2020 International and Intensive Program on Buddhism at Princeton University: Student Forum

Click here to return to the main program page.

Click here to jump to Abstracts.

A printable copy of the program can be downloaded here.

 

SEGMENT 1 Vancouver (PST) New York (EST) UK (BST) Beijing (CST)
Session 3 9:20 am–10:50 am 12:20 pm–1:50 pm 5:20 pm–6:50 pm 12:20 am–1:50 am*

 

July 1, Session 3
9:20–10:50 Forum Panel 1: Border-crossing (Chair: CHEN Jinhua)
1.1 (9:20-9:35) Daigengna DUOER (University of California, Santa Barbara): “Making the Esoteric Public: The Ninth Panchen Lama and the Trans-ethnonational Rituals of the Kālacakra Initiations in Early Twentieth-Century East Asia”
1.2 (9:35-9:50) MA Cho Wun (Clara) 馬楚媛 (University of Virginia): “The Transformation of Vaiśravaṇa in Sichuan through the Eighth to the Tenth Centuries”
1.3 (9:50-10:05) Nikita KUZMIN 雷鳴達 (University of Pennsylvania): “Many Faces of Guanyin Jing 觀音經: Pictorial and Textual Analysis of the Tangut Version from Dunhuang”
Comment 評議 (10:05-10:20) Discussant Stephen Teiser 太史文
Discussion 討論 (10:20-10:50) Open Floor 開放討論

 


 

SEGMENT 2 Vancouver (PST) New York (EST) UK (BST) Beijing (CST)
Session 1 4:30 am–6:00 am* 7:30 am–9:00 am 12:30 pm–2:00 pm 7:30 pm–9:00 pm

 

July 8, Session 1
4:30-6:00 Forum Panel 2: Doctrine and Text (Chair: ZHANG Hanyue)
2.1 (4:30-4:45) QI Guanxiong 齊冠雄 (Florida State University): “On History and History-making of the Yogācāra Buddhism in China”
2.2 (4:45-5:00) WANG Xinru 汪馨如 (Chinese Academy of Social Science): “日本天台法華宗《唐决集》版本考察” (A Study of the Edition of Tōketsu 唐决集 by Tendai Hokke School)
Comment 評議 (5:00-5:15) Discussant Imre GALAMBOS 高奕叡
Discussion 討論 (5:15-6:00) Open Floor 開放討論

 

July 9, Session 1
4:30-6:00 Forum Panel 3: Buddhist Practices (Chair: Jacqueline Stone)
3.1 (4:30-4:45) TAN Yingxian 談穎嫻 (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem): “Official and Private Buddhist Monasteries under Emperor Wen of Sui”
3.2 (4:45-5:00) Antione CID (INALCO): “De-compartmentalizing the Revival: Holmes Welch and His Trilogy on Chinese Buddhism”
3.3 (5:00-5:15) LIU Jun 劉軍 (Nankai University): “民國時期中美佛教文化交流敘略”
Comment 評議 (5:15-5:30) Discussant SHENG Kai 聖凱
Discussion 討論 (5:30-6:00) Open Floor 開放討論

 

July 10, Session 1
4:30-6:00 Forum Panel 4: Art and Literature (Chair: Anne Blackburn)
4.1 (4:30-4:45) WU Hong 吴虹 (University of Vienna): “漢地早期造像記的發展—基於印度視點的考察”
4.2 (4:45-5:00) LI Wei 李巍 (Peking University): “六朝佛教類書對譬喻故事的整理——以《經律異相》為中心”
4.3 (5:00-5:15) WANG Chenyi 王琛懿 (Sichuan University): “廬山慧遠: 從高僧到神僧——佛傳影響下的中國僧傳文學” (Evolving from History to Fiction, Story of Huiyuan of Mount Lu: Under the Influence of Biographic Literature of the Buddha)
Comment 評議 (5:15-5:30) Discussant Dorothy WONG 王靜芬
Discussion 討論 (5:30-6:00) Open Floor 開放討論

 

Abstracts
Forum Panel 1: Border-crossing

Daigengna DUOER (University of California, Santa Barbara): “Making the Esoteric Public: The Ninth Panchen Lama and the Trans-ethnonational Rituals of the Kālacakra Initiations in Early Twentieth-Century East Asia”

Between 1928 to 1936, nine Kālacakra initiations were given by the Ninth Panchen Lama in Inner Mongolia, Beijing, Hangzhou, and parts of Amdo. Tens of thousands of attendees, such as Mongol lords and princes, Chinese politicians and war lords, foreign dignitaries, distinguished Buddhists from various transnational traditions, celebrities, socialites, university students, all flocked to the rituals. Using newspaper, periodical, and biographical sources, this paper unveils that Tibetan Buddhism, especially Gelug Buddhism, was highly transregional, trans-ethnonational, and even international at the turn of the twentieth century. Focusing on the two rituals performed in Beijing (1932) and Hangzhou (1934), this paper shows that these Kālacakra initiations were not only open to diverse audiences of the public, they were also groundbreaking in their embrace of modern technologies such as print media for advertising, fundraising, and the trading of religious commodities. In sum, Tibetan Buddhist rituals functioned as public spheres that facilitated public discourse on religion and modernity. As the Kālacakra initiations became controversial topics of fascination and denunciation through the power of print media, the Buddhist ritual served as a location for public debates on the role of religion in politics, and the place of faith in the processes of modernization.

MA Cho Wun (Clara) 馬楚媛 (University of Virginia): “The Transformation of Vaiśravaṇa in Sichuan through the Eighth to the Tenth Centuries”

The cult of Vaiśravaṇa, the Guardian of the North, gained prominent in Sichuan from the eighth to the tenth centuries. Sichuan was situated at the borders between Tang China, the Tibetan Empire, and the Nanzhao Kingdom. Although the cult of Vaiśravaṇa is thought to have originated in Khotan and associated with state protection, visual evidences in Sichuan raises questions regarding the formation of local religious identity for worshippers. By examining the iconography and the meanings of Vaiśravaṇa in the Kingdom of Khotan and Tang China in different phases, this paper investigates the role of legends and rituals in shaping the iconography of Vaiśravaṇa. It demonstrates that the fragmented political environment in western Sichuan in the ninth century contributed to a regional expansion of the iconography of Vaiśravaṇa.

Nikita KUZMIN 雷鳴達 (University of Pennsylvania): “Many Faces of Guanyin Jing 觀音經: Pictorial and Textual Analysis of the Tangut Version from Dunhuang”

In 1959 Chinese archaeologists discovered two Tangut sutras in a stupa near Mogao grottoes in Dunhuang. One of them is an almost complete printed edition of the 25th chapter of the Lotus Sutra – “Guanshiyin pumen pin” (Guanyin jing). One distinguishing feature of this version is that its frontispiece contains a depiction of Water-Moon Guanyin accompanied by a donator and a gandharva. Moreover, the sutra’s narrative is supplemented by a string of images running across the top of each folio. Although such pictorial narratives are not commonly seen in Buddhist scriptures of Central and East Asia, different editions of Guanyin jing include a large number of illustrations and present various forms of text-image relationships.

In this paper, I will discuss this unique feature of the Tangut edition from Dunhuang in comparison with others, ranging from tenth century manuscripts discovered in Mogao Cave 17 to Song-Yuan woodblocks. While previous scholarships have mainly focused on particular editions of the sutra, my research aims for a comparative analysis of various sutra versions. This methodology enables me to trace the evolution of pictorial and textual narratives of Guanyin jing as well as its pictorial-textual transition from Sinitic to the Tangut version. I suggest that the appeal of its content for lay Buddhist practitioners triggered the formation of its text-image symbioses. Together with other Tangut materials from Dunhuang, it sheds light on the religious life of the Tanguts in Dunhuang.

 

Forum Panel 2: Doctrine and Text

QI Guanxiong 齊冠雄 (Florida State University): “On History and History-making of the Yogācāra Buddhism in China”

In this paper, I will reexamine the typical narrative about the sixth-century Chinese Yogācāra factionalism and argue that it is nearly impossible for modern scholars to establish a stable and objective history of the early Chinese Yogācāra Buddhism. Most contemporary scholars trace the origin of Chinese Yogācāra thought back to two or three groups of Mahāyāna devotees in the sixth century China, the Dilun shi 地論師 (Masters of the Dasabhūmikabhāsya) and the Shelun shi 攝論師 (Masters of the Mahāyānasagraha).[1] Nonetheless, this historiography is largely constructed on the basis of either seventh-century hagio-biographical or prejudiced sectarian literature, some of which have been proven historically untrue. Moreover, whether we define this idea of “Yogācāra” philosophically or genealogically, the early Chinese Yogācāra history is usually produced as a retrospective projection which confuses the boundary between philosophy and history, what supposed to be real and what supposed to be ideal. Instead of constructing history, I suggest we shall focus on the history-making and historiography of the Chinese Yogācāra Buddhism.

[1] The idea is the Yogācāra Buddhism sprouted in China along with translation of the Dasabhūmikabhāsya and the Mahāyānasaṃgraha. These groups of Buddhists are the predecessors of Chinese Yogācāra “school” of Buddhism. For example, see Yang Weizhong 楊維中, Zhongguo weishizong tongshi 中國唯識宗通識, (Nanjing: Fenghuang chubanshe, 2008), 35-64; See John Jorgensen et al., Treatise on Awakening Mahāyāna Faith, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), 12.

WANG Xinru 汪馨如 (Chinese Academy of Social Science): “日本天台法華宗《唐决集》版本考察” (A Study of the Edition of Tōketsu 唐决集 by Tendai Hokke School)

唐宋時期,遠渡重洋的日本求法僧往往肩負著向中國高僧求決答疑的任務,決答後留下的問答記錄被稱為“唐決”。日本天台法華宗留有《唐決集》,記錄由唐至宋日僧所提疑問與唐宋僧人回复。目前存世《唐決集》版本主要有青蓮院寫本、寬永三年(1626)印本、正保三年(1645)印本。最早的青蓮院寫本時代距“求決”活動的發生時間逾三百年之久,不過在此之前,日本天台宗典籍中已有對唐決的徵引。青蓮院寫本附有三篇唐人佚文,此為其他版本所無,這些佚文為探究日僧與唐僧、地方長官的互動提供了寶貴細節。

In Tang and Song Dynasties, Japan monks who visited China usually carried out Buddhism asking plans. And those questions and answers are called Tōketsu 唐决. Tendai Hokke 天台法華 School left Tōketsushū 唐决集 gathering questions and answers from Tang to Song Dynasty period between China and Japan monks. Shorenin 青莲院 version, Kuan Yong 宽永 three-year (1625) version and Zheng Bao 正保 three-year (1646) version. Although there is a three-hundred-year time span between the replies happened and Shorenin version, the earliest version, was completed, the citation of Tōketsu could be found in other Buddhist literature written earlier than Shorenin version. The article explores the Tendai School monks’ action in China especially their interaction with officials by using lost texts found in the Shorenin version. The three lost articles can supplement abundant information for Japan Buddhist monks’ activities in China.

 

Forum Panel 3: Buddhist Practices

TAN Yingxian 談穎嫻 (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem): “Official and Private Buddhist Monasteries under Emperor Wen of Sui”

Emperor Wen of Sui 隋文帝 (Yang Jian 楊堅, r. 581-604) is often portrayed as one of the most ardent imperial devotees of Buddhism in the course of Chinese history. As a regent of Northern Zhou from 580 to 581, he had already played a leading role in restoring Buddhism in the aftermath of 574-578 Northern Zhou suppression of the sangha. Soon after he ascended the throne as the first emperor of Sui, he displayed vigorous support of the Buddhist causes to the degree rarely matched by other sovereigns. His ruling period witnessed the Buddhist ordination of 230,000 people —the largest ordination ever under a single sovereign throughout Chinese history—and the establishment or renovation of a total of 3792 Buddhist monasteries.

The statistics mentioned above clearly suggest an enormous growth in the number of the sangha and monasteries owing to Emperor Wen’s vigorous support of Buddhism. These statistics are not self-explanatory, though, in terms of the sponsorship of the Buddhist causes. For instance, the data do not necessarily indicate an unreserved patronage of Buddhist constructions by Emperor Wen, as often concluded in modern scholarship. In fact, a close examination of the patronage of the monasteries established during Emperor Wen’s rule shows that the state-sponsored monasteries are of discreet proportion. Therefore, the view that the maintenance of a massive presence of Buddhism can only be assured by a tremendous drain on the state revenue does not bear scrutiny.

The present study aims to clarify the distinction between two types of metropolitan and local Buddhist monasteries: the state-owned monastic institutions and the aristocracy/magnate-sponsored temples. They vary in patronage, leadership, scale and function. The former are part and parcel of the state’s administrative system, exemplified in “Great Monastery of Rejuvenating Virtue” 大興善寺 in the capital and a network of “Great Monasteries of Rejuvenating the State” 大興國寺 distributed one per prefecture throughout the realm of the Sui empire. The latter, in contrast, are privately built, often in the donors’ mansions. These are cultic centers in control of estates and labors and their economic power bear resemblance to that of aristocratic or local magnate families. Clarifying these two different forms of Buddhist presence under Emperor Wen is first for the reconsideration of a common view that Buddhism was spread mainly at the expense of the state coffers. Moreover, the current study paves way for the understanding of the Sui ruling group’s different spiritual and economic concerns in maintaining both official and private Buddhist monasteries.

Antione CID (INALCO): “De-compartmentalizing the Revival: Holmes Welch and His Trilogy on Chinese Buddhism”

It is not so uncommon, within our respective research horizons, that Holmes Welch’s contribution constitutes one of the first introductory stones of our reflection; a relevant entry to questions relating to the spatial organization of monasteries, hereditary temples, monastic hierarchy, the place and function of the abbot, monastic economy, ordination, funerary rites, and, finally, the centrality of a certain conception of praxis. The idea of a revival, defended then nuanced in the second part of his triptych, enduringly irrigates the crucible of epistemological reflections in the second part of the nineteenth century and the first part of the twentieth century. This period of transformation and recomposition seems to move in the direction of this necessity to revisit the revival (Erik Hammerstrom, Gregory Adam Scott, 2017), but it was also probably intended to extend Holmes Welch’s reflection beyond our field, to apply it to neighboring territories. This paper aims to assess the extent to which it is possible to reread the revival by enriching it with new disciplinary approaches, touching, in turn, on education, on the micro-historical trajectories of certain monks, and the gestation in their journeys of the idea of modern nationhood.

LIU Jun 劉軍 (Nankai University): “民國時期中美佛教文化交流敘略”

中美間的文化交流歷來是學術界關注的一大焦點,成果已多,然在民國時期中美間的佛教文化交流上仍為研究的空白,民國是中美佛教文化交通的重要時期,中美間佛教交流頻繁,不少美國佛教學者、信徒紛紛來華,出現了類似玄奘西天取經的美國版“東土取經”,佛經在美國得到翻譯,佛教學術在美國,更是取得長足的進步。在國衰民弱、國人十分崇洋媚外、佛教不被看好的時代,美國人卻極為欣賞、崇慕中國佛教。佛教彰顯了它的超國家超民族的世界性特點,顯示了中國文化之“品牌”與魅力,促進了中美兩國間的交流與感情,特別是在中美同為反法西斯同盟國時,佛教更具有重大的國際意義。在近現代中美關係及中美文化交流史上,佛教發揮了不可忽視的積極作用。

 

Forum Panel 4: Art and Literature

WU Hong 吴虹 (University of Vienna): “漢地早期造像記的發展—基於印度視點的考察”

南北朝時期造像活動興盛。隨之產生的大量發願文為了解古代社會及宗教思 想提供了珍貴材料。對此,學界已經積累了廣泛研究。然而,現有研究傾向於 在中國語境下分析這些銘文,而不夠重視這種造像積福思想的外來根源。功績積累和轉移的基本概念在中國沒有可供比較的先例,完全是印度的進口。這就引發了一個重要的問題:這個外來的想法是如何被中國的受眾接受的?本研究從文化比較的角度,通過考察現存最早有銘文記錄的三世紀到五世紀末這一範圍,試圖重建文化差異被吸收和轉化的過程。通過對漢語發願文寫作格式發展的動態分析,我們觀察到漢語發願文格式中的印度要素與中國本土文化逐漸達到平衡,以及通過文化翻譯一個完全陌生的概念被本土化的歷史過程。

LI Wei 李巍 (Peking University): “六朝佛教類書對譬喻故事的整理——以《經律異相》為中心”

六朝類書《經律異相》中保存了大量的佛教譬喻故事,此書系統性整理譬喻故事不僅保存了大量的散佚故事,具有文獻學的意義,同時相關故事的條目整理、改寫和刪簡體現了漢地僧才對於譬喻故事的接受情況。改寫和簡化的過程不僅是僧人為了方便記憶對譬喻故事所作的簡單修訂,同時對後代類書中以四字短語為主要形式的典故類型提供了契機。深入研究這個化簡為繁的過程對於我們理解佛教文獻文學化和中國化的過程具有重要意義。

WANG Chenyi 王琛懿 (Sichuan University): “廬山慧遠: 從高僧到神僧——佛傳影響下的中國僧傳文學” (Evolving from History to Fiction, Story of Huiyuan of Mount Lu: Under the Influence of Biographic Literature of the Buddha)

東漢以來,大量佛傳文學沿絲路傳譯入華,對中國僧傳產生了深遠影響。在眾佛傳的反復書寫中,釋迦牟尼形象經歷了從歷史人物到宗教神祇的神格化歷程,與之相似,中國高僧廬山慧遠也在正統僧傳與民間文學的共同塑造下,逐漸定型為“神僧”。從南朝碑銘中的“慧遠”到唐宋話本里的“遠公”,慧遠形象逐漸神聖化、神秘化,反映出中土僧伽信仰的形成歷程。

A large amount of biographic literature of the Buddha had been translated into China since Han Dynasty via the Silk Road, significantly influencing the Chinese monk biographies.

Within the sutra of Mahayana Buddhism, the character of Sakyamuni had experienced a diachronic evolution from human to deity to attract believers. The development of eminent monks’ biographies was similar, and the story of Shi Hui Yuan 釋慧遠 (334-416 CE) is a typical case, which also witnessed a development tendency from history to fiction. According to the comparative study of the series from earliest authentic records to folk legends, the character image of Hui Yuan was becoming more and more mystical, reflecting the forming process of Sangha Faith in medieval Chinese folklore.