Three Teachings Studies: Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism (TTS) welcomes original scholarship examining the formation, representation, and transformation of intellectual and religious lineages, the construction and negotiation of legitimate authority, and the historical processes through which traditions are transmitted across generations. This research area investigates how Confucian, Daoist, and Buddhist communities establish relationships of intellectual succession, religious affiliation, institutional continuity, and doctrinal legitimacy. Particular attention is given to the historical sources, social networks, institutional arrangements, and interpretive practices through which claims of lineage and authority are articulated, recognized, contested, and reconstructed.

Lineage and transmission occupy significant but distinct positions within the historical development of the Three Teachings. Confucian traditions have articulated intellectual succession through concepts and practices such as the transmission of the Way (daotong 道統), scholarly lineages (xuetong 學統), and master-disciple relationships (shicheng 師承). Buddhist communities have developed diverse forms of Dharma transmission, succession narratives, master-disciple affiliation, and genealogical representation, including traditions of patriarchal succession and transmission-of-the-lamp literature. Daoist communities have maintained forms of master-disciple transmission, ritual authorization, scriptural and register transmission, and institutional succession shaped by particular schools, ritual systems, and historical circumstances.

These traditions should not be understood as possessing a single, uniform model of lineage or authority. Intellectual legitimacy, religious authorization, ritual competence, canonical interpretation, and institutional leadership may depend on different historical mechanisms. The recognition of a teacher, the inheritance of a textual tradition, the transmission of ritual qualifications, and succession to an institutional office do not necessarily constitute equivalent forms of authority. Their relationships require careful examination within the doctrinal, institutional, and social settings in which they developed.

This research area approaches lineage as both a historical relationship and a category of representation. Genealogies, biographies, succession records, institutional histories, and claims of orthodoxy may preserve evidence of historical transmission while also reflecting retrospective selection, institutional interests, and the construction of collective memory. TTS encourages research that distinguishes documented relationships from later claims of continuity and investigates how traditions establish, defend, revise, or challenge their own accounts of intellectual and religious inheritance.

Areas of Interest

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Intellectual, Religious, and Institutional Lineages: Studies of intellectual genealogies, religious succession, teacher-disciple relationships, ritual lineages, and institutional inheritance within Confucian, Daoist, and Buddhist traditions. Research may investigate how relationships of succession are established, recognized, recorded, and transmitted, and how different forms of lineage intersect with scholarly, religious, and institutional identities.
• Genealogies, Biographies, and Transmission Records: Investigations of lineage charts, biographical collections, transmission-of-the-lamp records, religious histories, commemorative inscriptions, genealogical texts, and other documentary representations of succession. Particular attention may be given to the compilation, transmission, revision, and historical reliability of such sources, including their roles in constructing institutional memory and claims of continuity.
• Authority, Legitimacy, and Institutional Power: Research on the foundations and recognition of intellectual, religious, ritual, and institutional authority. Studies may examine the qualifications of teachers and religious specialists, the authorization of ritual activities, the interpretation of canonical texts, leadership appointments, patronage relationships, and the social or political conditions through which authority is established or challenged.
• Orthodoxy, Succession, and Doctrinal Contestation: Analyses of claims to legitimate succession, competing interpretations of orthodoxy, disputes concerning transmission, doctrinal boundaries, and struggles over intellectual or religious leadership. Research may investigate how different communities construct standards of legitimacy and how these standards change through controversy, institutional competition, reform, and historical reinterpretation.
• Schools, Sects, and Intellectual Communities: Studies of Confucian scholarly schools, Buddhist communities and institutional traditions, Daoist lineages and ritual networks, and other groups organized through shared teachings, affiliations, or practices. Research may examine community formation, educational institutions, patterns of recruitment, scholarly exchange, internal differentiation, and the relationships between individual teachers and collective identities.
• Regional and Transregional Transmission Networks: Investigations of the movement of scholars, monastics, Daoist practitioners, texts, ritual qualifications, and institutional traditions across geographical and linguistic boundaries. Particular attention may be given to transmission networks connecting China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and other historically related regions, as well as to local adaptation, competing succession claims, and the development of regional traditions.
• Textual Authority and the Construction of Tradition: Research on the formation of canonical authority, the selection and interpretation of authoritative texts, commentarial lineages, textual attribution, editorial intervention, and the relationship between written sources and claims of intellectual or religious legitimacy. Studies may investigate how communities use textual traditions to establish continuity, authorize interpretations, and define the boundaries of inherited knowledge.
• Continuity, Reform, and Contemporary Reinterpretation: Studies of the preservation, reconstruction, institutional reorganization, and modern reinterpretation of intellectual and religious lineages. Research may address changing forms of authority, religious revival, reform movements, contemporary educational networks, the public representation of lineage, digital genealogies, and the ways in which historical traditions are selectively remembered or reconfigured under changing social conditions.

Research Approaches

This research area welcomes interdisciplinary scholarship drawing on religious studies, intellectual history, philosophy, history, philology, Buddhist studies, Daoist studies, Confucian studies, sociology, anthropology, historical geography, and related fields. Appropriate approaches may include historical source criticism, prosopography, textual and genealogical analysis, archival investigation, epigraphic research, institutional history, comparative interpretation, social network analysis, and the study of historical transmission routes and educational relationships.

Authors are encouraged to distinguish between historical evidence of transmission and retrospective claims of lineage or succession. Genealogical continuity should not be assumed solely on the basis of later institutional records, biographical compilations, or doctrinal narratives. Research should consider the circumstances of source production, the interests of the communities that preserved or revised particular records, and the possible effects of institutional competition, selective remembrance, documentary loss, and changing definitions of legitimacy. Absences, discontinuities, disputed successions, and groups excluded from conventional lineage narratives may also provide important subjects for investigation.

TTS particularly welcomes scholarship that connects detailed textual, historical, or institutional research with broader questions concerning authority, legitimacy, collective identity, intellectual inheritance, and the reconstruction of tradition. By examining the historical mechanisms through which teachings, affiliations, and claims to legitimate succession are established and transformed, this research area seeks to advance critical understanding of the diverse ways in which Confucian, Daoist, and Buddhist traditions construct and maintain their intellectual and religious continuity.

譜系、權威與傳承

《三教研究：儒、道、釋》歡迎探討儒家、道教與佛教思想及宗教譜系的形成、表述與轉化，權威正當性的建構與協商，以及傳統如何跨越不同世代而獲得傳遞和延續的原創性學術研究。本專欄著重考察三教社群如何建立思想繼承、宗教歸屬、制度延續及教義正統性等關係，特別關注傳承與權威主張所依據的歷史文獻、社會網絡、制度安排及詮釋方式，分析其如何被提出、認可、爭議與重新建構。

譜系與傳承在儒、道、佛三教的歷史發展中具有重要而不盡相同的地位。儒家透過道統、學統及師承等觀念與實踐，建立思想繼承與學術傳授的關係；佛教社群發展出多樣的傳法制度、繼承敘事、師徒關係及譜系表述，包括祖師世系、法嗣關係與傳燈文獻等傳統；道教則依據不同道派、科儀體系及歷史條件，形成師徒授受、儀式授權、經籙傳授及制度繼承等不同方式。

對三教譜系與權威的研究，不宜預設其存在單一而一致的傳承模式。思想正當性、宗教授權、儀式能力、經典詮釋權與制度領導地位，可能建立於不同的歷史機制之上。師承關係的認可、文獻傳統的繼承、儀式資格的授予及宗教職位的承續，未必構成相同形式的權威，其相互關係必須放在具體教義、制度與社會環境中加以考察。

本專欄將譜系同時視為具有歷史基礎的社會關係，以及對傳統繼承關係的敘事與表述。宗派譜牒、人物傳記、傳承記錄、制度史書寫及正統性主張，既可能保存歷史傳授的相關證據，也可能反映後世的選擇性整理、制度利益及集體記憶的建構。因此，本專欄鼓勵研究者區分具有史料支持的傳承關係與後世建立的連續性敘事，並考察不同思想和宗教傳統如何確立、維護、修訂或質疑自身的傳承歷史。

研究主題

本專欄徵稿範圍包括但不限於以下研究方向：

• 思想、宗教與制度譜系：研究儒、道、佛傳統中的思想譜系、宗教繼承、師徒關係、法脈傳授與制度承續，考察不同繼承關係如何建立、獲得認可、形成記錄並傳遞至後世，以及不同譜系如何與學術、宗教及制度認同相互聯繫。
• 譜牒、傳記與傳承文獻：考察宗派譜系圖、人物傳記、傳燈錄、宗教史書、紀念碑刻、世系文獻及其他記錄繼承關係的材料。研究尤其關注相關史料的編纂、流傳、修訂及歷史可靠性，並分析其在制度記憶建構及傳承連續性主張中的作用。
• 權威、正當性與制度權力：研究思想、宗教、儀式及制度權威的形成基礎與認可機制，探討教師和宗教專業者的資格、儀式活動的授權、經典詮釋權、宗教領導職位、贊助關係，以及權威得以建立或受到質疑的社會與政治條件。
• 正統性、繼承與教義論爭：分析正統繼承主張、不同道統或法脈的競爭性詮釋、傳承爭議、教義邊界及思想或宗教領導地位的競逐。研究可考察不同社群如何建立正當性標準，以及這些標準如何在思想論爭、制度競爭、改革及歷史再詮釋中發生變化。
• 學派、宗派與思想社群：研究儒家學派、佛教宗派與寺院社群、道教法脈及科儀網絡，以及其他以共同教導、傳承關係或實踐方式形成的群體。相關研究可涉及社群形成、教育制度、成員吸納、學術交流、內部分化，以及個別教師與集體認同之間的關係。
• 區域與跨區域傳承網絡：考察學者、僧侶、道教修行者、文獻、儀式資格及制度傳統在不同地域與語言環境中的流動，特別關注中國、日本、韓國、越南及其他相關地區的傳承網絡、地方調適、競爭性繼承主張及區域傳統的形成。
• 文本權威與傳統建構：研究經典權威的形成、權威性文本的選擇與詮釋、註釋學統、文獻歸屬、編輯介入，以及文本傳統與思想或宗教正當性主張之間的關係，探討不同社群如何利用文獻建立歷史連續性、授權特定解釋並界定知識傳承的範圍。
• 傳承延續、改革與當代再詮釋：研究思想與宗教譜系的保存、重新建構、制度調整及現代詮釋，涵蓋權威形式變化、宗教復興、改革運動、當代教育網絡、傳承關係的公共展示、數位譜系，以及傳統如何在不同社會條件下被選擇性記憶與重新組織。

研究方法與學術取向

本專欄歡迎宗教學、思想史、哲學、歷史學、文獻學、佛教研究、道教研究、儒學研究、社會學、人類學、歷史地理學及相關領域的跨學科成果。研究方法可包括歷史史料批判、人物群體研究、文本與譜系分析、檔案調查、碑刻研究、制度史、比較詮釋、社會網絡分析，以及對歷史傳播路徑與教育關係的考察。

研究者應注意區分具有歷史證據支持的傳授事實與後世建立的譜系或繼承主張。不應僅憑較晚形成的制度記錄、人物傳記彙編或教義敘事，就認定某一譜系始終保持完整連續。研究應考察史料形成的背景、相關社群保存或修訂文獻的動機，以及制度競爭、選擇性記憶、史料散佚和正當性標準變化可能帶來的影響。傳承中的斷裂、缺失、有爭議的繼承，以及被傳統譜系敘事排除的群體，同樣可以成為重要的研究對象。

本專欄尤其歡迎將細緻的文本、歷史或制度研究，與權威、正當性、集體認同、思想繼承及傳統重構等宏觀問題相結合的學術成果。透過考察思想教導、社群歸屬及正統繼承主張如何在具體歷史條件下建立與轉化，本專欄期望深化學界對儒、道、佛三教如何建構、維持及重新詮釋其思想與宗教延續性的批判性理解。