Kimura Shōshū has argued that Gyōgi provided Saichō with a model of the ideal Tendai practitioner, the bosatsusō or bodhisattva monk. Saichō planned to train Tendai monks so that they would be able to both preach to the populace and supervise construction projects which would help the common people. These were the same types of activities in which Gyōgi and his followers engaged. Gyōgi was often called a bodhisattva during his lifetime; after his death people believed he was a manifestation of Mañjuśrī. Since Saichō had proposed that Mañjuśrī be installed as elder (jōza) in the dining hall on Mount Hiei, Saichō might have regarded Gyōgi as a model of the ideal monk as manifested by Mañjuśrī. Saichō’s proposal that his monks be called ‘bodhisattva monks’ might have reflected the influence of figures such as as Gyōgi who had been called bodhisattvas by the populace. In the Nihon ryōiki, Gyōgi was described in the following way: “On the outside he had the form of a monk, but within were hidden the deeds of a bodhisattva.” This description was derived from the Lotus Sūtra. Saichō cited the same passage from the Lotus Sūtra in his last instructions to his disciples.

A position similar to that of Saichō finally emerged in the writings of Chan-jan’s disciple Ming-kuang. …

While earlier T’ien-t’ai masters had formulated a single interpretation to explain the observance of the Fan wang precepts for those who followed the Unique and Perfect teachings, Ming-kuang advanced separate interpretations of the Fan wang precepts, distinguishing between the precepts practiced by followers of the Unique teaching and those practiced by followers of the Perfect teaching. Ming-kuang based his new interpretations of the Fan wang precepts on Chih-i’s distinction between bodhisattvas who followed gradual practices and bodhisattvas who followed Sudden practices. The follower of the Unique teaching gradually practiced and mastered the various sets of precepts, including the Hinayāna precepts. In contrast, the follower of the Perfect teaching mastered all the precepts in an instant. Thus he did not necessarily have to master the Hinayāna precepts before progressing to the Fan wang precepts. Ming-kuang’s analysis effectively purged the Fan wang precepts of any onus resulting from the association of the Fan wang Ching with the Hua yen Ching. The idea of a Sudden realization of the precepts was fundamental to Saichō’s identification of the Perfect precepts with the direct path to enlightenment. …

Ming-kuang provided Saichō with much of the doctrinal justification for his proposals. In the process of remedying inadequacies which he perceived in the commentary on the Fan wang Ching attributed to Chih-i, Ming-kuang freed the Fan wang Ching from the onus of being closely associated with the Hua yen Ching. He insisted that the Fan wang precepts could be considered as solely Perfect (jun’en) precepts, not merely as precepts reflecting a mixture of Unique and Perfect teachings. At the same time, he also argued that the Perfect precepts were separate and distinct from the Hinayāna precepts, a position which Saichō later adopted in the Shijōshiki. Ming-kuang was probably the first Chinese monk to formulate a position on the precepts which developed the full implications of the Ying lo ching’s exclusion of the Hinayāna precepts from the sanjujōkai formula. In addition, Mingkuang’s discussions of the ‘Sudden’ acquisition of the Perfect precepts and his development of the doctrines concerning the (sanju jōkai) provided a rationale for elevating the precepts from being used as a stepping stone to the more advanced practices of meditation or wisdom, to a practice equal to, and essentially identical with, meditation and wisdom.