi Miyuan proposed the system. They turn ablind eye to records of the other three views. This is selective use of theevidence, and their conclusions are nothing more than the results of suchselective use of the evidence.
In examining the flow of information between China and Japan, we see
the influence that these two nations had on each other, but the view that Shi
Miyuan’s proposal to the Southern Song court was the beginning of the Five
Mountain, Ten Monastery system is not serious scholarship. Rather, it is only
the embellishment of a story about Shi Miyuan. There is still room fordiscussion of the origins of the Five Mountain, Ten Monastery system.
References
In Chinese
Cheng Tinggui 成廷珪 (14th cent.). Ju Zhuxuan shiji 居竹軒詩集 (Poems Composed
While Living at Zhuxuan). Taipei: Taiwan Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986. Includedin the Wenyuange 文 淵 閣 copy of the Siku quanshu 四 庫 全 書, vol. 1216.
Photographic reproduction, Taipei: Taiwan Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986.
Lan Jifu 藍 吉 富, ed. Chanzong quanshu 禪 宗 全 書 (Complete Works on the Chan
Sect of Buddhism), vol. 94. Taipei: Wenshu Wenhua Youxiangongsi, 1990.
Lin Xiyi 林希逸 (1193–1271). Zhuxi Yanzhai ji shiyi gao xuji 竹溪鬳齋集十一藁續集(Eleven Additional Works by Lin Xiyi). In the Wenyuange 文 淵 閣 copy of the
Siku quanshu 四 庫 全 書, vol. 1185. Photographic reproduction, Taipei: Taiwan
Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986.
Liu Changdong 劉長東. Songdai Fojiao zhengce lungao 宋代佛教政策論稿 (Essays
on Song Policies Pertaining to Buddhism). Chengdu: Bashu Shushe, 2005.
Mou Yan 牟 巘 (1227–1311). Mou-shi Lingyang ji 牟 氏 陵 陽 集 (The Lingyang
Collection of Mr. Mou’s Works). In the Wenyuange 文 淵 閣 copy of the Siku
quanshu 四 庫 全 書, vol. 1188. Photographic reproduction, Taipei: Taiwan

﻿A Critique and Discussion of the View That Shi Miyuan Proposed the Five-Mountain, Ten-Monastery System 65

Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986.
Shen Defu 沈 德 符 (1578–1642). Wanli ye huo bian 萬 曆 野 獲 編 (Matters Gleaned
from Unofficial Sources during the Wanli Period [1573–1619]). Beijing:
Zhonghua Shuju, 1959.
Song Lian 宋 濂 (1310–1381). Hufa lu 護 法 錄 (Record of Protecting the Law). In
Jiaxing cang 嘉興藏 (Jiaxing edition of the Tripitaka), vol. 21.
Song Lian 宋 濂 (1310–1381), ed. Yuan shi 元 史 (A History of the Yuan Dynasty).
Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1976.
Xie Yingfang 謝應芳 (1296–1392). Guichao gao 龜巢稿 (Turtle Nest Compositions).
In the Wenyuange 文 淵 閣 copy of the Siku quanshu 四 庫 全 書, vol. 1218.
Photographic reproduction, Taipei: Taiwan Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1986.
Zhou Mi 周 密 (1232–1298). Guixin zashi 癸 辛 雜 識 (Miscellaneous Observations
from Guixin Street). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1988.
In Japanese
Chikusa Masaaki 竺沙雅章. Chūgoku Bukkyō shakaishi kenkyū 中国仏教社会史研究(Studies in the Social History of Chinese Buddhism). Kyoto: Dōhōsha Shuppan,
1983.
Chisaka Genpō 千 坂 嵃 峰. Gozan bungaku no sekai: Kokan Shiren to Chūgan
Engetsu o chūshin ni 五山文学の世界: 虎関師錬と中巌円月を中心に (The World ofFive-Mountains Literature, with a Focus on Kokan Shiren and Chūgan Engetsu).
Tokyo: Hakuteisha, 2002.
Ihara Kesao 井原今朝男. Chūsei jiin to minshū 中世寺院と民衆 (Medieval Monasteries
and the Masses). Enl. ed. Kyoto: Rinsen Shoten, 2009.
Imaeda Aishin 今枝愛真. Chūsei Zenshū shi no kenkyū 中世禅宗史の研究 (Studies
in the History of Medieval Zen). Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai, 4th
printing 2001.
Imatani Akira 今谷明. Genchō Chūgoku tokōki: Ryūgakusō Sesson Yūbai no sūkina
unmei 元朝・中国渡航記: 留学僧・雪村友梅の数奇な運命 (Travelogue of a Trip to
Yuan China: The Calamitous Adventure of Sesson Yūbai, a Monk Who Studied
in China). Tokyo: Takarajimasha, 1994.
Ishii Shūdō 石井修道. “Chūgoku no gozanjussetsu seido no kisoteki kenkyū (ichi)”
中国の五山十刹制度の基礎的研究 (一) (Basic Research on the Chinese System ofFive Mountains and Ten Monasteries, Pt. 1). Komazawa Daigaku Bukkyō Gakubu
ronshū 駒澤大学佛教学部論集, no. 13 (1982): 89–132.
Ishii Shūdō 石井修道. Sōdai Zenshū shi no kenkyū: Chūgoku Sōtōshū to Dōgen Zen
宋代禅宗史の研究: 中国曹洞宗と道元禅 (Studies in the History of Song Dynasty
Chan Buddhism: Chinese Caodong Buddhism and Dōgen Zen Buddhism).
Tokyo: Daitō Shuppansha, 1987.
Kamimura Kankō 上 村 観 光, ed. Gozan bungaku zenshū 五 山 文 学 全 集 (TheComplete Works of Five-Mountains Literature). Kyoto: Shibunkaku Shuppansha,
1973.
Kimiya Yasuhiko 木宮泰彦. Nik-Ka bunka kōryūshi 日華文化交流史 (A History of
Sino-Japanese Cultural Interaction). 5th ed. Tokyo: Fuzanbō, 1977.
Matso Kenji 松 尾 剛 次. Kamakura shin Bukkyō no tanjō 鎌 倉 新 仏 教 の 誕 生 (The
Birth of New Forms of Buddhism in the Kamakura Period). Tokyo: Kōdansha,
1995.

66

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 5 2014

Mugan Soō 夢 巌 祖 応 (d. 1374). Kanrin shū 旱 霖 集 (The Drought and Rain
Collection). In Kamimura 1973, vol. 1.
Mujaku Dōchū 無著道忠 (1653–1744). Zenrin shōki sen 禅林象器箋 (Notes on the
Manifestations of Zen). In Lan Jifu 1990, vol. 96.
Ninkū Jitsudō 仁 空 実 導 (1309–1388). Xin xuexing yaochao 新 學 行 要 鈔 (NewPrecepts for Study and Comportment). In Taishōzō 大正藏 (Taishō Tripitaka), vol.
74.
Noguchi Zenkei 野口善敬. Gendai Zenshū shi kenkyū 元代禅宗史研究 (Studies in the
History of Yuan Dynasty Chan Buddhism). Kyoto: Hanazono Daigaku Zen
Bunka Kenkyūjo, 2005.
Ono Katsutoshi Hakushi Shōju Kinenkai 小 野 勝 年 博 士 頌 寿 記 念 会, ed. Tōhōgaku
ronshū: Ono Katsutoshi Hakushi shōju kinen 東方学論集: 小野勝年博士頌寿記念(Essays in East Asian Studies: Essays in Memory of the Long Life of Dr. Ono
Katsutoshi). Kyoto: Ryūkoku Daigaku Tōyō Shigaku Kenkyūkai, 1982.
Shimizu Kunihiko 清水邦彦. “Daijō-ji zō ‘Gozanjussetsu zu’ kō” 大乘寺藏「五山十剎図 」考 (A Study of the “Five Mountains and Ten Monasteries Painting” Heldby the Daijō Temple). Hikaku minzoku kenkyū 比較民俗研究 23 (2009), no. 3.
Shunnoku Myōha 春屋妙葩 (1312–1388). Chikaku Fumyō kokushi goroku 智覺普明
國 師 語 錄 (Quotations of Shunnoku Myōha). In Taishōzō 大 正 藏 (Taishō
Tripitaka), vol. 80.
Tamamura Takeji 玉村竹二. Gozan Zensō denki shūsei 五山禅僧伝記集成 (Complete
Biographies of Five-Mountains Zen Monks). Kyoto: Shibunkaku, 2003.
Ueda Jun’ichi 上田純一. Ashikaga Yoshimitsu to Zenshū 足利義満と禅宗 (Ashikaga
Yoshimitsu and Zen). Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 2011.