Stephen F. Teiser is a scholar of Chinese Buddhism, and this Princeton University Press book is his standard academic history of the seventh-month Ghost Festival for the dead, tracing how the festival developed by weaving together Buddhist, Daoist and popular Chinese religious strands from the sixth century onward. Its strength is showing that the festival was never a purely Buddhist import but an actual synthesis, built from close reading of medieval Chinese Buddhist and Daoist ritual texts alongside popular practice, rather than assigning it to one tradition alone. Its limit is that it documents the festival's medieval formation specifically, so a claim about how the Ghost Festival is observed today, in its modern regional forms, needs a source addressing contemporary practice rather than this medieval history.
Facts
Citation
AuthorStephen F. Teiser
PublisherPrinceton University Press
Publication Year1988
URLhttps://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691026770/the-ghost-festival-in-medieval-china
Source TypeMonograph
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
The standard scholarly history of the seventh month festival for the dead, tracing its Buddhist, Daoist and popular strands from the sixth century. NotesThe standard history of the seventh-month festival for the dead, tracing its Buddhist, Daoist and popular strands from the sixth century.
Claims Backed By This Source (48 claims)
This source backs 48 claims across the atlas. As facts: 42 well-attested. As cited relationships: 2 holds. Plus 4 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Rituals, 13 claims: 12 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Mythical Creatures, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Sources, 8 claims: 8 well-attested.
- Articles, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Realms, 7 claims: 6 well-attested, 1 general references.
- Religious Events, 5 claims: 2 well-attested, 2 holds, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.