This paper is part of my recent comparative research on the Xu Gaoseng zhuan and inscriptions. I discuss the relationship between the “Monument Extolling the Vinaya Master and Eminent Monk Zhishou” 智首律師高徳頌碑 (Zhishou monument) and the Xu Gaoseng zhuan’s biography of Zhishou. The Zhishou monument was built in the twelfth month of Xianqing 1 (656), over twenty years after his death in Zhenguan 9 (635). One of the reasons for its construction was that a plot was in the works to isolate Xuanzang, who was reigning over the Chang’an Buddhist world after returning to China and receiving the patronage of Taizong; he was seen by Gaozong and Wu Hou (later Wu Zetian) as part of a faction of Taizong’s former senior statesmen. The Zhishou monument was built at the gate of the Hongfu-si, where Zhishou had last resided. It became a place that highlighted the returning power of Zhishou’s disciples. This probably led to Zhishou’s top disciple, Daoxuan, becoming the senior monk at the Ximing-si in Xianqing 3 (658). Judging from the Zhishou monument text’s sequential composition and use of similar words and phrases, it is highly likely that it drew from the Xu Gaoseng zhuan (first version: ca. Zhenguan 19). However, the Xu Gaoseng zhuan mentions this monument. It appears that this was added when this collection of biographies was revised after Daoxuan became the senior monk at the Ximing-si.

The foremost characteristic of Japanese Buddhism is that it has established its identity in Japanese society based on a distinction of schools. Buddhist studies in Japan have largely been indifferent to this peculiarity, taking the characteristic to be applicable to Buddhism in general. This has led to the adoption by Japanese researchers of a rigidly standardized methodology in discussing Buddhism, even applying the same approaches to studies of Buddhism outside of Japan. For researches in this field to truly develop, implementation of fieldwork free from such biased traits and the choice of different paradigms suited to the subject matter are indispensable. This paper further points out that Buddhist studies published in Japan generally receive little attention abroad due to the distinctive use of the term “school” and the highly particular inter-relationship between schools, temples, and priests in Japanese Buddhism.