DOCSLIB.ORG

Traditional Commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Traditional Commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā 1 Traditional Commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Youngjin LEE Accurately defining the “Larger Prajñāpāramitā” is still open to discussion and several interpreta- tions have been offered. Conze (1978: 10) states that the “Large Prajñāpāramitā” is represented by three dif- ferent texts—the Prajñāpāramitā in 100,000 lines (Śatasāhasrikā), the Prajñāpāramitā in 25,000 lines (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā), and the Prajñāpāramitā in 18,000 lines (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā). According to Zac- cheti (2005:40, 2015:185), it is not until around the time of Bodhiruci (active at the beginning of the 6th cen- tury) that we find explicit mention of, among other Prajñāpāramitā texts, all three “canonical” Larger Prajñāpāramitā versions in 100,000, 25,000, and 18,000 lines respectively. Early Chinese historical, exegeti- cal and bibliographical sources tell us that the “Larger version [of the Prajñāpāramitā]” (da pin []) re- ferred to texts of varying sizes, ranging from about 17,000 to 22,000 lines. Shoji (2015: 59-62) points out that the “Large Prajñāpāramitā” comprises first five sections (~) of the Da banruoboluomiduo jing ( T. 220) by Xuanzang (). He places not only the aforementioned three texts but also the Prajñāpāramitās in 10,000 (Daśasāharikā) and 8,000 lines (Aṣṭasāhasrikā) under this category. In this section, a distinction will be made between the term “Larger Prajñāpāramitā” and “Tradi- tional commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā”. Based on Zaccheti’s classification, the “Larger Prajñāpāramitā” essentially comprises two versions, namely, the Prajñāpāramitā in 18,000 and the Prajñāpāramitā in 25,000 lines. Whereas, the “Traditional commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā”, ba- sically means refer to commentaries on the Prajñāpāramitā in 25,000 lines or Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. (It is important to note that according to the information at the end of the Da zhidu lun ( T. 1509, 756a27–b4), the Indic manuscript, on which Kumārajīva's translation of the Prajñāpāramitā in 25,000 lines is based, consists of 22,000 lines or ślokas (Zaccheti 2005, 40). With regard to traditional commentaries on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā, we can see a clear-cut dis- tinction between Indo-Tibetan and East Asian traditions. In the former tradition, the Abhisamayālaṅkāra, which was not introduced into China, Korea, or Japan, played a key role. Whereas in the latter tradition, the Da zhidu lun,—which is unknown to Indian and Tibetan Buddhism and is preserved only in Chinese transla- tion—, had great influence on the interpretation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Moreover, the Abhisama- yālaṅkāra, as well as most of its subsequent commentaries, is inseparably related to the revised recension of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā (Nakamura 2014, 30). While the Da zhidu lun, as well as its subsequent commen- taries, is a commentary on the unrevised recension of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā, namely, the Mohebanru- oboluomi jing ( T.223). Ⅰ Indian Commentaries We can verify that at least four [existing] commentaries have been composed with regard to the Larger Prajñāpāramitā in India: the Abhisamayālaṅkāra by Maitreyanātha(?), the Abhisamayālaṅkāravṛtti 2 by Ārya Vimuktisena ([the early] 6th century CE), the Abhisamayālaṅkāravārttika by Bhadanta Vimuk- tisena (6th or 7th century CE), and the Śuddhamatī by Ratnākaraśānti (ca. 1000 CE). (cf. Obermiller 1933, 9- 10; Conze 1978, 39-40 and 112; 101, Ruegg 1981, 101-104 and 122-124; Brunnhuölzl 2010, 65; Suzuki 2015, 158-160 ; Zaccheti 2015, 190-191) Ⅰ -1 Abhisamayālaṅkāra The Abhisamayālaṅkāra or Abhisamayālaṅkāraṃ nāma Prajñāpāramitopadeśaśāstram (hereafter AA) is, as its title shows, an Instructional Treatise on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. This treatise, consisting of nine chapters or abhisamayas,— eight subject matters (padārthāḥ) with a brief synopsis of them—, divides the Larger Prajñāpāramitā into eight chapters. Theses are divided in turn into 70 subcategories, which are further divided into 1,200 items (Conze 1978, 104-106; Brunnhuölzl 2010, 49-62). As Makransky (1997:110) very aptly states, “AA served as a table of contents for the entire Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, as a condensed summary of all the practices, paths and stages of realization to Buddhahood understood to be implicit in that Sūtra (Makransky 1997, 110).” An edition of the Sanskrit text, which is based on three fairly late—17th~18th century CE at the earliest— manuscripts, together with an edition of Tibetan translation was published by T. Stcherbatsky and E. Obermiller in 1929. Recently, one Nepalese manuscript scattered into two sets was identified as the Ab- hisamayālaṅkāra, which was written in the early twelfth century (LEE 2015, 18-19). Earlier witnesses of this text are reported to be preserved in Tibet or Tibetan Autonomous Region. This versified commentary is traditionally ascribed to Maitreyanātha, though this is doubtful from the perspective of modern scholarship. This is due to the fact that the first figure who ascribed authorship to Maitreyanātha, namely the famous Haribhadra (ca. 770-810 CE), did so only in the eighth century (AAA 1.13-18, 75.17-22; AAV 1.07-14). Ascribing authorship at such a late stage suggests that attribution may well have been used just as a means to lend greater authority to the text (Makransky 1997, 111). Moreover, the existence of two commentaries by Asaṅga and Vasubandhu, which is first stated by Haribhadra as well, is also questionable, because their works were not quoted by other AA commentaries, and were classified into commentaries unrelated to AA by a Tibetan historian, bCom ldan rig ral. (For more details, see Naka- mura 2011 and Kano and Nakamura 2009, 129-130.) The following three commentaries not only provide comments on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā, but also correlate it to, or comment on the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Ⅰ -2 Abhisamayālaṅkāravṛtti The Abhisamayālaṅkāravṛtti is not only the oldest available commentary on AA but also possibly the first commentary (Makransky 1997, 187). The author, Ārya Vimuktisena quoted from the revised or the Eight Chaptered (Nyi khri le brgyad ma) Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, provided glosses to explain its difficult words or concepts, and aligned each verse of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra with the corresponding section of the 3 Prajñāpāramitā (Makransky 1997, 112; Zaccheti 2005, 191). Although Ārya Vimuktisena's doctrinal posi- tion has been defined by Haribhadra as that of a Mādhyamika (AAV 3.18-19= NGMPP A 35/12 1v2: (Vimu)ktyākhyena vivṛtam āryānāṃ madhyava[r]tt[i]nā), traces of Yogācāra’s influence can also be ob- served (Conze, 1978, 102–103; Makransky, 1997, 110–111). The whole Sanskrit text, based on one Nepalese manuscript in the early twelfth century with its modern apograph, was edited by three scholars: 1st Abhisamaya by Pensa (1967), 2nd to 4th Abhisamayas by Cicuzza (2001), and 5th to 8th Abhisamayas by Nakamura (2014). The whole commentary was translated into English by Sparham (2006, 2008, 2009, 2012). In 2013, another manuscript of Ārya Vimuktisena’s commentary was identified. This manuscript, which is now preserved in Tibet, probably dates back to the early twelfth century, about the same time period as the Nepalese manuscript. (LEE 2015, 17-18 and 35-36: A re-edition of the first Abhisamaya, based on these two manuscripts, is being prepared by LEE) Ārya Vimuktisena—Vimuktiṣeṇa in both manuscripts— is one of the most important and influen- tial commentators in the AA commentary tradition in India and Tibet (Makransky 1997, 112). Moreover, he might have been the one who revised the Many Chaptered Larger Prajñāpāramitā into the Eight Chaptered recension, as was stated by bCom ldan rig ral (Nakamura 2014, 31-32). Ārya Vimuktisena may also have composed AA, as is suggested by a supplementary title on the first folio recto of the newly identified manu- script of AA (LEE 2015, 38-40; cf. Makransky 1997, 187). In fact the title, Abhisamayālaṅkāravṛtti, did not come from the Sanskrit text, but from the Tibetan translation, 'phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa'i tshul gyi mngon par rtogs pa'i rgyan gyi mngon par rtogs pa'i rgyan gyi man ngag gi bstan bcos kyi 'grel pa. In the Nepalese manuscript, the title is written as “Pañca- viṃśatisāhasrikāyaprajñāpāramitopadeśaṃ Abhisamayālaṃkāraśāstram”, which appears to be the same title as AA. Ⅰ -3 Abhisamayālaṅkāravārttika The Abhisamayālaṅkāravārttika was composed by another Vimuktisena with the different title, “Bhadanta”. He is believed to have been either a pupil of Ārya Vimuktisena, or a contemporary of Can- drakīrti (7th century). (Ruegg 1968, 307-308; Recently, Isoda(2014) raised the following question: Aren’t the Vṛtti and the Vārttika are different translations of the same original text?) To date, this commentary has been accessible only through the Tibetan translation, 'phags pa shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa'i man ngag gi bstan bcos mngon par rtogs pa'i rgyan gyi tshig le'ur byas pa'i rnam par 'grel pa (P. No. 5186; D. No. 3788), since the Sanskrit manuscript(s) had not yet surfaced. Haribhadra stated that Bhadanta composed the Vārttika without obtaining the entire AA (aprāpya sakalaṃ śāstraṃ: AAV 3. 21-22). In reality, the Abhisamayālaṅkāra on which he commented should be seen as “another recension”, rather than an “incomplete version” inasmuch as it not only lacks 23 verses (kārikās) but it also includes one verse that cannot be found in other commentaries (Nakamura 2014, 43-44; Isoda 2014, 679-680). In addition, it has been pointed out that the Larger Prajñāpāramitā that Bhadanta consulted 4 was the Many Chaptered or unrevised recension, which belongs to the same group of the extant unrevised recension. The Many Chaptered Prajñāpāramitā also had a large influence on the arising of the another re- cension of AA. (Nakamura 2014, 37-39: 48; The another recension of AA might have been used by his suc- cessive commentators, such as Ratnākaraśānti and others. See Sakuma 1994, 282-286 and Kobayashi 1981, 133.) Ⅰ -4 Śuddhamatī The Śuddhamatī or *Abhisamayālaṅkārakārikāvṛtti Śuddhamatī nāma (Tib.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reviewarticle Origins of the Mahāyāna
    Indo-Iranian Journal 63 (2020) 371–394 brill.com/iij Review Article ∵ Origins of the Mahāyāna Jonathan A. Silk Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands [email protected] Abstract A new volume, Setting Out on the Great Way: Essays on Early Mahāyāna Buddhism (2018), collects essays on questions related to the origins of the Mahāyāna Buddhist movement. This review article considers the contributions, and offers a few observa- tions on the state of the field. Keywords Mahāyāna origins – Abhidharma – sūtras – Buddhism Paul Harrison, ed., Setting Out on the GreatWay: Essays on Early Mahāyāna Bud- dhism. Sheffield: Equinox, 2018. 310pp., 35 plates. isbn-13 (Hardback) 978178179 0960; (Paperback) 9781781798539; (eBook) 9781781796856. Hardback £75.00 / $100.00; Paperback £26.99 / $34.00; eBook £26.99 / $34.00. Some time ago, the subject of the origins of Mahāyāna Buddhism was, at least among a small group of scholars, a hot topic. In recent years, however, the heat seems to have diminished significantly. Nevertheless, as the editor of the volume here under consideration, Paul Harrison, says in his introductory essay, “Early Mahāyāna: Laying out the Field,” there may be more to say on © jonathan a. silk, 2020 | doi:10.1163/15728536-06302005 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the cc by-ncDownloaded4.0 license. from Brill.com09/28/2021 11:25:32PM via free access 372 review article the question, especially now that we are in possession of a number of new sources, and of course old ideas can be fruitfully reconsidered as well. Based on papers presented at a 2012 conference, eight scholars here offer contri- butions on topics related to the emergence of the Mahāyāna movement(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Inventing Chinese Buddhas: Identity, Authority, and Liberation in Song-Dynasty Chan Buddhism
    Inventing Chinese Buddhas: Identity, Authority, and Liberation in Song-Dynasty Chan Buddhism Kevin Buckelew Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2018 © 2018 Kevin Buckelew All rights reserved Abstract Inventing Chinese Buddhas: Identity, Authority, and Liberation in Song-Dynasty Chan Buddhism Kevin Buckelew This dissertation explores how Chan Buddhists made the unprecedented claim to a level of religious authority on par with the historical Buddha Śākyamuni and, in the process, invented what it means to be a buddha in China. This claim helped propel the Chan tradition to dominance of elite monastic Buddhism during the Song dynasty (960–1279), licensed an outpouring of Chan literature treated as equivalent to scripture, and changed the way Chinese Buddhists understood their own capacity for religious authority in relation to the historical Buddha and the Indian homeland of Buddhism. But the claim itself was fraught with complication. After all, according to canonical Buddhist scriptures, the Buddha was easily recognizable by the “marks of the great man” that adorned his body, while the same could not be said for Chan masters in the Song. What, then, distinguished Chan masters from everyone else? What authorized their elite status and granted them the authority of buddhas? According to what normative ideals did Chan aspirants pursue liberation, and by what standards did Chan masters evaluate their students to determine who was worthy of admission into an elite Chan lineage? How, in short, could one recognize a buddha in Song-dynasty China? The Chan tradition never answered this question once and for all; instead, the question broadly animated Chan rituals, institutional norms, literary practices, and visual cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Masquerading As Translation: Examples of Chinese Lectures by Indian Scholar-Monks in the Six Dynasties Period
    chinese lectures by indian monks funayama toru Masquerading as Translation: Examples of Chinese Lectures by Indian Scholar-Monks in the Six Dynasties Period ome years ago I wrote an article in Japanese, the title of which in S English is “Mediating ‘Chinese Translation’ and ‘Chinese Compo- sition’: Regarding Some Features Special to Chinese Buddhist Texts.”1 There, I attempted to describe the characteristics of Chinese Buddhist translation and to suggest also that when we maintain a distinction be- tween Chinese translation (yi ᤟) and Chinese composition (zhuanshu ᐷ૪) as mutually exclusive categories,2 namely that the Chinese trans- lation of an Indic text is a genuine translation without any influence from the Chinese side, then we are apt to confront a situation where the dichotomy can no longer stand. To put it simply, there might be a third type of literature which falls between a Chinese translation and a Chinese composition or compilation. More specifically, the article was intended to raise three questions. First, in which cases were there omissions of original passages and additions of new passages to the translated text? Second, in which cases were there passages from an- other work that were brought into the translation in its eventual form under a new title? And last, is there any conclusive evidence for the I would like to express my special thanks to Prof. Victor H. Mair, Prof. Daniel Boucher and Prof. Tansen Sen, who kindly invited me to “Mairfest” in December, 2003, and to all the par- ticipants who provided questions and comments on my talk at the conference.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies, Vol. 2, May 2012
    VOLUME 2 (MAY 2012) ISSN: 2047-1076! ! Journal of the ! ! Oxford ! ! ! Centre for ! ! Buddhist ! ! Studies ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! The Oxford Centre for ! Buddhist Studies A Recognised Independent http://www.ocbs.org/ Centre of the University of Oxford! JOURNAL OF THE OXFORD CENTRE FOR BUDDHIST STUDIES May Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies Volume May : - Published by the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies www.ocbs.org Wolfson College, Linton Road, Oxford, , United Kingdom Authors retain copyright of their articles. Editorial Board Prof. Richard Gombrich (General Editor): [email protected] Dr Tse-fu Kuan: [email protected] Dr Karma Phuntsho: [email protected] Dr Noa Ronkin: [email protected] Dr Alex Wynne: [email protected] All submissions should be sent to: [email protected]. Production team Operations and Development Manager: Steven Egan Production Manager: Dr Tomoyuki Kono Development Consultant: Dr Paola Tinti Annual subscription rates Students: Individuals: Institutions: Universities: Countries from the following list receive discount on all the above prices: Bangladesh, Burma, Laos, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, ailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, In- donesia, Pakistan, all African Countries For more information on subscriptions, please go to www.ocbs.org/journal. Contents Contents List of Contributors Editorial. R G Teaching the Abhidharma in the Heaven of the irty-three, e Buddha and his Mother. A Burning Yourself: Paticca. Samuppāda as a Description of the Arising of a False Sense of Self Modeled on Vedic Rituals. L B A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli versions of the Bala Samyukta. , a collection of early Buddhist discourses on “Powers” (Bala).
    [Show full text]
  • Huaigan and the Growth of Pure Land Buddhism During the Tang Era
    HUAIGAN AND THE GROWTH OF PURE LAND BUDDHISM DURING THE TANG ERA By KENDALL R. MARCHMAN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2015 © 2015 Kendall R. Marchman To my family ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project would have not been possible were it not for the many loving family members, friends, and mentors who have supported me throughout my life. I would like to take a moment to highlight just a few of the many people and institutions who have helped me reach this goal. I would first like to thank all of the professors with whom I have studied during my time at Mercer, Vanderbilt, and the University of Florida. I also extend thanks to my new colleagues at Young Harris College for the encouragement and opportunity they have provided. I am very thankful to my dissertation committee, Mario Poceski, Jimmy Yu, Richard Wang, Guolong Lai, and Whitney Sanford for their patience, inspiration, and support. One day in class Jimmy Yu mentioned that Huaigan and the Qunyi lun needed further research, and I am thankful that he suggested them as the subjects of my dissertation. I am obliged to Dr. Poceski who took me in as a raw graduate student and has been essential in my process to become a better scholar, though this process is far from complete. Many thanks to Travis Smith who provided encouragement and advice throughout this process. I would also like to thank Richard King who encouraged my evolving interests in Asian religions while at Vanderbilt.
    [Show full text]
  • MAHĀPIṬAKA Newsletter New Series No
    MAHĀPIṬAKA Newsletter New Series No. 17 January 1, 2012 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of the ENGLISH TRANSLATION of the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism) Editor: MAYEDA Sengaku Table of Contents Publishing Schedule Published in 2011............................................................................................. 1 Forthcoming titles ......................................................................................... 1-2 Review: Sutra on the Concentration of Sitting Meditation Translated by YAMABE Nobuyoshi & SUEKI Fumihiko MIYAZAKI Tenshō ........................................................................................ 2-4 In Memoriam: John R. McRae Kenneth K. Tanaka ....................................................................................... 4-5 Brian Kensho Nagata ....................................................................................... 6 Committee Members ........................................................................................... 7 Publishing Schedule Published in 2011: 1. PRINCE SHŌTOKU’S COMMENTARY ON THE ŚRĪMĀLĀDEVĪ SUTRA (勝鬘經義疏 Shōmangyōgisho, Taisho 2185) Translated by Mark Dennis Forthcoming titles: 1. EXPOSITORY COMMENTARY ON THE VIMALAKĪRTI SUTRA (維摩經義疏 Yuimakyōgisho, Taisho 2186) Translated by Jamie Hubbard 2. TENDAI LOTUS SCRIPTURES (無量義經 Muryōgikyō, Taisho 276) Translated by KUBO Tsugunari and Joseph M. Logan (觀普賢菩薩行法經 Kanfugenbosatsugyōbōkyō, Taisho 277) Translated by KUBO Tsugunari and Joseph M. Logan (妙法蓮華經憂波提舍 Myōhōrengekyō-upadaisha,
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary: Overview
    Commentary: Overview The writing of commentaries has been and contin- studies, however, it has led to a certain neglect of ues to be one of the fundamental literary activities of commentarial literature due to a mistaken assump- Buddhists everywhere. For more than two thousand tion of lack of creativity (Kramer, 2013). In the years, going back to the earliest days of the tradition, Buddhist world as in the Latin world, the 5th cen- commentaries have been used to learn and teach tury marks the consolidation of earlier exegetical the words of the Buddha, to transmit their form and material into comprehensive commentaries on content faithfully, and to systematize and develop which following generations of scholars built. In Buddhist doctrine. parallel with these “literary” commentaries, the pro- A commentary can be defined as a sustained duction of “curricular” commentaries rooted in an textual mediation of the meaning and form of a instructional setting and based on either teachers’ culturally significant root text, or more simply the or students’ notes continued to be a powerful force “continuous explication of text” (Guthmüller, 2013), throughout the history of Buddhism (Ganeri, 2011, to distinguish it from the more localized and occa- 113–114; Krasser, 2011). Some of these curricular com- sional type of explication represented by glosses. At mentaries were elaborated and crossed over into the the same time, the very word “commentary” indi- literary tradition; others remained ephemeral, yet cates, for the Western European tradition, a gradual formed and continue to form the backbone of local evolution from glosses into the new literary genre of Buddhist instruction (McDaniel, 2008, 191–204).
    [Show full text]
  • The Indian Roots of Pure Land Buddhism: Insights from the Oldest Chinese Versions of the Larger Sukhåvat∆Vy¥Ha
    The Indian Roots of Pure Land Buddhism: Insights from the Oldest Chinese Versions of the Larger Sukhåvat∆vy¥ha Jan Nattier Indiana University MASATOSHI NAGATOMI WAS a panoramic thinker. Raised in a Jødo Shinsh¥ family, he chose the distant world of Indian Buddhism as his research field. Educated at Kyoto University, he went on to complete his doctorate at Harvard University, spending time studying in India as well. When thinking about Indian Buddhist literature he could call upon analo- gies from East Asia; when discussing Buddhist rituals in China he could draw upon his knowledge of Tibet. In sum, for him Buddhism was not a regional or sectarian entity but a worldwide and multi-faceted tradi- tion, and no student of his could fail to be impressed by the broad range of his perspective. Most students of Pure Land Buddhism, by contrast, have approached their topic within a far narrower frame. Generally this form of Buddhism has been treated as an East Asian phenomenon, and indeed it is often studied (with, one should recognize, many valuable results) within the parameters of a single school or sect. This paper, however, is intended as a small attempt to emulate Professor Nagatomi’s sweeping cross-cultural vision of Buddhist history by examining the evidence for Pure Land Buddhism not in East Asia, but in India. To understand how Amitåbha was viewed by Indian Buddhists, however, requires beginning with a sketch of the circumstances within which scriptures devoted to this figure emerged. I will begin, therefore, with a brief overview of some of the key developments that preceded— and indeed, may have elicited—the composition of scriptures devoted to Amitåbha.
    [Show full text]
  • Qisong on Lineage: the Critical Essay Revised and Defended
    CHAPTER SIX QISONG ON LINEAGE: THE CRITICAL ESSAY REVISED AND DEFENDED Introduction: A Different Format, a Different Scope, a Different Attitude The second fascicle of the Critical Essay takes the form of a series of questions and answers.1 The questions derive, in all likelihood, from reactions to the two sections of the first fascicle, which were circulated in the years after the composition of the first in the early 1050s and then the second in the late 1050s or very early 1060s. Qisong presents the questions in the voice of an unidentified ‘visitor’ or ‘guest’ who expresses skepticism on many points, including several made earlier in the Critical Essay, and then he responds at length in his own voice. The third section differs from the earlier sections of theCritical Essay in three ways. First, the topics discussed are more theoretical and acknowledge a wider Buddhist context for the issues surround- ing Chan lineage. Qisong’s answers draw very little on the historical sources used previously, turning instead to a number of sūtras and commentaries, particularly the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and the Da zhidu lun.2 Second, Qisong here confronts directly the questions and 1 The question-and-answer format had long been used in Indian Buddhism and traditional Chinese literature as well as Chinese Buddhist material. One of its permu- tations is the master-disciple conversation of Chan yulu, or discourse records. In the Chan Preface [Chanyuan zhuquanji duxu] of Zongmi, these conversations are criti- cized—by a questioner—as disorganized (T.48.2015.399c28–9), and the same certainly applies here.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Lushan Huiyuan a Pure Land Buddhist? Evidence from His Correspondence with Kumārajīva About Nianfo Practice
    Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal (2008, 21:175-191) Taipei: Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies 中華佛學學報第二十一期 頁175-191 (民國九十七年)，臺北：中華佛學研究所 ISSN:1017-7132 Was Lushan Huiyuan a Pure Land Buddhist? Evidence from His Correspondence with Kumārajīva About Nianfo Practice Charles B. Jones The Catholic University of America Abstract The Buddhist community in China has traditionally considered Lushan Huiyuan 盧山慧遠 334-416) to be the first “patriarch” (zu 祖) of the Pure Land school, based almost entirely on his having hosted a meeting of monks and scholars in the year 402 to engage in nianfo 念佛 practice and vow rebirth in the Western Paradise of Amitābha. This article examines the extent to which Huiyuan might be considered a “Pure Land Buddhist” by looking at an exchange between him and the great translator Kumārajīva on the topic of Buddha-contemplation, as well as other sources for his life that demonstrate his participation in activities that could be regarded as part of the Pure Land repertoire of ritual and doctrine in the early fifth century. Keywords: Lushan Huiyuan, Pure Land, Kumārajīva, nianfo, Patriarch. 176 • Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal Volume 21 (2008) 廬山慧遠是淨土信仰者嗎？ 以慧遠與鳩摩羅什對念佛修行的書信問答為論據 Charles B. Jones 周文廣 美國天主教大學神學與宗教學院助理教授 提要 在中國佛教傳統上視廬山慧遠是淨土宗的初祖，大部分是基於他在西元 402 年 所舉辦的法會，其中參與的僧眾及學者專修念佛法門及誓願往生西方阿彌陀佛淨土 者。此篇文章藉由考察慧遠與偉大的翻譯家鳩摩羅十對於念佛三昧的交流，以及陳 述其生平的其它出處，也就是對慧遠從事被視為第五世紀早期淨土宗儀式與教法的 部份，檢視其被視為淨土信仰者的程度。 關鍵字：廬山慧遠、淨土、鳩摩羅十、念佛、初祖 Was Lushan Huiyuan a Pure Land Buddhist? • 177 Introduction Early in the year 406 C.E., the eminent Chinese monk Huiyuan of Mount Lu (Lushan Huiyuan 盧山慧遠 334-416) wrote a letter to the Kuchean monk-translator Kumārajīva (Ch: Jiumoloushi 鳩摩羅什), then residing in the northern capital of Chang’an 長安.1 Huiyuan had heard that Kumārajīva was considering leaving China to return west, and so he wanted to write to him on “several tens of” doctrinal matters that continued to perplex him2.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Introduction This book [Zongmi’s Chan Prolegomenon] is not only a means for com- ing to know of matters related to Zen; it is also a book that is valuable for coming to know Buddhism in general. —Ui Hakuju, Zengen shosenshu tojo (1939) Modern Japa nese Zen has tended to foster a rather one- dimensional character- ization of the Chan/Zen school’s slogan “mind- to- mind transmission; no in- volvement with the written word [yi xin chuan xin bu li wenzi].” For Japa nese Zen it is common to imply that textual learning (gakumon) in Buddhism in general and personal experience (taiken) in Zen are separate realms. For in- stance, Yamamoto Genpo (1866– 1961), the most famous Rinzai Zen master of early Showa Japan and sometimes called the second coming of Hakuin Ekaku (1685– 1768), said that the crucial requirement for a Zen monk is the “mind of the Way” (doshin), and that adding learning (gakumon) to this is like making a ferocious demon hold a metal cudgel (oni ni kanabo). Supplying a cudgel is like adding superfl uous strength to a demon that is already strong.1 Even in Zen scholarship such a dichotomy between Zen mind and the word shows up. The Great Dictionary of Zen Studies (Zengaku daijiten), a multivolume Zen diction- ary published by the Soto Zen school in Japan in the 1970s, begins its entry for “no involvement with the written word” with the following: The slogan “no involvement with the written word; a separate transmission outside the canonical teachings” is spoken of as a special characteristic of the Zen school.
    [Show full text]
  • Qisong and Lineage in Chinese Buddhism (Sinica Leidensia
    Th e Power of Patriarchs Sinica Leidensia Edited by Barend J. ter Haar and Maghiel van Crevel In co-operation with P.K. Bol, D.R. Knechtges, E.S. Rawski, W.L. Idema, H.T. Zurndorfer VOLUME 94 Th e Power of Patriarchs Qisong and Lineage in Chinese Buddhism By Elizabeth Morrison LEIDEN • BOSTON 2010 Front cover: Photograph by Benjamin Marks of a detail from a rubbing from the collection of Wendi Adamek. The rubbing is of the carving of Indian patriarchs in the Dazhusheng ku ⡨Ẑ侗䧠 near Lingquan Monastery 暉㰊⬻ in Anyang ⫊斾 county, Henan. Th is book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Morrison, Elizabeth (Elizabeth A.) Th e power of patriarchs : Qisong and lineage in Chinese Buddhism / by Elizabeth Morrison. p. cm.—(Sinica Leidensia, ISSN 0169-9563 ; v. 94) Revision of the author’s dissertation (Ph. D.—Stanford University, 2004). Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-18301-8 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Zen priests—China—Lineage—History. 2. Qisong, 1007–1071. 3. Patriarchy— Religious aspects—Zen Buddhism. 4. Zen Buddhism—China—History. I. Title. II. Title: Qisong and lineage in Chinese Buddhism. III. Series. BQ9262.9.C5M67 2010 294.3’61—dc22 2009053521 ISSN 0169-9563 ISBN 978 90 04 18301 8 Copyright 2010 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, Th e Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
    [Show full text]