![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A Survey of Taoist Literature: Tenth to Seventeenth Centuries Judith M. Boltz
In her book Boltz looks at the period following that of my dissertation. Therefore while not a directly relevant, it’s useful to look at the trends in writing after the period I’m studying to see how ideas developed and changed. She also included a chapter on hagiographies a there are 77 collections of hagiographies that were written after the Tang. The popularity of hagiographies grew and biographies were found in “nearly every genre of Taoist literature” (54).
While not dealing directly with the period the methodology and approach that Boltz uses to the hagiographic literature of the later age can also be applied to the Hagiographies of the Tang that I am studying. It also makes for an interesting comparison between the differences between the earlier and later works. Boltz states that “The emphasis seems to fall on the special sacred mission ordained for a given talent, whether that be chiefly of a revelatory, prophetic, intercessory, or soteric nature.” 55. She goes on to add that, as is shown in the earlier accounts, much about the social settings of these accounts is revealed.
“Underlying nearly all hagiographies is a substantial body of oral tradition. In fleshing out a heritage of historicized folklore, hagiographers often draw upon available epitaphs, eulogistic verse, and any imperial decrees that grant official recognition. In those accounts that rise above mere convention, appeal is often made to the immediacy of a divine calling, whether it be generated for example, in response to political unrest or to the victimisation of local sacrificial cults. Most hagiographers, in making condensations of the available source material, favour a straightforward narrative style and often write in parallel prose” 55
Later hagiographies try to look at the products of specific scriptural traditions, and trace lineages of patriarchs, It is also noteworthy that local cults were converted into these hagiographies, “Devotees were thus encouraged to view their folk gods and goddesses not simply as personal saviours but as omnipotent messiahs with the welfare of the state at heart” 56. She goes on to say that vows to the deities were vows to the state.
The most extensive collection is Li-shih chen-hsien t’i-ao t’ung-chien (A Comprehensive Mirror On Successive Generations of Perfected Transcedents and Those who embody the Tao). Attributed to Fou-yun Shan. It contains two supplements the second of which is about female transcendent. This shows a continuation of Du Guangting’s separation of female transcendents and a divergence from earlier hagiographies of the period of disunion when male and female hagiographies were included together.
Boltz goes on to discuss the major works of the time period in greater detail. She also lists the major works on the Taoist canon that are available in Western languages and Japanese. Unfortunatly there doesn’t really seem to be all that much that will be helpful to me. But nonetheless a good reference work, and some nice views on using hagiographies as historical sources.
In her book Boltz looks at the period following that of my dissertation. Therefore while not a directly relevant, it’s useful to look at the trends in writing after the period I’m studying to see how ideas developed and changed. She also included a chapter on hagiographies a there are 77 collections of hagiographies that were written after the Tang. The popularity of hagiographies grew and biographies were found in “nearly every genre of Taoist literature” (54).
While not dealing directly with the period the methodology and approach that Boltz uses to the hagiographic literature of the later age can also be applied to the Hagiographies of the Tang that I am studying. It also makes for an interesting comparison between the differences between the earlier and later works. Boltz states that “The emphasis seems to fall on the special sacred mission ordained for a given talent, whether that be chiefly of a revelatory, prophetic, intercessory, or soteric nature.” 55. She goes on to add that, as is shown in the earlier accounts, much about the social settings of these accounts is revealed.
“Underlying nearly all hagiographies is a substantial body of oral tradition. In fleshing out a heritage of historicized folklore, hagiographers often draw upon available epitaphs, eulogistic verse, and any imperial decrees that grant official recognition. In those accounts that rise above mere convention, appeal is often made to the immediacy of a divine calling, whether it be generated for example, in response to political unrest or to the victimisation of local sacrificial cults. Most hagiographers, in making condensations of the available source material, favour a straightforward narrative style and often write in parallel prose” 55
Later hagiographies try to look at the products of specific scriptural traditions, and trace lineages of patriarchs, It is also noteworthy that local cults were converted into these hagiographies, “Devotees were thus encouraged to view their folk gods and goddesses not simply as personal saviours but as omnipotent messiahs with the welfare of the state at heart” 56. She goes on to say that vows to the deities were vows to the state.
The most extensive collection is Li-shih chen-hsien t’i-ao t’ung-chien (A Comprehensive Mirror On Successive Generations of Perfected Transcedents and Those who embody the Tao). Attributed to Fou-yun Shan. It contains two supplements the second of which is about female transcendent. This shows a continuation of Du Guangting’s separation of female transcendents and a divergence from earlier hagiographies of the period of disunion when male and female hagiographies were included together.
Boltz goes on to discuss the major works of the time period in greater detail. She also lists the major works on the Taoist canon that are available in Western languages and Japanese. Unfortunatly there doesn’t really seem to be all that much that will be helpful to me. But nonetheless a good reference work, and some nice views on using hagiographies as historical sources.