“Translation across the Four Directions” – Abstracts

Dipen BARUA, The University of Hong Kong
Dipen BARUA, 香港大學

Reviving Buddhist Heritage: Bengali Translations of Pāli Literature and Buddhist Studies in Bengal from the 1850s to the Present
佛教遺產的復興：1850年代以來孟加拉語巴利文獻翻譯與佛學研究

Historically, Buddhism originated in India and gradually disappeared from most of its birthplace, but it continued to survive in Bengal. ‘Bengal’ refers to what is now Bangladesh and West Bengal in India. This Buddhist tradition initially represented a unique mixture of Hindu-Buddhist tantric forms. However, it evolved under the influence of Burmese Theravada Buddhism throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, with approximately 0.06 percent of the population identifying as Buddhist in Bangladesh, and around 0.31 percent in West Bengal today, including New-Buddhists and Vajrayana followers.

The revival of Theravada Buddhism in Bengal is characterized by the translation of Pāli texts, the establishment of temples, Pāli institutions, schools, and organizations aimed at nurturing Buddhist practices and education. The first Buddhist text was Moghā Khamujā (1850s), followed by the Bauddha Rañjikā (1870), which narrates the life of the Buddha and includes homage to the Buddha, Icchāmati (a consort of Śiva), and Saraśvati. The translation of Pāli canonical text began with the Sutta Nipāta in 1887. Bengali monks such as Prajñālok Mahāthera (1879–1971) made significant contributions by establishing the Dharmadūt Vihar, a Buddhist Mission, and its own press in Rangoon, Burma (now Myanmar) in 1928. He translated over 50 books into Bengali from Burmese and Pāli. The Pāli Sāhitya Samiti and the government-managed Buddhist Religious Welfare Trust have published numerous Buddhist texts, including the Pāli-Bengali dictionary. Additionally, the Bangla Academy and various publishers, including the Mahabodhi Book Agency in Kolkata, have published many books on Buddhism.

In August 2017, the Tripiṭaka Publishing Society unveiled a Bengali translation of the entire Pāli Canon at Rajban Vihar in Rangamati, Bangladesh. This event marks a significant milestone for the Buddhist community in the region. The contributions of Burmese and Sri Lankan styles of Pāli teachings, as well as translation efforts, have played a crucial role in this process.

With the revival of Theravada Buddhism, the first Pāli institution, known as Ṭol, was established in 1885. Pāli studies were first introduced at the University of Calcutta in 1907. Since then, there has been a continued emphasis on Pāli and Buddhist studies through institutions such as Pāli Colleges under the Sanskrit and Pāli Education Board. Colleges like Chittagong College, and universities such as Dhaka University, Chittagong University, and the National University of Bangladesh have departments for Pāli and Buddhist Studies, offering courses from undergraduate to higher levels.

This paper examines the translation of Buddhist texts into Bengali and the significance of the complete translation of entire Pāli Canon, along with Pāli and Buddhist Studies in Bengal. I will highlight how Burmese and Sri Lankan Pāli teachings and transmitted texts have shaped Theravada Buddhism in Bengal and emphasize the importance of preserving Buddhist heritage in a changing socio-cultural landscape. This paper is divided into three parts: Part I covers the revival of Theravada Buddhism in the 19th and 20th centuries; Part II addresses the translation of Buddhist texts, including the publication of the entire Pāli Canon; and Part III explores Pāli and Buddhist Studies in institutions, focusing on the emergence of Pāli studies as an independent field.

Nadine BREGLER, University of Hamburg
傅佩琳, 德國漢堡大學

Chinese Buddhist Texts in Joseon Korea: Manuscript Culture and Practices of Translation
朝鮮王朝中的漢文佛典：寫本文化與翻譯實踐

This paper examines how Chinese texts, especially Buddhist materials, were transmitted and reshaped in premodern Korea. It treats translation not as a single act but as a range of practices through which texts were made usable in new contexts. These include selection, excerpting, paraphrase, and recompositing. The study asks how such practices affected the reception of Chinese Buddhist texts in Joseon scholarly and popular culture.

The study draws on Joseon materials containing Buddhist-related compilations based on Chinese sources. These survive mainly in early woodblock prints, later editions, and some manuscript copies in Korean collections. They preserve visible traces of textual handling, such as quotation, rearrangement, and commentary. The analysis treats these sources as records of use rather than fixed texts. It compares how Chinese Buddhist material is incorporated across different contexts and how it changes in the process. Attention is given to the material forms that preserve texts and textual variation compared to Chinese sources.

This study proposes a broader view of translation as a continuum of textual practices. It understands Buddhist texts in Korea as being continually reinterpreted within literati and popular culture as well as religious settings. This perspective complements research on Buddhist translation by highlighting dispersed modes of translingual exchange. It also contributes to the study of Chinese Buddhist texts as a shared written medium in East Asia. The focus on extant manuscript and print evidence shows how texts were reshaped in practice. In doing so, it frames textual transformation as a basic mechanism of cultural exchange and intellectual history in the region.

CHEN Jinhua, University of British Columbia
陳金華, 英屬哥倫比亞大學

地婆訶羅洛陽、長安行履考
Tracing Divākara’s Activities in Luoyang and Chang’an

本文以華嚴宗祖師法藏與印度譯經僧地婆訶羅的合作關係爲研究中心，綜合彥琮、法藏、武后、智升、崔致遠等早期文獻，以及《大週刊定衆經目錄》《開元釋教錄》等佛教目錄，重新考察地婆訶羅來華及其往返長安、洛陽兩京的年代與活動軌跡。文章指出，歷來關於地婆訶羅來華時間的諸種歧說，實因不同史料分別記錄其入華、抵洛、抵長安等不同歷史事件所致，並非必然相互矛盾。通過結合兩京制度、朝廷遷徙、譯場運作及譯經年表等多重證據，本文重建了地婆訶羅在中國近十年的活動年表，推定其約於677年底抵達洛陽，680年春遷居長安，685年後重返洛陽，最終卒於688年。此一重構不僅確立了法藏與地婆訶羅長期合作的歷史時空背景，進一步提高了法藏參與地婆訶羅譯場及譯經工作的可能性，也爲重新理解初唐譯經事業與華嚴學的發展提供了新的歷史框架。文章同時指出，將僧傳、經錄、序跋、碑銘等不同性質文獻置於統一歷史語境下進行綜合比勘，是解決中古佛教史年代與人物活動問題的有效方法，對於重建唐代佛教譯場、知識網絡及中印佛教交流史具有重要的方法論意義。

This article reexamines the chronology of the Indian Buddhist translator Divākara (613–688) and reconstructs his movements between the Tang capitals of Luoyang and Chang’an, with particular attention to his collaboration with the Huayan patriarch Fazang (643–712). Drawing upon early sources by Yancong, Fazang, Empress Wu, Zhisheng, and Choe Chiwŏn, together with the bibliographical records preserved in the Da Zhou kanding zhongjing mulu [Catalogue of Scriptures Established in the Great Zhou] and the Kaiyuan shijiao lu [Kaiyuan Catalogue of Buddhist Scriptures], this study systematically reexamines the conflicting accounts concerning Divākara’s arrival in China and subsequent activities.

It argues that the apparent discrepancies among these sources arise largely because they refer to different historical events—Divākara’s entry into China, his arrival in Luoyang, or his subsequent residence in Chang’an—rather than providing mutually contradictory chronologies. By correlating these records with evidence concerning the Tang dual-capital system, imperial itineraries, the organization of translation bureaus, and the chronology of Divākara’s translation projects, this study reconstructs a coherent timeline of his nearly ten-year career in China. It proposes that Divākara most likely arrived in Luoyang around the end of 677, moved to Chang’an in the spring of 680, remained there primarily at the West Taiyuan Monastery until the second half of 685, then returned to Luoyang while petitioning for permission to revisit India, where he died in 688.

This reconstruction not only clarifies Divākara’s biography but also establishes a firmer chronological framework for reassessing his long-term collaboration with Fazang, thereby strengthening the likelihood of Fazang’s active participation in Divākara’s translation enterprise. More broadly, the article demonstrates the methodological value of integrating hagiographies, bibliographical catalogues, prefaces, inscriptions, and political history within a unified analytical framework. Such a contextual approach provides a more reliable basis for reconstructing the chronology of medieval Buddhist figures, the operation of Tang translation bureaus, the networks of Buddhist scholarship, and the broader history of Sino-Indian Buddhist cultural exchange.

CHEN Zhinan, Dunhuang Research Academy
陳芷南, 敦煌研究院

The Continuation of the Indic “Mother of Starts” Lore in the East: Chinese and Tibetan Manuscript Tradition of the Grahamātṛkādhāraṇī
印度“星曜母”傳說在東方的延續：漢藏寫本中的《諸星母陀羅尼》傳統

The Sūtra of the Zhuxingmu Dhāraṇī 諸星母陀羅尼經 (Skt. Grahamātṛkādhāraṇī) is an esoteric Buddhist scripture translated by the Tibetan-period monk Facheng (Tib. Gos Chos grub) in 842 at Xiuduo Monastery in Ganzhou. The text is absent from traditional Buddhist catalogues and the Chinese canonical collections, yet more than seventy manuscript copies survive among the Dunhuang manuscripts. While numerous copies are common for major or popular scriptures in the Dunhuang corpus, the presence of over seventy manuscripts of a text not recorded in Buddhist catalogues is particularly noteworthy. Unlike the later translation, the Sūtra of the Shengyaomu Dhāraṇī 聖曜母陀羅尼經, produced by the Indian monk Fatian under imperial patronage after bringing an Indic manuscript of the sūtra to the Song court, Facheng’s translation was carried out within local Buddhist networks in the Hexi region under Tibetan rule.

Drawing on the Dunhuang manuscripts, this paper examines the codicological features and textual transmission of the Zhuxingmu Dhāraṇī, investigates the historical background of Facheng’s translation and its circulation in the Hexi region, and considers possible traces of the text’s local popularity. In doing so, it contributes to a better understanding of Buddhist translation networks and the production of Buddhist knowledge in the frontier regions of medieval China.

《諸星母陀羅尼經》爲吐蕃時期高僧法成（Gos Chos grub）於842年在甘州修多寺譯出的一部密教經典。該經未見於歷代經錄及漢文大藏經系統，但在敦煌文獻中卻保存有七十餘件相關寫卷。在敦煌文獻中，大經或常用經典保存大量寫本並不少見，但像《諸星母陀羅尼經》這樣未見於經錄卻留下七十餘件寫本的情況，是極不尋常的。與天竺僧法天攜梵本入宋後在朝廷支持下譯出的異譯本《聖曜母陀羅尼經》不同，法成的譯經活動是在吐蕃統治下河西地區的地方佛教網絡中展開的。本文以敦煌寫本爲主要材料，從寫本形制與文本流傳入手，考察法成譯經活動的歷史背景及其在河西地區的傳播情況，並嘗試尋找該經在當地流行的可能痕跡。在此基礎上，進一步探討吐蕃時期河西地區可能存在的地方性、非官方譯經機制，從而有助於理解中古時期佛教譯經網絡的多樣形態，以及邊疆地區佛教知識生產的運作方式。

CHO Eunsu, Seoul National University
趙恩秀, 韓國首爾國立大學

The Goryeo Canon as Civilizational Currency: Philological Authority and Political Prestige in Medieval East Asia
高麗大藏經作為文明資本：中世東亞的文獻權威與政治象徵

The Goryeo Buddhist Canon (Goryeo Daejanggyeong) is traditionally interpreted through the lens of “Buddhism for National Protection” (Hoguk Bulgyo), emphasizing its role as a spiritual defense against foreign invaders. This paper proposes a paradigm shift: rather than a static national treasure, the canon is better understood as a dynamic transregional “event”—in Lewis Lancaster’s sense—whose significance lay in its circulation among scribes, carvers, diplomats, monks, and merchants across East Asia. More specifically, this paper argues that the canon functioned as a Civilizational Currency: a medium of exchange whose value derived from its reputation as a philologically authoritative and editorially reliable text. Drawing on the collation work of the monk Sugi, the material evidence of the Nanzen-ji collection, diplomatic records of canon exchanges with Japan and the Ryukyu Kingdom, and the transition from Goryeo faith to Joseon pragmatism, this paper argues that the canon served as a transregional standard mediating cultural legitimacy and political prestige across medieval East Asia—one whose authority proved robust enough to outlast the dynasty that produced it and the belief system that originally animated it.

高麗大藏經素來被置於「護國佛教」的框架下理解，強調其作為抵禦外敵之精神屏障的功能。本文提出一種範式轉移：與其將大藏經視為靜態的國家寶物，不如將其理解為劉易斯·蘭卡斯特（Lewis Lancaster）意義上的動態跨地域”事件”——其意義正在於它在寫經生、刻工、使節、僧侶與商人之間，於整個東亞地區的流通過程之中。更具體而言，本文主張，大藏經實則發揮了”文明資本”的功能：一種其價值源自文獻學權威性與編校可靠性之聲譽的交換媒介。本文結合僧守其之校勘工作、南禪寺藏本之實物證據、與日本及琉球王國之大藏經交換外交紀錄，以及從高麗信仰到朝鮮實用主義之轉變，論證大藏經作為跨地域標準，在中世東亞調節著文化正當性與政治聲望——其權威之穩固，甚至超越了創造它的王朝與最初賦予其生命的信仰體系本身。

DING Yi (Allan), DePaul University
丁一, 美國帝寶大學

Meaning, Logic, and Coherence—Revisiting li 理 and daoli 道理 in the Translations of Dharmarakṣa, Paramārtha, and Xuanzang
義理、邏輯與連貫性——重探竺法護、真諦與玄奘譯經中的“理”與“道理”

Although an operative term in early classical texts and medieval philosophical discourse, li 理 or daoli 道理 (hereafter [dao]li) does not function as an overarching metaphysical category with relatively fixed semantic reference in medieval Chinese translations of Indic Buddhist texts. Despite sustained indigenous discourses on li—spanning early Chinese philosophy, Neo-Daoist (xuanxue 玄學) circles, and the so-called Three Treatise (Sanlun 三論), Tiantai, and Huayan schools—the term (dao)li remained semantically fluid. As a result, medieval translators of Indian Buddhist texts employed it pragmatically, rather than doctrinally, to render a host of polysemic Indic terms. These include, among others, nyāya (“standard, rule, model, etc.”; Tib. tshul or rigs pa; Ch. zhengli 正理, chengli 稱理, etc.), naya (“method, reason, etc.”; Tib. tshul; liqu 理趣/limen 理門), yukti (“means, reasoning, correctness, etc.”; Tib. rigs pa), yoniśas (“fundamentally”; Tib. tshul bzhin du; ruli 如理; yiyu daoli 依於道理), artha (“aim, purpose, etc.”; yili 義理) and yathāvat/yathābhūtaṃ (ji lta ba bzhin du; ruli 如理). At least it is my view that the deployment of (dao)li in Chinese translations is primarily pragmatic and does not necessarily reflect conceptual development within contemporary Chinese scholastic and doctrinal traditions.

A survey of works produced by the earliest translators suggests that (dao)li is relatively rare in works that can be safely attributed to An Shigao (fl. c. 148–180), Lokakṣema (fl. 178–189) and Zhi Qian (fl. 222–252). By contrast, (dao)li appears with much greater frequency in Chinese translations produced after the fifth century. Given the sheer volume of extant Chinese translations and the loss of many Indic sources, any account of this gradual increase in frequency must begin with a selective examination of well-documented translators and their best-known works. Accordingly, this paper focuses on three prolific translators: Dharmarakṣa (fl. 266-308), Paramārtha (499–569), and Xuanzang (602–664).

FENG Guodong, Zhejiang University
馮國棟, 浙江大學

目錄、儀式與經典崇拜：咫觀《法輪寶懺》初探
Catalogues, Rituals, and the Cult of Buddhist Scriptures: A Preliminary Study of Zhiguan’s Falun Baochan

清代咫觀所編《法界聖凡水陸大齋法輪寶懺》，是配合水陸大齋的閱藏儀式文本。此書對於理解大藏經、佛教經典崇拜、懺儀與佛教目錄的關係都有啟發意義。通過對咫觀生平行履、著作的考察，揭示此書與智旭《閱藏知津》的關係，在此基礎上進一步闡明佛教經典崇拜與儀式、佛教目錄的關係。

Fajie fansheng shuilu dazhai falun baochan 法界聖凡水陸大齋法輪寶懺 [The Precious Repentance Ritual of the Dharma Wheel for the Grand Water-and-Land Assembly of the Sacred and the Profane throughout the Dharma Realm], compiled by the Qing-dynasty monk Zhiguan, is a ritual manual designed for the scripture-reading (yuezang 閱藏) ceremony performed during the Grand Water-and-Land Assembly. The text provides valuable insights into the relationship among the Buddhist canon, scripture veneration, repentance rituals, and Buddhist bibliographical catalogues.

Through an examination of Zhiguan’s life and writings, this paper reveals the close relationship between Falun Baochanand Ouyi Zhixu’s 蕅益智旭 Yuezang zhijin 閱藏知津 [A Guide to Reading the Buddhist Canon]. Building upon this analysis, it further elucidates the interconnections between the cult of Buddhist scriptures, ritual practice, and the development of Buddhist catalogues, thereby shedding new light on the religious and intellectual functions of the Buddhist canon in late imperial China.

Imre GALAMBOS, Zhejiang University
高奕睿, 浙江大學

The Sounds of Wisdom: Medieval Chinese Pronunciation of Bore
絲綢之路寫本中的中古“般若”閱讀方式

Prajñā (‘wisdom’) is among the core concepts in Mahāyāna texts, commonly occurring in the phrase prajñāpāramitā (‘perfection of wisdom’), signifying the wisdom that enables bodhisattvas to attain buddhahood. The term was rendered into Chinese in several different ways, the most common of which was transliterating it using the characters 般若. Following up on earlier research, this paper presents some evidence on how this word was pronounced during the medieval Tang-Song period, during which the overwhelming majority of extant Buddhist manuscripts were copied. Not contesting the “original” pronunciation of this term at the time when it was first adapted into Chinese Buddhist texts, my focus is on how it was commonly read in the period in question, based on manuscripts excavated at sites along the Silk Road.

HE Rong, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
何蓉, 中國社會科學院社會學研究所

“力”在漢語佛經中的語義考察：以近代太虛大師的作品爲參照
A Semantic Study of “li” 力 in Chinese Buddhist Scriptures: With Reference to Modern Works of Taixu

在佛教進入中國之前，“力”字便是一個常用字。隨着佛經漢譯工作的展開與深化，“力”與外來字彙相結合，融匯爲新的漢語概念，典型如業力、十力等，獲得了廣泛傳播、深入到日常語彙與社會思想。本研究認爲，作爲後綴的“力”，其意義與功能值得專門探討。在此基礎上，以太虛大師的相關作品爲參照，探究“力”在近代知識傳播中意義更形豐富的方面。

HOU Xiaoming, Ghent University
侯笑明, 比利時根特大學

Where Meditation and Wisdom Converge: The Translation and Conceptualization of sīzé 思擇 and niànhuì 念慧
定慧交融之處：思擇與念慧的翻譯與概念化

This article investigates the processes of translation and conceptual reconstruction in Chinese Buddhism through the lens of two technical terms, sīzé 思擇 and niànhuì 念慧. By the late sixth century, these terms had come to designate an emergent field of practice tentatively termed “discursive meditation” or “exegetical meditation,” which occupied a pivotal position at the intersection of meditative cultivation and scriptural exegesis and exerted lasting influence on later Chinese Buddhist traditions. The study is structured in three parts. The first examines the gradual emergence of this hybrid practice in hagiographical literature, where meditative and exegetical ideals increasingly coalesce, and analyzes the lexical adoption of sīzé and niànhuì as central descriptors. The second reconstructs the translation histories of these terms and their original semantic implications in Yogācāra texts, where they functioned as Chinese renderings of Indian technical vocabulary. The third evaluates how the semantic resources inherent in these terms facilitated a novel conceptualization designed to resolve a longstanding paradox in Buddhist soteriology: whether profound meditative states permit discursive elements, and how non-discursive meditation can produce wisdom that finds discursive expression.

JIN Mingjun, Sichuan University
金明俊, 四川大學

從譯經到禪修：《達摩多羅禪經》與《坐禪三昧經》五門禪的演變與比較
From Translation to Meditation Practice: The Evolution and Comparative Study of the Fivefold Meditation System in the Dharmatrāta Dhyāna Sūtra and the Sūtra on the Samādhi of Seated Meditation

漢譯禪經並不只是對印度禪修方法的語言轉寫，而是在傳譯、編排與詮釋之中，對修行知識進行重新組織，並逐步促成經典體系的形成。《達摩多羅禪經》與《坐禪三昧經》是五門禪法形成過程中具有代表性的兩部典籍，二者分別從階段次第與煩惱對治兩種進路，安排數息觀、不淨觀、慈悲觀、因緣觀、界分別觀與念佛觀等禪法之間的關係。前者以“方便道和勝道”及“退、住、升進、決定”展開修行次第，呈現出較為系統的實踐框架；後者則依根器差異與煩惱類型分別設教，形成更具對機性的禪修模式。由此可見，“五門禪”並非一開始便具有固定形態，而是在漢譯佛典的流傳、詮釋與本土接受中逐漸成形。這一過程也說明，譯經不僅承擔義理傳達的功能，更深度參與了中國早期禪學修行體系的形成。

Chinese translations of meditation scriptures were not merely linguistic renderings of Indian meditative methods. Rather, through the processes of translation, compilation, and interpretation, they reorganized bodies of practical knowledge and gradually contributed to the formation of a scriptural system. The Dharmatrāta-dhyāna-sūtra and the Dhyāna-niṣṭhita-samādhi-dharmaparyāya-sūtra are two representative texts in the formation of the Five Gates of Meditation. They arrange the relationships among such practices as mindfulness of breathing, contemplation of impurity, contemplation of compassion, contemplation of dependent arising, contemplation of the elements, and recollection of the Buddha through two different approaches: graded stages of practice and the treatment of specific afflictions. The former develops a sequence of cultivation through the framework of the “path of expedient means” and the “superior path,” as well as the stages of “retrogression, abiding, advancement, and certainty,” thereby presenting a relatively systematic model of practice. The latter, by contrast, teaches according to differences in spiritual capacity and types of affliction, forming a more adaptive mode of meditation practice. This suggests that the “Five Gates of Meditation” did not exist from the outset as a fixed system, but gradually took shape through the transmission, interpretation, and local reception of Chinese Buddhist scriptures. This process further indicates that translation was not only a means of conveying doctrine, but also played an active role in the formation of early Chinese Chan systems of meditative practice.

John JORGENSEN, Griffith University
喬根森, 澳大利亞格里菲斯大學

Early Buddhist Translations and the Role of Confucian Philology with a Focus on An Shigao and His Circle
早期佛典翻譯與儒家訓詁學的角色——以安世高及其譯經群為中心

Guided by the assumption that the language adopted by a translator largely reflects their social milieu and intended audience, this paper investigates the translations of Buddhist texts made in the late Han Dynasty in order to challenge the dominant view that the earliest translations were into a Chinese “colloquial” and were chiefly informed by popular Daoism.

An Shigao 安世高, the earliest translator, far from being an ex-prince of Parthia who became a monk living midst a non-Chinese diaspora, was more likely a layman from a Tarim Basin group that was a dependency of Han China. He was a maquis (hou 侯) with an excellent education, probably in Confucian philology (Hanxue 漢學) and Chinese medicine. He was assisted by Yan Fotiao 嚴佛調 and An Xuan 安玄, an official who would have been trained in Hanxue. These three, and some of the next generation of translators and commentators of Buddhist texts on meditation and abhidharma-style of analysis, drew upon their knowledge of Confucian philology to select Chinese words to represent Indian ideas about the body and mind that were alien to Chinese audiences.

This investigation focuses on the strange translation of skandha (aggregates) by yin 陰 (hidden, shaded), as well as on related terms, to suggest that they were selected because of the derived meanings these words had been given in Confucian philology.

KIM Jiyun, Dongguk University
金池蓮, 韓國東國大學

From Reception to Transformation: The Transmission of the Xin Huayan jing lun in East Asia
從接受到轉化：《新華嚴經論》在東亞的流傳與變形

Among the Huayan masters of China’s Tang Dynasty, Li Tongwuan 李通玄 (635-730 or 646-740) stands out as a figure who, despite not being included in the orthodox Huayan lineage alongside prominent masters like Fazang 法藏 (643-712), Chengguan 澄觀 (738-839), and Zongmi 宗密 (780-841), exerted a profound influence on subsequent Huayan studies. His representative work is the forty-volume Xin Huayan jing lun 新華嚴經論 (hereafter Xinlun), which serves as a commentary on the eighty-volume translation of the Flower Ornament Sutra 大方廣佛華嚴經 (Dafangguangfo Huayan jing, hereafter Huayanjing) translated by Śikṣānanda 實叉難陀 (652-710).

Textual sources closely related to Li Tongxuan’s Xinlun include several key works produced across East Asia. In China, these include the 120-volume Dafangguang fo Xin Huayan jing helun 大方廣佛新華嚴經合論 (hereafter Helun) by Zhining 志寧 during the Tang Dynasty, as well as two works from the Ming Dynasty: the three-volume Dafangguang fo huayan jing helun zuanyao 大方廣佛華嚴經合論纂要 (hereafter Zuanyao) by Fangze 方澤 and the four-volume Dafangguang fo huayan jing helun jianyao 大方廣佛華嚴經合論簡要 (hereafter Jianyao) by Lizhi 李贄. In Korea, there is Hwaeom non jeoryo 華嚴論節要 (hereafter Jeoryo) authored by Chinul 知訥 (1158-1210) during the Goryeo period 高麗, while in Japan, representative works include the Kegon shuzen kansho nyu gedatsumon gi 華嚴修禪觀照入解脫門義 (hereafter Nyugedatsumongi) by Kōben 高辧 (1173-1232) during the Kamakura period 鎌倉.

One of the critical issues surrounding these textual sources involves the “transformations” caused by variations between the texts. In the context of China, this is primarily observed in the relationship between the Xinlun and the Helun, a textual divergence that has already been recognized within modern scholarship. Kojima Taizan 小島岱山 stated, “There are differences in approximately 8000 places between the Xinlun and the Helun. Although no fundamental alteration in thought is observed, it is difficult to say that the Helun preserves the original form of the Xinlun. . . . However, the period during which Zhining compiled the Helun was 847–859 (the Dazhong era of Emperor Xuanzong of the Tang 宣宗大中年間), and it subsequently underwent textual emendation by Huiyan 慧硏 in 967 (the fifth year of the Qiande era 乾德5).” In a similar vein, Kimura Kiyotaka 木村淸孝 noted, “The Helun authored by Zhining was subject to Huiyan’s supplementation and revision in 967. . . . The occasional discrepancies in vocabulary and phrasing that we observe today between the commentary sections of the Helun and the Xinlun are largely attributable to Huiyan’s revisions.” Both researchers acknowledge that the extant Helun represents a revised version. Meanwhile, Kim Cheonhag has proposed the possibility that the Xinlun which served as the base text for the extant Helun and the currently extant Xinlun itself may be entirely different textual variants 異本 yiben.

Considering both perspectives, this paper posits that the discrepancies between the extant Helun and Xinlun stem primarily from different textual variants as the first-order cause, and secondarily from the revisions by Zhining or Huiyan as the second-order cause. Accordingly, the discussion herein will proceed with a central emphasis on verifying this first-order cause. Furthermore, this study aims to examine the transformations that occurred during the process of the text’s transmission from China to Korea and Japan. Specifically, it focuses on the relationship between the Xinlun and the Jeoryo in Korea, and between the Helun and the Nyugedatsumongi in Japan. Although prior scholarship exists regarding Li Tongwuan’s thought, few studies have conducted a comparative analysis of the textual sources related to the Xinlun to trace their reception and subsequent transformations across China, Korea, and Japan. In this regard, the present study will serve as a meaningful endeavor to address this gap in the field.

In Chapter Ⅱ, I first compare the phrasing of the Xinlun, Helun, Jeoryo, and Nyugedatsumongi, using the passages of the Helun quoted in the Nyugedatsumongi as the baseline, in order to clarify the relationship between the Xinlun and the Helun. To be sure, Kojima Taizan (1992) already collated and arranged the Xinlun along with the corresponding sections in the Helun, Jeoryo, and Jianyao in a tabular format based on the Xinlun. Similarly, Kimura Kiyotaka (2001) compared three selected passages of the Xinlun with the Jeoryo, Jianyao, and Zuanyao to analyze their contents. Building upon these pioneering studies, the present study distinguishes itself by systematically comparing the Xinlun, Helun, and Jeoryo based precisely on the segments of the Helun cited within the Nyugedatsumongi. Second, this chapter examines the Japanese text Kegonshu ichijo kaishinron 華嚴宗一乘開心論 (hereafter Kaishinron), which was compiled prior to the compilation of the Helun, as another piece of chronological evidence. By conducting a comparative analysis of the form of the Xinlun quoted in the Kaishinron against both the extant Xinlun and Helun, this study expects to uncover the origins of the discrepancies between the Xinlun and the Helun with greater clarity. In Chapter Ⅲ, I demonstrate the transformations that emerged during the process of the text’s transmission from China to Korea and Japan. I first examine the Goryeo tradition, focusing primarily on the relationship between the Xinlun and the Jeoryo, and subsequently shift my focus to the Kamakura tradition, focusing closely on the Helun and the Nyugedatsumongi. Through this cross-regional analysis, this study aims to elucidate the distinct characteristics of the transformations that occurred as texts composed in China circulated within Korea and Japan.

By conducting a comparative analysis of the Xinlun, Helun, Jeoryo, and Nyugedatsumongi with a central focus on Li Tongxuan’s Xinlun, this study holds a twofold significance. First, by expanding the geographical scope of research from a localized focus on Chinese texts to a broader East Asian framework encompassing China, Korea, and Japan, this paper examines the textual transmission and its subsequent transformations from a much wider perspective. Second, it contributes to establishing a firm philological foundation for future research on Li Tongxuan’s thought.

Sung-Eun Thomas KIM, Dongguk University
金成恩, 韓國東國大學

Korean Vernacular Translations of Sinitic Buddhist Texts: The Role of the Directorate of Sūtra Publication
漢文佛典的朝鮮語譯本：刊經都監的角色與歷史語境

The Directorate of Sutra Publication (刊經都監) established in 1461 during the Choson dynasty (1392–1910), was administered for over ten years until 1471. During that time a total of thirty-seven Sinitic Buddhist texts were published and nine Buddhist texts were translated into the newly invented han’gŭl writing system, the Korean vernacular, which was officially promulgated in 1446 through the publication of the text Hunminjŏngŭm 訓民正音.

Along with its main task of publishing and translating of Buddhist Sinitic texts, the directorate was also in charge of various Buddhist rituals and affairs including the construction and renovation of temples. Given its administrative duties and functions, it can be said that the directorate was established for the same purpose as the monastic certification or the identification systems, namely to effect government control over Buddhism, its temples and monks. In this sense, and given the characteristics of the published texts, it can be assumed that the publication project was not royal court-sponsored but mainly a state-sponsored endeavor.

Furthermore, given the historical context of Chosŏn having adopted Neo-Confucian as its state ideology, the directorate was not designed to invigorate Buddhism nor in a manner that encroached on the status of the state ideology of Confucianism. However, surprising as it appears, it does not appear to be to suppress Buddhism, as was often interpretated by many modern scholars. The establishment of the directorate can be interpreted as the state’s attempt to control and also to preserve Buddhist institutions and practices as part of its governance.

It was realized that Buddhism was indeed helpful in its rulership over the people. Accordingly, as explained in this paper, support of Buddhism was limited to within the bounds of state defined Confucian norms and values, providing a framework for a finer understanding of the state policy towards Buddhism and the position of Buddhism in relation to the state. Such framework can also be traced to the contents and the overall characteristics of the Buddhist texts that the directorate published and translated.

Mónika KISS, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest
嵇夢籬, 匈牙利羅蘭大學

Textual and Ritual Evolution from China to Japan: The Case of the Yiqie rulai jingang shouming tuoluoni jing
從中國到日本的文本與儀式演變：《一切如來金剛壽命陀羅尼經》個案研究

The Yiqie rulai jingang shouming tuoluoni jing 一切如來金剛壽命陀羅尼經 (T 1135, vol. 20) belongs to a group of scriptures associated with the concept of the “adamantine life-span” (Ch. jingang shouming/Jp. kongō jumyō 金剛壽命). The other texts in this group are T 1133, T 1134A, and T 1134B. According to their colophons, all four works are attributed to the translation activities of Amoghavajra (705–774; Chinese: Bukong [Jingang] 不空[金剛]). Three of these texts share a number of common features, including the setting of the sermon, the composition of the assembly, the deities invoked, and the mantras employed. T 1135, however, appears to constitute an exception within this group.

Two additional texts preserved in the Buddhist canon are closely related to T 1135: the Zhufu jihui tuoluoni jing 諸佛集會陀羅尼經 (T 1346, vol. 21) and the Xichu zhongyao tuoluoni jing 息除中夭陀羅尼經 (T 1347, vol. 21). The former is a seventh-century translation attributed to Devaraprajña (active: 689–691; Chinese: Tiyunbore 提雲般若). The latter is a Song dynasty translation by Dānapāla (?–1017; Chinese: Shihu 施護), but it is generally regarded as another translation of T 1346. When considered together, these three texts appear to derive from a common origin.

My research addresses two principal issues arising from this corpus. First, the translation of T 1135 and its central concept of the “adamantine life-span” raise important questions, since this notion does not appear in the other two related texts and seems to occur only in connection with the life of Amoghavajra’s master, Vajrabodhi (671–741; Chinese: Jingangzhi 金剛智). Second, T 1346 later served as the textual basis for an esoteric longevity ritual established in Japan in the eleventh century. Although the text had already been transmitted to Japan in the ninth century, it was not originally classified there as a longevity scripture.

In this presentation, I compare these three texts in order to trace their development and dissemination from China to Japan. At the same time, I address two related questions: whether T 1135 represents a translation or rather an adaptation of an already existing text; and whether the arrival of T 1347 in Japan during the eleventh century may have prompted Japanese monks to rediscover an earlier, perhaps largely forgotten scripture and thereby inspired the establishment of a new ritual tradition.

LI Bohan, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen
李博寒, 香港中文大學 [深圳]

漢譯佛經中的“NP所”
The “NP suo” Structure in Chinese Translations of Buddhist Scriptures

漢譯佛經中頻繁出現表處所的“NP所”結構，源於譯者用“NP所”翻譯梵語“yena NP tena”，用以說明“NP所在之處”。自鳩摩羅什時期起，非位移動詞句中的“於NP所”逐漸凝固化，至玄奘時期成爲程式化表達。

The frequent appearance of the locative “NP suo” structure in Chinese translations of Buddhist scriptures stems from translators using it to render the Sanskrit phrase “yena NP tena” to indicate “the place where NP is located”. Starting from the Kumārajīva period, the “yu NP suo” construction in sentences with non-motion verbs gradually became fixed, and by the time of Xuanzang, it had developed into a formulaic expression.

LI Wei, Henan University
李巍, 河南大學

譬喻作為翻譯策略：文人筆受與早期中古漢譯佛典的“文／質”張力
Metaphor as Translation Strategy: Literati Scribes and the “Wen-Zhi” Tension in Early Medieval Chinese Buddhist Translations

漢譯佛典善用譬喻、文采斐然，不僅源於印度佛典本有的傳統，更關鍵的是在佛經翻譯的“文質之爭”中，文人筆受者的深度參與系統性地推動了佛典的雅化，尤其強化了譬喻的文學特質。支謙最早提出了佛典翻譯過於華美的問題，從而引出一個根本追問：佛經翻譯應當質直樸素，還是應當文采斐然？這種參與系統性地推動了佛經文本的雅化，尤其顯著地強化了譬喻的文學維度。在理論探討層面，“棄文就質”已成為一種自覺的原則，釋道安（312–385）即為典型。他指出，在“譯胡為秦”的過程中存在“五失本”，其中之一便是秦人喜好文辭之美。這意味著漢譯對梵、胡原典在語序、文質、反復詠歎等方面進行了系統性改動——刪繁就簡以適應漢語簡約傳統，這反而為譬喻的精煉與美感騰出了空間。同時，經序本身即呈現高度文學性，僧會、道安等人在序文中廣設新喻、融入身世之感，使“序經”成為“作文”。譯場制度中，“筆受”一職至關重要。筆受者不僅承擔謄寫潤飾，更參與參校、刪定乃至獨立翻譯。聶承遠、僧叡等人的翻譯實踐均表明，均顯示筆受者對譯文的深度參與與改造。謝靈運等人修治南本《大般涅槃經》，在保留“八種譬喻”（順喻、逆喻、現喻等）分類框架的同時，大量“去質存華”，使文本含蓄典雅。此舉雖遭僧人的指責，卻深刻反映了文人審美對佛典的滲透。佛典中八種譬喻的分類啟發了後來中國本土修辭學，如宋代陳骙《文則》的“比喻十法”，大量佛教譬喻成為漢語文學反復取用的意象資源。總體而言，漢譯佛典的譬喻文學美感是文質之爭中文人筆受者持續“雅化”實踐的產物，既是佛教中國化的文本維度，也是中古跨文化審美生成的重要機制。

The literary elegance and abundant use of analogies and metaphors (piyu 譬喻) in Chinese Buddhist scriptures stem not only from the traditions inherent in Indian Buddhist texts but, more crucially, from the deep involvement of literati serving as scribes (bishou 筆受) amid the “wen-zhi debate” (wenzhi zhizheng 文質之爭, the tension between ornate style and plain substance) during the translation process.

Zhi Qian 支謙 (ca. 194-253) originally addressed the problem of the Buddhist translation being too beautiful, which leads to the question whether Buddhist translation should be simple and straightforward (zhi 質) or beautiful with style (wen 文). This involvement systematically propelled the refinement of the scriptures and notably accentuated the literary dimension of metaphors. In terms of theoretical discuss, qiwen jiuzhi 棄文就質 (“abandoning literary style for simpler form”) has become a conscious principle as exemplified by Shi Dao’an 釋道安 (312-385). He argues that in the “translating from hu languages to Chinese” （yi hu wei qin 譯胡為秦）process, there were “five deviations” (wu shiben 五失本) which includes Chinese people’s (qinren 秦人) love for beautiful language. This indicates that Chinese renditions systematically altered the word order, stylistic register, and repetitive cadences of Sanskrit and Prakrit originals—pruning redundancy to align with the Chinese tradition of concision. Paradoxically, this process created space for the distillation and aesthetic enhancement of analogies. Meanwhile, the prefaces to the scriptures themselves exhibit a high degree of literary artistry. Figures such as Kang Senghui 康僧會 (?-280) and Shi Dao’an 釋道安 (312-385) crafted new analogies and infused personal pathos into their prefaces, transforming exegetical commentary into belletristic composition.

Within the institutional framework of the translation bureaus, the role of the scribe proved decisive. Scribes not only transcribed and polished but also collated, edited, and even independently translated texts. The translation practices of Nie Chengyuan 聶承遠 of Western Jin Dynasty (265-316), Seng Rui 僧叡 (ca.354-420), and others evince the scribes’ substantive creative authority over the final text. When Xie Lingyun 謝靈運 (385-433) and his collaborators revised the Southern version of the Dabo nieman jing 大般涅槃經 [The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra], they preserved the classificatory framework of the “eight types of metaphors” (bazhong yu 八種喻) while extensively “discarding the plain and preserving the ornate,” (quzhi cunhua 去質存華） rendering the text restrained and elegant. Although this move provoked clerical censure from monks, it profoundly attests to the penetration of literati aesthetics into the scriptural corpus. The eight fold Buddhist classification of analogies evidently inspired indigenous Chinese rhetoric, as seen in the ten metaphors in Chen Kui’s 陳騤 (1128-1203) Wenze 文則 [The Law of Writings], and a vast repertoire of Buddhist analogies became a recurring imagistic resource in Chinese literature.

The analogical and literary beauty of Chinese Buddhist translations is the product of sustained “refinement” by literati-scribes amidst the wen-zhi debate. It constitutes both a textual dimension of the Sinicization of Buddhism and a vital mechanism in the transcultural aesthetic formation of early medieval China.

LI Xuetao, Beijing Foreign Studies University
李雪濤, 北京外國語大學

跨語言的翻譯：鳩摩羅什與多語佛教知識網絡的生成
Translation across Languages: Kumārajīva and the Making of a Multilingual Buddhist Knowledge Network

本文以鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva, 344-413）爲中心，重新思考中古時期佛經翻譯的語言條件與知識結構。不同於傳統將其視爲“梵漢翻譯者”的理解，本文指出，羅什所處的並非雙語轉換情境，而是一個由龜茲語、梵語（包括佛教混合梵語）與漢語交織而成的多語知識場。在這一語境中，翻譯不再只是文本的轉寫，而是一種跨語言的中介實踐（mediation），通過多重語言層的協同作用，實現佛教知識的重組與再編碼。

文章首先分析龜茲語在絲綢之路北道的中介地位，指出其在佛教術語傳播與意義轉化中的關鍵作用；繼而探討梵語作爲跨區域宗教與學術語言的功能，尤其是在說一切有部與大乘佛教文本中的使用；最後，以羅什在長安譯場的實踐爲例，說明漢語譯經並非簡單對應原文，而是在多語互動中形成具有自身概念結構與思想張力的新文本體系。

通過這一分析，本文試圖將佛經翻譯從語言轉換問題提升爲知識生產機制的問題，進而揭示早期中國佛教的形成，乃是一個跨語言、跨文化網絡中持續生成的歷史過程。

This paper reconsiders the linguistic conditions and epistemic structures of Buddhist translation in late antiquity through the case of Kumārajīva (344-413). Moving beyond the conventional view of Kumārajīva as a translator working between Sanskrit and Chinese, it argues that his translation activity was embedded in a multilingual environment constituted by Kuchean (Tocharian B), Sanskrit (including Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit), and Chinese. In such a context, translation should not be understood as a simple act of linguistic transfer, but rather as a form of mediation across languages, in which Buddhist knowledge was reorganized and rearticulated through layered linguistic interactions.

The paper first examines the intermediary role of the Kuchean language along the northern Silk Road, highlighting its function in the transmission and transformation of key Buddhist terms. It then analyzes Sanskrit as a transregional religious and scholarly language, particularly in relation to Sarvāstivāda and Mahāyāna textual traditions. Finally, focusing on Kumārajīva’s translation workshop in Chang’an, it demonstrates that Chinese Buddhist texts were not direct equivalents of their source texts, but newly constituted discursive formations shaped within a multilingual framework.

By situating translation within a broader network of languages and knowledge practices, this study seeks to reconceptualize Buddhist translation as a mechanism of knowledge production, and to illuminate the formation of early Chinese Buddhism as a dynamic process within a transcultural and multilingual knowledge network.

LU Lu, Zhejiang University
盧鷺, 浙江大學

In the Words of Lokakṣema: Function Words, Textual Attribution, and Stylistic Profiling with Language Models
支婁迦讖的語言：功能詞、文本歸屬與基於語言模型的風格描寫

The translations associated with Lokakṣema (Zhi Loujiachen 支婁迦讖) occupy a pivotal place in the study of early Chinese Buddhist translation, early Mahāyāna Buddhism, and the history of Middle Chinese. Yet the attributions preserved in the received canon cannot be taken simply as records of translator fact. Already in Dao’an’s 道安 judgment, preserved in the Chu sanzang ji ji 出三藏記集, that certain scriptures “seem to have been translated by Zhi Chen” (似支讖出), the limits of the Lokakṣema corpus were being drawn in part on the basis of linguistic style. A previous classification experiment using SimCSE and OC-SVM broadly supports Nattier’s stratification of Lokakṣema-related translations: texts in different tiers do stand at different degrees of distance from the core reference corpus. At the same time, the model also brings into view a number of finer irregularities within particular tiers; T458 Wenshushili wen pusa shu jing 文殊師利問菩薩署經, in particular, stands at a notable distance from the core reference text T224 Daoxing bore jing 道行般若經. The present article takes this result not as an attributional verdict, but as a problem requiring philological interpretation: how, precisely, is such stylistic distance manifested in the language of the texts?

Using T224 and T458 as a test case, the article compares a series of semantic-functional fields: conjunctions, prepositions, modal adverbs, personal pronouns, degree adverbs, and passive constructions. Rather than asking merely whether a given form is present or absent, it considers the number of members in each field, their relative density, their distribution of functions, and their historical layering. The results indicate that T224 regularly deploys a broader inventory of forms, more articulated patterns, and a finer division of functional labor. T458, by contrast, often assigns a relatively heavy burden to a small number of high-frequency items, and diverges from T224 in a recurrent way across the fields examined. It follows that the study of Lokakṣema-related attributions should not rest solely on Buddhist terminology, transliterations, or a handful of conspicuous translation equivalents, nor should it be reduced to a simple opposition between “authentic” and “spurious.” It must also ask how far individual texts share, modify, or depart from the ordinary function-word and syntactic habits of the core Lokakṣema corpus.

LUO Mujun and GE Peiyi, School of Humanities, Zhejiang University of Technology
羅慕君、葛沛熠, 浙江工業大學

中國化佛教的傳播與影響——以僞經《高王經》爲中心的考察
The Dissemination and Influence of Sinicised Buddhism: An Investigation Centred on the Apocryphal Scripture Gaowang Jing

《高王觀世音經》是影響深遠的中國本土撰述經典之一，其經文以“摘抄編撰”的方式生成，既依托佛教真經獲得正統性支持，又立足本土民衆需求展開在地化創作。自問世以來，該經便在民間廣泛流傳，與之相伴的靈驗記不僅爲其注入強大生命力，使其在千年流傳中生生不息，更通過靈驗情節的跨媒介呈現，進一步擴大受衆範圍。此外，《高王經》及其靈驗記亦有西夏文、韓文譯本傳世，深刻影響少數民族與域外佛教文化。作爲典型的佛教疑僞經典，《高王經》之所以較部分真經更具傳播活力，關鍵在於構建起“誦經不死”的穩定信仰内核，并能順應時代、社會與民族等諸多因素靈活調適。這一個案研究集中展現了佛教在中國的本土化、世俗化適應，或可爲考察中國佛教疑僞經的生成機制與傳播路徑提供新的研究視角。

The Gaowang Guanshiyin Jing is one of the most influential locally created Buddhist classics in China. Compiled by excerpting and reorganizing canonical Buddhist texts, it draws authority from orthodox Buddhist sources while embodying localized creations tailored to the needs of the Chinese populace. Since its appearance, the scripture has enjoyed widespread popular circulation. The miracle stories associated with it not only endowed the text with enduring vitality that sustained its transmission over a millennium, but also expanded its audience through cross-media representations of miraculous episodes. In addition, a Tangut translation of the Gaowang Jing and its miracle stories has survived. The translation not only accords with the cultural characteristics of the Western Xia but also exerted a profound influence on its Buddhist culture. As a typical Buddhist apocryphon, its greater dynamism compared with orthodox canonical texts lies primarily in its establishment of the stable religious core of “reciting the scripture brings deliverance from death,” as well as its flexible adaptation to historical, social, and ethnic contexts. This case study vividly illustrates the localization and secularization of Buddhism in China, and may offer a new perspective for investigating the formation mechanisms and transmission paths of Chinese Buddhist apocrypha.

Tom NEWHALL, University of Tokyo
紐連結, 日本東京大學

From Translation to Interpretation to Application: The Translation the Vinaya, and the development of monasticism and the Vinaya School in China
從翻譯到詮釋到實踐：《律藏》翻譯與中國律宗的發展概述

This presentation will give a brief overview of how monastic law (the Vinaya) was translated into Chinese, and how these translations were later studied by scholars associated with the Vinaya school and put into practice in monasteries in China, and other parts of East Asia. It will argue that the translation and development of the monastic system in China can be understood as a three part process that includes translation, interpretation, and application, but these processes do not always occur in that order, nor do they necessarily happen in isolation with one another, nor is it the case that all aspects of what was written in the Vinaya became applied to monasticism in practice. It will draw on writings from Daoxuan, the foremost scholar of the Vinaya in Tang-dynasty China, as well as the work of contemporary researchers that have aimed to put his work into context.

PARK Chongdok C.H., Dongguk University
朴淸渙, 韓國東國大學

Glorifying the Order and Creating Great Monks: A Critical Survey of Oral History in Modern Korean Buddhist Studies
讚頌秩序與塑造高僧：現代韓國佛教史口述傳統批判研究

Oral tradition has held a central place in Buddhism since the religion’s 5^th Century BCE founding and remains so even today within Korea’s Buddhist temples and monasteries. Not only are sutras chanted daily, verbal anecdotes concerning prominent Zen (K. Seon) monastics are regularly shared in Dharma talks, meditation instruction and student-teacher interviews. Throughout Korean Buddhism’s turbulent modern history, such anecdotes have been critical in maintaining monastic values and identity while also preserving accounts of lived experience throughout Korea’s Japanese Annexation (1910-1945) and the cataclysmic violence of the Korean War (1950 – 1953). Oral tradition regarding the Dharma “transmission” (K. inga) between Seon masters and their Dharma heirs, has also served to legitimize often-competing monastic lineages during the contentious “Purification Movement” of the 1950s and 60s, ultimately resulting in the schism between the celibate Jogye and the married Taego Orders, as well as the Jogye Order’s own intra-sectarian conflicts of the 1990s.

With the growth of academic interest in Korean Buddhism’s modern history over the 1990’s, newly-introduced oral history methodologies showed great potential. In contrast with oral history trends in western Buddhist studies, which tend towards anthropological studies of Buddhist communities and practice “on the ground,” oral history in Korean Buddhist studies emerged from the need to supplement the lack of surviving documentation and to record testimony regarding key historical events before witnesses pass away. While the first decades of Korean Buddhist oral history have produced an invaluable increase in primary sources available for current and future resources, the field has nevertheless suffered from methodological issues and limitations often resulting from the Korean Buddhist community’s conflation of oral history with its own preestablished oral traditions.

Focusing on the pioneering publication Modern Buddhist History Seen through the Testimony of 22 People (2002) and the extensive research of Buddhist oral historian Gwangshik Kim, this study will examine how oral history methodologies have been mobilized to reconstruct Korea’s modern Buddhist past within South Korean academia. It will also critically evaluate the methodological limitations and institutional biases imbedded within these studies, before surveying more recent efforts to overcome these issues through greater critical rigor, methodological refinement, and the inclusion of more diverse perspectives. However, in order to provide sufficient background to these discussions, this article will first survey the roles of oral tradition in Buddhism along with the religion’s tumultuous modern history in South Korea as well as the introduction of oral history to Korean academia.

Valeriia SOLOSTOVA, Independent Researcher
靈風, 獨立研究員

Buddhist Translation as a Driver of Lexical Disyllabification in Chinese: From Old Chinese to Early Middle Chinese
佛典翻譯與漢語雙音節化的形成：從上古漢語到早期中古漢語

Disyllabification constitutes one of the most significant transformations in the history of the Chinese language, marking the transition from Late Old Chinese (c. 3rd c. BCE–2nd c. CE) to Early Middle Chinese (c. 3rd–7th c. CE). During this transition, the lexicon shifted from predominantly monosyllabic to increasingly disyllabic. While Buddhist translations are widely recognized as primary drivers of this lexical shift, the specific translatorial mechanisms, diachronic dynamics, and pathways through which disyllabic norms migrated beyond religious texts remain unaddressed at the corpus level.

This study analyzes sutra translations by An Shigao, Dharmarakṣa, Kumārajīva, and Xuanzang (2nd–7th c. CE) as represented in the CBETA corpus, covering disyllabification from its nascent stages through its establishment as a lexical norm.

Corpus frequency and comparative diachronic analyses are combined with lexical classification of transliterations and calques to isolate each strategy’s contribution; lexical diffusion analysis then tracks the integration of Buddhist disyllabic neologisms into the broader lexicon.

The research argues that source-language structural pressure, the Chinese logographic writing system, and sutra recitation prosody together reinforced the spread of disyllabic patterns, an effect that grew stronger as translators shifted from transliteration to semantic calquing. Ultimately, the educated elite facilitated the diffusion of these norms beyond religious contexts, contributing to the vocabulary of the modern Sinographic world.

SUN Yinggang, Zhejiang University
孫英剛, 浙江大學

檀特山考——文獻和圖像中的須大拿太子本生聖跡
A Study of Mount Dandaka: The Sacred Site of Prince Sudāna’s Jātaka in Textual and Visual Traditions

須達拏太子本生是重要的佛本生故事，也是佛教美術的重要主題。從犍陀羅，到克孜爾、敦煌以及中原北方地區，須達拏太子本生故事廣泛存在於佛教造像和壁畫中。雖然在巴爾胡特浮雕中就已經出現了須達拏太子本生故事，但是不論是早期漢文譯經，還是法顯、玄奘等西行求法高僧的行記，都將這一故事發生地點繫於犍陀羅。同時，相關故事主題，也出現在犍陀羅的佛教造像中。這個故事的一個重要的細節是須達拏太子被流放到檀特山。佛教進入中土，檀特山成為犍陀羅重要的佛教聖地。它在漢唐之際是西行求法的中國僧人巡禮的重要聖跡，在藏傳佛教中被引申為佛教的復興之地，在禪宗典籍中，被誤以為是釋迦太子出家修行之所。檀特山這一須達拏太子流放之地，在佛教和佛教美術發展史上，留下了自己深刻的印跡。

The Jātaka of Prince Sudāna (Vessantara) is one of the most significant Buddhist birth stories and a major theme in Buddhist art. From Gandhāra to Kizil, Dunhuang, and northern China, the story is widely represented in Buddhist sculptures and mural paintings. Although the tale already appears in the reliefs of Bharhut, both the early Chinese translations of Buddhist scriptures and the travel accounts of eminent Chinese pilgrims such as Faxian and Xuanzang consistently locate the story in Gandhāra. Correspondingly, scenes from the Sudāna Jātaka are also prominently depicted in Gandhāran Buddhist art.

One of the story’s most important episodes recounts Prince Sudāna’s exile to Mount Dandaka. As Buddhism spread into China, Mount Dandaka came to be regarded as an important Buddhist sacred site in Gandhāra. During the Han–Tang period, it became a significant pilgrimage destination for Chinese monks traveling west in search of the Dharma. In Tibetan Buddhism, it was further reinterpreted as a place associated with the revival of Buddhism, while in Chan literature it was mistakenly identified as the mountain where Prince Siddhārtha renounced the world and undertook his ascetic practice. As the site of Prince Sudāna’s exile, Mount Dandaka thus left a profound and enduring imprint on the historical development of Buddhism and Buddhist art.

WANG Yue, Kyoto University
王悦, 日本京都大學

Two Divergent Lives of Smṛti: Conceptual Reconfiguration as Niàn (念) and Mindfulness
Smṛti的兩種生命：作為“念”與Mindfulness的概念重構

This paper examines how the Buddhist term smṛti has come to occupy different conceptual positions and practical functions in Chinese and modern English, arguing that these differences reflect two distinct trajectories of conceptual reconfiguration through translation.

Drawing primarily on Chinese Yogācāra and Abhidharma materials, with Tibetan parallel sources as supplementary evidence, this paper argues that niàn (念) is not equivalent to “memory” in its colloquial sense. Rather, it denotes a specific mental factor (Skt. caitasika; Ch. 心所) in Buddhist psychology: the non-forgetting, clear retention, and clear mental expression of a familiar object, serving as the cognitive basis for non-distraction. By contrast, although the modern English term mindfulness also derives from the Buddhist sources, it has been reconfigured through modern translation and interpretation as a form of non-judgmental, open awareness of present-moment experience—a construct that is more readily intelligible, cultivable, and operationalizable within secular domains such as psychology, medicine, and education.

The paper argues that niàn and mindfulness embody two different paths of conceptual reconfiguration. Niàn largely preserves the semantic position of smṛti within Buddhist philosophy and the framework of mind and mental factors, whereas mindfulness tends to reorganize it within modern scientific and linguistic contexts into a form optimized for practice, communication, and institutional integration.

This case demonstrates that translation serves not merely as a vehicle for the transmission of inherited meanings, but as an active agent of conceptual reconfiguration, thereby reshaping the epistemic functions across historical eras and discourse systems, while profoundly influencing their vitality and manifestations in cross-cultural dissemination.

本文探討佛教術語 smṛti 在中文與現代英文中的不同概念位置與實踐功能，並據此分析其所呈現的不同概念重構路徑。

本文以漢譯唯識學和阿毗達磨材料爲基礎，藏譯平行材料爲輔，指出“念”並不等同於世俗語義下的“記憶”，而是佛教心理學中的一個特定心所（Skt. caitasika）：指對熟悉對象的不忘失、持續保持與清晰呈現，並作爲心不散亂之所依。相比之下，英語語境所對應的“mindfulness” 雖源自佛教，卻在現代翻譯、詮釋與傳播過程中，被重構爲一種對當下不加評判的開放性覺知。這種形式更易於理解、訓練與運用，從而使其能夠被心理學、臨牀醫學、教育等現代科學領域廣泛接納與吸收。

本文主張，smṛti 在中文中形成的“念”與在英語中形成的 “mindfulness”，體現了兩種不同的概念重構路徑：前者重在維持smṛti在佛教哲學與心所體系中的意義位置，後者則傾向於在現代知識制度與語言環境中，將其重組爲易實踐、易傳播、易制度化和再開發的形態。

由此可見，翻譯不僅承載既有思想的延續，更是驅動概念重構的中介，它推動知識功能在歷史和不同話語體系間的整合，並深刻影響了相關概念在跨文化傳播中的生命力與表現形式。

YAMABE Nobuyoshi, Waseda University
山部能宜，日本早稻田大學

The Guanfo sanmei hai jing and the Datong fangguang jing on the Descriptions of the Hells: The Relationship between Two Apocryphal Sūtras
《觀佛三昧海經》與《大通方廣經》中的地獄描寫：兩部疑偽經的關係

Both the Guanfo sanmei hai jing (T no. 643, GSHJ) and the Datong fangguang jing (T no. 2871, DFJ) have very detailed descriptions of various Buddhist hells. These descriptions are significantly similar, so these two sūtras must have been related to each other. However, if we compare the relevant portions closely, the DFJ seems to retain an older and original form than the GSHJ. Of these two texts, the DFJ has traditionally been considered apocryphal and is generally dated to the sixth century. On the other hand, the GSHJ was formerly believed to be an authentic sūtra, but my own study strongly suggests that it was also apocryphal and must have been composed/compiled in the first half of the fifth century. Then, it follows that a later text retains an earlier and more reasonable content. How can we explain the relationship between these two sūtras? This paper addresses this issue.

YAN Yaozhong, Shanghai Normal University
嚴耀中, 上海師範大學

佛典中“身份”概念在中國的影響
The Influence of the Concept of “Identity” in Buddhist Texts in China

語言是文化之間交流的通道，約定爲對應的用詞則是溝通不同語言的鋪路石。在這相應形式的轉換過程中，文化的聯繫和影響由此而生。

歷史上，對中國文化影響最大的外來因素是佛教之傳入，而漢譯的典籍則是不可替代的載體。若在翻譯時“蓋有外來‘語趣’輸入，則文學內容爲之擴大，而其素質乃起一大變化也” 。其中在“身分”一詞裏之注入新意而使“身份”成爲涵義甚廣的觀念詞，即是一個在社會語言中作用很大的範例。

Ru ZHAN, Peking University
湛如, 北京大學

從譯例到義例：中古佛典中江河的翻譯及其演變
Translation Equivalents to Semantic Usage: The Translation and Evolution of Jiang and He in Medieval Buddhist Scriptures

江與河的區別，是漢語所特有的文化現象，二者的不同，實導源於南北社會歷史文化的結構性演進。漢譯佛典中，一條河流翻為 “某江” 還是 “某河”，看似是因人而異，其背後卻蘊含著值得思考的文化隱史。對此，本文關注了以下三個問題：第一，“江” 在漢唐佛經翻譯實踐中的從有到 “無”；第二，“江” 在漢唐梵語集中的從無到有；第三，“江” 這一譯例對南朝系正史外國傳的影響。這些譯例的變動，所折射的正是漢唐中國思想社會與佛教互相間的周流反饋。

The distinction between jiang and he (“river”) is a cultural phenomenon unique to the Chinese language. Their differentiation ultimately arose from the structural evolution of the historical, social, and cultural landscapes of northern and southern China. In Chinese Buddhist translations, whether a river was rendered as jiang or he may appear to be a matter of individual translators’ preference, yet these choices preserve a largely overlooked history of cultural interaction.

This lecture addresses three interrelated questions. First, how did jiang disappear from Buddhist translation practice between the Han and Tang periods? Second, how did jiang, initially absent from Sanskrit–Chinese glossaries, come to be incorporated into them during the same period? Third, how did this translational convention influence the accounts of foreign lands in the Southern Dynasties’ official histories?

ZHANG Rui, Université Lumière Lyon 2 / Institut d’Asie orientale
張蕊, 法國里昂第二大學 / 法國東亞學院

From Hanshan to Montfroid: Translation, Reception, and the Modern Making of a
Poetic-Spiritual Figure
從寒山到蒙弗魯瓦：詩性精神形象的跨語言建構與現代接受

Hanshan’s poetry, as a poetic expression of Buddhist thought in early medieval China, has traveled far beyond its original linguistic and cultural context, gaining particular resonance in modern France through translation. This paper examines the French reception of Hanshan as a case study of the translingual transformation of Buddhist poetics, with particular attention to the works of Patrick Carré, Jacques Pimpaneau, and the translation by Cheng Wing-fun and Hervé Collet.

The Buddhist elements in Hanshan’s poetry do not usually appear in the form of explicit doctrine, but are more loosely embedded in the poems themselves. This makes them particularly open to reinterpretation in translation. Rather than treating translation simply as a transfer between languages, this paper approaches it as a process through which texts are re-understood. It explores how certain Buddhist notions found in Hanshan’s poetry, such as emptiness (śūnyatā) and illusion (māyā), were re-expressed within modern French literary and intellectual contexts. In Patrick Carré’s translations, for instance, Hanshan is often presented less as a poet defined by a clear religious background than as a poetic figure associated with spontaneity, marginality, and existential freedom.

At the same time, these translations may also be understood within a broader history of translation. In a modern and transformed form, they preserve certain basic features of Buddhist translation as a mode of cross-cultural knowledge production. Through close readings of selected poems and their French translations, combined with attention to their reception contexts, this paper suggests that translation not only changes the way a text is understood, but also contributes to the shaping of new cultural imaginaries.

The French reception of Hanshan also offers a concrete perspective from which to consider how works carrying Buddhist resonances may be reinterpreted as they circulate globally. In this process, translation does not simply transmit ideas; it also shapes new ways of reading, and in some measure alters the relation between literature, religion, and philosophy. By situating this case within the broader context of Buddhist translation history and cross-cultural exchange, the paper further reflects on how translation functions as a mediating force between different cultural traditions and participates in the transformation of meaning.

寒山詩作為中國中古時期佛教思想的一種詩性表達，經由翻譯進入西方語境，並在現代法國引發了具有代表性的接受與再詮釋。本文以 Patrick Carré、Jacques Pimpaneau、Cheng Wing-fun 與 Hervé Collet 的譯本為中心，探討寒山詩在法語語境中的傳播與重構，並以此作為觀察佛教詩學在跨語言轉換中的一個具體案例。

寒山詩中的佛教思想往往並不以明確的教義形式呈現，而是以較為鬆散的方式融入詩歌之中。這一特點使得相關觀念在翻譯過程中更容易被重新理解與轉化。本文將翻譯視為一個重新理解文本的過程，而不僅僅是語言之間的轉換。文章著重分析寒山詩中所涉及的一些佛教觀念，如「空」、「幻」，如何在現代法國的文學與思想語境中被重新表達。在 Patrick Carré 的譯本中，寒山往往不再被呈現為一位具有明確宗教修行背景的詩人，而更接近一種與自由、邊緣處境與存在經驗相關的詩性形象。

與此同時，這些譯本亦可被置於更廣泛的翻譯傳統之中加以理解：它們在現代語境下，以不同方式延續並轉化了佛教翻譯作為跨文化知識生產機制的一些基本特徵。通過對原詩與法譯的細讀，並結合其接受語境的分析，本文嘗試指出翻譯不僅改變文本意義，也參與建構新的文化想象。

寒山在法國的接受，也為理解帶有佛教意涵的作品在全球流動過程中如何被重新詮釋，提供了一個具體的觀察視角。翻譯在這一過程中，不只是傳遞思想，也形塑文本的閱讀框架，並在一定程度上改變文學、宗教與哲學之間的關係。本文將該案例置於佛教翻譯史與跨文化交流的背景中加以考察，旨在進一步思考翻譯如何在不同文化傳統之間發揮中介作用，並參與意義的轉化。