Return to main forum page.
Return to main conference page.
- BABA, Norihisa, University of Tokyo
馬場 紀寿, 日本東京大學
A “Mahāyāna Buddhist” and the Pali Text Society: How Shaku Sōen Met Rhys Davids
一位 “大乘佛教徒 “與巴利文學會：釋宗演如何結識瑞斯・戴維斯The Pali Text Society, founded by Rhys Davids in 1881, influenced not only European Orientalists but also East Asian Buddhists. A Japanese monk, Shaku Sōen (1860-1919), who invented the modern concept of “Mahayana Buddhism” (Daijō Bukkyō in Japanese), was inspired by Rhys Davids to spread Buddhism to the “West” during his stay in Ceylon from 1887 to 1889 and later sent his disciples (D. T. Suzuki, Shaku Sōkatsu, Senzaki Nyogen, and Sasaki Shigetsu) to the U.S.A. In this presentation, I will argue how Shaku Sōen met Rhys Davids through scholarly exchange and in person.
巴利文學會，由瑞斯・戴維斯（Rhys Davids，1843-1922）於1881 年建立。該學會對歐洲的東方學家，更且對東亞的佛教徒影響深遠。日本僧人釋宗演（1860-1919），提出了現代版的“大乘佛教”概念。1887-89年逗留錫蘭期間，他受到瑞斯的啓發，將佛教傳播到西方，更派弟子鈴木大拙、釋宗活、先崎如幻、佐佐木指月等人，至美國傳教。本次報告，我嘗試梳理釋宗演如何通過文字及親身經歷，得與瑞斯結識。
- BARRETT, T. H., SOAS, University of London
巴瑞特, 倫敦大學亞非學院
Tao and Zen in early Twentieth-century Britain
20世紀早期英國的道與禪In April 2024 I was asked to provide a short account of the Daode jing in late nineteenth and early twentieth century Britain to complement a workshop concerning the influence of Daoist texts in Germany at that time. I was not surprised to discover that several translations (or perhaps better, representations) of the Daode jing during this period were strongly influenced by Theosophist ideas, since this is now becoming well known. But I also noted that those who represented Japanese or pan-Asian thought in English also made frequent reference to Daoist texts and sought to discover why this might be. One longer term outcome of this association seems to have been that in the mid-twentieth century Anglophone world at least Zen and Daoist classics were frequently both mentioned by the same writers.
2024年4月，我受邀撰寫一篇短文，闡述19世紀末至20世紀初《道德經》在英國的情況，爲道教典籍對同時期德國影響的研討會作一補充。我發現彼時多部《道德經》譯作（或更準確地說，演繹作品）受到神智學思想的強烈影響，然此事初不足怪，眼下頗爲學者所知。然而，我還注意到，許多譯介日本或泛亞思想的英文作品頻頻訴諸道家典籍，慾一探究竟。拉開歷史鏡頭，原因或在於至少在20世紀中葉的英語世界，禪道經典常常見諸同一寫家筆下。
- Jinhua CHEN，The University of British Columbia
陳金華, 加拿大英屬哥倫比亞大學
于闐質子智儼/嚴生平再考
Translator, Exegete, and Meditation Master: The Complicated Life of a Khotanese Hostage Prince in Tang China印度在唐僑僧善無畏(637–735)歿後，所傳《大日經》疏解由其兩位弟子——一行(683–727)與智儼(活躍於700-720年代) ——整理成兩個版本，一為二十卷本的《大日經疏》、另一為十四卷本的《大日經義釋》。一行聲名顯赫，彪炳史冊，而智儼則相對無聞。本文認為，作為善無畏弟子的智儼或即贊寧(919–1001)《宋高僧傳》所記載的同名僧人：智儼、俗名欝持樂（即尉遲樂）。欝持樂原為于闐國王在唐質子、後奉旨出家、成為當時的一位重要譯僧。雖然不太可能是歷史上赫赫有名的于闐國在唐畫師尉遲乙僧，此智嚴/儼或即大敬愛寺同名僧：他既是一位註釋《楞伽經》的學問僧，又是一名禪師，出自北宗禪師龐塢元珪（644-716）的門下。通過重構這一複雜歷史人物撲簌迷離一生的幾個面相，本文力求展示大唐佛教世界主義（Cosmopolitan）的特質。
After the passing of the Indian monk Shanwuwei 善無畏 (Śubhakarasiṃha [637–735]), his lecture notes on the Mahāvairocana sūtra were compiled by two of his disciples, Yixing一行 (683–727) and Zhiyan 智儼/嚴 (active 700s–720s), into two editions, one entitled “Dari jing shu” 大日經疏 of twenty juan and the other “Dari jing yishi” 大日經義釋 [Explanation of the Meanings of the Mahāvairocana-abhisaṃbodhi-tantra] of fourteen juan. Yixing enjoyed an extraordinary reputation in East Asian Buddhism, while Zhiyan has been relatively obscure. In this paper, it is suggested that Zhiyan as a disciple of Śubhakarasiṃha, might have been the monk of the same name recorded in Zanning’s 贊寧 (919–1001) Song gaoseng zhuan 宋高僧傳 [Biographies of Eminent Monks Compiled under the Song dynasty], whose secular name is Yuchi Le 欝持樂 (i.e., 尉遲樂). Yuchi Le had been a Khotanese hostage prince in the court of Tang China till he was ordered by an imperial decree to take up a monastic career, which turned him into a key translator of his days. He could not be identified with the contemporaneous namesake (Zhiyan [602–668]) taken to be the fifth patriarch of Huayan Buddhism; neither is it likely that Youchi Le/Zhiyan could have been Yuchi Yiseng 尉遲乙僧, a famed Khotanese painter active in Tang China around this period. He was likely a homonymous monk affiliated with the Great Jing’ai Temple 大敬愛寺, who was both a scholarly monk annotating the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra and a meditation master trained by the Northern Chan master Pangwu Yuangui 龐塢元珪 (644-716). By reconstructing several important aspects of the complicated life of this historical figure, this paper seeks to feature the cosmopolitan characteristics of Tang Buddhism.
- Antoine CID, Inalco
安西泰，法國國立東方語言與文明學院
Letters and Networks: A Study of the Correspondence between Rev. Lopez and Su Manshu in the early 20th Century
20世紀早期個體間的中西方交流—Rev Lopez與中國詩僧蘇曼殊的書信往來研究abstract forthcoming
- ELLGUTH, Richard, Free University of Berlin
艾離澤, 柏林自由大學
From Dharma Talk to Religious Sentiment: Chinese Buddhist Encounters with Religious Psychology, 1912-1949
從佛法開示到宗教情緒：中國佛教對宗教心理學的發現，1912~1949In my paper, I want to reflect on a particular topic that was discussed in Chinese Buddhist journals during the Republican era (1912-1949). In the 1910s, Buddhist writers began to discuss how religions in general – not just Buddhism itself – could be conceptually analyzed. Although premodern Chinese Buddhism provided a vast reservoir of terms and concepts that could be used to distinguish and categorize certain teachings, many Chinese Buddhist intellectuals chose to engage creatively with concepts that originated in Western religious studies and that had entered the Chinese lexicon mainly via Japan since the 1890s. Therefore, reading Buddhist journals such as Haichaoyin 海潮音 and Xiandai fojiao 現代佛教, one can come to the conclusion that the Buddhist language of discourse was increasingly permeated by neologisms from religious studies.
One particular field of Western religious studies that Chinese Buddhists became interested in was religious psychology. In the 19th century, figures from continental Europe such as Friedrich Schleiermacher and Ludwig Feuerbach caused a paradigm change in religious scholarship by arguing that religion had its origin in individual emotions and personal needs. Engaging approaches of all these Western scholars, Chinese Buddhists started to reformulate Buddhist teachings using concepts like “religious feeling”, “mysticism” or “religious consciousness”. This paper will investigate how Buddhists sought to combine traditional Buddhist concepts concerned with the mind together with approaches of religious psychology. What will be shown is that Buddhists were interested in religious psychology since it created definitions of religion that were not following a “monotheist assumption” but could easily be applied to Buddhism. Furthermore, these approaches offered Buddhism new ways to argue against Christianity.
民國時期（1912-1949）佛教刊物中有一特殊議題。自1910年代起，佛教寫家開始探索宗教概念分析之道，不囿於佛教。中國古代佛教雖富有名相，可供教義區判，然許多佛學知識分子卻另闢蹊徑，慾套用19世紀末經日本傳入之西方宗教學概念。觀《海潮音》《現代佛教》等刊物，可見佛教論述日漸滲透宗教學新詞。西方宗教學中，宗教心理學尤受中國佛教徒青睞。19世紀歐陸學者如施萊爾馬赫、費爾巴哈等，申宗教源於個人情感與需求之說，變革宗教研究範式。中國佛教徒汲取西學，遂以“宗教情感”“神秘主義”“宗教意識”等新概念重釋佛之教法。本講將探究佛教徒如何將傳統心識學說接入宗教心理學之思路。本文說明，佛教徒之所以關注宗教心理學，實因其宗教之定義，不一“一神論”爲前提，易於佛教應用。更者，此等理論爲佛教與基督教論辯開闢新途。
- HALKIAS, Georgios T., University of Hong Kong
賀祺雅, 香港大學
Buddhism and its Hellenic Others: Representations of Transcultural Encounters
佛教及其希臘他者: 跨文化交流的表現This presentation will explore a number of documented interdependencies that enabled transcultural communications between East and West, focusing specifically on selective encounters between Hellenistic, Roman, and Indian Buddhist cultures. We will survey ‘spaces’ and ‘occurrences’ where transcultural encounters between Buddhism and the Greeks are visible. Sites under consideration may include variable aspects of connectivity: in maritime trading hubs, like Berenice; in land Eurasian commercial routes; in the inclusivism of Buddhist traditions; in migration waves; across interreligious competitions and exchanges; and last but not least, within cultural, linguistic and other shared spaces among the arts, devotional practises and philosophical idioms. An intricate mosaic of asymmetrical dependencies between ‘self’ and ‘other’ provide access to valuable insights into those aspects of transcultural communication labelled Graeco-Buddhism. Arguably, this term encapsulates a nuanced reading based on the premise that during the dynamic process of synchronic and diachronic communication of Buddhism with its Hellenic others, emerging sites of conversion have not led into a selective, hybrid synthesis, but to the deconstruction of well-defined boundaries between convertor and converted, the ‘Buddhist self’ and the ‘Greek other.’ Here, we will review some visibilities of Buddhist conversion through the eyes of material culture that embrace the view that Hellenic and Buddhist cultures have not always historically been two singular, independent entities.
不同文化間的相互依存關係促進了東西方的跨文化交流。本次演講將探討其中一些有據可查的依存關係，尤其關注希臘、羅馬和印度佛教文化之間的選擇性交流。我們將研究佛教與希臘人之間的跨文化交流中的「空間」和「事件」。納入考慮的場所包括二者於不同方面的相交點：在像貝倫尼斯（Berenice）這樣的海上貿易樞紐中，在歐亞陸地的商業路線上，在佛教傳統的包容性中，在移民潮中，在跨宗教的競爭與交流中，以及在藝術、修行和哲學術語等文化、語言和其他共享空間中。「自我（self）」與「他者（other）」間錯綜複雜的不對稱依賴關係對被稱為「希臘佛教（Graeco-Buddhism）」的這種跨文化交流提供了寶貴的見解。可以說，「希臘佛教」一詞反映了一種微妙的解讀──在佛教與其希臘他者共時與歷時的動態交流中，這新興的轉化過程並沒有導致兩者的融合，而是打破了轉化者與被轉化者、「佛教自我」與「希臘他者」之間明確定義的邊界。在這裡，我們將從物質文化的角度來審視一些可見的佛教轉化，從而接受希臘文化和佛教文化在歷史上並不一直是兩個完全獨立的個體。
- HARRIS, Elizabeth J., University of Birmingham
海睿思, 伯明翰大學
The Complexities of Orientalism: the case study of William Knighton
東方主義的複雜之處：以威廉·奈頓（William Knighton）為例Born into an aristocratic British family, William Knighton (d. 1900) spent the early years of his professional life in colonial Ceylon and India. He was Principal of the Normal College in Colombo and later taught at The Hindu College in Calcutta. His passions were literature (he erected a statue of Shakespeare in Paris), history and religion. As early as 1845, in Ceylon, he dared to write ‘the’ history of Ceylon, uncritically taking as fact the recently translated historical chronicles of the island. In 1854, he wrote a two-volume novel about the life of a planter in Ceylon that both used missionary writings on Buddhism and contested them, paving the way for the work of better-known orientalists, such as T. W. Rhys Davids. Particularly interesting are ‘Four Dialogues between a Budhist and a Christian’, appended to volume two, which eschew Christian supremacy. Knighton, however, could also extol to the British authorities the benefits of combining the teaching of English and Christianity to counter the influence of ‘superstition’.I first met Knighton in the late 1980s, when I was doing doctoral research on the British encounter with Buddhism and Buddhists in nineteenth century Sri Lanka. I found his writing fascinating, because it seemed to promote an early form of Buddhist modernism, drawing on encounter with Theravāda Buddhism. I promised myself that I would do further research on him. This paper is the result. Knighton’s life and writings illustrate the intra-orientalist debates and interreligious encounters in Asia that conditioned the diverse representations of Buddhism that reached Britain in the early modern period, influencing, in turn, Britain’s assimilation and appropriation of Buddhism in both popular and elite contexts.
威廉·奈頓（1900卒），英國貴族之後，早歲仕於錫蘭、印度殖民地。曾任科倫坡師範學院院長，後執教於加爾各答印度學院。其人雅好文、史、宗教，嘗爲莎翁立像於巴黎。早在1845年，奈頓鼓勇而撰錫蘭“史”，不加辨析，徑以新譯島國編年爲信實。1854年著小說兩卷，描繪錫蘭園主生活，既引用傳教士之佛教著述，復加批評，爲後來東方學名家如瑞斯·戴維斯之研究開闢先路。尤其第二卷附錄中“佛徒與基督徒之四次對話”，避談基督教之優越性。然而，奈頓亦曾向英當局推崇英語教學與基督教育相結合，以抗“迷信”之影響。我於1980年代末初知奈頓，彼時正從事博士研究，聚焦19世紀英人與斯里蘭卡佛教及佛教徒之初遇。其著作引人入勝，蓋似推動佛教現代主義一早起形態，建基於上座部佛教之接觸。遂決意深究，此文即爲踐約之作。奈頓之生平與著作，展現了東方學內部之辯論與亞洲內宗教間之交流，此等辯論與交流導致佛教在早期現代的英國有著多元表徵，進而影響英國大眾與精英對佛教之吸收與挪用。
- HU Xiaodan, Fudan University
胡曉丹, 復旦大學
‘Buddha’ in Manichaean terminology, a comparative study on Middle Iranian and Chinese texts
摩尼教術語中的“佛”——中古伊朗語和漢語文本的比較研究Manichaeism was a world religion. The Manichaean community preached in multiple languages. In Middle Persian and Parthian (two dialects of Middle Iranian) texts from Central Asia, we can see the proper name “Buddha”. But it is attested only a few times. While in Chinese texts, especially in the Hymnscroll discovered in Dunhuang, which preserves a large number of Chinese translations of the Middle Iranian hymns, “Buddha” has become the most frequently used term to address various Gods. In medieval period, what was the difference between Iranian-speaking people and the Chinese in their understanding of “Buddha”? This comparative study attempts to explore the answer to this question.
作為一個世界宗教，摩尼教的傳教範圍跨越了多個文化圈，以多種語言進行傳教。在吐魯番發現的兩種中古伊朗語方言——中古波斯語和帕提亞語——文本中，我們可以看到“佛”這個專名，但出現的次數不多。而在漢語文本中，尤其是在保存了大量中古伊朗語贊美詩漢譯本的敦煌發現的《下部贊》中，“佛”幾乎出現在每一首贊美詩中，成了最主要的用來表達神名的術語。中古時期，說伊朗語的摩尼教徒和說漢語的摩尼教徒對於“佛”的理解有何不同？這項比較研究將對此進行探討。
- JANSEN, Berthe, Leiden
簡深博, 萊頓大學
When the Lowlands met the Snowlands: A Dutch Theosophist (?) on Himalayan Buddhism
低地與雪域的邂逅：一位荷蘭神智學家（？）對喜馬拉雅佛教的研究Johan Van Manen (1877-1943), a Dutchman and initially a theosophist, conducted his research on Himalayan religions (primarily, but not limited to, Tibetan Buddhism) in the early 20th century. Now a largely forgotten figure, he made significant contributions towards Buddhist Studies in Europe and British India. Collecting both Himalayan (Tibetan and Lepcha) texts and artifacts, Van Manen was mostly interested in “extra-canonical Buddhism” and the way in which religion was practiced by people in his area of research: the greater Darjeeling region. This presentation discusses Van Manen’s methods of research and collecting as well as the influence of his works and collections on the academic study of Himalayan Buddhism. In this paper, I further intend to present him as a “facilitator of knowledge” and, perhaps more significantly, as an important intermediary between the Highlands of the Himalayas, British India, and the Lowlands of Van Manen’s place of birth.
約翰·范·馬嫩（1877~1943），荷蘭人，初爲神智學家，20世紀初主攻喜馬拉雅地區宗教（尤其是藏傳佛教）。今雖湮沒無聞，然對歐洲及英屬印度佛教研究貢獻良多。他收藏喜馬拉雅地區文本（藏語和雷布查語）與文物，著重“藏外佛教”及所研地區之宗教實踐，範圍涵蓋大達賴嶺地區。本講探討范·馬嫩之研究與收集方法，及其著作與收藏對喜馬拉雅佛教學術研究之影響。文中亦將之呈現爲“知識促成者”，更爲喜馬拉雅高地、英屬印度與其故土低地間之重要中介。
- JI Zhe, Inalco
汲喆, 法國國立東方語言與文明學院
Research on Chinese Buddhism in France: Disciplinarization and Paradigms
法國的漢傳佛教研究: 學科建設與研究典範Research on Chinese Buddhism in the Western academic world originated in France. Due to its unique system of elite formation and research, strong emphasis on the humanities and social sciences, and the extraordinary creativity and continuity of its academic community, France has cultivated a profound tradition in the study of Chinese Buddhism over the past two hundred years. Such a tradition has enabled continuous new developments in the field. This paper aims to provide a preliminary historical overview of research on Chinese Buddhism in France, discussing the disciplinary approaches, academic paradigms, and research themes across different periods.
西方學界對漢傳佛教的研究發軔於法國。得益于其獨特的精英教研體制、強大的人文社會科學實力, 也得益於其學術團體非凡的創造力與連續性, 法國在過去二百多年間形成了深厚的學術傳統, 並能不斷地推陳出新。本文嘗試對法國的漢傳佛教研究做出初步的歷史分期，並探討這一領域不同時期的學科取徑、學術典範式和研究主題。
- KALOYANIDES, Alexandra, UNC Charlotte
闞亞儷, 北卡羅來納大學夏洛特分校
Ferrying Buddhism
傳渡佛教This paper investigates the role that Southeast Asian river commerce played in conveying ideas about Buddhism to Europe in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It focuses on the Irrawaddy Flotilla Company Limited, a British ferry company established in Burma in 1865. With its use of newly available steam engine technology, this company took over the business of transporting cargo and passengers along the Irrawaddy River, the country’s central channel. The Company offered services between the Bay of Bengal port city of Rangoon and the royal capital, Mandalay. In 1868, it extended services to the northern Kachin city of Bhamo. In half a century, the Irrawaddy Flotilla Company grew to possess the world’s largest fleet of riverboats. These vessels not only powered the transformation of Burma’s economy, they also drew European tourists to visit what the Company’s publicity materials called the “Happy Land of Spires.” These materials featured images of pagodas alongside marketing language proclaiming the rare beauty of Burmese Buddhism. This paper draws on documents from the Irrawaddy Flotilla Company’s archives, independent writings of passengers, and Burmese royal correspondence to explore the particular vision of Burmese Buddhism that emerges in the wake of this ferry route. Further, it asks how this vision compares to the contemporary Orientalist visions of Buddhism that have been better studied. This paper hopes that attention to Burma’s changing infrastructure and economic practices will shed new light on how people in various class positions ferried a sense of the meaning of Buddhism in Asia and Europe.
本講探究19至20世紀初東南亞河運在佛教思想傳入歐洲之角色，重點考察成立於1865年緬甸之英資企業——伊洛瓦底江輪船公司。該公司運用新興蒸汽引擎技術，主導伊洛瓦底江貨客運輸，該江爲緬甸主要水道。公司業務自仰光港延伸至皇都曼德勒，1868年更拓展至北部克欽城市八莫。半世紀後，公司擁有全球最大河運船隊。這些船隻不僅推動緬甸經濟轉型，亦吸引歐洲遊客造訪公司宣傳冊中所謂“尖塔樂土”。宣傳品中佛塔影像與文字，宣揚緬甸佛教之稀世之美。本講藉由公司檔案、乘客手記及緬甸王室書信，探索此航線所呈現之緬甸佛教特殊視角，並提出與當代流行之東方主義佛教觀相比較之問題。通過關注緬甸基礎設施與經濟活動之嬗變，本講冀望爲佛教意義在亞歐兩洲不同社會階層間之傳遞提供新的見解。
- KIM, Kyong-Kon, University of Strasbourg
金慶坤, 斯特拉斯堡大學
Eugène Burnouf and Buddhist Studies in France in the middle of the 19th century
歐仁·布爾諾夫（Eugène Burnouf）與19世紀中葉法國佛教研究As the philological and historical approach to Buddhism undertaken by Eugène Burnouf (1801-1852), Professor of Sanskrit Literature and Language at the Collège de France, is acknowledged as one of the major factors in the development of Buddhology in France and Europe, it is worth revisiting his research method, as for example, with a case study on the notion of arhat, which contributed to his historical comprehension about the propagation of Buddhism in Asia.
歐仁·布爾諾夫（1801~1852），法蘭西學院梵文文學與語言教授，其佛教語文學與歷史學方法已公認爲佛教學在法國和歐洲發展之重要因素。重審其研究方法實屬必要，如透過阿羅漢概念之案例，探討他對佛教在亞洲傳播之歷史理解。
- KING, Matthew, UC Riverside
王邁休, 加州大學河濱分校
Unmaking ‘Buddhist Asia’ at the Margins: Writing: Anti-Field History Between Qing Inner Asia and the Orientalist Academy
在邊緣解構“佛教亞洲”：清朝內亞和東方學學院之間的反田野歷史書寫Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat (1788-1832) is memorialized for being “the first sinologist, in the modern sense of the term” (Honey 2001) and the founder of both the Société asiatique and Journal Asiatique. But he was much more than this. Appointed in 1814 as the world’s first chair in “Les langues et la littératures chinoises et tartare-mandchou” at the Collège de France, Abel-Rémusat and his milieu newly disciplined “Buddhist Asia” as an object of professional knowledge in Europe. However, as the title of his research chair suggests, Abel-Rémusat was elevated not for his sterling abilities as an orientalist scholar of “China,” as such, but of the contemporaneous polylingual and polyethnic Qing Empire. Combing through the sites and sources of Abel-Rémusat’s expansive scholarship on Buddhist Asia, this paper reveals his debts. First, the systematized Orientalism of his mentor, Silvestre de Chazy. Secondly, aspirations for a linguistically-based racial tableau owed to the work of Leibniz. Finally, and most directly, the organizing structures and logocentric equivalencies he gleaned from quadrilingual encyclopedias produced in the Qing court and authored by various Tibetan and Mongolian Buddhist scholastics, which had been collected at the Bibliothèque Royale in the 18th century. This presentation examines one particularly important example, the Xifan Man Meng Han ji yao 梵西番滿蒙漢集要 (Tib. Skad lnga sbyar gyi many+dzu’i skad gsal ba’i me long; Mong. Qaγan u bicigsen γurban jüil ün üsüg iyer qabsuruγsan Manju ügen ü toli bicig), overseen by the great Monguor-Tibetan preceptor to Qianlong, Lcang skya rol pa’i rdo rje. As early as 1810, Abel-Rémusat had used this work to literally trace the contours of equivalency and relation he named “Buddhist Asia.” It was, for example, the primary source for his radical argument that the Buddha had been a man from India. It remained a foundation for the science de l’Asie Bouddhiste for decades, reframed therein as a “vocabulaire philosophique.” This presentation shows how this work, in its Orientalist interpretation, was the founding document of Buddhist Studies; made from the circulation of Inner Asian Buddhist scholasticism and Qing sovereign forms into Leibnizian-inflected North Atlantic universals that endure today.
讓-皮埃爾·阿貝爾-雷穆薩（1788~1832），被譽爲“現代意義上首位漢學家”，亞洲學會與《亞洲學報》創始人。1814年，氏膺法國學院世界首位“漢語與滿洲語文學”教授。經阿貝爾-雷穆薩及其學術圈重新規範，“佛教亞洲”成爲歐洲專業知識研究對象。然其職銜多樣，聲名非因中國學之造詣，而在於對當時多語言、多民族清帝國之研究。本講梳理阿貝爾-雷穆薩對佛教亞洲之廣泛學術研究作資用之遺跡、材料，揭示其學術淵源：首先是其師希爾維斯特·德·夏齊之東方學體系；其次，因萊布尼茨啟發他有志於基於語言學之種族圖景；最後也最直接的，清廷四語辭典之組織結構與邏輯中心等價關係（辭典作者爲西藏和蒙古佛教學者，18世紀收入皇家圖書館）。本講探討一重要案例：《梵西番滿蒙漢集要》，由乾隆帝師倉央嘉措羅卑多傑監修。阿貝爾-雷穆薩早在1810年即藉此追溯其所謂“佛教亞洲”之等價與關係輪廓，提出激進論點，認爲佛陀印度人。此書後成爲“亞洲佛教科學”之基礎，又被譽爲“哲學詞彙”。本講說明此著作如何經東方學詮釋，成爲佛教研究奠基文獻；有賴內亞佛教學術流傳與清朝帝權加持方能成書，在西方又轉化爲萊布尼茨風格之北大西洋公器。
- KOZYRA, Agnieszka, University of Warsaw
羊安吉, 華沙大學
Dialogue of Buddhist and Christian worldview in Nishida Kitarō’s philosophy
西田幾多郎哲學中的佛耶世界觀的對話The presentation aims to compare Nishida Kitarō’s opinions on Christian and Buddhist worldviews in his two works: Zen no kenkyū (An Inquiry into the Good, 1911) and Bashoteki ronri to shūkyōteki sekaikan (The Logic of Topos and Religious Worldview, 1944).
The first text marks the beginning of Nishida’s philosophical exploration while the second one is regarded as one of his late philosophical essays on Absolute Nothingness.
The authoress will explain the relationship of Nishida’s philosophy to Mahayana Buddhism, especially to the paradigm of Indra Net and its logic of interpenetration of all phenomena, which can be regarded as a counterpart of Nishida’s logic of absolutely contradictory self-identity. The possible link between Hinayana Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism will also be discussed. The authoress will concentrate on Nishida’s opinions on Christianity and Mahayana Buddhism, considering human nature, ethics, religious conversion, notions of the absolute and the relative. According to Nishida Buddhist Enlightenment is religious experience of immanent transcendence (naizaiteki chōetsu), which is the essence of reality, and therefore the reflections on immanent transcendence can be found also in Christian teaching. Referring to the concept of Anonymous Christianity elaborated by Karl Rahner, the authoress argues that Nishida’s approach can be labeled Anonymous Buddhism.
本講比較西田幾多郎《善の研究》（1911）與《場所的論理と宗教的世界観》（1944）中對基督教與佛教世界觀之見解。前者標誌西田哲學探索之始，後者被視爲其晚期“絕對無”哲學論文之一。本講闡釋西田哲學與大乘佛教，尤其是因陀羅比喻及其事事無礙之關係，可視爲西田“絕對矛盾自我”之對應。並論及小乘與大乘佛教之可能聯繫。作者集中討論西田對基督教與大乘佛教之看法，涉及人性、倫理、宗教皈依、絕對與相對等概念。西田認爲，佛教覺悟爲“內在的超越”之宗教體驗，此乃真實之本體，此等反思亦可見於基督教教義。借用卡爾·拉納“匿名基督教”概念，作者稱西田方法爲“匿名佛教”。
- LANDRY, Nelson, Unversity of Hamburg
藍山, 漢堡大學
The Miraculous in Buddhism: Western Misconceptions from “Original Buddhism” to the Übermensch
佛教中的神異：從“原始佛教”到超人的西方誤解Since its “academic” reception in the West, “Buddhism” has occupied a special place in the imaginaire of a small subset of the educated elite. It was often cast as a rational religion-qua-philosophy founded long ago by a philosopher sage in a distant land. For instance, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), who only had a basic understanding of Buddhist philosophical concepts, presented the Buddha as an exemplar. He noted that the teachings of the Buddha were still relevant because they were not mired down by the corruption of a Church, as was the case according to Schopenhauer with the Christian Church corrupting the teachings of Jesus. In this post-Enlightenment era, intellectuals across Western Europe projected their rationalist ideals upon a sagely—and exotic—South Asian figure. When scholars such as T. W. Rhys Davids studied the sources they had at hand, they were uncomfortable with the vernacular elements that appeared in the scriptures: miracle stories, descriptions of relic cults and idol worship. These constituted the same religious and institutional “corruptions” that bothered Schopenhauer. The miraculous elements did not fit into the desired narrative and so an “original” Buddhism was fabricated, re-packaged, and presented to the occidental world as the real Buddhism that Siddhartha Gautama preached—i.e. a rational philosophy bereft of all vernacular religious elements. The miraculous elements in Buddhist literature were the extraneous details that distracted the seeker from the truth.
This talk looks to delve into the history in Occidental academia of how the ‘miraculous’ and the ‘supernatural’ were interpreted when studying the ‘orient’, focusing on South and East Asian Buddhism. Indeed, the ‘miraculous’ and the ‘supernatural’ are two terms that have long occupied theologians, historians, as well as scholars in the interdisciplinary field of religious studies. The French historian Jacques Le Goff claimed that the term ‘miracle’ in particular had been co-opted by the medieval Christian church in Europe to distinguish proper acts of God from ‘magic’—Satan’s trickery—and ‘marvels’—those unusual events issuing from natural causes that resist explanation. On the one hand, this is a survey of Western academia on the miraculous in the East—in this case, India and China. On the other hand, this is a discussion on the relevance of the term “miracle” as an etic concept describing similar phenomena in different contexts. Because of the theistic connotations associated to the term, scholars of South and East Asian religions have debated at length about using words such as ‘miracle’ to describe anomalous phenomena in non-Christian and non-theistic traditions. This talk will cover this ongoing academic discourse and elaborate on the semantic issues inherent to the translation of concepts not only in other cultures, but also from different times and places.
自“佛教”爲西方“學術界”接受以來，在一小部分受教育精英的想像中佔據特殊地位，常被視爲古代哲學聖人在遙遠的土地上創立的理性的宗教形式的哲學。如亞瑟·叔本華（1788~1860）雖對佛教哲學概念理解有限，仍視佛陀爲楷模，指其教義之所以仍具價值，乃因其不像耶穌教言那樣遭受教會之腐敗。啟蒙運動以降，西歐知識分子將理性主義理想投射於賢明而奇異之南亞人形象。學者如瑞斯·戴維斯等就手邊資料作研究時，對經文中民間元素甚感不安：神異故事、聖物與偶像崇拜，此即困擾叔本華之教會腐化作用。這些神異元素既不合其敘述期望，遂構造一“原始”佛教，重新包裝，以向西方世界展示爲釋迦牟尼所傳之真正佛教——一種去除民間宗教元素之理性哲學。佛教文獻中神異元素被視爲無關細節，妨害追求真理。
本講深入探討西方學術界研究“東方”時如何詮釋“神異”（miracle）與“超自然”，聚焦南亞與東亞佛教。“神異”與“超自然”是神學家、歷史學家及宗教研究跨學科學者長期關注的問題。法國歷史學家雅克·勒高夫稱，神異（miracle）一詞爲歐洲中世紀基督教會所挪用，以區分上帝正當行爲與“魔法”（magic, 撒旦詭計）及“奇特現象”（marvel, 自然原因引起而無法解釋的異常事件）。本講回顧西方學界對印度和中國神異現象之研究，並討論“神異”這一外部概念（etic）在不同背景下描述類似現象之可適用性。因其一神論的弦外音，南亞與東亞宗教學者就使用“神異”一詞描述非基督教與非一神論傳統中異常現象大論特論。本講回顧此長期討論，並展開討論其中的語義問題，這在翻譯其他文化、乃至歷史中的概念時，不可避免。
- Li Ling, University of Sichuan
李翎, 四川大學
製造佛像——早期佛像製造所反映的歐亞文化交流
Buddha-image making: The cultural exchange between Europe and Asia reflected in the Buddha-image manufacture of early period第一尊佛像，或者說最初的佛像，為了什麼而製造？工匠是如何製造出來的？造像的依據是什麼？觀者是誰？
考古證實，最早的佛教紀念物是塔，早期的塔並沒有裝飾，它們位於僧人的禪定場所，是佛陀在寺廟中的象徵，樸素的佛塔和佛塔所在支提，是僧人的禮拜物和進行相關宗教儀式的神聖場所。並且早期早期，僧侶們遵守“行四依法”進行修學，居所方面比較自由，比如允許僧侶雨安居期間住在五類簡易住所，那時更傾向于個人隱修而不是寺院集體生活。在“雨季”，僧人通常住在森林裡的一棵大樹下，或者在一些廢棄的房子裡，或者建一個茅草屋頂的小屋。有學者認為阿育王是第一個意識到僧侶需要永久住所的人，他在山上挖洞並捐贈，那就是著名的巴拉巴爾山石窟。逐漸的，信眾對流動僧侶的虔誠和關懷逐漸帶來了僧人住所的變化，僧侶長居寺院的做法得到確立，石窟成為寺院的一部分。但那時僧人舉行活動的佛塔並不需要裝飾，或者說只有一些極其簡單的紋樣，完全沒有敘事性圖像。大約從西元前2世紀，隨著商業的發達和國內外商貿交易的頻繁，位於商道上的石窟寺迎來了大量外國商人、旅行家以及學者等，外國人對佛教的好感和不理解，促使僧人改變以往的做法，這時“講故事”式敘事性視覺佛教開始出現。以《佛傳》敘事為主的裝飾雕刻圍繞著佛塔展開，它們大多鑲嵌在大塔的覆缽底部或入口處的欄杆上，當人們一進入大塔的空間，這些宣傳佛陀生平的故事畫就映入眼瞼，這些視覺佛教的閱讀物件，或宣教物件是世俗人群。在這個基礎上，更具有偶像性質的聖像也於不久後出現。
根據題記和其他證據可以看到，佛教大乘思想此時逐漸在印度西部傳播，在建築中也可以看出這種漸進的演化。“小乘”和“大乘”石窟建築形式之間最初的一個重要區別在於在僧房窟內引入了用於禮拜的像龕，它似乎說明僧人也開始禮拜聖像而不僅僅是象徵性的佛塔。在大乘石窟中，禮拜龕中的主體通常是人格化佛像。印度西部的納西克石窟是一個極好的例子，如前所述在西元2世紀初，納西克僧房窟第3和10號窟中出現了禮拜龕的設計。納西克在佛教大乘時期又建造了2個洞窟，並改造了一些已有洞窟，比如西元6世紀對20號僧房窟加以改造，對其大廳正壁的一個僧舍向後推深5米加入了佛造像龕。這就進一步推導出一個問題：佛造像的觀看對象是誰？是俗人，還是僧眾？
第一尊人格化佛像產生在哪裡？產生的原因是什麼？工匠製造佛陀形象的依據是什麼？誰在觀看這些造像？這是本文嘗試討論的話題。討論對象為犍陀羅和馬圖拉的早期造像，時間在西元1-2世紀，關注的重點是：佛發、佛衣、佛手印三個方面，通過這三個方面所反映的歐亞文化交流現象，說明佛教造像是在一個文化、經濟交流頻繁的背景下的自然產物，而以往學者關注的亞歷山大和希臘化只是其中諸多因素之一。而法藏部主張的塔崇拜是一個需要關注的前提內容，圍繞著塔崇拜而展開的敘事性裝飾雕刻，才是“講故事”的目的。
What was the first Buddha-image made for? How do craftsmen make them? What is the basis of the image-making? Who is the spectator?
Archaeological evidence shows that the earliest Buddhist monuments were stupas. The early stupas were not decorated. They were located in the monks’ meditation sites and were the symbol of the Buddha in the temple. The no decoratied stupas and chaitya and were sacred places for monks to worship and perform some religious ceremonies. Moreover, in the early days, monks observed the catvari pratisaranani , and were relatively free in terms of residence, such as allowing monks to live in five types of simple dwellings during the rain period, and were more inclined to live in individual than live together. The Buddhist monks during the ‘vassa vaas’ or ‘monsoon retreat’ used to stay either under a large tree in the forest or in some abandoned house or would build a hut with thatched roof. The king Ashoka was the first to understand the need of permanent shelter for monks and excavated caves in a mountain and donated it. and he made the first cave: Barabar cave. Gradually, This new found architecture spread across India and nearly 1200 caves were excavated between c 200 BCE to c 600 CE.. But at that time, the stupa where the monks held their activities did not need decoration, or only some extremely simple patterns, and no narrative at all. From about the 2nd century BC, with the development of commerce and frequent trade transactions , the cave temples located on the commercial road welcomed a large number of foreign merchants, travelers and scholars, etc. The favorable and unknowing of Buddhism by foreigners prompted monks to change their previous practices, and at this time, the narrative visual Buddhism of “storytelling” began to appear. Decorative carvings based on the narrative of the Buddha life are spread out around the stupa, and most of them are inlaid on the bottom of the mantle of the stupa or on the railing at the gateway. When people enter the space of the chaitya, these stories promoting the life of the Buddha are saw, and these visual Buddhist reading objects or preaching objects are secular people. On this basis, more Buddha images were made .
Inscriptions and other evidence show that Buddhist Mahayana thought was gradually spreading throughout western India at this time, and this gradual evolution can also be seen in architecture. One of the first important differences between the Theravada and Mahayana forms of cave architecture was the introduction of a niche for worship in the chamber, which seems to indicate that monks also began to worship ICONS rather than just undecorated stupas. The Nashik caves in western India are an excellent example of this, as mentioned earlier in the early 2nd century AD, the design of the liturgical niche appeared in the Nashik cave Nos. 3 and 10. Nashik built two more caves during the Mahayana period and modified some existing ones, such as the vihara No. 20, which was renovated in the 6th century AD, and a monk’s room on the front wall of the hall was pushed back 5 meters to add a Buddha image niche. This further leads to the question: Who is the object of viewing the Buddha image? Lay people or monks?
Where was the first Buddha image produced? What are the reasons for this? What is the basis for the craftsmen to make the image of the Buddha? Who is viewer? This is the topic of my paper. The discussion focuses on the early images of Gandhara and Mathura, dating from the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, and especially focuses on: The phenomenon of Eurasian cultural exchanges reflected by the three aspects of Buddha hair, Buddha clothes and Buddha hand prints shows that Buddhist statues are natural products under a background of frequent cultural and economic exchanges, and Alexander and Hellenism, which were concerned by scholars in the past, are only one of many factors.
- LI Xuetao, Beijing Foreign Studies University
李雪濤, 北京外國語大學
諾伯爾（Johannes Nobel, 1887-1960）及其鳩摩羅什傳德文譯本（1927）研究
A Study of Johannes Nobel (1887-1960) and His German Translation of Kumārajīva’s Biography (1927)約翰內斯·諾伯爾（Johannes Nobel, 1887-1960）是德國印度學家和佛教學者，他早年在格賴夫斯瓦爾德大學（Universität Greifswald）和柏林弗里德里希·威廉姆斯大學（Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Berlin）學習印歐學（Indogermanistik）、阿拉伯語、土耳其語和梵語。1911年，他在德國著名印度學家呂德斯（Heinrich Lüders, 1869-1943）的指導下完成了印度學博士論文：《有關〈莊嚴論〉對古代歷史的貢獻》（Beiträge zur älteren Geschichte des Alamkãraśāstra）。1920年，他以《印度詩歌的基礎及其歷史發展》（The Foundations of Indian Poetry and Their Historical Development）的論文獲得教授資格，並於1921年開始在柏林大學印度學系任教，與此同時，他還學習了漢語、藏語和日語，從此主要致力於佛學研究。1928年，他被任命為馬堡大學（Philipps-Universität Marburg）印度學系教授，直到1955年退休。諾貝爾在印度學方面的巨大貢獻是1937-1958年期間出版的《金光明經》（Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra, “Goldglanz-Sūtra”）的大量研究和校釋版本，該書是大乘佛教中最重要的經文之一，至今仍具有重要的學術價值。諾伯爾還出版了德國著名詩人、東方學家呂克特（Friedrich Rückert, 1788-1866）於1825年以德文詩歌的形式翻譯的《百詠》（Amaruśataka）的首個德文譯本。
諾伯爾對中國佛教的研究最重要的貢獻是他1927年在《普魯士科學院會議報告》上發表的《鳩摩羅什傳》德文譯本：Johannes Nobel (Übers.), „Kumārajīva“, in: Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaft (phil.-hist. Klasse), 20 (1927), S. 206-233——一篇具有劃時代意義的譯文。諾伯爾在譯文中還原了大量涉及到印度、西域和中國的人名、地名和各種書名。在譯文前的說明中，諾伯爾指出，“對於一些難懂段落的解釋和一些相關參考文獻，我還要感謝我博學的朋友陳寅恪（Yinkoh Tschen）”。因此，這也是德-中學者合作的結果。此外，諾伯爾還指出，儘管在音譯的過程中，它使用了英文的轉寫方式（moderne englische Transkription, 應當是“威妥瑪拼音”［Wade–Giles］），並且儘量保持簡單的拼寫方式，但在少數情況下，他依然嘗試著通過高本漢（Bernhard Karlgren, 1889-1978）的中古漢語的古音構擬，還原一些重要的古音，以便更好地與梵文相對應。
此後，法國漢學家伯希和（Paul Pelliot, 1878-1945）在他留在吉美博物館的遺稿（n. 220, Notes sur Kumārajīva）中對諾伯爾的譯文予以了高度評價：“諾伯爾先生出色地完成了這項任務，他將《高僧傳》的文本與《晉書》卷95的傳記進行了比較，譯文整個來講非常正確，注釋則顯示出了譯者對佛教專業術語非常熟悉。”伯希和認為，儘管《鳩摩羅什傳》德語譯文中加上了142個注，之前有3頁多的說明，但諾伯爾對文本處理的細緻程度是不夠的：“我們可以看到，傳統的鳩摩羅什傳記，尤其是《高僧傳》中的鳩摩羅什傳記，在內容和細節上受到的反對意見似乎比譯者諾伯爾先生想像的要多得多。和其他地方一樣，對文本進行細緻入微的批判是必不可少的，而且我毫不懷疑，我在這裡提出的臨時解決方案可以在許多方面得到澄清或糾正。”伯希和同時也只出了諾伯爾在翻譯和注釋過程中的諸多錯誤。
本文將對諾伯爾生平及其《鳩摩羅什傳》的德譯做系統的研究。
Johannes Nobel (1887-1960) was a German Indologist and Buddhist scholar who spent his early years studying Indo-European studies Arabic, Turkish and Sanskrit at the Universität Greifswald and the Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Berlin, and in 1911 he completed his doctoral thesis in Indology under the supervision of the eminent German Indologist Heinrich Lüders (1869-1943): “Beiträge zur älteren Geschichte des Alamkãraśāstra”. In 1920 he was awarded a professorship for his thesis on “The Foundations of Indian Poetry and Their Historical Development”, and in 1921 he began teaching at the University of Berlin, where he also studied Chinese, Tibetan, and Japanese, and from then on devoted himself mainly to the study of Buddhism. In 1928 he was appointed professor at the Department of Indology at the Philipps-Universität Marburg, a post he held until his retirement in 1955. Despite his reservations about Nazism, Noble signed a Vow of allegiance of the Professors of the German Universities and High-Schools to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialistic State in November 1933 by German professors. Noble’s great contribution to Indology was an extensively researched and proof-texted version of the Suvarṇaprabhāsasūtra (“Golden Light Sutra”), one of the most important scriptures in Mahayana Buddhism, published between 1937-1958, which still remains of great scholarly value. Noble also published the first German translation of the Amaruśataka (the hundred stanzas of Amaru), which was translated in 1825 in the form of a German poem by the famous German poet and orientalist Friedrich Rückert (1788-1866).
Nobel’s most important contribution to the study of Chinese Buddhism is his 1927 German translation of “Kumārajīva”: Johannes Nobel (Übers.), “Kumārajīva”, in: Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaft (phil.-hist. Klasse), 20 (1927), S. 206-233. – a groundbreaking translation. In the translation, Nobel restored a large number of names of persons, places, and various book titles related to India, the Western Regions 西域, and China. In the preface to the translation, Nobel pointed out, “For the explanation of some difficult passages and some related references, I also want to thank my erudite friend Yinkoh Tschen.” Therefore, this is also the result of German-Chinese scholar collaboration. In addition, Nobel also pointed out that although he used the English transcription method (modern English transcription, should be “Wade-Giles”) in the transliteration process, and tried to maintain a simple spelling, in a few cases, he still attempted to reconstruct some important ancient sounds through the reconstruction of Middle Chinese ancient sounds by Bernhard Karlgren (1889-1978) in order to correspond better with Sanskrit.
Afterwards, in his unpublished legacy he left at the Musée Guimet (n. 220, Notes sur Kumārajīva), French sinologist Paul Pelliot (1878–1945) highly praised Nobel’s translation: “Mr. Nobel has accomplished his task in an excellent manner. He compared the text of the Gaoseng Zhuan with the biography in the Jinshu vol. 95, and his translation is generally very correct. The notes show that the translator is very familiar with Buddhist terminology.” Pelliot considered Nobel’s treatment of the text not critical enough, though Nobel’s German translation of the “Kumārajīva” includes 142 notes and over 3 pages of explanations: “We can see that traditional biographies of Kumārajīva, particularly the one in Gaoseng Zhuan, have been subjected to more objections in terms of content and details than Mr. Nobel the translator would have thought. As elsewhere, a critical examination of the text is indispensable. I have no doubt that the interim solutions I have proposed here will be clarified or corrected in many respects.” Pelliot went on to point out several mistakes that Nobel made in his translation and annotation.
This paper will provide a systematic study of Nobel’s life and his German translation of the “Kumārajīva”.
- LIN Chia-Wei, Université de Lausanne
LIN Chia-Wei, 瑞士洛桑大學
The Buddha’s Journey to the West–The textual traditions of Barlaam and Josaphat from a linguistic perspective
佛陀西遊記：貝爾拉姆與約瑟伐特的語言學脈絡Barlaam and Josaphat (henceforth BJ) is the epitome of pre-modern transcultural, interreligious, cross-linguistic phenomena that took place on the Eurasian continent and beyond. BJ is a collection of the jātaka stories framed with the Buddha’s biography that has circulated widely in the medieval Middle East and Europe. Parallels of the stories can be found in Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita, Lalitavistara, Mahāvastu, and the Jātaka tales of various Buddhist traditions. BJ was translated from Indic first into Manichaean Middle Persian (now lost), which was later translated into Arabic (Kitāb Bilawhar wa-Būd̠āsaf, circa 8th cent.), and then from Arabic into Georgian (Balavariani and Sibrʒne Balahvarisi ‘Wisdom of Balahvar’), and from Georgian into Greek (Historia Barlaam et Ioasaph, ca. 10th cent.). Traces of BJ in Central Asia, attested in Manichaean Persian fragments and Old Uyghur fragments, were also discovered by the German Turfan Expeditions.
When BJ was introduced to the Islamic and Christian world, it enjoyed great literary success and popularity. From the Arabic version it was translated into Hebrew, Persian, Judeo-Persian, Ge’ez. From the Greek version it was translated into Old Church Slavonic and Latin and then into many medieval European vernaculars: Old French, Old Catalan, Old High German, Old English, Old Norse, etc. BJ gained so much popularity in the Christian world that both St. Barlaam and St. Josaphat were incorporated into the liturgical calendar of Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church.
When Jesuit missionaries arrived in China and Japan in the 16th century, they brought the story of BJ along and translated these into Chinese (Shèng rùo sā fǎ shǐ mò 聖若撒法始末, 1645CE) and Japanese (in Sanctos no gosagueo no uchi nuqigaqi, 1591CE), creating cultural “doublets” of the Buddha’s biography in Asia: a medieval Buddhist version from India and a Christian retelling in the early modern era.
This paper proposes to examine the transmission of BJ not only as an interreligious and cross-cultural encountering, as the text went through the transformation of Manichaeanism, Islam, and Christianity in the process of transmission and different elements from Arabic literature (e.g. Kalīla wa-Dimna), Biblical quotes, Christian literature (e.g. Apology of Aristides) are added, but also as a global event of language contact. Translating the BJ is a complicated linguistic event, as different language families (Semitic, Kartvelian, Indo-European, Sinitic, Japonic) were involved in the process of transmission.
The goal of the paper is twofold: This paper will showcase how translations of BJ bear philological and linguistic significance to their native traditions. For instance, Georgian Balavariani is the rare witness of Georgian translation into Greek, rather than the more common direction from Greek into Georgian; the Japanese version, written in Latin alphabet, contributes to the study of historical phonology of Early Modern Japanese. This paper will examine the translation strategies of BJ and demonstrate how Buddhist proper names (e.g. from Skt. Bodhisattva to Lat. Josaphat), techcnial terms (e.g. from Skt. bodhi to Georg. č̣ešmariṭeba ‘truth’), and phraseology are linguistically and cultural transformed in the process of transmission.
貝爾拉姆與約瑟伐特是個古典時代晚期和中世紀從印度經由中古波斯語、阿拉伯語、喬治亞語、希臘語被翻譯進入拉丁西方世界的佛陀傳記和本生經故事合集，並於十六、七世紀由耶穌會傳教士翻譯成漢語與日語。本篇論文將從文獻學的觀點切入探討不同版本譯者的翻譯策略，以及透過歷史語言學討論喬治亞語版本與阿拉伯語版本及希臘語版本的關係。
- LIU Yi, Capital Normal University
劉屹, 首都師範大學
釋《僧表傳》“罽宾路梗”
The Roads from Khotan to Gandhara: A Study Focused on the Biography of Sengbiao日本存留的寶唱著《名僧傳抄》，保留了一些關於4—6世紀的中國求法僧西行求法的重要資料，為《出三藏記集》和《高僧傳》所不載。其中《僧表傳》有云：
本姓高，涼洲人也。志力勇猛，聞弗樓沙國有佛鉢，鉢今在罽賓臺寺，恒有五百羅漢供養鉢。鉢經騰空至涼洲，有十二羅漢隨鉢。停六年後，還罽賓。僧表恨不及見，乃至西踰蔥嶺，欲致誠禮。并至于賓（闐）國，值罽賓路梗。于賓（闐）王寄表有張志，模寫佛鉢與之。又問：寧復有所願不？對曰：讚摩伽羅有寶勝像，外國相傳云：最似真相。願得供養。王即命工巧，營造金薄像，金光陜高一丈，以真舍利置于頂上。僧表接還涼州。知涼土將亡，欲反淮海，經蜀欣平縣，沙門道汪，求停鉢像供養。今在彼龍華寺。僧表入矣，禮敬石像。住二載，卒于寺(云云)。
這裡提及“罽賓路梗”，以往學界解釋為是因為嚈噠南侵等戰亂的原因，導致僧表無法完成從西域前往罽賓禮拜佛鉢的計劃。然而，戰事短暫可以平復，僧表無需因蔥岭以西發生戰亂而徹底放棄西行的計劃。結合4—6世紀中國求法僧西行的事跡和路線，僧表所能選擇從西域到罽賓的路線主要有兩條。其一是走瓦罕走廊，其二是走上印度河谷道路。所謂“罽賓路梗”不應該是指戰亂，而是指此時在帕米爾高原連接上印度河谷的地帶，發生了較大的地震，使得道路梗塞，短期內無法恢復通行。所以才導致僧表徹底放棄了西行的計劃。
圍繞僧表的選擇和決定，本文還將探討當時的罽賓是指哪裡？以及在“路梗”之前西域與罽賓之間正常的交通路線應該怎麽走？為何會有那麽多求法僧走上印度河谷的道路？以及“路梗”之後多久，道路又得以恢復等問題。力圖將當時所知的求法僧留下的記錄，落實在具體的道路上，從而對這一時期蔥岭東西兩側的佛教交流給出直觀而具體的地理空間概念。
The Mingseng Zhuan Chao 名僧传抄which partly copied in Japan contains valuable materials about Chinese monks traveling westward during the 4th to 6th centuries. Some of them is not recorded in Chusanzangjiji 出三藏記集 and Gaoseng Zhuan 高僧傳. Among them, the “Biography of Sengbiao” 《僧表傳》mentions:
Sengbiao wanted to visit Jibin 罽宾 where reserved the Buddha’s Bowl. When he reached at Khotan, the route to Jibin was blocked. The king of Khotan acknowledged Sengbiao’s determination, presented him with a replica of the Buddha’s bowl. Sengbiao gave up the plan to go westward to Jibin, and returned back to Liangzhou.
The text mentions “the route to Jibin was blocked”, traditionally interpreted as due to the invasions from the Hephthalites, disrupting Sengbiao’s plans to travel from the Western Regions to Jibin to worship the Buddha’s bowl. However, conflicts could have subsided quickly, and there was no need for Sengbiao to abandon his plans to travel west. Combining the deeds and routes of Chinese monks seeking the Dharma from the 4th to 6th centuries, there were mainly two routes Sengbiao could have taken from Khotan to Jibin: one through the Wakhan Corridor, and the other along the Indus Valley. The so-called “route to Jibin was blocked” should not refer to warfare but to a significant earthquake in the Pamir Mountains area that connected to the Indus Valley, causing the roads to be impassable and delaying restoration for a short period. This led Sengbiao to completely abandon his plans to travel west.
This paper will also explore where Jibin referred to at that time, the normal traffic routes between the Western Regions and Jibin before the “blockage”, why so many monks chose the route through the Indus Valley, and how long it took for the routes to be restored after the “blockage”. This aims to apply the records left by monks seeking the Dharma to specific routes, thus providing a clear and specific geographical concept of Buddhist exchanges on both sides of the Hindukush during this period.
- NI Nan, SOAS, University of London
倪楠, 倫敦大學亞非學院
Dreams of Health of Wealth: The Multi-Lingual Transmission of Amoghapāśa- Hṛdaya Dhāraṇī on the margins of Middle-Period China
中古中國及周邊地區不空羂索心陀羅尼文本流變管窺Dhāraṇī scriptures constitute a significant portion of Buddhist literature. The tradition of chanting dhāraṇī is rooted in Vedic tradition. It was introduced in China around late fourth century, and gradually became an important practice for both monastic and secular Buddhist training not only in China, but also in other regions like Tibet, Japan and Korea. The Amoghapāśa-hṛdaya Dhāraṇī has been one of the most popular texts for Esoteric Buddhists in Middle Period China, translated into various languages including Chinese, Tibetan, Sogdian and Tangut. While some fragments in Sanskrit were found to be preserved by libraries, most of the texts were excavated in Dunhuang and Ningxia, both cities are located in present Northwest China. The earliest Chinese version was translated in 587 A. D.. And previous scholarly treatment has managed to date the time of collating the Tangut version to early 14th century. Textual evidence has revealed an approximate 800-year worship of the Buddhist deity-Amoghapāśa on the margins of Middle period China, suggesting vibrant religious communications between neighbouring civilisations. This paper is going to provide a thorough philological study of the multi-lingual dhāraṇī based on etymological research and textual comparisons, and thus to elucidate the textual transmission between various dhāraṇī traditions. Moreover, it attempts to observe both similarities and differences concerning the styles of translating Buddhist literature in varied cultural contexts. Through the textual approach towards these manuscripts, this paper aims to dig into the historical background of how these dhāraṇī texts in different languages were produced, practised and valued by esoteric Buddhists of different cultural identities. With reference to related historical records and excavated materials, this paper is going to elucidate the function and significance of the Amoghapāśa-hṛdaya dhāraṇī in the context of religious life of Buddhists on the margins of Middle-Period China.
By collecting all attested manuscripts of Amoghapāśa-hṛdaya Dhāraṇī in various languages, this paper aims to elucidate the textual transmission of this dhāraṇī between Han Chinese and its neighbouring civilisations. It also provides a philological approach to study the worship of Amoghapāśa in Dunhuang and Ningxia, from approximately 6th century to early 14th century. By introducing “less-known” dhāraṇī traditions which have been relatively neglected in previous scholarly treatment, this paper will offer new information to the current knowledge of Esoteric Buddhist communications on the margins of Middle Period China.
陀羅尼經咒 是佛教文獻的重要組成部分其中不空羂索心陀羅尼是在中古中國及周邊地區密教佛教徒中最受歡迎的典籍之一，被翻譯成漢語、藏語、粟特語和西夏語等多種語言。除了部分梵文殘卷目前藏於劍橋大學圖書館等地該陀羅尼的多個語言版本都出土自現中國西北部的敦煌和寧夏。 該文本最早的中文翻譯可追溯至公元587年。而於寧夏出土的西夏文本 ，學界推定其出版時間約為十四世紀初。現存文本證據揭示了中古中國及周邊地區對不空羂索觀音的信仰已有約八百年歷史，期間不同文明相互的宗教與文化交流頻繁而活躍。本文將通過詞源學研究和文本對比等方法對 該陀羅尼的多語言版本進行深入全面的討論，從而闡明不同地區不空羂索心陀羅尼的文本流變。此外，本文還將基於現有文本材料討論不同文化背景下佛教文獻翻譯的風格異同。通過對這些手稿進行文本分析，本文旨在挖掘不同文化語境下佛教徒抄寫、實踐和尊崇該陀羅尼經咒的歷史背景 並參考相關史料和出土文物，闡釋不空羂索心陀羅尼在中古中國及周邊地區佛教徒信仰生活中的作用與意義。
本文收集了不空羂索心陀羅尼多語言版本的文書，旨在探索該經咒在漢文化及其周邊文明間的文本流變，同時為研究敦煌和寧夏地區從六世紀到十四世紀八百年間的不空羂索觀音崇拜提供了一種文獻學研究途徑 。通過聚焦前人研究中未得到充分重視 的陀羅尼版本，本文將為目前中古中國及周邊地區密教傳播的相關討論提供新的信息與思路。
- PÉRONNET, Amandine, Inalco
柏安庭, 法國國立東方語言與文明學院
Teaching Buddhist Studies in Post-Mao Chinese Buddhist Academies: Insights from the Chinese Educational Model and its Engagement with the European Academic Tradition
後毛時代中國大陸佛教學院的佛教研究教學：中國教育模式與歐洲學術傳統交互的啟示Throughout the 20th century, Chinese Buddhist academies (foxueyuan 佛學院), have evolved into elite institutions shaping power dynamics and resource allocation in mainland China. These academies serve as crucial hubs for training politically-approved religious specialists and executives, positioning their graduates to assume influential roles within the Buddhist Association of China (BAC, Zhongguo fojiao xiehui 中國佛教協會) and its affiliates. This institutionalized educational system emphasizes standardized Buddhist studies while seemingly minimizing external influences.
My research on the Mount Wutai Buddhist Academy for Nuns (Wutaishan nizhong foxueyuan 五台山尼眾佛學院) offered insights into modern Buddhist education, and uncovered the nuns’ interest in other educational models. In this paper, I delve into the educational landscape of other academies for Chinese Buddhist nuns, and examine their engagement with the Chinese tradition of Buddhist Studies. Additionally, I investigate the potential dialogue between these academies and the European academic tradition regarding educational methodologies—an area often overlooked despite known exchanges with other Asian countries.
20世紀，中國佛學院逐漸成爲塑造內地權力動態與資源分配之精英機構，爲培養官方認可之宗教專業人員及管理者之要樞，將畢業生部署在中國佛教協會及其下屬機構擔任要職。此種體制化教育體系強調標準化之佛學研究，似乎同時在減少外來影響。
本人對五台山尼眾佛學院的研究，可資研究當代佛教教育借鑒，並揭示尼眾對其他教育模式之興趣。文中將探討中國其他尼眾佛學院之教育現況，探討與中國佛學傳統之關係。此外，亦將研究佛學院與歐洲學術傳統在教育方法論上對話的可能性，雖然後者與亞洲其他國家有所交流，該課題然卻常被忽視。
-
SKRZYŃSKI, Przemysław, Jagiellonian University
史可然, 雅蓋隆大學
Zen and the Art of Being a Buddhist (behind the Iron Curtain): Politics and the process of shaping the identity of the first Polish Zen Buddhists
鐵幕背後的禪與為僧之道：政治與首批波蘭禪宗佛教徒身份的塑造The increased interest in Buddhist practice, developing in the United States and Europe since the 1950s, has also affected Poland and other countries behind the Iron Curtain. Initially limited to the academic community – linguists and philosophers, in the second half of the 1960s, on the wave of fashion and the development of hippie ideas, interest in oriental religions, especially Buddhism, penetrated into artistic and countercultural communities.
The leader of the pioneer one was Andrzej Urbanowicz – an avant-garde painter and member of the bohemia. In his home-studio, the first zazen meetings were organized, inspired by the instructions from the book “Three Pillars of Zen” by American zen teacher Philip Kapleau. The activities of an informal group of Polish Buddhists, which took the name „The Zen Circle” were the subject of concern for the The Security Service (secret police), one of whose tasks was to investigate churches, religious communities and religious associations.
The communist authorities of Polish People’s Republic were also concerned about connections with the “representative of the imperialist power”, Philip Kapleau, who, at the community’s invitation, was the first Zen teacher to come to Poland for missionary purposes. Police-political control of Buddhists was based on surveillance of the environment using a network of secret agents operating inside and periodic forms of pressure, such as detentions, searches, and confiscation of illegal writings published by Polish Buddhists.
In the early 1980s. the authorities of the People’s Republic of Poland changed their mind about the value of Buddhists. The culmination of this process was (without precedent in the history of the countries of the so-called Eastern Bloc) a meeting of the Minister of Office for the Proclamation of Faith (the central body of administration concerning religious confession in the Polish People’s Republic) with Philip Kapleau and entering Polish Buddhists into the official register. In the eyes of political decision-makers, Buddhism began to appear as an “interesting alternative” and even a potential “third way”, which Polish youth maturing in the time of a sharp deterioration of Soviet-American relations (“Second Cold War”) could treat as a counterweight to the two main antagonists of the Polish communist party: the Catholic Church and the growing democratic opposition – the “Solidarity” movement.
The speech will also discuss the “double game” of the leaders of the already legalized religious community, who strongly maintain the state authorities’ belief in the apolitical nature of the Buddhist faith, while at the same time being engaged in numerous and risky activities of democratic opposition.
The basic sources on which the presentation will be based will be statements collected during interviews with members of the “The Zen Circle” community, samizdat materials published by them, as well as never before examined documents from the archives collecting materials of the state and police services of the Polish People’s Republic (e.g. The Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation and The Józef Piłsudski Institute of America, NY), as well as materials collected during research at Duke University (Philip Kapleau Archive) and at the Rochester Zen Center, NY.
自1950年代始，美歐對佛教修行之興趣日增，此風潮亦影響鐵幕後的波蘭等國家。對東方宗教尤其佛教的興趣最初限於學界——語言學家及哲學家，而1960年代隨著時尚潮流及嬉皮理念發展，滲透至藝術及反文化群體。其中先驅爲安德烈·烏爾巴諾維茲——前衛畫家與波希米亞成員。在其家中工作室組織了首次坐禪共修，以美國禪師菲利普·卡普勞《禪的三支柱》爲之指導。非正式波蘭佛教徒團體名爲“禪圈”，其活動引起了國家安全部門（即秘密警察）的關注，他們的任務之一即調查教會、宗教團體及宗教協會。波蘭人民共和國共產當局亦關注該團體與“帝國主義勢力代表”菲利普·卡普勞之聯繫，後者曾受邀成爲首位來波蘭傳教之禪師。對佛教徒之警察政治監控基於秘密特工網絡對其環境之監視，以及週期性鎮壓，例如監禁、搜查沒收波蘭佛教徒非法出版物。1980年代初，當局改變對佛教徒的看法，高潮爲波蘭人民共和國信仰公告辦公室部長（該國管理宗教信仰之中央機構）與卡普勞的會面，及波蘭佛教徒登記於官方名冊，這在東方集團國家是空前之舉。在政治決策者眼中，佛教開始被視爲“有趣的替代”，甚至可能成爲“第三條道路”，美蘇關係急劇惡化時期（即“第二次冷戰”）成長起來的波蘭青年或可用之對抗波蘭共產黨兩大對手——天主教會與日益壯大的民主反對勢力“團結”運動。本講亦探討已合法化之宗教團體領袖的“兩手遊戲”，即一手堅定維持國家當局對佛教之非政治性的信念，一手積極參與多項風險重重之民主反對活動。本講之資料主要來自“禪圈”成員訪談及其地下出版物，亦包括從未被研究一類資料，即波蘭人民共和國國家及警察機構檔案（如國家記憶研究所——波蘭民族罪行追究委員會及美國紐約約瑟夫·畢蘇斯基研究所），以及杜克大學（菲利普·卡普勞檔案）和紐約羅徹斯特禪中心之研究資料。
- STEPIEN, Rafal K., Austrian Academy of Sciences
司岱嵐, 奧地利科學院
Buddhism and Philosophy in Europe
佛教與哲學在歐洲What is the state of Buddhism and philosophy in Europe? In my paper I am concerned largely with providing a descriptive account of the place of Buddhism in the conduct of philosophy in Europe, and not with the place of Buddhism in the conduct of European philosophy, whether undertaken within or outside of Europe, and whether undertaken from a historical or conceptual perspective. As such, I initially provide working definitions of key terms and issues so as to clarify the scope of the ensuing inquiry. On this basis, I go on to provide an overview of the place of Buddhism in the conduct of philosophy in Europe today. As it happens, however, this place is a very small one indeed. For if we define philosophy in descriptive terms as that which happens in institutions of philosophy—pre-eminently university philosophy departments—then we are confronted with a notable absence. Indeed, the overwhelming lack of study devoted to Buddhism within institutions in Europe nominally devoted to philosophy would lead us to conclude that Buddhism has practically no philosophy; that there is effectively no such thing as ‘Buddhist philosophy’. This would be a premature—not to say presumptuous—conclusion, for it turns out that a substantial amount of study in Europe is in fact devoted to Buddhist philosophy; it is just that the preponderant bulk of such scholarship is not to be found, institutionally speaking, in philosophy. I summarise this work and, in the final portion of my paper, proffer some general observations regarding the relationship between Buddhism and philosophy in Europe.
歐洲佛教及哲學現況如何？本文主要關注描述佛教在歐洲境內的哲學研究中的地位，而非探在“歐洲哲學”研究中的地位——不論歐洲境內外，亦不論其角度是歷史還是概念。首先提供可行定義以澄清後續探討範圍。基於此，略述佛教於當今歐洲哲學研究中的地位。然而，其地位實爲微小，若以描述性方式將哲學定義爲哲學機構內的實踐——尤指大學哲學系——則沒有佛教研究的一席之地。確實，歐洲名義上致力於哲學之機構中，佛教研究之全方位缺席，或可得出結論：佛教幾乎無哲學可言，也不存在什麼“佛教哲學”。然此結論若非狂妄，便是言之過早。事實上，歐洲內相當多研究致力於佛教哲學；衹不過該類研究大部分不在哲學機構中進行。本文將對此研究作一總結，對佛教與歐洲哲學關係提出若干基本意見。
- SUN Yinggang, Zhejiang
孫英剛, 浙江大學
迦必試與中國中土佛教
Kāpiśa and Buddhism in Medieval Chinaforthcoming
- TSEPAK, Tenzin, Leiden University
澤柏軻, 萊登大學
Faith at the Frontiers: Religious Conversion in Tibetan Autobiographies
邊疆的信仰： 西藏自傳中的荷蘭佛教與宗教多元化Tibetans have had a long history of interaction with the Europeans, but very few Tibetans wrote about their encounters. Furthermore, many of the historical narratives were constructed by European travelers, intellectuals, Christian missionaries, colonial officials, and spiritual seekers. This paper will focus on early 20th-century autobiographies, written at the request of Johan Van Manen (1877-1943), that are part of the Van Manen collection at Leiden University and the Worldmuseum in Leiden, to show the roles of Buddhism and other religions in the lives of Van Manen and the Asian men he employed. Away from Tibet and Europe, frontier Himalayan towns like Darjeeling, Kalimpong, and colonial metropoles like Calcutta created a unique environment where people from diverse backgrounds interacted and influenced each other’s lives.
Van Manen, a Dutchman and former theosophist, in his pursuit of Buddhism, ended up in India studying Buddhism and employing Tibetans and Chinese as his tutors, secretaries, and servants. While Van Manen was described in the Tibetan autobiographies as a devout Buddhist, his local associates forayed into other faiths in these frontier towns. Traditional autobiographies of Tibetan Buddhist masters have been widely studied in the Tibetan tradition and in the West, but secular autobiographies of lay Tibetans have not been adequately addressed. This paper aims to fill this gap and provide a deeper understanding of how ordinary Tibetans navigated the encounter with the Christian missionaries in Himalayan frontiers with special attention to religious conversion. Looking at the autobiography of Van Manen’s three assistants: Chen Cunzhi , Phuntsok Lungtok, and Karma Samten Paul, I argue that each of these men approached religion on their own terms and were not confined by the boundaries of one particular faith, but rather embraced the fluidity of religious identity and experiences in their lives.
西藏人與歐洲人交流歷史悠久，然極少西藏人將此付諸筆墨。許多歷史敘事乃由歐洲旅行家、知識分子、傳教士、殖民官員及精神追求者所構建。本文聚焦於20世紀初期所寫成的自傳，這些自傳乃應約翰·范·馬嫩之要求撰寫，收入萊頓大學及萊頓世界博物館“范·馬嫩藏品”，藉此說明佛教等宗教在范·馬嫩及其亞洲雇員生活中的角色。遠離西藏與歐洲，達賴凱倫堡、卡林邦等喜馬拉雅邊境城鎮及加爾各答等殖民都會，創造了獨特環境，使不同背景之人得以互動，影響彼此生活。荷蘭人范·馬嫩曾爲神智學家，爲追求佛教，終至印度學習佛法，並雇用西藏人與中國人作其私教、秘書與僕人。在藏語自傳中，范·馬嫩被描述爲虔誠佛教徒，而其當地夥伴則在這些邊境城鎮探索其他信仰。這些人有范·馬嫩、彭措隆多、噶瑪桑丹·保羅——一位皈依基督教的西藏佛教徒，並得基督教名保羅，段陽（音）——一位在卡林邦短暫皈依伊斯蘭教的中國基督徒，以及陳Trin（又名陳志村，音）。在喜馬拉雅與英屬印度，這些人作爲少數宗教及族裔群體，均能根據個人信仰和經歷，熟練遊走於不同宗教傳統之間。本文主張，他們各以其道接觸宗教，不爲某一信仰所局限，去擁抱宗教認同與體驗的自由。
- WANG Jingbo, Hangzhou Normal University
王晶波, 杭州師範大學
敦煌文獻與歐亞民間故事傳播
Dunhuang Literature and the Dissemination of Folktales in Eurasia隨著絲綢之路的正式開辟，敦煌便成為古代歐亞文明交流的樞紐之地。莫高窟藏經洞保存的六萬余件四到十一世紀的寫本文獻，便是東西方文明交流的見證資料。其中一件記載了佛本生故事的已佚寫本，以及圍繞這件寫本所進行的考察研究，為我們展示了文明交流中民間故事沿絲路在歐亞大陸傳播衍化的情形。相關研究表明，這則故事在亞歐大陸傳播的時間長達一千餘年，如果算上它的关键構成要素，則时长兩千年之久；故事源自印度佛本生傳說，其中也有古埃及神話及其它民間故事影響的痕跡；它以文本、口傳及繪畫三種形態傳播，在中國、蒙古、朝鮮半島、阿拉伯地區及歐亞其它地區廣泛流傳。
With the establishment of the Silk Road, Dunhuang became a hub for the exchange of ancient European and Asian civilizations. More than 60,000 written manuscripts from the fourth to the eleventh centuries, preserved in the Mogao Caves, bear witness to the exchange between Eastern and Western civilizations. One of the anonymous writings containing jataka, and the research conducted around this writing, show us how folk tales spread and evolved along the Silk Road in Europe and Asia during the civilization exchange. Relevant studies show that the story has been spreading in Asia and Europe for more than 1,000 years, or even c.a. 2,000 years if taking account the formation of its key components; that the story originated from the legend of the Buddha’s birth in India, and that there are traces of the influence of ancient Egyptian myths and other folktales; that it has been spread in three forms, namely, text, oral tradition, and painting, and that it has been widely circulated in China, Mongolia, the Korean Peninsula, Arabian regions, and other parts of Europe and Asia.
- WANG, Eugene, Harvard CamLAB
汪悅進, 哈佛大學
Ballard and Mandala
巴拉德與曼荼羅：從現代歐洲到中古中國A neurosurgeon had three months to live. He decided to take his fate in his own hand. He finished building an enigmatic form in the desert, inspired in part by a similar structure inside an empty swimming pool left unfinished by a biologist before him. In the final moment, the neurosurgeon went in and attained a different state of existence. What happened to the neurosurgeon? What is this structure – one that in fact links modern Europe to medieval East Asia?
The scenario above was dreamed up by J.G. Ballard (1930-2009). Born in wartime Shanghai, Ballard reached his puberty in a Japanese camp near Shanghai. He moved to England after the war and eventually became one of the most inspiring science fiction writers of the twentieth century. While his fiction has attracted worldwide attention, the enigmatic presence of mandalas in his imaginary world is yet to be fully accounted for. For one thing, it runs an uncanny parallel with how mandalas were conceived and used in medieval East Asia about which Ballard knew very little. How and why medieval East Asia and modern Europe could resonate with each other through the same wavelength, i.e., the medium of mandala, is the question to be addressed.
一個神經外科醫生還有三個月可活。他決定將命運操縱在自己手中。在他之前，一位生物學家曾在一個廢置游泳池內試圖建造一個曼荼羅至死。神經外科醫生便繼續生物學家的工程，在沙漠舊機場內建成一個曼荼羅。在他生命垂危之際，他步入自己所建的曼荼羅，進入別樣境界。神經外科醫生在沙漠曼荼羅內究竟體驗了什麼？沙漠曼荼羅又如何連結中古中國與現代歐洲？
上述曼荼羅情境來自英國作家巴拉德 (1930-2009)的虛構小說。巴拉德在上海長大，曾被拘留於日軍集中營。他戰後移居英國，最後成為世界知名的科幻作家。巴拉德的作品蜚聲文壇，評論如潮。但他作品中的曼荼羅意象卻一直是學界盲點。巴拉德對亞洲佛教藝術所知甚少，對佛教曼荼羅的知識有限，其曼荼羅概念基本取自瑞士心理學家榮格 (1875-1961) 對東方文化的轉述。令人匪夷所思的是：巴拉德小說中的曼荼羅的虛構情景與中國中古實際發生的曼荼羅場景竟然有異曲同工之趣。這兩者是偶合還是有更深邏輯？這便是本文需要論證所在。
- WANG Qian, Zhengzhou University
王倩, 鄭州大學
歐亞視野下的北朝四臂神像探析
An analysis of the four-armed deities in the Northern Dynasties from the perspective of Eurasia四臂神像源自印度萬神殿，廣泛見於歐亞大陸不同文化圈的圖像藝術中。本文通過系統梳理5-6世紀的四臂神像，發現北朝時期的四臂神像可以分為兩大階段，第一階段以5世紀70-90年代為主，四臂神像伴隨著佛教信仰和圖像藝術的大潮進入中國，主是作為佛教中的護法神，同時也進入到高等級墓葬中，成為最高級別的鎮守神，但這兩類空間內的四臂神像隨著北魏漢化程度的加深而消失於中國文化圈。第二階段以6世紀下半葉為主，四臂神像是隨著祆教信仰和圖像藝術再次出現於中國境內，主要見於入華的以粟特為主的西域上層胡人使用的石質葬具，雖然都是源自印度文化的四臂神像，但身份、職能、形象較第一階段都有所改變，第一階段是更純粹的印度文化，是對印度不同文化區如犍陀羅、秣菟羅等地相關要素的綜合，而第二階段是經過祆教或粟特改造過的印度文化，部分四臂神像雜糅了粟特、印度美術的某些圖像元素並且可能結合了漢晉傳統的方相氏打鬼觀念。
The four-armed divinities have attracted significant scholarly attention due to its widespread use in visual arts across Eurasia. However, there is a dearth of comprehensive research on the systematic analysis of these images, with Yan Yaozhong’s essay “Four-armed divinities from India to China” standing out as the most representative contribution in this field. This paper tries to provide an insightful exploration into the origins and cultural context surrounding the emergence of four-armed deities in India and China. Recent archaeological findings in China, such as the discovery of a sarcophagus bed in the tomb of Quqing during the Sui Dynasty, have offered important insights for re-evaluating images of four-armed deities from the Northern Dynasties. By combing images and texts related to four-armed deities across Eurasia during the 5th to 7th centuries, this study aims to analyze their development and evolution within Chinese culture during the Northern Dynasties (including Sui Dynasty). Against a backdrop of multicultural influences encompassing Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, and local beliefs prevalent during that time period, intriguing questions arise regarding these four-armed deities’ origins, divine attributes, religious roles, as well as their societal significance within communal use and broader social culture. Preliminary investigations have revealed several interesting clues. Notably, the depictions of four-armed deities during the Northern Dynasties are predominantly associated with people of high rankings: including emperors from Northern Wei Dynasty, members of royal families and Sogdian nobilities. Furthermore, despite their original religious connotations, the placement of these images-whether adorning tomb walls or Buddhist art – consistently conveys protective symbolism against malevolent forces; however, variations between depictions at similar locations suggest that they were intended for exclusive use by a select few elite classes within society.This observation aligns with some points raised by Yan’s article: despite not being considered highly elevated divinities, four-armed deities can be regarded as occupying a prominent position within traditional representations aimed at warding off evil spirits throughout the Northern Dynasties.
- ZHAN Ru, Peking University
湛如, 北京大學
眾裏尋他千百度：佛教作為中歐文化紐帶的再發現及其歷史性意義
“Searching Everywhere for you”: The Rediscovery of Buddhism as a Cultural Link between China and Europe and Its Historical Significance歐亞大陸，在整個人類文明發展史之中佔據有重要的地位，這是因為它首先是諸多古老文明的發祥地。可以說人類剛剛走出非洲，就在亞歐大陸上獲得了紮根的地域。像兩河流域的蘇美爾文明、古埃及文明、印度河流域文明、古希臘文明與中華文明都起源於這片古大陸。此大陸由於其廣袤的地域與多樣的自然環境，也孕育了極為多樣的文明、語言、宗教、族群，從而形成了極為豐富多彩的人類文明景觀。在人類歷史的最近五千多年中，最為重要的文化交流與碰撞也主要發生在這片古大陸之上，綿延萬里的海上與陸上貿易通道，就成就了極為密集的商貿與文化交流網絡，從而將歐亞大陸上的文明都連接了起來。一直到近代大航海時代到來之前，歐亞大陸更是人類科技、宗教與文化的核心地域，這裡不僅誕生了無數極大地左右了人類命運的哲學家、思想家、科學家、藝術家，更是幾乎世界上所有重要宗教的發源地或傳播中心。這些宗教與哲學思想對人類世界觀、價值觀與生活方式的塑造，都產生了深遠的影響。
即使是在近代全球化時代到來之際，歐亞大陸依然是全球地緣政治的中心。從古代的帝國擴張到一直到近現代的世界性戰爭，歐亞大陸始終是世界地緣政治的中心。除了過去一百多年中的來自新大陸的美國，此前所有具有全球性影響力的國家都來自歐亞大陸。在歷史的蒼狗白雲般的變幻中，它們在這片土地上崛起、繁榮並且最終衰落乃至滅亡；可以說，在人類歷史的絕大多數時間中，歐亞大陸的文明史是人類歷史的核心舞臺。因此，在世界地緣格局中，重視歐亞大陸內部的力量整合，就是一個重要的戰略考量。
中歐之間，目前仍然存有相當密切經貿、文化與政治合作關係，但日益加劇的中美爭衡爲中歐雙邊關係注入了巨大的未知數。而佛教，作為一種來自印歐文化的宗教，與歐洲文化有著天然的聯繫。因此，以經歷了中國化過程長期洗禮的漢傳佛教為平臺，來加強與歐洲的文化互動與宗教交往，就不失為加強中歐聯繫、柔化中美關係、促進世界和平的重要途徑。本文先簡要論證佛教的印歐文明要素，從學理的角度來探討佛教與歐洲諸宗教之間的共通之處。此外，本章還將討論佛教在東亞所經歷過的在地化改造過程。最後，再利用一些篇幅來討論中歐之間，佛教所可能起到的聯結作用。
Eurasia occupies an important position in the history of human civilization because it is, first of all, the birthplace of many ancient civilizations. It can be said that human beings gained their roots on the Eurasian continent as soon as they stepped out of Africa. The Sumerian civilization of the Two River Valley, the ancient Egyptian civilization, the Indus Valley civilization, the ancient Greek civilization and the Chinese civilization all originated on this ancient continent. Due to its vast territory and diverse natural environment, this continent has nurtured a great variety of civilizations, languages, religions, and ethnic groups, resulting in an extremely rich and colorful human civilization landscape. In the last 5,000 years of human history, the most important cultural exchanges and collisions took place mainly on this ancient continent, extending for tens of thousands of miles of sea and land trade routes, achieving a very dense network of trade and cultural exchanges, thus connecting the civilizations of the Eurasian continent. Until the arrival of the modern age of navigation, the Eurasian continent was the core of human science and technology, religion and culture, which not only gave birth to numerous philosophers, thinkers, scientists and artists who greatly influenced the fate of mankind, but also was the birthplace or dissemination center of almost all the world’s major religions. These religious and philosophical ideas have had a profound impact on the shaping of human worldviews, values and lifestyles.
Even in the modern era of globalization, Eurasia remains the center of global geopolitics. From the expansion of empires in ancient times to the world wars of modern times, Eurasia has always been the center of global geopolitics. With the exception of the United States of America, which came from the New World in the last hundred years or so, all previous countries of global influence have come from Eurasia. In the fickle and unpredictable changes of history, they have risen, prospered and eventually declined or even died on this land; it can be said that the history of civilization in Eurasia has been the central stage of human history for most of the time in the history of mankind. Therefore, in the world’s geopolitical pattern, it is an important strategic consideration to emphasize the integration of forces within Eurasia.
Between China and Europe, at present, there are still quite close economic, trade, cultural and political cooperation, but the increasingly aggravated Sino-US rivalry has injected a huge uncertainty into the bilateral relationship between China and Europe. Buddhism, as a religion from Indo-European culture, has a natural connection with European culture. Therefore, after a long baptism of Chinese Buddhism as a platform to strengthen cultural interaction with Europe and religious exchanges, Chinese Buddhism may function as an important way to strengthen the Sino-European ties, soften the Sino-US relations, and promote world peace. This paper will first briefly discuss the Indo-European civilization elements of Buddhism and explore the commonalities between Buddhism and European religions from a theoretical point of view. In addition, it will discuss the process of localization and transformation of Buddhism in East Asia. Finally, some space will be devoted to the possible role of Buddhism as a link between China and Europe.
- Zhang Xiaogui, Jinan University
張小貴, 暨南大學
蘇魯支：祆教中文術語及其新證據
Suluzhi (蘇魯支): A Chinese Zoroastrian term and its new evidence一般認為，中古時期流行的祆教乃源於波斯瑣羅亞斯德教。有關該教創始人的記錄，見於北宋太平興國三年佛僧贊寧所撰《大宋僧史略》。《僧史略》所記表明，火祆教起源於波斯，其創立者被稱為「蘇魯支」。「蘇魯支」是否即為波斯瑣羅亞斯德教先知瑣羅亞斯德？比較古代諸種語文有關瑣羅亞斯德的不同拼寫與音讀，可知漢文「蘇魯支」的語源為粟特文Zrušč 。《僧史略》將蘇魯支事跡與粟特人何祿上奏祆教一事連類而書，或許表明正是何祿向中原王朝的統治者講述了祆教的起源，其中包括先知之名字及門徒傳教事跡。身為粟特人的何祿，一定和他的族人一樣，具備不凡的語言能力。一般來說，祆教祭司在7歲時即開始接受專業訓練，掌握各種儀式及其重要含義，學習編寫經典的藝術，及時向神祈禱，以及關於今生來世的宗教神學，以及複雜的多神信仰等等。何祿既為職業祭司，一定也經受了這些嚴格訓練。眾所周知，祆教具有很強的保守性，其並不熱衷翻譯本教經典，亦不主張向外民族傳教。因此，何祿在向中原王朝上奏本教時，用不著攜帶本教經典，其憑借出色的語言才能和職業素養，當可向朝廷介紹本教的來龍去脈。而其所述，朝廷職官必有所記錄。上揭贊寧所載有關祆教之內容，很可能就是據佚失的相關唐代政書。近年福建霞浦所發現的若干民間宗教文書中有關 「蘇魯（路）支」的信息，尤其是有關其傳教歷程、教義核心的一些關鍵詞，證明霞浦抄本中的祆教內容絕非憑空杜撰，而是有所本的。雖然迄今未見漢譯祆教經典面世，但中古粟特地區卻不乏該教經典流行之痕跡。祆教主要由粟特人傳播而來，熟知本教教義歷史的祭司們一定會帶來本教諸多信息。經過歷代口耳相傳，其中若干信息成為宋代明教創制五佛崇拜的重要依據，後又被霞浦抄本的製作者所採擷。
It is generally held that Xian Religion (祆教) spreading in medieval China originated from ancient Persian Zoroastrianism. About the prophet Zoroaster of ancient Iran, Chinese Buddhist Zanning 贊寧 called him as Suluzhi 蘇魯支 in his Seng shilue 僧史略 [A Brief of Chinese Buddhist History in the Song Period]. There are various spellings in different languages about this Persian Prophet. It is obviously that Sogdian Zrušč is nearly the same as the reading of Chinese Suluzhi. It is also said that the information about Zoroastrian Prophet in Chinese should be from Sogdian sources. According to Seng shilue, it was He Lu 何祿 who firstly and officially came to the Tang court to introduce Zoroastrian teachings. He Lu was a Sogdian and a professional Zoroastrian priest. He must undergo the rigorous priestly training and know very well about his religion. It is well known that Zoroastrians are not keen to translate their classics into other languages and do missionary work. Even if He Lu did not carry the teaching classics, he can succeed in introducing to Chinese Emperor about Zoroastrianism by virtue of his excellent language ability and professional accomplishment. This is helpful to catch on the speculation which Chinese Suluzhi was transliterated from Sogdian Zrušč. In recent years, some folk religious documents have been discovered in Xiapu in Fujian province, which contain some information about Suluzhi, especially some key words about its missionary history and the core of its teachings. It proves that Zoroastrian contents in the Xiapu manuscripts are not fictionally fabricated, but based on something. Although no ancient Chinese translation of Zoroastrian scripture has appeared so far, there are many traces of the popularity of Zoroastrian classics in Sogdiana in the medieval period. Zoroastrianism was mainly spread by the Sogdians, and priests who are familiar with the history and religious teachings will definitely bring a lot of information about the religion. Passed down orally through the ages, some of the information became an important basis for the worship of the Five Buddhas by the Ming religion in the Song Dynasty, and was later picked up by the writers of the Xiapu manuscripts.
