佛教中国化既要维持自身的宗教传统，又要回应本土文明的挑战。师资之间“人”传承的唯一性，正“法”传承的亲证性，教“法”传播的正当性，就是“佛教正统观念”。早期佛教正统观念围绕“正法”展开，佛教徒通过提婆达多与外道的形象塑造，树立“释迦正统”观念。南朝佛教谱学代表佛教试图借助中国传统宗法谱牒体系，建构“释迦”正统性和神圣性的努力。“以释为姓”代表僧团内部获得地位平等与身份认同，呈现出“人”的正统性。印度佛教有祖师付法的传统，《付法藏传》阐释了印度的祖统谱系与信仰实践。唐代佛教继承了南北朝佛教“正法付嘱”“依师承习”的叙事传统，强调“师资相传”的内在依附性与亲密性，将“法”的亲证性和超越性变成现实因缘的历史性。禅宗通过对印度祖师谱系的嫁接与改造，塑造出法脉传承的正统性，强调法衣、法偈作为“表法”的神圣性，最终形成独具特色的西天二十八祖。禅宗南北之争，不仅是后辈弟子在内部试图争夺正统的尝试，而且可能牵涉政治格局，神会的创见在于提出正统的唯一性。唐代天台宗通过“金口所记”和“今师祖承”成功弥合了断裂的法脉，从而实现上求龙树正统的可能。北宋天台宗的复兴选择以高丽典籍为正统，是因为中日天台教法的旨趣差异和中朝佛教之间的亲密关系，继而出现了山家山外之争。“炉拂”成为传法信物，表明佛教正统观念呈现为掌握话语权的派别意图。唐代密宗典籍中的祖统谱系，以金刚界和胎藏界为脉络，同时还深受禅宗祖统观念的影响。北宋华严宗依据经典的弘传和注疏追溯祖师，净源建立“七祖堂”，试图建立自身的祖统谱系。? 儒家正统观念基于华夏中心主义产生，宋代“治统”观念以血脉承赋形塑正统谱系，人伦教化赋予现实可能。宋学兴起的重要原因，即是以华夏正朔的立场反对佛教。契嵩通过“圣人设教”的逻辑理路，提出佛教“无为治心”与儒家“有为治世”的场域共存，继而追求圣人一致的平等观。“道统”观念可能受佛教祖统观念影响而诞生，《中庸》的心性价值追求，催生儒佛交涉的贯通可能。“原”代表探求源头的形而上旨趣，韩愈的《原道》需要落实“先王之教”，契嵩的《原教》提出圣人与大道，在实践层面沿循岁月长河，外化为正统的延续。“祖统”观念以亲证正法为体，以传法信物为相，以师资相传为用，从而建构起唐宋佛教的正统观念。唐宋“祖统”观念的流行，既刺激了宋明理学“道统”观念的兴起，也深刻影响了唐宋以后的佛教走向，绵延至今。

The sinicization of Buddhism is a process of both maintaining Buddhist orthodoxies and tackling new challenges from local civilization. The uniqueness of master-disciple inheritance, the personal realization of “Sad-dharma”, and the legitimacy of teaching “dharma” comprise the Buddhist orthodoxies. Early Buddhist orthodoxy mainly concerns “Sad-dharma”. By shaping the figures of Devadatta and Non-Buddhists, Buddhists established the idea of “Shakyamuni orthodoxy”. Buddhist genealogy in the Southern Dynasty attempts to build up the legitimacy and sanctity by turning to the traditional Chinese patriarchal clan system. The “Shi as surname” symbols the equal status and the same identity in the Buddhist monastic community, thus highlighting legitimacy of “human” in Buddhist tradition. Indian Buddhism boasts a tradition of patriarch imparting dharma, which is elaborated in Fufa Zangzhuan, a book presents the Indian patriarch genealogy and worshipping practices. Buddhism in the Tang Dynasty inherited the narrative tradition of “Grant by Sad-dharma” and “Obey the teacher’s teaching” from Northern and Southern Dynasties, endowing the personal realization and transcendence of Buddhist impartation with the historical nature of the worldly reality by highlighting the mutual dependence and intimacy between masters and disciples. By grafting and reshaping the Indian Buddhist patriarch genealogy on the basis of “the Dharma ka＆＃7779;āya and the Dharma gāthā as the symbols of Dharma”, the Chan＆＃160;School establishes the legitimacy of the Dharma lineage and presents 28 patriarchs in the Indian Buddhism. The dispute between the Northern and Southern Chan Schools is not only the Chan disciple’s contest for the orthodox position, but also for political purposes. Shenhui is known for his proposal of the uniqueness of orthodoxy. In the Tang Dynasty, Tiantai School successfully bridges the broken lineage through “Buddha’s sayings”and “Chinese patriarchs’ inheritance”, making it possible to trace back to the orthodox of Nāgārjuna. In the Northern Song Dynasty, based on the different preferences of Chinese and Japanese Tiantai Schools and the intimacy between Chinese and Korean Tiantai Schools, Chinese Tiantai School adopts scriptures from Korea as its orthodoxy. Therefore, there emerges the split between the Shanjia Faction and Shanwai Faction. The fact of regarding “Lu-fu” as the symbol of dharma indicates that the Buddhist orthodoxy coincides with the teachings of the Buddhist faction in power （i.e., the “Lu-fu” holder） . The genealogy of the patriarch lineage in the Tantric texts from the Tang Dynasty, though present differently as the Vajra-dhātu and the Garbha-dhātu, shows deep influences of the Chan patriarch genealogy. In the Northern Song Dynasty, the Huayan School locates its patriarchs in scriptures and commentaries. The “Seven Patriarch Hall” built by Jingyuan is an attempt to establish the Huayan School’s patriarch genealogy. The notion of Confucian orthodoxy emerges on the basis of the idea of Sinocentrism. The Song Dynasty witnesses the formation of bloodline-grounded orthodoxy, which makes education on ethics a reality. One reason for the rise of Song-xue is the objection to Buddhism while holding the belief of “Confucianism as orthodoxy”. Following the logic of “Saints also aim to teach/civilize”, Qisong proposes that the co-existence of the Buddhist “Sa＆＃7747;sk＆＃7771;ta for mind” and the Confucian “Asa＆＃7747;sk＆＃7771;ta for world” shows the idea of equality shared by all saints. The Confucian genealogy of Dao might have emerged under the influence of Buddhist patriarch genealogy. The pursuit of the nurture of mind in The Doctrine of the Mean possibly helps facilitate the mutual exchanges between Confucianism and Buddhism. “Yuan” in the Chinese language means the pursuit of metaphysical existence. Han Yu’s Yuan Dao aims to implement the “teachings of the great emperors”, while Qisong’s Yuan Jiao proposes the practice of saints’ Dao. As time passes, both are being externalized into orthodoxy at the practical level.The idea of “patriarch genealogy” implies that svabhāva is based on the enlightenment of Sad-dharma, the lak＆＃7779;a＆＃7751;a on the inheritance of the Dharma symbol, and the use on the master-diciple inheritance, which is later known as the idea of orthodoxy in Buddhism in the Tang and Song Dynasties. The idea of “patriarch genealogy” in the Tang and Song Dynasties stimulated the rise of the concept of “the Dao genealogy” in the Neo-confucianism, the popularity of the idea has profoundly influenced the direction of Buddhism evolvement since the Tang and Song Dynasties.