|
|
| Line 11: |
Line 11: |
| | than one hundred years, the text has also become a source of knowledge of Buddhism in the West thanks to a number of English translations. After examining the early textual history of the two existing versions of the text, this article will offer some examples of its modern appropriation by a novel group of readers and interpreters, an appropriation that took place during the first decades of the twentieth century amidst efforts to re-envision Chinese and East | | than one hundred years, the text has also become a source of knowledge of Buddhism in the West thanks to a number of English translations. After examining the early textual history of the two existing versions of the text, this article will offer some examples of its modern appropriation by a novel group of readers and interpreters, an appropriation that took place during the first decades of the twentieth century amidst efforts to re-envision Chinese and East |
| | Asian Buddhist history and the place of Buddhism in modern society. | | Asian Buddhist history and the place of Buddhism in modern society. |
| − | |ArticleContent=Introduction
| |
| − | The Dasheng qi xin lun or ''Treatise on the Mahāyāna Awakening of Faith'' is a
| |
| − | highly influential text in the history of East Asian Buddhism.2 Even if it is a
| |
| − | 1 I would like to thank Stefan Sperl, Stefano Zacchetti and an anonymous reviewer
| |
| − | for providing detailed commentary and helpful suggestions for revisions on a
| |
| − | previous version of this paper.
| |
| − | 2 With regard to the use here of the term ‘‘East Asian Buddhism’’, it should be noted
| |
| − | that the Buddhist source texts used in China, Korea, Japan and even Vietnam are
| |
| − | identical and that together they form the tradition that gave rise to what is
| |
| − | commonly referred to now in Chinese as dazangjing or the canon of Buddhist
| |
| − | scriptures written in literary Chinese.
| |
| − | Bulletin of SOAS, 71, 2 (2008), 323–343. E School of Oriental and African Studies.
| |
| − | doi:10.1017/S0041977X08000566 Printed in the United Kingdom.
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | lun – the term generally used in Chinese to translate the Sanskrit s´a¯stra –
| |
| − | meaning a work of exegesis or a doctrinal treatise, it has none the less been
| |
| − | regarded as a text containing teachings on the same level as scriptures
| |
| − | (su¯tras, what is heard) that conveyed the word of the Buddha.3 The
| |
| − | Treatise’s key concern is the discussion of ultimate reality, referred to as
| |
| − | ‘‘suchness’’ or ‘‘thusness’’ (zhenru). The text examines this concept in
| |
| − | relationship to what it refers to as the ‘‘two aspects’’ (er zhong men) of
| |
| − | the ‘‘one mind’’ (yixin), which are mutually inclusive and embrace all
| |
| − | things (she yiqie fa). This is an important discussion in that it suggests
| |
| − | that the absolute does not belong to an order of being completely distinct
| |
| − | from the phenomenal order. One of the metaphors used in the text to
| |
| − | illustrate the relationship between principle (li) and phenomena (shi),
| |
| − | between the pure mind and the world, and so on, is the famous metaphor
| |
| − | of the wind and the waves.
| |
| − | All the characteristics of the mind and of consciousness (xin shi zhi
| |
| − | xiang) are produced by ignorance. The characteristics of ignorance
| |
| − | (wuming zhi xiang) are not separate from the nature of awakening (jue
| |
| − | xing) and thus are not something that can either be destroyed or not
| |
| − | destroyed. It is like the water of the big sea, which is turned into waves
| |
| − | by the wind. The characteristics of the water and of the waves are
| |
| − | inseparable, and yet the nature of movement does not pertain to
| |
| − | water. When the wind ceases, the characteristics of movement also
| |
| − | cease, but the nature of wetness remains undestroyed.4
| |
| − | Another key doctrinal formulation expounded in the text is that of the
| |
| − | ‘‘buddha bodies’’ (foshen), which entails the analysis of buddhahood in
| |
| − | terms of the doctrine of multiple coexisting buddha bodies that possess
| |
| − | different characteristics and can thus respond to the prayers of the suffering
| |
| − | living beings. Finally, the treatise elaborates upon earlier Indian Buddhist
| |
| − | notions of tatha¯gatagarba (literally, ‘‘womb’’ or ‘‘embryo’’ of the Tatha¯-
| |
| − | gata, the latter being an epithet for Buddha) instilling them with a
| |
| − | distinctive cosmological dimension whilst initiating a new discourse on the
| |
| − | intrinsic possibility for all beings to reach enlightenment, which had
| |
| − | enormous consequences for the development of East Asian Buddhist
| |
| − | soteriology.5 Arguably, however, the popularity of the text was not only
| |
| − | connected with its doctrinal content, but also with what could be described
| |
| − | 3 The title of many East Asian su¯tras begins with the words fo shuo or ‘‘the Buddha
| |
| − | says’’. The widespread use of this formula highlights the importance placed on
| |
| − | direct oral transmission to authenticate Buddhist writings. On issues of translation
| |
| − | and Buddhist language see, for example, Nattier (1990). For some interesting
| |
| − | comments on the use and reception of sacred texts within Buddhist traditions see
| |
| − | Levering (1989: 13–14; 58–101).
| |
| − | 4 See Taisho¯ shinshu¯ daizo¯kyo¯ (hereafter abbreviated as T.), No. 1666, p. 576c, 9–13.
| |
| − | 5 See T. 1666, p. 576a–c. For a discussion of the doctrinal contents of the text see for
| |
| − | example Williams (1989: 109–10). On tatha¯gatagarba thought see for example
| |
| − | Ruegg (1969) and Grosnick (1995). On the ‘‘buddha-body’’ (buddhaka¯ya) doctrine
| |
| − | in China see Sharf (2002: 100–14).
| |
| − | 324 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | as its ‘‘spiritual capital’’.6 In fact, East Asian Buddhists read it and
| |
| − | worshipped it as the original work of As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, the first-century Indian
| |
| − | Buddhist patriarch author of a very important work on Buddha’s teaching
| |
| − | career.7 Its translation from Sanskrit was attributed to Parama¯rtha
| |
| − | (Zhendi, 500–569), an equally important figure in medieval Chinese
| |
| − | Buddhist circles.8 Yet, no original Sanskrit manuscript has ever been
| |
| − | found, nor is there any reference to the Treatise in Buddhist texts composed
| |
| − | in India.
| |
| − | In modern times, not least because of the emergence of the modern study
| |
| − | of Buddhism in Asia and in the West, and the Orientalist quest for
| |
| − | ascertaining the Indian pedigree of all things Buddhist, the genealogy of the
| |
| − | treatise has been the focus of intense scrutiny.9 Ultimately, the idea that the
| |
| − | Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith is an indigenous Chinese
| |
| − | composition gathered consensus, especially in scholarly circles, but this
| |
| − | agreement is still far from universal. Theories surrounding the text’s
| |
| − | creation remain largely speculative, spurring on the debate on its possible
| |
| − | ancestry.10 Recently, the truthfulness of all teachings connected with the
| |
| − | tatha¯gatagarba tradition has been questioned in both Chinese and Japanese
| |
| − | Buddhist circles,11 yet it seems unlikely that the Treatise will ever be
| |
| − | expunged from the East Asian Buddhist canon. In this paper, I first outline
| |
| − | the history and reception of the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of
| |
| − | Faith since its first appearance in medieval Chinese Buddhist monastic
| |
| − | circles, and then examine its manifold metamorphoses in modern times.
| |
| − | 6 For a discussion of the meaning and the making of ‘‘spiritual’’ capital see Verter
| |
| − | (2003). See also Bourdieu.
| |
| − | 7 There is no consensus on the exact dates of As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’s life, but the majority of
| |
| − | scholars indicate a period from the first to the second century CE. A recent study by
| |
| − | Alf Hiltebeitel, after surveying the existing literature on this issue, favours the first
| |
| − | century as the more likely dating (2006: 233–5). While I was preparing this paper I
| |
| − | was not aware of the forthcoming dissertation by Stuart Young, ‘‘Conceiving the
| |
| − | Indian Buddhist patriarchs in China’’ (Princeton University). Young addresses the
| |
| − | issue of the attribution of the Treatise to As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a in chapter 4.
| |
| − | 8 William H. Grosnick suggested that Parama¯rtha may be the real author of the text,
| |
| − | see Grosnick (1989). For a critique of Grosnick’s and others’ methodological
| |
| − | assumptions in the study of medieval Buddhist texts see Sharf (2002: 104, n. 85; 4–
| |
| − | 21).
| |
| − | 9 For a study of the founding figures of Buddhist studies in the West see Lopez
| |
| − | (1995). See also the comments in Nattier (1997) and in Silk (1994). For Japan see
| |
| − | Jaffe (2004) and Snodgrass (2003). For some preliminary comments on the
| |
| − | beginning of Buddhist studies in the modern Chinese context see Goldfuss (2001).
| |
| − | See also here below.
| |
| − | 10 Some of the major contributions to the question of the authorship of the Treatise on
| |
| − | the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith are the studies by Demie´ville (1929),
| |
| − | Liebenthal (1958), Lai (1980) and Grosnick (1989). Grosnick (1989) has suggested
| |
| − | that Parama¯rtha may be the real author of the text. For a critique of Grosnick’s
| |
| − | methodological assumptions see Sharf (2002: 104, n. 85).
| |
| − | 11 See for example the study on doctrinal transformation in twentieth-century Chinese
| |
| − | Buddhism in Hurley (2004). See also here below.
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 325
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Composition and reception
| |
| − | One of the most distinctive features in the history of East Asian Buddhism
| |
| − | is that the collection of Buddhist texts preserved in literary Chinese, what is
| |
| − | commonly referred to as the Chinese Buddhist canon, was printed from a
| |
| − | very early stage. The earliest printing from woodblocks – no fewer than
| |
| − | 130,000 blocks were used – of a collection of Buddhist texts in Chinese that
| |
| − | comprised translations from Indian languages as well as indigenous ones,
| |
| − | was carried out by imperial order between 971 and 983. Perhaps the most
| |
| − | influential of the early printed editions of the Chinese Buddhist canon is
| |
| − | that of the ‘‘Tripitaka Koreana’’, the Korean edition of the canon. The
| |
| − | woodblocks for this edition were carved in the middle of the thirteenth
| |
| − | century and consist of 1,521 separate texts in more than 6,500 scrolls.
| |
| − | Regardless of the fact that it was transmitted in print, the ‘‘canon’’ of East
| |
| − | Asian Buddhism was, and in theory still is, an ‘‘open’’ canon, as opposed to
| |
| − | the relatively ‘‘closed’’, and comparatively very short, canonical collections
| |
| − | found in Islam or Christianity. Currently the most widely used modern
| |
| − | edition of the collection of Buddhist scriptures in Chinese script, also
| |
| − | thanks to its being the foundation of the digital format edition (CBETA), is
| |
| − | the Taisho¯ shinshu¯ daizo¯kyo¯, originally edited and compiled in Japan (1924–
| |
| − | 34) on the basis of the thirteenth-century xylographic edition produced in
| |
| − | Korea.12
| |
| − | The Taisho¯ edition of the East Asian Buddhist canon contains two
| |
| − | versions of the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith, numbers
| |
| − | 1666 and 1667. T. 1666 is the shorter version in one fascicle (juan), while T.
| |
| − | 1667, which is entitled New Translation of the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of
| |
| − | Faith (Xinyi dasheng qixin lun), is in two fascicles.13 The preface appended
| |
| − | to T. 1666 attributes it to the Indian patriarch As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, known in
| |
| − | Chinese by the rather unusual name of Maming or ‘‘horse neigh’’ because,
| |
| − | says his Chinese hagiography, even ‘‘the horses could understand his
| |
| − | words’’.14 Maming is indeed a legendary figure to whom medieval and later
| |
| − | Buddhists granted an important place in the genealogy of transmission
| |
| − | from India to China of the fofa (Sanskrit: buddhadharma, the Buddhist
| |
| − | teachings), and who thereby populates a rich body of images and stories in
| |
| − | Chinese exegetical materials and in ritual texts. As with the well-known
| |
| − | 12 For Buddhism and the rise of printing in medieval China see Barrett (2001). For
| |
| − | alternative strategies of canon formation in medieval East Asia see Deal (1999). For
| |
| − | the Taisho¯ edition of the canon see Vita (2003).
| |
| − | 13 Currently the most widely used, the CBETA digitized canon is largely based on the
| |
| − | Taisho¯ edition, see http://cbeta.org. For a preliminary assessment of the use of
| |
| − | digitized source materials in the study of East Asian Buddhism see Schlu¨ tter (2005).
| |
| − | 14 The Chinese Buddhist canon contains countless references to the magical and
| |
| − | numinous powers of As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, not least in the hagiographical account Maming
| |
| − | pusa zhuan (Biography of the bodhisattva As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, T. no. 2046). For a
| |
| − | translation of this text see ‘‘Biography of the Bodhisattva As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’’, by S. H.
| |
| − | Young, available at the URL http://ccbs.ntu.ed.tw/FULLTEXT7JR-AN/103180.
| |
| − | htm (accessed March 2008). For an example of nineteenth-century Western
| |
| − | scholarly interest in As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a as a historical figure see Le´vi (1928) and here below.
| |
| − | On religious biographies and hagiographies in India and China see Kieschnick
| |
| − | (1997); Granoff and Shinohara (1988).
| |
| − | 326 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Na¯ga¯rjuna, the purported founder of the Madhyamika Indian school of
| |
| − | Buddhist thought, the poet and philosopher As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a was worshipped in
| |
| − | China as a salvific figure and as a bodhisattva, a Buddha to be, from the early
| |
| − | medieval period. Thus, the attribution of the text to As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a/Maming may
| |
| − | initially have been understood in terms of spiritual inspiration, as it were,
| |
| − | rather than actual authorship in the modern sense. Indeed, the medieval
| |
| − | collection of Biographies of Eminent Monks (Gaoseng zhuan) claims that
| |
| − | specific commentaries produced by prominent Chinese monks were dictated
| |
| − | by As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, who had manifested himself in the guise of a horse.15
| |
| − | Of course, the preface to T. 1666 is almost certainly spurious. It is
| |
| − | inaccurate with reference to Parama¯rtha and contains several other
| |
| − | anachronisms.16 Moreover, it is important to point out that the Treatise
| |
| − | on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith was initially listed in a catalogue of
| |
| − | canonical texts in 594 as a text of ‘‘dubious’’ (yi) origin, a fact that modern
| |
| − | Buddhist interpreters, of course, found very problematic (more on this
| |
| − | below). Eventually, however, the highly authoritative catalogue Kaiyuan
| |
| − | shijiao mulu (T. 2154), composed by Zhisheng (active c. 730), declared T.
| |
| − | 1666 a legitimate translation of an Indian original, thus guaranteeing its
| |
| − | entrance in the body of accepted canonical texts. The catalogue also gives
| |
| − | notice of the ‘‘new translation’’ (xinyi), now preserved in the Taisho¯ edition
| |
| − | of the Buddhist canon as T. 1667.17
| |
| − | After the initial uncertainty among medieval Buddhist scholars
| |
| − | regarding the status of the Treatise as a genuine translation was overcome,
| |
| − | the text went on to become one of the most emblematic cases of the
| |
| − | enculturation of Buddhism in East Asia.18 After its canonization, the
| |
| − | widespread fortune of the Treatise is witnessed, above all, by the wealth of
| |
| − | commentarial literature composed by eminent scholar-monks in the premodern
| |
| − | period. According to a Japanese survey from the 1920s there are about
| |
| − | 173 surviving commentaries on the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of
| |
| − | Faith.
| |
| − | 19 As I will show below, many further studies, commentaries and
| |
| − | translations have been added to this list over the past eighty or so years.
| |
| − | Perhaps the most influential medieval commentary is that of the
| |
| − | patriarch of the Huayan school, Fazang (643–712), who not only accepts
| |
| − | the text as the work of As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a, but also assigns it a key role in his own
| |
| − | doctrinal classification scheme (panjiao) of the Buddhist teachings, together
| |
| − | with a number of su¯tras.20 For the purpose of monastic study and practice,
| |
| − | 15 See Liebenthal (1958: 157, n. 2).
| |
| − | 16 See Demie´ville (1929: 11–5).
| |
| − | 17 For a study of Chinese Buddhist medieval catalogues and their role in canon
| |
| − | formation see Tokuno (1990).
| |
| − | 18 See for example the comments in Sharf (2002: 107–10) on the passages in which the
| |
| − | text combines the Buddhist doctrine of the three bodies of the Buddha with earlier
| |
| − | Chinese philosophical terminology of ‘‘essence’’ (ti) and ‘‘function’’ (yong).
| |
| − | 19 See Hakeda (1967: 5).
| |
| − | 20 Fazang’s commentary, the Dasheng qixin lun jiyi, is a fairly expansive text that
| |
| − | covers some forty pages of the modern edition of the canon and can be found at T.
| |
| − | 1846. For the early commentaries to the Treatise, including Fazang’s, see Demie´ville
| |
| − | (1929). For a recent study on Fazang see Chen (2007). For the context in which the
| |
| − | monk lived see Weinstein (1987: 46–7 and passim).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 327
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | such doctrinal classifications were perhaps more important than the sum of
| |
| − | the texts contained in the canon.21 The transmission beyond China is well
| |
| − | attested. For example, the early eighth century saw the emergence of a text
| |
| − | closely related to the Treatise, namely the Explanation of the Treatise on
| |
| − | Maha¯ya¯na (Shi Moheyan lun, T. 1668). Again, the Explanation is attributed
| |
| − | to the Indian patriarch, Na¯ga¯rjuna, but the text is clearly of East Asian
| |
| − | provenance and was widely read throughout China and Japan, especially in
| |
| − | esoteric contexts.22
| |
| − | A new ‘‘translation’’ of the Treatise (Xinyi dasheng qixin lun) is
| |
| − | attributed to the Khotanese monk S´iks˙
| |
| − | a¯nanda (active in China between
| |
| − | 695 and 710). Once again, this attribution is made in the anonymous
| |
| − | preface appended to the text (T. 1667, pp. 583bc–584a). It is worth noting
| |
| − | that the two versions contain some significant terminological differences,
| |
| − | particularly with regard to the concept of ‘‘thought’’ (nian) and ‘‘nonthought’’
| |
| − | (wu nian), and its relation to the mind (xin) and enlightenment
| |
| − | (jue). The preface to T. 1667 deliberately attributes the differences to the
| |
| − | existence of two Sanskrit versions, or to translators’ choices. But in fact the
| |
| − | production of this new version is probably an attempt to explain away some
| |
| − | of the more controversial passages of T. 1666, those close to Daoist, and
| |
| − | generally pre-Buddhist, understandings of xin, the ‘‘mind’’.
| |
| − | According to the preface, the new translator obtained the much soughtafter
| |
| − | Sanskrit original in a very intriguing way, among the texts stored in
| |
| − | the pagoda of the Monastery of ‘‘Great Compassion and Grace’’ at the
| |
| − | Western Capital Chang’an. This is the monastery where the great translator
| |
| − | monk and pilgrim traveller to India Xuanzang (602–664) lived and worked
| |
| − | and to which he added the pagoda to store the scriptures and relics he had
| |
| − | brought back from his travels. This story is interesting because it connects
| |
| − | the composition of the later version of the text to the diffusion, thanks to
| |
| − | Xuanzang’s translations, of the thought of the Yoga¯ca¯ra school in China,
| |
| − | and the criticisms of some of the teachings of the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na
| |
| − | Awakening of Faith which resulted. Thus, as Whalen Lai has suggested, the
| |
| − | appearance on the scene of the ‘‘second translation’’, with its conscious
| |
| − | quasi-commentarial approach to the earlier redaction and its attempt to
| |
| − | bring it in line with the new orthodoxy, which was then being introduced
| |
| − | from India, is no mere coincidence. As not all of the reliable historical
| |
| − | sources concerning the work of the translator monk S´iks˙
| |
| − | a¯nanda mention
| |
| − | this work, it is likely that the second version was a deliberate rewriting of
| |
| − | the existing version carried out at a later stage in China or Korea.23
| |
| − | For a variety of reasons, including perhaps the fact that it almost reads
| |
| − | like a commentary on the earlier version, T. 1667 did not enjoy much
| |
| − | critical fortune and there exist only three commentaries on it, all by the
| |
| − | 21 On the use of the treatise within medieval panjiao systems see for example Gregory
| |
| − | (1983).
| |
| − | 22 For the formation of indigenous Buddhist schools in China and Korea and the role
| |
| − | of the Treatise see Buswell (1989). For Shingon associations with the Shi Moheyan
| |
| − | lun see Rambelli (1994).
| |
| − | 23 See Lai (1980: 35); and also pp. 45–8 for a discussion of the Sinitic nature of the
| |
| − | concept of ‘‘no-thought’’.
| |
| − | 328 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | same author. Thus, it is intriguing that D. T. Suzuki (1870–1966), the highly
| |
| − | influential modern writer and popularizer of Buddhism to the West, chose to
| |
| − | translate this text rather than the more established version of the East Asian
| |
| − | exegetical tradition, thus opening a new chapter in the fascinating history of
| |
| − | the readings and interpretations of T. 1666 and T. 1667 (see below).
| |
| − | What happened to the Treatise after the medieval period? A cursory
| |
| − | examination of a few library collections of pre-modern texts indicates that
| |
| − | the Treatise was one of a finite number of canonical texts that were
| |
| − | individually reprinted, a common act of devotion among Chinese Buddhists
| |
| − | and a sure indication of popularity among the faithful. Thanks to the
| |
| − | nineteenth-century British missionary Robert Morrison (1782–1834), one
| |
| − | can gauge the importance of the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of
| |
| − | Faith in the world of late imperial southern China, particularly between the
| |
| − | second half of the seventeenth century through to the first quarter of the
| |
| − | nineteenth century.24 Morrison lived in one of China’s most important
| |
| − | centres of commercial publishing, the southern city of Canton (modern
| |
| − | Guangzhou) and in Macao between 1807 and 1823. Over a period of about
| |
| − | sixteen years, he amassed some 10,000 Chinese-style thread bound volumes,
| |
| − | an important library by any standard. In Morrison’s times, commercial
| |
| − | publishing houses in Canton were responsible for the carving of printing
| |
| − | blocks for religious texts on behalf of Buddhist monasteries. The blocks
| |
| − | were stored in monastic libraries, whence practitioners could print off
| |
| − | copies for charitable distribution. Of the 120 Buddhist texts in the Morrison
| |
| − | Collection, eighty-four were printed between 1658 and 1823 from blocks
| |
| − | held at the Haichuang Monastery in Canton. Buddhist books are very well
| |
| − | represented with 120 records as compared, for example, to only 23
| |
| − | Confucian works. This appears to be a veritable cross-section of the most
| |
| − | commonly used texts, including the most ubiquitous su¯tras (jing), namely
| |
| − | the Diamond Su¯tra (Jingang bore boluomi jing), the Lotus Su¯tra (Miaofa
| |
| − | lianhua jing), the Su¯tra of Bodhisattva Dizang (Dizang pusa benyuan jing),
| |
| − | and an interesting selection of their commentaries, as well as the ritual
| |
| − | manuals, liturgical texts and collections of charms and spells that served as
| |
| − | the backbone of religious practice.25 The collection also contains an
| |
| − | 24 See the published catalogue of the Morrison Collection in West (1998), especially
| |
| − | pp. 169–204. The collection of pre-modern printed texts at the Shanghai Library
| |
| − | contains several copies of the Treatise printed at different times and on behalf of
| |
| − | different donors, as well as copies of some of the later commentaries. The Collection
| |
| − | of Chinese Books at the Vatican Library in Rome contains at least one copy of the
| |
| − | text, printed at the Changsha Scriptural Press (Changsha kejingchu) in 1877.
| |
| − | 25 For ritual practices associated with Buddhist texts of various kinds see also
| |
| − | Strickmann (1996), Stevenson (2001) and passim Lopez (1998). Recently, Barend ter
| |
| − | Haar (2001) examined the importance and variety, albeit in an earlier period, of
| |
| − | Buddhist-inspired religious activities and lifestyles in the context of China’s local
| |
| − | religious cultures. The practices he describes range from the performance of death
| |
| − | rituals to the recitation of Buddhist texts, and from the liberation of animals (fish or
| |
| − | fowl) during the Setting Free Life Gatherings (fangshen hui) to keeping a vegetarian
| |
| − | lifestyle. The sponsorship of printed collections of Buddhist texts under the
| |
| − | leadership of local monasteries was also regarded as highly meritorious. For other
| |
| − | uses of the Diamond Su¯tra in Chinese culture besides reading, copying, memorizing
| |
| − | or reciting it see passim Chern Shu-ling (2000).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 329
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | example of the later commentarial tradition of the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na
| |
| − | Awakening of Faith, authored by the illustrious monk Deqing (1546–1623),
| |
| − | one of the key figures of late imperial Buddhism, and composed in 1620, a few
| |
| − | years before the death of the master. The book in the Morrison Collection was
| |
| − | printed and distributed in Canton in 1751. It is worth noting that this is one of
| |
| − | the very few texts of its kind, namely the commentary of a lun or doctrinal
| |
| − | treatise, rather than the commentary of a su¯tra, or the sub-commentary of a
| |
| − | su¯tra, that are preserved in the Morrison Collection.26
| |
| − | Modern readings in China
| |
| − | As I suggested above, the significance of the Treatise in pre-modern times
| |
| − | was perhaps not only due to its hermeneutical value for the exegetical
| |
| − | constructions of medieval and post-medieval East Asian Buddhist thinkers,
| |
| − | but also to the fact that its association with the Buddhist patriarch
| |
| − | As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a granted it a special status in the eye of the practitioner, and
| |
| − | maybe even all kinds of powers akin to those of some key su¯tras. Similarly,
| |
| − | modern interpreters justified their re-reading of the text on the basis of
| |
| − | philosophical and doctrinal arguments, and yet the accumulated weight of
| |
| − | the symbolic capital of the Treatise is never completely absent from their
| |
| − | pronouncements. In the course of the twentieth century, the text has
| |
| − | captured the imagination of many modern Buddhist interpreters, but also
| |
| − | of Christian missionaries, and of members of East Asia’s modernizing
| |
| − | elites. Thus, several key thinkers of late nineteenth- and twentieth-century
| |
| − | China have used it.
| |
| − | Conventionally described as the ‘‘father of modern Chinese Buddhism’’,
| |
| − | Yang Wenhui (courtesy name Renshan, 1837–1911), was one of the most
| |
| − | influential laymen of his generation, and the founder in Nanjing of a very
| |
| − | active private Buddhist press, which survives to this day.27 Prior to devoting
| |
| − | all of his energies and economic resources to Buddhism and to the
| |
| − | collection and carving of woodblocks for printing texts, Yang worked as a
| |
| − | government official and visited Europe twice, from 1878 to 1881 and from
| |
| − | 1886 to 1889. In Oxford, he met the Japanese buddhologist Nanjo¯ Bun’yu¯
| |
| − | (1849–1927), with whom he formed a life-long friendship based on similar
| |
| − | bibliographical interests and the communal search for ‘‘lost texts’’. Nanjo¯
| |
| − | belonged to a new generation of Japanese scholar-monks trained in
| |
| − | Sanskrit and Western philological and textual approaches to the study of
| |
| − | Asian religion, and was a collaborator of the highly influential Orientalist
| |
| − | F. M. Mu¨ller (1823–1900).28 One of the topics discussed in the letters
| |
| − | 26 The collection contains, for example, an interesting combined edition of two
| |
| − | translations of a commentary on the Diamand Sutra (Jingang bore boluomijing lun)
| |
| − | putatively attributed to the Indian master Vasubandhu and printed in Canton in
| |
| − | 1800.
| |
| − | 27 For a classic study on the so-called Buddhist revival beginning in late imperial
| |
| − | China see Welch (1968), particularly pp. 2–10 for Yang Wenhui. For a more recent
| |
| − | study of Yang Wenhui’s activities see Goldfuss (2001).
| |
| − | 28 For a study of nineteenth-century Japanese clerical travels see Jaffe (2004). On
| |
| − | Mu¨ller’s attitudes towards Indian and Chinese Buddhism and see Girardot (2002).
| |
| − | 330 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | exchanged between Yang and Nanjo¯ is the importance of the Treatise for
| |
| − | their tradition. Yang was very much convinced of its Indian origin and,
| |
| − | together, the two looked in vain for the lost Sanskrit original, which would
| |
| − | have confirmed that the text was a legitimate source of Buddhist doctrinal
| |
| − | authority.29
| |
| − | According to some sources, Yang’s conversion to Buddhism was indeed
| |
| − | sparked by reading the Treatise.
| |
| − | 30 Undoubtedly, he refers to it often, and
| |
| − | manifests interest in both its doctrinal content and in its final exhortation to
| |
| − | practise Buddhism. In a short note entitled The True Fruit of the Treatise on
| |
| − | Awakening the Faith (Qixin lun zhenguo), for example, Yang uses the text to
| |
| − | discuss the complex theory of the ‘‘three bodies’’ (sanshen) of the Buddha.
| |
| − | In other writings he encourages students to use the text to approach various
| |
| − | aspects of Buddhist thought and practice.31 Yang’s influence is probably
| |
| − | one of the key reasons for the widespread knowledge of and interest in the
| |
| − | Treatise in modern China. During the first decades of the twentieth
| |
| − | century, several other Chinese commentators in fact appropriated it and
| |
| − | reshaped its content to suit a variety of agendas. Indeed, according to the
| |
| − | contemporary observer of things Buddhist Lewis Hodous, ‘‘Not only
| |
| − | monks, but laymen trained in Japan are delivering lectures on Buddhist
| |
| − | su¯tras. The favourites are the Awakening of Faith and the Saddharmapundarika
| |
| − | Su¯tra’’.32
| |
| − | In the first issue of Haichaoyin (The Sound of the Tide), the most
| |
| − | popular and influential of a novel type of Buddhist periodical publication
| |
| − | that emerged in the 1920s, the monk Taixu (1889–1947) uses the wellknown
| |
| − | metaphor of the water and wind quoted at the beginning of this
| |
| − | article to explain the ‘‘mind of modern people’’ (xiandairen xin). He
| |
| − | reminds his readers that the relationship between ignorance (wuming) and
| |
| − | enlightenment (jue) is similar to that between open waters and the waves
| |
| − | stirred by the wind. Water moves because of the wind but movement is not
| |
| − | inherent to its true, fundamental, nature. Thus, while the ‘‘mind’’ (xin) of
| |
| − | sentient beings is inherently pure, it is stirred by ‘‘wind of ignorance’’
| |
| − | (wuming feng). Yet, because the mind is not by its own nature movable,
| |
| − | once the wind of ignorance ceases so does the production of delusional
| |
| − | thoughts. In his untiring attempts at finding new ways to communicate
| |
| − | traditional Buddhist ideas to his contemporaries, Taixu understands the
| |
| − | usefulness of the Treatise’s concept of xin, and the potential of its
| |
| − | 29 On the exchanges between Yang Wenhui and Nanjo¯ Bun’yu¯ see Goldfuss (2001,
| |
| − | especially 68–78). Yang’s letters to the Japanese buddhologist are published in
| |
| − | volume 10 of his Collected Writings, see Yang Wenhui (1918). For a study of the
| |
| − | intellectual context surrounding Nanjo¯ Bun’yu¯ and other Asian scholars at Oxford
| |
| − | see Girardot (2002).
| |
| − | 30 One source for this statement is the autobiography written by Yang Wenhui’s
| |
| − | granddaughter Yang Buwei Chao (1970: 82), but see also here below.
| |
| − | 31 See Yang Wenhui (1918), especially vol. 9, ch. 6 and 7. The final part of the Treatise
| |
| − | is interesting in that it refers specifically to the practice of the ‘‘faith’’ (xin)
| |
| − | mentioned in the title. Some scholars consider this section the creation of a different
| |
| − | author from the one who wrote the main body of the text. See for example
| |
| − | Liebenthal (1958: 196–7).
| |
| − | 32 See Goldfuss (2001: 203) and Hodous (1924: 67).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 331
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | soteriological appeal to ‘‘modern people’’ (xiandairen).33 Haichaoyin and
| |
| − | the other Buddhist journals of the 1920s and 1930s return again and again
| |
| − | to such Buddhist xin, and to the Treatise.
| |
| − | 34
| |
| − | Interestingly, so far as I am aware, with few exceptions (one of which I
| |
| − | shall examine here below), modern Chinese Buddhists remained faithful to
| |
| − | tradition and maintained that the treatise was the word of the Bodhisattva
| |
| − | As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a.35
| |
| − | Some cultural activists outside of Buddhist monastic circles also sought
| |
| − | to construct Buddhism as a possible solution to the dilemmas of Chinese
| |
| − | modernity. The influential writer Liang Qichao (1873–1929), for example,
| |
| − | best known for his commitment to a ‘‘new’’ society, and his skilful use of
| |
| − | the possibilities offered by the emergence of the modern periodical press,
| |
| − | also features among the modern commentators on the Treatise. Liang, one
| |
| − | of a number of late nineteenth-century intellectuals advocating reform in
| |
| − | China, took an active part in the Hundred Days Reform of 1898, after the
| |
| − | failure of which he was forced to flee China and take refuge in Japan, where
| |
| − | he continued his political and journalistic activities. Incidentally, immediately
| |
| − | prior to his exile, between 1895 and 1896, Liang worked as the
| |
| − | secretary of Timothy Richard, the British missionary who translated the
| |
| − | Treatise into English (more on this below).36 According to Chan Sin-wai,
| |
| − | Liang Qichao, although not strictly speaking a practitioner, was nevertheless
| |
| − | interested in the study of Buddhism, and introduced in his daily
| |
| − | schedule a period devoted to reading Buddhist texts.37 His interest was of a
| |
| − | peculiar kind though, and had perhaps more to do with the perceived
| |
| − | 33 The passage is quoted in Yinshun (1995: 59–60). For Haichaoyin and other
| |
| − | Buddhist periodicals see Tarocco (2007: 75–81). Between 1911 and the early 1940s,
| |
| − | some 150 Buddhist periodicals were circulated in China. Beginning with the
| |
| − | Buddhist Studies Miscellany distributed in Shanghai, Beijing and Tianjin on the eve
| |
| − | of the 1911 revolution, a list of Buddhist periodicals would have to include The
| |
| − | Buddhist Monthly; the New Buddhist Youth, the Buddhist Studies Monthly, the
| |
| − | Buddha Mind, the Buddhist Critic, the Buddhist Research, the Modern Sangha and
| |
| − | the New Buddhism. The titles of some of the periodicals are themselves illustrations
| |
| − | of the attention Buddhists had to wider cultural trends emerging in Chinese
| |
| − | intellectual circles. For a recent study of the multifarious activities of the monk
| |
| − | Taixu and his approaches to modernity see Pittman (2001).
| |
| − | 34 In an ironic twist of events, Yinshun (b. 1906), one of Taixu’s main disciples and a
| |
| − | very active and influential contemporary scholar-monk, has a very different
| |
| − | position regarding the importance of tatha¯gatagarbha thought and its place in the
| |
| − | future of the Chinese Buddhist community. Through the use of classical Buddhist
| |
| − | hermeneutics, Yinshun repudiates the commonly held East Asian Buddhist view,
| |
| − | long established also thanks to the Treatise, that the teaching of tatha¯gatagarbha
| |
| − | represents the ultimate teaching of Buddhism. This, he believes, resides instead with
| |
| − | the teaching of emptiness. Unlike Japanese proponents of the so-called ‘‘Critical
| |
| − | Buddhism’’ movement, however, Yinshun does not completely reject tatha¯-
| |
| − | gatagarbha thought and highlights instead its soteriological value for the
| |
| − | practitioner. On Yinshun’s critique of tatha¯gatagarbha see Hurley (2004).
| |
| − | 35 For a recent example of Chinese commentarial scholarship see Gao Zhennong
| |
| − | (1992).
| |
| − | 36 For a classic study of Liang Qichao see Alitto (1982). For Liang Qichao’s
| |
| − | journalism see, more recently, Vittinghoff (2002).
| |
| − | 37 See Chan Sin-wai (1985: 41 and passim).
| |
| − | 332 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | problems of then contemporary China than with Buddhist doctrine. In fact,
| |
| − | Liang argued that since religion was at the root of Western civilization and
| |
| − | an important element of its success, China should also resort to the
| |
| − | ‘‘ancient teachings’’ of Buddhism and Confucianism. In an essay entitled
| |
| − | ‘‘On the relationship between Buddhism and social order’’ (Lun Fojiao yu
| |
| − | qunzhi zhi guanxi), Liang laments the fact that China, unlike Europe or
| |
| − | America, does not have a national religion. He then goes on to say, ‘‘Will
| |
| − | progress in governing China be attained using faith? … [I believe that] the
| |
| − | root of faith is religion … some say that education can take the place of
| |
| − | religion, but I dare not accept this statement. And even if it may be so this
| |
| − | would apply only to countries where education is universal … This time has
| |
| − | not yet arrived for China’’. According to Liang, there are various reasons
| |
| − | for why Buddhism would be the ideal choice as the Chinese national
| |
| − | religion. Buddhism is ‘‘a rational belief’’ (zhexin) and not a superstition
| |
| − | (mixin) and it trusts in one’s strength and not in the strength of others. On
| |
| − | account of the bodhisattva vows, Buddhists believe in universal goodness
| |
| − | and not in individual goodness. It also teaches equality because all living
| |
| − | things possess the nature of buddhas, a reference to the doctrine of Buddha
| |
| − | nature (fo xing) expounded in the Treatise.
| |
| − | 38
| |
| − | The edition of Liang Qichao’s Textual Criticism on the Treatise on the
| |
| − | Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith I consulted was published in 1935 (it was
| |
| − | first printed in 1922) by the Commercial Press. This publishing house was
| |
| − | perhaps the most important mainstream Shanghai-based commercial
| |
| − | publisher of Republican China, well known for its new-style textbooks
| |
| − | and periodical publications: Liang’s work was not meant to be read by a
| |
| − | small Buddhist readership, but was aimed at a more general intellectual
| |
| − | elite.39 The principal point Liang appears to be making in his study, partly
| |
| − | based on the wealth of scholarship on the Treatise that had appeared in
| |
| − | Japan since the late nineteenth century, is that the text was composed in
| |
| − | China by a Chinese person. Thus a strong nationalistic sentiment, then
| |
| − | widespread among members of Chinese modernizing elites, is perhaps
| |
| − | Liang’s main motivation for deciding to rewrite this particular segment of
| |
| − | Chinese Buddhist history.40
| |
| − | T. Richard’s and D. T. Suzuki’s Awakening
| |
| − | A few English versions of the Treatise were published during the course of
| |
| − | the first decade of the twentieth century, a period in which translations of
| |
| − | Chinese religious texts, let alone of Buddhist texts, were still few and far
| |
| − | between. The first translation, published in 1900, was carried out by the
| |
| − | Japanese scholar and popularizer of Buddhism D. T. Suzuki, and the
| |
| − | 38 See Liang Qichao (1910: 33–6; 1990: 49–56).
| |
| − | 39 For the Commercial Press and Shanghai publishers see especially Reed (2004: 203–
| |
| − | 25). For Buddhist publishers see Tarocco (2007: 41–65).
| |
| − | 40 See Liang Qichao (1935: 82–6). Note that Liang makes abundant use of the terms
| |
| − | then current among reformist nationalists including ‘‘nation’’ (guo) and ‘‘citizens of
| |
| − | the nation’’ (guo min), etc. For religion and the nation in Republican China (1911–
| |
| − | 49), see in particular Duara (1995); Nedostup and Liang Hong-ming (2001).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 333
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | second, completed earlier but eventually published in 1907, was carried out
| |
| − | by Briton Timothy Richard (1845–1919).
| |
| − | A Baptist missionary, Richard arrived in China in 1870 and lived there
| |
| − | for almost 45 years. One of his key proselytizing strategies was to open a
| |
| − | dialogue with Chinese political and cultural elites and to seek to influence
| |
| − | them.41 In 1892, he presented the work Historical Evidences of the Benefits
| |
| − | of Christianity to the Chinese authorities, and we know that his views on
| |
| − | modern education were certainly known to, among others, the Qing
| |
| − | reformer Li Hongzhang (1823–1901). Richard’s purpose was to provide
| |
| − | books and pamphlets that would show ‘‘the bearing of educational and
| |
| − | religious development in industries and trade and in every department of
| |
| − | national progress’’.42 The views he put forward to the Chinese can be
| |
| − | glimpsed in the following excerpt, where he makes an explicit connection
| |
| − | between religion, modernity and national prosperity:
| |
| − | The result of this advance in the Christian religion has been to give
| |
| − | liberty to men to progress on all lines, and they have progressed in the
| |
| − | last 300 years more than they have progressed in the 3000 years
| |
| − | previously. This we say to all the followers of the non-Christian
| |
| − | religions; we bid them not to take alarm because we bring them new
| |
| − | religious ideas which may supplant those they now hold; for we say
| |
| − | that it will not rob them of a single good which they have without
| |
| − | supplying them with something better … Those who oppose change in
| |
| − | religion are to-day in danger of retarding progress, as Roman
| |
| − | Catholicism and Islam do in all countries under their sway. They
| |
| − | bring on inevitable national death … Hence the prosperity of all
| |
| − | Protestant countries … In religion, we must not be behind, but before
| |
| − | every kingdom of this world. If we do not embrace all branches of
| |
| − | knowledge, ours is not worthy to be the one religion of the future of
| |
| − | the whole world.43
| |
| − | In an improbable rehearsal of earlier approaches to Chinese religious life
| |
| − | devised by seventeenth-century Jesuit missionaries to China, Richard also
| |
| − | put forward the theory that the so-called Buddhism of the ‘‘Great Vehicle’’
| |
| − | (Maha¯ya¯na) was not Buddhism at all, but rather a form of Christianity. In
| |
| − | fact, he writes, when the apostle Thomas went to India he met the Indian
| |
| − | Buddhist master As´vagos˙
| |
| − | a and preached to him. Eventually, As´vagos˙
| |
| − | a
| |
| − | wrote the Treatise on the Maha¯ya¯na Awakening of Faith that caused
| |
| − | Buddhism to be transformed from the more primitive ‘‘Small Vehicle’’ into
| |
| − | the more advanced Maha¯ya¯na form. Apparently, Richard was so impressed
| |
| − | by the ‘‘Christian nature of the teaching of the book’’, he decided to
| |
| − | translate it. The fruit of his labours was initially published by the Christian
| |
| − | 41 The main sources on Richard are his own memoir published in 1916 and the
| |
| − | biography written by the missionary and professor of Chinese at Oxford W. E.
| |
| − | Soothill. On the ecumenical attitudes of some Protestant missionaries see Lian
| |
| − | (1997).
| |
| − | 42 See Richard (1916: 222).
| |
| − | 43 Soothill (1924: 210).
| |
| − | 334 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Literature Society in 1907 as The Awakening of Faith in the Maha¯ya¯na
| |
| − | Doctrine: The New Buddhism, and still enjoys an incredibly wide
| |
| − | distribution, especially now various digitized versions have appeared on
| |
| − | the World Wide Web. The claims initially made in that text are even more
| |
| − | clearly articulated in a subsequent collection of translations from Chinese
| |
| − | scriptures that also includes the translation of the Treatise, The New
| |
| − | Testament of Higher Buddhism. Richard writes that:
| |
| − | The Maha¯ya¯na faith is not Buddhism but an Asiatic form of the same
| |
| − | gospel of our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ, in Buddhistic
| |
| − | nomenclature, differing from the old Buddhism just as the New
| |
| − | Testament differs from the Old … It commands a world-wide interest,
| |
| − | for in it we find an adaptation of Christianity to ancient thought in
| |
| − | Asia, and the deepest bond of union between the different races of the
| |
| − | east and the west, namely the bond of a common religion.44
| |
| − | According to the missionary, the ‘‘Awakening of Faith’’ – as he and others
| |
| − | called the text, perhaps because of the resonance of the word faith in
| |
| − | Christian contexts – is among the great ‘‘Books of the World’’, together
| |
| − | with the Quran, the Bible, and the Vedas. ‘‘The book is Brahmanistic and
| |
| − | Buddhistic, Indian and Western in some aspect of philosophical thought’’,
| |
| − | and yet it also presented itself as very practical.45 After having described the
| |
| − | emergence of ‘‘New Buddhism’’ some 500 years after the death of the
| |
| − | Buddha, and after having made Jesus a contemporary of As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a,
| |
| − | Richard astutely describes its presumed state of decline he apparently
| |
| − | witnesses. ‘‘The reader who is acquainted with the low state of Buddhism in
| |
| − | China to-day may naturally ask, since the New Buddhism was so full of
| |
| − | such high teachings on some of the greatest problems of life and since it was
| |
| − | so flourishing for many centuries, why is its glory departed?’’ The answers
| |
| − | are that ‘‘later writers’’ attempted to ‘‘combine the primitive with the
| |
| − | advanced’’, and that Buddhists, being ‘‘ignorant’’ of their own religion,
| |
| − | were simply incapable of doing anything right.46
| |
| − | In a strange twist of destiny, the eminent layman Yang Wenhui, one of
| |
| − | the people who did most to encourage the study and understanding of
| |
| − | Buddhism and of the Treatise in modern China, was called to collaborate
| |
| − | with Richard, and ultimately and unwittingly helped the missionary to
| |
| − | produce a Christian-influenced translation of his favourite Buddhist text.
| |
| − | He was clearly unaware of Richard’s transformation of the Treatise into a
| |
| − | sort of preparatio evangelica, and extremely frustrated when (too late) he
| |
| − | finally discovered it.47 This is how Richard relates their first encounter, and
| |
| − | legitimizes his choice to translate the Treatise:
| |
| − | 44 See Richard (1910: 43–6).
| |
| − | 45 See Richard (1910: p. vi).
| |
| − | 46 See Richard (1910, pp. vi, xv and passim). Criticism of Buddhism was common
| |
| − | among missionaries of this period. See passim Welch (1968) and Pittman (2001).
| |
| − | 47 See Yang Wenhui’s letter to Nanjo¯ Bun’yu¯ in which he relates some of the facts
| |
| − | (Yang Wenhui 1918, vol. 10, ch. 7, letter 13).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 335
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | In 1884 I visited Nanking …Whilst there, I sought for some books
| |
| − | which I could not procure in the North of China. I learnt that a
| |
| − | Buddhist Book Society had been started in Nanjing, Soochow, and
| |
| − | Hangzhou, three of the leading cities in Central China, in order to
| |
| − | replace those destroyed by the Taiping rebellion. Of these three
| |
| − | societies, the most important was that at Nanking, and the prime
| |
| − | mover over the whole three societies lived there. His name was Yang
| |
| − | Weˆn Hui. I called on him and found the most intelligent Buddhist I
| |
| − | had ever met. He had been several years in Europe as treasurer to the
| |
| − | Chinese embassy when the Marquis Tseng represented China in
| |
| − | England and France. Mr Yang had had interviews with Max Mu¨ller
| |
| − | and Julien and Bunyuˆ Nanjo of Tokyo, who had studied under Max
| |
| − | Mu¨ller. Thus, besides being well acquainted with the best authorities
| |
| − | in Europe and Japan, Mr Yang was not a Buddhist priest, but a
| |
| − | Confucianist with the B.A. (siutsai) degree and was only a lay
| |
| − | Buddhist. I said to him, ‘‘How is it that you, with a Confucian degree,
| |
| − | should have ever become a Buddhist?’’ His answer was striking: ‘‘I am
| |
| − | surprised that you, a missionary should ask me that question, for you
| |
| − | must know that Confucianism shirks some of the most important
| |
| − | questions. It only deals with human affairs now, not with the
| |
| − | superhuman.’’ But do you mean that Buddhism answers those
| |
| − | questions? He said: ‘‘Yes’’. ‘‘Where?’’ I asked again. He answered:
| |
| − | ‘‘In a book called the Awakening of Faith. That book converted me
| |
| − | from Confucianism to Buddhism’’.48
| |
| − | Of course, this dialogue may not have taken place in the exact terms with
| |
| − | which Richard reports it. And perhaps the missionary was not completely
| |
| − | convinced that later Buddhism was an offshoot of Christianity, or that the
| |
| − | apostle Thomas had preached to As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a in India; most missionaries
| |
| − | were probably not. Yet Richard’s archetypically Orientalist appropriation
| |
| − | of Buddhism to serve his missionary agenda was not an isolated case. And
| |
| − | he was certainly not alone in offering an essentialist reading of the Treatise,
| |
| − | adapting its description of the absolute to suit his proselytizing agenda. In
| |
| − | fact, the transnational exchanges that characterized the religious life of East
| |
| − | Asia, Europe and America since the late nineteenth century, have left a
| |
| − | clear mark on another modern interpretation of the Treatise.
| |
| − | 49
| |
| − | Outside of China, the Treatise became part of what has been described as
| |
| − | the ‘‘occidentalist strategies’’ of Japanese Buddhists, whereby they
| |
| − | discovered the role Western studies of Buddhism could play in legitimizing
| |
| − | their tradition in the eyes of their local critics.50 In particular, to those
| |
| − | Japanese Buddhist clerics and lay people interested in what James Ketelaar
| |
| − | calls ‘‘the construction of Eastern Buddhism’’, the Treatise represented a
| |
| − | great resource: it was one of the texts that could be used to manufacture a
| |
| − | 48 Richard (1907: pp. ix–x).
| |
| − | 49 For some recent studies of these exchanges see for example Tweed (2005) and Jaffe
| |
| − | (2004).
| |
| − | 50 On Japanese Occidentalism see Ketelaar (1991) and Snodgrass (2003).
| |
| − | 336 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Buddhism beyond sectarian boundaries, a united, trans-historical, essential
| |
| − | Buddhism. Thus some Japanese thinkers looked on the text as a clear
| |
| − | articulation of Buddhism itself.51
| |
| − | A not yet famous D. T. Suzuki translated the Treatise in 1900.
| |
| − | Puzzlingly, and offering little by way of explanation for this choice or even
| |
| − | acknowledging the wider diffusion of the other version, Suzuki decided to
| |
| − | use the second version for his English version.52 One reason for this may be
| |
| − | that the later version, in its commentarial attitude towards the earlier
| |
| − | formulation, offered greater scope for smoothing down the ‘‘Chineseness’’
| |
| − | of the text. To the best of my knowledge, this is still the only English
| |
| − | translation based on T. 1667.
| |
| − | This work is Suzuki’s first major effort to present Buddhism to Western
| |
| − | audiences, North Americans in particular, an endeavour that was going to
| |
| − | last for more than sixty years. In 1897, he went to the United States to
| |
| − | study with the eclectic thinker Paul Carus (1852–1919), and learn the
| |
| − | ‘‘various skills required to disseminate knowledge of Buddhism to the
| |
| − | West’’.53 A speaker at the World’s Parliament of Religion of 1893 and
| |
| − | editor of the journals The Open Court and The Monist, Carus was the
| |
| − | author of the popular volume The Gospel of the Buddha and of many other
| |
| − | writings on all things Buddhist, including a baffling collection of Buddhist
| |
| − | Hymns containing pseudo-Buddhist lyrics set to music by Chopin and
| |
| − | Beethoven.54 Perhaps unsurprisingly, the brief Publisher’s Preface to
| |
| − | Suzuki’s translation, is a typical example of Carus’s discourse on
| |
| − | Buddhism. First it tells the reader that Aśvaghoṣa ‘‘is the philospher ofBuddhism’’ and that his ‘‘treatise on The Awakening of Faith is recognized
| |
| − | by all Northern schools and sects as orthodox and used even to-day in
| |
| − | Chinese translations as a text-book for the instruction of Buddhist priests’’.
| |
| − | Unfortunately, the original Sanskrit has not yet been found, thereby
| |
| − | limiting ‘‘our knowledge of As´vagosha’s [sic] philosophy’’ to ‘‘its Chinese
| |
| − | translation’’.55 Eventually, Carus reassures the reader of the importance
| |
| − | and accuracy of the English translation, not least because it confirms his
| |
| − | own interpretation of Buddhism. The idea of ‘‘Suchness’’ contained in the
| |
| − | Treatise, in particular, confirms what he had written in his own Gospel of
| |
| − | Buddha. Further, ‘‘Suchness’’ is also connected with many other aspects
| |
| − | of European philosophy and literature, apparently, it is ‘‘Plato’s realm of
| |
| − | ideas and Goethe’s ‘Mothers’ of the second part of Faust’’.56
| |
| − | In his own Introduction, Suzuki defends Buddhism saying that ‘‘The
| |
| − | Awakening of Faith is dedicated to the Western public by a Buddhist from
| |
| − | Japan, with a view to dispelling the denunciations so ungraciously heaped
| |
| − | upon’’ Maha¯ya¯na Buddhism.57 It is worth remembering, incidentally, that
| |
| − | 51 See Ketelaar (1990: 186–7).
| |
| − | 52 See Suzuki (1900: 41).
| |
| − | 53 See Snodgrass (2003: 260).
| |
| − | 54 For Carus’s thought and its influence on Suzuki see Sharf (1995). See also
| |
| − | Snodgrass (2003) and Tarocco (2007: 111–2).
| |
| − | 55 The first quotation is from Suzuki (1900: iii); the second from Suzuki (1900: iv).
| |
| − | 56 See Suzuki (1900: iv, v).
| |
| − | 57 See Suzuki (1900: xii).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 337
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | in 1895, within months of its American publication, Suzuki translated The
| |
| − | Gospel of the Buddha into Japanese. According to Judith Snodgrass, this
| |
| − | was not because Japanese Buddhists thought much of Carus’s eclectic
| |
| − | mixing of Buddhist texts, but rather because the book was proof of
| |
| − | ‘‘Western approval of Buddhism as the most appropriate religion for the
| |
| − | modern, scientific world’’.58 Indeed, Suzuki worked hard both to restore
| |
| − | Western views of Maha¯ya¯na Buddhism, and to help convince people at
| |
| − | home that Buddhism was useful to the modern Japanese nation. In his
| |
| − | elegant, if at times misleading, translation of T. 1667, the Japanese scholar
| |
| − | utilizes a sophisticated philosophical idiom, and appropriates many of the
| |
| − | philological and historicist weapons of the Western buddhologist’s arsenal.
| |
| − | Interestingly, one of his main concerns is to prove As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’s historical
| |
| − | existence, and his work is thus emphatically concerned with discourses of
| |
| − | chronology, history, and rationality, which were certainly not central to the
| |
| − | language or practices of pre-modern readers of the Treatise.
| |
| − | Conclusions
| |
| − | For the past one hundred or so years, a medieval Buddhist text has been
| |
| − | adapted to serve very different projects, ranging from those of Buddhist
| |
| − | modernizers, to those of Asian nationalists, to those of Christian
| |
| − | missionaries. All have produced conflicting interpretations of the original
| |
| − | Buddhist text. Ironically, some of these radically different translations and
| |
| − | representations now coexist in the vast uncritical repository of human
| |
| − | textual production that is the World Wide Web.59 In 2006, Columbia
| |
| − | University Press published a new edition of what is now regarded as the
| |
| − | standard English translation of the Treatise, that by Y. Hakeda, originally
| |
| − | published in 1967, which is based on a reading partly influenced by
| |
| − | sectarian Japanese developments. Intriguingly, the publicity material
| |
| − | describes the Treatise as ‘‘attractive’’, ‘‘profound’’, and even ‘‘mysterious’’.60
| |
| − | Nationalist and Orientalist readings of the Treatise may be a thing of the
| |
| − | past but the search for its authors and its origins continues. Indeed, the
| |
| − | 1980s witnessed a resurgence of the debate on the authenticity of the text.
| |
| − | Several articles by prominent scholars were published throughout the
| |
| − | decade in the Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies,
| |
| − | perhaps the most influential journal in the field of Buddhist Studies.61 One
| |
| − | reason for this may be that the East Asian Buddhist canon contains a very
| |
| − | large number of so-called ‘‘apocryphal texts’’, which claim to be
| |
| − | translations of Indian originals but are East Asian compositions. Some
| |
| − | of these texts have recently been rediscovered in Japan and previously were
| |
| − | 58 See Snodgrass (1998: 341 and 320).
| |
| − | 59 See for example http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/aof/index.htm and http://www.
| |
| − | sacred-texts.com/bud/taf/index.htm (accessed November 2007).
| |
| − | 60 See http://cup.columbia.edu/book/978-0-231-13156-8/the-awakening-of-faith
| |
| − | (accessed November 2007). See also Hakeda (1967) and Tarocco (1996).
| |
| − | 61 For Japanese debates of the 1920s, 30s and 40s see Liebenthal (1958: 155 and
| |
| − | passim). See also passim Demie´ville (1929). For more recent studies see Lai (1980)
| |
| − | and Grosnick (1989).
| |
| − | 338 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | found in the extraordinary medieval Buddhist library found in 1900 in
| |
| − | Central Asian Dunhuang. Before the modern period only a small minority
| |
| − | of Chinese, Japanese and Korean Buddhists were conversant with Sanskrit
| |
| − | or other Indic languages. But this fact has not in any way hampered the
| |
| − | development of East Asian Buddhism. In light of recent research,
| |
| − | moreover, it is clear that there is nothing intrinsically Indian, let alone
| |
| − | Sanskrit, about Maha¯ya¯na Buddhism. The growing body of scholarship on
| |
| − | East Asian Buddhist apocrypha demonstrates that many East Asian
| |
| − | Buddhist traditions are based on these texts rather than on translations of
| |
| − | Indian materials. If medieval catalogues initially categorized some of these
| |
| − | texts as Chinese compositions rather than as translations, thus making their
| |
| − | entry into the canon difficult, some were eventually accepted as canonical,
| |
| − | thereby changing for ever the course of Buddhist history. This, alas, may
| |
| − | well be one of the most enduring legacies of the Treatise.
| |
| − | 62 Its status in
| |
| − | medieval times may have facilitated the production of other apocrypha and
| |
| − | their inclusion in the canon. In modern times, on the other hand, its
| |
| − | contested origins have contributed to its appropriation by very different
| |
| − | interpreters, each with very different agendas.
| |
| − | References
| |
| − | Alitto, G. 1982. The Last Confucian: Liang Shu-ming and the Chinese Dilemma of
| |
| − | Modernity. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
| |
| − | Almond, P. 1986. ‘‘The Buddha in history: from myth to history’’, Religion 16,
| |
| − | 305–22.
| |
| − | Barrett, T.H. n.d. Buddha’s Word in Modern China: An Introduction to the Modern
| |
| − | Chinese Buddhist Canon. Unpublished manuscript.
| |
| − | ———. 2001. ‘‘The rise and spread of printing: a new account of religious factors’’,
| |
| − | London: School of Oriental and African Studies, Working Papers in the Study
| |
| − | of Religions.
| |
| − | ———. 2005. ‘‘Chinese religion in English guise: the history of an illusion’’,
| |
| − | Modern Asian Studies 39/3, 509–33.
| |
| − | Brook, T. 1993. Praying for Power: Buddhism and the Formation of Gentry Society
| |
| − | in Late Ming China. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
| |
| − | Buswell, R.E. Jr. 1989. The Formation of Ch’an Ideology in China and Korea: The
| |
| − | Vajrasama¯dhi-Su¯tra, A Buddhist Apocryphon. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
| |
| − | University Press.
| |
| − | ——— (ed.). 1990. Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i
| |
| − | Press.
| |
| − | Chan, Sin-wai. 1985. Buddhism in Late Ch’ing Political Thought. Hong Kong:
| |
| − | Chinese University Press.
| |
| − | Chen, Jinhua. 2007. Philosopher, Practitioner, Politician: The Many Lives of Fazang
| |
| − | (643–712). Leiden: Brill.
| |
| − | Chern Shu-ling. 2000. ‘‘The Diamond Sutra in Chinese culture before the Sung’’,
| |
| − | PhD Thesis, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
| |
| − | 62 On Sanskrit studies in pre-modern China and Japan, or lack thereof, see the study,
| |
| − | albeit somewhat dated, by van Gulik (1953).
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 339
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Cowell, E.B. 1893. The Buddha-karita of Asvagosha Edited from Three Mss. Oxford:
| |
| − | Anecdota Oxoniensia.
| |
| − | Deal, W.E. 1999. ‘‘Nichiren’s Rissho¯ ankoku ron and canon formation’’, Japanese
| |
| − | Journal of Religious Studies 26/3–4, 326–48.
| |
| − | Demie´ville, P. 1929. ‘‘Sur l’authenticite´ du Ta tch’eng k’i sin louen’’, Bulletin de la
| |
| − | Maison franco-japonaise, 2/2. Reprint pp. 1–78.
| |
| − | Duara, P. 1995. Rescuing History from the Nation: Questioning Narratives of
| |
| − | Modern China. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
| |
| − | Gao Zhennong. 1992. Dasheng qixin lun jiaoyi. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju.
| |
| − | Girardot, N. 2002. ‘‘Max Mu¨ller’s ‘Sacred Books’ and the nineteenth-century
| |
| − | production of the comparative science of religions’’, History of Religions 41/3,
| |
| − | 213–50.
| |
| − | Goldfuss, G. 2001. Vers un bouddhisme du XXe sie`cle. Yang Wenhui (1837–1911),
| |
| − | re´formateur laı¨que et imprimeur. Paris: Colle`ge de France, Institut des Hautes
| |
| − | E´tudes Chinoises.
| |
| − | Granoff, P. and Shinohara Koichi (eds). 1988. Monks and Magicians: Religious
| |
| − | Biograpies in Asia. Oakville: Mosaic Press.
| |
| − | Gregory, P.N. 1983. ‘‘The place of sudden teaching within the Hua-yen tradition:
| |
| − | an investigation of the process of doctrinal change’’, The Journal of the
| |
| − | International Association of Buddhist Studies 6/1, 117–36.
| |
| − | Grosnick, W. 1989. ‘‘The categories of T’i, Hsiang, and Yung: evidence that Parama¯
| |
| − | rtha composed the Awakening of Faith’’, Journal of the International Association
| |
| − | of Buddhist Studies 12/1, 66–92.
| |
| − | ———. 1995. ‘‘The Tatha¯gatagarbha Su¯tra’’, in D.S. Lopez (ed.), Buddhism in
| |
| − | Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 92–106.
| |
| − | Haichaoyin. 1920–1947. Hangzhou, Shanghai, Hankou.
| |
| − | Hakeda Yoshito. 1967. The Awakening of Faith. New York and London: Columbia
| |
| − | University Press. (Reprinted in 2006 with a preface by Ryuichi Abe.)
| |
| − | Hiltebeitel, A. 2006. ‘‘As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’s Buddhacarita: the first known close and critical
| |
| − | reading of the Brahmanical Sanskrit epics’’, Journal of Indian Philosophy 34,
| |
| − | 229–86.
| |
| − | Hodous, L. 1924. Buddhism and Buddhists in China. New York: Macmillan
| |
| − | Company.
| |
| − | Hubbard, J. and Swanson, P. (eds). 1997. Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over
| |
| − | Critical Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
| |
| − | Hurley, S. 2004. ‘‘The doctrinal transformation of twentieth-century Chinese
| |
| − | Buddhism: Master Yinshun’s interpretation of Tatha¯gatagarbha doctrine’’,
| |
| − | Contemporary Buddhism 5/1, 29–46.
| |
| − | Jaffe, R.M. 2004. ‘‘Seeking S´a¯kyamuni: travel and the reconstruction of Japanese
| |
| − | Buddhism’’, Journal of Japanese Studies 30/1, 65–96.
| |
| − | Ketelaar, J.E. 1990. Of Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji Japan: Buddhism and Its
| |
| − | Persecution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
| |
| − | ———. 1991. ‘‘Strategic Occidentalism: Meiji Buddhists at the world’s parliament
| |
| − | of religion’’, Buddhist–Christian Studies 11, 37–56.
| |
| − | Kieschnick, J. 1997. The Eminent Monk. Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese
| |
| − | Hagiography. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
| |
| − | Lai, Whalen. 1980. ‘‘A clue to the authorship of the Awakening of Faith: S´iks˙
| |
| − | a¯-
| |
| − | nanda redaction of word Nien’’, Journal of the International Association of
| |
| − | Buddhist Studies 3/1, 35–53.
| |
| − | 340 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Levering, M. 1989. ‘‘Scripture and its reception: a Buddhist case’’, in M. Levering
| |
| − | (ed.), Rethinking Scripture: Essays from a Comparative Perspective. Albany:
| |
| − | State University of New York Press, 58–101.
| |
| − | Le´vi, S. 1928. ‘‘Encore As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’’, Journal Asiatique 213, 193–216.
| |
| − | Lian Xi. 1997. The Conversion of Missionaries: Liberalism in American Protestant
| |
| − | Missions in China 1907–1932. University Park: Pennsylvania University Press.
| |
| − | Liang Qichao. 1935. reprint, first edition 1922. Dasheng qixin lun kaozheng.
| |
| − | Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan.
| |
| − | ———. 1910. ‘‘Lun Zhina zongjiao gaige’’, in Yinbingshi wenji. Shanghai:
| |
| − | Guangzhi shuju, 1910. 11 vols., vol. 5, 33–6.
| |
| − | ———. reprint 1990. ‘‘Lun fojiao yu qunzhi zhi guanxi’’, in Shi Jun, Lou Yulie,
| |
| − | Fang Litian, Xu Kangsheng and Yue Shouming (eds), 49–56.
| |
| − | Liebenthal, W. 1958. ‘‘New light on the Maha¯ya¯na-s´raddhotpada s´astra’’, T’oung
| |
| − | Pao 46, 155–216.
| |
| − | Lopez, D.S. (ed.). 1995. Curators of the Buddha: The Study of Buddhism under
| |
| − | Colonialism. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
| |
| − | ——— (ed.). 1995a. Buddhism in Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
| |
| − | Matsumoto, S. 1997. ‘‘The doctrine of Tatha¯gatagarbha is not Buddhist’’, in J.
| |
| − | Hubbard and P. Swanson (eds), Pruning the Bodhi Tree: The Storm over Critical
| |
| − | Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 165–73.
| |
| − | Mu¨ller, G. 1993. Buddhism und Moderne. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
| |
| − | ———. 1997. ‘‘Buddhist studies in the post-colonial age’’, Journal of the American
| |
| − | Academy of Religion 65/2, 469–85.
| |
| − | Nattier, J. 1990. ‘‘Church language and vernacular language in Central Asian
| |
| − | Buddhism’’, Numen 37/2, 195–219.
| |
| − | ———. 1997. ‘‘Buddhist studies in the post-colonial age’’, Journal of the American
| |
| − | Academy of Religion 65/2, 469–85.
| |
| − | Nedostup, R. and Liang Hong-ming. 2001. ‘‘‘Begging the sages of the party-state’:
| |
| − | citizenship and government in transition of nationalist China, 1927–1937’’,
| |
| − | International Review of Social History 46, Supplement, 185–207.
| |
| − | Pittman, D. 2001. Toward a Modern Chinese Buddhism: Taixu’s Reforms.
| |
| − | Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
| |
| − | Poo Mu-chou. 1995. ‘‘The images of immortals and eminent monks: religious
| |
| − | mentality in early medieval China (4–6 c. AD)’’, Numen 42, 172–96.
| |
| − | Rambelli, F. 1994. ‘‘True words, silence, and the adamantine dance: on Japanese
| |
| − | Mikkyo¯ and the formation of the Shingon discourse’’, Japanese Journal of
| |
| − | Religious Studies 21/4, 373–405.
| |
| − | Reed, C. 2004. Gutenberg in Shanghai: Shanghai Print Capitalism, 1876–1937.
| |
| − | Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
| |
| − | Richard, T. 1907. The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana Doctrine: The New
| |
| − | Buddhism. Shanghai: Christian Literature Society, printed by the Methodist
| |
| − | Publishing House.
| |
| − | ———. 1910. The New Testament of Higher Buddhism. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.
| |
| − | ———. 1916. Forty-Five Years in China. London: T. Fisher Unwin.
| |
| − | Ruegg, D.S. 1969. La the´orie du tatha¯gatagarbha et du gotra: e´tude sur la
| |
| − | sote´riologie et la gnose´ologie du bouddhisme. Paris: E´ cole Franc¸aise d’Extreˆmeorient.
| |
| − | Schlu¨ tter, M. 2005. ‘‘Windfalls and pitfalls: the use of digitized source material in
| |
| − | the study of Asian Buddhism’’, AAS Annual Meeting, March 31–April 3.
| |
| − | THE MAHA¯ Y A¯ NA AWAKENING OF FAITH 341
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Sharf, R.H. 1995. ‘‘The Zen of Japanese nationalism’’, in D.S. Lopez (ed.),
| |
| − | Curators of the Buddha: The Study of Buddhism under Colonialism. Chicago:
| |
| − | Chicago University Press, 107–160.
| |
| − | ———. 1995b. ‘‘Buddhist modernism and the rhetoric of meditative experience’’,
| |
| − | Numen 42/3, 228–83.
| |
| − | ———. 2002. Coming to Terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure
| |
| − | Store Treatise. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
| |
| − | Silk, J. 1994. ‘‘The Victorian creation of Buddhism’’, Journal of Indian Philosophy
| |
| − | 22, 171–96.
| |
| − | Snodgrass, J. 1998. ‘‘Buddha no fukuin: the development of Paul Carus’s Gospel of
| |
| − | Buddha in Mejij Japan’’, Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 25, 320–44.
| |
| − | ———. 2003. Presenting Japanese Buddhism to the West: Orientalism,
| |
| − | Occidentalism, and the Columbian Exposition. Chapel Hill: University of
| |
| − | North Carolina Press.
| |
| − | Soothill, W.E. 1924. Timothy Richard of China: Seer, Statesman, Missionary and
| |
| − | the Most Disinterested Adviser the Chinese Ever Had. London: Seeley, Service
| |
| − | and Co.
| |
| − | Stevenson, D.B. 1995. ‘‘Pure Land Buddhist worship and meditation in China’’, in
| |
| − | D.S. Lopez (ed.), Buddhism in Practice. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
| |
| − | 359–79.
| |
| − | ———. 2001. ‘‘Text, image and transformation in the history of the Shuilu fahui,
| |
| − | the Buddhist rite for deliverance of creatures of water and land’’, in M. Weidner
| |
| − | (ed.), Cultural Intersections in Later Chinese Buddhism. Honolulu: University of
| |
| − | Hawai‘i Press.
| |
| − | Strickmann, M. 1996. Mantras et mandarins: le bouddhisme tantrique en Chine.
| |
| − | Paris: Gallimard.
| |
| − | Suzuki, D.T. 1900. As´vaghos˙
| |
| − | a’s Discourse on the Awakening of Faith in the
| |
| − | Maha¯ya¯na. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company.
| |
| − | Taisho¯ shinshu¯ daizo¯kyo¯. 1924–34. and Takakusu Junjiro¯ et al. (eds), Tokyo: Taisho¯
| |
| − | issakyo¯ kanko¯kai, 58 vols.
| |
| − | Tarocco, F. 1996. ‘‘Mente (xin) ed illuminazione (jue) nel Trattato sul risveglio
| |
| − | della fede secondo gli insegnamenti del Maha¯ya¯na (Dasheng qixin lun)’’, Venice
| |
| − | University Dissertation Thesis.
| |
| − | ———. 2007. The Cultural Practices of Modern Chinese Buddhism: Attuning the
| |
| − | Dharma. London: Routledge.
| |
| − | ter Haar, B. 2001. ‘‘Buddhist-inspired options: aspects of lay religious life in the
| |
| − | lower Yangzi from 1100 until 1340’’, T’oung Pao 87, 92–152.
| |
| − | Tokuno, K. 1990. ‘‘The evaluation of indigenous scriptures in Chinese Buddhist
| |
| − | bibliographical catalogues’’, in R.E. Buswell (ed.), Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha.
| |
| − | Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 31–74.
| |
| − | Tweed, T. 2005. ‘‘American occultism and Japanese Buddhism: Albert J. Edmunds,
| |
| − | D. T. Suzuki and translocative history’’, Japanese Journal of Religious Studies
| |
| − | 32/3, 249–81.
| |
| − | van Gulik, R.H. [1956] reprint 1980. Siddham: An Essay on the History of Sanskrit
| |
| − | Studies in China and Japan. Delhi: Jayyed Press.
| |
| − | Verter, B. 2003. ‘‘Spiritual capital: theorizing religion with Bourdieu against
| |
| − | Bourdieu’’, Sociological Theory 21/2, June 2003, 150–74.
| |
| − | Vita, S. 2003. ‘‘Printings of the Buddhist ‘Canon’ in Japan’’, in G. Verardi and S.
| |
| − | Vita (eds), Buddhist Asia, I: Paper of the First Conference of Buddhist Studies
| |
| − | Held in Naples in May 2001. Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian Studies,
| |
| − | 217–45.
| |
| − | 342 FRANCESCA TAROCCO
| |
| − | terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X08000566
| |
| − | Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Denver Main Library, on 02 Oct 2018 at 16:24:49, subject to the Cambridge Core
| |
| − | Vittinghoff, N. 2002. ‘‘Unity vs uniformity: Liang Qichao and the invention of a
| |
| − | ‘New Journalism for China’’’, Late Imperial China 23/1, 91–143.
| |
| − | Welch, H. 1968. The Buddhist Revival in China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
| |
| − | University Press.
| |
| − | Williams, P. 1989. Maha¯ya¯na Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. London:
| |
| − | Routledge.
| |
| − | Weinstein, S. 1987. Buddhism under the T’ang. Cambridge: Cambridge University
| |
| − | Press.
| |
| − | West, A.C. 1998. Catalogue of the Morrison Collection of Chinese Books. London:
| |
| − | School of Oriental and African Studies.
| |
| − | Yang Buwei Chao. 1970 (first edition 1948). Autobiography of a Chinese Woman,
| |
| − | Buwei Yang Chao. Put into English by Her Husband Yuanren Chao. Westport:
| |
| − | Greenwood Press.
| |
| − | Yang Wenhui (Renshan). 1918. Yang Renshan jushi yizhu. Nanjing: Jinling
| |
| − | kejingchu, 10 vols + 1 vol.
| |
| − | Yinshun. 1950 (reprint 1995). Taixu dashi nianpu. Beijing: Zongjiao wenhua
| |
| − | chubanshe.
| |
| | }} | | }} |
