| This dissertation is a close examination of Kuiji's (632--682) endeavor to restructure the methodology of the Chinese Buddhist intellectual practice of his time. More precisely, it focuses on the three methodological dimensions that I found to be the most characteristic of Kuiji's endeavor; namely recontextualization, exegesis, and logic.;Following in Xuanzang's footsteps, Kuiji continued the task of setting the earlier Chinese understanding of Buddhism aright by reorienting it toward Indian Buddhism. However, what is constituted by this reorientation was not mere advocacy of the Yogacara system of thought as modern scholars of Chinese Buddhism would understand it. I would argue that more fundamental and potentially significant contributions of this reorientation lie in Kuiji's construction of the methodological foundation for a more systematic understanding, interpretation, and evaluation of the Buddhist teachings.;Consequently, this study addresses two broader issues in the history of Chinese Buddhism specifically and in the field of intellectual history more generally. By focusing on the methodological aspect of Kuiji's commentarial works and doctrinal treatise, I intend to address the over emphasis on the study of thoughts and ideas in the field of intellectual study.;My study of Kuiji's project of reorienting Chinese Buddhism toward Indian Buddhist intellectual practice will also shed new light on contemporary theories about the "sinification of Buddhism;" it demonstrates the reverse process of "signification" and the significance of agency vis-a-vis cultural structure in shaping the course of Chinese Buddhism. |
