Recently，there has been growing realization of the gaps between the Daoism described in canonic sources and the lived religion as practiced by communities. While researchers in contemporary Daoism can make use of ethnographic techniques，access to lived religion in historical contexts is more complicated. One avenue to complement the prescriptive textual sources is through archaeological and epigraphic materials. A particularly intriguing example of such a local Daoism is represented by over sixty Dao-Buddho stelae，which were erected in the valley between the Jing and Wei rivers in Shaanxi，and all dating from the mid-fifth to late sixth century. Previous scholarship has studied these stelae from the perspective of canonic textual categories，such as Celestial Master（Tianshi 天师or zhengyi 正一），Lingbao灵宝，or Louguan 楼观. In this paper I argue that a better approach for understanding these stelae is to examine them as representative of a local Daoist community of practice with a particular vision of Daoism and Buddhism.

近年来，道教学者愈来愈了解经典所描述的道教与地方社群所实践的那个曾经存在的宗教之间的差距。当代道教学者已经学会利用人类学的方法，而且研究那些曾经在历史上存在特别复杂的宗教社群。可以弥补这些具有规范性经典资料的方法就是借助于出土的石刻史料。一个特别有趣的例子是五世纪中叶至六世纪末，由陕西、关中的六十多方北魏道佛造像碑为代表的地方道教社群。早期学者研究这些造像碑时，主要根据经典道教所做的分类判断这些碑文的归属，诸如天师、正一、灵宝、楼观等。在此，我想提出的是：一个更能了解这些造像碑的切入角度是重新检验它们来自一种对于道教与佛教保持着特殊观点的地方道教社群的可能性。

Thus-come and great sage，extensions of the ultimate worthy，as split forms they universally transform；as inner and outer they inspire and penetrate. Dao and Buddha are matched in compassion；non-action is one2153168

如来大圣，至尊□延，分 刑（形）普化，内外启彻。道佛合慈，无为是一。

For a century and a half，beginning in the late fifth century，2153169a new type of religious community appeared in the western region of the central plains，stretching from the western districts of Chang’an and along the Wei and Jing river valleys [map 1]. These communities were local associations of lay adherents led by religious professionals，Buddhist monks or Daoist masters. These new religious communities dotted the landscape with a new type of religious artifact，dozens of stelae carved with Buddhist and Daoist figures and inscribed with dedicatory texts that mix Buddhist and Daoist terminology and rhetoric.

These stelae are extremely valuable for understanding the religious history of medieval China. First，these stelae may be the earliest exemplars of Daoist images，and thus represent a major shift in Daoist religious practice. Secondly，these stelae express a particular mode of interaction.2153170Most importantly，these stelae，often labeled by Chinese scholars as“Buddho-Daoist stele with statues”佛道造像碑，defy our standard categories of religious affiliation. While individual members of the communities are often affiliated with one religion，the community as a whole is affiliated with both religions. This joint religious affiliation is conscious and explicit，and we cannot therefore label these communities as simply syncretic. The stelae were clearly erected by communities that consciously amalgamated ideas，rhetoric，and practices from Buddhist and Daoist sources to create local communities of practice that recognized both Daoism and Buddhism as equally valid，and viewed their deities as their twin saviors.

But how should we define and characterize the religion of these communities？Should we label them Buddhist，Daoist，Buddho-Daoist？What do these labels mean in this context？

We must remember that the fifth and sixth centuries were an era of intense and complex religious interaction and rivalry. On the one hand，there was intensive borrowing of Buddhist ideas and practices by Daoists，especially seen in the Lingbao 灵宝 scriptures.2153171Stephen Bokenkamp has shown that these borrowings should be understood within a complex program of Daoist appropriation of specific elements of Buddhism while rejecting the foreign creed of Buddhism. Another approach using a similar strategy of appropriation and rejection that developed within certain Daoist linages was the discourse of“conversion of the barbarians”（huahu 化胡）. On the other hand，Buddhists too were adapting and adopting a variety of Chinese traditional religious and ideological forms and practices to create particularly Chinese forms of Buddhism.2153172Indeed，while the Buddho-Daoist stelae may be seen as a specific variation within the larger tradition of Buddhist stelae，the practice of erecting stelae（bei 碑）by Buddhist devotional societies（yiyi 邑义）should be understood as an appropriation and elaboration of traditional Chinese practices that developed and flourished during the Han. It is important to note that Buddhists appropriated both the stele as a physical artifact as well as the structure and notion of the local community（known as either she社 or yi邑）that sponsored these stone monuments.2153173It is within this context of intense contestation，appropriation，and adaptation that the communities of Shaanxi developed their particular form of Daoism.

Such conscious merger is exemplified by the passage cited above，culled from the dedicatory inscription on the Shi Family stele（dated to 523）. This stele has Daoist images on the front and right faces，and images of Buddha on the reverse and left. [image 1 and 2] Among the many names listed as dedicators we find several Buddhists（佛弟子）as well as Daoists（道民）. As the passage clearly demonstrates the members of the community that erected this stele recognized the existence of two supreme sages，Buddhist and Daoist，who taught two distinct teachings，and the members of these communities revered them both equally. This stele exemplifies the intriguing nature of the stelae of the Northern Dynasties and the communities that sponsored them.

Among the clearest examples of the stelae and inscriptions，the stele is by no means unique. There are dozens of such stelae，almost all erected in the region stretching westward from Chang’an between the Jing and Wei rivers in Shaanxi and all dating from the late fifth to the late sixth century. While these intriguing stelae have drawn much scholarly attention，there is still no consensus on the number of extant stelae.2153174Thus，the 1996 collation by Zhang Yan includes 18 stelae（limited to the most significant of the stelae preserved at Yaowangshan and Lintong museum），Kamitsuka’s essay lists 49 stelae，Zhang Xunliao and Bai Bin list 55 stelae，Zhang Zexun lists 46，and Hisanori Kuraki 仓本尚德 lists 69 stelae.2153175Li Song’s 李淞 Zhongguo daojiao meishu shii 《中国道教美术史》 lists 53 stelae dating to the Northern Wei，and includes a total of 176 steles dating to the Northern Dynasties.2153176Zhang Yan’s 2013 publication of all stelae on Yaowang Shan and the Lintong area includes 21 Daoist stelae and 16 Buddho-Daoist stelae.2153177

There are also as debates on transcriptions，titles，and dates of some of the stelae.

The“type”or categorization of each stele，whether Daoist，Buddhist，or a mixed stele，is conventionally determined by the central figure on the obverse face of the stele，labeled by Chinese scholars as（yang 阳，sometimes labeled“south face”南面）. The stelae are often entitled by the name of the main donor（xiangzhu 像主）on this face. It is，however，not always clear which is the obverse face of a stele. A few problematic stelae present difficulties in identifying the main face or the main donor of the image. The Shi Family stele cited above is a good example for such problems. Many scholars have labeled this stele Shi Lusheng stele，based on the inscription“Master of the Image Shi lusheng”（xiangzhu Shi lusheng 像主师录生）found by the main Buddhist image. This title may indeed be a mistake. The inscription by the Daoist image on the other side of the stele reads“[ ] south face”□南面，which seems to conflict with the common determination of this face as the yin face. Li Song argues the face with the Daoist figure is the yin face. Li Song also argues that he cannot locate the name and title Shi Lusheng on the stele. He thus titles this stele“Stele of 71 members of the Lu clan”师氏七十一造像碑.2153178