1977; Harootunian, 1989; CHJ, 1988: chap. 14). Not listed are persons who
receive less than a minimal amount of citation in these sources, who fail to appear
in more than one source, or who receive only minor mention in these texts.
(Additional sources used for network information are Najita, 1987; Nosco, 1990;
Ooms, 1985; Bellah, 1957; Weinstein, 1977). It should be stressed that the criterion
for inclusion in this network is relative ranking in the attention space; the network
does not simply reproduce the lineage charts which were used as a mode of
organizational legitimation (and transfer of rights of office) in Chinese and Japa-
nese Buddhism, and which were imitated by the Neo-Confucian, Ancient Learning,
and National Learning schools. Similarly, my criterion for network contact is not
simply listing in one of these official lineages as a pupil or successor; it is significant
direct personal contact (including written correspondence) between individuals,
whether they are listed as doctrinal followers or not. As we see repeatedly through-
out the world, innovation typically breaks off from within an established school
of thought. Thus, Ogyu Sorai was a student at the Hayashi school of official
Neo-Confucianism, although he became its most vehement critic; Kamo Mabuchi,
the promoter of National Learning, is linked by intermediaries of acquaintanceship
as well as pupilship to Sorai’s lineage of Ancient Learning. It is the same in the
Buddhist period: Honen the Pure Land founder and Eisai the patriarch of Japanese
Zen were taught by the same Tendai masters.- Sources on Japanese institutional and historical development (Yamamura, 1990;
McMullin, 1984; Anderson, 1974: 435–461; Kitagawa, 1990; Sansom, 1958,
1961; Morris, 1964; Frédéric, 1972; Ikegami, 1995). - Once again eminence arises from the center of the prior network. Saicho began by
studying with all the main Nara orders; in China his ordination came from Tao-sui
(269 in Figure 6.2), a grandpupil of Chan-jan (267), who had revived the T’ien-tai
doctrine during the mid-700s. Saicho, a typical importer, eclectically collected other
ordination certificates, from Zen as well as Vinaya and mantra (tantric) masters. - Kukai was ordained by a grandpupil of Amoghavajra (254 in Figure 6.2), a
Ceylonese tantrist who had been tutor and rainmaker to emperors. - A popular saying of the Kamakura period went: “Tendai for the imperial court,
Shingon for the nobility, Zen for the warriors, Pure Land for the common people”
(Dumoulin, 1990: 31). - This syncretism had already set in by the mid-900s, when the Zen master T’ien-tai
Te-shao revived the old center on Mount T’ien-t’ai; among his pupils were Tao
Yüan, who edited the Zen chronicles, Record of the Transmission of the Lamp
(1004, formulating a Zen orthodoxy), and Yung-ming Yen-shou, who compiled a
huge syncretist overview of all teachings, emphasizing compatibility between Zen
and the sutras. In a parallel branch of the same lineage, Ch’i-sung (1007–1072)
even incorporated Confucianism into Zen by composing a work on the classic
Doctrine of the Mean. - See Dumoulin (1990: 8–15, 54). Nonin’s pupils made contact with Te-kuang, a
disciple of Ta-hui, of secondary stature in Figure 6.4, from the Lin-chi line. These
pupils brought back a rich reliquary from China, including Ta-hui’s dharma robe,
implying that the Chinese lineages encouraged the Japanese as continuers of a
974 •^ Notes to Pages 326–333