Download Kumarajiva the Translator

Ústav Dálného Východu
Filozofická fakulta
Univerzita Karlova v Praze
Zuzana Daňková
Diplomová práce
Kumarajiva the Translator
His Place in the History of Translating
Buddhist Scriptures into Chinese
Vedoucí práce: Doc. PhDr. Olga Lomová, CSc.
Praha 2006
Prohlášení
Prohlašuji, že jsem diplomovou práci vypracovala samostatně a uvedla v ní
předepsaným způsobem všechnu použitou literaturu.
V Praze dne 18.9.2006
Zuzana Daňková
Tahle of Contents
1. Early Chinese Buddhism - Historical Sources and Their Character ............... 5
1
2. Translating Buddhist Scriptures from the 2nd to the 4 h century AD .............. tO
Late Han .................................................................................................... 13
Three Kingdoms ........................................................................................ 22
Western Jin ................................................................................................ 26
Eastem Jin- South ..................................................................................... 32
Eastem Jin- North .................................................................................... 33
3. The Life ofKumarajiva ............................................................................... 40
Studies in India and Central Asia ............................................................... 40
Captivity at Liangzhou ............................................................................... 42
Kumarajiva in Chang'an ............................................................................ 47
Kumarajiva's Chinese disciples and collaborators ...................................... 51
Kumarajiva and Buddhabhadra .................................................................. 55
Kumarajiva and Yao Xing ......................................................................... 57
Kumarajiva's Death ................................................................................... 58
4. Kumarajiva' s Princip les of Translation ........................................................ 60
Emphasis on polished/refined language :ffiff~Jtfrtí ..................................... 60
Kumarajiva's use of omissions and additions
Correcting terms
!mUII!tr,
±~** (~~~á"JimU*ffi) .. 71
U li. i'; 't' ........................................................................ 74
5. Dao'an's Principles ofTranslation............................................................... 77
6. Xuanzang's Princi ples of Translation .......................................................... 84
Appendix 1 - Vimalakirtinirdesa Sutra ............................................................ 91
Appendix 2 - Heart Sutra ................................................................................ 93
Bibliography ................................................................................................... 96
3
4
1. Early Chinese Buddhism - Historical Sources and Their
Character
The biography in the section of "Translators", Yi jing ll**~' in the Li ves of Eminent
Monks, Gaoseng Zhuan ~1tif1W (hereinafter GSZ) along with additional remarks
1
found in other biographies of the same compendium, represents the main source of
information about Kumarajiva's life. The GSZ was compiled around 530 AD by the
Liang dynasty monk Huijiao (497-554 AD) and it is a valuable source of information
on the first phase of Buddhism in China and on the personalities who played their
roles in the process of establishing Buddhism in China. As Arthur Wright argues in
his article "Biography and Hagiography, Huijiao's Lives of Eminent Monks",
Huijiao's purpose in writing the GSZ was an ambivalent one. On one hand, Huijiao's
aim was to put down a comprehensive and reliable record of the li ves of the religious
personalities who played important roles during the initial five centuries of Buddhism
in China (67 - 519 AD). On the other hand, he also wished to present the Buddhist
monastic figures in such a light as to integrate them in to the milieu of the Chinese
intellectual elite. 2
To fulfil the first of hi s purposes- that of presenting a comprehensive account of the
li ves of the monks - Huij iao gathered the biographical information from numerous
sources available to him, such as previously written biographies and biographical
Huijiao Yá3(:. "Yijing" 8~*!1~. in Gaoseng Zhuan IB'J{~{~. In TaishO Shinshii Daiz8ky8 ::fclE!fJT~~::fc~
*~ [Taisho Tripitaka], vol.SO, no.2059. The biography ofKumarajiva is the first
entry in the second se roll of the "Yi )ing" chapter (yi )ing zhong 8~*~cp). The
whole chapter is divided into three scrolls, shang, zhong,xia __C,cp,T.
The first chapter of the GSZ, "Yi )ing" (Translators), was translated in to Russian by Yermakov
in:Yermakov. Zhizneopisania dostoinykh monakhov. "Razdel 1: Perevodchiki."
Moscow: Nauka, 1991.
1
2
Wright, Arthur F., "Biography and Hagiography, Huijiao's Li ves of Eminent Monks", in Studies in
Chinese Buddhism. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1990, p 75.
5
compendia, chronicles and histories, miscellaneous accounts, inscriptions and
doctrinal treatises and discussions. Out of all the major sources that Huijiao used for
his compendium only a single item has survived intact until this day: the Chu
sanzang jiji ( Collection oj Notes on the Translation oj the Tripitaka) by Huijiao's
older contemporary, a Vinaya master Sengyu (435-518). 3 The CSZJJ is a description
of the formation of the Chinese Tripitaka, in which Sengyu draws on older
bibliographies, mainly the now lost catalogue of translated scriptures Zongli
zhongjing mulu *~~lll:L'0(*~ § ~ compiled by Dao'an (314-385) in 374. The CSZJJ
4
contains various prefaces xu
ff
and colophonsji ~[.to the individua! translations, as
well as 32 biographies of monks, mainly translators and exegetes. Among these
biographies we also find the biography ofKumarajiva, which bears great resemblance
to Kumarajiva's biography in the GSZ. It seems that Huijiao has taken over the
biography from CSZJJ and then supplemented it from additional sources. 5
Most historians also agree that another important, perhaps principal, source used by
Huijiao has been the Mingseng Zhuan (MSZ) written in the years 510-519 by another
ol der contemporary of Huij iao' s, the Liang monk Baochang. 6 The original has long
been lost and only a few excerpts were compiled by a Japanese monk Shiish6 of the
Chu sanzangjiji ,'::1::\~Jii§c~ (Collection oj Notes on the Translation ofthe Tripitaka). Taish6
Tripitaka, vol. 55, no. 2145. Hereinafter CSZJJ.
4
Ziircher E. The Buddhist Conquest ofChina. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1959.Conquest, p. 10.
5
According to Wright this has been a standard method used by Huijiao. In certain other biographies he
would actually go as far as copying the text from CSZJJ verbatim, like for example in the biography of
Bo'yuan. (Wright, "Biography and Hagiography", p. 105-106). Furthermore, this method oftaking
over whole bod ies of text has been a long established practice in the tradition of Chi nese
historiography. Moreover the overal! forma! organization of Huijiao's work is very much in keeping
with traditional works of Chinese historiography. The biographies are grouped according to the
dominant activity oftheir subjects. Huijiao also makes use of subordinate biographiesfu llít. Each of
the individua! sections is preceded by a lun §ii!i and concluded by a zan W. Whenever he makes a
comment of hi s own, he ma kes it clear, and he also specifies whenever he repeats an oral tradition or
legend. (lbid.)
6
For different scholars discussing the Mingseng Zhuan as Huijiao's potentially principle source for the
GSZ, see for example Zenryu. History, p. 484; Wright. "Biography and Hagiography", p. 78, 95-98;
Ziircher. Conquest, p. ll.
3
6
Kasagi monastery in 1235 and essentials ofthe prologue and epilogue are reproduced
in the Xu gaoseng zhuan. 7 From these fragments we know that Baochang's
compendium contained 425 biographies altogether. In his preface to the GSZ Huijiao
seems to criticise Baochang indirectly for being too prolix and erratic. Accordingly,
Huijiao reduced the number ofbiographies included in his GSZ to 257. By comparing
the table of contents of the two compendia ( Gaoseng Zhuan and Mingseng Zhuan ), it
seems that Huijiao has substantially drawn on this source both in terms of form and
content. The Mingseng Zhuan also divided the biographies to categories based on
dominant activity of the subj ects and many of the categories are very similar or
identical with those employed by Huijiao and there are some other formal
resemblances as well. As for the contents, out of the 257 major biographies in GSZ,
216 had been the subjects ofbiographies in the Mingseng Zhuan. 8 Andjudging from
the few excerpts compiled by Shiish6, the wording is very similar and at places even
identical with that found in the GSZ.
To fulfil his second purpose, that of advancing the naturalization of Buddhist
monasticism in Chinese history and society, Huijiao emphasizes such values in the
li ves of the monks which were likely to appeal to the members of the Chinese
educated class, such as the literary accomplishments of the monks. He often
emphasizes that the monks were well versed in the Chinese classics, that they were
able to memorize texts upon reading them only once etc. He also pays great attention
to the interaction between the monks and the Chinese men of letters and describes in
great detail all the gifts and homage which the monks would receive from members of
Xu gaoseng zhuan *i~{~{$ [Continuation ofthe Li ves oj Eminent Monks]. Aiso called Tang
gaoseng zhuan f@f~{~{$:. Compiled ca. 645 by Daoxuan ill'§. In TaishO Tripitaka, vol.50.
8
See Yamanouchi Shinkyo. "Kosoden no kenkyu" ["A Study of Huijiao's Li ves of Eminent Monks] in
Shina Bukkyoshi no Kenkyu [Studies in the History ofChinese Buddhism]. Kyoto: Bukkyo daigaku
shuppanpu, 1921. p.1 7-27 for comparative tab les of contents of the two works.
7
7
the aristocracy and intellectual elite. 9 The amount of instances of such contacts and
friendships by far exceed any such references in the secular histories of the time. In
the case of Kumarajiva's biography we find that apart from his broad leaming and
literary talents, great emphasis is also given to his close connection to kings and rulers
of practically a ll the countries he had lived in throughout his life. 10
Apart from the ambivalence in Huijiao's motivation to compose the GSZ, there is also
another factor worth considering while reading the GSZ. It is the fact that as a devout
Buddhist monk himself, Huijiao might have been inclined to be rather uncritical with
certain accounts glorifying the subjects of his biographies. Indeed it is true that the
biographies of GSZ often speak of miraculous events, but as Wright points out, "the
miracles punctuate but do not dominate the sequences of events in the biographies" .11
Wright also makes a comment to the effect that in medieval China miraculous events
were often present in secular biographies as well, and that in this respect, the instances
of miracles in Huijiao's GSZ is no more frequent that in secular histories of the time.
In fact if we compare the biographies from GSZ to accounts of the same personalities
found in the secular history of the Jin dynasty, the Jin Shu, it tums out that the secular
biographies emphasise the miraculous, supematural or eccentric aspects much more
9
Wright. "Biography and Hagiography", p. 77.
An outline of the rulers who ha ve in one way or another been in cl ose contact with Kumarajiva
would look as follows: First of a ll Kumarajiva was born as a son of a younger sister ofthe ruler of
Kucha. Later when his outstanding abilities started to reveal themselves from Kumarajiva's early age,
he is said to ha ve received homage and privileges from the ruler of Kashmir and subsequently Kashgar.
ln fact based on the Kashgar ruler's veneration of Kumarajiva Kashgar was able to win the long sought
friendship of Kucha, since the ruler of Kucha also held Kumarajiva in the highest esteem.
Stilllater the ruler ofTibetan origin Fu Jian ruling in northern China from 379 sent his general Lu
Guang to conquer Kucha and bring Kumarajiva back with him. However Fu Jian's kingdom was
defeated by the Yao clan before Lu Guang's return. Lu Guang in turn started an independent state of
his own in the Gansu area where he kept Kumarajiva for 17 years as a hostage. Lu Guang has never
converted to Buddhism, but he is said to have been using Kumarajiva's advice in his government. Most
ofthis advice as described in the GSZ has to do with Kumarajiva's ability to predict the future and
other such skills. Fina !ly the state of Later Liang founded by Lu Guang was defeated and Kumarajiva
was received by the Late Qin ruler Yao Xing in Chang'an. The biography in GSZ then contains a
number of passages discussing Yao Xing's veneration for Kumarajiva, and their cl ose relationship. Yao
Xing is even said to ha ve personally participated in the translations.
11
Wright. "Biography and Hagiography", p.76.
10
8
than the GSZ. At the same time, the biographies in Jin Shu do not pay any attention to
literary accomplishments of the Buddhist monks which are described so thoroughly
by Huijiao. 12
Finally, for of all the undeniable qualities of the GSZ, if one is to regard the
compendium as a comprehensive account of the development of the early Chinese
Buddhist Community, there is one relative weakness which should be keep in mind:
namely, that the GSZ emphasises the developments in the South much more, while it
provides often only scanty and inaccurate accounts of northem Buddhism. In this
sense the overall picture provided by the compendium is not geographically balanced.
12
Yermakov in Zhizneopisania dostoinykh monakhov points out that there are 5 biographies of
Buddhist monks present in Jin Shu. Four ofthem are biographies ofmonks who belong to the category
of 'Chudotvortsy' in GSZ. The fifth biography is the biography of Kumarajiva. Yermakov argues that
this choice of biographies of Buddhists to be included in the Jin Shu reflects the tendency of its authors
to portray the Buddhists as exotic charlatans and untrustworthy eccentrics. lt is agreed by most scholars
that these accounts in the Jin Shu are either based on the same source as those in GSZ or that they are
based on the GSZ itself. However the biographies in Jin Shu are much shorter than those in GSZ and
they seem to be abbreviated in such a way as to Iea ve out a! most all historical data and keep only the
miraculous deeds and fantastic episodes from the li ves of their subjects. In particular, all accounts
regarding the literary accomplishments of the monks are left out. As for the biography of Kumarajiva
found in QS, it lacks many of the data about hi s studies in Kashmir and Kashgar, and about his
trans lati on activities after arriving at Changan. At the same time the Jin Shu biography supplements
two episod es not found in the GSZ which both ha ve to do with the sensitive issue of Kumarajiva's
alleged involvement with women. (Yermakov, 51-55)
9
2. Translating Buddhist Scriptures from the 2nd to the 4th
century AD
In the Middle of a Daoist revival Buddhism was introduced to China. For the .first
time the Chinese were to meet with a way of thought completely independent of their
own tradition, yet not inferior to it. This was a shock to which they reacted
instinctively, by assimilating Buddhism to Daoism. A long period of incubation was
necessary before they were to face the Indian doctrine for what it really was.
Paul Demieville 13
At the wake of the Western Christian Era, there started a fascinating process of
interaction between two major Asian cultures - India and China. Indeed it was a
rather one sided exchange during which Indian Buddhism was literally exported to
China, and during which China has over many centuries moulded the foreign creed
and philosophical system to its own liking.
There were obviously several stages of the penetration of Buddhism in to China.
Different scholars find different ways ofperiodization ofthe process 14 , yet while
do ing so, most of them sti ll refer to the periods defined by successive ruling dynasties
13
Demieville, Paul. "Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui" in The Cambridge History ofChina,
vol I. Cambridge University Press: 1986, p 820.
14
Cf Wright, Arthur. "Buddhism and Chinese Cul ture: Phases of Interaction" in The Journal oj Asian
Studies", vol XVII, no.1!1957. p 17-42. Wright defines four phases of interaction between Buddhism
and Chi nese cul ture: Period of Preparation (65-317), Period of Domestication (317-589), Period of
Acceptance and lndependent Growth (589-900), Period of Appropriation (900 to the present).
Also cf. Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest ofChina. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1959, p. 72. Zurcher argues that:
"One could easily suggest several key dat es in the periodization of Early Chinese Buddhism: the
introduction of Mahayana scriptures at the end of the second cen tury; the activities of Dao-an in
Ch'angan (379-385), or the arrival ofKumarajiva at Ch'angan and the subsequent introduction of
Madhyamika scholastic literature (402). However such schemes would result from a purely
philological approach which treats the history of a religion as a history of texts. If we attempt to
describe the development of early Chinese Buddhism as one aspect ofthe social and cultural history of
medieval China, we cannot but conclude that the years around 300 AD constitute the tuming point par
excel!ence. The penetration ofthe doctrine into the highest gentry circles virtually determined the
course which Chinese Buddhism was to follow in the next decades: it paved the way to the victory of
Buddhism in its conquest of China." Nevertheless in hi s treatment of early Chinese Buddhism Zurcher
himselfrefers to the periods defined by successive dynasties and kingdoms.
10
and kingdoms. 15 In this chapter which is tracing the development of the translation
activities from the second to the fourth century we will also, for the sake of simplicity,
refer to the periods defined by successive ruling dynasties and kingdoms.
In the process of penetration of Buddhism in to China the translation of texts
expounding the Buddhist doctrine undoubtedly played an essential role. Y et for the
process of translating the scriptures to take place, three basic preconditions had to be
present. First there had to be established some contact between the land of the
scriptures' origin and the Chinese territory. Secondly, by virtue of such contact, there
had to arise certain interest on the Chinese side and a subsequent demand for
translation of the scriptures. Thirdly, there had to be persons who knew both the
language of the originals (hu ben M4)and Chinese and who were able to make the
translations.
As for the first precondition, mutual traffic and exchange between China and India
was enabled by the Silk Road established by Zhang Qian's expedition commissioned
by Han Wudi in the latter half of the second century BC. Although the expedition
didn't succeed in its original goal- that ofwinning an alliance with the Yuezhi against
the Xiongnu, the fact that Zhang Qian was able to open the route between China and
the Western Regions was of immense historical importance. In this way, western
artefacts started making their way into China through the northern and southern route
of the continental Silk Road. Indian artefacts followed soon after and with them also
m,
15
Cf. Zenryu, Tsukamoto, A History oj Early Chinese Buddhism. Also cf. Tang Yongtong 151m
Hanwei /iangjin nanbeichaofojiao shi ~~lJ:!t;!'Nl"tm~tlj!JH!ll~X~. Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan, 1998.
Also cf. Ren Jiyu 11#-~.lÍ\. Zhongguo Fojiao Shi J:j:1 !!®f1Jlqr1(~. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue
chubanshe, 1985.
ll
Indian Buddhism, which was initially travelling to China from the Western Regions,
where by the second century BC it has been established as a widely practiced religion.
There is no factual historical evidence indicating when exactly Buddhism entered
China for the first time. lt is assumed that it must have been some time between the
first half of the
1st
century BC when China managed to consolidate its power in the
W es tem Regions and the middle of the
1st
century AD when the presence of
Buddhism in China is already attested. 16
As for the second precondition- interest in the new doctrine and demand for it to be
translated: even before the first translations of Buddhist scriptures in to Chinese were
made, there are already accounts proving a presence of certain knowledge about the
Indian religion. The Buddha was venerated as a superhuman sylph shenxian
t$fúJ on a
par with the Huangdi and Laozi, and certain basic Buddhist rituals were performed on
Chinese soil by foreign shramanas. Bellow we will discuss the presence of Buddhism
on the court of king Ying of Chu as early as mid
1st
century AD. From such a
background there naturally arose a demand for a more specific understanding of the
new doctrine, hence for Chinese translations of the scriptures.
Once the process of translating begins, it usually also has a number of stages. As a
rule the very first translations are very rudimentary, and texts need to be retranslated
again and again. During this proces s, the quality of the translations changes, usually
for the better, as the translators' knowledge of the subject matter a s well as the
languages broadens. But not only that, as was the case with the translation activities of
Kumarajiva, the quality of his translations was to a large extent brought about by the
16
Cf. Zi.ircher, Conquest, p. 23.
12
fact that he had at hi s disposal a team of hundreds of first rate Chinese scholars and
translators, and that his translation projects were sponsored by the court. On the other
band, the support of the court was brought about by the intense demand for accurate
translations which in tum was caused by the fact, that people important enough to
matter to the court were acquainted with the previous translations, and also that they
were dissatisfied with their quality. Thus it tums out that the seemingly purely
intellectual activity of translating Buddhist scriptures into Chinese needs in fact to be
seen as a part of a very organic interaction between processes simultaneously taking
place on the intellectual, spiritual, social and even politicallevel.
In the following sections of this chapter we will attempt to provide a historical
overview of the translating activities starting from the very first translations of the
latter half of the
2nd
century AD up to the translation activities taking place in
Chang'an in late
4th
century. By covering this time span we will be able to see the
developments in the filed of scriptural translation prior to the arrival of Kumarajiva at
the beginning of the
5th
century. The overview will be presented with reference to
Kumarajiva's activities, so that we can see in what ways Kumarajiva's work has been
a culmination of previous trends.
Late Han
Translation activities at Luoyang in the second half oj the 2nd century.
As Tsukamoto points out, it is most likely that Buddhist conversion had taken place
on the Chinese territory even before there were any translations of scriptures available,
by word of mouth and example. 17 W e do not know an exact date when Buddhism had
17
Tsukamoto. History, p.72.
13
entered China for the fist time, yet from scanty historical sources we know that by the
middle of the first century AD, Buddhism had penetrated as far as the region north of
the Huai, in Eastem Henan, Southem Shandong and Northem Jiangsu- an area with
many foreign groups and with its most important city Pengcheng being a flourishing
centre of commerce situated on the raute from Luoyang to the South-East, which was
in fact an extension of the continental Silk Road. In the Hou Han Shu we read about
the king Ying of Chu ~3:.* (king since 41-71 AD) who was deeply interested in the
teaching of Huang-Lao and at the same time observed fasting and performed
sacrifices to the Buddha. This record in the Hou Han Shu is the first allusion to
Buddhism in Chinese historical literature and king Ying, half brother of emperor
Ming, 18 is thus the first known Chinese Buddhist. 19 When king Ying was later
expelled from Chu and went South of the Yangzi accompanied by all his followers, it
allowed Buddhism to spread further South.
lt is quite certain that there has been a continuous presence of Buddhism in China
ever since the second half of the first century AD, pro bab ly continually increasing
with more and more foreigners coming to Chinese soil: merchants and missionaries,
18
ln the historical sources we also find a legend about Emperor Ming's dream. According to the legend, emperor
Ming of Late Han (58-75 AD) had a dream, in which he saw a golden figure of the Buddha. Based on this dream
the emperor sent an embassy to India in quest of the Dharma. As a result two monks, Kashyapa Matanga .l!i!!i\iilt
H~ and Dharmaratna A~Jtd'./ii, came to Luoyang where they translated scriptures in a monastery tJ .~c;'f(also known
as r./ii:crc;'f) built for the purpose. This story is mentioned in the Hou Han li fti:tJI:~~ without quoting a specified
source, in the Hou Han Shu t3t11Ji; ;li: it is preceded by the phrase "in the world it is said". Further it i s mentioned in
the CSZJJ and given final form by Huijiao in the GSZ. By Dong Jin times in Buddhist church both north and south
it was regarded as a fact that Buddhism brought to China by imperial quest based on a dream. Being included in
Record of rhe Lauer Han and Book of the Lauer Han- historical works highly trusted in Chi nese intellectual
society, and in Li ves of Eminent Monks, the story became accepted as official authoritative history of introduction
of Buddhism to Ch in a, although it is self evident that it is not history. It wasn't until Henri Maspero 's meticulous
study, that the lack of historicity of the story of Emperor Ming's dream was proved. Nevertheless even though the
story has been proved anachronistic, it does not mean that there was no presence of Buddhism in Chi na during the
time of Emperor Ming. Cf. Tsukamoto. History, p. 43-50. Zurcher, Conquest, p. 19-23.
19
Zurcher. Conquest, p.26.
14
lay believers as well as monastics. However, up until the middle of the second century
AD we do not find any records about any translation activities or translated texts.
20
The first period of intense translation activities attested in historical sources is the
time from the middle of the second century to the first decade of the third century.
The beginning of this period is marked by the arrival of two foreign translators at
Luoyang - An Shigao and Lokaksema - who were both active in Luoyang during the
reign of emperors Huan (147-167) and Ling (168-188). An Shigao came from Parthia,
Lokaksema from the Yuezhi. An Shigao translated Hinayana scriptures, Lokaksema
specialized in the Mahayana. The activity of these translators in Luoyang coincides
with the time when the two streams of Buddhism - Hinayana and Mahayana - were at
the height of mutual rivalry in India. Interestingly enough, in China the teachings of
both streams were being accepted simultaneously as one amalgam, and as such they
were studied and practiced virtually until the arrival ofKumarajiva at the beginning of
the fifth century AD, who was the first to draw a clear distinction between the two
streams, explicitly favouring the Great Vehicle.
An Shigao
An Shigao is not only the first translator of Buddhist scriptures into Chinese, but, as
Ziircher argues, he is also the first undoubtedly historical personality in Chinese
1
Buddhism? Nevertheless the truly historical information available about him is
scarce, as is the case with most of the early translators. According to a very early and
20
The only exception is the emergence ofthe Sutra in Forty-two Sections, probably in late first or early second
cen tury AD. As Ziircher points out, this text is commonly regarded as the first Buddhist scripture in Chinese
language, however it is not clear whether it is a translation from a Sanskrit original or a Chinese compilation.
According to a late tradition- the same one which talks about the dream of emperor Ming - it was brought to
Luoyang by Kashyapa Matanga and Dharmaratna, and translated by the latter in 67 AD. The text is a short work
consisting of 42 chapters. See Ziircher, Conquest, p. 29-30. Also cf. Tsukamoto, History. p 79. Also cf. Tang
Yongtong, Fojiao shi, p. 31-46. '''''·' shnuld mcntion that considt:rcd a l~tlsitical<:'!
21
Zurcher, Conquest, p 32.
15
hence perhaps a more reliable tradition, An Shigao has been a crown prince of Parthia,
who has given up the throne in order to devote himself to a life of a religious
renunciate. Having travelled to the East, he arrived at Luoyang in 148 AD and he
stayed there for 20 years. From the few historical sources available (mainly the GSZ
and the CSZJ J) we know that Luoyang in the second half of the second cen tury AD
was a centre of intense translation activity of Buddhist scriptures. Unfortunately apart
from the information conceming the translation activities, we do not know much more
about the life of the Luoyang Buddhist community in the second half of the second
cen tury. The reason for this is that secular sources do not mention the existence of a
Buddhist Community at all, and the Buddhist sources teem with hagiographical
information, which has to be treated rather cautiously. Apart from that, we are left
with colophons and introductions from CSZJJ which are thus the only source of early
or even contemporary biographical information? 2
As for An Shigao's methods oftranslation, some early colophons contain information
conceming the translation process which seems to have been a common practice not
only for An Shigao, but also for other translators active in Luoyang in the late second
and early third century, namely Lokaksema, An Xuan and others. Ziircher presents the
following summary of information about the translation process which can be found
in the early colophons:
"The master either had a manuscript of the original text at his disposal or he recited it
from memory. Ifhe had enough knowledge ofChinese (which was seldom the case)
22
The two main sources of information about the li ves ofthe early translators, the GSZ and CSZJJ,
both contain stories about An Shigao's travelling through Southem China, but there is no evidence to
support these. There has also never been found any Parthian prince in the occidental sources who could
be identified with An Shigao. Yet since Parthia under the Arsacides (ca 250 BC- 224 AD) was not a
unified state but a conglomeration of petty kingdoms, An Shigao might ha ve been a member of a
ruling fami ly in one ofthese kingdoms. See Maspero in "Essay sur le Taoisme", Mel. Posth., vol. II, p.
189. Quoted acc. to Zurcher, Conquest, p 33.
16
he gave an oral translation (kou shou Df~), otherwise the preliminary translation was
made, "transmitted" by a bilingual intermediary (chuan yi {$~:$). Chinese assistantsmonks as well as laymen- noted down the translation (bi shou $~), after which the
text was subjected to a final revision (zheng yi 1E~,jiao ding ,f;Z)E). During the work
of translation, and perhaps also on other occasions, the master gave oral explanations
(koujie O~~) conceming the contents ofthe scriptures translated. Explanations of
this kind often appear to have crept into the text. ... The material funds for the work
of translation were fumished by laymen who "encouraged and helped" (quan zhu zhe
liJWJ~)."23
This team work, for the first time attested to have been adopted during the translation
activities in Luoyang in the latter half of the second century AD remained the normal
method of translating scriptures throughout the history of Buddhism in China.
Dao'an's catalogue, the Zong li zhongjing mu /u *-*l!.)~U~§~ from 374 AD
ascribes 34 titles to An Shigao. Out of these only nineteen have survived to the
present day and sixteen of these can be ascribed to An Shigao with some degree of
certainty since they form a relatively homogenous body of texts with distinctive
linguistic and stylistic features. In the article A New Look at the Earliest Chinese
Buddhist Texts Ziircher presents the findings that have come out of an analysis of a
body of 29 Han translations made at Luoyang by five different translators teams
between 150 and 220 AD? 4 Among these there are also those 16 titles by An Shigao
produced most likely between 150-170 AD. Ziircher defines the language ofthese
translations as "erratic, crude and full of vulgarisms. Often chaotic to the point of
unintelligibility."25 As for the style of the translations, it is rather un-Chinese, there is
no trace of having been influenced by the Chinese literary taste: no attempt to use the
four-syllable prosodic pattem si yan ju IJ] §{i_], which was to become a characteristic
feature of the Chinese Buddhist translations by the time of the third century, and
23
Zi.ircher. Conquest. p 31.
Zi.ircher. "A New Look at the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts" in From Benares to Beijing, Essays
on Buddhism and Chinese Re/igion. Edited by Kiochi Shinohara, Gregory Schopen, Oakville:
MOSAIC PRESS, 1991. pp 277-304
25
lbid. p 283.
24
17
which had been a dominating feature of secular classic literature of the period. We
also do not find any syntactic parallelism in An Shigao's translations. Neither is there
any use of typical wenyan elements. Versified passages are rendered in prase and
there is no trace of a prosimetric form - this new stylistic device inspired by the
Indian literary style- which was also to become a characteristic feature of Chinese
Buddhist translations? 6 Instead An Shigao renders the gathas - the verse passages in prase, sometimes with an opening line saying: "The following is said in giitiis (jie
f~).
Furthermore, in the translations ascribed to An Shigao technical terms are usually
translated, whereas foreign proper names are transcribed.
From the point ofview of contents, An Shigao's translations deal mainly with two
subjects both belonging to the Hinayana stream ofBuddhism: the system ofmental
and respiratory exercises commonly called dhyiina (chan
numerical categories (s hu
~)
ffr~)
and classifications and
of the A hidharma (such as the six ayatanas, the five
skamlhas etc.). As for the subject matter of dhyana, certain scholars, among them
Tsukamoto, argue that the dhyana practices appealed to the Chinese because of the
similarity with certain Daoist practices. Namely, Tsukamoto compares the Scripture
oj Anapana Mindfulness (Anpan s hou yi )ing ~m§ť~~*JíD to certain mental exercises
practiced by the Daoists, pointing out certain terminological borrowings. 27 Contrary to
that, Zurcher argues that
"the use of Daoist terminology in this context has been generally overestimated, since
terms of undoubtedly Daoist provenance actually form only a small percentage of
Chinese archaic Buddhist terminology, the bulk of which consists of terms which
The term "prosimetric form" has been used for the first time by V. Hrdličková. "The first translations
of Buddhist sutras in Chi nese literature and their place in the development of story-telling". Archiv
Orientální 26, 1958. pp 114-144.
see also Kumarajiva's explanation about the difference between the Indian and Chinese literary styles
in Chapter 3 "The Life of Kumarajiva".
27
Tsukamoto, Hisotry, p 306-307.
26
18
cannot be traced to any Chinese source and which probably have been improvised by
the earliest translators. " 28
Elsewhere Ziircher explains, that the similarity between the dhyana practices and
Daoist exercises is merely superficial. Furthermore he argues that the main appeal of
Buddhism in the initial stages of its presence in China was not its familiarity but
rather its novelty, mainly the emphasis on impermanence, which has become a
particularly attractive concept at a time of the collapse of the Han dynasty and with it
the disintegration of the traditional valu es it was built on. 29
Dao 'an, the compiler of the Zongli zhong }ing mulu, praises An Shigao highly
referring to his translations as to masterpieces and classical examples of the art of
translations. Y et judging from the poor quality of the translations themselves ~ often
no more than free paraphrases or highly chaotic extracts form the original texts
~
it
was probably rather Dao'an's expression of the Chinese traditional veneration for the
ancients. 30
Lokaksema
Lokaksema is the sanskritised name of an Indo-Scythian translator Zhiloujiachan
m::i!1!l~1l, sometimes also known as Zhi Chan
x
)d1l. 31 He arrived at Luoyang at the end
of the reign of Emperor Huan (146-168 AD) and produced his translations under
Emperor Ling (168-189 AD). Lokaksema is generally credited with the introduction
of the Mahayana teaching in to China. Different catalogues differ in the number of
28
Ziircher, Conquest. pp 33-34.
Ziircher, "A New Look at Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts," p. 291-293.
3
For detailed treatment ofthe comments by Dao'an about An Shigao's translations see Chapter 5:
"Translation Princip les of Dao'an".
31
The syllable Zhi J( stands for Da Yuezhi :k~ 3Z: (sometimes also :k~ _R) (K ucha), the place ofthe
translator's origin. Similarly in other names An stands for Anxi (Parthia), Zhu stands for Tianzhu
(India). Later there developed a custom among the Chinese Buddhists oftaking on the ethnikon of
one's teacher, eg. Dhannaraksha , Zhu Fahu, who was not an Indian yet used the ethnikon Zhu after his
master Zhu Gaozuo.
29
°
19
translations ascribed to Lokaksema. Namely the CSZJJ attributes 14 texts to
Lokaksema, while the Zongli zhongjing mulu ofDao'an mentions only twelve texts,
nine of which are marked as only hypothetical attributions. Of the remaining three,
only two have been preserved till the present day. These are the
Astasahasrikaprajnaparamita (Daoxding boru o jing ;i_~Jrm~l5*~), 32 and the
Pratyutpannabuddhasammukhavasthitasamadhisutra (Banzhou sanmei )ing m~f& _:::::
3
B**~i . Along with the Suramgamasamadhisutra (Shoulengyan sanmei jing ~f"HJ5 iJ.
:-:-Di#~)
also ascribed to Lokaksema, yet by a later and hence not entirely reliable
source, these scriptures constitute the basic scriptures of Mahayana literature. 34
As in the case of An Shigao's translations, Ziircher subjected a body of seven
translations by Lokaksema to an analysis of its linguistic and stylistic features. He
concludes that the language is more natural and intelligible than that of An Shigao,
sometimes with abundant vemacular elements. On the other hand, Lokaksema's
rendering s are characterized by transcriptions of both proper names and technical
terms which can sometimes be up to 12 syllables long. These transcriptions tend to
significantly obstruct the flow of the narrative and hinder the intelligibility of the text.
Lokaksema's translations are the first to contain a certain amount ofunrhymed
Buddhist verse of 5, 6 and 7 syllables, although Lokaksema uses this device rather
unsystematically and some metrical passages are stili translated in prose. Nevertheless
by using this device he introduces a feature which was to become one of the
32
33
T 08, no.224.
T 13, no.417.
34
The dates of these translations of Lokaksema also pro vide the first fixed date as to the emergence and presence
of the Mahayana literature, since no concrete dates have survived about the emergence of the Mahayana litera ture
in India. See Harrison, Paul. "The Earliest Chinese Translations ofMahayana Sutras: Some Notes on the Works of
Lokaksema". In Buddhist Studi es Review, Vol I O, 2. 1993
20
characteristic features of Chinese scriptural style- the so called prosimetric form, also
known as the Buddhist bianwen, which in tum became an instrumental influence on
later Chinese popular literature. 35
Together with An Shigao and Lokaksema, there were about a dozen translators
working in Luoyang during the years preceding the collapse of the Han Empire in 220
AD. They were a mixed group ofParthians, Sogdians, Indians and Indo-Scythians.
Among them there was for example An Xuan, who arrived at Luoyang in 181 AD. An
Xuan was a rich merchant from Parthia, who later even obtained the Chinese military
title of cavalry commander and who at the same time considered affairs of Buddhist
religion as hi s duty. 36 He translated the Scripture of the Dharma-Mirror, a Mahayana
scripture for a Bodhisattva-householder. In his translation he does not use the term
dacheng :A* yet for Mahayana, instead he uses dadao
:A@. An Xuan also
collaborated with the first historically known ethnically Chinese monk Yan Fodiao JMi
f~~Jj'ij.
In An Xuan's translations all technical terms as well as proper names were
translated and there is also a certain amount of wenyan elements employed.
The development of the scripturallanguage and style under the Han pro bab ly
culminates in the Chinese version of the Lije of the Buddha translated in two parts: as
37
38
Xiuxing benqi }ing ~~1::Y::zis:illi*~ , and the Zhong benqi }ing cp::zis:Jlli*~ by the
Sogdian Kang Mengxiang and the Indians Zhu Dali and Zhu ·ranguo. There is a
marked literary influence in their translation with frequent use of wenyan and stylistic
Zurcher. "A New Look at Early Translations," p. 287. Cf also Hrdličková, .,The First translations of
the Buddhist Sutras".
36
Tsukamoto. "History," p.93-97. See also Ma Zuyi ,li!~W&l~. Zhongguo fanyijianshi tp~~~:$~'ij§:.. p.
18-19.
37
T 03, no.l84.
38
T 04, no. 96.
35
21
embellishment, parallelism and the four syllable prosodic pattern. Gathas are rendered
in unrhymed verse of varying lengths. On the level of terminology, the translators
apply what Ziircher calls terminological syncretism where "foreign names and terms
are rendered by means of a mixed vocabulary borrowed from various earlier
translators, resulting in a great variety of forms that serves a double purpose: to avoid
monotony, and to enable the translator to conform to the four-syllable pattern by
choosing a prosodically suitable rendering." 39 From the literary point of view these
two Buddha biographies represent the most sophisticated product of Han Buddhism,
in which we can already clearly distinguish the characteristic features which by the
end of the third century would become a norm for Chinese Buddhist scriptural style.
On the level of terminology this is a unified terminology consisting partly of
translations and partly of transliterations, while on the level of style and composition
it is the use of the four-syllable prosodic pattern, parallelism, the prosimetric form,
and predominantly five syllable verse form.
Three Kingdoms
After the collapse of the Han dynasty in 220 AD, there continued a certain amount of
Buddhist activity in Luoyang under the state ofWei (220-265 AD), but it can't be
compared to the intensity of translation and missionary activities under the Han. In the
third century the centres of Buddhist activities ha ve shifted, first to Jianye in the state
of Wu and later to Chang'an. Let us first look at the activities going on in Jianye, the
capital ofWu since 229 AD. There are certain fundamental differences between the
Buddhism of Luoyang in the latter half of second century and the Buddhism in Wu in
the third century. One of these is reflected in the main figures of Wu Buddhism: Zhi
39
Zi.ircher, "A New Look At Early Translations", p 284.
22
Qian
2ci:lft and Kang Senghui !3J.Hi~. These foreigners bom on Chinese soil- an
Indo-scythian and Sogdian respectively - were completely naturalized and have
obtained a Chinese literary education along with solid training in the Buddhist
scriptures. They were even in contact with the ruling family of Wu. This is indeed a
whole different background compared to the culturally isolated translators of Luoyang,
who had no training in the Chinese tradition and only a rudimentary knowledge of the
language. Out of the two representative figures of Buddshism in Wu- Zhi Qian and
Kang Senghui - the former was a more prominent translator than the latter and as
such is of more interest for our present study. Let us look at his activity and
translation work more dosely.
Zhi Qian
Zhi Qian (died between 252-257) was a grandson of an Indo-Scythian who came to
Luoyang under emperor Ming (168-188 AD). At Luoyang Zhi Qian, so we are told,
leamed six foreign languages, studied Buddhist scriptures and became a disciple of
Zhi Laing, himself a disciple of Lokaksema. 40 Thus he continued in the predominantly
Mahayana tradition brought to Luoyang by the foreigners from Yuezhi. Shortly before
220 Zhi Qian went to Wuchang, and later when the Wu capital was moved to Jianye,
he moved there too. In the biographies of Zhi Qian in the CSZJJ and the GSZ we read
that the translator was invited for an audience with the Wu ruler Sun Quan. The ruler
was apparently so impressed with Zhi Qian's penetrating exposition of some obscure
passages in the classics, that he granted him the title boshi t:W± and appointed him
the tutor ofthe crown prince. 41 After the death ofthe prince in 241 AD, Zhi Qian is
40
see the biography of Zhi Qian in CSZJJ. T55n2145 __p0097b13(00) - T55n2145 _p0097c18(00)
lbid. See also Tang Yongtong. Han wei liang }in nanbei chao fojiao s hi, p 131, where he specifies
that the crown prince in question was Sun Deng t%~ who held the status from 229 to his death in 241.
41
23
said to have left the capital and retired to the Qiong 'a i s han ~~LlJ where he died
some time between the years 252-257.
42
As for Zhi Qian's activities as a translator, Ziircher considers him the only important
translator in Southem China before the late fourth century.
43
The CSZJJ attributes 36
works to him, out of which 23 ha ve been preserved. Most of these are Mahayana
scriptures, among them such influential works like the Vimalakirtinirdesasutra
(Weimojiejing
Mr!2J§a*~)
which was translated to Chinese for the first time by Zhi
Qian. He was also the first to translate the Sukhavativiuha (Amituo jing JrrlJ5ft~B*~).
Zhi Qian i s also the author of a translation of the s tory of the first part of the Buddha' s
44
life, the Taizi ruiying benqijing /tŤJiMl!*im#& , which is another version of the
above mentioned work produced by Kang Mengxiang of the Late Han. Zhi Qian's
rendering of the text has remained the most popular version until present day.
Ziircher summarizes the stylistic and linguistic qualities f Zhi Qian's translations in
the following way:
"Zhi Qian's translations are very free. All sources stress the mastery of his language
and the elegance of his style, but more often than not, there is an undertone of
criticism directed against his habit of adding stylistic omaments, or translating every
word ( including proper names) in to Chinese, and of summarizing the wording of the
45
original texts with their long-winded narratives and endless repetitions."
Zhi Qian's emphasis on rendering the scriptures in elegant literary language also lead
him to make new versions of several texts previously already translated into Chinese,
among these the Suramgamasamadhisutra (Shoulengyan sanmei jing ~i(tjj /ll
· B;1d~)
and the Astasahasrikaprajnaparamita (Daoxding boruo jing ilit::Ym§t:E=*~) translated
42
1bid.pl31.
Zurcher. Conquest. p 50.
44
T 03, no.l85.
45
Zlircher. Conquest. p 50. ln a note to this passage Zurcher names all the sources containing
judgements on Zhi Qian's translations by personalities like Zhi Mindu, Dao'an, Sengzhao and Huirui.
43
24
by Lokaksema and the Dharmapada (Fajujing
1!-bJMiD translated previously by the
Indian translator.
The CSZJJ contains a preface to the Darmapada (Fajujing xu r!t]~\[rf) which does
not indicate a name of its author, however Tang Yongtong argues that it was most
likely written by Zhi Qian himself. 46 In the preface we find an interesting discussion
of the problems arising during translating the Indian originals into Chinese. It shows
that already at the third century the translators were facing the basic dilemma:
whether to produce faithful and literal translations which are crude and difficult to
understand, or whether to sacrifice faithfulness and literariness to accord with the
Chinese literary taste and produce stylistically refined and polished translations.
Throughout the prefaces and colophons of the CSZJJ we find Chinese critics
discussing this dilemma in terms of the traditional Chinese dichotomy of zhi
~
and
wen )(_. 47 One section of the preface is particularly interesting- it is a discussion
between the author of the preface (presumably Zhi Qian himself) and Vighna, which
clearly reveals the opposing outlook at translation of the Indian translator and his
Chinese counterpart:
l
l
l
T55n2145_p0050a13(02) f~tJJ~ft~f/f':ftL ,~'ffii!UW:Fl o
T55n2145 _p0050a14(07) H1r;'i1:&Jt~/f'ffi ~'r!i o ItXJtr!/f' l;J,Ji&Jt1$ o
T55n2145 _p0050a15(08) ~\li::;"í~4' ~8JtÍ7J ~!JX~o :fi'J~IJ~~o ~ 9=J ~ Flo ~ t\:
tflL
46
Tang Yongtong. p. 131
47
Zhi means "susbstance, crude material". lt implies simplicity and sincerity, but also coarseness and
boorishness. Wen means "culture" or "that which is refined", "that which has a pattem". lt implies
elegance and forma[ attractiveness. As Zurcher points out in Conquest, p. 334, note 121, the dichotomy
of z hi and wen is present already in Confucius, see Lun Yu ~ífB§g VI.l6:
-=fS: r m~tUl.IIY. :>QlnlfE, :>ťm1~~ ~To J Confucius said: "lfraw substance dominates
refinement, you will be coarse. lfrefinement dominates raw substance, you will be like a court
historian. When refinement and raw qualities are well blended, you will be a gentleman."
25
T55n2145 _p0050a16(03) 11-Jt;=r:~Hl§ o 11§-:=i/f'~L 1rr ~3]\ ~o ~/f'.iíl8 o
T55n2145_p0050a17(03) 11-;':;'/HfB:~o ~}j]!JLA~1*~1!\Ii~]o
Ziircher renders the passage in the following translation:
"At first I objected against the wording (ofthis translation) as being unrefined. (To
this), Vighna replied: "As to the words of the Buddha, we are concemed with their
meaning, and do not need to adom them; the grasping of the doctrine they (contain) is
not effected by adding embellishment. Those who transmit the scriptures (in another
language) must make them easy to understand, and the meaning must not be lost (only) then the work is well done." All those present said: "Laozi has said: 'Beautiful
words are not reliable, reliable words are not beautiful' 48 . Likewise, Confucius has
said: 'Writing does not completely express speech, nor does speech completely
express the idea' 49 . This (correspondence) clearly shows the unfathomable depth of
the Saint' s thoughts" ... " 50
This passage is particularly interesting because it seems to embody in a way the basic
dilemma of all translators of Buddhist scriptures into Chinese. We will find that
Kumarajiva was concemed with the same issue, as well as Dao'an and Xuanzang.
Western Jin
Dharmaraksha
Previously it has been said that after the fall of the Han, the centre of Buddhist
activities on Chinese soil shifted from Luoyang to Wuchang and Jianye (the
successive capitals ofWu during the period ofthe Three Kingdoms), and then to
Chang'an during the Western Jin. The most influential and representative figure of
Western Jin was undoubtedly the translator Dharmaraksha (Zhu Fahu
~1~~~),
a
Yuezhi boru in Dunhunag. In the CSZJJ we find a relative wealth of information
about Fahu in prefaces and colophons to his translations. The biography of
Dharmaraksha in the CSZJJ seems to have been put together based on these
comments adjoined to the translations and also preserved in the CSZJJ. The GSZ
48
49
50
Dao De Jing. chapter 81.
Yijing, "Xizi". part I.
Zlircher. Conquest. p. 48
26
biography, as if often the case, bears great resemblance to the CSZJJ biography which
most likely served as its principal source. In both biographies we read that
Dharmaraksha (active ca. 266-308) was boru around 230 AD in Dunhuang into a
Yuezhi family which has been living in Dunhuang for generations. He became a
monk and studied with the master Zhu Gaozuo
!cft ťi5Jg[.
He is said to have committed
a large vol ume of texts to memory. Later, disillusioned with the state of Buddhism in
China, with its opulently decorated viharas and statues, yet lacking in the most
essential - the sacred texts - he set out to the Western countries in a quest for
Buddhist scriptures. On his way he is said to have acquired the knowledge of 36
language which is probably just a way of saying that he was able to leam some of the
languages of the Centra! Asian countries traditionally referred to as the Thirty-six
Western Regions (San s hi liu xi yu -=:: +7\"E§±~). On his way back, via Dunhuang to
Chang'an, Dharmaraksha was translating the scriptures as he went, and after his
arrival at Chang'an, he continued translating and teaching, gathering thousands of
students and followers, both foreign and Chinese, monastic and lay. His most
outstanding Chinese collaborator was a layman Nie Chengyuan, who figures in a
number of colophons as the person who was noting down the translation (bi shou
~).
*
According to the biographies Dharmaraksha left Chang'an in the year 304 with
his disciples and died of illness a few years later at the age of 77.
In both the CSZJJ and the GSZ biographies Dharmaraksha is spoken of with the
highest respect and he is even granted the honour of having contributed more than
27
anyone else to the conversion of China to Buddhism. 51 In connection with this
statement Ziircher makes the following comment:
"This might be an overstatement, but it is undoubtedly true that it was he who made
from the hitherto rather insignificant Buddhist community at Chang'an the major
Buddhist centre in northem China, thus laying the foundations of the work which,
some seventy years after his death, would be resumed by Dao'an and completed by
Kumarajiva and his school". 52
In addition to this, the intense activity which Dharmaraksha stimulated in Chang'an
and the translations which were produced there must have been a major influence and
inspiration for the xuanxue Buddhism53 which flourished in the South throughout the
fourth century.
As for Dharmaraksha 's reputation as the greatest translator prior to Kumarajiva, it
seems he might ha ve eamed it due to the choice of texts he translated rather than to
the quality ofthe translations themselves. Generally, Dharmaraksha's translations are
very literal, and therefore rather difficult to read. Y et to be sure, his translations mark
a distinctive progress from the literal translations of An Shigao. After all, unlike An
Shigao who had only a rudimentary knowledge of the Chinese language,
Dharmaraksha was bilingual, and since youth a recipient of traditional Chinese
education. Compared to the Han translations, Dharmaraksha's work is characterized
by greater conformity to Chinese grammatical and stylistic standards and also by a
comprehensive and expanded system of technical Buddhist vocabulary. 54
51
Zi.ircher, Conquest, p. 343. CSZJJ XIII. 98.1.3. = GSZ I. 326.3.45: fi't1tJ'Jrl;J,fl1f1JrUp'ljiC:fí. :ii.L.tJtl!..
Zi.ircher. Conquest, p. 66.
53
Xuanxue Buddhism is a term used by Zi.ircher in Conquest referring to the study of Buddhism in the
South during the time of Eastern J in, where the revival of Daoist ideas known as xuanxue was taking
place among men of letters. Some ofthese intellectuals aiso took interest in the Buddhist teachings, and
they would often use the Daoist concepts to interpret buddhist philosophy. For more detailed treatment
ofthis trend see section "Eastern Jin- South". Cf. also Zi.ircher, Conquest pp 81-109, and Tang
Yongtong, Fojiao shi, chapter "xuanfeng zhi nandu z!.®.Z.~y§t" p.168-173, and Demieville.
"Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui". p 809-859.
54
Tsukamoto, History, p. 193-229, 1126-1129.
52
28
According to Dao'an's catalogue, Dharmaraksha produced an ouvre of 154
translations, in CSZJJ the number rises to 159 entries. Little less than a half of the
works have been preserved. The vast amount ofDharmaraksha's translations testify to
the man's enormous activity and dedication, in particular given the fact that all of the
translations were produced in the most turbulent of times, surrounded by virtually
constant warfare. Y et precisely because the translations were made under the
uninterrupted warfare that plagued the Chang'an and Luoyang areas and since his
death was almost immediately followed by the collapse of the W es tem Jin, many of
his works were totally or partially lost relatively early after being produced.
Among the translated scriptures there are five which stand out in particular as
scriptures which were about to exert substantial influence on the development of early
Chinese Buddhist thought. These were the five Mahayana sutras (four of them being
retranslations): Prajnaparamita in 25,000 Lines
(Paiicavimsatisahasrikaprajnaparamita sutra, Guang zan borzw }ing :JťiflU§ť:;f§=*~),
Suramgamasamadhisutra (Shoulengyan sanmei }ing
Vimalakirtinirdesasutra ( Weimojie }ing *ffii'J§a*~
iLHJf fil -- B;fi:f.:~),
), Saddharmapundarikasutra
(Zhengfa hua }ing TE1~**~), Sukhavativyuhasutra (Wuliang qingjing pingdengjiie
"'"*-
'=-_,.."
<«) A'
·~ -f"'"'
}·z·ng JHf:-=---·;=·ic+k
)1\\_miFJi-J
~Ji';i.!'.::C. SS
EJ
'"'
The numerous prefaces and colophons in the CSZJJ contain some valuable
information about the process of Dharmaraksha 's translation work as well as about
the conditions under which it was taking place. In an anonymous colophon in the
CSZJJ we read:
55
For a comprehensive list of Dharmaraksha 's translations see Tsukamoto, History, p. 207-211.
29
"In Tai shi 2, [226, Dharmaraksha being 35 at the time], in the eleventh month on the
eighth day, in Chang'an within the Green Gate (qing men fl§F~), inside the White
Horse Monastery (Baima si Él Ji~~), the Indian bodhisattva Dharmaraksha
pronounced it orally. At the time, those who passed the words on were An W enhui Ji:
X~ and Bo Yuanxin m:JC{E3 [a Parthina and a Kucheanjudging from their
ethnikons]. Those who took it down by hand were Nie Chengyuan íl;it\~, Zhang
Xuanbo 51ti:r18 and Sun Xiuda j%{;f;il, on the thirteenth day, at the hour of the ram
[some time early in 267], it was finished." 56
According to Leon Hurvitz, this passage can be taken to mean that the Kuchean and
Parthian laymen either recited from memory or read out loud the Sanskrit original,
which was then orally rendered into Chinese by Dharmaraksha, upon which the three
Chinese took it down in writing, converting it from the colloquial idiom into the
.
57
11terary.
The sheer amount of translations produced by Dharmaraksha under the turbulent
circumstances of his time has incited a certain confusion among scholars as to
whether the dates provided are really reliable and whether such bulk of work could
possibly have been performed by a single individua!. Tsukamoto suggests the
following explanation: Many of the translations produced by Dharmaraksha might not
be translations in the "narrow sense of the term". Rather it might often have been the
case that Dharmaraksha would have committed certain scriptures to memory during
his studies at Dunhuang, and later he would explain them directly in Chinese, without
going through the process of comparing the original and the orally rendered Chinese
version. The Chinese assistants would then write down these oral expositions of
Dharmaraksha. This, according to Tsukamoto, might explain why it was possible for
56
57
CSZJJ vol. 7. Quoted according to Tsukamoto, History, p 197-198.
Tsukamoto, History, note j. (note by Leon Hurvitz), p. 549.
30
the man to produce several translations within a year, sometimes even within only a
month. 58
Tsukamoto also makes the observation that there has been a major difference between
the translation work of Dharmaraksha and the work of Kumarajiva and later yet
Xuanzang. He points out that the latter two had state-sponsored translation projects
with all necessary background and organization at their disposal, while Dharmaraksha
could only rely on the support and dedication ofhis fellow believers, not to mention
the acute instability and violence ofhis time.
In his History ofChinese Buddhism Ren Jiyu makes an interesting comparison
between Dharmaraksha and Kumarajiva. He regards both of them as essential
exponents of Mahayana Buddhism in China, whose activity was instrumental for the
development of Chinese Buddhism in the Mahayana direction. However, he says that
while Kumarajiva's merit lies in expounding clearly the philosophical doctrine of
emptiness, and by making a clear distinction between the understanding of emptiness
within the Hinayana and the Mahayana, Dharmaraksha 's main emphasis was on the
actual application of the teaching of emptiness - the Mahayana teaching of universal
compassion, the intention to liberate a ll sentient beings from suffering. 59
As has already been mentioned, Dharmaraksha's activity at Chang'an was in fact a
setting of ground for the activity of Dao 'an and hi s disciples who were to come some
seventy years later. However, before we look at the Dao'an and his circle more
58
59
lbid. p. 211-213.
Ren J iyu {f~~- Zhongguo Fojiao Shi
cp lllll{:IMJ:si:.'.. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1985.
31
dosely, let us comment briefly on another noteworthy development in the field of
scriptural studies which was meanwhile taking place in the South.
Eastern Jin - South
Zhi Mindu
Already since the third century there was taking place a strong philosophical revival
among Chinese intellectuals known as the xuan xue
:Z~'
usually translated as neo-
daoism. Many men of letters were withdrawing from active participation in political
affairs, and engaging in the pure talks qing tan
1f!rgit In the first wave of the neo-
daoist movement, He Yan and Wang Bi interpreted Confucian classics in Daoist
terms. One generation later, scholars like Xiang Xiu and Guo Xiang proceeded to
interpret Zhuangzi in Confucian terms. And at such a time, Buddhism started to enter
the Chinese intellectual scene. Particularly after the loss of the North and the sack of
Luoyang in 311, large numbers of the aristocratic intellectuals escaped to the South,
where they remained - bereft of their former active engagement in the affairs of the
state - waiting for their time to retum back to the North. Meanwhile many of them
took to discussing the mysteries among themselves, and gradually more and more
often also with Buddhist monks educated in Chinese culture. 60 An example of such a
scholar-monk is Zhi Mindu, who is known as an independent thinker and in fact a
founder of one of the so called "schools" of Early Chinese Buddhism. He is also
known to ha ve compiled a catalogue of early Chinese translations of the scriptures,
which however, like Dao'an's catalogue, has been 1ost. Furthermore, Zhi Mindu is
known as an author of the synoptic editions heben 15-::z!s: of certain important
Mahayana scriptures, ie. the Vimalakirtinirdesa and the Suramgamasamadhisutra. As
6
°Cf. Demieville. "Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui". p 809-859.
32
Ziircher points out, such works were not undertaken for philological reasons. They
were the best attempt at exegesis by those Chinese Buddhists who did not know the
language of the originals. Without a guidance of a foreign master, the Chinese
exegetes could only try to get as near as possible to the original meaning by critically
comparing the various existing Chinese translations of a certain scripture. They would
treat one text as the "mother" (mu
m) to which the other texts or "sons" (zi Ť) were
appended sentence by sentence wherever there was a major deviation in meaning.
None of these works have survived, but the early catalogues mention several other
compilations ofthis kind composed by other clerical intellectuals.
61
Eastern Jin- North
Translation and exegesis in the style of geyi f~~.
In allliterature dealing with the first centuries of Chinese Buddhism we find the term
geyi. lt is usually associated with a method of exegesis of the Buddhist scriptures in
terms of Chinese philosophical categories, which developed during the 41h century.
Y et different researchers differ in how broad they understand the meaning of geyi to
be. For example Tsukamoto expands the meaning to a general approach of
interpretati on of the Buddhist doctrine in China. Indeed he goes as far as to apply the
term to certain interpretations made by An Shigao and Lokaksema, even though at
their time the term geyi had not even existed yet. 62 Kenneth Ch'en also presents a
rather broad understanding of the term when he says: "The practice of the Buddhists
of searching through Chinese literature, mainly Daoist, for expressions to explain
61
62
Ziircher. Conquest, p 100.
Tsukamoto. History. pp 306.
33
their own ideas is known as geyi, or the method ofmatching the meaning."
63
Ziircher
on the other hand presents the term geyi in a more specific and narrow sense, as a
method of exegesis used by Zhu Faya and Kang Falang, and later also by Dao'an and
Zhu Fatai. He explains that the method consisted of taking the numerical categories
s hi s hu ~%i)(, probably of dhyana and Abidharma, and matching these with terms
from secular literature, and therefore it came to be known as "matching the meaning",
geyi. Yet regardless of how broadly or narrowly we understand the term geyi, it is
primarily a method of translation in which the Buddhist terms and concepts were
matched to concepts already existing in the Chinese tradition. The word ge ř'lr means
"a box- a standardized part of a whole system or a grid", the word yi ~ stands for "a
meaning". Thus the translation method of geyi consisted of finding an appropriate box
within the existing system of Chinese thought which would best match the meaning of
the Sanskrit word or concept.
In the GSZ biography of Zhu Faya, we read about how the term geyi came to
existence in the first place:
"Zhu Faya was a man from Hejian ... In his youth he excelled in secular studies (wai
xue )!}~ ), and when he grew up he became well-versed in the tenets of Buddhism;
young members of gentry families (yiguan she z i t\Jútffr±ř) all adhered to him for
information and instruction. Since at that time the disciples who followed Faya were
all well-versed in the secular canons, but had not yet become conversant with the
princip les of Buddhism, Faya together with Kang Falang and others then took the
numerical categories (s hi s hu lJJl&) of the sutras and matched these with [terms from]
secular literature, as a method to make them understand; this was called matching
64
meanings (geyi f~~)."
63
Ch'en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China, A Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1972. p 68.
64
GSZ IV. Biography of Zhu Faya. p 347.1. The English translation by Zi.ircher, in Conquest, p.l84.
34
Prom this extract we leam that geyi was indeed a method of interpretation of Buddhist
numerical categories by means of terms from the Chinese tradition. Zurcher makes an
interesting observation saying that here the "matching of meanings" cannot refer to
equasions like bodhi= dao )]!, arhat = zhenren
~A,
nirvana = wuwei ~~etc.,
since these translation devices ha ve become characteristic of already the earliest
Chinese Buddhist translations. Furthermore these could not even be recognized as
equations by someone like Zhu Faya who did not know the language of the
. . 1s. 65
ongma
Later in the same biography we also read that Dao'an used the geyi method to explain
the Buddhist scriptures in the beginning of his career. Later, however, he tumed away
from it resolutely, and after Kumarajiva's arrival at Chan'an, the method has been
abandoned altogether.
lt seems worthwhile to briefly mention Tsukamoto's understanding ofthe term geyi as
well. For one, he is not the only researcher who interprets geyi in the more general
sense. Secondly, while introducing the concept of geyi, Tsukamoto touches upon
certain tendencies within the history of early Chinese Buddhism relevant to our
present discussion. In a general summary of the process of acceptance of Buddhism in
China, Tsukamoto says that at first - even before the first translations were made- the
Buddha was accepted as a superhuman sylph (shenxian
t$1W), on the same level as
Huangdi and Laozi. In late second century came the first translations of Buddhist
scriptures, and with them exegesis.
"Luckily for Buddhism," says Tsukamoto, "the apotheosis of Confucianism, which it
had obtained under the Han, had declined somewhat under the Wei and Jin and the era
of xuan xue came first to flourish, then to overwhelm the exegetical oriented
Confucianism, and ushered in a mood of human liberation and freedom of thought.
65
Ziircher. Conquest. p 184.
35
Y et even so, the exegetical approach to the study of the classics - and not only the
Confucian classics - bound as these latter were to a long-established veneration of
antiquity, was something not easy to eradicate from the consciousness of the
. ll"tgentsia
. ... "66
mte
Tsukamoto further suggests that at this point, the only way how the Chinese men of
letters could become interested in Buddhism was by presenting the new doctrine by a
method of traditional Chinese exegesis. And that is when the method of geyi comes
into play. While in a general sense this is certainly true, we should not forget that by
the time Zhu Falan, Dao'an and others were beginning to use the geyi method of
exegesis in the North, there was already present a thriving tradition of interpreting the
Buddhist concepts in terms of the philosophy of xuan xue in the South. The qing tan
of the South resulting in various contradictory interpretations of the Prajnaparamita
philosophy have developed independently from the geyi method in the sense of
interpreting the Buddhist numerical categories. Y et Tsukamoto seems to view the
leamed discussions and pure talks of the Chinese men of letters and scholar-clerics
and the geyi method as practically the same thing, or at least an expression of the
same tendency in the Chinese acceptance of Buddhism. He even says that "the
propagation of Buddhism in keeping with xuan xue is just another name for geyi
Buddhism." 67
Dao'an
lt is true that from a certain point of view we may understand the participation of
Buddhist scholar-clerics in the qing tan discussions as a very original and fertile way
of one philosophical system (Indian Buddhism) inspiring and enriching another (the
66
Tsukamoto. Historv. p 293. Translation by Leon Hurvitz.
As an example ofhow geyi was used by Zhu Faya, Tsukamoto mentions the matching ofthe Five
Precepts, pancasila, wujie against the Five Norms wu chang. For detailed explanations ofthese ten
concepts see Tsukamoto. Historv. Note bw, p 575.
67
Tsukamoto. History, p 299.
36
Chinese xuan xue). And it is also trne that it was largely dueto the notable
co incidence in time - which allowed the meeting of the Indian Prajnaparamita
philosophy with the revival of the daoist thought in China - that the Chinese
intellectual elite started to take interest in the foreign creed through finding certain
common denominators of the two systems of thought. Y et on the other hand we
cannot but see that the similarities between the two thought systems are rather
superficial and, more importantly, that in the period of the vogue of the qing tan and
xuanxue, most of the assumptions made by the Chinese intellectuals about
Prajnaparamita philosophy were based on insufficient understanding, which was in
tum caused by lack of information, since translations were scarce and full of errors.
Thus by the middle of the fourth century we can see that there ha ve emerged a host of
"Chinese schools of prajnaparamita philosophy" holding strongly to their dogmas and
quarrelling with each other, while virtually all of them were only based on insufficient
understanding of the philosophy in the original form. 68 Furthermore foreign masters
who would know the language of the original and who could give accurate
explanations of them were rare, particularly in the South where the various qing tan
interpretations of the Mahayana philosophy were most rampant. And even if there
were foreign missionaries, their Chinese language ability and familiarity with the
indigenous culture and philosophy would usually not be enough to allow them to
make much sense of the pure discussions. Leon Hurvitz describes the situation quite
aptly as one of mutual misunderstanding: the foreign missionaries believed that they
were able to get their message across to the Chinese, while the Chinese were thinking
that they understood correctly. In actual fact however, the foreigners and the Chinese
constituted two isolated groups and their mutual understanding was far from thorough.
68
For detailed treatment ofthe Chinese Prajnaparamita scholarship prior to Kumarajiva, see
Tsukamoto, Historv, chapters "Pure Talkers and Dark Leamers"and "Doctrinal Disputes and the
Advance of Prajnaparamita Study".
37
Of course there was the exception of the foreigners bom on Chinese soil 69 and as we
have seen throughout this chapter, these naturalized foreigners were truly most
instrumental in translating and transmitting the teachings.
The first Chinese cleric to realize how unsatisfactory the understanding was of the
Chinese Buddhists, and how misleading was the habit of qing tan and method of geyi
was Dao'an (312-385). Dao'an was bom in the present Hebei province in a family of
Confucian scholars. He took his first monastic vows at the age of 12. Later he
travelled to Ye where he studied under Fo Tuteng. According to Dao'an's biography
in the CSZJJ, ever since young age he was convinced that even though the Buddha
had passed away long ago, it was possible to seek after the authentic meaning of his
teaching by reading as widely as possible and studying with as many teachers as one
could. In 379 Dao'an was summoned to come to Chang'an by Fu Jian, a ruler of
Tib etan origin who had established the state of Qin in the North in 379. Fu Jian is
described as a patron of leaming and a devout Buddhist. Until his death in 385 Dao'an
remained the dean ofthe Buddhist hierarchy ofChang'an. Dao'an indeed had the
vision of a religious reformer, which can be most markedly attested by the following
three facts: He was the first one to clearly dismiss the pseudo-Buddist parlour
conversations (i.e. the qing tan) as misleading and harmful to correct understanding of
the doctrine. He was devoted to the orthodox monastic discipline as well as to the
study of dhyana and the Abidharma. Lastly he understood the importance of obtaining
faithful correct translations, and although ignorant of the language of the original
scriptures, he sponsored and collaborated with a number of translators.
69
Hurvitz, Leon. "Chi h-l (538-597) An lntroduction to the Life and ldeas of a Chi nese Buddhist
Monk". In Melanges Chinois et Bouddhiques, vol XII. Bruxelles: Institute Belge des Hautes Etudes
Chinoises, 1980. p 56.
38
Y et it was precisely the lack of knowledge of the language of the original scriptures
that prevented Dao'an from carrying his reform ofChinese Buddhist scholarship
successfully to the end. Although his exegesis of the prajnaparamita was the closest to
the authentic meaning of all the various Chinese interpretations, it was stili not free of
the influence of the Chi nese classics and geyi. It was only twenty years after Dao'an's
death, when Kumarajiva arrived at Chang'an that the Chinese Buddhists were to
receive a comprehensive expalanation of the prajnaparamita. In the same way in
which Dharmaraksha prepared the ground of Buddhism in Chang'an for the arrival of
Dao'an, Dao'an in tum prepared the community for the arrival ofKumarajiva. Many
ofKumarajiva's Chinese assistants in translation- most prominent ofwhom was
Sengrui- were in fact disciples of Dao'an.
39
3. The Life of Kumarajiva
In a accordance with what has been said in the chapter discussing the historical
sources on Early Chinese Buddhism, this biographical sketch is going to be based on
the principle ofthe sources available- Huijiao's GSZ. At the same time, we will try to
incorporate the information on Kumarajiva's life found in other sources as well.
Additional information from other sources as well as comments by modem
researchers will be specified.
Studies in India and Central Asia
According to the GSZ Kumarajiva was bom in the year 350 AD in Kucha to parents
of noble descent. His father, Kumarayana, was bom in India as a son of an important
official. Kumarayana himself renounced his carrier and became a monk. Then he
travelled across Pamir until he arrived at the kingdom of Kucha. As we read in the
GSZ, the King of Kucha felt great respect for Kumarayana and appointed him the
state preceptor (gzwshi
~@/1i)
in his kingdom. Later Kumarayana must apparently
have given back his monastic vows since we read that he married the king's younger
sister Jiva, who was endowed with exceptional wisdom and intellectual abilities. As
we read in the GSZ, the birth of their son Kumarajiva 70 was preceded by various
auspicious signs. Shortly after Kumarajiva's birth his mother became a nun and left to
live in a monastery together with her seven year old son. Eventually they left Kucha
for Kashmir, where Kumarajiva studied the Sarvastivada doctrine under the guidance
of Bandhudatta. When Kumarajiva was twelve years old, his mother had decided to
°
7
Kumarajiva's name is a combination ofthe name ofboth ofhis parents, Kumarayana and Jiva.
Huijiao explains in the biography that this method of giving names was a custom in the non-Chinese
countries of the time. At the same time the meaning of the name is "A Child destined to ha ve a long
life". The name is transcribed to Chi nese as Jiumoluoshi ~~/f-i{t, or occasionally also translated as
tongshou :i:~~ a child of long life. Hurvitz. "Chih-1", p. 64.
40
retum to Kucha. On the way they passed through Kashgar. By that time Kumarajiva's
exceptional talent had already become well known and the king of Kashgar had asked
Kumarajiva to stay in his country and teach the monks. At the same time the king also
hoped to gain the friendship of the kingdom of Kucha by paying respects to
Kumarajiva, in which he succeeded. The historicity ofthis passage cannot be
proveď,
however it is clearly one of the examples characterizing the biography of Kumarajiva
- the fact that Kumarajiva was considered a valuable asset by the kings and rulers
throughout his life. Indeed, in this passage he was merely a boy of twelve years, and
yet we read that respect paid to him was enough of a reason to win an alliance of
another country.
While in Kashgar, Kumarajiva encountered for the first time the teachings ofthe
Mahayana, which were presented to him by a teacher called Surjasom, a prince of
Yarkand, who had given up his post and became a monk. 71 Kumarajiva studied
Mahayana very thoroughly and at the same time compared it to the Sarvsastivada
teachings he had received earlier. In the end he came to a conclusion that the
Mahayana teachings were superior and since then concentrated wholeheartedly on
them.
In between teaching and studying the Buddhist doctrine, we read that Kumarajiva also
studied Indian sacred scriptures of other than Buddhist doctrines. At the same time he
also explored Indian literary forms, the art of composition, the art of debate etc. His
fame as a great master and scholar continued to spread far and wide, and soon it
reached the far o ff land of China.
71
Y crmakov. /hi:neopisania /)os/ojnych /'v!onaclwv. vol I. iv!uscuw: N:lllka. 1991.
41
After several years Kumarajiva retumed to Kucha, accepting an invitation made
personally by the king. At the age oftwenty, Kumarajiva took the monk's ordination
at the royal palace of Kucha. 72 He then stayed in Kucha in the King's New Monastery
:=E!tJT-~
where he continued to study the Mahayana sutras and shastras. According to
the GSZ, Bandhudatta, Kumarajiva's former teacher of the Sarvastivada, came to
Kucha at this time to receive the Mahayana teachings from his former student. After
he had accepted the doctrine of the Great Vehicle, Bandhudatta made this remark
about Kumarajiva and himslef: 'This monk ismy teacher of the Mahayana. And I am
his teacher of the Hinayana." 73
In the GSZ biography there follows a passage discussing Kumarajiva's mother's
departure from Kucha to India. Before leaving she explained that the kingdom of
Kucha will soon be destroyed. She urged Kumarajiva to leave with her, but he
decided to stay. In her last words before leaving, the mother wams her son that
expounding the Mahayana teachings in the lands of the East is beyond the powers of
Kumarajiva alone. Kumarajiva answers that if it is his fate to preach the law, then he
w1'll not regret anyt h'mg. 74
Captivity at Liangzhou
Meanwhile in northem China the ethnically Tibetan ruler Fu Jian had established his
kingdom in 379 in the region Between the Passes (Guan Zhong
fi~cp)
making plans
n Tsukamoto explains in the "Dates of Kuamrajiva and Sengzhao Re-examined" that it used to be a
norma[ practice for the monks to ta ke fu ll ordination at the age of twenty, and becoming bikshus. Until
that age, they were shramaneras, p 581.
73
CiSZ. T 50. no. 2()5C). p. :131 b()()(OI) ,·1 1'11 [·.)Lfk}"*ll11i. :[k.),~ ,fil [·_;J';'l~l'lljí;;:~.
74
Hurvitz dismisses this passage as a clear example ofhagiographical embellishment, and argues that if
it was not for Fu Jian's ambition to become the Son of Heaven and therefore to conquer the western
regions, Kumarajiva might as well ha ve finished out his days in his native Kucha as a Mahayana
scholar. Hurvitz. "Chih-1", p. 65.
42
for a further expansion to the west. Fu Jian was a Buddhist ruler and apparently a
patron of leaming. By that time the fame of Kumarajiva had already reached northem
China and Fu Jian was eager to welcome the outstanding scholar and master in
Chang'an. He sent the general Li.i Guang to conquer Kucha, instructing him to
dispatch fast messengers to bring Kumarajiva to Chang'an as soon as Kucha is
defeated. The GSZ biography presents Fu Jian's conquest ofKucha in such a light as
if obtaining Kumarajiva was its principle purpose. This is obviously doubtful and the
passage is most likely another example of the hagiographic character of the GSZ. In
this case it is not Kumarajiva however, but Fu Jian who is presented in a more
favourable and acceptable light as a wise and devout ruler with noble motives.
The conquest of Kucha was successfully carried out by Li.i Guang in 3 84 AD and Li.i
Guang set on a joumey bac k with Kumarajiva as a "valuable piece of boo ty".
75
When
they arrived at Liang Zhou, the news reached them that Fu Jian's kingdom was
defeated by the Yao clan and Fu Jian himselfwas killed by Yao Chang. Upon hearing
the news Li.i Guang arrested his joumey in present day Gansu and promptly founded
an independent state there, which he named the Later Liang. General Li.i Guang, now
the self-appointed ruler of the Later Liang, had no appreciation whatsoever neither for
literacy and leaming nor for the Buddhadharma. Yet he kept Kuamarajiva as a captive
at his court for seventeen long years, using him as an advisor for political and military
affairs and also as an object of many uncouth jokes, as we read in the GSZ. For
example, after the defeat of Kucha in 3 84, Li.i Guang would amuse himself by
insisting on making Kumarajiva break the vows of monastic discipline by getting him
drunk and closing him in one room with the Kuchean princess. This account seems to
75
Ziircher. Conquest, p. 226.
43
be anticipated within the GSZ biography by a curious passage describing how on his
way back to Kucha from northem India, Kumarajiva had encountered a certain arhat
who said the following to the young shramanera's mother:
"If this child li ves to the age of thirty-five without violating his vows, he shall be as
great a servant of the Buddha and saviour of souls as Upagupta; if, however, he does
violate his vows, he shall be a highly leamed dharmacarya, but no more."
In his article "The Dates of Kumarajiva and Sengzhao Re-examined" Tsukamoto
argues that the tale about the arhat was probably invented later by the Chinese
Buddhist community in order to justify the first violation ofKumarajiva's vows. 76
As Zurcher puts it in his Buddhist Conquest of China, there is practically nothing
known about the seventeen years ofKumarajiva's life at Liangzhou" 77 One cannot but
agree with this statement, in spite of the fact that we find a rather long passage in the
GSZ biography dealing with this period of Kumarajiva's life. But virtually all of this
information in GSZ consists of different instances of Kumarajiva giving advice to Ui
Guang, and to his sons who succeeded him on the throne. In all these instances, we
read about Kumarajiva using his ability to predict the future and to read the meaning
of various natural signs like sudden strong winds, or supematural signs, like the
appearance of dragons etc. As has been said while discussing the character of
historical sources, such instances are by no means specific to Buddhist historiography
of early medieval China. On the contrary, they are a very frequent phenomenon
76
Tsukamoto. "Dates", p. 577-588. Tsukamoto further mentions the fact that after Kumarajiva had
arrived at Chang'an, he was once again forced by the ruJer to Jeave the monk's quarters and to Jive in a
paJace with a harem often. Tsukamoto then makes the following comment: "His [Kumarajiva's]
vioJation ofthe vows (Jeaving aside the circumstances that gave rise to it) seems to have been a fact.
And it was an embarrassing fact to the Chinese monastic community that had recorded him in its annaJs
as a great and famous monk. The Chinese Buddhist Community, which had come to Jook upon
Kumarajiva's transJations and ideas as authoritative, probabJy invented the taJe ofthe arhat in order to
justify the first vioJation of hi s vows since hi s ordination as unavoidabJe, something not to be
condemned out of hand." ln hi s study, Tsukamoto uses the story of the arhat as evidence supporting
his re-statement ofthe dates of Kumarajiva's life, arguing that regardJess of its factuaJ truth of faJsity,
the passage impJies that Kumarajiva was 35 in the year 384.
77
Zi.ircher. Conquest, p. 226.
44
present in the secular writings throughout Chinese history. Other than such accounts,
however, the biography provides us with hardly any more substantial information on
Kumarajiva's life in Liangzhou.
The only thing that seems to be certain about this period of Kuamrajiva's life is that
neither Ui Guang nor his sons have expressed any interest in the teachings for which
Kumarajiva was so renowned, let alone converted to them. "Although Kumarajiva's
wisdom grew even deeper," states Huijiao, "he didn't find any use for it." 78 Based on
this brief comment, there seems to have arisen a generally acknowledged vague
assumption that the seventeen years in Liangzhou, from Kumarajiva's 35 to 49 years
of age, were the time of maturing of his own understanding of the Buddhist ideas
which he studied prior to 384 AD. 79
One might be tempted to assume that these seventeen years were also the time when
Kumarajiva came to master the Chinese language which he later put to use in the
translation activities during the eight remaining years of his life after arriving at
Chang'an in 401. 80 This assumption, however logical it might seem, can be proveď
false by the following evidence according to which Kumarajiva had only a very basic
knowledge of Chinese when he arrived at Chang'an in 401 AD. The evidence consists
of a number of comments on the subject of Kumarajiva's Chinese made by his
disciples in the prefaces to the various translations. Wang Wenyan presents some of
78
Ycrmakov. /.hi::.neopisania, p.l3lJ.
cf. Tsukamoto, "Dates", p 579. Tsukamoto also points out that during these seventeen years
Kumarajiva probably did not ha ve access to the newer schools of Mahayana thought which were
forming in India while he was kept captive in Gansu.
80
Wang Wenyan í.'X:~J[. Fodian hanyi zhi yanjiu {~:!J$..~Ji~~ZlitfJ'C.Tianhua foxue congkan zhi 21.
Wang states the date of Kumarajiva's arrivat at Chang'an is 401. Zurcher says it was early 402.
(Zurcher. Conquest.)
79
45
these extracts in his Study ofTranslating Buddhist Scriptures into Chinese. 81 We will
discuss these in detail in the chapter on Kumarajiva's principles oftranslation. For the
moment let us only note that two ofKumarajiva's most influential disciples, Sengmi
and Sengzhao, both mention in their prefaces written in 402 AD that at that time
Kumarajiva didn 't ha ve a sufficient command of the Chinese language. 82 These and
other similar comments allow us to assume that Kumarajiva probably didn't
undertake any extensive study of the Chinese language while at Liangzhou. Another
piece of evidence supporting the assumption that Kumarajiva's command ofChinese
upon his arrival at Chang'an was probably less perfect than one would be inclined to
judge from the seamless translations he had produced, can be found in his letters to
Huiyuan. In one of the letters Kumarajiva says: "In expressing my feeling and in
communicating my friendship (to you), I have to transmit my ideas by means of
translation; how can I ever express them fully!" 83 This is a rather striking statement
coming from the most celebrated translator of Chinese history at a time when he was
at the height of the translation activity, translating several sutras and shastras every
year, i.e. some time between 405 and 409. 84 It is also an indication that Kumarajiva's
elegant and smooth translations must owe a great deal to his Chinese collaborators.
Again, we will discuss this point in detail in the chapter on Kumarajiva's Principles of
Translation.
81
lbid. p. 221-222.
see Chapter 5 for details.
83
T 1856. Dasheng Da Yizhang -**-*~l'if (var. Jiumoluoshifashi dayi ~I~Mf11t1!@ffi:*~). The
entry contains 18 letters exchanged between Kumarajiva and Huiyuan between the years 405-409. The
English translation ofthe quoted excerpl was taken from Zi.ircher's Conquest, p 247.
82
Zi.ircher makes the following comment: "J:.-S1~!1J!1g . 1'itJt~g~ ; an important remark, which shows
that Kumarajiva, in spite of what is commonly told about him, was stili having considerable difficulties
with the Chinese language, and that he stili probably ma de use of interpreters in hi s correspondence
with Chinese like Huiyuan or Wang Mi." (Zi.ircher. Conquest, p. 409).
84
46
Kumarajiva in Chang'an
State sponsored translation projects.
The GSZ mentions that while Kumarajiva was stili at Liangzhou, the ruler of the
Later Qin Yao Chang had repeatedly invited him to come to Chang'an, but the Lii
rulers wouldn't let go offtheir valuable advisor. 85 It was not until401 AD when the
Yao clan defeated the Later Liang that Kumarajiva was received in Chang'an as the
preceptor ofthe state by Yao Chang's son and successor on the throne Yao Xing. In
the GSZ we read about Yao Xing that "he had underlined his knowledge of the
Buddhist scriptures with good deeds". 86 He provided Kumarajiva with all the facilities
necessary for scriptural translation as a state project, in which he personally
participated. Yao Xing's reign (394-416) is regarded as a climax ofthe imperial
sponsorship of Buddhism which came band in hand with unprecedented flourishing of
the religion in northem China. The generous sponsorship and the fervent activity
caused many monks from both China and abroad to come to Chan'an and take part in
the teaching and translating activities. Yao Xing's era was also a rare period of time
without wars, during which Chang'an enjoyed political security, peace and prosperity.
When Kumarajiva arrived at Chang'an in 401, all the favourable conditions he found
there were in fact a culmination of a process which had started already in 379 AD
when Fu Jian invited Dao'an to come to Chang'an from Xiangyang. lt was the same
Fu Jian who also ordered Lii Guang to bring Kumarajiva to Chang'an from Kucha but
who never met with the Kuchean master in his life. Ziircher explains that it was
already with Dao'an's arrival at Chang'an that there started a new chapter in the
history of northem Buddhism, characterized by a renewed influx of missionaries,
scriptures and ideas from Central Asia and India, huge translation projects, state
85
Leon Hurvitz points out that Tsukamoto speculates that behind these repeated requests must have
laid the petitions ofsome ofthe disciples ofDao'an such as Sengrui. Hurvitz. "Chih-1", p. 66.
86
Y crmakov. /.hi:::neupisania. p. 140.
47
patronage and supervision, and the emergence of a body of scriptural and scholastic
literature (both Hinayana and Mahayana) together with a new method of exegesis and
a new translation technique. 87 The eight years ofKumarajiva's activity at Chang'an
present a culmination of this period of northem Chinese Buddhism.
As we have seen in the chapter "Translating Buddhist Scriptures from
2nd
to 41h
century AD" the various conditions which contributed to the accomplishment of
Kumarajiva's work were a result ofthe activities ofhis numerous predecessors
coupled with political developments in northem China. We saw that from his
predecessors on the Chinese soil, Kumarajiva had inherited a large number of
previously translated scriptures along with a whole body of Chinese interpretations of
these as well as the state patronage over religious activities and particularly over the
translation projects established under the foreign rulers of northem China. With all
these preconditions present, Kumarajiva was able to produce in the short period of
eight years between 401 to 409 more then 300 scrolls of translations. 88 The biography
ofKumarajiva in the CSZJJ contains the following passage about Yao Xing's
establishing, sponsoring and participating at the translation projects headed by
Kumarajiva in at the Garden ofWhimsical Wanderings by the Bright Western Tower
(Xi mingge xiaoyao yuan ® l!)j ~Jl!í~~):
Ever since the reign of the Han emperor Mingdi ( 5 8-7 5) when the Great Law had
entered the East, and later under the Wei (220-264) and Jin (265-420) dynasties, many
sutras were translated. But the texts translated by men from Yuezhi and India were all
made using the principle of zhiwen geyi 1fffJtt.t~ (getting lost in the words and
matching the meaning).
[Y ao] Xing, a s a young man, venerated the Three J ewels and sharpened hi s ambition
to be involved in exegesis and collation [of scriptures]. Once Kumarajiva arrived, he
87
Ziircher. Conquest. p. 114.
This is according to GSZ. According to Pfl:lG~ it was a total of 74 volumes of scriptures in 383
juans, according to tti~f< it was 35 vol um es in 294 juan.
88
48
asked him to enter the Garden of Whimsical Wonderings by the Bright W es tem
Tower xi ming ge xiao yao yuan, there to produce translations of a multitude of
scriptures. Kumarajiva had committed most ofthem to memory, and there was
nothing his understanding did not penetrate. He would convert them into Chinese
words, the oral translation being both fluent and to the point. He had a good command
of the language of the Jin, and the translations were fluent. Once he examined the old
scriptures [in Chinese translation, he understood that] at many places the meaning was
twisted, that the translators often missed the point, and the translations were not in
accord with the originals. Thereupon Xing had the shramanas Sengzhao, Sengliie,
Sengmao, and others, more than eight hundred in all, conferred with Kumarajiva to
get his meaning, and then to reissue the Scripture ofthe Great Chapters (da pin*
89
r:flr:J) , i.e., the Pancavismatis. p.p. Kumarajiva took the foreign text in hand, while
Xing held the older translation of the scripture, so that they could compare both. The
new translation differed from the old one at many places, and it expressed the true
90
meaning of the sutra with precision."
T55n2145 _pOl Ol bl4(01) 1113 :A:~!:~Offi:~€J;JN~ll)j o !HWl~ B'*~futjfft.$ o
T55n2145 _pOl O1b 15(01) TfrJ _:k 'YU1fi tl] .$11\'t)(~~ o
T55n2145_p010lbl6(08) ~Y~ · · .. ~;ť;;fi~W:o 1f~5t~lL
T55n2145 _po 101 h17(12) II1JJ~rr A 1ffi ll}j ~iliiffi~~* tiJ **~o 1t$.$ oo~m 1!tr--r.:ft:
l
l
:li
o
l
T55n2145 _pOl Ol bl8(07) ijWJ~~B'ri ~-~*t;fL;fU o ~;t';:~*~~.$~6~.
i§' dJ 7'd*~
~
S
o
T55n2145_p010lbl9(02) ll /1~5U!M4:t§JJ!L
T55n2145_p010lb20(12) ~~J!!1~1Y~~1~~1~1B!1~~~)\ Ef~~A6~5ť1t ~ ~4tlj :A r1"1 o
T55n2145_p010lb21(03) ll1tt~M4:~~)l~~~o lj,f§t;iíS(o Jt*JTX~lii!t o
T55n2145_p010lb22(02) ll ~i§'JI]j!JL 91
l
It is obviously impossible for us to know, whether Yao Xing would really personally
participate in the translation sessions as described above or whether his participation
was rather more symbolic. But even if it was merely symbolic, it is quite
89
:*:6'1:1 here refers to the Pancavimsatisahasrika prajnaparamitasutra (The Prajnaparamitasutra in
25,000 lines). For classification of the various prajnaparamita sutras see Conze, Edward. The
Prajnaparamita Literature. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1978. p 31-74.
90
With some changes, we use the translation made by Leon Hurvitz and presented in Tsukamoto,
History, p. 581.
91
CSZJJ. T55, no.2145, p. 0101b14(01)- p. 0101b22(02) This passage is almost identical with a
passage from GSZ. T50, no.2059, p.0332a20(01)- p.0332b13(10). The two versions differ in only a
few words, such as when Huijiao uses ~ Fi for Chinese in the GSZ version, whereas Sengyu uses B' ~­
in the CSZJJ. This close similarity is a clear illustration of the fact that Huijiao used the biographies
from CSZJJ as his basic source material, and that sometimes he would even copy certain passages
verbatim.
49
understandable that the Buddhist historians would be more than eager to include such
a fact in their historiographies and attach great importance to it.
Prom the passage just quoted, as well as from certain other prefaces, we can assume
that the translation work was taking place in the midst of large gatherings. 92 But it is
unlikely that all of the hundreds, sometimes thousands of men present would directly
participate in the translation work. lt rather seems that these gatherings were
conceived as teachings given by Kumarajiva to the gathered sangha, on which
occasions the translations were made as part of the process. Kumarajiva would
probably make a first rough oral translation, which was written down by his Chinese
assistants and further polished, until a smooth Chinese rendering was achieved.
The GSZ contains one revealing passage which concems Kumarajiva's attitude to the
difference between the Indian and Chinese literary styles. The passage is presented as
an explanation which Kumarajiva gave to his close Chinese collaborator, and former
disciple of Dao'an, Sengrui: ln this passage, quoted in full within the chapter on
Kumarajiva's Principles ofTranslation, Kumarajiva expresses his fundamental stance
on the impossibility of a litera! translation from Sanskrit into Chinese due to the great
difference between the literary styl es of both languages. 93 This clear and rad ical
stance toward translating from Sanskrit into Chinese can be regarded as the pivot of
92
Tang Yongtong points out the following quotes on this topic from various prefaces:
"Sengrui says that when Kumarajiva was translating the Prajnaparamita in 25,000 fines (Da pin), there
were over 500 people present. According to Huiguan, there were over 2000 learned shramanas from a ll
directions present at the translation ofthe Lotus Sutra, Sengrui says that there have gathered over 800
monks to hear and understand, and that they were all men of outstanding talent. During the translation
ofthe Siyijing .I"Gttrit*~· says Sengrui, there were over 2000 men conferring over the translation.
Sengrui also says that there were 1200 men present at the translation ofthe Vimalakirtinirdesa Sutra.
The CSZJJ says: at the time learned shramanas from all the directions didn't consider ten thousand
miles too far." Tang Yongtong. Fojiao Shi. p. 249.
93
For the quotation see Chapter 4 "Kumarajiva's Principles ofTranslation," p.59.
50
Kumarajiva's theory oftranslation. (To be discussed more extensively in
"Kumarajiva's Principles ofTranslation").
Kumarajiva's Chinese disciples and collaborators
As has been said earlier, Kumarajiva's translations could probably never be what they
are, had it not been for the many Chinese assistants, who worked on the translations
with him. These were men who have either been in Chang'an already before
Kumarajiva's arrival, or who have arrived there especially to take part in
Kumarajiva's activities. Sengzhao was Kumarajiva's closest disciple. When he was in
his twenties and while Kumarajiva was still held captive at Liangzhou, Sengzhao
went to that distant land to become his disciple. He was convinced that there were
errors in the elder scholars' understanding ofBuddhism and wanted to improve his
understanding by studying with Kumarajiva. When Kumarajiva was received at
Chan'an, Sengzhao accompanied him. In Chang'an he then assisted his master in the
work of translation together with his seniors such as Sengrui. After the translation of
the Prajnaparamitasutra in 25,000 li nes was completed in 404, Sengzhao composed
a commentary to it, the Banruo wu z hi lun fN;ff ~ J;p ~jtr, and presented it to
Kumarajiva. Kumarajiva, so it is said, had praised its accuracy. 94
Another important disciple and collaborator ofKumarajiva was Sengrui, a former
student ofDao'an. In 382 Dao'an left Chagn'an for the city ofYeh, where he
participated in a translation project in which the foreign expert was Kumarabudhi.
94
Tsukamoto. "Dates", p. 580.
51
Sengrui was one of the copyists at that project. 95 As well as his master Dao'an,
Sengrui is known for his disenchantment with the method of translation and exegesis
known as geyi. But unlike his master, Sengrui was able to participate personally in
Kumarajiva's translating activities, which provided a solution and an altemative to the
misleading method of geyi. He had arrived at Chang'an in 402 AD, probably from
Mount Lu, the newly emerged centre of Buddhism headed by Huiyuan, a leading
disciple ofDao'an. In the biography ofDaosheng in the GSZ we read that a group of
monks from Lu Shan, including one Huirui of the Shixing temple 96 left Lu Shan
together to make their way to Chang'an to study under the famous Kumarajiva. The
fact that Sengrui was a regular participant of the translation activities headed by
Kumarajiva is amply attested by his prefaces as well as his biography in the GSZ. As
for the prefaces, they are to be found in the CSZJJ. He wrote prefaces to
commentaries (lun ~ífa) like the Da zhi du lun
::1\:WJ!r§ffil and Shi er men lun +=F5§ffil,
as well as to the translations ofthe following sutras: Da pin
hua
1=*'1J.
Wei ma
*-lltf,
Si yi JGI,:~.
97
::1\:d"r:J, Xiao pin ;J\ťfr:J, Fa
lt is these prefaces that are a valuable source of
information on Kumarajiva's translation theory and methodology. Kumarajiva
himself was very fond of Sengrui. In the GSZ we read that Kumarajiva once asked
Sengrui to explain a certain text, the wording of which was rather obscure at certain
places. Sengrui was able to elucidate even the most subtle and difficult points
precisely in accord with the correct interpretations. Delighted with Sengrui,
n
lnformation on this translation project can be found in the preface to Si ahan mu chao xu VW l~iiJ jfi;
tY ff (Excerpts from the four agamas), CSZJJ 9: T vol.49, no.2034. The preface was probably written
by Dao'an himself.
96
For the discussion of Huirui's and Sengrui's identity see Wright, "Sengrui alias Hui Rui". Wright
argues that although these two are ascribed two different biographies in the GSZ, they are actually one
and the same person. The confusion might ha ve come from the monk's activities in the north and in the
south seen as activities oftwo different persons. Wright, Arthur F. "Seng-Jui Alias Hui-Jui: A
Biographical Bisection in the Kao-Seng Chuan" in Sino-lndian Studies, 5.
97
For bibliographical references ofthese prefaces see lbid. p. 276 and 293.
95
52
Kumarajiva exclaimed: "In translating the Sutra and shastra I have been able to meet
you; indeed there is nothing in my life to regret!" 98
Another important collaborator ofKumarajiva was Daosheng, who came to Chang'an
from Mount Lu together with Sengrui and others. The GSZ says that he would come
to seek Kumarajiva's advice "whenever he felt that he might be mistaken in the
words". He directly participated in the translation of the Vimalakirtinirdesa and the
Saddharmapundarika. Having benefited from this experience and from Kumarajiva's
instruction, he retumed to the south in 409, where he later became a rather
controversial figure due to his radical interpretation of the Mahaparinirvanasutra.
99
Another important Chinese monk who made contact with Kumarajiva was Huiyuan
of Mount Lu. Due to the geographical conditions and his obligations at Lu Shan,
Huiyuan was not able to meet with Kumarajiva in person. But as soon as he leamt of
Kumarajiva's presence in Chang'an, he wrote him a letter expressing his friendship
and delight over the fact that Kumarajiva had come to China. Kumarajiva answered
him with a letter containing the curious remark about having to rely on translators and
interpreters for the communication which was quoted above. There followed a series
of 18 letters exchanged between the two masters, in which Huiyuan requested
Kumarajiva to resolve his doubts about certain passages and aspects ofthe Mahayana
doctrine and Kumarajiva answered, mainly using quotations from scriptural texts.
These letters have been collected into a document called Dasheng da yi zhang
98
99
GSZ. T vol.50, no.2059. Quoted according to Wright. "Seng-rui alias Hui-rui."p.276
Tsukamoto. History, 458.
53
***
~~
100
After Kumarajiva had completed the translation of the Dazhi dulun :*:~f:lt§íffl
(A Large Commentary on the Prajnaparamita in 25.000 Line s, attributed to
Nagarjuna), Yao Xing requested Huiyuan to write a preface to it. Huiyuan's
biography in the GSZ contains the following quotation from Yao Xing's letter of
request:
"The translation of the da z hi(duJ lun has been just completed. Since it is a work of
Nagarjuna, and, moreover, a guide to the Vaipulya (sutra, c.q. the 25 000 p 'p '), it is
fitting that a preface should be written to it in order to elucidate the (basic) ideas of
the author. However, all these monks here urge each other on but refuse to do it
(themselves), and none ofthem dares to undertake this task. Ma(' you, Master ofthe
Doctrine, compose a preface for the benefit of later students!" 10
Subsequently, accepting the request, Huiyuan copied the most important passages of
the treatise and made an extract of it in 20 juans. 102
Thanks to the close connection maintained between Kumarajiva's fellowship and
Huiyuan's community on Mount Lu, Kumarajiva's translations, and doctrines
explained in them, rapidly made their way to Mount Lu, which at the time enjoyed
highest respect throughout the lands ofthe Eastem Jin. Many elements ofNorthem
Buddhism and the new development in the Prajnaparamita scholarship became known
in the South. 103
100
T4411851_008. In a chapter "Reform from without- Kumarajiva" of hi s "Chih-1" Leon Hurvitz
suggests that Kumarajiva 's letters to Huiyuan can be seen as the on ly extant source material on what
Kumarajiva thought himself, along with his remarks preserved by Sengzhao in his preface to the
translation of Vima/akirtinirdesa. Unlike Hurvitz, Tang Yongtong tends to minimize the importance of
the Da sheng da yi zhang as an index to Kumarajiva's ideas, because it merely repeats and recapitulates
scriptural texts and theories of others.
101
GSZ, Biography of Huiyuan. 360.2.1.
Most scholars agree, that the authorship of the Dazhi dulun, usually ascribed to Nagarjuna, is
doubtful to say the least. For a discussion ofthis topic see Demieville. "Sur la Traite de la grande vertu
de sagesse traduit par E.Lamotte, t.2 (1950) in Choix ďetudes bouddhiques (1929-1970). Leiden:
E.J. Brill, 1973. p.4 70. See also a letter of Alex Wayman quoted by Hurvitz in "Chih- !," p. 67.
103
Ziircher. Conquest, p 114.
102
54
Kumarajiva and Buddhabhadra
Apart from Kumarajiva, there were also other foreign teachers present in the capital,
personalities such as Buddhabhadra, Buddhayashas, Dharmayashas, Dharmagupta and
others. Sengzhao says that "it was as if the intense preaching and teaching that to ok
place on the Vulture Peak during the venerable Shakya's own time had moved to
Chang'an." 104 Tsukamoto also talks ofthis period as of
"the unprecedented hour of glory of Chang'an, where scriptures were being translated
by a group whose centra! figure was Kumarajiva, there were groups of visiting monks
from Kashmir and elsewhere, the Chinese pilgrims to Centra! Asia were retuming,
and there was large-scale translation and propagation of Buddhist scriptures, monastic
codes, and treatises of both vehicles, the Greater and the Lesser." 105
Although Kumarajiva's biography in the GSZ doesn't mention his interaction with
Buddhabhadra (359-429), master of dhyanadharma invited to Chang'an by a Zhiye, 106
certain other sources do talk about it, among them Buddhabhadra's biography in the
GSZ. It seems appropriate to mention the interaction between these two masters in
this comprehensive account ofKumarajiva's life, as it happens to give us some idea
ofthe position ofKumarajiva's fellowship within the Buddhist community of
Chang'an, as well as on the intellectual and spiritual climate of the era. According to
the biography of Buddhabhadra in GSZ, the two masters did discuss Buddhist matters
and help each other to a certain extent. For example there is an account of a
discussion between the two on their difference of view on the existence of indivisible
. 1es versus th e nature o f emptmess.
.
107
partie
104
quoted according to Tsukamoto. History, p. 874.
Tsukamoto. History, p. 453.
106
Zhiye set out for Centra! Asia together with Faxian. Later he left Faxian and studied dhyanadharma
under Buddhasena. When he heard, that Buddhabhadra was the best teacher in this discipline, he
supplicated him to come to China.
107
Biography of Buddhabhadra in the GSZ. T50, no.2059, p.334b.
105
55
While Kumarajiva's focal activity was translating sutras, Buddhabhadra was
predominantly a teacher of dhyana meditation. Also from the accounts available it
seems that Buddhabhadra condemned Kumarajiva's mode oflife as an upper-class
priest in Chang'an, working mostly on translations and relying on the might of the
king as un-Buddhist. Buddhabhadra himself on the contrary was a firm believer in and
practitioner of the dhyana as the course for all devout, practicing religions. 108
After Kumarajiva's death, we read in the GSZ, Buddhabhadra and his disciples were
banished from Chang'an by Sengliie and Daoheng, both senior members of
Kumarajiva's school and both clerical officials (sengguan {~fff), on account of a
violation of the monastic discipline by one of Buddhabhadra's followers. Although
the GSZ obligingly explains that the banishment was basically a misunderstanding, it
appears from these accounts that there must have existed a certain rivalry between the
two communities. Tsukamoto explains in the following words:
"While the monks ofKumarajiva's school had the run ofthe palace, being appointed
to ecclesiastical offices and enjoying worldly honour and glory, Buddhabhadra, being
fundamentally at odds with Kumarajiva on pints of doctrine, and being, in particular,
a person who had come to China to give concrete, practical guidance on Buddhist
meditation, parted company with Kumarajiva's school and, as a teacher and head of a
community of strict practitioners of that meditation, was resfgected and admired by
large numbers of seriously, religiously committed monks." 1 9
Y et along with the banishment of Buddhabhadra, and the differences between the two
masters and their schools, we also find accounts of Kumarajiva and his students
expressing respect for Buddhabhadra. Namely in Buddhabhadra's biography we read
that Kumarajiva rejoiced in Buddhabhadra's coming to Chang'an and that he would
seek his advice wherever he had doubts. There also exists a letter written by
108
109
Tsukamoto. "Dates", p. 571.
Tsukamoto. Historv, p. 453.
56
Kumarajiva's closest disciple Sengzhao to Liu Yimin on Lu Shan in 409, in which
Sengzhao makes a respectful reference to the fact that Buddhabhadra had given
instruction in dhyana to several hundred pupils at the Waguansi ]L'§~, and that all
had pursued their practice in eamest both day and night.
110
Thus we cannot get a definite picture ofwhat the stance ofKumarajiva himselfwas
toward Buddhabhadra and his school, or how it developed over time. However
Buddhabhadra's case illustrates the fact that Kumarajiva was not the only influential
foreign master in Chang'an and that along with the doctrines he had brought, there
were others, also receiving great attention from the Chinese Buddhist community.
Kumarajiva and Y ao Xing
Kumarajiva 's arrival at Chang'an was initiated by the invitation of the ruler of Later
Qin Yao Xing. Upon Kumarajiva's arrival, Yao Xing welcomed him as the preceptor
of the state and provided him with a thoroughly equipped translation institution as
well as with hundreds of first rate Buddhist scholars as assistants. Furthermore, as we
ha ve seen earlier, according to the bibliographies of Kumarajiva in both the GSZ and
the CSZJJ, Yao Xing took active part in Kumarajiva's translation sessions. We can
see that the relation between the master and the king must have been very close. To be
sure, Yao Xing was providing support to other Buddhist teachers and communities as
well. However, as has been mentioned in connection with Buddhabhadra, Kumarajiva
and his students were probably the most favoured.
110
Quoted by Tsukamoto in "Dates", p.571.
57
According to the GSZ, Y a o Xing was concemed that such an exceptional master as
Kumarajiva should leave the world without posterity. Therefore, so it is said in the
biography, he forced Kumarajiva to leave the monk' quarters and live in a house
provided by the ruler, with a barem of ten and a generous regular pension. From this
passage it seems that Tsukamoto i s right in saying that Kumaraj iva' s violation of the
monastic vows was probably a fact, leaving aside the motives which gave rise to it.
The GSZ continues to quote Kumarajiva's words, which he would say to anyone who
came to seek him in his new home to ask for advice: "My words are like a lotus
growing in a stinking swamp. Pluck the lotus, but do not touch the swamp."
Kumarajiva's Death
The GSZ contains the following passage as Kumarajiva's last words addressed to the
monastic community before his death:
"I ha ve met with you all as the Law had ordered. However, not all of my intentions
were fulfilled. Now that I am leaving this life, how can I express my grief? An
ignoramus, I have engaged in the mission of translating scriptures. I have translated
three hundred scrolls of sutras and shastras. There is only one text, the
Sarvastivadavinaya, which has not gone through the final editing. If you tum to the
meaning of the sutras, you will find no errors nor omissions. " 111
The question of omissions in Kumarajiva's translation's actually represents one ofthe
central topics of the discussion of his principles of translation. As will be seen bellow
Kumarajiva advocated omissions in translations of the Indian originals in to Chinese.
But as is obvious from the quoted passage, he was convinced that while leaving out
words or sometimes whole passages of the text, he could guarantee that no ne of the
true meaning of the scriptures would be lost.
111
Kumarajiva's biography in the GSZ.T50, no.2059, p.332c-333a.
58
The GSZ mentions that before dying, Kumarajiva made an oath saying that if there
are no errors in his translations, then after his body is bumt, the tongue will remain
intact. And so it really happened- the tongue remained intact, says the GSZ.
Having recapitulated the life and activities ofKumarajiva, it might seem surprising
that although Kumarajiva is considered to be the most influential translator of
Buddhist scriptures in to Chinese of all ages, along with the Tang dynasty translator
Xuanzang, he has on ly spent a very short period of hi s life translating - mere eight
years starting from 401 AD when he arrived to Chang'an and ending by his death in
409 AD. Let alone the fact that it was only in this short period of time that he
gradually became proficient in Chinese.
59
4. Kumarajiva's Principles of Translation
Kumarajiva himselfhas never composed any comprehensive theory oftranslation.
However from various comments preserved in the prefaces and colophons written by
Kamarajiva's students and collaborators, it is possible to reconstruct a set ofbasic
principles guiding Kumarajiva's translation work. 112
Based on the different accounts recorded in prefaces and biographies, Wang W enyan
suggests that Kumarajiva's translation principles can be summarized into three main
points:
1. emphasis on polished/refined language
mffrW. Jtfi'rtí
2. use of omissions and additions lllJ-U~,
±mfffi
3. correcting terms *Tii:ť;f(
Obviously when these principles are examined against the actual translations, one
finds that they are all applied simultaneously, and therefore it doesn't seem
appropriate to try to force out representative examples. However, pointing out the
limitations of the approach, Wang Wenyan stili proceeds to deal with these princip les
sequentially.
Emphasis on polished/refined language Iff~Jttifp
This first principle can be very clearly attested by the quality of Kumarajiva's
translations themselves. Indeed, if Kumarajiva's translations stand out among the
112
ln this section of the Thesi s we will amply draw on the findings made by professor Wan Wenyan in
his Fodian Hany i :chi yanjiu f?t ~lli'J;i~'f.{_ 1i}f'1{(Study ofthe Chinese Translations oj Buddhist Scriptures),
where he presents a comprehensive summary ofthe theoretical principles behind Kumarajiva's
translation work.
60
various Chinese versions of Buddhist scriptures, it is precisely because of the smooth
and flowing quality of their language, the elegance of the words.
In his biography in the GSZ, we find a passage in which Kumarajiva discusses the
difference between the Indian and Chinese literary styles with Sengrui.
fJJ1;_l,>F~11'f~;z::t~xf%BJj
o
!0~1t111JM
o
From the beginning, Sengrui, a shramana of great talent and wisdom, followed
Kumarajiva and wrote down his words.
ff~m~~~~mm~~~~~o~~~m~m~o
Kumarajiva discussed with Seng about the similarity and difference ofthe language
and style of the West. In India litera ture is valued highly.
~g~mM~A~m~oR~~E~~-~ 0
The tones (harmonies) (gong and shang are tones in the old 5 tone system), styles and
rhymes sound best when accompanied by stringed instruments [of the land of India].
Everyone who presents himself before the monarch has to praise his virtue.
~mz~o~~~mWo~$m~~~~fuo
In the ritual of beholding the Buddha, the song is used to praise and admire. The
gathas and sl o kas of the sutras are of the same style.
S:Jlr:i'*é~ 1+-.jt'W-++!i!{f:/.El +=<LJi!J::rioA'ri.'!!!!!
o !ilrdv/\.}[s,J--'l'l'i'fLX.. 8R o
1_L)(.J'L,t;;"'oJ5RA__..~1'*ff-t
But if it is translated from Sanskrit into Chinese, it has to lose the omamentality and
adomments, though the meaning is retained, the style is different.
~{l;ZD~!WWA
o;;lló{/E~P;K o7'J4J"D~D~fu o
[Otherwise] it would be like offering people pre-chewed food, which loses the
original taste, and might even lead to vomiting. 113
From the above quotation we can clearly see that for Kumarajiva the difference
between the literary styl es of India and China was of great concem indeed. It also
suggests, that Kumarajiva certainly preferred a comprehensive approach to translating,
taking into account both the meaning and the form. In other words, he would not be
113
GS/.: CBFTA: T50n2059 _p0332b23(04)- T50n2059_p0332b29(02), GSZ 3326:
61
satisfied with a literal translation, however exact it may be, and he would continue to
search for a rendering which would be at the same time exact and pleasing to the ear.
The following quote from the GSZ biography of Sengrui can serve as another fitting
illustration of Kumaraj iva' s attitude.
1lJi!fllm#&o #XMw i[ o
Jui collaborated in perfecting the sacred texts which Kumarajiva translated.
Long before, Dharmaraksha had translated the Sadharmapundarikasutra. In the
Shoujue (Predictions of future enlightenment) there is the passage which reads, "Gods
look at men and men look at gods."
Kumarajiva, in translating the sutra, reached this point and said. This passage agrees
in meaning with the Serindian, but it is too crude and literal ~ 114 in its wording."
#JR
o
l~~~A:K3(t~l>W1~t§5L
1t%R
o
Jui said, "Would it not be better to render it, 'Men and gods are interrelated, and the
two can see each other'?" Kumarajiva was pleased and said,
"This is exactly right." Manifestation of his commanding insight and his exemplary
quality were all of this kind. 116
Dharmaraksha's
7(~A
, A ~7( is already smooth enough, argues Wang Wenyan.
But Sengrui's rendering _A7(~~ ' j}.f;\jf~;f§~ seemed more adequate to Kumarajiva
because it accorded with the four-syllable prosodic pattem, which has gradually
114
For discussion of the terms zhi and wen, see footnote no.47 on page 25.
GSZ: CBETA: T50n2059_p0364b02(09)- T50n2059_p0364b06(01).
116
Translating tian as gods or devas is appropriate bere. The passage is a part of description of the pure
land, in which the beings who were receiving Buddha' s prediction are going to be bom once they reach
enlightenment. ln that pure land, the world ofhuman world and the world ofthe gods (two ofthe six
realms of Buddhist cosmology) will be so cl ose, that "gods and men will be interrelated, and they will
be able to see each other." Kumarajiva's translation ofthe Lotus Sutra (Miaofa lianhuajing ftj>$fi*
~Ji':), T 09, no.262, p. 1cl2-62bl. "J...)!(xt#!i: , jí.jj,jj~,f§J!"- p.27c25.
115
62
become one of the characteristic features of Chinese scripturallanguage 117 and the
additional two characters
:).(~
make the whole image easier to understand.
However, although Kumarajiva did emphasize the refined and polished language of
the translations, the texts which were the outcome of his translation activities were
obviously not products of only Kumarajiva's own skill and effort. Kumarajiva- a
non-native speaker of Chinese - would hardly be able to achieve such a level of
refinement and fluency of the translations, had it not been for his many Chinese
collaborators. Indeed, as can be seen from a number of remarks in various prefaces
and colophons, Kumarajiva's Chinese was not particularly good when he arrived at
Chang'an. According to Wang Wenyan, Kumarajiva was barely able to be fluent in
spoken Chinese of everyday use. This fact can be supported by the following quotes
from various prefaces in the CSZJJ.
5.Mil-4- (401) 201h day of lih month Kumarajiva enters Chang'an.
5.MilJ[91f. (402) *{íffl*i3 has not mastered the language ofQin yet (CSZJJ,
juan 8, Jst.táMí~Jf by Sengrui)
5.Mil[J]'if. (402) :ft§'ri!fJi!g~ ' fíij:1Ji3*VM! Although he made the translations
himself, he did not have a full command of the locallanguage.(CSZJJ,juan ll,
B§íÍffff by Sengzhao)
Prom these two remarks by Sengrui and Sengzhao we can assume that even though
Kumarajiva spent 17 years in Liang Zhou, he has not mastered the Chinese language
117
Interestingly enough, the prosodic four-syllable pattern had been widely used for Buddhist
translations since late Han. Ziircher in his "A New look at the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts" points
out, that the use of the prosodic four-syllable pattern- a stylistic convention that played a dominating
role in secular classic literature of the period- is the most striking example of certain features of
Chinese literary style which were gradually introduced in the Buddhist translations. He further explains
that the stages of introduction of this pattern in to the translations are very clear: total absence in the
works of An Shigao and Lokaksema, occasional appearance in the eighties ofthe second century (An
Xuan, T 322), universa! application in the !atest Han translations. Then it was to remain dominant in all
Jater Chinese Buddhist scriptures. cf. Ziircher, "A New Look ... ", p 286
63
i.
during these years. It rather seems that he started seriously leaming the languages
only after his arrival at Chang'an.
5L~f!iJ\if. (406) f!3ť~$cp ' 51...~15§ Having been exposed to the environment,
he became proficient in the locallanguage (CSZJJ,juan 8, *~~~a*~r.f by
Sengrui)
This quote seems to testify to the fact that by his sixth year in Chang'an, Kumarajiva
was already very proficient in the language.
Indeed Sengrui' s remark from the preface to the Da z hi s hi lun
:*:~f~§ífa
from the
year 405 seems to describe the state of Kumarajiva's Chinese most accurately:
1!@ffi
a general understanding of the language of the Qin, therefore his translation were only
general. His knowledge of the locallanguage was not sufficient, and therefore he
couldn't understand those places, which were charged with deep meaning). This
means that by the year 405 Kumarajiva was already fluent in Chinese of everyday use,
and he was able to explain the meaning of the sutras using this basic spoken language,
but when it came to places in the texts charged with deep meaning, he didn't have the
skill and proficiency to express them accurately in Chinese.
From these quotes about the state ofKumarajiva's Chinese we can clearly see to
what extant Kumarajiva was indebted to his Chinese collaborators. Furthermore,
while trying to define the "theory of translation" behind Kumaraj iva' s work, there is
another factor which we should keep in mind. Namely, it is the fact that
Kumarajiva's Chinese collaborators and students had their own view ofthe topic of
scriptural translation and therefore that the translations produced were not necessarily
entirely representative of Kumarajiva's translation princip les alone.
64
When Kumarajiva's assistants were noting down the translations, they were not
necessarily always in complete agreement with Kumarajiva's opinions, as can be seen
from CSZJJ juan 8, preface to :lcrfr:~*~ by Sengrui:
"While writing [the translations] down, I was contemplating the instructions of my
late teacher [Dao'an] ofli9(:&' ~/f~. And I was worrying greatly, and tried to be
alert and strict, because although there was a certain rendering of the depth [in the
translations], the understanding was not sufficient". 118
Sengrui was a disciple ofDao'an and his outlook on translation ofsutras was identical
with Dao'an's. In his later years, Dao'an's view was that the translation should be zhi
~ as opposed to wen
-x_, ie. simple and literal rather then elegant and polished. 119
After Dao'an's death, Sengrui found himselfamong the followers ofKumarajiva.
Kumarajiva's and Dao'an's opinion was almost opposite when it came to the
dichotomy of zhi and wen, and Sengrui was locked in between. No wonder he says
that upon remembering the instructions of his late master he was worrying greatly.
However, Sengrui gradually understood that the meaning is not being compromised in
Kumarajiva's translations. Then he no longer held the preconceived notion of zhi
versus wen, and he also worried no longer about the fact that the language was only
approximate. After all, even Dao'an's views on wen and zhi were flexible as long as
the objective, mubiao- accurate rendering of the meaning, was not compromised. 120
Sengzhao, another close collaborator of Kumarajiva, says in the same volume in a
~
83 +H:«<
pre1ace
to the s·zyl)...mg ;~'lrrtíf=:
118
CSZJJ scroll 8. Preface to The Prajnaparamitasutra in 25,000 Unes (Dapinjing xu :AJtf.\'tif) T55
no.2145, p 52c27
119
As has been mentioned in footnote no.47 on page 25, the dichotomy ofthe terms zhi and wen was
present in the Chinese intellectual tradition way before the introduction of Buddhism. The original
meaning of z hi can be defined as "raw matter" or "substance", of wen as "cul ture", "that which is
refined". When these terms are used in the context of an approach to trans lati on, it can be argued that
the "raw matter or substance" of z hi would imp ly literalness and simplicity, while wen would imp ly
refinement and elegance of style.
120
See chapter 5: "Principles ofTranslation of Dao'an"
65
"The respectful and famous previous translations are of considerably beautiful words,
but they confuse the meaning. In them, beautiful surface is allowed to distort the
words. The taste is diluted because of the omaments. [The previous translators] were
able to accomplish something, yet the trne meaning remained unrevealed. The
121
meaning for the most part remains buried under the words."
In the same volume, in a preface to the Vimalakirtisutra, Sengzhao criticizes Zhi Qian
and Zhu Fahu for using the terminology of the xuanxue
the words zhiwen
::Z~
and for getting caught in
1Wtx.
Both Sengrui and Sengzhao were extremely dissatisfied with the translations of Zhi
Qian and Zhu Fahu and others. They blame them for using flowery omate language
which hinders the expression of the meaning. 122 Therefore, while assisting
Kumarajiva, they were obviously careful not to follow the same tracks. Therefore,
even though Kumarajiva held the principle of polished and refined language in great
esteem, there were hi s cautious assistants making sure that overly omate style of the
translations do es not begin to hinder the clarity of the meaning.
Wang concludes that the outcome ofKumarajiva's collaboration with his Chinese
assistants were translations the quality of which can be summarised in to two points:
H)j Él ~~p~, 1*/\1~ til (clear and unobstructed, profound meaning explained in simple
language.) 123
CSZJJ scroll 8. Preface to The Prajnaparamitasutra in 25,000 Lines (Dapinjing xu :k~fo.\'Hf) T55
no.2145.
122
This joint criticism seems somewhat unjustified given the fact that Zhu Fahu's (i.e. Dharmaraksa's)
translations are known to be very litera!, whereas Zhi Qian's translations represent an extreme offree
translation within the history of early translation of scriptures in China.
123
Wang. Fodian Hanyi Yanjiu, p 220.
121
66
To illustrate the fluency and clarity ofKumarajiva's translations Xi Xiu 124 makes an
interesting comparison of a translation of an extract from the Vimalakirtinirdesa made
by Zhi Qian (222-253AD), Kumarajiva (401-409 AD) and Xuanzang (600-664) 125 .
Let us briefly examine Xi Xiu's findings, as it may help to illustrate what is meant by
Kumarajiva's emphasis on a polished and refined language.
One point which can be illustrated by comparing the three versions (see Appendix 2)
of the exchange between Vimalakirti and Mahakashyapa is that Kumarajiva's
translations tend to be briefer, or les s wordy, than those of the other translators. Let us
for example look at the second sentence of the respective excerpts, in which the
Buddha tells Mahakashyapa to go to Viamalakirti and inquire about his illness. In this
case Kumarajiva's translation is identical with Zhi Qian's, which implies that
Kumarajiva was pro bab ly satisfied with earlier Zhi Qian's rendering of this particular
phrase in eight syllables and decided to keep it in his translation. On the contrary
Xuanzang uses 12 syllables to translate the same sentence, although the meaning
conveyed is identical, i.e. Go and cal! on Vimalakirti to inquire about his illness.
124
Xi Xiu. "Luoshi yanjiu" in Xiandai Fojiao xueshu conggan.
Excerpt from the Viamalakirtinirdesa sutra, chapter 3, The Disciples. For the versions translated by
the three respective translators see appendix 2.
125
67
Another examp1e illustrating Kuamrajiva's tendency to use briefpregnant 1anguage is
Mahakashyapa's answer, which can be rendered in Eng1ish as: I remember one day,
when I was in the street of the poor beggingfor my food, the Licchavi Vimalakirti
came along and said to me.
From this examp1e we can see again that the renderings made by Kumarajiva and Zhi
Qian are nearly identical. This seems to illustrate what we read in various prefaces
about how meticu1ous1y Kumarajiva was correcting the previous trans1ations. Another
examp1e of Kumarajiva's approach to previous trans1ation is his discussion with Seng
Rui about the wording of a phrase in the chapter Shou jue
3t1Ř
(Predictions of Future
Enlightenrnet) of the Miaofa lianhua jing ~'.Nii.3.J/l(H3Ii (Lotus Sutra), where
Kumarajiva refused to preserve the wording of the o1d trans1ation and rep1aced it with
a new rendering. 126 Indeed the process of Kumarajiva's trans1ation work seems to
have been 1argely based on editing o1der versions, wherever a given text had been
. 1y trans 1ate d.mto Ch'mese. P?
prevwus
-
Xuanzang's trans1ation of the given phrase, on the other hand, differs from the other
two. This time not on1y in number of characters, but a1so in meaning. His rendering of
126
See page 62.
Cfthe excerpt from GSZ which describes Kumarajiva's and Yao Xing's cooperation on translating
the Prajnaparamita sutras. (Chapter 3, p. 48-49).
127
68
Mahakashyapa's answer includes two facts which are not present in either of the two
previous translations. Namely, Mahakashyapa's specifies that the city where he had
encountered Vimalakirti was Vaisali. Also, in Xuanzang's rendering Vimalakirti
actually kowtows to Mahakashyapa before he begins to talk to him. The Sanskrit
original of the Vimalakirti Sutra has long been lost, and therefore it is impossible to
verify whether this additional information was indeed present in the original text.
However from Xuanzang's meticulous approach to translating the scriptures, we can
assume that he would not permit himself to insert any additional information into hi s
translation. (See chapter Xuanzang's Princip les of Translation).
Xi Xiu then proceeds to illustrate the flowing quality ofKumarajiva's language by a
comparison of Viamalakirti' s first remark made to Mahakashyapa:
Zhi Qian: :tzP ~1'í1f:A-Rt~:A~H)t ~'Z o (A virtuous man who has great pity, and
yet avoids the houses of the wealthy and begs alms among the poor.)
You have compassion and yet are not able to apply it universally, when you shun the
wealthy and beg alms among the poor.)
In this case, Kumarajiva probably found the rendering of the previous translation
insufficiently fluent. The effect of the change Kumarajiva made to the sentence is that
its purport is clearer upon first hearing. We also see the application of the four
t'
syllable prosodic pattem in Kumarajiva's translation-
c
flttjc;lti!L_!i"~~;t:;~t' rm/f~~~~-
even without the use of punctuation, this section naturally falls into three four syllable
69
units, followed by a unit ofsix syllables: ti%~~1{t~,Z. Compared to the translation
of Zhi Qian which is not segmented in any way, Kumarajiva's version seems much
more suitable for recitation.
Interestingly enough, we also see that in this case Xuanzang ended up using an
almost identical phrase in his translation of the sutra which in tum pro ves that just as
Kumarajiva, Xuanzang also examined the previous translations, editing and correcting
them, in order to produce smoother and more exact renderings. In the chapter
"Xuanzang's Principles ofTranslation" we will present more examples ofthis type,
illustrating that while Xuanzang was very critical of certain aspects ofKumarajiva's
translations, he had at the same adopted large sections ofKumarajiva's versions with
only minimum changes.
Using the same excerpt from the Vimalakirti Sutra, Xi Xiu also points out that
Kumarajiva achieves a sense of a natural flowing speech by means of inserting Wei,
Dajiaye! rJtt,jcJJm~ (Ah, Mahakasyapa!), when Vimalakirti addresses Mahakashyapa.
Kumarajiva uses this form of addressing four times throughout the exchange between
Vimalakirti and Mahakashyapa. In Zhi Qian's version this form of addressing is not
present at all and instead Vimalakirti addresses Mahakashyapa twice using the term
xianzhe ~%- (virtuous man). As for Xuanzang's translations, almost every Jiaye :i!1!l
~
(Kasyapa) is preceded by zunzhe :@:~- (reverend). Again it is most likely that
Xuanzang's rendering is more trne to the original, yet we cannot but agree with Xi
Xiu who argues, that the use of:@::=g does diminish to a certain extant the sense of a
lively natural conversation.
70
Similar examples ofKumarajiva's language being brief and clear at the same time can
be found in virtually all of his translations. And all such examples allow us to
conclude that for Kumarajiva, the emphasis on an elegant, smooth and unobstructed
language was indeed one of the most important princip les guiding his work. Indeed,
as we have seen from Kumarajiva's explanation ofthe differences between Sanskrit
and Chinese to Sengrui, he considered this principle often more important than
faithfulness to the original.
Kumarajiva's use of omissions and additions fllřtl~, :ft *"I (~AB<Jfllřtl
*HI)
Wang Wenyan explains, that there were three main motivations leading Kumarajiva
to make omissions and additions in the translations of scriptures:
1. making the style of the translations more in accordance with the originals
2. judging how much detail was appropriate for the Chinese audience/readership
3. making the translations more fluent and easy to understand
The first motivation, the effort to make the style of the translation more true to the
original, has to do with the fact that many of the older translations were made from
versions of the scriptures in various Central Asian languages, not necessarily Sanskrit.
While comparing the older translations with the Sanskrit originals, Kumarajiva would
identify places which did not accord with the original due to discrepancies in the
intermediate Centra! Asian versions. In such cases, he would edit the translations by
making omissions, additions and other changes so that the translation would accord
with the original Sanskrit versions. Such a process is described for example in
Sengrui's preface to the Prajnaparamitasutra in 25,000 Lines (Dapinjing xu :*:r:fr:J*~
Ff): "The old translation contained the preface, a chapter called Avaivartika (JíilJf~N),(:
71
~Jz:rfo),
and a chapter called the Mara (rirfo). The remaining sections were only
indicated by numbers. Since Kumarajiva considered that these names were not given
by the Buddha, he only kept the preface, and left out the other two items." 128
The second reason which lead Kumarajiva to make omissions and additions- ~{jllj~~"/A
lihé"Ji'ffl!?.fHIU~- judging how much detail was necessary for the Chinese and
subsequent simplification- concerns mainly translations of commentaries rather than
translations of sutras.
In the Da zhi lun ji 7\~~Íff!~c (Colophon to the Da zhi du lun 7\~kf~Íffl)
129
Sengrui
says that Kumaraj iva translated the first chapter of the Da z hi du lun 7\~ J:fjjÍffJ
(Mahaprajnaparamita-upadesa-sastra) in its entirety. As for the remaining two
chapters, Kumarajiva made substantial omissions and translated only their gist. He
only translated the introductory explanations, but didn't proceed to translate the
subsequent extensi ve explanations. 130 W ang W enyan argues that one of the reasons
for such omissions was Kumarajiva's belief that the Chinese had a liking for terseness
(qin ren hao jian *AHFJJ). Wishing to attune to the literary taste of the Chinese,
Wang. Fodian Hanyi, p 225. Quote from CSZJJ scrolliO, T55, no.2145., :kr'FJJk~Ff.
CSZJJ scroll 10, T55, no.2145.
130
Edward Conze says about the same text in The Prajnaparamita Literature: , p 93: "Only the first
chapter, parivarta, is translated in full, in the first 34juan . ... ofthe remaining 89 chapters, only an
abstract is given." :k~}jt§ífij, Mahaprajnaparamita-upadesa-sastra, is a gigantic commentary written
during the first two centuries ofthe Christian era, presumably on the version of Prajnaparamita in 25
000 fines. The commentary is ascribed to Nagarjuna and it reflects the attitude ofthe Madhyamaika
school. The Sanskrit original ofthe commentary is completely lost. There exists no Tibetan translation
ofthe scripture either, which leads most scholars to the assumption that the Sanskrit original had
already been lost by 800 AD, since it is difficult to imagine that the Tibetan translators wouldn't make
a translation of such a major PP commentary had it been available to them. Kumarajiva's trans lati on
made between the years 402 (404?) and 406 is therefore the only extant version ofthe text. And even
this is not complete. Kumarajiva's translation has 90 chapters in 100 scrolls, whereas a complete
trans lati on of the alleged I 00 000 slokas would ha ve to comprise I 000 scrolls. Cf. E.Conze. The
Prajnaparamita Literature. Munshiram Maniharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1978. p 93
128
129
72
'\
Kumarajiva tried as much as possible to convey the essential meaning in concise
words.
The third reason for omissions and editions - making the translations more fluent and
easy to understand - was brought about by the fact that the authors of commentaries
to sutras were men of various degrees of literary accomplishment. Therefore the style
and level of literary refinement of these differs significantly. In order to spare the
Chinese reader the difficulty, Kumarajiva would make omissions and additions so that
in the final translations were smooth and easy to read.
In his Tongshou yuman lunfanwen canben ba :!i[5it:OifrJ:W§ffif:l'it3t71:;;t~Jt, ChenYinke
~_jff§Í['['í?r
131
presents a number of examples comparing Sanskrit originals with Chinese
translations. These examples clearly illustrate how Kumarajiva would make omission
where he found the original too cumbersome, how he did not strictly adhere to the
literary form of the original, and how he made changes in the original. Let us briefly
mention three of the examples presented by Chen Yinke:
The first example concems the translation of the Sutralankarasastra by Asvagosha.
Chen Yinke shows that the last section of the last chapter of seroU 1O of the sastra has
not been translated completed, and instead Kumarajiva made an abbreviation of the
section. Similarly the last section of the first chapter of vol ume ll has not been
translated, but is only presented as a brief summary in the Chinese version. This is an
example ofKumarajiva's omissions and abbreviations. The second example concems
the fact that Kumarajiva often didn't adhere to the literary form ofthe original.
131
Chen Yinke !í*Ji:l:'['g.. Tongshouyumanlunfanwen canben ba Q'(~IJíj,j~AAij:J\t)Clj~Jt;:Ji,&:, published in
Qinghua xuebao 4:2 (December 1927), 1337-1341.
73
Namely, when the original was composed of altemating passages in prase and verse,
he would freely change the two, sometimes translating verse by prase, and vice versa.
Thirdly, Chen Yinke presents clear examples of how Kumarajiva sometimes
intentionally changed the original. One example is that while the original talks of a
particular Indian hermit of the name Kanva, Kumarajiva considered that this proper
name would not be intelligible to the Chinese anyway, and therefore translated it
instead by the common noun zhu xian
~{Úl,
thus also changing it from singular to
plural. Another similar example is when Kumarajiva uses the name Xunmi IIW!SI, i.e.
mount Sumeru, for various Indian names of different mountains, like Mandara and
Vindhya. Here too, Kumarajiva probably assumed that the different names would not
mean anything to the Chinese anyway. As we will see in the chapter "Xuanzang's
Principles ofTranslation", it was precisely these inaccuracies ofKumarajiva's
translations that Xuanzang would criticise so much.
Correcting terms
liT iE-1'5.
Wang Wenyan continues to explain that apart from the above mentioned, Kumarajiva
made a substantial contribution to the work of translating Buddhist scriptures in to
Chinese by revising the terminology which was currently in use. Before Kumarajiva's
arrival, the Chinese Buddhist scholarship was dominated by the geyi approach, also
known as matching the meaning. This approach arose from the belief, that the best
way to explain the Buddhist ideas to people raised in Chinese culture is by means of
analogy. An important protagonist of this approach was Zhu Faya ~1:!!1i. In the Wei
shu
~if,
seroU 114, we find the following explanation in the geyi style made by Zhu
Faya:
74
"The practitioner relies on the Three Jewels (san bao -Jr), Buddha, Dharma and
Sangha, which are like the three things that a gentleman fears/respects (san wei - ~
of the junzi :B -1'-). The practitioner also has five things to abandon (wu jie 1itlX;):
killing (sha ~~), stealing (dao ~), licentiousness (yin~), lying (wang yan)~§ and
intoxication (yin jiu)ax1Jm. Broadly speaking, these are like the Five Norms (wu chang
Em): humanity (ren {-), righteousness (yi ~), propriety (li m~), wisdom (zhi 9§1),
trustworthiness (xin {§)." 132
Although the quoted example of geyi makes an analogy between Buddhist concepts
and Confucian terms, most of the geyi analogies were made in connection with the
philosophy of xuanxue, using terminology from the Yijing, Laozi and Zhuangzi. A
representative example of a Buddhist meaning matched with a neodaoist term is wu
m~ (the neodaoist "inexistence, non-being"), or ben wu *~ ("the original non-
being"), which was widely used to translate the concept of sunyata of the
prajnaparamita philosophy (kong ~). Similarly, the daoist term wuwei ~~ was
matched to the Buddhist nirvana, and the dialectical relation between "action" (dong
!b) and "quiescence" (i ing jl@) of the daoist philosophy was equated to the two truths
of Buddhism: the conventional truth (sudi {~§\%) and the ultimate truth (zhendi ~
Dao'an, Zhu Faya, Zhu Fatai and others were using the method of geyi widely in the
mid third century. However, later in his career Dao'an realized the harmful
consequences of the method. Dao 'an began to understand, that by assuming that the
Buddhist categories and concepts must reflect those present in the Chinese traditional
philosophy, Chinese intellectuals were preventing themselves from understanding the
Buddhist philosophy for what it really was. Thus before even acquainting themselves
132
133
Wei s hu~~. scroll 114. Quoted according to Wang Wenyan, Fodian hanyi zhi yanjiu, p. 231.
See Demiéville, Paul. "Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui." p 838.
75
with the Buddhist categories properly, they projected their own concepts on them. In
this way, we can see how, by the second half ofthe fourth century, there were already
flourishing six Chinese "schools" ofPrajnaparamita scholarship, arguing vehemently
with one another. 134 Even though Dao'an was aware of the inaccuracies and
misunderstandings brought about by geyi and he tried to abandon it completely, he
was greatly disadvantaged by the fact that he did not know Sanskrit himself.
Therefore he was not able to completely free himself from the old habit. Kumarajiva
himself was greatly troubled by the habit of geyi and put great effort in revising and
systematizing the terminology confused previously by geyi. lt is interesting to see that
two and a half centuries later, Xuanzang would become equally troubled by the
inaccuracies which Kumarajiva made in his translations. This simply proves that the
emergence of systematized and comprehensive translations of the Buddhist scriptures
in Chinese was a long process of continuous revisions stretching over many centuries.
134
For a detailed discussion ofthe Prajnaparamita scholarship in the spirit of geyi exegesis, prior to
Kumarajiva 's arrival, see Tsukamoto. History. "Doctrinal Disputes and the Advance of Prajnaparamita
Study." p 361-384.
76
5. Dao'an's Principles of Translation
In most litera ture discussing or even merely touching on the topic of the early
Buddhist translations into Chinese, whenever it comes to Dao'an, one reads about his
famous eight principles, the so called wu shi ben san bu yi 1L~4: -- /1'~, i.e. five
deviations and three difficulties. Furthermore one reads that these have become
extremely influential guidelines for the work of later translators. To Dao'an's
contemporaries as well as to many contemporary researches, such a set of clearly
formulated principles certainly seemed very appealing. Even more so given the fact
that it is the only clearly formulated "theory" of scriptural translation into Chinese.
Y et let us not be misguided by the compact and clear formulation of the eight
principles, since equally important as their formulation is also the fact that late in his
life Dao'an made a radical revaluation ofhis outlook, as a result ofwhich he
dismissed most of the eight princip les he had previously adhered to.
In this section we will therefore first discuss these eight principles, but later we will
also describe how, later in life, Dao'an came to dismiss these same principles.
Dao'an's .li~~ · /F~ 135 : (The English translation bellow was made by Leon
Hurvitz.
136
We have decided o use his translation for the purpose of this chapter,
although it is rather a free one, because it clearly captures the essence ofDao'an's
concems which we are discussing. However not to lose track of the literal meaning
we also provide the excerpt from the original text, as found in CSZJJ scroll 8.)
135
136
CSZJJ scroll 8. T 55 no.2145. p52b-c.
Hurvitz. "Chih-I", p 62.
77
Five deviations li~-4:
1. ~::títJ3~ttiH1f~fí01~fjé*o ~~4:illo i.e. alteration ofword order
2. =1'f(i}j?,;~MjJ!io *A~f)(o 1$PJ~JC,\~~)(/f;;ifo jl:JT=~*illo i.e.
embellishment of verbiage on the Chinese translation in order to please the
sensibilities of the sophisticated Chinese reader
3.
·1'fM~~~~~~~oT·&~o~-~~o~~~~omJ~~fro
· ~ 4: ill o i. e. omission in the Chinese translation of repetitious phrases
which occur ad nauseam in the Indian Buddhist scriptures
4. ~ 1'f 15~ ~ ~ gc:iE 1U, tmL ~f. o .ey. g}llwHl§ )( f!\U2U'iL ~ T 1i s ><!J rm /f~ff o
~ ~4: ill o i.e. omission in the Chinese translation of sentences which in the
original seem to be no more than commentary on the sentences that preceded
them
5.
Ji~~B~~o~~m&o&R~~B~~~fíij~~o~n~-4:-tEo
omission in the Chinese translation of those sentences which in the original
seem to be repetitious summaries ofwhat has preceded (this occurs when a
point has been made, and the text is ready to go onto the next point, but
repeats itself before doing so)
The three difficulties · /f~ ~
1. ~:16, ~ D#D"if11t~ ~o ff0111Jij5f!Et!l::J.:@~D-;J o ~ /f~~ ill o i.e. translating the
scriptures in such a way as to make them seem applicable to the translator's
time
2. m~~~~A.lli~o~~~T~~k-~o-~irTII~T*mo=~
~ ill o i.e. translating them in such a way as to make these scriptures,
originally composed for the saints of yore, intelligible for the fools of today
3. ~-ili~L~*~o#*~~~niTA~~~~mo~~T~rm~ili~
ASo~~R~~~~~~o~~~AffO~~~~o~~~~~1'f~
fo jl:JT · · /f~ ~ ill o i. e. taking care that these scriptures, that even Ananda and
Kashyapa pronounced with trepidation, lest they misrepresent the Buddha's
word in any way, are transmitted without error.
In the Zhongguo Jany i jianshi Ma Zuyi provides a more litera! explanation of
Dao'an's five deviations in the following way:
"While translating the sutras from Sanskrit, there are five kinds of circumstances in
which the outer form of the translation differs from the original, and three criteria
which are difficult to adhere to. As for the five deviations, they are: 1. The word order
in the language of the original is often opposite than in Chinese. In such cases it is
necessary to adjust it to the Chinese grammatical structure. 2. The Sanskrit of the
sutras is simple and straightforward (zhi), while the Chinese have a fondness for
ornament and embellishment. If the translation is to satisfy the reader in this respect,
certain polishing of the language is required. 3. In the Sanskrit sutras, one and the
78
same meaning is often repeated as much as three times in a row. In translation these
repetitions need to be omitted. 4. At the end of a section in the Sanskrit scriptures
there follows a summary and commentary on the previous section, often in as many as
one thousand or five hundred words. These sections also need to be omitted in the
translation. 5. When one section ends in the Sanskrit original and another one is about
to begin, there is always inserted yet another summary of the previous part. These
summaries should also be omitted in translation." 137
Ma Zuyi then continues to explain the three difficulties:
"As for the three difficulties: 1. The Buddha was teaching with respect to the customs
and circumstances ofhis time, yet the customs ofthe past were different from those of
today. To translate in such a way that the customs of old can be adapted to modem
times, that is the first difficulty. 2. To transmit the profound meaning of the subtle
words of the sages of the past to beings of shallow knowledge of our times, that is the
second difficulty. 3. After the death of Shakyamuni, when Ananda was repeating the
sutras, he was extremely cautious. Yet today it is up to common ordinary people to
transmit the teachings, and this is the third difficulty." 138
Looking at the deviations from the original and three difficulties of Dao 'an, it is
obvious that Dao 'an too, like so many of his predecessors and successors, was
concemed with the basic dilemma of translation: whether to lean more on the side of a
faithfulliteral translation which is necessarily less palatable to the reader, or whether
to sacrifice faithfulness in order to produce a smooth and elegant rendering in the
target language. Again these two poles can be related to the traditional Chinese
dichotomy of zhi (substance, raw matter) and wen (culture, that which is refined),
which in the context of an approach to translation imply literalness and simplicity on
one band, and refinement and omamentality on the other.
Basically all scholars agree that these eight points defined by Dao'an have become an
influential tool to generations of Chinese translators and in most literature dealing
with the topic we find references to accounts of later translators who were quoting
Ma Zuyi ,~m!l.~Jl:. Zhongguofanyijianshi cp~~§$f.,l~. Beijing: Zhongguo duiwai fanyi chuban
gongsi, 1984. pp 31-32.
138
lbid.
137
79
Dao'an's principles as their guideline. 139 Wang Wenyan summarizes the five
deviations and three difficulties into four basic principles, which can be seen as an
expression of Dao 'an' s outlook on scriptural translation as such:
1.
2.
3.
4.
grammatical structure must be adapted to the Chinese language
the language of the Chinese translation must be pleasing and easy to read
repetitions should be omitted to various degrees
under no circumstances should the meaning be lost 140
Analyzing the points further, Wang concludes that points 1., 2. and 3. concem the
method (j'angfa
111'!.), whereas point 4. concems the objective (mubiao
§ f~). Wang
further observes that for Dao'an, the mubiao remains essential throughout his career,
Whereas as concems the method, his statements in various forewords and epilogues
seem to be contradictory. To get a better understanding as to why would Dao'an's
comments on the method seem contradictory, let us take a closer look at how Dao'an
was gradually introduced into the difficulties and contradictions connected with
translation of scriptures.
As Dao'an didn't know Sanskrit, when studying the Prajnaparamita he had to rely on
Chinese translations. Therefore he started examining different translations of the
Prajnaparamita sutras, namely the Prajnaparamita in 25.000 Lines. When he was
comparing the Fangguang 15'5<.-Jf.t
141
to the Daoxini 42 (since at the time it was thought
these were made from an identical original), he discovered that there were omissions
made in the Fangguang version and he considered it very beneficial: he concluded
139
As for scholars discussing the topic see: Ma Zuyu, 1984, pp 29-33. Wang Wenyan, pp 204.
Wang Wenyan, Fodian Hanyi, p. 204, 205.
141
The Fangguangjing/J'J.JY:J!Ii(The Scripture ofthe Emission ofRays) is a Chinese version ofthe
Prajnaparamita in 25,000 fines, produced in 291 AD by the Kothanese Moksala ~.YZJi and the
sinicized Indian Zhu Shulan ""'",r,;zr~.
142
The Daoxin boru o )ing iif:í:1iiíťl:;E'*~' Prajnaparamita in 25,000 Li nes translated in to Chi nese by
Lokaksema in late second century AD.
140
80
that after making the omissions the text became much more fluent and the language
unobstructed, and therefore more straightforward and easier to understand. Yet when
he compared the Guangzan 143 and the Fangguang versions, he leamed that the
omissions made in the Fangguang version were not entirely justified. He came to
understand that the Fangguang version left out too many words as a result ofwhich
. 1 meamng
. was 1ost. 144
part o f th e essentla
In this way, Dao'an's understanding ofthe complexities ofscriptural translation
developed gradually. As Wang Wenyan 145 points out, the year 382 became a breaking
point in the development ofDao'an's outlook at scriptural translation. It is the year
when Dao'an wrote the preface to the Combined Prajnaparamita }1t~nJffi"tm:&i1Uii:
#~1Yrf, in which he also mentions the 8 principles we have discussed above. Yet
while he mentions these in the preface, it is only to illustrate the major change which
his theory of translation had undergone. As Dao'an explains, the change was brought
about by the fact, that after many years of studying the PP from Chinese translations,
he was now finally able to understand ~ with the help of the translators with whom he
was closely cooperating in Chang'an- the word for word meaning ofthe Sanskrit
original. This experience lead Dao 'an to a co mp lete revaluation of his outlook at
scriptural translation. While until the year 382, the five deviations and three
difficulties discussed above constituted the basic principles Dao'an adhered to, from
382 on, he became a determined supporter of zhi against wen as far as translations
were concemed. Whereas previously he considered the translations of An Shigao and
Lokaksema too litera! and crude and as such detrimental to correct understanding,
Guangzan boruo }ing 7\:;~~:E'Ml~, Prajnaparamita in 25,000 Lines translated into Chinese by
Dharmaraksa in 286AD.
144
Lu Wei I Ma Zuyu p 31
145
Wang Wenyan. p 214-218.
143
81
now he came to regard the work of these early translators as "carefully rendered
originals, setting a high standard for the future translators to follow" (1if1~ M4:,
Jtt
t.i:%'íill). From the same year also comes Dao'an's preface to the Vinaya (biqiu dajie
xu !:~
Fr.-A:ffiUf:), in which he speaks resolutely against the omissions and
embellishments in translations by which he clearly dismisses the five deviations he
was previously advocating.
Without realizing the change in Dao'an's outlook which occurred in 382, the various
remarks about scriptural translation we find in prefaces and colophons of the CSZJJ
may indeed make one conclude that Dao'an was rather inconsistent in his opinions
regarding this matter. But even ifwe acknowledge the change ofDao'an's position
ever since 382, we may find out that in one respect, Dao'an remains consistent both
before and after 382. To demonstrate this, let us use Wang Wenyan's terminology
which divides Dao'an's principles intofangfa and mubiao. lt is possible to say that
between the two- fangfa and mubiao- Dao'an had only changed his view regarding
the method, while with regard to the objective he remained equally uncompromising
before as well as after 382. As for the method, Dao'an's opinion has gradually shifted
from a slight preference for wen to a resolute preference for zhi.
Let us now briefly remind ourselves of the basic princip les which were applied in the
translation work ofKumarajiva. A mere glance at the three major rules behind
Kumarjaiva's work allows one to see how different they are from Dao'an's:
emphasis on polished/refined language í!tt~ )(if'rji
use of omissions and additions lllJrj~, ±~fffi
correcting terms fiT ii 1'; Jr
82
The first two points in fact seem like a summary of the jive deviations dismissed by
Dao'an in the later years ofhis life. No wonder Sengrui, while noting down
Kumarajiva's translations was remembering the instructions ofhis late master and
worrying greatly. 146 The third point- correcting terminology- refers to Kumarajiva's
effort to divorce the scripturallanguage from the misleading remains of the geyi
method. In this respect, Kumarajiva's work can be seen as a direct continuation of
Dao 'an' s effort and indeed as a fulfilment of the latter' s wish to purify Chinese
Buddhism from the pseudo-Buddhist interpretations of geyi.
146
For a detailed account of Sengrui 's collaboration with Kumarajiva, hi s doubts about Kumarajiva's
method and their subsequent dispelling, see chapter 4: "Kumarajiva's Principles ofTranslation."
83
6. Xuanzang's Principles of Translation
Even though the Tang dynasty translator Xuanzang (600-664) was active some 200
years after Kumarajiva, in a certain sense his translation work represents a
culmination or continuation of that Kumarajiva's. Therefore let us present a brief
overview of his translation activity and the princip les which guided his translation
work. 147 W e believe that such an overview might shed some interesting light on the
career ofKumarajiva since it will allow us to see Kumarajiva's work not only as a
culminations of previous trends, but also as a part of a centuries long process which
continued even after Kumarajiva's death. Like Kumarajiva's translations, Xuanzang's
translation work also represents an important milestone, if not the most important one,
in the history of Chinese Buddhist scriptural translation.
Xuanzang's translation career can be divided into three periods. In each period
Xuanzang focused on the translation of scriptures of a particular thematic area:
1. 645-650 - Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra
2. 651-660 - Abidharma Kosha
3. 659-664- Extensive Prajnaparamita
During these three periods spanning over nineteen years Xuanzang translated 75
volumes of scriptures, consisting of 1335 scrolls altogether. Prior to these periods,
Xuanzang travelled to India to study with Indian masters and to fetch the originals of
the scriptures. In India he studied at the then renowned Nalanda University, where he
had eamed deep respect of the Indian scholars and practitioners for his outstanding
. an d d"l"
un d erstand mg
1 tgence. 148
147
For this brief overview we will also draw on some ofthe observations made by Wang Wenyan in
Fodian hanyi zhi yanjiu, pp 248-270.
148
Ma Zuyu. Zhongguo Fanyi Jianshi. pp 53-66
84
Wang Wenyan summarizes Xuanzang's main concems with regard to scriptural
translation to the following thee points:
1. He strived to make the translations complete.
2. Translations had to be absolutely true to the original.
3. There were five things not to be translated.
As for the first point, Xuanzang was aware that many previous translators of Buddhist
scriptures into Chinese would freely make omissions in them. Xuanzang found this
fact disconcerting and he insisted on retranslating and completing the old translations.
Even the Tang Emperor [gr'i''b* himself urged Xuanzang to focus on translating those
texts which did not yet exist in Chinese translation instead of retranslating scriptures
which have already existed in a Chinese version. But Xuanzang insisted on
retranslating the old ones, which he was gravely dissatisfied with. 149 In the :lc;t;}~t~
- ffi1t:@ffl{f we read that Xuanzang would even have nightmares about the
incomplete translations made by Kumarajiva (referring to them in words like tiD*I{t
pfrflm , ~*~~m, ie. like the translations of Kumarajiva, in which so much is omitted
that the essence is lost).
As for the second point - the uncompromising faithfulness to the originals: Upon
comparing Xuanzang' s rendering of the same text to an earlier translation one may be
surprised that the changes made were not all that radical. In fact when we talk about
Xuanzang's retranslating (chongyi
m~~)
the scriptures, we cannot imagine that he
would make entirely new renderings, radically different from the old version. In fact it
might almost be more accurate to refer to chong yi as 'editing of old versions' rather
than 'retranslating' them. In Xuanzang's case this 'editing work' consisted ofusing
149
A.~.lfE,.!i' --~li.Vtnffl1W. T50. No. 2053. Quoted according to Wang Wenyan, p 250.
85
minor adjustments in order to make even more correct those parts in the old
translations which were more or less correct already, but not entirely. Secondly it
consisted of amending those parts which were incorrect or confused. Thirdly, it
consisted of filling in all those parts which were omitted in the old translations and
leaving out those which were added although not present in the originals.
All these types of amendments can be illustrated by looking at Xuanzang's translation
of the Heart Sutra and comparing it to a translation made some 200 years earlier by
Kumarajiva.
15
°First of all, the titles of the two versions differ.
151
Secondly, unlike
Kumarajiva's version, Xuanzang's version contains the introduction starting with
"thus ha ve I heard" ÝQ ~ JJG litl and specifying the time and place of where the sutra
was transmitted. This illustrates the determination to translate every detail on
Xuanzang's part, and contrary to that the liberty with which Kumarajiva would
randomly decide how much factual detail was necessary for the Chinese audience and
how much was cumbersome. The rest of Xuanzang's translation is practically
identical with Kumarajiva's with only a few exceptions. It uses a different term for
skandha (Kumaraj iva use s yin ~. Xuanzang yun *i.), leaves out two additions
150
for the Chinese originals see appendix 3
Kumarajiva's translation: T08 No. 250 [Nos. 251-255, 257] J:lfKnJf.ťt;ff~~~:;k:ll)j%~~
Xuanzang's trans lati on: T08 No. 253 [Nos. 250-252, 254, 255, 257] f.ťt;ff~~ ~ ::t'lAi'l:
151
86
inserted by Kumarajiva 152 , and omits the words mahamantro
A
l:l}j
n which is not
found in any of the Nepalese manuscripts or Tibetan translations either. 153
Let us now quote the example of the title of the Diamond Sutra translated by
Kumarajiva, and retranslated by Xuanzang to better understand the nature of
Xuanzang's corrections ofthe old translations. Kumarajiva translated the name ofthe
sutra as Jinggang banruo boluomijing ±~1JJN:t'f1ffi:~1ff,;~ (Scripture ofthe
Prajnaparamita which is like a diamond) . 154 Xuanzang translates it as A.JN~1Bz~ 1f
~?.;~, ~tlVr~~Ht (Scripture of the Great Prajnaparamita, the part which can cut
even the diamond) 155 . In the sutra, the kleshas are compared to a diamond, while the
wisdom of prajnaparamita is described as that which can cut even the diamond-like
(ie. extremely hard and solid) kleshas. This meaning is however slightly blurred when
Kumarajiva compares the wisdom of prajnaparamita to the diamond in the title. In
Xuanzang's biography we find a section describing a discussion between Xuanzang
and the Tang Emperor
r'§J
* in which Xuanzang explains the radical distortion of the
meaning of the original brought about by the fact that Kumarajiva leaves out the two
words neng duan ~~!Wf:
152
The first insertion consists ofthe words: ~;fljiJlj! 5~i\"JUWd~l~,fA, jl:~i\"J:,W,jl:,fA, fJ:!S':i\"J:,W,
~ll!l?.i\"J:,W,~1Ao 1nJ!j[\"!(? afterwhichthetextcontinueswith~;fljiJlj! ~~~
);UfA, {j'?i\"J:J!\fd'HR,
~~'~~~'~5o 5llPJl~~, ~~~[lPJl5o
jl:, fJ:!, :ff,
~ijij)\~Q;}Io
Xuanzang's rendering does not contain the inserted part, instead, after addressing Shariputra, it
proceeds directly with: 5:f~'?, '?:f~5o 5llPJl~, ~llPR:5o jl:, fJ:!, 11< ~l"lXiJH!t!mJl.
The second insertion consists of: Jl'?tt, ~~~*' ~~;f:Jk, ~~IJ/.{1:, which is not found in
Xuanzang's translation at all.
153
154
Conze. The Prajnaparamita Literature, p. 22.
TOS No. 235 [Nos. 220(9), 236-239]1=:fiř;JrjfJl:!:-ň~K~ í~U~
155
n. B {:;-!·{:;
T07n0220_p0980a03(13) ll J.:fJJZ-ň$J.t~ 1f ~ i\'t{t:~
T07n0220_p09Soaoscoo)ll ~~Y!nijj~;~t,; Mn~
T07n0220_p0980a06(00) ll~ h ~glliJT:;(,::[iř;Jú -5t
87
"The merit and value of this sutra can be compared to an imperial edict. The men of
the West hold it in equal veneration. Yet if we look at the old translations, we find
they leave out the essence. For example, the Sanskrit original says: "Prajna which can
cut even the diamond" (~~IWT~IlfiliJf.J)t::ff). The old translations only say: "Diamond
prajna I Prajna which is like a diamond" (~llfiJUf.ťZ:#). The bodhisattva Subuthi
(Yuming tiXI:l}j) explains that separation )t]Jij itself equals kleshas ;l:~·t~l. Furthermore,
the confusion caused by separation is as solid/firm/hard 1M as a diamond. Only the
essence explained in this sutra - the wisdom oj no-separation ~ 7t JJIJ ~- can cut it
through. Thaťs why it says: prajna which can cut the diamond. Yet the old
translations leave out the first two characters can cut ~~IWT." 156
The third major aspect of Xuanzang's translation work is the definition of five things
not to be translated (wu zhong bufan 1i1'i+m~):
1. esoteric language, (dharanis, mantras etc.)
2. words with several meanings, (eg. bhagavan- ~1nojt which has six levels of
meaning which couldn't possibly be preserved in a Chinese translation)
3. words without an equivalent in Chinese (eg. Jambu tree)
4. terms which ha ve already been established in Chinese for centuries( eg. j)PJ;OO
~fh!:,
annutara samyak sambhodi)
5. WOrds which SOUnd less impressive when translated (eg. m~:;g: VS :9§1~, i.e.
prajna vs wisdom).
By clearly defining these five categories, Xuanzang has made one step further in the
systematisation of the Chinese Buddhist terminology. The process of systematisation
has been going on virtually ever since the time of the first translations during the late
Han, when the two extremes of either translating all terms and names or transliterating
them were syncretised into a first system of Chinese Buddhist terminology. 157 This
system was then gradually upgraded by later translators, most importantly by
156
157
.A::~tJ~t,'f- ~liV!ňijjf~Ltr-t:;, T50. No. 2053.
See chapter 2: "Translating Buddhist Scriptures from 2"d to 4'h Century AD."
88
Kumarajiva, whose revised the terminology so as to divorce it from the anachronisms
of geyi.
In the same way, Xuanzang's retranslations or new redactions of old translations can
also be seen as a continuation of a centuries long process of ever increasing
refinement of the translations. The most outstanding quality of the translations made
by Kumarajiva's team is undoubtedly the natural flow and elegance oftheir language.
While Xuanzang was able to retain this smooth and natural quality of the translations,
his major contribution to the process of refining the Chinese Buddhist translations was
in the uncompromising determination to make the translations as faithful to the
originals as possible, not permitting any changes, omissions and additions. Y et
Xuanzang was able to focus on refining the details and correcting inaccuracies to a
great extent thanks to the fact, that there already existed the translations of
Kumarajiva. And the quality ofKumarajiva's translations was such, that Xuanzang
didn't have to retranslate the whole texts, but rather he could focus on fintuning the
details. Therefore, even though the most widely known and popular version of eg. the
Hreart Sutra and the Diamond Sutra in Chinese is the version produced by Xuanzang,
we have seen that the bulk ofthese texts is actually a result ofthe team ofKumarajiva
and his collaborators, which was later completed by the final touch of Xuanzang.
Then there are certain other scriptures, like for example the Lotus Sutra and the
Vimalakirtinirdesa Sutra, which have remained until this day in precisely the form in
which they were produced by Kumarajiva's team oftranslators in the fifth century.
Both of these scriptures ha ve become exceptionally influential not only within
Chinese Buddhism but they also influenced many Chinese artists, poets and
89
philosophers throughout the centuries. In this way, Kumarajiva's translations have
become an integral part of the Chinese literary and cultural heritage.
90
Appendix 1 - Vimalakirtinirdesa Sutra
Excerpts from the Vimalakiritnirdesa, Chapter 3, The Disciples. Dialog between
Vimalakirti and Mahakashyapa. (As analyzed in Chapter 4: "Kumarajiva's Principles
of Translation").
Translation by Zhi Qian.
T14n0474_p0522a08(00) ll 1~M5tl:%tkj}JQ~
o
&i'Jil§*i•§aF~5*
o
Tl4n0474_p0522a09(02) j}JQ~á{~§ o fj(;/ff~{f:il§1ElF~5* o pffJ;)~{iiJ o
Tl4n0474_p0522al0(02) ·[:l~fJGff~~j!~ffTii'JZ: o B~Ht•ila*~~fJG§ o
Tl4n04 74_p0522all(O 1) ~Otl~~::*:-Rfl§:::*:fri.if:Éj!z o
Tl4n0474_p0522al2(06) 'i"~08~$J]ffiffillM~?JTi'J o e~g/fít-Ri!&if:Éz o
Tl4n0474_p0522al3(04) ~0/fJ;)§::fi{í~~ o pJT/\.~cpi§J\JJt~:P: o
Tl4n0474_p0522al4(05) ?ff A.fJI1ZE3~0;l=l;fmfri. o M8§~%?JTi'JZ: o ~~M'ii!M,?JT§t o
Tl4n0474_p0522al5(01) ;fiJ!ě~O~~ o pJT!ifJV~OW~ o pJTD*~~OJJ1,~ o
Tl4n0474_p0522al6(00) ?JTitO-*/fj;)§f!H~ o *-ffifFtM,]l!~ o ~~~i!~O.íJ o
Tl4n0474_p0522al7(00) ~0~~48~/\!f~ o
Tl4n0474_p0522al8(09) J\~~IE§ttJIEk~!f~:g o J;J:Jl!::?JTZ:WI:--!;7JA. o Jj\J;J*WI:
M'i{~tl~
o
Tl4n0474_p0522al9(00)
Tl4n0474_p0522a20(00)
Tl4n0474_p0522a21(01)
Tl4n0474_p0522a22(02)
Tl4n0474_p0522a2301)
l ~1&Elít
~O:ll!::ít~m3-f:A'<M o 1J\3-f:M,M
o /f:ff±37E/f1!~~N o
l ~Otl~ít?JTZ:W~ o m3-f:M,ti1J\3-f:::*:t~ o
l m3-f:lti~1J\3-f:~trd: o
o
o
l /f~:g~Jj\M,pjf:ť[
l :ll!::miE1~1~~/f1~:ffi-TZ~
o
tl~~o:ll!::m/ftJ~*ít~
cp)jffio
Tl4n04 74_pO S22a24(03)
l
seyfJ(;iiJ::@: lifJ ;l=l;ě.ft:ll!::~*W~ --I:JJ~ili 'i"mfFffr~
o
o
Translation by Kumarajiva:
Tl4n0475_p0540a25(02) 1~5::*:j}JQ~ o &i'J8§*-t•ilaF~5* o j}JQ~áfijjj§ o
Tl4n0475_p0540a26(00) iit:@: o fj(;/ff~{f:8§1ElF~5* o pJT~~~{iiJ o
Tl4n0475_p0540a27(02) ·f:l~fJGff~~j!JErm:f=rZ: o sey*t•ila*~~fJG§ o
Tl4n0475_p0540a28(00) Oi::*:j}JQ~ o ~1cE1J{j,rm/f~g{f o
Tl4n0475_p0540a29(04) fl§:~~if:Éj!z o j}JQ~ o f.=t.zr:~i:t~:::J:::f'JZ:ít o
Tl4n0475_p0540b01(02) m/fíti!&~i'JZ:ít o
Tl4n0475_p0540b02(09) m±~ffO-E!if§i!&~lf.SZtffiít o m/f§ti!&~3t1Elit o
Tl4n0475_p0540b03(06) I tJ~~;tJ!A.~~~m o ?JTJ!ě!M~~ o ?JTMVWW~ o
Tl4n0475_p0540b04(02) l pJTD*~!MJJ1,~ o ?JTitO-*/f:5:1JllJ o
Tl4n0475_p0540b05(05) l §t:~~fl/~0~§~ o ~OM'ii!~O.íJ;f§M,E!tiM,{lliti o
Tl4n0475_p0540b06(02) l *E!/f~~~JjM,j~ o j}JQ~ o
Tl4n0475_p0540b07(08) l ;G~g/fťi§'J\!f~A.J\~~~ft o J;)!f~if§A.IEi! o J;)-it)]ffi-
91
1J)o
Tl4n0475_p0540b08(01) 111;J:HJ~f~&%<Ji~ o~1&PJ~ o
Tl4n0475_p0540b09(05) l "90~~1!§-?f:~:J:J['['~?f:l~íHJ~j~ o ?f:A.5E~?f:ílli5E~ o
Tl4n0475_p0540bl0(00) l ?f:f1:t!tFs,?f:{1:~~~ o
Tl4n047S_pOS40bll(07) 1 ~~J1ffi1!§-M-*mM-!J\m o ::f~Iirl:::f~:tffii o
Tl4n0475_p0540bl2(06) l ~~IEA.f~~::ff~VIífl o ill!.!~ o
T14n047S_p0540b 13(09) l :;fitzO~~~::f @~A.ZJ1ffiili o B~íl<:t!t# o lífl§3t~3Ř1~
*1W~o
Tl4n0475_p0540bl4(01)
l ~PJ]~--Wi}~{~ílli~~~,
o
Translation by Xuanzang:
Tl4n0476_p056lc29(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562a01(08)
Tl4n0476_p0562a02(04)
Tl4n0476_p0562a03(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562a04(04)
Tl4n0476_p0562a05(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562a06(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562a07(03)
Tl4n0476_p0562a08(11)
l 'mB~t!t#-é-ill!.!~1&
o
l &H!1!8§íM-t6f~?JTF~=~5~~*
o *ill!.!~1&á 8 ot!t# o
JJ<:::f±iH:f8§í1EžF~=~5* o?JTtJ1!§-1PJ o·f:iťtfJ<:tfJ]~--B~Fs, o
A.JJiM:±m~~~~~rm~z~ o
B~M,±,tif~*1U1Ež?JT of~§JJ<:JE.rmfF'~s o Oi*ill!.!~ o
~l~~1~rm::f~g=a o~~'i'{tf~z o
#1!§-ill!.!~ o{1:zts:~1!!!!*1'Tz~ o
~::f~i&H!i'Tz~ o
~~'X±!1&JJ~~~Jii&H!1'Tz ~ o ~~'X'3t1lli?JTJ1ffi~i&H!1'Tz
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
~o
Tl4n0476_p0562a09(03)
Tl4n0476_p0562a10(03)
Tl4n0476_p0562all(l8)
W~~
o
l tJ@~f~A.n~~m
~~J\ft\Glí:A~:ft*;J\
o
l
l A.~±mE'!.~1~*r~8§íz~*~::f'3ti&H!'3t1&~
?JTiíflVWm~
Tl4n0476_p0562a12(02)
Tl4n0476_p0562al3(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562al4(02)
Tl4n0476_p0562al5(07)
Tl4n0476_p0562al6(05)
Tl4n0476_p0562al7(01)
Tl4n0476_p0562al8(04)
Tl4n0476_p0562a19(11)
o
o
?JTY!ě
o
l pJTOffi!WWNR~
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
o?JT~O*::f:5t55U o '3t~flltzo~n~ o
~D~1!tzOíJf§ o M-E"H1M-1llit1 o
~~~U~~M,~?~ o#1!§-ill!.!~ o
:;g:~g::f~J\;f~A./\~~~jt o J;);f~zts:~A.IEzts:~ o
tJ--:t,~JJffir--111 o1:tHl~1%&%<Ji~~1&PJ~ o
"90~~1!§-?f:~~~?F~~~ o
?f:A.~5E?f:te~5E o
?1:11:~5E?f:11:1~~'m7JPJ~ o ~~J]ffi1J~#1!§-Z~ o M,;J\
5F1:M-*5F1:o
Tl4n0476_p0562a20(00)
Tl4n0476_p0562a21(01)
Tl4n0476_p0562a22(05)
Tl4n0476_p0562a23(01)
l M-:tffiii~M-±~Irrl:
l
l
l
o/OOA.{%/OO::f!OOVM o
#1!§-ill!.!~ o :;g:~gtzo~rm~17~~ o
~::f@~{lli?JT.affi~ o B~íl<:t!t# o lífj§)t~3tH~*1W~ o
~P17~--W§~i}~~{~ílli~{J' o
92
Appendix 2- Heart Sutra
(Analyzed in Chapter 6: "Xuanzang's Principles ofTranslation")
Translation by Kumarajiva:
T08n0250_p0847c06(00)
T08n0250_p0847c07(00)
T08n0250_p0847c08(00)
T08n0250_p0847c09(00)
T08n0250_p0847cl0(00)
T08n0250_p0847cll(l9)
l
l
l
l
l
No. 250 [Nos. 251-255, 257]
J*§ilJffi)ť~rEUi~::kfjJ§'J-EMí~
fr:Jt*7Z~ ~ ~~J*a1t§~
lllltltif~l\i
· i'Ti~ffi)ť~r~m~sey · ~.~.%1i~~ · N-W
'@f~o
T08n0250_p0847cl2(14) l
T08n0250_p0847cl3(34) l
~~Di'§
'
i'J~i&~fFi'§
1
%fU9t ! ě~i&~'['~±!;f§ '
· §~~i&~W:i'§
~~;!&~~i'§
o
~
,
f~
o
:;!ik~r!
o
ě~P:;!ik~
'
~
, i'J ,
T08n0250_p0847cl5(02) l ~?Ď\~D:;!ik o
1
T08n0250_p0847cl6(19) l
%fU9t ! :;!ik§ti1!~i'§ ' /f~/f1~
/fi~
f~~ti~
o
T08n0250_p0847cl4(14) l fPJtJ;f&? %fiJ9t ! ~Fě~~ ' ~F~~ě
~P:;!ikě
'
· ~F:~:=E , ~F:** , ~F:rJl:f±
' /f±_6/f1' ' /f±~
o
T08n0250_p0847cl7(00) l :;!ik;l&~cp~ťg ' ~~ ' f~ ' i'J ' ~ ' ~§N ' 1} ' • '
15,~,
T08n0250_p0847cl8(00) l ~ ' ~tg ' V ' ~ ' ~ ' Ml '
T08n0250_p0847cl9(12) l
T08n0250_p0847c20(31) lir! · ~§NWJJ~~~~W · ~~S)jzfr\~~fjJ§3'1 · JJ~~
~~~~~*•~~'~'~'~'~~~~fflo
--t::J/Lin,,t/U.1±:tť.
D
~
i/~
J..t:i
"" B ~j\11\\ r'-J
/1\\
1
T08n0250_p0847c21(09) l
.L-~~?M~i& · ~l\i11Xffi)ť~1~a~i& · ,~,~~W o
T08n0250_p0847c22(07) l ~~Wi& · ~i'f!~'[Ttl · /W--f;JJi'rri1lU~f~'5'['~ · '1C3t1."E
T08n0250_p0847c23(02) l
T08n0250_p0847c24(20) ~ tttM!119'1H:t<ffi)ť~r~a~i& · 1~fíPJm~m ~Mr:- ~m o
1
T08n0250_p0847c25(18)
i&~Dffi)ť~r~a~:;!ik::kSA'J-E , ~J:BA'J-E , ~~~BA
11
11
'JE '
~g~~-f;JJ'@f ' ~-/f~ o
T08n0250_p0847c26(03) l i&~ffi)ť~1Ela~'J-E o J ~P§~'J-EEJ :
T08n0250_p0847c27(00) 1 ~~w ~~w 1~m~~w 1Ela11W~~w
T08n0250_p0847c28(00) l {1f§/OOJ J
T08n0250_p0847c29(00) l J*§ilJffi)ť~1Ela~::kBA'J-E*~
11
93
~m
Translation by Xuanzang:
T08n0253_p0849b22(00)
T08n0253_p0849b23(00)
T08n0253_p0849b24(00)
T08n0253_p0849b25(00)
T08n0253_p0849b26(00)
T08n0253_p0849b27(14)
1~
No. 253 [Nos. 250-252, 254, 255, 257]
m~~i&Vf-tHf~{"*~
mm~~- iU~~~;ru §~ll!
PD~í'<:tifJ
:
~s~1~:tt:t~±m~~m!tťLL!cf1
, W::*:ttrrJ:K.&~líiJ:K
o
T08n0253_p0849b28(10) l B~1~t!t~~PA.=e* , i;JJ[::;k:g:~~ o
T08n0253_p0849b29(14) l ms~J;Kcpi'f~Jíi~§ilJ]li , iSiilE!:fr o
T08n0253_p0849c01(18) lli'J{~m~~i&Vf-i~~B~ , ~.~5!11]~~@ , m~ňB o
T08n0253_p0849c02(15) l
T08n0253_p0849c03(35) l ~PB~~5f1J9t7]\{~&JG:1J , illt$~ á lil E! :fr~Jíi~§ilJJíi
§:
r~~~!~i'J~~:g:~~~~-~~fi~,~W~fi?J~~~Bo
T08n0253_p0849c04(00) l
T08n0253 _p0849c05( 18) l mB~Iil E! :fr~Jíi~§ilJ]li~ J'ta~5fiJ9t § : r ~jflj~ ! ;fi
~~~'
T08n0253_p0849c06(10) l ~ft_;\J=y:g:~~m~:fiiWR~~i::YB~ , ~lil1ii#iti@ o
T08n0253_p0849c07(09) l ~5FIJ~ ! 5~~@ , @~~5 o 5~P~@ , @~P~5
T08n0253_p0849c08(02)
T08n0253_p0849c09(02)
T08n0253_p0849cl0(02)
ill'
T08n0253_p0849cll(05)
T08n0253_p0849cl2(12)
:ft:. '
_....T......
0~
' .A.!;::!.
~§
ifhX.i
l
l
l
~1J\1![PD~ o ~5FIJ~ ! ~~i!@:f§ , ~~~1~ ,
~±)§~~ ' ~j;~~i~ o ~rf&@cp~5 ' ~§t ' ;fl'!
o
' i::Y '
, ~§N , ~ , w , [5 , Jt , ~ , ~5 , Ti , ~ , ~*
~
111! , ~§NJí!.JJ~~~~Jí!.
l
~~BJI;Jj\~~BJI~
, 1Hf9glf"r\1Hf:f!h
o
~~~" ~ VJ',,\, r'-J
,
o
, ]J~~~JE;Jj\~~JE~
o
~=@f ,
T08n0253_p0849cl3(00) l
T08n0253_p0849cl4(18) l tJ~?M~t&, ~m!:Jíir~IH:t<m~~1WR~~rf&{,,~~~JiE o
T08n0253_p0849cl505) 1 ~~Wttz: , ~i'f~~'f:ffi , ~mmHiU~rl'! , J'Gj[;13!~ o
T08n0253_p0849cl603) 1 -t!t~1~1:t<m~~iw&~~ttz:, 1~1íoJm~m-~-~m o
T08n0253_p0849cl7(07) l
T08n0253_p0849cl8(27) l ttz:~om~~1WR~~~*t$5'E , ~::*:BJI5'E , ~~__t5'E , ~
1f~~~5'E o ~g~;F~VJ=@f , ~-~lillf o
T08n0253_p0849cl9(07) l rf&§3tm~:fi1WR~~5'E o J ~P§tl5'EEJ :
T08n0253_p0849c20(00) l r [ft/(líoJ- PJ +~)/*]§$ [ftl(líoJ- PJ +~)/*]§$ 1WR[ft
l<iíoJ- WJ +~)/*JilW 1wm11Wr ttl<iíoJ- PJ+$)/*J§$ ~m
T08n0253_p0849c21(00) l ~(~*'Z;,&)~§ilJ
T08n0253_p0849c22(00) l
T08n0253_p0849c23(20) l r PD~ , ~5FIJ9t ! ~~Jíi~§ilJJíitf~:g:i~m~~iWR~~
i::Y , ~PD~i::Y
o
J
PD~§tlB
T08n0253_p0849c24(06)
T08n0253_p0849c25(24)
l
l
o
~PB~
, t!t~1JéJJ[::;k:g:i~- ~tfu!lf,
94
, ~lil E! :fr~Jíi~§ilJ
, :g~ ! :§:~T- ! tzo~ , tzo~ ! tzo&?JT§)'ť;
T08n0253__p0849c26(00) l ~~~m5ť::S1W&~~1'J , JJ!tzD~1'J
T08n0253__p0849c27(05) l tzD~1'JB'if , ~tJJtzo*~~lí.l1rg J
T08n0253__p0849c28(10) l
T08n0253__p0849c29(28) l ~B'ift!t#§)'ť;~§R8 , ~-~tiJ9t-}(~3't~ , 15:!§1±~
!ll§ :
1 :g~
o
o
o
Jli-~Jli~*-~o~~~~~·A·~~&•
T08n0253__p0850a01(06) l ~~~~ ' tifJ{51jjpfT§)t ' ~*-~
T08n0253__p0850a02(00)
l
m5ť::51W&~~~~,*~
95
,{§-3t*=1'T
o
Bibliography
Bagchi, Prabodh Chandra. Le canon bouddhique en Chine: Les traducteurs et les
traductions. 2 vols. Paris: P.Guethner,1927, 1938.
Chan, Sin-wai. Pollard, David. An Encyclopaedia ofTranslation. Chinese-English,
English-Cinese. The Chinese Uni. ofHong-kong. 1995, 2001.
Ch'en, Kenneth. Buddhism in China, A Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1972.
Conze, Edward. The Prajnaparamita Literature. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal
Publishers, 1978.
Demiéville, Paul. "Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui" in The Cambridge
History ofChina, vol I. Cambridge University Press: 1986.
--------------------. "La penetration du Bouddhisme dans la tradition philosophique
chinoise." Cahiers ďhistorie mondiale 3 (1956): 19-38.
--------------------. Demieville. "Sur la Traite de la grande vertu de sagesse traduit par
E.Lamotte", in Choix ďetudes bouddhiques (1929-1970). Leiden:
E.J.Brill. 1973. pp.470.
Harrison, Paul. "The Earliest Chinese Translations of Mahayana Sutras: Some Notes
on the Works ofLokaksema". In Buddhist Studies Review, vol10, 2,
1993.
Hrdličková,
V. "The first translations ofBuddhist sutras in Chinese literature and their
place in the development of story-telling" in Archiv Orientální 26,
1958.
Hurvitz, Leon. "Chih-1 (538-597) An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of a Chinese
Buddhist Monk". In Melanges Chinois et Bouddhiques, vol XII.
Bruxelles: Institute Belge des Hautes Etudes Chinoises, 1980.
Kolmaš, Josef. Buddhistická svatá písma. Praha: Práh,1995.
Ma Zuyi ,~fflll~. Zhongguo fanyijianshi cp~~~~FJ33!::.. Beijing: Zhongguo duiwai
fanyi chuban gongsi, 1984.
Maspero, Henri. "Essay sur le Taoisme", Mel. Posth., vol. II, p.189.
Ren Jiyu {:Hifimt. Zhongguo Fojiao Shi cp~{.,IMJ<:3!::.. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue
chubanshe, 1985.
96
~ang Yongtong ~JtHJJ, Hanwei liangjin nanbeichao jojiao shi 11~~~-wJ::fc!I!JH~
~)(3t. Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan, 1998.
Tsukamoto, Zenryu. A History oj Early Chinese Buddhism. From Its Introduction to
the Death oj Hui-yuan. Tokyo: Kodansha Intemational Ltd., 1985.
Tsukamoto, Zenryu. "Dates of Kuamrajiva and Seng Chao Re-examined"
Wang Wenyan .í)O~J[. Fodian Hanyi zhi yanjiu {~~1i§~~titfJE.Tianhua foxue
yekan zhi 21, 1984.
Wang Wenyan .í:X~J[. Fodian chongyijing yanjiu yu kaolu {~~m§~*~tiHJ"CW~~;R.
Taipei: Wen shi zhichubanshe, 1993.
Wright, Arthur. "Buddhism and Chinese Culture: Phases of Interaction" in The
Journal ojAsian Studie:/', vol XVII, no.1/1957.
------------------. "Biography and Hagiography, Huijiao's Li ves of Eminent Monks", in
Studies in Chinese Buddhism. New Haven and London: Yale
University Press, 1990.
------------------ . "Seng-Jui Alias Hui-Jui: A Biographical Bisection in the Kao-Seng
Chuan" in Sino-Indian Studies, 5.
------------------.
"Fo-ťu-teng:
A Biography." Harward Journal ojAsiatic Studies II,
nos. 3-4 (Dec 1948): 321-71.
Waley, Arthur. Three ways o.fThought in Ancient China. New York: Macmillan, 1939.
Xi Xiu E§~§:. "Luoshi yanjiu mfttitfJE" in Xiandai Fojiao xueshu conggan 13.
Yamanouchi Shinkyo. "Kosoden no kenkyu" ["A Study ofHuijiao's Lives ofEminent
Monks] in Shina Bukkyoshi no Kenkyu [Studies in the History of
Chinese Buddhism]. Kyoto: Bukkyo daigaku shuppanpu, 1921.
Yang Bojin T~{áill3?.. Lun Yu Yizhu §#H§R§~i.1. Zhonghua shuju, 1999.
Yermakov M.E. Zhizneopisania Dostojnykh Monakhov, vol I. Moscow: Nauka, 1991.
Ziircher, E. "A New Look at the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts" in From Benares to
Beijing, Essays on Buddhism and Chinese Religion. Edited by Kiochi
Shinohara, Gregory Schopen, Oakville: MOSAIC PRESS, 1991. pp
277-304
-------------. The Buddhist Conquest oj China. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1959.
-------------. "Late Han Vemacular Elements in the Earliest Buddhist Translations" ...
97
Buddhist Scriptures in Chinese and other languages
TaishO Shinshu Daizokyo ::klE!fJT~~::kiU~ [Taish6 Tripitaka]. Ed. Takukasu Junjir6
and Watanabe Kaigyoku. 55 vols. CBETA ii-T{~~~g\Z. CBETA
Chinese Electronic Tripitaka Collection. version 2006. Taish6
Tripitaka Vol. 1-55&85 and the Shinshan Zokuzokyo (Xuzangjing)
Vol. 54-88.
The Vimalakirti Sutra. Translated by Burton Watson (from the Chinese version by
Kumarajiva). New York: Columbia University Press, 1997.
The Lotus Sutra. Translated by Kubo Tsugunari and Yuyama Akira (from the Chinese
ofKumarajiva) Berkekley: Bukkyo Dend6 Kyokai and Numata
Centre for Buddhist Translation and Research, 1993.
Scripture o.fthe Lotus Blossom o.fthe Fine Dharma. Translated by Leon Hurvitz (from
the Chinese ofKumarajiva). New York: Columbia University Press,
1976.
98