1,721,018 research outputs found
Interpretations of "Thusness" (zhenru) : Sanskrit tathatā and Chinese benwu, ru, ruru and zhenru
No full textWith special attention to the term "thusness (zhenru), " the present article attempts to explore the Chinese way of thinking which is firmly based on Classical Chinese and Chinese culture. Tracing the transition of Chinese Buddhist translations of Sanskrit tathatā (suchness), namely "benwu (the original nothingness), " "ru-ru (the true state of reality)" and "zhenru (thusness or suchness), " the author emphasizes the significance of the two-Sinograph fundamental terms of Chinese Buddhism such as zhenru (lit. "true and certain"), ru-shi ("thus"/"in this way" ; Skt. evam), shisu ("worldly"/"conventional" ; Skt. samvrti), rulai ("Thus Come [One]" ; Skt. tathāgata). All these two-character words can be divided into each Sinograph as possessing the synonymous, yet notably differentiated connotation ; as a result, when bound into one term, they broaden the original meanings as applicable to wide contexts. The Tang Buddhist commentators Kuiji (632-82), Fazang (643-712), Chengguan (738-839) and Zongmi (780-841) and so forth explained zhenru in several ways, by dividing the single term zhenru into zhen and ru and reuniting them. This type of Chinese Buddhist interpretation was obtained by newly accepting the Indian Buddhist exegetics called nirukti or nirvacana (folk etymology in Sanskrit), on the one hand, and adopting the preceding Chinese orthodox scholarship as found in Ruist commentaries and historiographies as well as exegetical dictionaries such as the Shiming "Explaining Terms" composed by Liu Xi in the Later Han. The linguistic and philosophical interpretations of zhenru is a Chinese Buddhist equivalent to the problems of universals and particulars in western philosophy
<Articles>How to Deal with Untranslatable Foreign Words: A Re-examination of the “Five Kinds of Untranslatable Words” Ascribed to Xuanzang of the Tang Dynasty
No full text本稿は「『廣弘明集』に見る中國中世在家佛敎」(班長船山徹) における原文語彙硏究の基礎を整理した個人硏究である。This article is a re-evaluation of what is traditionally called “Xuanzangʼs theory of the five kinds of untranslatable Sanskrit words, ” widely known in East Asian Buddhism. These “five kinds” are (1) words whose real meaning should not be known to the public, such as spells (dhāraṇī); (2) words that have multiple meanings such as bhagavat (i. e. “World-Honored One”); (3) words whose referent does not exist in China, such as “Jambu-tree; “(4) words that have traditionally been expressed as Chinese phonetic transcriptions for such as “anuttarā samyaksambodhi; “ and (5) words which benefit Buddhist believers when they remain in Sanskrit transcription, such as “prajñā.” After a critical examination of the issue, focusing on whether or not these five types of untranslatable words are Xuanzangʼs original idea, this paper argues that: First, the “Five Kinds of Untranslatable Words” sometimes contradicts how Xuanzang actually selected words to use in his translations into Chinese. Second, there is a clear gap between the date of Xuanzangʼs death and the first reference to the “Five Kinds of Untranslatable Words.” The earliest reference to this idea is found in a commentarial work composed by Chaowu 超悟in 789 CE, suggesting that the “Five Kinds of Untranslatable Word” may have appeared as late as 130 years after Xuanzangʼs death in 664. Third, the contents of the “Five Kinds of Untranslatable Words” are also found, albeit partially, in the work of Chinese exegetes that pre-date Xuanzang. In conclusion, this paper calls into question the traditional attribution of the “Five Kinds of the Untranslatable Words” to Xuanzang
<Reports of the Research Projects>An Annotated Translation of the Complete Abstinence from Alcohol and Meat by Emperor Wu of the Liang Dynasty
No full text本稿は京都大學人文科學硏究所共同硏究班「中國在家の佛敎觀: 唐道宣撰『廣弘集』を讀む」(二〇二〇年四月～二〇二四年三月)硏究果の一部である。The present research seminar (April 2020-March 2024) attempts to shed a new light on the actual situation of Buddhist Laity in medieval China. As Chinese Buddhism underwent various developments between the fourth and seventh centuries, not only monastics but also laypeople played a large role. Significant topics include the following questions: To what extent did laypeople possess knowledge of Buddhism? On what points was that knowledge similar to and different from the knowledge held by monastics? Were there any shared likes and dislikes of particular Buddhist scriptures and ideas among laypeople? Being a partial result of the seminar projects, the present report is an approach to achieving a goal in the form of an annotated translation of the Complete Abstinence from Alcohol and Meat (Duan jiu rou wen 斷酒肉文 in the 26th fascicle of Daoxuanʼs 道宣 Guang hongming ji 廣弘明集), a lecture delivered by Emperor Wu of the Liang (Liang Wudi 梁武帝, r. 502-549) together with his dialogues with major vinaya masters (lüshi 律師) in Jiankang 建康 (present-day Nanjing) around 520 CE or slightly earlier
The Sinification of Buddhism as Viewed from the Translation and the Compilation of Scriptures in the Six Dynasties Period
Full text linkThis article is an investigation into the question of how sutras were translated, transformed and received in Chinese Buddhist society. This analysis is based on my theory of a threefold classification of Buddhist sutras in China: first, Chinese translation in the normal sense; second, Chinese Buddhist apocrypha which contain component elements unique to Chinese culture; and third, Chinese compilation of sutras which contain elements of the previous two categories. Examples of the first category include the omission of original words, the addition and interpolation of new elements such as exegetical comments, and the secondary usage (i. e., implicit citation or incorporation) of previously translated texts. Buddhist apocrypha is also closely connected to the compilation and the incorporation of other source materials. Making an abridged version out of one or multiple sutras is an example of Chinese compilation. Clarifying the actual conditions of these editorial activities contributes to our understanding of the sinification of Buddhism
From Zhongsheng to Youqing, and Back Again to Zhongsheng : A Historical Transition of the Chinese Rendition of Skt. Sattva
Full text linkThe Sanskrit bodhisattva/bodhisatva was translated as zhongsheng 衆生 in older times and as youqing 有情 in the Tang. This paper attempts to explore remarkable aspects of zhongsheng and youqing. Zhongsheng is not evidently attested in translations by An Shigao 安世高 (the mid-second century C. E), the first translator in Chinese Buddhism. Zhongsheng was started to use by Zhi Loujiachen 支婁迦讖 (Lokaks ema?) who was active one generation after An Shigao. After becoming a fixed transltion of sattva by Wu 吳 of the Three Kingdoms, zhongsheng was continuously used until the time of Prabhākaramitra (565-633) in the early Tang dynasty. Youqing, a new translation of sattva was coined by Xuanzang 玄奘 (d. 664) around 649 C. E. Kuiji (632-682), the successor of Xuanzang, pointed out a problem of zhongsheng to the effect that it could includes plants which should be excluded from sattva in the doctrinal sense. Kuiji claimed that youqing was the only precise translation. Thereafter, however, post-Xuanzang translators, including Yijing 義淨 (635-713) and Bukong 不空 (Amoghavajra 705-774), chose not only youqing but also zhongsheng ; they intentionally re-evaluated and resurrected zhongsheng. It was Zhanran 湛然 (711-782) of the Tiantai school who explicitly criticized Kuiji's statement. In conclusion we see a notable series of Chinese translations of sattva in a way such as the establishment of zhongsheng by the third century, the birth of new translation youqing by Xuanzang in the mid-seventh century, and returning once again to zhongsheng after the death of Xuanzang
Chinese Buddhist PhoneticTranscriptions during the Liang Dynasty Depicted in the Fragmentary Quotations of the Chu yao lü yi
No full textThis is the world's first attempt to explore the significance of the lost Chinese Buddhist text entitled Chu yao lü yi 出要律儀"Clarification of the Essence of Regulations in the Buddhist Monastic Code, " by exhaustively collecting its fragmentary quotations in later times (ninety-five passages in all) accompanied by Japanese translation and philological notes, and by comprehensive evaluation of the Chu yao lü yi as well. The present article has reached the following conclusions : The Chu yao lü yi was compiled in the early sixth century in the Liang dynasty 梁, and immediately cited in the fascicle three of the Fan fanyü ;翻梵語 "Translations of Indic Terms" arguably ascribed to the monk Baochang 寶唱(d. u.) in the Liang. The Chu yao lü yi was most probably consists of the two sections ; namely, literal quotations of the Chinese Buddhist translations of the monastic code (vinaya) as Major Section and the explanation of Buddhist terms which is called "Yin yi 音義(Pronunciations and Meanings of Words)" as Minor Section. All the fragmentary quotations recorded in the present article belong to the "Yin yi" section. The Yin yi section includes five kinds of information : 1 entry word ; 2 old translations and phonetic transcription prior to Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什(ca. 350-409) ; 3 explanation by "specialist of monastic code (chi lü zhe持律者)" ; 4 explanation by "linguist (sheng lun zhe 聲論者, i. e., Chinese scholar-monk on the Sanskrit)" ; and explanation by "foreign monk (hu seng 胡僧)." It is noteworthy that phonetic transcriptions of Sanskrit words shown by the linguist are sometimes incorrect. The Yin yi section is highly valued as the linguistic explanation of Buddhist terms in the early sixth century prior to what is called Yiqie jing yin yi一切經音義"Pronunciations and Meanings [of Buddhist terms] in the Whole Canon" such as that of Xuan'ying玄應(the mid-sixth centurury). The Yin yi of the Chu yao lü yi are not free from ambiguity about the exact correspondence between Sanskrit and Chinese phonemes, and about the distinction between short and long vowels in Sanskrit, as well as other points. Further, the text is not equipped with systematic treatment regarding the notation of Skt. consonant cluster such as pra-, -tra, and sma. It is indeed true that the linguistic aspect of the Chu yao lü yi is far from satisfactory, but the composition of the Yin yi in a transitional period brought Chinese Buddhist linguistics to the ground-breaking production of comprehensive Yin yi texts called Yiqie jing yin yi in the late sixth century and thereafter
Mental Cognition (manasa) in Kamalasila's Theory of Direct Perception
No full textThis article is an investigation into how Kamalaśīla, an eminent Indian Buddhist scholar in the eighth century, uses the word "mānasa" in his Tattvasamgrahapañjikā, especially in the commentary on the stanzas 1329 and 3380-88 of the Tattvasamgraha by his teacher Śāntaraksita. The result of this research reveals that mānasa, meaning "mental cognition" (mānasam jñānam), is used in the sense of either "mental perception" (mānasapratyaksa), "yogic perception" (yogipratyaksa) or "conceptual cognition" (vikalpajñāna) according to the context where the word in question is used. As such, mānasa is a synonym of manovijñāna and an antonym of indriyajñāna (sensory cognition). In particular, Kamalaśīla states that "mental cognition" in stanza 1329 should be construed either in the sense of mental perception or yogic perception. However, this does not mean that the notion of mental perception and that of yogic perception are the same in Kamalaśīla's theory of perception, but means that both of these different types of perception belong to mental cognition. Commenting on stanzas 3380-88, Kamalaśīla explains what the Buddha's omniscient cognition is. He takes it to be a type of yogic perception, but it cannot be the same as mental perception defined by Dharmakīrti. Also, the usages of the above-mentioned technical terms in the Bhāvanākrama, another important work by Kamalaśīla, as well as those in Dharmakīrti's works, are partially examined in this article. In conclusion, Kamalaśīla's view on the types of perceptual cognition is shown by the following diagram : [Figure omitted] Notes a) [1] [2] [3] [4] are the four types of direct perception enumerated by Dignāga and Dharmakīrti. b) Two types of cognition marked with *are regarded as direct perception only in the case [3b]
<Articles>The Significance of the Anonymous Cibei daochang chan fa in Ten Fascicles
No full textThis is a preliminary research into an anonymous work entitled Cibei daochang chan fa 慈悲道場懺法 “Confession Rituals Performed in the Enlightenment Hall for the Attainment of the Buddha's Compassion” in ten fascicles (Taisho no. 1909), with a special focus on terms and diction observed therein. The text is formed by two components : a large number of core parts composed at the turn of the sixth century ; and a small number of revisions. The cardinal parts are firmly connected with the religious activities of the Emperor Wu of the Liang dynasty 梁武帝 (r. 502-549). Special terms in the Cibei daochang chan fa are much in common with its contemporary seven texts listed in § 2 of this article. The eight texts altogether, including the Cibei daochang chan fa, lexically reveal two features : firstly, the words shared by the eight texts are typical to the early sixth century in South China ; and secondly, some remarkable words have their origin in the Prince Xiao Ziliang's 蕭子良 (460-494) lost work entitled Jingzhu zi 淨住子 “Heritors of Pure Observance” in twenty fascicles. The original words of the Jinzhu zi in twenty fascicles are confirmed by the abridged one-fascicle version, Tonglü Jingzhu zi jingxing famen 統略淨住子淨行法門 “Entrance Gate to Pure Practice for the Heritors of Pure Observance, ” compiled by Daoxuan 道宣 (596-667) in the early Tang 唐 period
- …
