The Phenomenon of “Tao-for-Buddhism” in Dunhuang Taoist Manuscripts

Abstract

The text Poxie lun:Daojing shijingfo wen破邪論:道經師敬佛文 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies: On the Respect of Taoist Scriptures for Buddha) records twenty-three items of “miscellaneous ancient records in Taoist scriptures” 道教古經古事雜抄. Half of these entries align with contents found in Dunhuang manuscripts and pertain to the practice of “replacing Buddhism with Taoism”. The Dunhuang manuscripts that involve the content of “replacing Buddhism with Taoism” can be categorized into five situations: First, Taoist scriptures that retain Buddhist terminology which was later replaced by later generations; Second, instances where traces of Buddhist terminology remain, showing signs of having been altered or replaced; Third, cases where the replacement of Buddhist terminology has already been completed in the manuscripts; Fourth, instances where, after replacing Buddhist terminology, the sentence structure was also revised; Fifth, sections that were preserved which, in later generations, were deleted due to their content relating to the blending of Buddhism and Taoism. These instances of “replacing Buddhism with Taoism” may reflect efforts by Taoism to remove Buddhist elements amid criticism or an attempt by Buddhist monks to preserve Buddhism’s sanctity by altering Taoist texts. The Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts offer vibrant historical material for discussing interactions between Buddhism and Taoism in medieval China.

1. Introduction

In the fifth year of Tianhe天和in Northern Zhou 570, Zhen Luan甄鸞 submitted the text Xiaodao lun笑道論 (Treatise on Laughing at the Dao) to the court. In the section “Taoist texts have yet to reveal in discourse” (道經未出言出), it states: “The Huangting and Yuanyang replaced Buddhism with Taoism” (而《黃庭》《元陽》，以道換佛) (Shi 1934). Subsequently, in the Discourse on the Erjiao lun二教論 (Treatise on the Two Teachings) by Northern Zhou monk Shi Dao’an释道安, there is a discussion under “Discerning True and False” (明典真偽) which remarks: “The Huangting and Yuanyang compiled phrases from the Fahua, but the editing is clumsy” (《黃庭》《元陽》，采撮《法華》，改用尤拙) (Shi 1934) Tang Dynasty monk Shi Falin释法琳’s Bianzheng lun辯正論 (Treatise on the Rectification of Debates) under “Internal Dissent and Common Goals” (內異方同置) records: “The Huangting, Yuanyang, Lingbao, Shangqing, and other scriptures, along with the classic of the Sanhuang, were created by modifying Fahua, Wuliangshou, and other scriptures” (《黃庭》《元陽》《靈寶》《上清》等經及《三皇》之典，改換《法華》《無量壽》等經而作者也) (Shi 1934).

Additionally, Tang monk Xuan Ni玄嶷’s Zhenzheng lun 甄正論 (Treatise on Discriminating the Correct) documented:

“There were Taoist masters Li Xing from Yizhou and Fang Chang from Lizhou who together forged ten volumes of the Haikong Jing. Taoist Li Rong created the Xiyu jing in response to the Wenshi jing, while Taoist Liu Wudai created the Daxian jing as a counterpart to the Yulan pen, and also authored Jiuyou, which addressed sin and reward. Besides these large texts, the number of falsifications is immeasurable”.

(Xuan 1934)

即有益州道士黎興、澧州道士方長，共造《海空經》十卷。道士李榮又造《洗浴經》以對《溫室》，道士劉無待又造《大獻經》以擬《盂蘭盆》，並造《九幽經》，將類罪福報應。自餘非大部帙，偽者不可勝計。

This account clearly points to a history of Taoist scriptures imitating Buddhist scriptures. Scholars such as Kamata Shigeo鎌田茂雄 and Liu Yi劉屹 have substantiated the connection between the Fahua jing法華經 (The Lotus Sutra) and the Taishang lingbao yuanyang miaojing太上靈寶元陽妙經 (The Supreme Numinous Treasure Scripture of Primal Yang’s Mysterious Essence). (Kamata 1968; Y. Liu 2013) However, this borrowing invites varied interpretations. Liu Xianxin劉咸炘 comments on Zhu Xi朱熹’s critique of the Zhen’gao真誥 (Declarations of the Perfected) and Sishi’erzhang jing四十二章經 (The Sutra of Forty-Two Sections):1

“Zhu Xi claimed that the Buddhist doctrines borrowed heavily from the teachings of Laozi and Zhuangzi, which was a misconception. Furthermore, he asserted that the Taoist practices of salvation were derived from Buddhism, which was even more erroneous. Before the introduction of Buddhism, there were already customs of worship and sacrificial rites. As for the use of Buddhist terms in Taoist texts, this does not detract from their value; if the meanings align, there is no harm in adopting them. Besides, only later texts from the Northern and Tang dynasties incorporate these terms, while ancient scriptures from the Jin and Southern dynasties do not contain Buddhist terminology”.

(X. Liu 2010, p. 29)

朱子謂佛家教理，竊諸老莊，已為謬誤。又謂道家濟度之事，竊諸佛家，彌為值矣。佛教未入，已有祠祀之事矣。至於沿用佛書名詞，此自無關價值，其義苟同，沿用何害。況沿用者只北朝、唐人以後晚出之書，晉以前及南朝所傳之古經，故無佛書名詞。

Liu Xianxin劉咸炘 offers a more balanced view on the so-called “Taoist imitation of Buddhist scriptures”, although his statement that “ancient scriptures from the Jin and Southern dynasties contain no Buddhist terminology” (晉以前及南朝所傳之古經，故無佛書名詞) is arguably a misunderstanding.

The term “Tao-for-Buddhism” essentially represents a tactic of textual borrowing within the history of Buddhist-Taoist interactions, where Taoist texts borrowed from Buddhist scriptures. Research on this topic is substantial. Erik Zürcher’s article Buddhist Influence on Early Taoism highlights how Taoism adopted Buddhism selectively, not just a particular sutra or sect, but rather incorporating popular Buddhist knowledge to fill theoretical gaps. (Erik 1980) Livia Kohn, in his translation and study of Xiaodao lun笑道論 (Treatise on Laughing at the Dao), posits that while the text exposes Taoist borrowings from Buddhism, its primary focus is to portray Taoism as a group with inconsistent doctrines and disorganized structure (Livia 1995). Liu Yi劉屹’s work further examines the intentionality and selectivity behind the Taoist adaptation of Buddhist scriptures, emphasizing not a simple borrowing but a creative reinterpretation (Y. Liu 2013). Stephen R. Bokenkamp’s research into the Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) notes an attempt by the Lingbao tradition to transcend and replace Buddhism, while in his article Sources of the Lingbao scriptures, he outlines its defining characteristics:

Even a cursory reading of the Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) reveals that the term “syncretism” alone might be insufficient to capture its essence. When approaching a religious tradition, the core issue is less about the diversity of its origins than the type of fusion it achieves. As with mixing colors, the resulting hue depends not only on the colors used but on their proportions and tonal shifts. The Shangqing jing draws from many sources, absorbing Buddhist, Taoist, and both elite and popular elements. The Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure), in its synthesis, achieves a distinct character, with its compilers demonstrating a clear intent to integrate multiple religious ideologies into a single, unified system encompassing both the cosmos and the human experience. Evidently, this fusion was aimed at attracting more adherents from competing factions. Thus, by analyzing the elements of the Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure), we not only gain insight into the Lingbao tradition itself but also can better understand the social and religious conditions of 4th-century Jiangnan, which fostered this tradition (Stephen 1983).

In summary, Stephen R. Bokenkamp underscores not only the “syncretic” nature of the Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) but also its “integrative” and “transcendent” qualities, aimed at broadening its appeal.

Japanese scholar Ōfuchi Ninji大淵忍爾, upon comparing Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts with the Taoist Canon, noted instances where Buddhist terms such as “Buddha佛”, “Pusa菩薩”, and “Buddhatu佛圖” were erased and replaced with Taoist terms like “Xian仙”, “Tao道”, “Tongzi童子” and “Lingtan靈壇”. Based on the copying period of these manuscripts, he concluded that these alterations likely occurred in the first half of the 7th century when tensions between Buddhism and Taoism were becoming more pronounced (Ōfuchi 1978). His research reveals a different narrative from the common view of Taoism borrowing from Buddhism, emphasizing instead “Tao-for-Buddhism”. Starting from this premise, this study will conduct a comprehensive examination of Dunhuang Taoist texts, exploring the examples of “replacing Buddhism with Taoism” found within and the implications of these substitutions for understanding Buddhist-Taoist interactions. The evidence of modifications in the Dunhuang texts suggests that these alterations were not casual but systematic, as corroborated by records in Buddhist sources that recount the history of such adjustments in Taoist scriptures.

2. Ancient Taoist Texts and Events in the “Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies)”

Tang Yongtong湯用彤 once noted that in Shi Falin釋法琳’s Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), there exists a passage titled Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha). Tang labeled this passage in his Dushu zhaji讀書劄記 (Reading Notes) as “Miscellaneous Excerpts of Ancient Taoist Texts and Events” 道教古經古事雜抄 (Daojiao gujing gushi zachao). Tang believed that the descriptions in Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies)reflected early Taoist scriptures, though he did not have access to Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts, nor did he explain why he considered them early Taoist texts. Nonetheless, these “Miscellaneous Excerpts of Ancient Texts and Events道教古經古事雜抄 (Daojiao gujing gushi zachao)” align closely with the Dunhuang manuscripts, with little content missing except for those manuscripts. This alignment validates Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), affirming Tang’s insights.

The “Miscellaneous Excerpts of Ancient Taoist Texts and Events” 道教古經古事雜抄 (Daojiao gujing gushi zachao)comprises 23 items, including texts such as Daoshi falun jing道士法輪經 (The Scripture of the Dharma Wheel of the Taoist),Taishang qingjing xiaomo baozhen anzhi zhihui benyuan dajie shangpin jing太上清淨消魔寶真安志智慧本願大戒上品經 (The Supreme Scripture of Purity, Dispelling Demons, Precious Truth, Peaceful Resolve, Wisdom, and the Supreme Precepts),Laozi shengxuan jing老子升玄經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the Mysterious),Daoshi zhangling biezhuan道士張陵別傳 (The Separate Biography of Taoist Zhang Ling),Shengxuan jing升玄經 (The Scripture of Ascent to the Mysterious),Laozi xisheng jing老子西升經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the West),Zhihui guanshen dajie jing智慧觀身大戒經 (The Scripture of Great Precepts on Wisdom and Observing the Body),Laozi daquan pusa jing老子大權菩薩經 (The Scripture of Laozi as the Great Power Bodhisattva),Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages),Xiangong qiju zhu仙公起居注 (The Annals of the Daily Life of the Immortal Lord),Xiangong qingwen jing仙公請問經 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry),Taishang lingbao dongxuan zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上靈寶洞玄真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Scripture of the Numinous Treasure, the Profound Mystery, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel). As these contain references to Buddhism, they are labeled by Buddhists as Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha道經師敬佛文 (Daojing shijingfo wen), as the text states:

“Based on the classical works of Confucius and Laozi, as well as various historical records from the Han and Wei dynasties onward, brief quotations are provided below that demonstrate the respect Confucius and Laozi had for Buddhism, in order to respond to those with heretical views, hoping they will repent. These textual pieces of evidence are listed below. … On the right are recorded passages from Taoist scriptures that show respect for the Buddha, as mentioned earlier”.

(Fa 1934)

案孔老經書，漢魏已來內外史籍，略引孔老，師敬佛處文證如左，以答邪人，冀其伏罪。……右錄道經師敬佛文如前。

This Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) mainly originates from Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) and works on Laozi huahujing老子化胡經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Conversion of the Barbarians). Both schools aimed to unify and transcend Buddhism as well as the various Taoist factions of the time, an approach discussed extensively in academic circles (Stephen 2004). This so-called “Taoist Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) is essentially a blend of Buddhist and Taoist teachings. As conflicts between the two religions grew, these reverent passages were gradually removed from Taoist scriptures, with Taoist Canons containing very few references. This is why Tang considered these as “Miscellaneous Excerpts of Ancient Taoist Texts and Events”. 道教古經古事雜抄 (Daojiao gujing gushi zachao). Interestingly, these ancient texts and records correspond closely to the Dunhuang manuscripts.

In the Dunhuang manuscripts, not only are the clues of Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) preserved, but since these texts were gradually removed in later periods, the Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) in the Dunhuang scrolls appears in various forms.

2.1. The Manuscripts Exhibit Substitution and Erasure of Buddhist Terminology

In the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), some of the preserved Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) only refer to Buddhist terms in Taoist scriptures, which were later replaced with Taoist terminology. Some of these terms are completely preserved in the Dunhuang texts, while others were directly scraped off and replaced, though traces of the original text before scraping are still visible.

For example, the section Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies)quotes from parts of the Falun miaojing法輪妙經 (The Wonderful Scripture of the Dharma Wheel).

From the Dunhuang manuscripts, we learn that Taishang lingbao zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上靈寶真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Wonderful Scripture of the Numinous Treasure, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel) was divided into four sections in the Taoist Canon: Taishang donxuan lingbao zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上洞玄靈寶真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Wonderful Scripture of the Profound Mystery, the Numinous Treasure, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel),Taishang xuanyi zhenrenshuo miaotong zhuanshen ruding jing太上玄一真人說秒通轉神入定經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Mysterious Unity Perfected Being’s Discourse on Subtle Penetration, Transforming Spirit, and Entering Meditation), Taishang xuanyi zhenrenshuo quanjie falun miaojing太上玄一真人說勸誡法輪妙經 (The Wonderful Scripture of the Supreme Mysterious Unity Perfected Being’s Discourse on Exhortation and the Dharma Wheel),Taishang xuanyi zhenrenshuo santu wuku quanjiejingYaoxiu keyi jielü chao太上玄一真人說三途五苦勸戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Mysterious Unity Perfected Being’s Discourse on Exhortation Against the Three Paths and Five Sufferings), (Ōfuchi 1978) cited a unified version of the Falun miaojing法輪妙經 (The Wonderful Scripture of the Dharma Wheel), as does Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), which references the Falun miaojing法輪妙經 (The Wonderful Scripture of the Dharma Wheel) three times, mirroring this unified form. These references align with the Dunhuang manuscripts.

The first reference from Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites the Daoshi falun jing道士法輪經 (The Scripture of the Dharma Wheel of the Taoist):

“If you see a monk, think of the boundless, wishing to be born early to practice the true teachings of the Buddha”.

若見沙門，思念無量，願早出身，以習佛真。

It also states:

“If you see a Buddha stupa, think of the boundless. May all universally enter the Dharma gate”.

(Fa 1934)

若見佛圖，思念無量。當願一切，普入法門。

The Dunhuang manuscript S.1906 of the Taishang lingbao zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上靈寶真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Wonderful Scripture of the Numinous Treasure, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel) (see Figure 1):

“If you see a contemplation hall, think of the boundless. Universally practice the Dharma gate, and with my spirit, attain the Tao without action”.

“If you see a monk, think of the boundless. Universally attain rebirth, and with my spirit, together achieve the Xian (Buddha)-truth”.

(Institute of Historical Research of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 1990)

若見觀舍，思念無量，普履法門，身與我神，得道無為。

若見沙門，思念無量，普得出身，身與我神，同得仙 (佛)真。

Clearly, the two quoted sentences have a common source, showing a strong similarity, with the Dunhuang manuscript having undergone modifications.2 The manuscript S.1906 contains two areas of erasure: the characters “Xian”仙and “contemplation hall”觀舍 (Guanshe) were scraped and rewritten. The traces of these erasures can still be discerned, with “Xian”仙originally being “Buddha”佛 (Fo). The original character replaced for “contemplation hall”觀舍 (Guanshe) is no longer visible, but in combination with the citation from Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), “contemplation hall”觀舍 (Guanshe) should be changed to “Buddha stupa”佛圖 (Fotu). (Institute of Historical Research of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 1990)

S.1906 and S.1605 can be combined; the copying is neat, with 28 lines and 17 characters per page. The text does not avoid the taboos of the Tang dynasty, suggesting it is a manuscript from before the early Tang period. Ōfuchi Ninji大淵忍爾 considers it a manuscript from the Sui dynasty. This indicates that prior to the Tang dynasty, Taoist texts indeed contained many Buddhist terms. The identity and time of the corrector remain indeterminate. The alterations appear to be a mechanical replacement of Buddhist terms with Taoist ones, but S.1906 retains “monk”沙門 (Shamen), an evident Buddhist term, indicating that the modifications were not part of an organized effort.

In the Dunhuang manuscript P.2842V, this passage reads (see Figure 2):

“If you see an altar of governance, think of the boundless. Universally practice the Dharma gate, and with my spirit, attain the Tao without action”.

“If you see a young servant, think of the boundless. Universally attain rebirth, and with my spirit, together achieve the ultimate truth”.

(National Library of France n.d.c)

若見治壇，思念無量，普履法門，身與我神，得道無為。

若見僮子，思念無量，普得出身，身與我神，同得至真。

P.2842V is also neatly copied, with 28 lines and 17 characters per page, and avoids Tang taboos, suggesting it is a manuscript from the flourishing Tang period. The back contains an inscription for an oracle book, indicating the cataloguer mismanaged the orientation. The formatting of P.2842V differs from other Dunhuang manuscripts but is similar to those in the Taoist Canon. “monk”沙門 (Shamen) is replaced with “young servant”僮子 (Tongzi) in P.2842V, while the Taoist Canon version uses “young servant”童子 (Tongzi). “contemplation hall”觀舍 (Guanshe) is replaced with “altar of governance”治壇 (Zhitan)in P.2842V, and the Taoist Canon reads “spiritual altar”靈壇 (Lingtan). However, P.2842V shows no signs of erasure, indicating the text was directly copied without modifications. “Buddha-truth”佛真 (Fozhen) in P.2842V is “supreme truth”至真 (Zhizhen) and in the Taoist Canon, it is “Tao-truth”道真 (Daozhen). These variations suggest that changes in terminology were not a uniform activity.

The second reference from Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites the Falun miaojing法輪妙經 (The Wonderful Scripture of the Dharma Wheel):

“The wheel of rebirth does not perish; it returns to the realm of sentient beings. Those with great wisdom and understanding, from countless kalpas, have achieved the path of the true person, high immortal, and all Buddhas, each resulting from their actions, focusing their will, practicing meditation to understand the subtle”.

(Fa 1934)

道言：夫輪轉不滅，得還生人中。大智慧明達者，從無數劫，學已成真人、高仙自然、十方佛者，莫不從行業所致，制身定志，坐禪思微。

S.1906 states (see Figure 3):

“The wheel of rebirth does not perish; it returns to the realm of sentient beings. Those with intelligence and understanding, with calm hearts and gentle emotions, devoted to the Sanbao, aspiring to immortality, should think of good deeds, broadly cultivating the field of merit. When their merits and virtues are complete, they can swiftly attain enlightenment, entering into meditation to become the ultimate truth. If one’s Taoist practice is incomplete, immortality cannot be attained. From countless kalpas, they have achieved the true person, high immortal, and all Tao (Buddha) beings, all resulting from their practice, focusing their will, practicing meditation to understand”.

(Institute of Historical Research of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 1990)

道言：夫轉輪不滅，得還生人中。才智明達，心和情柔，篤好三寶，志慕神仙，當思念善功，廣建福田，功滿德備，旋行秒通，轉神入定，以成至真。道行不備，仙亦不成。自從無數劫來，學已成真人、高仙自然、十方道 (佛)者，莫不從業行所致，制身定志，坐禪思維。

As in the previous text, the reference from Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) is a shortened citation. The main difference between the two is “all Tao beings”十方道者 (Shifangdaozhe) and “all Buddha beings”十方佛者 (Shifangfozhe). Although S.1906 states “Tao”道 (Dao), traces of the erasure indicate it originally contained “Buddha”佛 (Fo), which was subsequently scraped off and rewritten. P.2842V and the Taoist Canon both use “All the Sages”十方尊者 (Shifangzunzhe). Additionally, while “meditation”坐禪 (Zuochan) remains unchanged in S.1906, P.2842V and the Taoist Canon have changed it to “contemplation”坐念 (Zuonian).

The third reference from Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites the Taishang donxuan lingbao zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上洞玄靈寶真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Wonderful Scripture of the Profound Mystery, the Numinous Treasure, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel):

“I have observed for countless kalpas, seeing Taoists, commoners, men, and women, who have attained the supreme and correct path, high immortals, true people, and all Buddhas. They have all suffered in past lives in pursuit of the Tao, which cannot be measured”.

(Fa 1934)

吾歷觀諸大，從無數劫來，見諸道士、百姓子、男女人，已得無上正真之道、高仙真人、自然十方佛，皆受前世勤苦求道，不可稱計。

This section is not preserved in the Dunhuang manuscript due to prior damage but can be compared to the Taoist Canon version:

“I have observed for all the heavens, seeing Taoists, commoners, men, and women, who have attained the supreme and correct path, high immortals, true people, and all revered beings. They have all endured hardship in past lives in pursuit of the Tao, which cannot be measured”.

(Cultural Relics Press et al. 1988a)

道言：吾歷觀諸天，從無數劫來，見諸道士、百姓子、男女人，已得無上正真之道、高仙真人，自然十方諸聖，皆受前生勤苦求道，不可稱計。

The differences mainly lie in “all Buddhas”十方佛 (Shifangfo) and “all revered beings”十方諸聖 (Shifangzhusheng). From previous observations, “revered beings”諸聖 (Zhusheng) likely originated from a substitution for “Buddha”佛 (Fo). Additionally, “all the great”諸大 (Zhuda) may be a misreading of “all the heavens”諸天 (Zhutian). This also suggests that Buddhist texts reference Taoist texts without strict accuracy.

Furthermore, S.1605 has another erasure, “or damaging the quiet residence, the immortal Tao spiritual hall”或敗壞靜舍，仙道神堂, where “immortal Tao”仙道 (Xiandao) was also scraped and rewritten (see Figure 4). Here, P.2426 directly states “Spiritual Diagram”靈圖 (Lingtu), while the Taoist Canon reads “Hall of Spiritual Observation”靈觀治堂 (Lingguanzhitang), which may indicate that the original term was also “Buddha stupa”佛圖 (Fotu) (see Figure 5). While there are both erasures and direct replacements, these modifications may have occurred around the same time. It can also be confirmed that those who made the erasures were certainly writing at a relatively earlier time.

Similarly, the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites from the Zhihui benyuan shangpin dajie jing智慧本願上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom and Original Vows).

Zhihui benyuan shangpin dajie jing智慧本願上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom and Original Vows) appears in Dunhuang manuscripts as Taishang xiaomo baozhen anzhi zhihui benyuan dajie shangpin太上消魔寶真安志智慧本願大戒上品 (The Supreme Scripture of Dispelling Demons, Precious Truth, Peaceful Resolve, Wisdom, and the Supreme Precepts of Original Vows). Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites a line from the Taishang xiaomo baozhen anzhi zhihui benyuan dajie shangpin jing太上清淨消魔寶真安志智慧本願大戒上品經 (The Supreme Scripture of Dispelling Demons, Precious Truth, Peaceful Resolve, Wisdom, and the Supreme Precepts of Original Vows)’s forty-ninth vow (see Figure 6):

“When encountering a Bhikkhuni, may all beings attain enlightenment and realize the path as the Buddha did”.

(Fa 1934)

若見沙門尼，當願一切明解法度，得道如佛。

This line corresponds directly with Dunhuang’s manuscript, though there it appears as the nineteenth vow, not the forty-ninth. (National Library of France n.d.d)

The term “Bhikkhuni”沙門尼 (Shamenni) is rendered as “master”法師 (Fashi) in other texts such as the Taoist Canon and Yunjiqiqian雲笈七籖 (The Seven Tablets in the Cloud Satchel) while Wushangmiyao uses “heterodox teachings”異學 (Yixue). Additionally, the phrase “attain enlightenment like the Buddha得道如佛” appears as “attain the non-doing path得道無為” in the Taoist Canon and “attain enlightenment like the divine得道如神” in Wushangmiyao無上秘要 (The Supreme Secret Essentials).

The Dunhuang text, noted for its beautiful calligraphy and absence of Tang dynasty taboos, is identified as a pre-Tang manuscript. While the Dunhuang version retains Buddhist terminology, the version from the Northern Zhou period shows signs of having been altered to remove these terms. This suggests that the modifications occurred during the process of integration into the Taoist Canon rather than through a coordinated effort.

Overall, the alterations to Buddhist terminology in Taoist texts appear to have been a prolonged and gradual process, concluding around the late Tang to early Song period. Comparisons reveal that “Wushang miyao無上秘要 (The Supreme Secret Essentials)”, despite undergoing modifications, maintains a closer connection to the earlier Taoist texts, aligning more closely with the Dunhuang manuscripts than with the versions found in the Taoist Canon.

2.2. Deletion of Buddhist Content in Manuscripts

The Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), due to its Buddhist content, was deleted in its entirety by later generations, or the entire scripture was lost. However, a modified version of “Tao-for-Buddhism” has been preserved in the Dunhuang manuscripts.

For example, the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites from the Zhihui shangpindajie jing智慧上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom).

Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites the Zhihui shangpindajie jing智慧上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom):

“Offering alms to monks, providing food in temples and pagodas, and donating even a single coin brings blessings multiplied 24,000 times. The greater the merit, the greater the reward, leading to wisdom and endless prosperity for generations, and enabling seven generations of ancestors to enter boundless Buddha realms”.

(Fa 1934)

施散佛僧中食塔寺，一錢已上，皆二萬四千倍報。功多報多，世世賢明，玩好不絕，七祖皆得入無量佛國。

P.2461, Dunhuang Manuscript Taishang dongxuan lingbao zhihui shangpindajie太上洞玄靈寶智慧上品大戒 (The Supreme Precepts of Wisdom from the Profound Mystery and Numinous Treasure) (see Figure 7):

“The precept states: Giving treasures and constructing temples, with donations of even a single coin, brings blessings multiplied 24,000 times. The more merit accumulated, the greater the rewards, granting wisdom and prosperity for generations, and enabling seven generations of ancestors to enter realms free from suffering”.

(National Library of France n.d.b)

戒曰：施散財寶營造觀宇，一錢以上，皆二萬四千倍報。功多報多，世世賢明，玩好不絕，七祖皆得入無患之國。

Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies)misattributes this passage to the Zhihui benyuan shangpin dajie jing智慧本願上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom and Original Vows), when it should correctly reference Zhihui shangpindajie jing智慧上品大戒經 (The Scripture of the Supreme Precepts on Wisdom). Both the Dunhuang Manuscript P.2461 and BD.14841 contain identical excerpts without any alterations (see Figure 8). This demonstrates that Buddhist terminology had already been revised by the time these scriptures were copied, as seen in the Taoist Canon, where this entry has been entirely removed. Fortunately, the Dunhuang version preserves the modified content, which corroborates the reliability of the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies). P.2461, a well-preserved manuscript written in regular script with 28 lines per page and 17 characters per line, does not avoid taboo terms from the Tang dynasty, indicating it was transcribed prior to the Tang era. This manuscript shows evidence that revisions to Buddhist terminology in Taoist scriptures began well before the Tang, although the peak of these revisions occurred during that period. BD14841, copied around the same time as P.2461, also underwent a similar editorial review, replacing Buddhist terms in multiple places.

For instance, in the D.172 (see Figure 9):

“The supreme sages, true deities, celestial emperors, and those who have attained the Way, as numerous as the sands of the Ganges in the past, all achieved it through acts of giving and spreading virtue”.

(Peking University Library and Shanghai Classics Publishing House 1995)

諸天上聖至真大神、諸天帝王及已過去恒河沙之輩得道之者，莫不由施散布德。

In this case, “the sands of the Ganges”恒河沙 (Henghesha) is written as “dust and sand”塵沙 (Chensha) in P.2461 (see Figure 10), BD.14841, and the Taoist Canon, showing that Buddhist terminology in Taoist texts was being revised before the Tang, though on a smaller scale. Large-scale revisions likely started in the Prosperous Tang period (see Figure 11).

2.3. Revised Manuscripts

The Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha) in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) as presented in the Dunhuang manuscripts is an adapted version, but the adaptation is clumsy, with traces of modification being very obvious.

For example, the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) quotes from the Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages).

Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites the Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages):

“Sage Ge informs his disciples: In former times, I and Shi Daowei, Zhu Faka, Zhang Tai, and Zheng Siyuan made vows together. Daowei and Faka vowed to become monks, while Zhang Tai and Zheng Siyuan vowed to be Taoist priests”.

(Fa 1934)

葛仙公告弟子曰：吾昔與釋道微、竺法開、張太、鄭思遠等四人同時發願，道微、法開等二人願為沙門，張太、鄭思遠願為道士。

P.2454, Dunhuang Manuscript Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages) (see Figure 12):

“At that time, the three servants made vows: that in future lives, they would become Taoist priests, while I would be a recluse. Daowei, Zhu Faka, Zheng Siyuan, and Zhang Tai all vowed to be Taoist priests”.

(National Library of France n.d.a)

是時三侍臣同皆發願：後生作道士，我為隱士，其道微、竺法開、鄭思遠、張泰等，普皆願為道士。

Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages) in the Dunhuang version P.2454,Дх5625,P.2724 is known as the Taishang dongxuan lingbao xianren qingwen benxing yinyuan zhongsheng nanjing太上洞玄靈寶仙人請問本行因緣眾聖難經 (The Supreme Scripture of the Profound Mystery and Numinous Treasure: The Immortal’s Inquiry into the Fundamental Practices, Causes, and the Difficulties of the Sages) with only P.2454 preserving this specific passage. The phrase “Daowei and Faka vowed to become monks道微、法開等二人願為沙門” in the Treatise has been altered in the Dunhuang version to “all vowed to be Taoist priests普願為道士”. The P.2454 scroll was transcribed in regular script, with 28 lines per page and 17 characters per line. The manuscript shows no signs of corrections or erasures, with characters like “世 (Shi)” and “治 (Zhi)” fully intact, suggesting it was written before the Tang dynasty, indicating that the process of revising Taoist scriptures had begun by then. This change also suggests that the text was modified in a way that hid evidence of its Buddhist origins, though sometimes the altered passages became somewhat awkward, revealing the editing process.

Additionally, “Zhu Faka竺法開” in the Taoist Canon is “Zhu Falan竺法蘭”, aligning the Dunhuang Manuscript and Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) references, thus corroborating the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies)’s reliability.

Dunhuang’s Xianren qingwen zhongsheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages) has removed Buddhist references, whereas the Taoist Canon retains traces of earlier content. In the Dunhuang manuscript, “When his karma is complete, he is reborn in a virtuous family and becomes a Taoist priest因緣未盡，命過太陰，即生賢家，復為道士法師”, while the Taoist Canon refers to him as a “monk”沙門 (Shamen), showing incomplete removal of Buddhist terms in certain cases. The presence of “monk”沙門 (Shamen) also supports the credibility that among the four individuals mentioned earlier, two were indeed śramaṇas.

Similarly, the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites from the Xiangong qingwenjing仙公請問經 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry), with two instances of citation.

The first citation in Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) reads:

“The Grand Sage Laozi said: In ancient times, people were simple and honest, upheld virtue, and practiced detachment and tranquility, doing things without ulterior motives. As such purity faded, competition and chaos arose, intelligence and ignorance clashed, and saints appeared to guide the people toward goodness through scriptures. Hence, the Five Confucian Classics and Taoist teachings each preach the ultimate goodness”.

(Fa 1934)

高上老子曰：上古之時，人民純樸，各懷道德，虛心玄寂，無為為事。此風既散，百競煙起，萬流分析。奸巧互攻，愚智相陵。鬼神執威，眾聖並出，製作教化。唯令民修善自守，是以有五經儒俗之業，道佛各歎其教大歸善也。

S.1351, Taiji zuoxiangong qingwenjing太極左仙公請問經上 (The Scripture of the Inquiry of the Immortal Lord of the Supreme Ultimate’s Left) (see Figure 13):

“The Grand Sage Laozi said: In ancient times, people were honest and virtuous, held quiet and deep meditation, and acted without ulterior motives. As this way of life faded, strife arose, wisdom clashed with cunning, and gods and saints came to teach people to maintain goodness. Thus, the Five Confucian Classics and Taoist and Buddhist teachings each promote the ultimate goodness”.

(Institute of Historical Research of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 1990)

高上老子曰：善古之時，人民淳樸，各懷道德，虛心玄寂，無為為事。此風既散，百競煙起，萬流分析，奸巧互攻，愚智相淩，鬼神執威，眾聖並出，製作教化。惟令民修善自守。是以有五經儒俗之業，道仙 (佛)各教其大歸善也。

“Xiangong qingwenjing仙公請問經 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry)”, The Dunhuang manuscript is titled “Taiji zuoxiangong qingwenjing太極左仙公請問經上 (The Scripture of the Inquiry of the Immortal Lord of the Supreme Ultimate’s Left)”. It does not exist in the Taoist Canon but is a new scripture of the Gexiangong xinjing葛仙公新經 (The New Scripture of Immortal Lord Ge) from the ancient Lingbao jing 靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure). The only extant manuscript is a single roll, S.1351. The roll avoids the tabooed character of “Tang” and is written in the regular script without corrections or marks, suggesting it is a copy from the early Tang period. There is only one instance of erasure, where the character “Buddha” 佛 (Fo) was replaced with “Xian”仙.

Comparing the content, the Dunhuang version differs from the quotation in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) mainly in the final sentence: “Tao and Buddha each praise the great goodness of their teachings道佛各歎其教大歸善也” vs. “Tao and Immortals each teach their great goodness道仙各教其大歸善也”. The latter clearly revises the former, and the sentence even becomes ungrammatical. “Tao”道 (Dao) and “Xian”仙 are used for the same “teaching”教 (Jiao), so after changing “Buddha”佛 (Fo) to “Xian”仙, the phrase “each praises their teachings各歎其教” had to be modified, leading to “Tao and Immortals each teach their great goodness道仙各教其大歸善也”, which is incoherent and does not relate to the previous sentence “The five teachings of Confucianism and the secular profession五經儒俗之業”.

The second quote from the Xiangong qingwenjing仙公請問經下 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry) read:

“If a mortal performs this merit, wishes to become a monk or Taoist priest, after much study, he will become a monk and learn the Buddhist scriptures and be a teacher. There is another person who sees the Taoists and monks fasting and reading scriptures, and he laughs, saying: ‘He recites scriptures to no purpose. What does he hope for? He has an empty stomach, eating only once a day, this is a sinner.’ The Taoist kindly explains, but the person remains obstinate. After his death, he enters hell and suffers the five tortures of poison”.

(Fa 1934)

有凡人行是功德，願為沙門道士。大博至後生，便為沙門。大學佛經為眾法師。復有一人，見沙門道士齋靜讀經，乃笑之曰：彼向空吟經，欲何希耶？虛腹日中一食，此罪人耳。道士乃慈心喻之，故執意不釋。死入地獄，考毒五苦。

The Taishang dongxuan lingbao benxing suyuan jing太上洞玄靈寶本行宿緣經 (The Supreme Scripture of Lingbao on Original Actions and Predestined Affinities from the Dongxuan Tradition) from the Taoist Canon reads:

“Thus, he ascends to the hall of blessings, becoming a noble in later life, and in each generation, he is a prince. Fortune and happiness naturally follow, and he enjoys the Way and Virtue, offering service to the Three Treasures, with deep and extensive learning. There is another person who sees the Taoist fasting and reading scriptures and laughs, saying: ‘He recites empty scriptures with no aim. What does he hope for? He has an empty stomach, eating only once a day, this is a sinner.’ The Taoist kindly explains, but the person remains obstinate. After his death, he enters hell and suffers the five tortures of poison”.

(Cultural Relics Press et al. 1988c)

便令升福堂，後生貴家，世世公子，福祿自然，好樂道德，供養三寶，才識淵遠。復有一人，見真人道士齋靜讀經，乃笑曰：彼向空吟空經，將欲何所希耶？虛腹日中一食，此罪人耳。道士乃慈心喻之，故執意不釋。其人後死，徑入地獄，拷毒五苦備致。

The Dunhuang manuscript’s Lingbao jingmu 靈寶經目 (Catalog of Lingbao Scriptures) lists the text as “Taiji zuoxiangong qingwenjing太極左仙公請問經 (The Scripture of the Inquiry of the Immortal Lord of the Supreme Ultimate’s Left)” and “Xiangong qingwenjing仙公請問經 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry)”. The Lingbao zhongmeng jingmu靈寶中盟經目 (Lingbao Zhongmeng Scripture Catalogue) lists it as two volumes, “Xiangong qingwenjing vol.1 and vol. 2”.仙公請問經上下二卷 (The Scripture of the Immortal Lord’s Inquiry vol.1 and vol. 2) The Volume 2 corresponds to the present Taoist Canon version of the Taishang dongxuan lingbao benxing suyuan jing 太上洞玄靈寶本行宿緣經 (The Supreme Scripture of Lingbao on Original Actions and Predestined Affinities from the Dongxuan Tradition), so the two sections quoted above are from the same scripture.

A comparison shows that almost all references to “monk”沙門 (Shamen) and “Buddha sutras”佛經 (Fojing) are removed, or the term “monk”沙門 (Shamen) is changed to “Buddha sutras”佛經 (Fojing) but the rest of the content remains almost unchanged. Unfortunately, there is no Dunhuang manuscript of this scripture.

2.4. The Manuscripts Preserve Lost Texts from the Daoist Canon

The Daojing shijingfo wen道經師敬佛文 (Taoist Texts on Reverence for the Buddha)cited from the Taoist scriptures in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) is untraceable, as the Taoist Canon version has been lost and cannot be verified. However, similar passages have been preserved in the Dunhuang manuscripts.

For example, the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) cites from the Laozi shengxuan jing 老子升玄經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the Mysterious).

Laozi shengxuan jing 老子升玄經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the Mysterious) states: “The Heavenly Lord told Daoling to go eastward to receive teachings from the Buddha天尊告道陵，使往東方詣佛受法”.

The Shengxuan jing升玄經 (The Scripture of Ascending to the Mysterious) further says:

“The Eastern Tathagata sent the great bodhisattva Shan Sheng to the Supreme One, saying: ‘The Tathagata has heard that you are teaching the Dharma to Zhang Ling, so he sent me to visit you.’ The great sage Shansheng then said to Zhang Ling:’I will take you to meet the Buddha, so you can see what you have not seen and hear what you have not heard.’ Zhang Ling bowed and followed the great bodhisattva to the Buddha”.

(Fa 1934)

《升玄經》又云：東方如來遣善勝大士詣太上曰：”如來聞子為張陵說法，故遣我來看子，語張陵曰：卿隨我往詣佛所，當令子得見所未見，聞所未聞。”陵即禮大士隨往佛所。

Laozi shengxuan jing老子升玄經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the Mysterious) is the same as the Shengxuan jing升玄經 (The Scripture of Ascending to the Mysterious), and the Taoist Canon no longer contains this scripture. Although ten volumes of the Dunhuang version remain, they are heavily damaged. The quotation from the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) in the first section is most likely from the fifth volume, titled Taishang dongxuan lingbao shengxuan neijiao shansheng huanguo jing太上洞玄靈寶升玄內教善勝還國經第五 (Supreme Scripture of Lingbao on Ascending to the Mysterious, Inner Teachings, and the Triumphant Return to the State from the Dongxuan Tradition) in the Dunhuang version. P.2990+3678, states (see Figure 14):

“The Heavenly Lord said: “Good! Good! Daoling, in your past life, you accumulated good deeds, your achievements were lofty and far-reaching, and now you have achieved the great treasure of wisdom. You have entered the formless realm, reached the place of longevity, and merged with the Way in its true form. You will also be able to encourage sentient beings in that land, expound the great Way, teach many doctrines, and bring about numerous benefits”.

(National Library of France n.d.e)

天尊曰：善哉善哉。道陵，卿於前身，已積善行，㓛業高遠，於今成就智慧大寶，得入無形，到長壽處，與道合真。復能於彼國土，勸發眾生，闡揚大道，種種教授，多所利益。

Although this differs from the text quoted in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies), the content is consistent. Earlier, there is also a description of Zhang Daoling張道陵 following the great bodhisattva Shan Sheng to the Buddha’s place.

The passage continues:

“Daoling also advanced, bowed, and said to the Supreme One: ‘Now, following the great bodhisattva, I have come to that land to pay respects to the Heavenly Lord. Upon arriving in that land, what should I do? Please instruct me, and I will follow your orders carefully.’”

道陵亦進，稽首白太上曰：今隨大士，往到彼國，禮拜天尊。既到彼國，何所施行？願垂誨敕，謹而行之。

Here, the “Heavenly Lord”天尊 (Tianzun)refers to the “Heavenly Lord of that land” 彼土天尊 (Bitutianzun),i.e., the Buddha. Although an exact matching sentence cannot be found, both the quoted passage from the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) and the corresponding section from the fifth volume of the Dunhuang manuscript describe how the Heavenly Lord instructs Zhang Daoling to go to the Buddha’s location and listen to the Buddha’s teachings.

The second quoted passage from the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) corresponds to the third volume of the Dunhuang manuscript, P.2391 Shengxuan jing vol. 3,升玄經卷三 (The Scripture of Ascending to the Mysterious vol. 3):

“Then the great bodhisattva Shan Sheng said: “I have come from afar, as a distant guest, and so I will speak first about the Dharma”. He joined his palms, raised his hands, and addressed Daoling: “In the past, when you practiced the Way, you endured hunger and thirst for a long time. Who would have thought that today, in public, you would also fulfill your private aspirations, and be able to express your waiting feelings? Now you can first receive this scripture, your virtue is vast and immeasurable. The Heavenly Lord of my land, for the sake of this scripture, sent me here to bring it to you and wishes for you to travel to the poor land, where you will further increase your merit. You will also hear what you have never heard, and see what you have never seen”.

(Shanghai Classics Publishing House and National Library of France 1995a)

於是大士善勝曰：我從遠來，便為遠客，法應先言。即便合掌捧手，擬道陵曰：昔湌道德，饑渴日久，不謂今日因公遂私，得展虛佇之情。卿今乃能先受此經，㓛德巍巍，不可限量。吾土天尊為此經故，遣我來此勞來於卿，並欲相屈至乎貧土，亦當令卿，於彼尊所，更增功徳。亦當令卿，聞所未聞，見所未見。

P.2391 from the Shengxuan jing升玄經 (The Scripture of Ascending to the Mysterious) says, “You will also hear what you have never heard, and see what you have never seen亦當令卿，聞所未聞，見所未見” (see Figure 15), which is similar to the quotation from the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies): “You will enable you to see what you have never seen and hear what you have never heard當令子得見所未見，聞所未聞”. From the comparison, it is clear that the Shengxuan jing升玄經 (The Scripture of Ascending to the Mysterious) quoted in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) is more concise, which may be due to excerpting or possibly the result of later additions and expansions.

In addition, “miscellaneous ancient records in Taoist scriptures” also mentions other related lost texts such as the Xisheng jing西升經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Ascent to the West), Laozi huahujing老子化胡經 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Conversion of the Barbarians), Daoshi zhangling biezhuan道士張陵別傳 (The Separate Biography of Taoist Zhang Ling), and Laozi daquan pusa jing老子大權菩薩經 (The Scripture of Laozi as the Great Power Bodhisattva), many of which are either not found in Dunhuang manuscripts or the Dunhuang manuscripts are heavily damaged, making it difficult to identify corresponding sections. However, based on the matching entries above, the references seem credible.

Overall, the “miscellaneous ancient records in Taoist scriptures” recorded in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) are not malicious attacks by Buddhism but are indeed based on real events. The Taoist scriptures’ “Tao-for-Buddhism” during their creation period was, in fact, an attempt by the Lingbao jing靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) to incorporate and transcend both Buddhism and various Taoist sects. This approach followed the thinking of “Laozi transforming into the Buddha”老子化胡 (Laozi Huahu) and did not affect the sanctity of Taoist scriptures. The terms” monk”沙門 (Shamen) and “Buddha”佛 (Fo) in Taoist scriptures served Taoist doctrine and were not mere substitutions or plagiarism. It is possible that as the conflict between Taoism and Buddhism intensified, with Buddhism criticizing the “Taoist plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures”, Taoism began the process of removing Buddhist terms from its scriptures. This process likely started in the Northern and Southern Dynasties period and peaked during the Tang Dynasty. The purging process did not appear to be a unified, organized action, and even by the time of the Taoist Canon, some content had not been fully removed. The Dunhuang manuscripts contain many instances of content before the purge, as well as cases after alterations, which can be verified using the Taoist Canon.

3. “De-Buddhicization” as Seen in Dunhuang Taoist Scriptures

The Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) lists only twenty-three instances, but actually, the Dunhuang Taoist scriptures contain more examples. The Taishang yuanyang jing太上元陽經 (The Supreme Scripture of Primordial Yang), a Taoist text from the Northern Dynasties, largely models itself on Buddhist scriptures such as the Jiuhu shenming jing救護身命經 (The Scripture of Saving and Protecting Body and Life), Fahua jing法華經 (The Lotus Sutra), Huayan jing華嚴經 (The Avatamsaka Sutra), Zhude futian jing諸德福田經 (The Scripture of the Field of Merit and Virtues), Wuliangshou jing無量壽經 (The Sutra of Infinite Life) (Kamata 1968; Cao 2020). Its “de-Buddhicization” is quite challenging. The Yuanyang jing元陽經 (The Scripture of Primordial Yang) faced significant criticism from Buddhists, leading to the loss of much of its Buddhist-influenced content; fortunately, the Dunhuang version preserves many of these passages. The Dunhuang version of the Taishang yuanyang jing太上元陽經 (The Supreme Scripture of Primordial Yang) shows a marked difference from the Taoist Canon version in both content and structure, with signs of replacing Buddhist terminology. For instance, the term “palms joined”合掌 (Hezhang) in S.482 of the Taishang yuanyang jing太上元陽經 (The Supreme Scripture of Primordial Yang) becomes “bowing”稽首 (Jishou) in the Taoist Canon version, and “meditative thought”禪思 (Chansi) is changed to “contemplative thought”存思 (Cunsi).

Similarly, in P.2357 of the Taishang miaofa benxiang jing太上妙法本相經 (The Supreme Scripture of the Wondrous Dharma and Its Original Nature), the terms “sumeru”須彌 (Xumi) and “trira”提羅 (Tiluo) were replaced by “Kunlun昆侖” and “sin”是罪 (Shizui) in the Taoist Canon. Using the indigenous “Kunlun昆侖” to replace the Buddhist “sumeru”須彌 (Xumi) likely originated from the Huahujing. The Laozi huahujing xuan ge juan, vol.10老子化胡經玄歌卷十 (The Scripture of Laozi’s Conversion of the Barbarians vol.10) in Dunhuang records: “When I went west to transform, I ascended Mount Hua and gazed at Kunlun, with Sumeru hanging clear”.我身西化時，登上華嶽山。舉目看昆侖，須彌了了懸 This substitution of “Mount Hua”華嶽 (Huayue) for “sumeru”須彌 (Xumi) can also be seen in other Dunhuang scrolls, which were evidently influenced by the Huahujing. In P.2454, Xianren qingwen zhusheng nanjing仙人請問眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages) says (see Figure 16):

“Have you not seen Kunlun, Penglai, Zhong Mountain, Songgao, Mount Hua, Lingniao, and numerous great mountains and caves, where countless immortals reside?”.

(Shanghai Classics Publishing House and National Library of France 1995b)

子不見昆侖、蓬萊、鐘山、嵩高、華嶽、靈鳥，諸大山洞室，仙人無數矣。

Here, “Mount Hua”華嶽 (Huayue) replaces “sumeru”須彌 (Xumi), which appears in the Taoist Canon, and the Taoist encyclopedic work (道教類書)Daodian lun道典論 (The Treatise on the Daoist Canon) quotes the Zhusheng nanjing眾聖難經 (The Scripture of the Immortal’s Inquiry into the Difficulties of the Sages) with the term”sumeru”須彌 (Xumi). As the analysis above shows, P.2454 is a copy that has removed Buddhist terms, suggesting that the “Mount Hua”華嶽 (Huayue) in the Dunhuang manuscript may be a replacement for “sumeru”須彌 (Xumi) in the Taoist Canon version.

Additionally, some passages regarding “Laozi transforming into the Buddha”老子化胡 (Laozi Huahu)were often deleted in later times. For example, P.4562 of the Laojunshuo yibaibashijie bingxu老君說一百八十戒並敘 (Laojun’s Discourse on the 180 Precepts and Their Explanation) states:

“Laozi entered the Hu nation in the west, teaching Buddhism, and the language of the Hu is called Buddha, while in Chinese it is Tao. It is the same transformative energy, and cultivating the Buddhist path also leads to longevity”.

(Shanghai Classics Publishing House and National Library of France 1995c)

老子西入關，教胡國，授佛道佛胡語耳，漢言曰道也。同是一正之化炁，修佛道亦得長生。

Currently, there is no standalone version of the Laojunshuo yibaibashijie bingxu老君說一百八十戒並敘 (Laojun’s Discourse on the 180 Precepts and Their Explanation) in the Taoist Canon, but the complete text is found in the Taishanglaojun jinglü太上老君經律 (The Scripture and Precepts of the Supreme Laozi), Yaoxiu keyi jielüchao vol. 5要修科儀戒律鈔卷五 (The Manual for Cultivating the Precepts and Rituals vol. 5), and Yunjiqiqian vol. 39雲笈七籖卷三十九 (The Seven Volumes of the Clouded Codex vol. 39) This passage, present in all three, has been deleted in later versions, clearly due to its association with “Laozi transforming into the Buddha”老子化胡 (Laozi Huahu).

Another Taoist scripture, the Dongxuan lingbao tianzun shuojiku jing洞玄靈寶天尊說濟苦經 (The Sutra of the Celestial Worthy of the Mysterious and Spiritual Treasures on Relieving Suffering), has had its Buddhist-syncretizing content removed in later versions. The text in D.117 reads (see Figure 17):

“Lord Tianzun says, ‘My Tao is vast, all-encompassing, and penetrates all laws. In the Hu nation, I am called the Buddhas of Ganges sands; in Han, I am known as the Supreme Lord Lao. In both Hu and Han, my body only shifts forms. Ananda is the immortal Yin Xi; Vimalakirti is the immortal Wu Ji; Sariputra is the immortal Guigu; and Manjushri is the immortal Guozi. These immortals follow my transformations, holding dual names and ranks, constantly accompanying me, returning to the palace after transformations, and achieving oneness with the Tao.’”.

(Peking University Library and Shanghai Classics Publishing House 1995)

天尊言：我道寬廓，無法不經，無法不度。若在胡國，稱之恒河沙諸佛；若在漢名曰太上老君。在胡在漢，止轉我身。阿難者，尹喜先生身是；維摩詰者，無極先生身是；舍利弗者，鬼穀先生身是；文殊師利者，郭子先生身是。此等先生，隨我形變，名位二處，恒侍從我，歷化還宮，得道合真。

This passage follows the logic of “Laozi transforming into the Buddha”老子化胡 (Laozi Huahu) and is modeled after Buddhist sutras, often promoting a blending of Taoism and Buddhism. However, this entire segment has been deleted from the Taoist Canon.

Other substitutions include replacing “ganges sands”恒沙 (Hengsha) with “dust and sand”塵沙 (Chensha), “Tathagata”如來 (Rulai) with “Erlai”而來, “Bodhisattva”菩薩 (Pusa) with “true person”真人 (Zhenren), “temple”刹 (Cha) with “hall”館 (Guan), “Buddha”佛 (Fo) with “Tianxian天仙”, and “Brahma”梵天 (Fantian) with “divine heaven”神天 (Shentian), among others. These substitutions are primarily simple replacements of Buddhist terms, though some have led to unintended shifts in meaning. In combination with the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies) and Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts, we identified five forms of “Tao-for-Buddhism” in these texts.

The first form is the preservation of early Taoist scriptures with Buddhist terminology, as described by Tang Yongtong as “miscellaneous ancient records in Taoist scriptures”. This includes manuscripts that aren’t limited to pre-Tang copies. The second form retains evidence of erasure, with Buddhist terms scraped off or overwritten. The third form includes manuscripts where term substitutions have been fully implemented, a fact corroborated by records in the Poxie lun破邪論 (Treatise on Refuting Heresies). The fourth form involves the complete reworking of relevant Buddhist content, often with visible signs of revision that do not blend smoothly with the context. The fifth form consists of passages in Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts about “Laozi transforming into the Buddha”老子化胡 (Laozi Huahu) or “Tao-Buddha syncretism”, which have been entirely removed in the Taoist Canon.

The Dunhuang Taoist manuscript presents the process of “Tao-for-Buddhism” in Taoist scriptures. This process was not a unified internal action within Taoism; it likely began before the Dunhuang manuscripts and continued afterward. Even during the compilation of the Zhengtong daozang正統道藏 (Zhengtong Taoist Canon), some Buddhist terms had not yet been fully eliminated. Moreover, there was no standard procedure for how to “Tao-for-Buddhism”, and the different versions of the Dunhuang manuscripts, along with Taoist texts such as Wushangmiyao無上秘要 (The Supreme Secret Essentials)and Yunjiqiqian雲笈七籖 (The Seven Volumes of the Clouded Codex), as well as Daozang editions, show that the vocabulary changes were not consistent, indicating that this was not a coordinated or organized effort.

In terms of historical development, the Northern and Southern Dynasties period was a time of prolific creation of Taoist scriptures. Taoism inevitably needed to borrow Buddhist concepts and ideas to enrich its own teachings, and at times, it directly copied large sections of Buddhist scriptures, simply replacing the word “Buddha” with “Tao”. This naturally provoked attacks from Buddhism. During the Northern Zhou period, particularly because Emperor Wu of Zhou favored Taoism and suppressed Buddhism, the debate over the authenticity of scriptures between Taoism and Buddhism became especially intense. In order to avoid criticism, Taoism began the process of “de-Buddhification”. However, this process appeared to be gradual and inconsistent. The relatively friendly political environment at the time prevented Taoism from making large-scale alterations to its scriptures. By the Tang Dynasty, the debate between the two religions resumed. The Tang Dynasty established Taoism as the state religion, marking a golden age for Taoism. However, the institutionalized debates between Buddhism and Taoism meant that Taoism still had to face Buddhist attacks, and its efforts to “de-Buddhification” continued. During the reign of Emperor Gaozong and Empress Wu, the state’s support for Buddhism surpassed that for Taoism, and Taoists lost the debates over the authenticity of the sinicized Buddhist scriptures. The Tang government even ordered the burning of these scriptures. Many of the manuscripts with extensive revisions to the original texts were likely created in this context. Despite this, the Tang Dynasty’s policies supporting Taoism led to the preservation of many Buddhist elements within Taoist scriptures.

It is clear that the term “Tao-for-Buddhism” in Buddhist protector texts has a different meaning than in the Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts. The former refers to the act of Taoist scriptures mimicking Buddhist scriptures, while the latter is a process of purification to rid Taoism of Buddhist influence. While Taoist scriptures that mimic Buddhist texts attempt to contain and transcend Buddhist values, it is undeniable that they borrowed many Buddhist-related ideas. The “de-Buddhification” efforts aimed at distancing Taoism from Buddhist influence were largely driven by the pressure of the Buddhist-Taoist debates.

This passage explores the evolution of the process of “Tao-for-Buddhism”, its historical context, and the ongoing tension between Taoism and Buddhism, especially regarding scripture revisions and doctrinal debates.

4. Taoism’s Response Through “Tao-for-Buddhism”

In Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles) by Du Guangting, two accounts detail the practice of “Tao-for-Buddhism”, substituting Buddhist terms with Taoist ones.

4.1. Monk Facheng法成’s Secret Revisions of Taoist Scriptures

“Monk Facheng, whose surname was Chen, was of unknown origin. He was naturally stubborn and rigid, bound by his original teachings, yet he often exaggerated and embellished things. One day, while traveling through Mount Lu, he arrived at the Jianji Temple. However, he did not encounter any Taoist practitioners there. The temple and its scriptures were not locked, so he took the Taoist scriptures and read them. With thirty-four volumes in hand, he went to stay at Lingxi Temple, claiming: ‘I am a monk by birth, but my true wish is to follow the Tao. I wish to stay here, read Taoist texts, and grow my hair to fully enter the Tao.’ People praised his words. He also took more than a hundred volumes of scriptures from the temple and read them day and night. Every three or five days, he would descend the mountain to beg for food. People heard his teachings and gave generously; his needs for grain and salt were always met, month after month.

He then altered the titles of the Taoist scriptures, replacing them with the names of Buddhist sutras. He changed references to the Heavenly Lord into the Buddha, and the true men into Bodhisattvas and Arhats. The words and meanings were also greatly altered. He painted over, erased, and cut apart the scriptures, making more than 160 volumes of his own version.

One day, when he was on his way to a request for offerings and also sought to borrow paper and writing utensils, he was accompanied by a servant from the temple. After walking two or three miles, they encountered a military officer and his soldiers, who were marching with strict discipline. It turned out the provincial governor was touring the mountain, and they were instructed to arrest Monk Facheng. He and his servant quickly hid in the forest. After a while, they saw the military flag planted and a high-ranking officer standing in the road. The officer ordered the arrest of Monk Facheng.

Facheng and his servant could not escape in time. Several strong men approached and captured him from the forest, while the servant watched. The officer rebuked him: ‘The teachings of the great Tao, the words of the sages, what business is it of yours to alter them?!’ He was then beaten with a hundred strokes of the rod and ordered to restore the scriptures to their original form, returning them to the temple for verification. Once the punishment was carried out, Monk Facheng was made to return the altered scriptures to the temple and present them for inspection.

He had once left his robes and alms bowl at a monastery in Jiangzhou, so he fetched them, sold them for money, and used the proceeds to buy more paper and writing utensils. For a whole year, he continued to copy and alter scriptures. When the texts were finished, he returned them to the temple, burned incense, and offered prayers of gratitude, hoping to enter the Tao. But because of his unscrupulous behavior, the other practitioners refused to accept him. That night, he cried out several times, as if being beaten, and blood began to flow from his ears and nose. He died shortly after”.

(Cultural Relics Press et al. 1988b)

僧法成，姓陳，不知何許人。立性拘執，束於本教，而矯飾多端。因遊廬山，至簡寂觀，不遇道流，而堂殿經廚，素不關鑰，遂取道經看之。將三十四卷，往靈溪觀棲止，誑云：某在僧中，本意好道，欲於此駐泊，轉讀道經，兼欲長髮入道。人皆善其所言。又取觀中經百餘卷，日夕披覽。每三五日一度，下山化糧。人聞其所說，施與甚多，糧鹽所須，計月不闕。乃改換道經題目，立佛經名字。改天尊為佛，言真人為菩薩羅漢，對答詞理，亦多換易。塗抹剪破，計一百六十餘卷。忽山下有人請齋，兼欲求乞紙筆，借觀奴一人同去。行三二裏，見軍吏隊仗，呵道甚嚴，謂是刺史遊山，法成與奴下道，於林中回避。良久，見旗幟駐隊，有大官立馬於道中，促喚地界，令捉僧法成來。法成與奴聞之，未暇奔竄，力士數人，就林中擒去，奴隨看之。官人責曰：大道經教，聖人之言，關汝何事，輒敢改易！決痛杖一百，令其依舊修寫，填納觀中，填了報來，別有處分。即於道中決杖百下，僕於地上，瘡血遍身。隊仗尋亦不見。奴走報觀中，差人看驗，微有喘息而已。扶舁入山，數日方較。遂出所改換經本，呈眾道流。法成本有衣缽，寄在江州寺中，取來貨賣，更求乞紙筆，經年修寫。經足送還本觀，燒香懇謝，欲願入道，道流以其無賴，無人許之。是夜叫呼數聲，如被毆擊，耳鼻血流而死矣。

4.2. Monk Xingduan行端’s Alteration of Wuchu jing五廚經

“The monk Xingduan was upright in conduct, but of rather wild and erratic nature. He once came across the Taoist text Wuchu jing, which contained only five short mantras. He decided to modify the title and called it Foshuo santing chujing, claiming that the five mantras were spoken by the five Tathagatas. At the end of the text, he added words about the effects of reciting the sutra, expanding the text, and turning it into something that could be likened to a full page.

The Wuchu jing belongs to the Taiqing section, and the Ming dynasty official, Yinshi, head of the Suming Temple, annotated it, explaining that it contained the secret words of the five spirits and the true energy of the five organs. Reciting it a hundred times would harmonize the five energies, allowing one to live without food. The first mantra of the sutra says: “When one energy harmonizes with the Great Harmony, one attains the Way, and all is well. Harmony brings the ultimate harmony, the profound principle is the same as the profound boundary”.During the Kaiyuan period, the Taoist master Zhao Xianfu wrote a commentary, which explained that practicing to harmonize one’s energy and spirit was the key.

Xingduan attached this interpretation to the text and began promoting that if one recited the sutra 120 times, one could use it to bless water, which, when drunk, would allow one to live without food. He called it the Santing chujing. The wording was crude, and its meaning bore little resemblance to the explanations of Yin and Zhao.

Once the revised sutra was finished, Xingduan copied and distributed five or six copies to others. While he was writing the sutra beneath a window, suddenly, a divine being appeared. The figure was about eight or nine feet tall, holding a sword. It said, “The sutras are treasures passed down through the generations. How can you, in your ignorance, dare to alter and distort them?” With a swing of the sword, it cut at him, but he blocked it with his hand, injuring several fingers. Two fellow monks who were living with him witnessed the event and were filled with terror and begged for mercy. The divine being said, “This is a grave offense. Take care of your life and act quickly!” It ordered that he retrieve the altered texts, and only then would it listen to his plea.

Xingduan and his fellow monks searched for the original manuscripts and found only half of them. The remaining copies had already been taken out of the temple by another monk. Xingduan then wrote ten new copies of the original sutra, burned incense to repent, and offered prayers. He burned the altered versions on the incense burner. The divine being appeared again and said, “You have desecrated the sacred text. Since you failed to retrieve the altered copies in time, you will not escape death”. The divine being vanished, and shortly after, Xingduan fell ill and died.

The altered sutra he created has been passed down in various places, and by examining its meaning, one can understand its errors”.

This translation preserves the essential details and tone of the original text, which conveys the story of a monk who, through his own misinterpretations and alterations, encounters divine retribution for distorting sacred texts (Cultural Relics Press et al. 1988b).

僧行端，性頗狂譎。因看道門《五廚經》，只有五首咒偈，遂改添題目，云《佛說三停廚經》，以五咒為五如來所說，經末復加轉讀功效之詞，增加文句，不啻一紙。《五廚經》屬太清部，明皇朝諫議大夫、肅明觀主尹愔注云：蓋五神之秘言，五臟之真氣，持之百遍，則五氣自和，可以不食。其經第一咒云：一氣和太和，得一道皆泰，和乃無不和，玄理同玄際。開元中，天師趙仙甫為疏，皆以習氣和神為指。行端旁附此說，即云讀誦百二十遍，可以咒水，飲之令人不食。名為《三停廚經》。詞理鄙淺，與尹、趙注疏，殊不相近。改經既了，已寫五六本，傳於他人。於窗下寫經之際，忽有神人，長八九尺，仗劍而來，謂之曰：太上真經，歷代所寶，何得輕肆庸愚，輒為改易！奮劍斬之，以手拒劍，傷落數指。同居僧二人，共見其事，驚為哀乞。神人曰：如此無良也，解惜命促！令追收寫換，然後奏聽敕旨。行端與同居僧，散尋所行之本，只得一半，餘本已被僧將出關，別寫元本經十本，燒香懺謝，所改添本，香上焚之。神人復見曰：訾毀聖文，追收不獲，不宜免死。逡巡頓僕而卒。其所改經，至今往往傳行諸處，覽觀其義，自可曉焉。

These two stories involve one where the monk Fa Cheng法成 exchanges Buddhism for Taoism by altering Taoist scriptures and the other where the monk Xing Dua行端 rewrites a Taoist scripture into a Buddhist one. Both approaches reflect Buddhist criticisms of Taoism.

The monk Fa Cheng法成altered the titles of Taoist scriptures to those of Buddhist texts, changing “Tianzun天尊” to “Buddha”佛 (Fo), “true person”真人 (Zhenren) to “Bodhisattva”菩薩 (Pusa) or “luohan羅漢”. The content of the scriptures was extensively altered, with more than 160 volumes being rewritten, erased, and modified. Du Guangting杜光庭’s phrase “erased and modified塗抹剪破” matches the appearance of the Duhuang Taoist manuscripts. However, according to previous research, altering titles and terms like “Tianzun天尊” and “true person”真人 (Zhenren) was generally a tactic employed by Taoists to obscure their plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures. In the Bianzheng lun辯正論 (Treatise on the Rectification of Debates), there is a record of the case in which Taoist scriptures were altered by changing Buddhist terminology, such as “replacing ‘Tathagata’ with ‘Past Honored One’, ‘Buddha path’ with ‘True path’, and ‘golden statue’ with ‘Primordial True One’改諸如來為過去尊，改佛道為真道，改真金像為元始真”.Chen Ziliang陳子良’s annotations also explain the intentional alteration of Buddhist terms in Taoist scriptures, such as in the Lingbao jing靈寶經 (The Classic of the Spiritual Treasure) where ‘current Buddha Dharma’ (Chen’s note: changed to Taoist Dharma) is altered to ‘future Buddha Dharma’ (Chen’s note: changed to Taoist Dharma), and ‘the Pure and Spotless Buddha Way’ (Chen’s note: changed from the Medicine Buddha Sutra).靈寶經十三願者，當觀現在佛法 (陳注：改云道法)十四願者。當觀未來佛法 (陳注：改云道法)普化無遍十五願者，當觀過去未來佛道悉無穢疵 (陳注：改藥師經) Similar records can also be found in Fayuan zhulin法苑珠林 (The Forest of Pearls in the Garden of the Dharma), though we will not elaborate further here” (Fa 1934).

Both Fayuanzhulin法苑珠林 (The Forest of Pearls in the Garden of the Dharma) by Shi Falin釋法琳 and Zhenzheng lun甄正論 (Treatise on Discriminating the Correct) by Xuanyi玄嶷 discuss the issue of Taoist texts borrowing from Buddhist scriptures. Through textual comparison, it has been confirmed that the phenomenon of “Taoist plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures” exists, although such alterations are of little doctrinal value. This issue has repeatedly been used by Buddhism to shame Taoism in the ongoing debates between the two. The Buddhist-Taoist debates from the Southern and Northern Dynasties to the Sui and Tang periods are numerous, and as a Taoist leader, Du Guangting could not have ignored this topic. As a response to the issue of “Taoist plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures”, Du Guangting’s work Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles) records a story about a Buddhist monk rewriting the Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment) into the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha).

Japanese scholar Makita Teiryō牧田諦亮 was the first to study the Buddhist apocryphal text Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha), but he mistakenly believed it was Taoist Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment)that had plagiarized the Buddhist text (Makita 1976). Later, Ozaki Masaharu, based on the Wuling xindan zhang五靈心丹章 (The Chapter on the Elixir of the Five Numinous Spirits) included in Yunji qiqian雲笈七籖 (The Seven Volumes of the Clouded Codex)and the explicit citation of Laozishuo wuchujing老子說五廚經 (The Five Alchemical Kitchens Sutra as Spoken by Laozi: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment), demonstrated that the Taoist Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment) predates Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha) (Noguchi 1994).

Subsequently, scholars like Christine Mollier, Ikehira Noriko池平紀子, Li Xiaorong李小榮, and Cao Ling曹淩 discussed the relationship between the two texts, with evidence supporting that the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha) was indeed modeled after the Wuchu jing五廚經 (Christine 1999; Ikehira 2002; Li 2005; Cao 2011). The creation process of the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha)was complex. At least before the commentary by Yin An尹諳, Buddhism already had its version of the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha). Thus, the monk Xing Duan行端 was not the original author of the rewrite of Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment). However, Du Guangting杜光庭’s record confirms the process by which the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha) borrowed and plagiarized from the Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment). In Du Guangting杜光庭’s Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles), the rewritten Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha) by Xing Duan行端 is said to have existed in five or six copies that were widely circulated. Although half of these versions were retrieved under the scolding of spirits, the remaining copies could not be recovered. Therefore, Du Guangting杜光庭 concludes, “The scriptures that were modified still circulate widely, and when viewed in various places, their meaning is quite clear”.

By the middle and late Tang period, both the Foshuo santing chujing佛說三停廚經 (The Sutra of the Three Cessations of Food Preached by the Buddha) and the Wuchu jing五廚經 (The Sutra of the Five Alchemical Kitchens: A Taoist Treatise on Fasting and Inner Nourishment) were popular. Du Guangting杜光庭’s purpose was to alert people to their falseness and provide a strong response to the long-standing Buddhist claim of “Taoist plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures”.

In fact, as is widely known, Taoism has indeed borrowed many elements from Buddhism, while at the same time, Buddhism has also borrowed extensively from Taoism and traditional Chinese culture. This exchange of ideas and practices is a normal aspect of cultural interaction and development. However, during the Buddhist-Taoist debates, it was often used to make judgments about superiority and inferiority. Du Guangting杜光庭 used examples to prove that Buddhism had also plagiarized from Taoism, responding to the Buddhist claim of “Taoist plagiarism of Buddhist scriptures”.

Ōfuchi Ninji大淵忍爾, in his collation of the Dunhuang manuscript of the Taishang dongxuan lingbao zhenyi quanjie falun miaojing太上洞玄靈寶真一勸誡法輪妙經 (The Supreme Wonderful Scripture of the Profound Mystery, the Numinous Treasure, the True One, and the Exhortation of the Dharma Wheel), discovered the phenomenon of rewriting early Taoist scriptures in the second half of the seventh century. He believed this phenomenon indicated the growing sense of opposition between Taoism and Buddhism (Ōfuchi 1978). However, this perspective assumes that these alterations were carried out by Taoist priests. Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles) presents a different motivation for these alterations: after reading a large number of Taoist scriptures, a Buddhist monk decided to adapt Taoist teachings for the conversion of laypeople, changing the titles of Taoist texts to Buddhist ones, renaming “Zhenren真人” as “Luohan羅漢”, and so on.

In fact, the alterations made by the monk Fa Cheng法成 may not have been entirely malicious and could even have been motivated by a desire for learning. Of course, even if this was the case, editing Taoist scriptures was still considered a grave offense, and as a result, the divine spirits instructed him to rewrite the texts. Fa Cheng法成 sold his robes and alms bowl and rewrote the Taoist scriptures to return them to the Taoist temple. However, the spirits still did not forgive him, and he ultimately died of bleeding from his ears and nose.

Du Guangting杜光庭’s Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles)was primarily aimed at the general public, promoting the miraculous powers of Taoism to gain broader support. It vividly reflects the relationship between Taoism and Tang society (Franciscus 1992; Yuza 1999). As a result, Liu Xianxin, when discussing the classification of Taoist texts, did not highly regard Du Guangting杜光庭’s Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles), stating:

“Those who dealt with the invisible and the divine first began with Tao Hong jing, while the manifestation of miraculous responses began with Du Guangting. The former was profound, the latter superficial”.

(X. Liu 2010, p. 31)

著冥通之事者始於陶弘景，言靈應之驗者始於杜光庭。冥通則深，靈應則淺矣。

Liu Xianxin劉咸炘, from the perspective of Taoist literature, considered Du Guangting’s works to be shallow and vulgar. However, such popular works were the most effective means of publicizing Taoism. The primary purpose of Du Guangting in writing such works was to promote Taoist beliefs and attract Taoist followers. Although the stories in these texts may seem absurd, they were not entirely fabricated and were based on certain factual sources.

Chen Yinke陳寅恪, in his Chanhui miezui jinguang mingjing mingbao zhuanba懺悔滅罪金光明經冥報傳跋 (Colophon to the Tale of Otherworldly Retribution in the Golden Light Sutra of Confession and Elimination of Sins), offered an excellent discussion on the relationship between Buddhist narratives of karmic retribution and Chinese fiction:

“As for works on the extinguishing of sins and karmic retribution, their purpose is to highlight responses to actions, to encourage circulation, and to draw inspiration from the Dhammapada while beginning to influence the Taishang ganying pian’s commentary. Initially, they were supplements to Buddhist classics, but gradually they became a major source for the development of Chinese novels. Though Chinese novels are said to be rich in long, epic forms, an examination of their structure often reveals that they are a blend of various karmic retribution narratives. If one carefully investigates and verifies this kind of literature, it may contribute to the study of the history of Chinese novels”.

(Chen 1928, 2001)

至滅罪冥報傳之作，意在顯揚感應，勸獎流通，遠托《法句譬喻經》之體裁，近啟《太上感應篇》之注釋，本為佛教經典之附庸，漸成小說之大國。蓋中國小說雖號稱富於長篇巨制，然一察其內容結構，往往為數種感應冥報傳記雜糅而成。若能取此類果報文學詳稽而廣證之，或亦可為治中國小說史者之一助歟。

Lu Xun’s Zhongguo xiaoshuo shilue中國小說史略 (A brief history of Chinese fiction) also classified Buddhist works related to karmic retribution as “supplementary texts to Buddhist teachings”, seeing them as one of the main sources for later fiction:

“Books supplementing Buddhist teachings, as recorded in the Sui Zhi, are listed in nine categories, in both the Zi and Shi sections, with only Yan Zhitui’s Yuanhun Zhi surviving. They use scriptures and history to prove the existence of karmic retribution, mixing Confucianism and Buddhism, and the rest have been lost. Other surviving works include Liu Yiqing’s Xuanyan ji, Wang Yan’s Mingxiang ji, Yan Zhitui’s Jiling ji, and Hou Bai’s Jingyi ji. These are mostly records of the visible effects of Buddhist images, which clearly document their responses, aiming to awe the secular world and foster faith. Later generations may regard them as novels”.

(Lu 2014)

釋氏輔教之書，《隋志》著錄九家，在子部及史部，今唯顏之推《冤魂志》存，引經史以征報應，已開混合儒釋之端矣，而餘則俱佚。遺文之考見者，有宋劉義慶《宣驗記》，齊王琰《冥祥記》，隋顏之推《集靈記》，侯白《旌異記》四種，大抵記經像之顯效，明應驗之實有，以震聳世俗，使生敬信之心，顧後世則或視為小說。

Daojiao lingyan ji was created in imitation of this tradition. Although these miraculous stories include some fantastical elements, they often use terms like “record”志 (Zhi)or “account”記 (Ji) to indicate that they were not fabricated, but rather based on real events. Most of the stories include specific details such as time, place, and people. They are either firsthand experiences or accounts from those who witnessed the events, with the author merely recording them in a factual manner (Kominami 2014). Thus, many such works include annotation-style notes. For example, in the Junzhou baiheguan yehuo zimie yan均州白鶴觀野火自滅驗, the text ends with an annotation stating:

“In the year of Ji Hai, I traveled to visit the miraculous sites, and the temple appeared majestic. An old man spoke of the divine response, and I recorded this extraordinary event, inscribing it on the temple wall”.

(Luo 2013)

乾符己亥歲，因遊訪靈迹，觀亦俨然。有老叟話兹靈應，嘗紀其祥異，题於殿壁。

In the Qingyang siyan, the text also includes a note:

“After the event, he moved to Pengzhou, selling wine as his trade. Over time, he became wealthy and sold the land to the government official Chen Ping. This took place in the spring of Bing Shen year. I visited Chen and asked about the site, and he explained it to me”.

(Luo 2013)

事畢，乃移家彭州，賣酒為業。日益富贍，以其地賣與度支院官陳評。事乃丙申年春也。餘詣陳訪其地，已有此宮，因問其所以，陳為餘道之。

These annotations are meant to show that the miraculous stories are not fictional. The author not only asked those involved about the events but also visited and investigated the locations to ensure the accuracy of the records (Yuza 1996).

Works like the karmic retribution records from the Sui and Tang periods clearly inherited the “factual recording” style of the Six Dynasties’ ghost stories. As such, despite their content often delving into the supernatural, they possess significant historical value. In his Suitang fojiao shigao隋唐佛教史稿 (Draft of Sui and Tang Buddhist history), Tang Yongtong湯用彤 classifies works like the “Karmic Response Transmissions” as part of the “historical and geographical writings” and lists 26 works, including Karmic Response Transmissions, The Record of Divine Responses of the Three Jewels of China, and The Record of Karmic Retribution, among others (Tang 1982). This classification underscores the historical nature of such works. Zheng Acai believes that these Buddhist testimonial works, as important historical materials for Buddhist studies, contain elements of fiction but also reflect a substantial degree of factual information (Zheng 1998).

Daojiao lingyan ji道教靈驗記 (Records of Taoist Miracles) undoubtedly bears resemblance to these types of works, similarly holding historical value. Therefore, Du Guangting’s records should not be simplistically seen as mere retaliation against Buddhism. This “factual recording” style also reminds us to take Du Guangting’s accounts seriously. The stories of monks Fa Cheng and Xingduan should be considered real events. Though the “Buddhism-for-Tao” narrative in Du Guangting’s writings is a response to Buddhism’s criticism of Taoism, it is equally important to recognize another mode of textual alteration in Taoist scriptures.

5. Conclusions

The two stories in Du Guangting’s Taoist Miraculous Accounts that involve “Tao-for-Buddhism” are evidently not mainstream occurrences in the history of Taoist-Buddhist interactions. In early Taoism, there were cases where Taoist texts were modeled on Buddhist sutras or used Buddhist terms to express Taoist principles, which later became a basis for Buddhist criticisms of Taoism. Indeed, during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, Buddhist apologetic texts such as Xiaodao lun 笑道論 (Treatise on Laughing at the Dao) and Erjiao lun 二教論 (Treatise on the Two Teachings) began to aggressively criticize Taoist texts for “plagiarizing Buddhist sutras”, framing this as a case of “Tao-for-Buddhism”. It was likely around this time that Taoism initiated a process of “de-Buddhization” of Taoist scriptures—removing Buddhist terms and eliminating content that reflected the conflation of Taoist and Buddhist concepts. The Dunhuang Taoist manuscripts illustrate this process, allowing us to understand both ancient Taoist texts and the practice of “Tao-for-Buddhism”. The methods of alteration that Du Guangting described, such as “erased and modified塗抹剪破” align with the techniques seen in Dunhuang manuscripts, where Buddhist terms were often replaced with Taoist terms.

However, Du Guangting records the opposite phenomenon of “Buddhism-for-Tao”, a practice notably absent in the Dunhuang manuscripts. Du Guangting’s account likely has historical basis, though such incidents were rare and can be seen as a countercurrent to the broader “Tao-for-Buddhism” modifications prevalent during the Tang dynasty.