together by shared ideals and adherence to a common
set of principles. When the term is used in the last
sense, it does not denote separate sects, as defined in
typologies formulated by sociologists of religion. The
distinct schools of Chinese Buddhism lacked institu-
tional independence. They primarily represented dis-
tinct doctrinal or exegetical orientations, or loosely-
organized religious groups that were subsumed within
the mainstream monastic order. It is also important to
note that as a rule these schools involved only a small
segment of the monastic elite, and local manifestations
of Buddhist religiosity among ordinary people mostly
had little direct connection with them.
During the early period, the intellectual and reli-
gious agendas of Chinese Buddhism were largely
shaped by texts and teachings that originated in India.
During the fourth and fifth centuries the most influ-
ential school of Mahayana was the Madhyamaka (Mid-
dle Way), whose teachings of s ́unyata attracted the
attention of Chinese scholiasts. The interest in Mad-
hyamaka philosophy was stimulated by the arrival of
Kumarajva, and it culminated with the formation of
the Sanlun (Three Treatises) school by Jizang
(549–623), which is usually described as a Chinese ver-
sion of Madhyamaka. Notwithstanding these develop-
ments, the sixth century was the beginning of a general
move within Chinese Buddhism away from the re-
lentless apophasis of Madhyamaka doctrine toward
increased interest in teachings that presented more
positive depictions of the nature of reality and the
quest for salvation, especially as articulated by the Yo-
gacara and TATHAGATAGARBHAtraditions. The strong
interest in YOGACARA SCHOOLteachings about the na-
ture of consciousness and the stages of spiritual prac-
tice eventually led to the development of the Shelun
school (based on the Mahayanasamgrahaof ASAN ̇GA)
and the Dilun school (based on VASUBANDHU’s com-
mentary on the Das ́abhumikasutropads ́a). Both of them
were primarily exegetical traditions, centered around
small groups of elite scholarly monks who were bound
by shared religious and intellectual interests.
The tathagatagarbha, together with the closely re-
lated Buddha-nature doctrine, originally occupied a
marginal position in Indian Buddhism. Although these
theories did not give rise to any new Chinese schools,
they became key doctrinal tenets and articles of belief
for the new Buddhist traditions that emerged during
the Sui-Tang period. This new Buddhism is principally
associated with the teachings of the Tiantai, Huayan,
Chan, and Pure Land schools. Each of them was a
unique Sinitic tradition that had no direct counterpart
in Indian Buddhism, and their emergence is viewed as
the culmination of the Sinification of Buddhist doc-
trines and practices. Tiantai and Huayan were espe-
cially renowned for their scriptural exegesis and
creation of sophisticated systems of Buddhist doctrine
that represent the highest intellectual achievements of
Chinese Buddhism. On the other hand, Chan and Pure
Land offered compelling soteriological frameworks
and methods of spiritual practice. In the case of Chan
the main practice was meditation, while the Pure Land
tradition emphasized faith and devotional practices.
Chan and Pure Land came to dominate the religious
landscape of Chinese Buddhism from the late Tang
onward, with Chan being more popular among the
monastic elites and their educated followers, and Pure
Land enjoying a greater following among the masses.Interactions with other religious traditions
The history of Chinese religions is usually discussed in
terms of the “three teachings”: Confucianism, Daoism,
and Buddhism. China’s religious history during the last
two millennia was to a large extent shaped by the com-
plex patterns of interaction among these three main
traditions and popular religion. The history of Bud-
dhism in China was significantly influenced by its con-
tacts with the indigenous traditions, which were also
profoundly transformed through their encounter with
Buddhism.
The initial arrival of Buddhism into China during
the Han dynasty coincided with the emergence of re-
ligious Daoism. During the early period the acceptance
of Buddhism was helped by the putative similarities
between its beliefs and practices and those of Daoism.
With the increased popularity and influence of Bud-
dhism, from the late fourth century onward Daoism
absorbed various elements from Buddhism. In the lit-
erary arena, that included large-scale adoption of Bud-
dhist terminology and style of writing. The Daoist
canon itself was modeled on the Buddhist canon, fol-
lowing the same threefold division. In addition, nu-
merous Buddhist ideas—about merit, ethical conduct,
salvation, compassion, rebirth, retribution, and the
like—were absorbed into Daoism. The Buddhist in-
fluence also extended into the institutions of the Daoist
church, and Daoist monasteries and temples were to a
large extent modeled on their Buddhist counterparts.
During the medieval period, intellectual and reli-
gious life in China was characterized by an ecumeni-
cal spirit and broad acceptance of a pluralistic outlook.
The prevalent view was that the three traditions were
complimentary rather than antithetical. Buddhism andCHINA