Transmission, Communication, and Breakthrough
------- to See the Transmission of Indian Buddhism to
China from the Period of Kumārajīva
By Cui Fen, translated by Shi Sherry
Abstract
The transmission of Indian Buddhism to China is one comparatively successful
example put forward by peace, in the communication history of ancient human
civilization, in which Kumārajīva translating Buddhist scriptures is one important event.
This dissertation tries to explore and analyze the process from Kumārajīva’s Buddha
Dharma learning in India and west regions of ancient China in his early days, to his
transmitting Buddhism and translating scriptures in Chang’an, and to the great
influence of his thoughts and translated scriptures on inland Chinese Buddhism. By the
above manner, this dissertation is aimed to penetrate, after Indian Buddhism entered
into Chinese cultural mechanism, into Buddhism transmitting paths, historical
opportunities, interaction dialogues, developing traces, fates and changes, after Indian
Buddhism entered into Chinese cultural mechanism. This not only deepens the
knowledge about original source of history, but it also brings greatly instructive value
for modern culture communication.
Indian Sarvastivada School developed mainly to northern areas of India, initially
centered in Gandhara, then moving to Kophen 罽宾. In contemporary 贵霜 Kushan
Kingdom, Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana Buddhism both developed. As is seen
from heritage sites 遗址 of early Khotan 于阗 temples and Kuci grottoes art, that
initially transmitted Buddhism to west regions of ancient China is Gandharian
Hinayana Buddhism. Along with the arising of Mahayana Buddhism in Kushan
Kingdom, West Regions of ancient China also accepted Indian Mahayana Buddhism.
It could be discovered from Chinese translated scriptures that Mahayana scriptures were
mainly popular in Shache and Khotan in south road, etc. In Kuci and other countries in
north road, there continued Hinayana Buddhism, which influenced these areas most
were from Sarvastivada School in Kophen 罽宾. Kumārajīva with honorable status and
gifted wisdom quickly became elite around. When he returned to Shache, he contacted
Mahayana Buddhism and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory, from which on, he
1
transferred to Mahayana Buddhism. In Kuci, he received full precept ordination and
studied Mahayana Buddhist doctrines, and associated with (Kuci’s King )纯白 Chun
Bai’s reform, Kumārajīva finally became a well-known great monk in West Regions.
Although in east and west Han dynasties, Buddhism was directly transmitted to inland
China by people from Da Yuezhi, the medium status of West Regions gradually became
obvious from Wei and Jin dynasties, with many monks transmitting Buddhism and
translating scriptures to inland China. Due to translated scriptures limited in amount,
low in quality, absent in Buddhist doctrinal instruction, Buddhism in inland China
(usually called Han area) could not achieve fast development. Geyi Buddhism attached
to Metaphysical Theory could not get access to self-development. Meanwhile, due to
long period wars and disorder in North ancient China, many rulers in five countries
from ethnic minorities in the north and sixteen countries in the south, made use of
Buddhism to stabilize their political power. All the above factors constituted the
historical context for Kumārajīva’s transmitting Buddhism and translating scriptures in
Chang’an. In the great support of Emperor Yao Xing authority, excellent monks in
Buddhism from all areas assembled in Chang’an to learn dharma from Kumārajīva.
Although in the period of scripture translation, there once overwhelmed contradictory
relationship between politics and religions, between scripture translating teams,
Kumārajīva’s super competence and other beneficial factors made scripture translation
in Chang’s a great success.
Scripture translation and Buddhism transmission in Chang’an initialized Indian
Buddhism rooted in Chinese culture mechanism. Many Indian and Western thoughts
brought by Kumārajīva started contact with Chinese inland culture, and aroused
significant influence. Madhyamaka four treatises promoted the development of Indian
Mahayana Buddhism, and Kumārajīva often treated himself as the inheritor of
Nagarjuna, with Madhyamaka prajna theories as Kumārajīva’s leading philosophical
thoughts. Kumārajīva translated Indian Madhyamaka prajna theories authentically and
accurately. On the one hand, such Indian Mahayana thoughts assisted Chinese monks
to correctly understand the essence of Mahayana theories, making Chinese Buddhism
step forward the path of independent development (such as Treatise of Zhao Lun by
Master Seng Zhao, a disciple of Kumārajīva) and have the idea of doctrine classification
of Mahayana and Hinayana. On the other hand, such Indian Mahayana thoughts were
encountered with the contradiction with Chinese traditional culture. Historical
limitation for the thought of ultimate emptiness not only bears doubt or skeptical voice
in Indian, but also in China. Chinese traditional thoughts, such as “worshiping being or
existence 尚有”, “all could become great sages as Rao and Shun 人人皆可为尧舜”,
are in conformity with thoughts in Mahanirvana Sutra, such as “all sentient beings have
2
Buddha Nature 众生皆有佛性”, “Everyone could become the Buddha 人人皆可成佛”,
etc. Thus, Buddha Nature theory soon became the new trend by replacing Madhyamaka
prajna theories.
In addition to the above, a lot of scriptures translated by Kumārajīva made deep
influence on the development of Buddhism in China. However, such influence
obviously shines on the same content, that because of different culture backgrounds in
India and in China, there displays different developing traces and blueprints. After
Indian Buddhism transmitted to China, by strict selection and absorption, there aroused
changes and created new content in the development process of Buddhism in China.
From the perspective of thought influence on all sects, Diamond Sutra developed for a
long time in India, but until Tang Dynasty, Diamond Sutra became the supreme sutra
respected by Chan Sect. Satyasiddhi-śāstra 成实论 was not popular in India, but in
south and north dynasties of ancient China, this sutra prospered and was worshiped by
many masters specialized in Satyasiddhi thought. Nagarjuna’s three treatises only
temporarily prospered in Sui Dynasty and early Tang Dynasty, by reference to which
Master Ji Zang 吉 藏 established Three Treatises Sect, but soon declined. Lotus
Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra) was popular in India and in China, by reference to
which Tian Sect was established. From the perspective of people’s faith, there are
multiple types of Avalokitesvara faith in India, but in China, there is only one function
of saving people from suffering, with Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva usually present as
female. Amitabha Buddha’s image appeared little in India, but from Tang Dynasty,
along with the development of West Pure Land faith, Amitabha Buddha became the
main theme for making images in local public. The faith in Maitreya Bodhisattva
descending to this secular world was once prohibited due to rebels’ misusage, but to
Song Dynasty, Maitreya image was made in the form of big belly well-known to
everyone and was transmitted extensively. Lay Buddhist image in Vimalakirti Sutra
became the goal sought by literati generation by generation, and re-made the image of
the lay Buddhist. Such facts all illustrate that Buddhism, which was transmitted from
India to China, changed greatly to fit for Chinese people’s need and culture.
From the perspective of the entire process of Kumārajīva transmitting Buddhism
and translating scriptures, deficiency and necessity for Chinese culture development is
the prerequisite for the entry of Indian Buddhism into China. Absorbing and rechanging some forms of Indian Buddhism so as to assimilate with Chinese culture is
the general regularity for the development of Buddhism. Choosing proper historical
time and methodology is the necessary requisite for the successful transmission of
Buddhism. Meanwhile, in the process of transmission, there manifest some
3
characteristics of unification in continuity, epoch, and entirety and the subjective
principle of Chinese culture. By analyzing and penetrating into these characteristics,
there presents practical referent value and meaning for understanding communication
between Chinese culture and foreign culture.
Key words: Kumārajīva, Indian Buddhism, transmission, scripture translation
4
CONTENT
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 10
1 Dissertation Background and Value .................................................................................................. 10
2 Literature Review of Scholars’ Researches in China and abroad............................................... 13
3 Research Methodology......................................................................................................................... 37
4 Dissertation Innovation and Limitation............................................................................................ 40
Chapter One: The Development of Sarvastivada School and Its Influence on Kumārajīva’s Early
Buddhist Theories .............................................................................................................................................. 44
1.1The Development of Sarvastivada School .................................................................................... 44
1.1.1The Development of Sarvastivada School in Kushan Kingdom ................................. 44
1.1.2 Sarvastivada School in Kophen ......................................................................................... 49
1.2 Transmision of Sarvastivada School in Kuci ............................................................................... 56
1.2.1From the perspective of Chinese-translated scriptures to see Buddhism Transmission
.............................................................................................................................................................. 56
1.2.2The Original Source of Kuci’s Sarvastivada School ...................................................... 62
1.3Kumārajīva’s Learning about Sarvastivada School .................................................................... 64
1.3.1Kumārajīva’s Learning about Scriptures of Sarvastivada School ............................... 64
1.3.2Kumārajīva’s Contact with Thoughts of Sarvastivada School .................................... 67
Chapter Two: Early Transmission of Da Yuezhi’s Mahayana Buddhism and Kumārajīva’s
Transference of Buddhist Theories ................................................................................................................ 69
2.1The Arising and Eastern Transmission of Da Yuezhi’s Mahayana Buddhism...................... 69
2.1.1The Development of Da Yuezhi’s (Greater Yueh-chih, or Da Yuezhi, or Otsuki)
Mahayana Buddhism ...................................................................................................................... 69
2.1.2Eastern Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism in Early Period .................................. 73
2.2Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism in Western Regions of Ancient China ..................... 80
2.2.1 Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism to Western Regions ........................................ 80
2.2.2Reasons for Two Different Roads Transmission of Buddhism in Western Regions87
2.3Kumārajīva’s Acceptance and Development of Mahayana Buddhism .................................. 96
2.3.1The Time When Kumārajīva Transferred to Mahayana Buddhism ............................ 96
2.3.2Kumārajīva’s Acceptance of Madhyamaka Theories..................................................... 98
2.3.3Kumārajīva’s Contact with Mahayana Scriptures ........................................................ 100
2.3.4Kumārajīva’s Cognition about Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana Buddhism ... 104
2.4Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transimission in Kuci (Kuzu, or 龟兹, or Qiuci, or Kucina, or Kucha,
or Kuche) and His Influence ................................................................................................................ 109
2.4.1The Completion and Development of Mahayana Buddhism in Kucina .................. 109
2.4.2 Kucina King’s Religious Reform and Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transmission......... 114
Chapter Three: Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transmission to Inland China................................................. 118
3.1The Function of Western Regions on the Transmission of Indian Buddhism to Inland China
in Wei and Jin Dynasties ....................................................................................................................... 118
3.1.1Western Regions as the Important Bridge Connecting Western Culture with Chinese
Culture .............................................................................................................................................. 118
3.1.2The Method Transference of Early Indian Buddhism Transmission to Inland China
............................................................................................................................................................ 122
3.1.3 Western Regions’ Buddhism Transmission to Inland China and Its Influence ..... 126
5
3.1.4 Seeking Dharma to the West in Wei and Jin Periods .................................................. 132
3.2 The Exploration about Context and Reasons for Kumārajīva Coming to Inland China . 135
3.2.1 The Development of Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism in Early Ancient China
............................................................................................................................................................ 135
3.2.2 Early Development of Prajna Sutra Translation and Prajna Theories in Han, Wei and
West Jin Dynasties ......................................................................................................................... 139
3.2.3 Master Dao’an’s Doubt about Chinese Buddhism ...................................................... 144
3.2.4 Former and Latter Qin Authorities’ Worship to Buddhism ....................................... 146
3.2.5 Re-exploration about the Historical Truth of Kumārajīva’s Coming to Inland China
............................................................................................................................................................ 148
3.3 The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Indian Monks .................................................... 155
3.3.1 Kumārajīva and Sangha in Chang’an ............................................................................. 155
3.3.2 The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Dharma-yaśas, Puṇyatāra, and Dharmaruci .................................................................................................................................................... 160
3.3.3 The Relationship between Buddhabhadra and Kumārajīva Sangha ........................ 164
3.4Analysis about the Factors of Kumārajīva’s Success to Translate Scriptures..................... 173
3.4.1Sinicized Factors of Kumārajīva Translating Scriptures ............................................. 174
3.4.2Characteristics of Kumārajīva’s Personal Quality ........................................................ 178
3.4.3External Conditions for Successful Scripture Translation .......................................... 186
3.4.4Internal Conditions for the Development of Buddhism .............................................. 189
Chapter Four: Indian Factors of Kumārajīva’s Life Style and Their Influence ................................. 193
4.1The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Political Power before and after His Entering
into Inland China..................................................................................................................................... 193
4.1.1The Relationship between Politics and Religion in Kumārajīva’s Early Life ........ 193
4.1.2 Yao Xing’s Communication with Kumārajīva and His Disciples for Political Aims
............................................................................................................................................................ 194
4.1.3Kumārajīva’s Attitude to Yao Xing’s Political Power ................................................. 201
4.2The Indian Origin and Historical Influence of Kumārajīva’s Precept Violation ................ 203
4.2.1Indian Origin of Kumārajīva’s Precept Violation ......................................................... 203
4.2.2Historical Influence of Kumārajīva’s Precept Violation ............................................. 211
4.3Kumārajīva’s Absorption of Indian Magical Method 道术 .................................................... 213
4.3.1Early Transmitters’ Application of Indian Magical Method....................................... 213
4.3.2Kumārajīva’s Application of Magical Method .............................................................. 217
4.3.3The Origin of Kumārajīva’s Magical Method ............................................................... 221
Chapter Five: Transmission of Madhyamika School into China and Its Dialogue with Chinese
Having Existed Buddhism ............................................................................................................................. 226
5.1Indian Origin and Transmission of Madhyamaka Theories .................................................... 226
5.1.1Indian Origin of Madhyamaka Theory ............................................................................ 226
5.1.2Transmission of Madhyamaka Theory to the North ..................................................... 230
5.1.3Translation of Four Treatises in Madhyamika School ................................................. 234
5.2 Ideology Dialogue between Kumārajīva and Master Hui Yuan ............................................ 236
5.2.1 Ideology Comparison between Kumārajīva and Master Hui Yuan.......................... 238
5.2.2 Analyzing the Reasons of Ideology Difference between Master Hui Yuan and
Kumārajīva ...................................................................................................................................... 244
6
5.3Master Seng Rui’s Doubt about Indian Prajna Thought .......................................................... 245
5.3.1Master Seng Rui’s Learning about Indian Prajna Theory ........................................... 246
5.3.2Master Seng Rui’s Doubt about Indian Prajna Theory ................................................ 249
5.4The Combination of Indian and Chinese Thoughts in Zhao Lun........................................... 251
5.4.1Wu Bu Qian Lun and the Combination of Indian and Chinese Thoughts ............... 252
5.4.2Indian and Chinese Philosophical Thoughts Presented in Bu Zhen Kong Lun ..... 256
5.4.3The Combination of Indian and Chinese Thoughts in Bo Re Wu Zhi Lun ............. 259
5.4.4Philosophical Transference in Nie Pan Wu Ming Lun................................................. 260
5.4.5The Status and Influence of Master Seng Zhao’s Theory in the History of Chinese
Philosophy ....................................................................................................................................... 261
5.5Kumārajīva’s Prajna Thinking Style and Its Influence in China............................................ 262
5.5.1 Re-translation and New Translation of Prajna Scriptures by Kumārajīva ............. 263
5.5.2Kumārajīva’s Prajna Thinking Style ................................................................................ 265
5.5.3Kumārajīva’s Influence on the Development of Chinese Buddhist Philosophy.... 267
5.6Temporary Prosperity of Theories in Three Treatises............................................................... 271
5.6.1Prosperity and Declination of Three Treatises in South and North Dynasties ....... 272
5.6.2Three Treatise Sect Founded by Master Ji Zang and His Development Contribution
to Madhyamaka Theories............................................................................................................. 275
5.7From Prajna Emptiness to Nirvana Subtle Existence ............................................................... 282
5.7.1Buddhist Trend Transference from Prajna Emptiness to Nirvana Subtle Existence
............................................................................................................................................................ 282
5.7.2The Exploration about Transference Reasons................................................................ 288
5.7.3 The Political and Social Development Need in South and North Dynasties ......... 297
Chapter Six: Indian Origin of Kumārajīva’s Buddhist Theories and Different Development Future
in China .............................................................................................................................................................. 300
6.1Transmission of Diamond Sutra to China and Its Evolution in China.................................. 300
6.1.1The Arising and Transmission of Diamond Sutra ......................................................... 301
6.1.2Transmission of Diamond Sutra to China and the Popularity of Kumārajīva Version
............................................................................................................................................................ 304
6.1.3The Selection and Transformation of Diamond Sutra in Chan Sect ......................... 306
6.1.4The Popularity of Diamond Sutra in Tang Dynasty ..................................................... 313
6.2 Indian Origin of Satyasiddhi-śāstra and Its Popularity in South and North Dynasties .... 316
6.2.1Indian Origin of Satyasiddhi-śāstra .................................................................................. 316
6.2.2Kumārajīva’s Translation about Satyasiddhi-śāstra ..................................................... 319
6.2.3The Transmission of Satyasiddhi-śāstra in China ......................................................... 320
6.2.4Analyzing the Reasons for Popularity of Satyasiddhi-śāstra in South and North
Dynasties ......................................................................................................................................... 327
6.3 Indian Origin of Lotus Sutra and Its Development in China ................................................. 338
6.3.1The Arising and Influence of Lotus Sutra in India ....................................................... 338
6.3.2Transmission of Lotus Sutra in South and North Dynasties....................................... 342
6.3.3Application and Development of Lotus Sutra Thoughts by Tiantai Sect ................ 347
6.4 From Vimalakirti Sutra to See the Assimilation between Indian Buddhism and Chinese
Culture ....................................................................................................................................................... 356
6.4.1The Formation of Vimalakirti Sutra in India .................................................................. 356
7
6.4.2The Transmission of Vimalakirti Sutra in Kumārajīva Version ................................. 359
6.4.3Faith in Vimalakirti and Image Transformation in South and North Dynasties..... 360
6.4.4The Influence of Faith in Vimalakirti on Literati Buddhism in Tang and Song
Dynasties ......................................................................................................................................... 366
Chapter Seven: Indian Origin of Transcendental Faith Transmitted by Kumārajīva and Its Different
Development in China .................................................................................................................................... 373
7.1Transmission of Faith in Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva in India and Its Transformation in
China .......................................................................................................................................................... 373
7.1.1The Origin and Transmission of Faith in Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva ..................... 373
7.1.2Transmission and Functional Changes of Faith in Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva .... 377
7.1.3The Formation of Apocryphal Scriptures Related with Faith in Avalokitesvara
Bodhisattva...................................................................................................................................... 380
7.1.4 The Gender Evolution of Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva................................................ 383
7.2 Transmission of Amitabha Sutra to China.................................................................................. 385
7.2.1Origin of Amitabha Sutra outside China ......................................................................... 385
7.2.2Transmission of Amitabha Sutra to China ...................................................................... 387
7.2.3The Designation Transference from Immeasurable Lifespan Buddha to Amitabha
Buddha ............................................................................................................................................. 390
7.2.4 Faith in Amitabha Buddha in Sui and Tang Dynasties ............................................... 393
7.3 Maitreya Scriptures’ Origin in India and Their Transformation in China .......................... 397
7.3.1The Formations of Faith in Maitreya and of Scriptures about Maitreya’s Birth
Descent Transmitted in Indian and Middle Asian Areas ...................................................... 398
7.3.2 Faith in Maitreya’s Birth Descent in South and North Dynasties ............................ 403
7.3.3 The Decline of Faith in Maitreya and Rebelling Movement of Chinese People .. 407
7.3.4 Empress Wu Zetian’s Application of Faith in Maitreya’s Birth Descent ............... 409
7.3.5Monk Bu Dai in Song Dynasty and Maitreya Image with Big Belly ....................... 410
Chapter Eight: From Kumārajīva Transmitting Buddhism to China to See the Transmisstion
Characteristics of Indian Buddhism to China ............................................................................................ 411
8.1The Basic Principle of Transmitting Indian Buddhism to China: from Demand Conflicts to
Absorption and Transformation ........................................................................................................... 412
8.1.1Demand and Proper Opportunity as the Prerequisites for Indian Buddhism Entering
into Chinese Culture...................................................................................................................... 412
8.1.2From Conflicts to Choosing Absorption ......................................................................... 417
8.1.3From Transformation, Innovation to Integration........................................................... 418
8.2Media, Environment, and Methods: Factor Analyses about Successful Transmission of
Indian Buddhism to China .................................................................................................................... 420
8.2.1Medium Function of Great Monks in Communication between Indian Buddhism and
Chinese Culture .............................................................................................................................. 421
8.2.2Social and Historical Environment When Indian Buddhism Entered into China.. 422
8.2.3Manners for Indian Buddhism Entering into China ..................................................... 423
8.3Continuity, Epochal, Entirety: as Characteristics Presented in the Transmitting Process of
Indian Buddhism to China .................................................................................................................... 430
8.3.1Transmission of Indian Buddhism to China with Continuous and Innovative
Characteristics ................................................................................................................................ 430
8
8.3.2The Development of Chinese Buddhism with Epochal and Entirety Characteristics
............................................................................................................................................................ 432
8.4The Subjective Principle in the Process of Chinese Traditional Culture Accepting Indian
Buddhism .................................................................................................................................................. 434
8.4.1The Stable Characteristics of Chinese Culture as the Subjective Entity ................. 435
8.4.2Selection and Transformation about Indian Buddhism................................................ 436
8.4.3The Maintenance of Human Characteristics in Chinese Main Stream Culture ..... 437
8.4.4Great Embracing Characteristics of Chinese Culture .................................................. 438
8.4.5The Unbalanced Principle in the Communication of Civilization ............................ 438
Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................................... 439
9
Transmission, Dialogue, and Breakthrough: to See the
Transmission of Indian Buddhism to China
from the Period of Kumārajīva
By Cui Fen, translated by Shi Sherry
Introduction
1 Dissertation Background and Value
1.1Dissertation Background (cause and condition to select the dissertation subject)
In human society from ancient times to modern times, there have been multiple
kinds of civilization ups and downs. However, they are not separately existent but with
characteristics of mutual communication, penetration and assimilation. Under the
background of different civilizations, people have different thinking manners. Samuel
P. Huntingdun 亨廷顿 put forward civilization conflicts, which obviously has the sense
of western hegemonism. Chinese people have harmony-valued notion since ancient
times, whose extension could be found in the establishment of harmonious society and
world in modern times. Along with strengthening degree of globalization,
communication among different kinds of civilization is becoming close and complex.
How to treat and deal with such communication in order to commonly improve human
civilization has become the problem that all countries must face and think over.
Religion is the important carrier of human culture, as well as the significant
content of communication among different kinds of human civilization. Buddhism as
one of three biggest religions in the world, has splendid status and influence in the
transmission history of human civilization. Ancient communication between Chinese
culture and Indian culture is mostly characterized by the transmission of Indian
Buddhism to China, which is also the most influential event in the transmission history
of Buddhism. Although there have been fruitful achievements in the aspects of study
on Buddhist philosophy and history, etc., there is still less attention to the transmission
of Indian Buddhism to China, from the perspective of communication theory and of
comparison between different cultures. Therefore, it is a very meaningful subject, by
selecting a representative event, to see such communication process, to explore the
10
conflicts and communication among different cultures in the transmission process, and
to explore different development outlooks and changes presented by Buddhism in the
background of a foreign culture.
Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism and translation of scriptures to Inland
China is an event with great influence in the transmission history of Indian Buddhism
to China, which opens full-fledged prosperity of Mahayana Buddhism in China.
Selecting such a typical event as study object is able to better achieve the goal of this
dissertation topic.
1.2Value in Theory and Practical Life
Firstly, from the vision of world history development, from time and space of
cross-region cultures and nations, from the perspective of communication theory, this
dissertation attempts to investigate and study the transmitting process and transforming
process of different civilizations. This dissertation attempts to apply horizontal
comparison to analyze different outlooks and changes on the path of Indian Buddhism
to assimilate with Chinese culture. In research methodology, these are undoubtedly
innovative attempts. This dissertation attempts to start with an important historical
event, with the focus on some points, such as the exploration of paths or manners of
Indian Buddhism entering into China, the process of Indian Buddhism contacting with
Chinese culture, and changes of Indian Buddhism under different culture backgrounds,
which are conducive to enrich visions and methods for Buddhist studies.
Secondly, the transmission of Indian Buddhism to China is a great event in the
communication history of human culture, about the development process of which,
there is less comprehensive and complete study. This is also a gap in previous studies
required to bridge. By complete analysis about the background and process of events
related with Kumārajīva’s dharma learning, Buddhism transmission and scripture
translation, this dissertation attempts to uncover the reasons, contexts and successful
factors for Indian Buddhism able to enter into Chinese culture mechanism. This could
more profoundly understand how Indian Buddhism became one part of ancient Chinese
culture, and further provide assistance for exploring some special characteristics in
human culture communication.
Thirdly, based on comparative study on the difference between Indian Buddhism
and Chinese Buddhism, especially emphasizing comparative study on development
paths and traces of the same content under different culture backgrounds, thus to
overcome the weak parts in previous studies. In the process of Indian Buddhism
entering into Chinese traditional culture mechanism, different contents are countered
with different results and traces, some abandoned, some absorbed, and some
transformed. By exploring different results and traces manifested by different contents
11
of Indian Buddhism transmitted by Kumārajīva in the development process of
Sinicization, as well as by study on them in comprehensive horizontal manner, this
dissertation attempts to uncover the difference in content demand and prosperous
degree in different culture backgrounds. This could make people better understand the
difference between Chinese culture and Indian culture, and provide more areas for
people to understand the Sinicization of Buddhism.
Fourthly, by deep exploration about Kumārajīva’s Buddhism transmission and
scripture translation to inland China, more studies, related with Kumārajīva and
communication between Chinese Buddhist culture and Indian Buddhist culture, step
forward more deeply. For example, the following studies are all in the coverage of deep
exploration and precise elaborate in this dissertation. These studies include:
1. The difference of Buddhism development in south road and north road at the age of
Kumārajīva;
2. The real reasons for Kumārajīva coming to inland China;
3. His relationship with monks from Western Regions and his real attitude to Hinayana
Buddhism;
4. The problem of Kumārajīva’s precept violation, temporary prosperity of Prajna
School in China and the historical reasons for its transformation to Nirvana theory;
5. The communication between Buddhism transmitted by Kumārajīva and Chinese
culture.
Fifthly, as a kind of foreign culture, Buddhism finally becomes one inseparable
part of Chinese culture after transmission, absorption, and transformation, and makes
great influence on the development of Chinese culture. However, Buddhism has not
changed the main value system of Chinese culture, with Confucian thoughts in the
leading status. Buddhism, as a new and fresh blood into the mother body, promotes
better development of Chinese culture. This makes the subjective (main body) principle
of Chinese culture develop perfectly, which is not negative but active to absorb, select,
and transform beneficial elements in Buddhist culture. This presents obviously contrast
with the transmission of Christianity in modern China. Especially, in nowadays, in front
of pervasive transmission of western culture, how to make full use of beneficial aspects
of other cultures and to promote self-culture with innovation is a question deserving
Chinese people taking into consideration. Taking the history as the mirror, by exploring
the entry of ancient Buddhist culture into China, and by concluding historical regularity
and experiences, beneficial implications are undoubtedly brought forth for establishing
self-awareness and self-confidence in modern Chinese culture.
In summary, this dissertation attempts to analyze the communication process
between Indian Buddhism and Chinese culture, to analyze the reasons for Buddhism
successfully entering into China, and different outlooks and paths in the development
12
process of Buddhism in China. Such analyses in this dissertation would have
significantly theoretical and practical value and meaning in the following areas. These
areas include understanding the status and function of north India and West Regions for
Buddhism coming to inland China, understanding how Indian Buddhism successfully
entering into inland China, understanding why Mahayana Buddhism able to be rooted
in inland China successfully, and understanding the results or effects for respective
Indian Buddhism and Chinese culture, as well as their mutual relationship. Successful
Sinicization of Buddhism is the typical example of foreign culture entering into China
in ancient Chinese history. Since modern world is open and interactive, so by way of
civilization communication to study on successful models in ancient civilization
communication and to find out their communication paths and manners, which would
have significantly practical reference value, in view of modern communication with
conflicts among different civilizations.
2 Literature Review of Scholars’ Researches in China and abroad
Kumārajīva’s Buddhism transmission and scripture translations are the great
events in the history of Chinese Buddhism, the significant and deep influence of which
is unprecedented, and become the important study objects for historians, litterateurs,
and philosophers because of extensive areas involved, with abundant study
achievements in each area. By review of Kumārajīva’s Buddhism transmission and
scripture translation, as well as relevant academic achievements and study motions, it
is attempted to discover some study gaps, innovative opinions, and new states.
1.Literature review about the transmission of Indian Buddhism to West Regions
and inland China
(1)Transmission and communication between Indian Buddhism and Chinese
culture
In 1920s, Liang Qichao 梁启超 published some articles, such as Communication
between China and India 中国印度之交通, Initial Transmission of Buddhism to China
佛教之初步输入, The Relationship between Indian Culture and Chinese Culture 印度
与中国文化之亲属的关系 , etc., which deeply explored the transmitting process of
Indian Buddhism to China and its influence, and later are collected into Eighteen
13
Articles in Buddhist Studies 佛学研究十八篇 . 1 Ji Xianlin 季羡林 wrote Thesis
Collection of the History of Relationship between Chinese Culture and Indian Culture
中印文化关系史论文集, with twenty-one articles in all. In these articles, there put
forward new views by quoting new materials, in which the verification about the
transmission of paper making and silk to India bridged the historical gap of Chinese
culture transmitted to India in previous studies. In the article of the Discovery and
Exploration of Tocharian Language and Its Function in the Communication between
Indian Culture and Chinese Culture 吐火罗语的发现与考释及其在中印文化交流中
的作用, it also illustrated the main communication meaning between Indian culture and
Chinese culture from the aspect of archeology in ancient Chinese characters.
In some published articles, such as Communication between Buddhism and Indian
and Chinese Culture 佛教与中印文化交流, Communication History between Chinese
Culture and Indian Culture 中印文化交流史 , the communication history between
Chinese culture and Indian culture is divided into seven stages, with five main stages:
conflict, absorption, transformation, integration, and assimilation,2 which started the
new vision of Buddhism transmission. Tang Yijie 汤一介 wrote three articles, including
Two-way Selection—the Exploration about the Transmission of Indian Buddhism to
China 文 化 的 双 向 选 择 — 印 度 佛 教 传 入 中 国 的 考 察 , To See Conflicts and
Integration between Two Cultures by Way of Transmission of Indian Buddhism to China
从印度佛教传入中国看两种文化的冲突与融合, To See the Development of Chinese
Culture by Way of the Transmission of Indian Buddhism to China 从印度佛教传入中
国看中国文化的发展 . These articles illustrate the process of two cultures from
conflicts to integration after Indian Buddhism entered into China, as well as the redevelopment of Chinese culture, which bring great inspiration to people. 3 Later
scholars’ study achievements are also fruitful, such as Buddhism and Chinese Culture
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年。
季羡林：
《中印文化关系史论文集》
，三联书店，1982 年；
《佛教与中印文化交流》
，江西人民出版社，1990
年；
《中印文化交流史》
，新华出版社，1991 年。
3
汤一介：
《文化的双向选择—印度佛教输入中国的考察》
，
《佛教与中国文化》
，宗教文化出版社 1999 年；
《从印度佛教传入中国看两种文化的冲突和融合》
，
《深圳大学学报》
，1985 年第 3 期；
《从印度佛教传入中
国看中国文化的发展》
，
《光明日报》
，1986 年 1 月 20 日。
14
1
2
佛教与中国文化 by Wang Hongwei 王宏纬,4 Buddhist Arts from India to Xin Jiang
of China 印度到中国新疆的佛教艺术 by Jia Yingyi 贾应逸 and Qi Xiaoshan 祁小
山,5 Ancient India and Ancient China 古代印度与古代中国 by Liu Xinru 刘欣如,6
Communication History of Chinese and Foreign Religious Culture 中外宗教文化交
流史 by Lou Yulie 楼宇烈,7 Buddhism Communication History between China and
India 中印佛教交通史 by Shi Dongchu 释东初,8 Buddhism Transmission to the East
and Chinese Buddhist Arts 佛教东传与中国佛教艺术 by Wu Chao 吴焯,9 Causes
and Conditions for Chinese and Indian Arts 中印艺术因缘 by Chang Renxia 常任
侠 , 10 etc. These articles made a series of verification about Buddhist culture
communication between China and India.
There are some articles in the aspect of communication between Chinese culture
and Indian culture. Chen Han 陈寒 wrote Monks from Kophen to Inland China and
Buddhism in Chang’an in the Period of Sixteen States Countries 十六国时期罽宾来
华僧人与长安佛教, which illustrates monks from Kophen 罽宾 coming to Chang’an
to translate scriptures.11 Shi Weixiang 史苇湘 wrote To See Culture Communication
between China and India in History through Dun Huang’s Wall Picture “Subtle
Changes of Bhikkhunis”从敦煌壁画“微妙比丘尼变”看历史上的中印文化交流.
Yuan Shuhui 袁书会 wrote Foreign People in Twenty-four Kinds of Filialty—Simple
Talk about Culture Communication between China and India 二十四孝中的异域人物
—浅谈中印文化交流. These two articles observe the difference between Chinese
culture and Indian culture from a specific point. 12 Xu Zhiyuan 徐志远 wrote The
Transmission of Indian Buddhism to China and Culture Communication between China
and India 古 代 印 度 佛 教 的 传 入 及 中 印 文 化 交 流 . Chen Yihai 陈 义 海 wrote
Discussion about Culture Tradition from the Perspective of the Relationship between
Buddhism and Chinese Culture 从佛教与中国文化关系谈跨文化传统. Chen Ming
陈鸣 wrote To See the Conflicts and Development from the Perspective of Sinicization
of Buddhism 从佛教汉化看中印文化的碰撞与高扬.These three articles generally
discuss about the communication of traditional culture between China and India. 13
王宏纬：
《佛教与中国文化》
，华侨出版社，1995 年。
贾应逸，祁小山：
《印度到中国新疆的佛教艺术》
，兰州：甘肃教育出版社，2002 年。
6
刘欣如：
《古代印度与古代中国》
，牛津大学出版社，1988 年。
7
楼宇烈：
《中外宗教文化交流史》
，湖南教育出版社，1998 年。
8
释东初：
《中印佛教交通史》
，中华佛教文化馆，中华大典编印会出版，1968 年。
9
吴焯：
《佛教东传与中国佛教艺术》
，浙江人民出版社，1991 年。
10
常任侠：
《中印艺术因缘》
，上海出版公司，1955 年。
11
陈寒：
《十六国时期罽宾来华僧人与长安佛教》
，
《西安电子科技大学学报（社会科学版）
》2004 年第 1 期。
12
史苇湘：
《从敦煌壁画“微妙比丘尼变”看历史上的中印文化交流》
，
《敦煌研究》1995 年第 2 期。袁书会：
《二十四孝中的异域人物—浅谈中印文化交流》
，
《社会科学战线》2000 年第 4 期。
13
徐志远：
《古代印度佛教的传入及中印文化交流》
，
《曲靖师专学报（社会科学版）
》1989 年第 4 期。陈义
15
4
5
Chen Guoguang 陈国光 wrote Interpreting 和尚 and Discussion about the Function
of Buddhism in Western Regions at the Early Period of Culture Communication
between China and India 释“和尚”—兼谈中印文化交流初期西域佛教的作用, 14
which from the perspective of linguistic etymology changes, verifies the fact that many
Buddhist words in inland China are derived from Western Regions, such as Khotan and
Kuci.This illustrates that inland Buddhism has close relationship with Buddhism in
Western Regions.
Some scholars make comparative study on Buddhist problems from the
perspective of the difference of Buddhist thinking styles between China and India.15
Such scholars include Fang Litian 方立天, who wrote Simple Discussion about the
Difference of Mind Nature Theory between Chinese Buddhism and Indian Buddhism 简
论中印佛教心性思想之不同 and Comparison about Thinking Styles between Chinese
Buddhism and Indian Buddhism 中印佛教思维方式之比较;16 Sa Zhihui 萨支辉,who
wrote Thinking and Comparing Chinese and Indian Ancient Partial Philosophical
Thoughts and Analysis of Forming Factors 中印古代部分哲学思想的思考比较和成
因分析; Wei Fuming 魏福明, who wrote Zhao Lun and Culture Communication
between China and India 肇论与中印文化交流,17 etc.
Some articles explore early communication between China and India, such as The
Characteristics of Buddhism to the East in Kushan Period 贵霜时期东渐佛教的特色
by Liu Xinru 刘欣如, China’s Records of People from Kushan and Great Yuezhi 贵霜
大月氏人流寓中国考 by Lin Meicun 林梅村, Simple Discussion about Kushan
Kingdom and China 浅谈贵霜王国与中国 by Li Linfeng 李林凤.18 Gu Zhengmei 古
正 美 wrote Political Tradition on Buddhism in Kushan Kingdom and Mahayana
Buddhism 贵霜佛教政治传统与大乘佛教, which through Chinese translated Buddhist
scriptures makes presumptive study on the development of Buddhism in all periods of
Kushan Kingdom, especially for 迦 腻 色 迦 Kaniṣka period, and analyzes the
relationship between Buddhism and politics, as well as the important status of
Mahayana Buddhism, etc. However, in this article, some ideas are to be discussed.19 In
addition, 刘慧 Liu Hui’s The Origin Exploration about Faith in Maitreya and Imagemaking in India as well as the Translation of Early Scriptures about Maitreya in China
海：
《从佛教与中国文化关系谈跨文化传统》
，
《盐城师范学院学报》1999 年第 4 期。陈鸣：
《从佛教汉化看
中印文化的碰撞与高扬》
，
《宗教》1992 年第 2 期。
14
陈国光：
《释“和尚”—兼谈中印文化交流初期西域佛教的作用》
，
《西域研究》1995 年第 2 期。
15
李利安：
《中印佛教观音身世信仰的主要内容和区别》
，
《中华文化论坛》1996 年第 4 期。
16
方立天：
《简论中印佛教心性思想之不同》
，
《佛学研究》1984 年第 3 期。
17
萨支辉：
《中印古代部分哲学思想的思考比较和成因分析》
，
《世界历史》1995 年第 2 期。魏福明：
《肇论
与中印文化交流》
，
《江海学刊》2006 年第 6 期。
18
刘欣如：
《贵霜时期东渐佛教的特色》
，
《南亚研究》1993 年第 3 期。林梅村：
《贵霜大月氏人流寓中国考》
，
《中国敦煌鲁番学》1988 年学术讨论会暨会员大会论文。李林凤：《浅谈贵霜王国与中国》，《西北史地》
1999 年第 2 期。
19
古正美：
《贵霜佛教政治传统与大乘佛教》
，台湾允晨文化出版社，1993 年版。
16
印度弥勒信仰，造像探源与中国早期弥勒经典的传译, and 陈强 Chen Qiang’s The
Comparison about Development Paths of Buddhism between China and India 中印佛
教发展路径之比较, both articles 20 make deep exploration about different contents
and paths of communication between China and India.
Buddhist Conquest of China 佛教征服中国, written by Erik Zürcher 许里和,
translated by Li Silong 李四龙, illustrates the situation of Buddhism entering into China
in early days, especially the conflicts and adaptation between Buddhism and Chinese
culture in Han and Wei periods. But the author wrote in the manner of one civilization
conquering another civilization, which obviously does not match the fact of Buddhism
transmitting to China. 21 P. C. Pagchi’s Thousand Years of Communication between
China and India 中印文化的千年交往 , discussed about the culture relationship
between China and India in ancient times.22 The Family Tree of Buddhas’ Images 佛像
的系谱, written by 村田靖子 Yasuko Murata, translated by Jin Shen 金申, explores the
evolution process of Buddhas’ images from India to China from the perspective of
iconography.23 桑山正进’s Bamyan Great Buddha and Traffic Line Changes between
China and India 巴米扬大佛与中印交通路线的变迁 and Two Traffic Lines Related
with Bamyan Great Buddha 与 巴 米 扬 大 佛 有 关 的 两 条 交 通 路 线 , explore
communication lines between China and India in ancient times presented by Bamyan
Great Buddha.24
(2)The Relationship between West Regions and Chinese Buddhism in Early Days
Three articles from different angles fully illustrate the status and function of Silk
Road in middle and western regions, which include 常任侠 Chang Renxia’s Silk Road
and Culture Arts in Western Regions 丝绸之路与西域文化艺术 , 周菁葆 Zhou
Qianbao and 邱陵 Qiu Ling’s Silk Road and Religious Culture 丝绸之路宗教文化,
苏北海 Su Beihai’s Silk Road and Kuci’s History and Culture 丝绸之路与龟兹历史
文化.25 吴焯 Wu Chao’s To See the Time of Buddhism Transmitted to Western Regions
by Archaeology Remains 从考古遗存看佛教传入西域的时间 26 makes discussion
about Buddhism transmission in early Western Regions.宋肃灜 Song Suying’s The
Contribution of Western Regions Great Monks to Chinese Translated Scriptures in Wei
刘慧：
《印度弥勒信仰，造像探源与中国早期弥勒经典的传译》
，
《美术大观》2009 年 12 月。陈强：
《中
印佛教发展路径之比较》
，
《中国宗教》2010 年第 7 期。
21
<荷兰>许里和著，李四龙等译：
《佛教征服中国》
，南京：江苏人民出版社，1998 年第 1 版。
22
P. C. Pagchi: India and China—Thousand Years of Cultural Relation, Mumbai, 1951.
23
村田靖子著，金申译：
《佛像的系谱》
，上海：上海辞书出版社，2002 年。
24
桑山正进著，王钺编译：
《巴米扬大佛与中印交通路线的变迁》
，
《敦煌学辑刊》1991 年第 1 期。桑山正
进：
《与巴米扬大佛有关的两条交通路线》
，
《东方学报》第 57 册，1985 年。
25
常任侠：
《丝绸之路与西域文化艺术》
，上海文艺出版社，1981 年。周菁葆，邱陵：
《丝绸之路宗教文化》
，
第 11 期，乌鲁木齐：新疆人民出版社，1998 年。苏北海：
《丝绸之路与龟兹历史文化》
，新疆人民出版社，
1996 年。
26
吴焯：
《从考古遗存看佛教传入西域的时间》
，
《敦煌学辑刊》1985 年第 8 辑。
17
20
and Jin Periods 魏晋时期西域高僧对汉译佛典的贡献27 illustrates the contribution
of great monks from Western Regions by way of Buddhist canons.
Some articles from the perspective of communication theory discuss the function
and influence of ancient Khotan on the transmission of Buddhism. These articles
include South and North Traffic in Ancient Khotan 古代于阗的南北交通 by Yin Qing
殷晴, To See Buddhism Transmission to the East by way of Khotan as a Buddhist
Country 从于阗佛国看佛教东传 by Zhang Fuxin 张付新, The Influence of Kushan
Culture on Khotan 贵霜文化对于阗的影响 by Zhang Jinfen 张津芬, Ancient Khotan
and Initial Transmission of Buddha Dharma 古代于阗与佛法初传 by Xue Zongzheng
薛宗正, The Record Exploration and Analysis about the Origin of Gupta Style of
Image-making and the Art Style of Khotan Drawing School 笈多式造像与于阗画派
艺术风格的内在渊源考析 by Zhang Jianbo 张健波, The Origin Exploration and
Analysis about Cao Zhongda and Drawing School Style of Khotan 曹仲达与“于阗画
派”风格渊源探析 by Wang Xiaoling 王暁玲.28 In addition, some articles respectively
explore Buddhism in other countries of Western Regions. These articles include The
Family Name “白” in Kuci and Buddhism Transmission to the East Kuci 白姓和佛教
东传 by Chen Shiliang 陈世良, The Changes of Buddhism in Western Regions from 5th
Century to the Middle of 7th Century 五至七世纪中叶西域佛教之变迁 by Gong Jing
宫静, Problems about Buddhism Transmission to Shanshan and the Input of Western
Culture 佛教传入鄯善与西方文化的输入问题 by Huang Wenbi 黄文弼, Faith in
Buddhism in Kuci and Yanqi 焉耆 before, during and after the Period of Kumārajīva
鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰 by Ji Xianlin 季羡林.29
宋肃灜：
《魏晋时期西域高僧对汉译佛典的贡献》
，
《西域研究》1994 年第 4 期。
殷晴：
《古代于阗的南北交通》
，
《历史研究》1992 年第 3 期。张付新：
《从于阗佛国看佛教东传》
，
《西北
民族研究》2005 年第 2 期。张健波：
《笈多式造像与于阗画派艺术风格的内在渊源考析》
，
《云南艺术学院
学报》2009 年第 3 期。王暁玲：
《曹仲达与“于阗画派”风格渊源探析》
，
《新美术》2009 年第 5 期。
29
陈世良：
《龟兹白姓和佛教东传》
，
《世界宗教研究》1984 年第 4 期。宮静：
《五至七世纪中叶西域佛教之
18
27
28
羽溪了谛 Ryotai Hatani’s Buddhism in Western Regions 西域之佛教 has been
the most complete article about the exploration of Buddhism in countries of Western
Regions, in which there is precise illustration about the development of Buddhism in
Kushan and its influence on China, so it is the inevitable referent book for later scholars.
But in some aspects, there remains to be complemented. Some articles are about the
study on the history of Buddhism in Western Regions. These articles include General
Introduction about the Civilization History in Western Regions 西域文明史概论 by
Tōru Haneda 羽田亨, Study on the History of Buddhism in Khotan 于阗国佛教史的
研究 by Enga Teramoto 寺本婉雅, etc.30
The above research achievements from various areas investigate the contents in
the aspect of Buddhist culture in China and India, among which there are more static
exploration and less emphasis on dynamic analysis about process exploration, and even
less penetration into culture communication and influence between China and India
from the perspective of an entire event. Ji Xianlin 季羡林 should be regarded as the
excellent representative in this aspect, who concluded the development regularity as
five periods from the viewpoint of culture communication, thus providing some
instruction in theoy and thought for later scholars. However, about Kumārajīva’s
transmission of Buddhism to Inland China, as the most influential event in the history
of Buddhism, there is no one to analyze and explore the characteristics of culture
communication from this angle.
2.Study on Kumārajīva’s biography, thoughts, and activities
(1).Study on Kumārajīva’s biography and experiences
Earlier articles are mostly simple introductions about Kumārajīva, without deep
study. The study atmosphere initially formed in 1980s, and in recent years, study has
stepped forward to higher levels. Some representative articles include Simple
Discussion about Kumārajīva 略论鸠摩罗什 by Yin Ding 殷鼎, The Biography of
变迁》
，
《南亚研究》1990 年第 4 期。黄文弼：
《佛教传入鄯善与西方文化的输入问题》
，载《西北史地论丛》
，
上海人民出版社，1981 年。季羡林：《鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰》，《孔子研究》
2005 年第 6 期。
30
羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，商务印书局，1999 年 11 月。寺本婉雅：
《于阗佛教史的研究》，国书刊行会，
1974 年。羽田亨：
《西域文明史概论》
，弘文堂，1931 年。
19
Kumārajīva as Famous Monk in Kuci 龟兹名僧鸠摩罗什 by Hu Ji 胡戟, Simple
Investigation about Kumārajīva’s Record List 鸠摩罗什年表考略 by Chen Shiliang
陈世良, Kumārajīva—Transmitting Buddha Dharma to the East 东弘佛法的鸠摩罗
什 by Wang Xin 王欣, Kumārajīva—One of Three Greatest Translators in Ancient
China 鸠摩罗什—中国古代三大佛经翻译家之一 by Xie Qihuang 谢启晃, etc.31
Xun Feng 熏风 in 哀鸾孤桐上，清音澈九天—翻译家鸠摩罗什的一生 discussed
about some theories in late years of Kumārajīva.32 Some articles make conclusion and
review about study achievements in 20th century. These articles include Research
Review about Kumārajīva in Mainland China for Forty-five Years 四十五年来中国大
陆 鸠 摩罗 什研 究综述 and Colloquium Review about “Kumārajīva and Chinese
National Culture” “鸠摩罗什和中国民族文化”学术讨论会综述 by Huang Xianian
黄夏年; Introduction about Study on Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什研究概述 by Sang Rong
桑荣; International Colloquium Review about Commemoration of Kumārajīva’s 1650th
Anniversary of Birthday 纪念鸠摩罗什诞辰 1650 周年国际学术讨论会综述 by Liu
Guofang 刘国防.33 Zheng Yuqing’s 郑郁卿 Study on Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什研究 is
the monograph in this area, with many aspects to be discussed deeply.34
Japanese scholars also have some special achievements in the study on Kumārajīva.
Some articles present profound understanding about many problems related with
Kumārajīva and deserve further study. These articles include Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什
written by Kaimo Kitao 北尾干雄 and translated by Shi Dahe 释达和; Kumārajīva 鸠
殷鼎：
《略论鸠摩罗什》
，
《新疆大学学报》1980 年第 2 期。胡戟：
《龟兹名僧鸠摩罗什传》，
《敦煌学辑刊》
1991 年第 1 期。陈世良：
《鸠摩罗什年表考略》
，
《新疆社会科学研究》
，1982 年第 1 期。
《龟兹佛教文化论
集》
，新疆龟兹石窟研究所编，1993 年 6 月。王欣：
《东弘佛法的鸠摩罗什》
，
《历史》1998 年第 9 期。谢启
晃等：《鸠摩罗什—中国古代三大佛经翻译家之一》，《中国少数民族历史人物志》，民族出版社，1983 年。
32
熏风：
《哀鸾孤桐上，清音澈九天—翻译家鸠摩罗什的一生》，
《北京社会科学》1990 年第 3 期。
33
黄夏年：
《“鸠摩罗什和中国民族文化”学术讨论会综述》
，
《世界宗教研究》1995 年第 1 期；
《四十五年来
中国大陆鸠摩罗什研究综述》
，
《佛学研究》1994 年。桑荣：
《鸠摩罗什研究概述》
，
《西域研究》1994 年第
4 期。刘国防：
《纪念鸠摩罗什诞辰 1650 周年国际学术讨论会综述》
，
《西域研究》1994 年第 4 期。
34
郑郁卿：
《鸠摩罗什研究》
，台北：文津出版社 1988 年版。
20
31
摩罗什 by Yoshizumi Suwa 诹访义纯 and Enichi Ocho 横超慧日; Kumārajīva 鸠摩
罗 什 by Jenryu Tsukamoto 塚本善隆 , etc. 35 Some field survey reports include
Kumārajīva’s Sarira Stupa 鸠 摩 罗 什 的 舍 利 塔 by Adachi Kiroku 足 立 喜 六 ;
Kumārajīva and Cao Tang Temple 鸠摩罗什与草堂寺 by Hachi Hiroshi 八力广喜;
Cao Tang Temple at Zhong Nan Mountain 终南山草堂寺 by Ryoichi Kondo 近藤良
一 and Tetsuo Otani 大谷哲夫.36 佛瑞 Bernard Faure in The Red Thread: Buddhist
Approach to Sexuality 红线 — 佛教对性的处理 considered that Japanese monks
absolutely regarded Kumārajīva’s precept violation nowhere improper.37 斎藤达 in the
article Re-discussion about Kumārajīva’s Late Years’ Problems 鸠摩罗什的末年问题
的再检讨 also held the similar opinion, and meanwhile pointed out that in the pray for
the death of Kumārajīva, there implied his precept violation, and this was not
reasonable.38 Foreign study also includes Study Notes about Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什研
究札记 by Paul Pelliot (Chinese Name called Bo Xihe 伯希和), etc.39
(2)Study on Thoughts of Kumārajīva
Study on Buddhist philosophy has been the important content for Buddhist
scholars in China, with abundant articles in this area. These articles include The History
of Buddhism in Han, Wei, East and West Jin, South and North Dynasties 汉魏两晋南
北朝佛教史 by Tang Yongtong 汤用彤, Treatise Collection of Buddhist Thoughts in
《罗什》
，东
北尾干雄著，释达和译：
《鸠摩罗什》
，台湾恒沙出版社，1998 年版。诹访义纯，横超慧日：
京：大藏出版社，1983 年。塚本善隆：
《鸠摩罗什》，
《干泻博士古稀纪念集》
，1960 年；
《结成教授颂寿纪
念佛教思想史論集》
，1964 年。
36
足立喜六：
《鸠摩罗什的舍利塔》
，
《考古学杂集》第 3 卷第 4 号，大正元年 12 月。八力广喜：
《鸠摩罗什
与草堂寺》
；近藤良一，大谷哲夫：
《终南山草堂寺》收录于《中国佛教探访》
，北海道佛教研究者友好访华
团纪念论文集编委会编，响和五十五年。
37
The Red Thread: Buddhist Approach to Sexuality, Princeton University Press, 2001.
38
斎藤达：
《鸠摩罗什的末年问题的再检讨》
，国际佛教学大学院大学研究纪要，2000。
39
伯希和：
《鸠摩罗什研究札记》；富安敦 Antonino Forte 和马西尼 Federico Masini 主编：
《通向西方的生
命之旅—白佐良，汉学研究纪念集》(A Life Journey to the West: Sinological Studies in Memory of Giuliano
Bertuccioli), 京都，2002 年。
21
35
Han and Tang Dynasties 汉 唐 佛 教 思 想 论 集 by Ren Jiyu 任 继 愈 , Essential
Connotation of Philosophy in Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教哲学要义 by Fang Litian
方立天, Thought Introduction about Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教思想概论 by Lű
Cheng 吕澂, Thought History of Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教思想史 by Guo Peng 郭
朋, Study on Master Seng Zhao’s Thoughts 僧肇思想探究 by Tu Yanqiu 涂艳秋,
Common History of Hua Yan Sect in China 中国华严宗通史 by Wei Daoru 魏道儒,
The History of Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教史 by Ren Jiyu 任继愈, and The History
of Buddhism 佛教史 by Du Jiwen 杜继文.
Yang Zengwen 杨曾文 in Kumārajīva’s Theory of Ultimate Reality of Dharma
鸠摩罗什的诸法实相论 , by analyzing Notes on Vimalakirti Sutra 注维摩诘經 ,
considered that Kumārajīva’s thought did not isolate from the basic idea of Nagarjuna’s
Madhyamaka theory. 40 Liu Yuanchun 刘 元 春 in Attempted Discussion about
Kumārajīva’s Mahayana Thoughts 试 论 鸠 摩 罗 什 的 大 乘 佛 学 思 想 , analyzed
Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts. 41 Yu Dunkang 余敦康 in Kumārajīva and the
Buddhism-Metaphysic Combined Thought in East Jin Dynasty 鸠摩罗什与东晋佛玄
合流思想 pointed out that the transmission of Madhyamaka thoughts to China was the
greatest contribution of Kumārajīva, which made foundation to establish ontological
philosophy in China. 42 Yao Weiqun 姚卫群 in The Development Origin of Prajna
Thought in Buddhism 佛 教 般 若 思 想 发 展 源 流 , based on the discussion about
Nagarjuna’s thoughts, also illustrated deeply about the influence and development of
Madhyamaka philosophy in China.43 Xue Zongzheng 薛宗正 pointed out that in early
40
41
42
43
杨曾文：
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。
刘元春：
《试论鸠摩罗什的大乘佛学思想》
，
《西域研究》1994 年第 4 期。
余敦康：
《鸠摩罗什与东晋佛玄合流思想》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。
姚卫群：
《佛教般若思想发展源流》
，北京大学出版社，1996 年。
22
years, Kumārajīva was a religious reformer, while in his late years had the harmonious
inclination between Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana Buddhism. 44 There are also
some scholars claiming for Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts. For example, Zhang
Miao 张 淼 wrote Attempted Discussion about Kumārajīva’s Mahayana Prajna
Thought and His Comparison with Master Huiyuan 试论鸠摩罗什的大乘般若思想—
兼与慧远的佛学思想作比较, as well as Simple Illustration about the Transmission of
Prajna Theory in West Jin and East Jin Dynasties in the Area of Chang’an—Centered
on Dharma-rakṣa, Master Dao’an, and Kumārajīva 略述两晋时期般若学在长安地区
的流传—以 Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护，Dao’an 道安，Kumārajīva 罗什为中心的叙述,
etc.45
In academic arena, some articles make professional analysis about Chapters about
Mahayana Meanings 大乘义章. For example, Du Jiwen 杜继文 in Simple Analysis
about Chapters about Mahayana Meanings 大乘大义章析略, compared theoretical
difference and thought difference between Kumārajīva and Master Huiyuan in the
aspects of true dharma, ultimate reality, and dharma body, etc. 46 吴丹 Wu Dan’s
dissertation Study on Chapters of Mahayana Meanings 大乘大义章研究 made fullfledged interpretation and argument. 47 Some articles are about prajna theory and
metaphysical theory in Wei and Jin dynasties. They include The Interaction and
Selection between Prajna Theory and Metaphysical Theory—Centered on Vimalakirti
Sutra 般若学与玄学的交汇及选择—以“维摩诘經”为核心 by Shi Suiyu 施穗钰,
Discussion about Master Seng Zhao’s Buddhist Philosophy Thought and Its Theoretical
Origin and about Kumārajīva’s Prajna Thought 论僧肇佛教哲学思想及其理论渊源
兼论鸠摩罗什的般若思想 by Tian Wentang 田文棠, Prajna and Reality—Doubt
about Dharma Nature in Early Buddhist Doctrines 般若与实在—“法性”在早期佛教
薛宗正：
《鸠摩罗什彼岸世界的超越历程与此岸世界的复归—从说法龟兹到弘法长安》
，
《西域研究》1999
年第 2 期。
45
张淼，刘辉萍：
《试论鸠摩罗什的大乘般若思想—兼与慧远的佛学思想作比较》
，
《新疆社会科学》2006 年
第 3 期。
46
杜继文：
《<大乘大义章>析略》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。
47
吴丹：
《大乘大义章研究》
，苏州大学 2008 年博士论文。
23
44
义理学的疑惑 by Li Ren 立人, Study on the Development of Emptiness Thought in
Buddhism 佛教性空思想发展研究 by Ding Wenhui 丁文慧.48
The focus of Buddhist philosophy transformed from prajna theory to nirvana
theory is one great event in Buddhist philosophy of Wei, Jin, South and North dynasties,
which many scholars have noticed and made profound discussion. In this aspect, the
representative articles include The Formation of Chinese Meaning Theory—the Debate
between Kumārajīva’s Prajna Theory and Master Huiyuan’s Nirvana Theory 中国佛
教义学的形成—东晋罗什“般若”与慧远“涅槃”之争 by Lai Pengju 赖鹏举, The
Transformation from Non-being to Being in Kumārajīva Lineage—Represented by
Master Sengrui 鸠摩罗什门下由空到有的转变—以僧叡为代表 by Tu Yanqiu 涂艳
秋 , From the Debate between Master Huiyuan and Kumārajīva to See the
Transformation of Chinese Buddhist Thought Trend in Jin and Song dynasties of South
and North period 从慧远鸠摩罗什之争看晋宋之际中国佛学思潮的转向 by Zhang
Fenglei 张风雷, etc.49
The influence of Kumārajīva’s scripture translation is discussed from the some
aspects in these articles. For example, Jing Yan 静岩 in The Thought of Non-dual
Theory in Vimalakirti Sutra and Its Influence on Thoughts in Platform Sutra 维摩诘經
不二法门思想及其对坛经思想的影响, An Yibing 安亦冰 and Hu Xianli 胡宪立 in
Tiantai Sect and Lotus Sutra 天台宗与法华经, Song Lidao 宋立道 in The Self View
in Tiantai Sect and Lotus Sutra 天台宗与法华经之我见 all make discussion in the
aspects such as Chan Sect, Hua Yan Sect, Tiantai Sect, and Cheng Shi Sect, etc.50
施穗钰：
《般若学与玄学的交汇及选择—以“维摩诘經”为核心》
，
《成大宗教与文化学报》2002 年第 2 期。
田文棠：
《论僧肇佛教哲学思想及其理论渊源兼论鸠摩罗什的般若思想》
，
《陕西师大学报》
，1984 年第 2 期。
立人：
《般若与实在—“法性”在早期佛教义理学的疑惑》
，载《觉群》
，2007。丁文慧：
《佛教性空思想发展研
究》
，华中师范大学 2007 年博士论文。
49
赖鹏举：《中国佛教义学的形成—东晋罗什“般若”与慧远“涅槃”之争》，载《中华佛学学报》，2000。张风
雷：
《从慧远鸠摩罗什之争看晋宋之际中国佛学思潮的转向》
，中国人民大学学报 2010 年第 3 期。涂艳秋：
《鸠摩罗什门下由空到有的转变—以僧叡为代表》
，载《汉学研究》
，2000。
50
静岩：
《维摩诘經不二法门思想及其对坛经思想的影响》
，
《法藏文库 27》
，高雄：佛光山文教基金会，2001
年。安亦冰，胡宪立：
《天台宗与法华经》
，
《殷都学刊》1992 年第 4 期。宋立道：
《天台宗与法华经之我见》
，
《佛学研究》1998 年。
24
48
In foreign scholars’ researches, the above aspect is mentioned in some articles,
such as Common History of Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教通史 by Kamata Shigeo 镰
田茂雄, Common History of Chinese Buddhism 中国佛教通史 by Jenryu Tsukamoto
塚本善隆, Study on Tiantai Great Master 天台大师研究 by Tesuei Sado 佐藤哲英,
etc., which are still not with deep penetration. The articles, presenting important
achievements on the study of Kumārajīva’s thoughts related with Lotus
Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), include Could Japanese Develop Abstract
Thinking?—One Thought Motivation to Surpass Kumārajīva Translating Lotus Sutra
日本人能拓展抽象思维吗?---超越鸠摩罗什译法华经的一个思想动向 by Hajime
Nakamura 中村元, Mahayana Buddhism with Chinese Thoughts 中国思想的大乘佛
教 by Manya Fukui 福井文雅, and Introduction of Teaching Study on Lotus Sutra—
Master Ji Zang’s Acceptance and Development 法华教学研究序说—吉藏的受容与
展开 by Teruo Maruyama 丸山孝雄, etc.51
Other foreign study achievements include Early Madhyamika in India and China
by Richard H. Robinson, translated by Guo Zhongsheng, Study on the Transmission of
Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka Thought in China—Centered on the Period from East Jin
Dynasty to Early Tang Dynasty by Shi Yan Lian (secular name 阮氏全凤) from
Vietnam.52
About the study on Chan contemplation advocated by Kumārajīva, some articles
are related with this aspect. These articles include The Main Chan Methods before Sui
and Tang Dynasties 隋唐以前流行的主要禅法 by Yang Zengwen 杨曾文, Penetration
about Breath Meditation Transmitted by Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什所传数息观禅法之剖
析 by Shi Huimin 释慧敏, The Transmission and Characteristics and Early Chan
Methods in China 中国早期禅法的流传和特点 by Ran Yunhua 冉云华, The Thought
中村元：《日本人能拓展抽象思维吗?---超越鸠摩罗什译法华经的一个思想动向》，《世界宗教研究》1998
年第 2 期。丸山孝雄：
《法华教学研究序说—吉藏的受容与展开》
，平东寺书店，1978 年。
52
理查德德 罗宾逊著，郭忠生译：
《印度与中国早期的中观学派》
，正观出版社，1996 年 12 月。阮氏全凤
（释嚴莲）
：
《龙树中观思想在华流波研究—以东晋至初唐时期为中心》
，福建师范大学 2008 年博士论文。
25
51
History of Early Chan Theory in Middle China 中土前期禅学思想史 by Xu Wenming
徐文明. 53 Some Japanese scholars make study in this area, including 池田英淳
Young-soon Ikeda’s Meditation Scriptures Translated by Kumārajīva and Master
Huiyuan, 藤 堂 恭 俊 ’s Reciting the Buddha’s Names Theory in Chan Scriptures
Translated by Kumārajīva, 菅 野 龙 清 Kanno Ryukiyoshi’s Kumārajīva’s
Interpretation about Chan Based on Scriptures, 船 山 彻 Toru Funayama’s
Sarvastivada Master-disciple Lineage Written by Master Seng You in Liang Dynasty
and Buddhism in Tang Dynasty, 牧 田 谛 亮 Kiyoshi Maeda’s Biography of
Kumārajīva—about Problems of Mahayana Bodhisattva’s Three Kinds of
Contemplation in Seven Temples and All Scriptures.54
Study achievements on Kumārajīva are fruitful, but scholars mostly explore
Kumārajīva’s thoughts and translated scriptures, with less attention to other aspects,
such as Kumārajīva’s learning in India, his aspiration, his relationship with monks in
Western Regions, his relationship with rulers, his attitudes to Hinayana Buddhism, his
communication with monks and disciples in China, etc. These constitute historical
factors of Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism, the study about which is one of
areas drawing later scholars’ attention.
3.Study on Problems in Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation and the
Influence
(1).Study on Problems in Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation
Articles from different aspects to discuss about Kumārajīva’s scripture translation
include 李 惠 玲 Li Huiling’s Kumārajīva and the Establishment of Translating
杨曾文：
《隋唐以前流行的主要禅法》
，
《中国社会科学院研究生院学报》1996 年第 4 期。释慧敏：
《鸠摩
罗什所传数息观禅法之剖析》
，
《鸠摩罗什和中国民族文化：纪念鸠摩罗什诞辰 1650 周年国际学术讨论会》
，
新疆龟兹石窟研究所编，2001 年。冉云华：《中国早期禅法的流传和特点》，《中国禅学研究论集》，台北：
东初出版社，1990 年第一版。徐文明：
《中土前期禅学思想史》
，北京师范大学出版社，2004 年。
54
池田英淳：
《鸠摩罗什所一禅学经典与庐山慧远》
，
《大正大学学报》26，1937 年；藤堂恭俊：
《鸠摩罗什
所译禅学经典中的念佛观》，福井博士颂寿纪念东洋思想论集，东京，1960；菅野龙清：《鸠摩罗什依据经
典所诠释的禅学》，收入佐佐木孝宪博士古稀纪念论文集刊行会，《佛教学佛教史論集：佐佐木孝宪博士古
稀纪念论集》
，东京：山喜房佛書林，2001 年；船山彻：
《梁僧祐撰“萨婆多师资傳”与唐代佛教》
，收入吉川
钟夫主编：
《唐代的宗教》
，京都：朋友书店，2000 年。
《罗什外传—关于七寺一切經中“大乘菩萨入道三种
观”等问题》
，牧田谛亮著，刘建译，
《世界宗教研究》
，1994 年第 2 期。
26
53
Mechanism in Ancient China 鸠摩罗什与中国古代译场制度的确立, and Kumārajīva
and Buddhist Scripture Translation in Early Ancient China 鸠摩罗什与中国早期佛经
翻 译 , 55 李 利 安 Li Li’an’s Comparison between the Buddhist Situation before
Kumārajīva and Paramārtha’s Entry into China and That after Their Entry into China
鸠 摩 罗 什 与 真 谛 入 华 前 后 命 运 同 异 之 比 较 , 吴 文 星 Wu Wenxing’s Simple
Discussion about Reasons for Kumārajīva’s Version of Vimalakirti Sutra More Popular
than Other Versions 浅议鸠摩罗什的维摩诘經译本比其他译本更为流行的原因 ,
宋立道 Song Lidao’s Difference and Sameness between Different Versions of Maitreya
Descending to Achieve Buddhahood 弥勒下生成佛的几个译本的异同 , 梁富国
Liang Fuguo’s Comparative Study on Dharma-rakṣa’s and Kumārajīva’s Transmission
of Buddhism 竺法护与鸠摩罗什入华传教比较研究, 胡湘荣 Hu Xiangrong’s Lexical
Comparison between Kumārajīva’s Translated Scriptures and Zhi Qian’s and Dharmarakṣa’s 鸠摩罗什同支谦，竺法护译經中词语的比较, 杨惠南 Yang Huinan’s Faith
in Maitreya in Chinese Translated Scriptures—Study Centered on Maitreya Ascending
Sutra and Maitreya Descending Sutra 汉译佛經中的弥勒信仰—以弥勒上下生经为
主的研究.
These articles from different translated versions compare characteristics of
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation. 56 Some articles discuss about the influence of
scripture translation on the development of Buddhism in China and Japan. 57 These
articles include Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation and Buddhism in Gaochang in the
李惠玲：
《鸠摩罗什与中国古代译场制度的确立》
，
《河南师范大学学报》2005 年第 6 期。李惠玲：
《鸠摩
罗什与中国早期佛经翻译》
，
《中山大学学报论丛》
，2004 年第 2 期。
56
李利安：《鸠摩罗什与真谛入华前后命运同异之比较》，《中国古代史论集》，西北大学出版社，2004 年。
吴文星：《浅议鸠摩罗什的维摩诘經译本比其他译本更为流行的原因》，炳灵寺石窟学术研讨会论文集。宋
立道：
《弥勒下生成佛的几个译本的异同》
，何劲松主编《布袋和尚与弥勒文化》
，宗教文化出版社，2003 年。
梁富国：
《竺法护与鸠摩罗什入华传教比较研究》
，西北大学 2005 硕士学位论文。胡湘荣：
《鸠摩罗什同支
谦，竺法护译經中词语的比较》，
《古汉语研究》1994 年第 2 期。杨惠南：
《汉译佛經中的弥勒信仰—以弥
勒上下生经为主的研究》
，
《文史哲学报》35 号，1987 年 12 月。
57
贾应逸：
《鸠摩罗什译經和北凉时期的高昌佛教》
，
《敦煌研究》1999 年第 1 期。杨曾文：
《鸠摩罗什的译
经与日本佛教》
，
《佛学研究》
，2004 年，载《鸠摩罗什和中国民族文化—纪念鸠摩罗什诞辰 1650 周年国际
学术讨论会文集》
，新疆美术出版社，1994 年版。马丽：
《鸠摩罗什的佛典翻译及其历史贡献》，东北师范大
学 2002 年硕士学位论文。
27
55
Period of North Liang 鸠摩罗什译經和北凉时期的高昌佛教 by Jia Yingyi 贾应逸,
Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation and Japanese Buddhism 鸠摩罗什的译经与日本
佛教 by Yang Zengwen, Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation and Chinese Buddhism
鸠摩罗什的译经与中国佛教 by Yang Zengwen 杨曾文, Kumārajīva’s Scripture
Translation and the Historical Contribution 鸠摩罗什的佛典翻译及其历史贡献 by
Ma Li 马丽. Other articles illustrating from different aspects also include Investigation
about Meditation Scriptures Translated by Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什所译禅經考辨 by
Xuan Fang 宣方, and Essential List of Kumārajīva’s Chinese Translated Scriptures
Seen in Tu Lufan Script 吐鲁番写本所见鸠摩罗什汉译佛教经籍举要 by Wu Zhen
吴震, etc.58
There are some articles from literary characteristics to study on Kumārajīva’s
scripture translation. They include Common Phoneme Notes Used by Kumārajīva 鸠摩
罗什通韵笺 by Rao Zongyi 饶宗颐, Initial Investigation about Kumārajīva’s New
Translation of Buddhist Scriptures 鸠摩罗什佛经新译初探 by Yuan Yi 苑艺, The
Meaningful Value of Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation on Study of Comparative
Literature 鸠摩罗什的译典在比较文学研究上的意义 by Liu Bin 刘宾, How to Read
Chinese Translated Buddhist Canons—Simple Introduction about Kumārajīva and
Discussion about Textual Style 怎样读汉译佛典—略介鸠摩罗什兼谈文体 by Jin
Kemu 金 克 木 , Main Literary Characteristics of Lotus Sutra and Its Reason for
Formation 法华经主要文学特征及其成因 by He Yuping 贺玉萍, Textuality in
Buddhist Scripture Translation 佛经翻译文质论 by Huang Baosheng 黄宝生, etc.59
宣方：
《鸠摩罗什所译禅經考辨》
，
《中国哲学史》1998 年第 1 期。吴震：
《吐鲁番写本所见鸠摩罗什汉译
佛教經籍举要》
，
《佛学研究》1994 年。
59
饶宗颐：《鸠摩罗什通韵笺》
，
《饶宗颐二十世纪学术文集》，第五卷，台北：新文丰出版公司，2004 年。
苑艺：
《鸠摩罗什佛经新译初探》
，
《天津师大学报》1984 年第 4 期。刘宾：
《鸠摩罗什的译典在比较文学研
究上的意义》
，
《西域研究》1999 年第 3 期。金克木：
《怎样读汉译佛典—略介鸠摩罗什兼谈文体》
，
《读书》
28
58
In this area, some Japanese scholars also make not a little contribution. They include
汤山明 who wrote articles related with Lotus Sutra, 板村幸男 who wrote The Thought
of “Extension and Integration (extending expedience to illustrate reality, integrating
three vehicles into one vehicle if in full description)” and Theory of Expedience and
Reality 法华经之开会思想与权实论, Hajime Nakamura 中村元 who wrote Some
Ideas Based on Practical Life—Characteristics of Kumārajīva’s Version 基于现实生
活的思考 — 鸠摩罗什译本的特征 , 高桥弘次 and 杨笑天 who wrote Amitabha
Sutra—Kumārajīva’s Version and Xuan Zhuang’s Version 阿弥陀经—鸠摩罗什译本
与玄奘译本, etc.60
(2).Study on the Influence of Culture
Some articles make specific investigation about the influence of Kumārajīva’s
thoughts on Buddhism in Kuci, especially for digging grottoes. These articles include
Kuci Grottoes at the Teenage of Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什少年时的龟兹石窟 by Zhu
Yingrong 朱英荣, Kumārajīva and Buddhist Arts in Kuci 鸠摩罗什与龟兹佛教艺术
by Ding Mingyi 丁明夷, The Development of Kumārajīva’s Mahayana Thoughts and
the Influence on Kuci Grottoes 鸠摩罗什大乘思想的发展及其对龟兹石窟的影响 by
Huo Dongchu 霍旭初, Simple Discussion about Buddhism in Kuci in the Period of
Kumārajīva 略论鸠摩罗什时代的龟兹佛教 by Chen Han 陈寒.61 Some Japanese
articles emphasized on the influence of Kumārajīva on Chinese Buddhism, especially
on Buddhism in East Asia. They include in the The Status of Tripitaka Master
Kumārajīva in the History of Chinese Buddhism 罗什三藏在中国佛教史上的地位 by
1986 年第 2 期。贺玉萍：
《法华经主要文学特征及其成因》
，
《小说评论》2008 年第 5 期。黄宝生：
《佛经翻
译文质论》
，
《文学遗产》1994 年第 6 期。
60
汤山明：
《从中亚地区对佛教典籍的接受情况来看罗什汉译妙法莲华经的特色》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年
第 2 期。板本幸男：
《法华经之开会思想与权实论》
，戴张曼涛主编《天台典籍研究》
，台北大乘文化出版社
1979 年版。高桥弘次，杨笑天：
《阿弥陀经—鸠摩罗什译本与玄奘译本》
，
《佛学研究》2004-06-15。
61
朱英荣：
《鸠摩罗什少年时的龟兹石窟》
，
《新疆大学学报（哲学社会科学版）
》第 23 卷第 3 期，1995 年。
丁明夷：
《鸠摩罗什与龟兹佛教艺术》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。霍旭初：
《鸠摩罗什大乘思想的发
展及其对龟兹石窟的影响》
，
《敦煌研究》1997 年第 3 期。陈寒：
《略论鸠摩罗什时代的龟兹佛教》
，
《西北
大学学报（哲学社会科学版）
》2002 年第 1 期。
29
马田行启, The Influence of Kumārajīva on the History of East Asian Buddhism 鸠摩
罗什对东亚佛教史的影响 by Kamata Shigeo 镰田茂雄, The Foundation of Creating
Pacific Ocean Civilization—Kumārajīva 创造太平洋文明的基础 — 鸠摩罗什 by
Honma 本间
and Akinosuke 昭之助.62
Some articles illustrate the influence of Kumārajīva on Chinese culture. These
articles include Kumārajīva in the History of Chinese Culture 中国文化史上的鸠摩罗
什 by Sun Changwu 孙 昌 武 , Kumārajīva—Deep and Broad Influence on the
Development of Buddhist Thoughts in China 鸠摩罗什—影响中国佛教思想发展至
深至广 by Fang Litian 方立天, Simple Discussion about Kumārajīva and Buddhist
Culture 简论鸠摩罗什与佛教文化 by Wang Rong 王嵘, Kumārajīva and Yao Xing
鸠摩罗什与姚兴 by Mou Zhongjian 牟钟鉴, Kumārajīva in Chang’an 鸠摩罗什在
长安 by Luo Zhiying 罗志英, The Contribution of Kumārajīva to Prjana Theory and
Eastern Asian Culture 鸠摩罗什对般若学及东亚文化的贡献 by Shang Yongqi 尚永
琪, Interpretation about Biography of Kumārajīva—Discussion about Mid-ancient
Buddhist Culture and History in China 解读鸠摩罗什传—兼谈中国中古早期的佛教
文化与史学 by Lu Yang 陆扬.63
(3)Kumārajīva’s Scripture Translation Related with Faith Influences Chinese
People
Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra) has deep influence on Chinese people’s
马田行启：
《罗什三藏在中国佛教史上的地位》
，
《大崎学报》50 号，1918 年；镰田茂雄：
《鸠摩罗什对东
亚佛教史的影响》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。镰田茂雄：
《中国佛教史》第三卷，第三章《鸠摩罗
什的翻译事业》
，1983 年，东京大学出版社。本间，昭之助：
《创造“太平洋文明” 的基础—鸠摩罗什》
，
《世
界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。
63
孙昌武：
《中国文化史上的鸠摩罗什》
，
《南开学报（哲学社会学报）
》2009 年第 2 期。方立天：
《鸠摩罗
什—影响中国佛教思想发展至深至广》
，
《中国宗教》2001 年第 1 期。王嵘：
《简论鸠摩罗什与佛教文化》
，
《新疆大学学报（哲学社会科学版）
》1997 年第 1 期。牟钟鉴：
《鸠摩罗什与姚兴》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994
年第 2 期。罗志英：
《鸠摩罗什在长安》
，
《文献》2001 年第 1 期。尚永琪：
《鸠摩罗什对般若学及东亚文化
的贡献》
，
《史学集刊》2010 年第 2 期。陆扬：
《解读鸠摩罗什传—兼谈中国中古早期的佛教文化与史学》
，
《中国学术》2006 年第 23 辑，商务印书馆，2006 年。
30
62
belief in Buddhism. Due to worship, scripts of this sutra in the public are also very
popular. Kumārajīva’s translation version is the most popular one in history, the main
achievement in which aspect is the article of The Transmission of Lotus Sutra in China
法华经在中国的流传 by Gao Zhennong 高振农. Other articles investigate the
thoughts and influence of this sutra, which include The Changes of Lotus Sutra in Dun
Huang Wall Painting 敦煌壁画中的法华经变 by He Shizhe 贺世哲, The Translation
of Lotus Sutra and Image-making of Sakhyamuni Buddha and Prabhutaratna Buddha
法华经的翻译与释迦多宝佛造像 by Zhang Baoxi 张宝玺, Character Changes of
Lotus Sutra in Mai Ji Mountain grottoes and Its Thought in Dharma Transmission 麦
积山石窟法华经变相及其弘法思想 by Xiang Yifeng 项一峰 and Liu Li 刘莉, etc.64
Faith in Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva the most typical example in the Sinicized
development of Indian Buddhism, in the study of which there are many scholars. For
example, 李 利 安 Li Li’an in The Origin of Faith in Avalokitesvara and the
Transmission 观音信仰的渊源与传播 explored the entire changing process of Faith
in Avalokitesvara from India to China, and compared faith in Avalokitesvara between
these two countries and deeply searched for the process, content, and basic
characteristics of Sinicization of Avalokitesvara, which is a complete works with
profound analysis and becomes the typical example for later similar study.65
Dissertations in the study of faith in Avalokitesvara are abundant, the following
dissertations are selected involved with problems of Sinicization. They make study on
Sinicized problems of Avalokitesvara in macro view, which include Sinicization of
Faith in Avalokitesvara 观音信仰的中国化 by Li Li’an 李利安, Discussion about
Sinicization of Buddhism by Way of Avalokitesvara Images or Appearance 从观音造型
谈 佛 教 中 国 化 by Sun Xiushen 孙 修 身 and Sun Xiaogang 孙 暁 岗 , To See
Sinicization of Buddhism by Gender Change of Avalokitesvara 从观音的变性看佛教
高振农：
《法华经在中国的流传》
，
《光山净居寺与天台宗研究》
，香港天马图书有限公司，2001 年第 1 版。
贺世哲：
《敦煌壁画中的法华经变》
，
《敦煌石窟论稿》
，兰州：甘肃民族出版社，2004 年。张宝玺：
《法华经
的翻译与释迦多宝佛造像》
，
《佛学研究》1994 年。项一峰，刘莉：
《麦积山石窟法华经变相及其弘法思想》
，
《敦煌学辑刊》2009 年第 4 期。
65
李利安：
《观音信仰的渊源与传播》
，宗教文化出版社，2008 年。
31
64
的中国化 by Zhao Keyao 赵克尧, Entry and Transmission of Faith in Avalokitesvara
观音信仰的传入和流传 by Yang Zengwen 杨曾文, To See the Secularized and
Localized Process of Chinese Buddhist Arts by Way of Form Changes of Avalokitesvara
从观音形态之流变看中国佛教美术世俗化本土化的过程 by Wang Dan 王丹, etc.66
Some articles make study from the perspective of image changes of
Avalokitesvara in folk faith. These articles include Attempted Discussion about
Avalokitesvara’s Pure Bottle, Pillow Branch and Water Worship Custom in China and
India 试论观音净瓶，杨枝与中印拜水习俗 by Zheng Xiaojun 郑筱筠, Simple
Exploration about Female Avalokitesvara in Middle Areas of China 中原地区女相观
音渊源浅探 by Bing Chuanming 丙传明, Study on the Image of Avalokitesvara
Bodhisattva 观世音菩萨的形象研究 by Chen Qingxiang 陈清香, Simple Discussion
about Lay Women’s Faith in Avalokitesvara in China 浅论华夏俗世妇女的观世音信
仰 by Cao Shibang 曹仕邦, Simple Discussion about Apocryphal Scriptures and
Sinicization of Faith in Avalokitesvara 浅谈伪經与观音信仰的中国化 by Fa Zun 法
尊, From the Development of Body Transformation Theory in the Thought History of
Buddhism to See Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva 从佛教思想史上转身论的发展看观世
音 菩 萨 by Gu Zhengmei 古 正 美 . 67 Giuseppe’s Sinicization of Buddhism with
Avalokitesvara 佛教的中国化—以观音为例 as Example, firstly based on historical
review about Buddhist images in China, made deep study on people’s faith, types of
Avalokitesvara images in Buddhist scriptures, worship rituals, etc.68 Danya J. Furda in
李利安：
《观音信仰的中国化》，
《山东大学学报》
，2006 年第 4 期。孙修身，孙暁岗：
《从观音造型谈佛
教中国化》
，
《敦煌研究》1995 年第 1 期。赵克尧：
《从观音的变性看佛教的中国化》
，
《东南文化》1990 年
第 4 期。杨曾文：
《观音信仰的传入和流传》
，
《世界宗教研究》1985 年第 3 期。王丹：
《从观音形态之流变
看中国佛教美术世俗化本土化的过程》
，
《河北师范大学学报》，2003 年第 3 期。
67
郑筱筠：
《试论观音净瓶，杨枝与中印拜水习俗》
，
《云南师范大学学报》2001 年第 4 期。丙传明：
《中原
地区女相观音渊源浅探》
，
《史林》1993 年第 1 期。陈清香：
《观世音菩萨的形象研究》
，
《华岗佛学学报》
第 3 期。古正美：
《从佛教思想史上转身论的发展看观世音菩萨—中国造像史上转男成女像的由来》
，
《东吴
大学中国艺术史集刊》第 15 期。曹仕邦：
《浅论华夏俗世妇女的观世音信仰—兼论这位菩萨的性别问题》
，
《中华佛学学报》
，总第 15 期，2002 年 7 月。法尊：
《浅谈伪經与观音信仰的中国化》
，
《世界宗教文化》
，
2004 年第 3 期。
68
Vignato. Giuseppe: Chinese Transformation of Buddhism: The Case of Kuanyin, Micro-published by
32
66
Avalokitesvara as Female Symbol in Chinese Buddhism 观音菩萨—中国宗教中的女
性象征 mainly analyzed gender changes of faith in Avalokitesvara and its popularity
problems in China.69
Faith in Maitreya has been well-accepted for generations in China. Kumārajīva’s
translation of Maitreya Descending to Birth Sutra 弥勒下生经 brings about the major
influence, especially popular in folk areas. Some articles from macro view illustrate the
evolution of faith in Maitreya in China, which include Zhou Shaoliang’s study on early
transmission of faith in Maitreya to China and Maitreya image-making problems, Faith
in Maitreya and Its Declination in North Dynasty 北朝的弥勒信仰及其衰落 by Tang
Changru 唐长孺, Faith in Maitreya in China 弥勒信仰在中国 by Fang Litian 方立
天, The Relationship between Faith in Maitreya and Buddhist Sects in Tang Dynasty 唐
代弥勒信仰与佛教诸宗派的关系 by Wang Juan 汪娟, Maitreya Buddha in Agama
sutras—Maitreya Worship in China 阿含经中的弥勒佛—兼论中国佛教的弥勒崇拜
by Huang Xianian 黄 夏 年 , etc. 70 Some articles discuss about the popularity of
Maitreya in folk areas, which include The Input of Faith in Maitreya and Its Popularity
in Folk Areas 弥勒信仰的传入及其在民间的流行 by Yang Zeng Wen 杨曾文,
Nationalization of Faith in Maitreya—Monk Cloth Bag 弥勒信仰的民族化—布袋和
尚 by Yang Zengwen 杨曾文, Simple Discussion about the Reason for Declination of
Faith in Maitreya 弥勒信仰衰落原因简论 by Wu Xianhe 吴先核, The Stereotyping
Image of Maitreya and National Characters of Chinese People 弥勒形象的定型与中
国人的民族性格 by Xu Wenming 徐文明, From Future Delicacy Buddha to Monk
Theological Research Exchange Network, Portland, Oregon, 1994.
69
Dany J. Furda, Kuanyin Bodhisattva: A Symbol of the Feminine in Chinese Religion, Miami University Library,
Miami, Ohio, 1994.
70
唐长孺：
《北朝的弥勒信仰及其衰落》
，
《魏晋南北朝史论拾遗》
，中华书局，1983 年。周绍良：
《弥勒信仰
在佛教初入中国的阶段和其造像意义》
，
《世界宗教研究》1990 年第 2 期。汪娟：
《唐代弥勒信仰与佛教诸
宗派的关系》
，
《中华佛学学报》5 号，1992 年 7 月。方立天：
《弥勒信仰在中国》
，
《文化与传播》3 卷 7 号，
1995 年 1 月。黄夏年：
《阿含经中的弥勒佛—兼论中国佛教的弥勒崇拜》
，何劲松主编《布袋和尚与弥勒文
化》
，宗教文化出版社，2003 年。
33
Cloth Bag 从未来庄严佛到布袋和尚 by Han Bingfang 韩秉芳.71
Some articles observe problems of faith in Maitreya from the perspective of
Maitreya images. These articles include The Evolution of Maitreya Image in Sculpture
Art of Buddhism 佛教雕塑艺术中弥勒形象的演变 by Zhang Pingyi 张平一, The
Penetration of Chinese Thoughts into the Evolving Process of Maitreya Bodhisattva
Statues 弥勒菩萨造像变迁过程中中华思想的融入 by Ou Yangqiming 欧阳启名,
Study on Early Maitreya Statue in the North of Middle Area 中原北方早期弥勒造像
研究 by Liu Hui 刘慧, Maitreya Pictures and Faith in South and North Dynasties and
Sui and Tang Periods 南北朝与隋唐时期弥勒图像与信仰 by Shi Jianzheng 释見证,
Study on the Influence of Matreya Bodhisattva in Northwest India on Mo Gao Grottoes
莫高窟 by Lai Pengju 赖鹏举. 72 Some articles discuss faith in Maitreya from the
aspects of canons, scripture transformation, apocryphal (fake) scriptures, etc. One
example of these articles is called Apocryphal Scriptures in Buddhism and Faith in
Maitreya—Exploration Centered on Scripture Records in Buddhism 佛教疑伪經与弥
勒信仰—以佛教經錄为中心的考察 by Zhang Miao 张淼,73 Historical Facts about
Maitreya Worship in India and China 印度及中国的弥勒崇拜史实 by Mochizuki
Nobu 望月信亨.74
After Buddhism was transmitted into China, in the area of belief, one typical
phenomenon is the function change and prioritized integration between honorable gods,
which is made to fit for the taste of Chinese people. 塚本善隆 Jenryu Tsukamoto’s
article mainly explored the changes of Buddhist central Buddha statue and the relevant
杨曾文：
《弥勒信仰的传入及其在民间的流行》
，
《中原文物》1985 年特刊；
《弥勒信仰的民族化—布袋和
尚》
；韩秉芳：
《从未来庄严佛到布袋和尚》
；徐文明：
《弥勒形象的定型与中国人的民族性格》
；何劲松：
《布
袋和尚与弥勒文化》
，宗教文化出版社，2003 年。吴先核：
《弥勒信仰衰落原因简论》
，
《宗教学研究》2008
年第 1 期。
72
张平一：
《佛教雕塑艺术中弥勒形象的演变》
，
《文物春秋》1996 年第 2 期。赖鹏举：
《西北印弥勒菩萨在
中亚石窟的大小乘异化及其对莫高窟的影响》
，
《敦煌研究》2008 年第 4 期。欧阳启名：
《弥勒菩萨造像变
迁过程中中华思想的融入》
，
《首都师范大学学报》
，2004 年第 5 期。刘慧：
《中原北方早期弥勒造像研究》
，
上海大学 2010 年博士学位论文。释見证：
《南北朝与隋唐时期弥勒图像与信仰》
，四川大学 2006 年硕士论
文。
73
张淼：
《佛教疑伪經与弥勒信仰—以佛教經錄为中心的考察》，
《宗教学研究》2006 年第 1 期。
74
望月信亨：
《印度及中国的弥勒崇拜史实》
，
《大正大学学报》30,31 卷合刊，1940 年。
34
71
set, and analyzed the inside reasons. 藤田宏达 made study on the relationship between
faith in pure land and Lotus Sutra.75 Zhang Zikai 张子开 in Attempted Discussion
about the Interaction between Faith in Maitreya and Faith in Amitabha 试论弥勒信仰
与弥陀信仰的交融性, and He Shizhe 贺世哲 in Three Buddha Statues Formed by
Sakyamuni Buddha, Maitreya Buddha, and Amitabha Buddha in Mo Gaoku of Dun
Huang 敦煌莫高窟由释迦，弥勒与阿弥陀组成的三佛造像 these two pay attention
to the connection between Maitreya and Amitabha. Zhao Shengliang 赵声良 in Record
Discussion about Changes of Sculpture Maitreya in South Dynasty of Cheng Du and
Changes of Lotus Sutra 成 都 南 朝 浮 雕 弥 勒 經 变 与 法 华 经 变 考 论 , also made
discussion about the set changes of Maitreya and Avalokitesvara, 76 the discussion
about which in general is very weak and deficient.
Liu Changdong 刘长东 in Study on Faith in Amitabha Pure Land in Jin and Tang
Dynasties 晋唐弥陀净土信仰研究,77 illustrated the entire picture of popularity for
faith in Amitabha Pure Land in Jin and Tang dynasties, clarified the development clue
of doctrines, rituals, and the relationship with other Buddhist schools, indicated its
extensive and broad social influence. 河原山雄 Kazuo Kawahara’s The Formation and
Development of Pure Land Changes in Dun Huang 敦煌净土变相的形成和发展, and
胜木言一郎 Katsugi Yanichiro’s Exploration about Amitabha Pure Land Changes in
the 220th Cave of Dun Huang Mo Gao Grottoes 敦煌莫高窟第 220 窟阿弥陀佛净土
变相图考, etc., discussed about faith in Amitabha Pure Land in different degrees.78
塚本善隆著，施萍婷译，赵声良校：《从释迦，弥勒到阿弥陀，从无量寿到阿弥陀—北魏至唐的变化》，
《敦煌研究》2004 年第 5 期。藤田宏达：
《净土信仰与法华经的关系》
，见《法华经信仰的诸形态》
，1967
年，平乐寺书店。
76
贺世哲：
《敦煌莫高窟由释迦，弥勒与阿弥陀组成的,三佛造像》
，
《1994 年敦煌学国际学术讨论会论文集》
“石窟考古卷”，甘肃民族出版社，1999 年。张子开：
《试论弥勒信仰与弥陀信仰的交融性》
，
《四川大学学报》
2006 年第 1 期。赵声良：
《成都南朝浮雕弥勒經变与法华经变考论》
，
《敦煌研究》2001 年第 1 期。
77
刘长东：
《晋唐弥陀净土信仰研究》
，巴蜀書社，2000 年 5 月。
75
78
河原由雄：
《敦煌净土变相的形成和发展》
，
《佛教艺术》第 68 号，1968 年 8 月。胜木言一
郎：
《敦煌莫高窟第
月。
220 窟阿弥陀佛净土变相图考》，《佛教艺术》第 202 号，1992 年 5
35
Pan Guiming 潘桂明 in Lay Buddhist History in China 中国居士佛教史 79
illustrated the faith arising and development history of lay Buddhists in China, which
has significant referent value for people to understand Vimalakirti Sutra and other
relevant lay Buddhist faith. He Jianping 何剑平 in Faith in Vimalakirti in Middle
Ancient Period of China 中国中古时期的维摩诘信仰 80 precisely made argument
about the popularity of Vimalakirti Sutra and people’s faith, especially for literati’s. Sun
Changwu 孙昌武 in Vimalakirti and Avalokitesvara in Chinese Literature 中国文学
中的维摩诘与观音, 81 and Paul D? in Vimalakirti in China 维摩诘在中国 also
illustrated the development process of Vimalakirti along with Indian Buddhism into
China. 82 Wu Wenxing 吴 文 星 in Analysis about Reasons for the Popularity of
Kumārajīva’s Version of Vimalakirti Sutra 维摩诘經的鸠摩罗什译本流行的原因分
析, deeply analyzed the reasons for the popularity of Kumārajīva’s translation version
of this sutra in Chinese populace.83
From the above illustrations, it could be seen that there are rich achievements
about the study related with Kumārajīva, especially for his biography, thoughts and
influence analysis. However, previous studies present some weak points and blank
areas to be complemented and explored. Firstly, previous studies only explored
problems about Kumārajīva in a static view, without analyzing many problems in the
dynamic standpoint of Buddhist culture communication between China and India. This
only resulted in isolation of each problem, unable to better connect together. If from the
entire transmission process to see such problems, there would be different acquisition.
Next, there are a large number of achievements about the study on Indian Buddhism
and Chinese Buddhism, but with less comparative study. Therefore, discussion about
comparative study on developments in different culture backgrounds is still blank,
which leaves opportunity for this dissertation to bridge gaps. In addition, The
transmission of Buddhism from India to China is a great event in the history of human
79
80
潘桂明：
《中国居士佛教史》
，北京：中国社会科学出版社 2000 年第 1 版。
何剑平：
《中国中古时期的维摩诘信仰》
，巴蜀書社，2009 年。
孙昌武：
《中国文学中的维摩诘与观音》
，高等教育出版社 1996 年。
保罗 戴密微著，刘楚华译：
《维摩诘在中国》
，
《中国佛教史论集》
，
《世界佛学名著译丛》
，台北：华宇
出版社，1987 年 5 月初版。
81
82
吴文星：
《维摩诘經的鸠摩罗什译本流行的原因分析》
，
《华南师范大学学报（社会科学
版）
》
，2005 年第 2 期。
36
83
culture communication, centered on the arising and development process of which,
there are few complete studies. This is also the gap necessary to bridge in previous
studies.
3 Research Methodology
(1)Research Clues
Firstly, this dissertation starts with different world culture communications with a
view of global common history, with events related with transmission of Buddhism in
inland China as the clue, treating different development futures and directions of
Buddhism in inland China as the focus of investigation. In this way, this dissertation
makes study on the history of the successful transmission of Buddhism to China, and
of final integration with local culture, thus to make a survey of the function and
characteristics of Buddhism in the civilization communication of different countries
and regions, as well as to understand the relevant reasons.
Secondly, highlight the question awareness, applying questions to go through
argumentation, while applying argumentation to interpret questions. In the study
process, from the beginning to the end, four questions are focused: why could
Mahayana Buddhism be transmitted to China successfully? How does Mahayana
Buddhism transmit to China and the path of transmission? After the entry of Buddhism
into China, how does Buddhism integrate with Chinese local culture and bear
transformation? Why could Buddhism achieve the final integration with Chinese local
culture successfully?
Thirdly, apply the combination of static and dynamic investigating methods, along
with the development process of origin—input—selection—absorption—innovation
(transformation)—integration, to investigate the historical content of Buddhism
entering into China and successful achievement of development.
Fourthly, highlight innovation awareness. Due to abundant achievements in the
study on Kumārajīva, this dissertation should neither merely make simple conclusion
and manufacture, nor illustrate historical development facts and pursue accessible clues,
which would lose study value and become plain and dull. In the meantime of tracing
back to the history, it is also necessary to get rid of fakeness and identify the truth, to
carefully investigate and retain historical truth, to compare, analyze, penetrate into the
reasons behind, to make efforts to correct past biases and wrong ideas, and to obtain
true historical regularity and phenomena.
About the research clue of this dissertation, firstly, it is necessary to make review
and analysis about the background and requisites of Kumārajīva’s transmission of
37
Buddhism. This clue not only includes the development background of Indian
Buddhism, but also includes the development background of Buddhism in Western
Regions. In the historical background of Buddhist development in India, the
investigation focus is on the development and transmission of Mahayana Buddhism and
Hinayana Buddhism in Kushan Kingdom in North India, which is the origin of
Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts and the prerequisite of China accepting Mahayana
Buddhism. In this period, Buddhism in Western Regions was influenced by Kushan
Kingdom and Kophen 罽宾 regions, one influence of which is the appearance of
difference in north road and south road in Xin Jiang. By investigating such difference,
it is conducive to understand contemporary transmission characteristics of Buddhism
in Western Regions. Secondly, to investigate Kumārajīva’s activities of scripture
translation and Buddhism transmission in Chang’an. The development of Chinese
Buddhism in Wei and Jin period is the opportunity for Kumārajīva’s successful
transmission of Buddhism. Whether this period could accept and fit for Kumārajīva’s
transmission of Buddhism is one investigation of this dissertation. By deeply analyzing
contemporary situations and factors of Buddhist development in China, this dissertation
tries to find the reason for Mahayana Buddhism and Madhyamika theoretical system
able to be rooted in China. Based on this, this dissertation also tries to illustrate the
event process of Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism to China. The dharma
transmission in contemporary Chang’an aroused universal attention in China, with
monks no matter nationalities or regions, all assembling in Chang’an to listen and learn
Buddha Dharma. This is also one important factor for Kumārajīva’s successfully fast
and broad transmission of Buddhism in China.
Kumārajīva learned Buddha Dharma in Kophen 罽宾, whose father was from
India, so he was influenced by Indian culture. By arranging Kumārajīva’s thoughts in
different aspects, it would be better to understand the difference in Buddhist notions
and culture between ancient China and ancient India.
Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhist thoughts and scriptures bring great
influence to the development of Buddhism in inland China. The influence varies in
short period and long period, with different influence in different areas. Investigating
such influence becomes one important task to examine the culture conflicts and
communication between two countries. This dissertation is ready to make deep
argumentation from three parts, which are analyzed from the perspective of
development comparison between Chinese Buddhism and Indian Buddhism. The first
part is about the influence of prajna thought transmitted by Kumārajīva on the Buddhist
philosophy in China. The second part is about the influence of Mahayana Buddhism
and Hinayana Buddhism transmitted to China on thoughts in all schools in South and
38
North dynasties. The third part is about the great influence of Buddhist scriptures on
people’s faith in Mid-ancient China. In the area of faith, popular Buddhist scriptures
are mostly translated by by Kumārajīva. This dissertation emphasizes the faith in
Avalokitesvara in Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), the faith in Pure Land in
Amitabha Sutra, the faith in Maitreya, and the faith in Vimalakirti Sutra. By analyzing
the above three parts, the general outlook of Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism
and scripture translation is established in the development process of Chinese
Buddhism. Meanwhile, such analyses lay solid foundation to understand the
Sinicization process of how Buddhism integrates with Chinese local culture, after
Buddhism entered into China.
Lastly, there is the conclusive analysis and elevation about the dissertation content.
Firstly, it gives historical evaluation about Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism in
inland China. Secondly, it makes general analysis about different futures and paths of
Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism in China, as well as discussion about
Kumārajīva’s Buddhist thoughts outside inland China, thus making the dissertation
more extensive. Thirdly, from the perspective of civilization communication, this
dissertation tries to discover and know about the characteristics of civilization
communication between China and India, as well as the inspiration for modern people.
(2)Research Methods
Firstly, 沃勒斯坦 Wallerstein’s theory of world system tries to break through
disciplinary demarcation and advocate the unification of disciplines and the
establishment of historical and social science. Such cross-discipline method
significantly influences the history study. This dissertation attempts to make case
analysis in verification study from the cross-discipline perspective, involved with
disciplines, such as religion, history, philosophy, sociology, etc., with the aim to
manifest the comprehensive advantage of cross-discipline in view of interpretation
power.
Secondly, this dissertation applies the combined method of literature and
archaeological traditional materials, and the consistent method of history and logic.
History discipline is different from other disciplines. History firstly seeks for truth and
is strict with space and time, especially for factors behind historical phenomenon. The
literature verification method is to combine all kinds of historical literature materials
and other facts for transmission process of Buddhism to China. History is the objective
basis of logic, and logic is the theoretical summary of history. This method not only
clarifies the historical evolution traces of Buddhism, but also interprets clearly the basic
content according to the basic system of history and logic.
Thirdly, culture communication does not separate from the analysis about culture
39
transmission. Culture transmission varies in direct and indirect manners. This
dissertation applies communication theory and methods to make study on transmission
paths of Buddhism, on interaction between different cultures and regions, especially on
the social environment, the major content of communication, the major medium of
communication, and the influence of communication, in the communication process
between China and India.
Fourthly, the comparative study method is to combine horizontal comparison with
vertical comparison. This method not only emphasizes the comparison between
different understandings and developments of the same content in different culture
backgrounds, and the comparison between Kumārajīva’s transmission of Buddhism and
other people’s transmission in the history. But it also pays attention to the comparison
between different Buddhist thoughts and people’s faith, and the comparison between
different futures of the same doctrine and the same faith. This method makes
investigation by putting historical events to farther historical and geographical
backgrounds, analyzes factors in time and space, explores the formation historical
origin, background, and influence on later generations. This method tries to grasp
development characteristics of Buddhism by comparatively investigating these
development systems, advantages and disadvantages.
4 Dissertation Innovation and Limitation
(1)Innovation of this dissertation
Firstly, innovation in research methods. Starting from human civilization
communication, and from cross-region, cross-culture, cross-nation characteristics of
communication theory, this dissertation makes study on activities in culture
communication with Buddhism as the carrier in the ancient history of India and China.
This dissertation, based on dynamic investigation about the entire history process from
the origin of Buddhism in India, through Western Regions, transmitted to Inland China,
to further development in China, penetrates into factors for ancient China’s successful
acceptance of Buddhist culture. Such research methods are beyond previous academic
studies and could provide more communication phenomena for cross-culture study on
civilization, and more meaningful thinking and inspirations for vision development of
Buddhist studies. In addition, this dissertation, by the method of horizontal comparison
and vertical investigation, analyzes different development futures and directions after
Buddhism entered into China, with the aim to uncover different reactions and accepting
degrees for the same event or the same content under different culture, social, and
historical backgrounds. Such method is still blank in previous Buddhist studies, and
enriches study areas on problems about Sinicization of Buddhism.
40
Secondly, Western Regions plays the bridge function in the process of Buddhism
transmitting to inland China. At the period of Kumārajīva, Buddhism in Western
Regions displayed north-road and south-road difference in faith in Buddhism. In south
road, faith in Mahayana Buddhism was the major trend, with Khotan as the
representative; in north road, Hinayana Buddhism was popular with Kuci 龟兹 as the
representative. Such layout of transmission is related with the transmission influence
and characteristics of Buddhism in Inland China. Such transmission layout is not only
related with geographical factors, but it is also closely related with national relationship,
movement, culture communication, historical inheritance, and similarity in languages,
etc. By investigating these factors, this dissertation tries to discover their mutual
influential relationship in the transmission development of Buddhism.
Thirdly, between the period of East Jin dynasty and South and North dynasties,
one important phenomenon of philosophy development in Chinese Buddhism is the
transformation from prajna theory to nirvana theory. Prajna theory as one kind of
asoteric theories, gradually declined, while nirvana theory prospered along with the
popularity of Mahaparinirvana Sutra, which is pitifully lack of sufficient analysis in
academic arena. This dissertation regards that there are three main reasons for such
trend. The first reason is the political requirement due to the decline of the rich and the
arising of the poor. Authority representing the poor is urgent to change thoughts in
metaphysics, being and non-being existent since Wei and Jin period, and to pursue
actual development of real existence, the manifestation of which is the transformation
of Statue style from thin and delicate face to round and full face. The second reason is
the requirement for self-development of Buddhism. After the thought that all sentient
beings could achieve Buddhahood became the main stream, theoretical interpretation
must be real existence of nirvana rather than emptiness of all things, which is the
fundamental evidence of imperishable theism. The third reason is the nirvana thought
and the thought that all sentient beings could achieve Buddhahood are fit for the need
of new arising political power represented by the poor in South and North dynasties.
Fourthly, Three Treatise Sect once prospered in South and North dynasties and Sui
Dynasty, because of Master Ji Zang’s efforts. However, in early Tang Dynasty, it
declined. In addition to the support by Emperor in Chen Dynasty and Master Ji Zang’s
critique about other schools, there are still other more important factors. Sui and Tang
dynasties is the period of Sinicization of Buddhist theories and formation of Buddhist
sects. If authentic Indian Buddhism could not be able to fit for Chinese local culture,
then it would be knocked out, in the situation of which, the decline of Three Treatise
Sect is the inevitable result. Another similar example is Consciousness-only School.
Fifthly, Kumārajīva’s precept violation has been the discussion focus in history.
From relevant historical literature, this dissertation discovered that the origin of precept
41
violation derived from the contemporary development environment of Buddhism in
Western Regions. No matter from Kumārajīva’s parents or from literature records at
that period, it all could be found that there were some phenomena of not obeying the
precept of sexual misconduct, and the precept of alcohol, etc., which provide essential
clues to solve this historical problem.
Sixthly, starting from Kumārajīva’s scripture translation and Buddhism
transmission, this dissertation extracts some basic principles for the transmission
process of Indian Buddhism to China from demand, conflict to absorption and
transformation, as well as denotes the entire, continuous, and epochal characteristics
presented in this process.
Based on this, this dissertation puts forward the subjective principle maintained in
the process of Chinese traditional culture accepting Indian Buddhism, which exhibits
certain referent value for modern culture communication between China and foreign
countries.
(2)Limitation of this dissertation
Firstly, the topic of this dissertation is too extensive, with some difficulty to grasp,
with some problems unable to give specific illustration. For example, the influence of
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation on the development of Chinese Buddhism, involves
many aspects, with only to select some influential and representative scriptures to give
analysis and illustration.
Secondly, it is obviously lack of historical materials related with Buddhism in
India and Western Regions. On the one aspect, it is due to the limitation of extant
historical materials; on the other aspect, it is difficult to collect some research materials
and historical materials in foreign languages, especially in Japanese and Sanskrit. Both
aspects make Buddhist studies related with such areas unable to advance properly.
Thirdly, in the dissertation, there involves multiple disciplines and areas, such as
philosophy, vinaya, arts, history, geography, etc., beyond the historical scope, which
deepens writing difficulty and makes it imbalanced in illustration emphasis and depth
of the dissertation.
Since this dissertation has the explorative sense, many aspects are not perfect,
which leaves much improving space for later further study.
Notes about geographical location in the dissertation:
About Western Regions in historical literature, it started with Biography of
Western Regions in Han Book, which refers to the general designation of regions to the
west of Yu Menguan and Yang Guan. However, there is broad meaning and narrow
meaning for Western Regions. In narrow meaning, it refers to the regions from the west
42
of Yu Menguan to the east of Cong Ling (now Xin Jiang area). In broad meaning, it
also includes regions covering middle Asia, west Asia, south Asia, and east Europe and
North Africa, etc. Meanwhile, Western Regions also has the meaning of local
administrative authority, so it is not merely a pure geographical scope.
Da Yuezhi invaded into North India and established Kushan Kingdom, in which
the development of Mahayana Buddhism influenced the trend of Indian Buddhism, and
which became the major origin of transmitting Buddhism to Western Regions and
inland China. At that period, Kophen 罽宾 Kingdom was in the control of Kushan
Kingdom, which made important influence on the arising of Sarvastivada School in
India. In fascicle 30 of Wei Shu in San Guozhi, it recorded: “Kophen 罽宾，Da Xia 大
夏，Gao Fu 高附，and Tianzhu 天竺 all belong to Da Yuezhi”. From the perspective
of culture, they are regarded as parts of Buddhist development of ancient India. In
Kumārajīva’s translation of Biography of Aśvaghoṣa 马鸣, there was the saying of
“North India minor Yuezhi King”. In commentary of Hundred Treatise, there was also
the saying of “North India Kophen 罽宾 Kingdom”. From these sayings, it could be
seen that in Buddhist scriptures, Yue Zhi and Kophen 罽宾 are all in the coverage of
North India. In the Biography of Kumārajīva, it mentioned coming to Kophen 罽宾 by
crossing Indus River (one part of Indian river), which should be referred to the region
near India from the south of Kaśmira（now called 克什米尔, previous name 迦湿弥
罗）. Therefore, this dissertation puts Kushan Kingdom with Kophen and Gandhāra as
the centers in the coverage of Buddhist culture of ancient India. Since this dissertation
makes discussion about the transformation from India to Western Regions, and then to
inland China. In order to accurately illustrate and express the changing and transmitting
process, this dissertation only applies the narrow meaning of Western Regions, ranging
from the east of Yu Menguan and Yang Guan, to the west of Cong Ling 葱岭.
43
Chapter One: The Development of Sarvastivada School and Its
Influence on Kumārajīva’s Early Buddhist Theories
From Sectarian Buddhism, Sarvastivadin theories in Hinayana Buddhism took up
the leading role in north Indian areas, especially at about the common era, in Kushan
Kingdom, Sarvastivada School attained fast development. At the beginning, Gandhāra
was the center and later Kophen 罽宾 became the center. At the beginning of Buddhism
in Western Regions, it was influenced a lot by Sarvastivada School from Gandhāra, but
later Sarvastivadin thoughts from Kophen 罽宾 took up the important status and
brought about deep influence. From early contact with Buddhist theories in Kuci 龟兹,
to learning in India, and to translate scriptures in Chang’an, Kumārajīva had close
relationship with Sarvastivada School. Kumārajīva grew up in the environment with
Sarvastivada School as the leading role.
1.1The Development of Sarvastivada School
1.1.1The Development of Sarvastivada School in Kushan Kingdom
No matter in Western Regions or in inland China, before South and North
dynasties, the transmission of Hinayana Buddhism mainly came from Sarvastivada
School in Northwest India, in the development process of this school at the
contemporary period, with Gandhāra and Kophen as two centers. At the early period, it
is centered in Gandhāra and later centered in Kophen. Kophen as the center of
Sarvastivada theories influenced a lot on Buddhism in Western Regions, which
Kumārajīva contacted was mainly from this area. All these development is inseparable
from the development history of Buddhism in Kushan Kingdom. Liang Qichao 梁启超
once said: “People in Yue Zhi often cover the entire India, but the remains of those
contributed to culture career are all in Gandhāra and Kaśmira. Both places are the major
cities in the process of Buddhism transmitting to the east”.84
According to Buddhist history in Southern tradition, it recorded that at the period
of Asoka, he once sent a lot of Buddhism transmitters to all areas in and outside India.
In Sri Lankan Mahāvaṃsa in Pali tradition and Cliff inscriptions by Dharmatrāta 摩崖
84
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年版，第 102 页。
44
法救碑文 in Asoka period, there both recorded the facts of Buddhism transmission in
areas such as Kaśmira, Gandhāra, Himavān parvataḥ 雪山.85 In Samantapāsādikā 善
见律, it also recorded the places, scriptures of Buddhism transmission sent by Asoka.
1.Kophen and Gandhāra：《蛇喻經》，今《增一》卷 31, 6。
2.摩酰娑曼陀罗：《天使經》，今《增一》三十二品，四。
3.臾那世界，今印度西北。《迦罗罗摩經》，今巴利文《增一》卷 2。
4.雪山边，今喜马拉雅。《转法轮經》，今《杂》卷 15,17。
According to Lű Cheng’s study, at the second schism of Buddhism, quite a lot of
virtuous monks in 化地 Mahīśāsaka School were sent to develop Buddhism around
India, with each area they came becoming one separate school. Among these, there
established Sarvastivada School in the area of Kaśmira and Gandhāra in Northwest
India; there formed Dharmaguptaka School in middle India and west India; Himavata
School was set up by some transmitters in the area of Himavān parvataḥ. 86
Sarvastivada School in northwest India arose at the period from Asoka to the ceasing
of Mauya Kingdom (BCE250—BCE185). Chinese translated Samyuttagama and
Kumārajīva’s Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十 诵 律 belong to Tripitaka system of
Sarvastivada School. However, Kumārajīva’s translation is the simplified version
without nidāna 因缘, apadāna 譬喻, Jātaka 本生 of broad version.87
At the end of Yuanguang period of Yu Emperor in Han Dynasty (BCE133—
BCE133), “Da Yuezhi was subject to Da Xia Kingdom, with rich land, little enemies,
in safety and comfort, far from Han Dynasty. Zhang Qian went from Yue Zhi to Da Xia,
and was unable to get Yuezhi’s guidance”. 88 From BCE 91 to BCE 81, Da Yuezhi
transferred its ruling center to the south of Wei River, and treated Lan Shi city 蓝氏城
(capital of Da Xia) as its capital, so Da Xia Kingdom ended. From then on, people in
Yue Zhi accepted Sarvastivada School from northwest India. Da Yuezhi continued land
allocation mechanism of Han Dynasty, dividing Da Xia into five minor countries,
85
86
87
88
见任继愈主编：
《中国佛教史》第一册，中国社会科学出版社，1985 年 6 月第一版，第 72-74 页。
吕澂：
《印度佛学渊源略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年第 1 版，第 37 页。
参见吕澂：
《印度佛学渊源略讲》上海人民出版社，1979 年第 1 版，第 50,51 页。
《史记》卷 123，
《大宛列传》
。
45
granting to heirs of the imperial system, who were called Xi Lord 翕候. Da Yuezhi had
five tribes: Xiu Mi 休密, Shuang Mi 双靡, Kushan 贵霜, Xi Dun 希顿, and Gao Fu 高
附, with Xi Hou as the leader in each tribe. Now the designation of Kushan’s earliest
appearance was on the coin in the upper part of 1 BCE.89
Among the five tribes, Kushan was the most powerful, and there were often wars
among them. About upper part of 1 CE, Kushan tribe finally unified Da Yuezhi, and
established one kingdom called Kushan Kingdom.90 Later, Kushan Kingdom expanded
to other areas severely. To the period of King Kaniṣka, the kingdom had crossed South
Asia and Middle Asia. “In northwest, it conquered Huo Xun (also called Hua Lazimo);
in the southwest, it expanded to Mathura in the upper of Gange River; in the east, its
power reached the south of Tarim Basin 塔里木盆地”. 91 Kushan Kingdom at this
moment prospered to the peak time. In Late Han Book, it once recorded: “Since then,
Yue Zhi (Han called it as Yuezhi) became the richest and well-known to all small
countries, calling it the King of Kushan; Han Dynasty still used its old name called Da
Yuezhi”.92 The capital of the kingdom was transferred from middle Asia to Purusapura
(Fu Lousha 富楼沙), and Han dynasty still called its old name as Da Yuezhi Kingdom.
In Records of Travel from Da Tang to Western Regions, it recorded: “Once upon a time,
the king of Gandhāra was called Kaniṣka. His power covered neighborhood countries,
interacted with farther areas, by military force to obtain large land, even to the east of
Cong Ling, with some small countries afraid of his power so as to send hostage to
Gandhāra”. In the third century of Common Era, Kushan Kingdom began to decline,
and was in the control of Persian Sassanid Empire 波斯萨珊.
In the latter half of the fourth century CE, Kushan Kingdom revived, but in the
middle of fifth century CE, Kushan Kingdom ended due to the invasion of enemies (厌
哒 ebodalo, some say they belong to Hephthalites; some say people from Kayanian
dynasty). In the first year of Yuan Shou period of Ai Emperor in Han Dynasty (2BCE),
Qin Jingxian received Stupa Sutra from Da Yuezhi’s missionary called Yi Cun, which
illustrates the fact that at that time, Da Yuezhi had already believed in Buddhism.
89
90
91
92
《后汉书》卷 88，
《西域传》
。
王治来：
《中亚史纲》
，湖南教育出版社，1986 年版，第 126 页。
《史记》卷 123，
《大宛列传》
。
加文 汉布里主编，吴玉贵译：
《中亚史纲要》
，北京：商务印书馆 1994 年版，第 59 页。
46
According to Ryotai Hatani 羽溪了谛: “King Kaniṣka first was the patriarch of Kushan
Kingdom, and meanwhile, was the first converter to Buddhism”. 93 At this period,
Buddhism transmitted from India to other countries all belonged to Hinayana Buddhism,
with Sarvastivada School maily extended from Gandhāra and Kaśmira in northwest
India to An Xi 安息, Da Xia 大夏, Da Yuezhi 大月氏 and other middle Asian areas.94
In early Kushan dynasty, Sarvastivada School had been the dominant role, and to
the period of King Kaniṣka, Mahayana Buddhism began to prosper. Although
Mahayana Buddhism with some extent of transmission and influence, Sarvastivada
School was still in great power and got the support of King Kaniṣka. As it is recorded
that King Kaniṣka built four great temples in four directions and offered monks from
both Mahayana and Hinayana with 30, 000 in all”. 95 In his support, Buddhism in
Kushan Kingdom prospered and developed, with a situation of plentiful theories
flourishing from all schools.
In north India, there discovered remains in both Mahayana Buddhism and
Hinayana Buddhism, such as Dharma King stupa, Kunara stupa, Kalawan stupa, etc.,
with many remains in Kushan period. Especially in the biggest ruined temple cite called
Karawang 卡拉旺, there was a Buddha hall with the tablet inscription of “阿健斯 134
Year”, and at this moment, it was 77 CE, in which it recorded: enshrine Sarira to Buddha
hall and donate to Sarvastivada School. This is the earliest tablet inscription with school
name in it in north India.96
In addition, King Kaniṣka near Peshawa 白夏瓦, built the famous Kaniṣka stupa,
which was located in Shah-ji-ki Dheri 夏加奇德里 and was dug out, in which there
discovered the Sarira bottle offered in Kaniska-vihara 迦腻色迦寺. In the tablet
inscription, it showed that this temple belonged to Sarvastivada School. There was also
tablet inscription in a bronze stupa discovered in Kurram 库拉姆 of Peshawa 白夏瓦,
in which it recorded that offering the Buddha’s sarira in the stupa to Sarvastivada
School. It is recorded that this inscription was made in 148CE, and there are other
inscriptions to show the school names, such as offering water station to Sarvastivada
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西藏之佛教》
，北京商务印书馆，《宗教文化丛书》
，1999 年版，第 71 页。
参见佐佐木教悟，高崎直道，井之日泰淳，冢本启祥：
《佛教史概说—印度篇》第 7 章，日本平乐寺书
店，1976 年第 12 次印刷。
95
王治来：
《中亚史纲》
，湖南教育出版社，1986 年版，第 142 页。
96
平川彰著，释显如，李凤媚译：
《印度佛教史》
，台北：商周出版，2004 年版，第 262 页。
47
93
94
School, digging a well for Sarvastivada School, offering bronze spoon to 饮 光
Kāśyapīya School, offering pottery vat to Bahuśrutīya 多闻 and Kāśyapīya 饮光, etc.
These are well-recognized remains in the second century. In general, Sarvastivada
School had strong power in north India.97
In addition, in a bronze box with tablet inscription, it recorded King Kaniṣka’s
contribution to Sarvastivada School. According to French scholar 福斯曼 Forsman’s
study, this inscription could be “It is the great King Kaniṣka who supported
Sarvastivada School. In the city of 普尔, this incense box is a sacred offering to protect
all beings in prosperity and happiness. This offering belonged to the monk called 摩诃
色那和, who was in charge of fire affair in the temple of Kaniṣka”.98 As it is said:
“Sarvastivada school was the first school with great organization and complicated
philosophical system, with dense air of scripture institute, so if no support from the
ruling authority, it was impossible to achieve such development”.99
The area around Gandhāra is the important development region of Buddhism,
especially for Sarvastivada School. In addition, in all places in the coverage of Kushan
Kingdom, such as Kaśmira, etc., Sarvastivada School was also very popular. Due to
inside difference in opinions, Sarvastivada School divided into Kaśmira masters and
Gandhāra masters. Both have a large number of followers with different arguments.
An Shigao 安世高 was the prince of 安息 An Xi kingdom and went forth for
liberation. In the period of Huan Emperor in late Han Dynasty, he came to inland China
and translated Agama sutra and treatises related with Abhidharma. In the period of Ling
Emperor, An Xuan 安玄 came to inland China from An Xi 安息. They translated
scriptures mostly belonging to Sarvastivada School. Even for Lokakṣema and Dharmarakṣa, who were famous for translating Mahayana scriptures, also translated quite many
Hinayana scriptures. At the contemporary period, the center of Sarvastivada School was
Gandhāra and Kaśmira. In addition to popular Agama sutras, there were Dharmapada
by Dharmatrata 法救 and Milindapanha Sutra 那先比丘經, etc. It is clear to see that
even after King Kaniṣka, the influence of Sarvastivada School was still tremendous.
平川彰著，释显如，李凤媚译：
《印度佛教史》
，台北：商周出版，2004 年版，第 262 页。
G. Fussman, Numisatic and epigraphic evidence for the chronology of early Gandharan art, In: M. Yaldiz
(ed.) Investigation Indian art, Berlin, 1986, p.78.
99
杜继文主编：
《佛教史》
，中国社会科学出版社，1991 年版，第 66 页。
48
97
98
1.1.2 Sarvastivada School in Kophen 罽宾
Kophen is also called Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗, with different names of the same place.
Ryotai Hatani 羽溪了谛 in his Buddhism in Western Regions, in the part of Buddhism
in Kaśmira, he had given precise argumentation.100 Some people also regarded that in
Han and Wei dynasties, Kophen was in the northwest of Kaśmira. After Sui and Tang
dynasties, Kophen mostly referred to Kaśmira area, such as in Master Yin Shun’s The
Relationship between Chinese Buddhism and Indian Buddhism.101 In Han Book, it said
that Kophen was plain and wild, with people good at arts and manuscripts, which might
refer to Gandhāra 犍陀罗. This is because of little geographical knowledge about India
and other areas around. In Wei Book, it described that there had appeared some changes,
and said that Kophen was located in the southwest of 波路, surrounded by mountains,
with 800 Li from east to west, 300 Li from south to north, so it clearly refers to Kaśmira.
To Jian Dynasty, it became more obvious that Master Dao An in Records of Western
Regions said: “Kophen was in the west of Śrāvastī 舍卫国”, “Indian river passed
through Kophen, Gandhāra and Maharastra 摩诃剌陀 and other countries and entered
into South Sea”. Since Master Fa Xian did not reach Kophen, in Biography of Fa Xian,
there did not mention Kophen or Kaśmira. Kumārajīva in Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra
regarded Kophen as Kaśmira. If there were any mistakes, he would must make
correction. This illustrates that the place called Kophen where Kumārajīva went was
Kaśmira. Liang Qichao also regarded Kaśmira as Kophen. “Kaśmira is Kophen, located
in the west of Himalaya 喜马拉雅, across two branches of Indian river (two branch
rivers called 那布奢林), with an area of 1, 900 square miles, surrounded by mountains,
now as a part of north India. Once I talked of this place, I thought of Sarvastivada
School, collecting Mahavibhasa Sastra. After the schism into Stherivada School and
Mahasanghika School, middle India was in popular for Mahasanghika School.
Stherivada School collected in Kophen, with landscape fit for their conventional
cultivation, so original Buddhism remained mostly in this area. Since this place was
long time controlled by European clan, and was invisibly influenced by Greek thoughts,
so air of scientific study was obvious. Academics in this area was indirectly transmitted
100
101
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，北京：商务印书馆，1999 年版，第 216 页。
释印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年版，第 6 页。
49
to inland China by Yue Zhi, and the direct connection started from East Jin Dynasty”.102
In Fascicle 99 of Mahavibhasa Sastra, it recorded that at the period of King Asoka,
when Mahadeva discussed about five events, monks from Stheravada School were not
as many as Mahadeva’s followers, so they gave up the temple in Pataliputra 华氏城(a
temple called 鸡园) and moved to Kaśmira. In some sturas such as Asoka Sutra, there
also mentioned that Upagupta 優婆笈多 preached dharma in 摩耨罗 and 末田地
preached dharma in Kaśmira. Such sayings were in conformity with the later fact that
Kaśmira became the solid place for Sarvastivada School. Sarvastivada School built
Sangha in material-rich Kaśmira, which is one of the reasons for the development of
Abhidharma teaching. Ryotai Hatani 羽溪了谛 regarded this as a tale with many
mistakes.103
After King Asoka passed away, Mauya Kingdom was ruined by 熏迦 Kingdom
built by Puśayamitra 弗 沙 密 多 罗 , who worshipped Brahmanism and destroyed
Buddhism. Buddhism from 鸡园 temple to 摩耨罗, all the way to Kaśmira, was all
destroyed. According to Mahavibhasa Sastra, it recorded that Puśayamitra 弗沙密多羅
in Kaśmira 迦湿弥多羅 destroyed more than 500 Buddhist temples. However, after
Kushan Kingdom was subject to Kophen at about 1 CE, Sarvastivada School in Kophen
began to revive.
At the beginning of Kushan Kingdom, Sarvastivada School had two centers:
Gandhāra and Kaśmira, each owning their respective sangha. Gandhāra was located in
the west, with Master Dharmottara 法胜 as one of the earliest masters, who wrote
Abhidharma-hrdaya-sastra 阿毗昙心论, laying the foundation for early Sarvastivadin
theories. Later, Venerable Paśva 胁尊者 wrote Treatise of Four Agamas 四阿含论. To
the period of King Kaniṣka, elites appeared more than before, with four commentators
as the most famous: Dharmatrata 法救, Vasumitra 世友, Ghosa 妙音, Buddhadeva 觉
天 , who respectively had their own works. Among these works, there included
102
103
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年版，第 104,105 页。
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，商务印书馆，1999 年版，第 219 页。
50
Dharmapada by Dharmatrata 法救，甘露味毘曇论 by Ghosa 妙音, Vasumitra 世友的
异部宗轮论, 品类足论, 婆须蜜所集经, etc. Chinese translated 僧伽罗刹所集经
was written by 僧伽罗刹, also called 众护, who was said to be the master of King
Kaniṣka. In Kaśmira, there also appeared famous masters, including 迦旃延尼子, who
wrote Jnanaprasthana-sastra 发 智 论 also called 八 犍 度 论 , which is also the
foundational works in Sarvastivada School. Later, his disciples made interpretation
about this treatise, called Vibhasa-sastra 毗婆沙 in 14 fascicles. Based on this, there
appeared six treatises:界身足, 施设足, 法蕴足, 识身足, 品类足, 集异门足, etc.
Sarvastivada School in Gandhāra had striving spirit, while Sarvastivada School in
Kaśmira were conventional, both also different in doctrines, so 經量部 was popular in
Gandhāra and Sarvastivada School treated Kaśmira as the solid center. After the
exposition of such treatises, in Sarvastivada School, there arose the trend of making
commentaries for such treatises, commentators of which were called Vibhasa masters.
King Kaniṣka requested 500 arahants to collect tripitaka in Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗 (also
called the fourth collection by modern scholars), who finished Mahavibhasa Sastra by
assembling the above commentators’ study on Abhidharma for two hundred years. This
collection was also recorded in Records of Travel from Da Tang to Western Regions,
as well as in Biography of Vasubandhu, though there were some difference between the
two. In Records of Travel from Da Tang to Western Regions, it recorded: “King Kaniṣka
everyday invited one monk to preach dharma, who had different opinions. The king felt
doubtful and unable to get rid of defilements. Then Venerable Paśva 胁尊者 said:
‘Tathagata passed away long time ago, so disciples had different opinions and aroused
contradiction’. After hearing this, the King felt sorrow and sighed for a long time, and
said to the Venerable: ‘I still feel lucky to follow previous venerable masters’ teaching,
though still far from the sainted. I give up ignorant points and develop dharma teaching,
and according to different schools, I interpreted tripitaka’. Venerable Paśva said: ‘Your
excellency King, rooted with wholesome virtue, admirable for Buddha Dharma, so this
is your vow’. Then the king made the order to request sainted monks nearby and far
away to collect tripitaka”.104
104
（唐）玄奘：
《大唐西域记》卷 3，章異校点，上海人民出版社，1977 年，第 75 页。
51
In Biography of Vasubandhu, it recorded that this collection was started by 迦旃
延尼子 and 马鸣 Aśvaghoṣa also took part in this collection due to his excellent
writing. 105 According the investigation made by 小野玄妙, etc., 迦旃延尼子 and
Paśva 胁尊者 were the same person, but Ryotai Hatani 羽溪了谛 disagreed and still
regarded that this collection’s instructor was Paśva 胁尊者.106 According to recent
studies, the sayings from Master Xuan Zhuang did not follow historical facts, because
this great treatise by hundreds of years of study was possible to be finished at about 3
CE. The time might be after the period of King Kaniṣka, at which time Sarvastivada
School had reached quite maturity. 107 The time of Kumārajīva’s translation of
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra was close to that period, so Kumārajīva’s saying is more
reasonable and reliable. The compilation of Mahavibhasa Sastra was made to develop
迦旃延尼子’s theories by his disciples.108
The extant version of Mahavibhasa Sastra is only in Chinese, translated by Master
Xuan Zhuang, a vast treatise with 200 fascicles, as the great achievement of
Sarvastivadin doctrines. This represents the maturity of Sarvastivadin theories in
Kaśmira area and the powerful consolidation of Sarvastivadin sangha. From then on,
there formed the branch school of Vibhasa, representing the entire Sarvastivada School,
with Cophen as the center. After the collection, “King Kaniṣka made the order to carve
this treatise in the red bronze and to be enshrined in the stupa. He also ordered gods to
guard the country, not allowing those from different schools to learn this treatise. If they
wanted to learn, they must follow this branch school”.109 After this collection, King
Kaniṣka sent monks to transmit Buddhism around the country. From then on, Buddhism
in Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗 developed from conventional and closed path to the open path.
Shi Dongchu 释东初 considered: “At the end of the second century, from countries of
Western Regions, such as Yue Zhi, An Xi 安息, Kang Ju 康居, etc., many monks came
to inland China to transmit Buddhism and translate scriptures. However, Kaśmira 迦湿
105
106
107
108
109
参见真谛译《婆薮槃豆法师传》
，
《大正藏》第 50 册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1983 年，第 189 页。
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，商务印书馆，1999 年版，第 223-224 页。
吕澂：
《印度佛学源流略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年，第 49-55 页。
吕澂：
《印度佛学源流略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年，第 132 页。
（唐）玄奘：
《大唐西域记》卷 3，章異校点，上海人民出版社，1977 年，第 75 页。
52
弥罗 with Buddhism in prosperity had no monks to China, so it could be seen clearly
that such conventional and closed learning custom was due to King Kaniṣka’s
protection of Sarvastivadin doctrines, not allowing outside transmission”. 110
Mahavibhasa Sastra compiled in Cophen is the great achievement of Sarvastivadin
doctrines, and promoted the development of Sarvastivada School. Kumārajīva in the
third century was well-known to five parts of India, as famous as Aśvaghoṣa 马鸣 and
Aryadeva 提婆. Kumārajīva was originally from Takkasila 呾叉始罗国, but went to
learn dharma in Kophen, with breaking wrong views and presenting right views as his
duty. He wrote many commentaries such as 九百论 and 喻鬘论, etc.111
Buddhism in Kaśmira did not develop smoothly. According to Records of Western
Regions, it recorded: “After King Kaniṣka passed away, 讫利多族 Krīta revived,
controlled Kaśmira area 迦湿弥罗, destroyed Buddhism and expelled Buddhist monks.
In the third century (600 years after the Buddha’s nirvana), Tocharian King 泗摩旦罗,
was originally Sakya caste, worshipped Buddha Dharma, and heard of 讫利多族
Krīta’s Buddhism-destroying movement, so he was irrigated and sent 3000 soldiers
hiding their identities to enter into 讫利多族 Krīta’s area. Five hundred monks selected
from 3000 were sent to the palace to offer jewels with sharp knives in their sleeves.
Then they cut the king’s head and expelled 讫利多族 Krīta to far areas. Kaśmira 迦湿
弥罗 was in peace again and Buddhism revived there, by setting up temples and
collecting Buddhist monks”.112
From the fourth century, Buddhism in Kaśmira began to revive, Buddhist monks
from other areas came to learn Sarvastivadin doctrines. Based on Mahavibhasa Sastra,
some commentaries appeared, Commentary of Abhidharma-hrdaya-sastra 阿毗昙心论
by Dharmottara 法胜 in four fascicles, Vibhasa-sastra 毗婆沙论 by 尸陀盘尼, 阿毗
昙心论经 6 优婆扇多, Samyuktabhidharma-hrdaya-sastra 杂阿毗昙心论 by 法救
110
111
112
释东初：
《中印佛教交通史》
，台北：行政院新闻局出版，第四版，第 78 页。
《成唯识论述记》卷 2，
《大正藏》第 43 册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1983，第 274 页。
《佛祖统记》卷 35，
《佛祖历代通载》卷 6 皆同记此事。
53
Dharmatrata, 入 阿 毗 达 磨 论 2 悟 入 , etc. Vasubandhu from came to learn
Sarvastivadin doctrines, and learned Vibhasa Sastra from Sautrātika School 经量部,
and then he made Kośa Sastra.
At about the end of 3 CE and the beginning of 4 CE, Sarvastivada School in
Kophen got power to develop and gradually prospered, presenting great life strength.
Such phenomenon directly displayed strong trend to outside transmission. The most
influential area is the on the north road of Xin Jiang and middle China. At this period,
Kophen influenced greatly on the development of inland Buddhism. Dharma-rakṣa’s
translation of Bhadrakalpa Sutra 贤劫经 in Yong Kang period of West Jin Dynasty was
from Sanskrit version in Kophen. Here is the list of monks related with Kophen coming
to inland China to transmit dharma and translate scriptures.
Name
Sangha 跋澄
Year
Scriptures
th
The 17 year of Jianyuan Recite 尊婆须菩萨所集论，婆须密经 10，卑（毘
period with Fu Jian as the
emperor (381)
或毗）婆娑论 14
Sanghadeva
From 19th year of Jianyuan Translate 阿毗昙八犍度论 30, 阿毗昙心论 16,
period to 16th year of Taiyuan
period (383-391)
三法度论, 增一阿含 51
昙摩耶舍
405-418 (Chang’an)
僧伽提婆
Recite 毗婆沙律 translate 舍利弗阿毗昙 with
Dharmayaśas
Dharmagupta 昙摩掘多 22, 善摩经 1
佛若多罗
The 6th year of Hongshi Translate Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十 诵 律 58with
Kumārajīva
period (404)
卑摩罗叉
The 8th year of Hongshi Professional in vinayapitaka, promote Daśa-bhāṇavāravinaya 十诵律
period (406)
Vimalākṣa
佛陀耶舍
Buddhayaśas
From 10th year to 15th year of Translate Dharmaguptaka Vinaya60, Dirghagama
Hongshi period
32, Dharmaguptavinaya 四 分 僧 戒 律 1 When
back to Kophen, get and send 虚空藏菩萨经 to
Liang Zhou.
佛驮什
Song country
Dynasty in 423
in
South
五分律 30, 五分比丘戒律 1, 弥沙塞羯磨 1
54
昙摩密多
Passed by 龟 兹 to Dun 虚空藏菩萨神咒经 12sections 17 fascicles, most
Dharmamitra Huang, then to Jiangye in the from Mahayana scriptures Vaipulya 方等部
18th year of Yuanjia period
求那跋摩
431
Gunavarman
Study on Mahayana 9 sutras and 4 agamas, good
at Chan. Preach Lotus Sutra, Dasabhumi Sutra.
Translate 菩萨善贝经, 沙弥威仪, 四分比丘羯
磨法, 经律分异 etc.
In the sixth year of Hongshi To Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗
period (404) from Chang’an
智猛
Song country in South 僧猛昙朗 25 people to Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗 get
Dynasty about 420 to the
west
Sanskrit 观音授记经.
法勇
Travel to Kaśmira learn meditation. Translate 无
智嚴
尽意菩萨经 6，法华三昧 1，广博严净不退转
轮经 4
Liu Song period
慧览
Received
methods
meditation
methods
and
precept
Emperor Taiwu’s persecution From royal family of Kophen, to Liang Zhou and
of Buddhism in North Wei then to Luo Yang.
Dynasty
师贤
From the above, it could be seen that at about 4 CE and 5 CE, Hinayana Buddhism
was popular in Kophen, but in early 5 CE, there were not a few Mahayana scriptures
transmitted from Kophen to inland China, from which it could be seen that Mahayana
Buddhism was also popular there. In Biography of Tibet, it recorded: “At the beginning,
there was no Mahayana Buddhism in Kaśmira. From Asanga and Vasubandhu,
Mahayana Buddhism gradually developed, and to Vasubandhu’s disciples, Mahayana
Buddhism became popular. After 5th century, North India became the major area for
Mahayana Buddhism”.113
113
释东初：
《中印佛教交通史》
，台北：行政院新闻局出版，第四版，第 83 页。
55
1.2 Transmision of Sarvastivada School in Kuci 龟兹
龟兹 Kuci in the process of Buddhism transmitting from India to China played as
the important medium role, as the same as Khotan. Many scholars investigated the
development situation of Buddhism in this area. About the earlies time of Buddhism
transmitted to Western Regions, the basic idea in academic arena is: Buddhism has
transmitted to Western Regions after 2 BCE, with the latest time about the end of
1BCE.114 After transmitted to Khotan, Buddhism also developed to the west and the
north. There are also some scholars who regard that Buddhism in Kuci 龟兹 might be
earlier than Khotan. 115 The earliest transmission to Khotan and other areas was
Sarvastivada School, a kind of Hinayana Buddhism. After Hinayana Buddhism was
transmitted from Kaśmira（now named 克什米尔; previous name 迦湿弥罗）to Khotan,
it was popular in Western Regions for a long period. There are many virtuous masters
preaching Hinayana Buddhism in Western Regions.116
1.2.1From the perspective of Chinese-translated scriptures to see Buddhism
Transmission
The sayings that Buddhism was transmitted to Kuci and Khotan, were quoted by
many scholars from 阿育王息坏因缘經, in fascicle one of which, it said: “Asoka
heard about that happily and told Yasa: now this should be distributed to all areas, and
I just take one portion, by which I can get dharma benefit and long lifespan, and manage
the public. Then due to Asoka’s command to make distribution, all areas get benefit,
with people in good management, so Asoka was well-known by generations”.117
In addition, in Biography of Liu Zhilin of Liang Shu 梁书—刘之遴传, it recorded
that Liu Zhilin once in Jingzhou collected many ancient devices and offered four of
them to East Palace. Among these devices, there was one foreign bath tin, on which it
is carved the inscription of “元封二年，龟兹国献给”(the second year of Yuan Feng
period, about 109BCE, offered by Kuci country). These materials have some sense of
presumption. Ji Xianlin 季羡林 considered that Buddhism began to enter into Inland
114
115
116
117
周菁葆，邱陵：
《丝绸之路宗教文化》
，新疆人民出版社，1998 年，第 176 页。
李泰玉主编：
《新疆宗教》
，新疆人民出版社，1998 年，第 35 页。
李吟屏：
《佛国于阗》
，新疆人民出版社，1991 年，第 50 页。
《大正藏》第 50 册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1983 年，第 175 页。
56
China about 1CE. At the period of Ming Emperor in Han Dynasty, Buddhism was
transmitted a little in inland China. Due to the important status of Kuci in the
communication between the west and middle China, Buddhism had played the function
in Kuci at least at the middle of 1 CE. 118 Therefore, there was the record of Kuci
country in the Biography of Si Yi of Jin Shu in the third century, or at the period of West
and East Jin, in which it recorded the historical fact that Kuci had threefold walls with
Buddhist towers in thousands. Moreover, at that time, there were many Buddhist monks
from Kuci to inland China to translate scriptures.
In the third year of Yongyuan period of He Emperor in East Han Dynasty (91CE),
Bai Ba 白霸 in the support of Ban Chao became the king of Kuci. Until the end of the
eighth century, the throne was nearly in the control of Bai 白 family. In Chinese ancient
books, sometimes Bai 白 is also written as Bo 帛. Many early monks with the family
name as Bo 帛 to inland China to translate scriptures were mostly from Kuci country.
Now the following list is about monks and lay people from Kuci to inland China at the
period of West Jin and East Jin, their translation and scriptures they took along with
them.119
Name
Year
帛延
Scriptures
Source
At the end of Zhengshi period 首楞严 2 卷
of Wei country near West Jin
Dynasty
除灾患經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
叉须赖經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
Gan Lu period of Wei country 无量清净平等觉經 2 卷
near West Jin Dynasty
Hinayana
section
Sutra
Mahayana Vaipulya
Mahayana Vaipulya
菩萨修行經 1 卷
The second year of Taishi 须真天子經 2 卷
period in West Jin dynasty
帛元信
7th year of Taikang period in Jin 正法华经 10 卷
Dynasty
Mahayana Vaipulya
Mahayana 法华部
季羡林：
《鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰》
，
《孔子研究》2005 年第 6 期，第 30
页。
119
唐秀连：
《龟兹国与西域的大乘佛教—从两汉至鸠摩罗什时代》
，
《中华佛学研究》2006 年第 10 期，台
北：法鼓中华佛学研究所，第 90-93 页。
57
118
7th year of Taikang period in Jin 光赞般若 27 品
Dynasty
Mahayana 般若部
The second year of Yong Jia 普曜經 8 卷 Lalitavistara
period
Sutra
(from the
second to Hui Emperor in West Jin
法句本末經 4 卷
the fifth,
Hui Emperor in West Jin
he
楼炭經 6 卷
translated
Hui Emperor in West Jin
诸德福田經 1 卷
with Fa
Mahayana Vaipulya
Li).
大方等如来藏經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
遗教法律經 3 卷
Hinayana vinaya
净饭王般泥洹經 2 卷
Hinayana sutra
贫穷老公經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
前世三转經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
优田王经 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
阿阇世王受决經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
诸经菩萨名經 2 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
正意經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
明帝释施經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
福田經 1 卷
Mahayana Vaipulya
恒水經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
顶生王故事經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
求欲經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
苦阴因事經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
瞻婆比丘經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
帛法炬
Hui Emperor in West Jin
58
Samyutta
Hinayana sutra
Mahayana Vaipulya
伏淫經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
数經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
波斯匿王太后崩尘土坌身 Hinayana sutra
经
频婆娑罗王诣佛供养經 1 Hinayana sutra
卷
鸯崛髻經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
难提释經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
相应相可經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
慢法經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
法海經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
阿闍世王问五逆經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
罗云忍辱經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
佛为年少比丘说正事經 1 Hinayana sutra
卷
沙曷比丘功德經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
群牛譬經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
比丘避女恶名欲自杀經 1 Mahayana Vaipulya
卷
灌洗佛形像經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
危脆經
Hinayana sutra
大蛇譬喻经 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
59
罗汉迦留陀夷經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
爪甲擎土譬經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
衰利經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
众生未然三界經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
求欲说法經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
罗旬喻經 1 卷
Hinayana sutra
楼炭經 8 卷
帛 法 祖 Hui Emperor in West Jin
（帛远）
惟逮菩萨经
Mahayana Vaipulya
五百童子经
Hinayana sutra
等集三昧經
Mahayana Vaipulya
菩萨修行經
Mahayana Vaipulya
菩萨逝經
Mahayana Vaipulya
严净佛土經
Mahayana Vaipulya
郁伽罗越问菩萨经
Mahayana Vaipulya
大方等如来藏經
Mahayana Vaipulya
如来兴显經
Mahayana
Avatamsaka
持心梵志經
Mahayana Vaipulya
无量破魔陀罗尼經
Tantric
檀特陀罗尼經
Tantric
善权經
Mahayana Vaipulya
海龙王經
Mahayana Vaipulya
60
贤者五福經
Hinayana Sutra
佛般泥洹經
Hinayana sutra
大爱道般泥洹經
Hinayana sutra
佛问四童子经
Mahayana Vaipulya
调伏王子道心經
Mahayana Vaipulya
五百王子作净土愿經
Mahayana Vaipulya
三幼童經
Mahayana Vaipulya
二童子见佛说偈供养經
Hinayana sutra
首达經
Hinayana sutra
注首楞严经
Mahayana Vaipulya
注《放光般若》，著《显宗 Mahayana
帛法祚
论》
帛尸梨密 Emperor Yuan in East Jin
(317-323)
多罗
Srimitrala
帛延
《 大 孔 雀 神 王 经 》 Tantric
Mahamayuri
Sutra,
Vidyarajni
《孔雀王杂神经》
Tantric
《大灌顶經》
Tantric
The third year of Emperor 首楞严经
Jianwen in East Jin (373)
须赖經
上金光首經
如幻三昧經
龟兹副史 The fifth year of Taikang period 授 Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护梵
(284)
61
Mahayana Vaipulya
Mahayana Vaipulya
Mahayana Vaipulya
Mahayana Vaipulya
羌子侯
书《不退转法轮經》
From the above table about the scripture types translated by monks from Kuci, it
is possible to draw the entire outline of scripture transmission from Kuci. From Wei
period to East Jin dynasty, Buddhist scriptures translated by people from Kuci to inland
China mostly belonged to Hinayana sutra and vinaya pitakas. Such phenomenon
basically followed the fact that in this country Hinayana Buddhism was popular. In the
aspect of Mahayana scriptures, translators from Kuci were in favor of Vaipulya, then
Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), prajna sutras, etc. In the society, Mahayana
and Hinayana were both popular, and there were even Tantric scriptures and thoughts.
For example, in the table, there listed some scriptures related with mantras, which began
to influence people’s faith. From 4th century, there were some people from Ku Che 库
车 believing in Tantric scriptures.120
1.2.2The Original Source of 龟兹 Kuci’s Sarvastivada School
Many scholars regard that Sarvastivada School in early Western Regions and even
later days mainly derived from Kophen area, the major reason for which is careless
about the historical changes of Buddhism in Kophen. The origin and development of
Hinayana Buddhism in Kuci is a changing process. If the earliest Buddhism derived
from Sarvastivada School in Kophen, then at the period of King Kaniṣka, or about 1
CE, Kuci was more influenced by Hinayana Buddhism from Gandhāra, which lasted
until the end of the third century. From the fourth century, Sarvastivadin doctrines in
Kophen began to develop and to influence Western Regions, especially countries in
north road. Kumārajīva grew up in Kuci under the influence of Sarvastivada School
from Kophen. Kumārajīva brought temporary prosperity of Mahayana Buddhism in
Kuci. However, Buddhism in Kuci later focused on Hinayana Buddhism, which did not
change until Tang Dynasty. The development process of Buddhism in Kuci deserved
serious consideration.
Sarvastivada School in Kuci did not only came from Kophen, which was still
influenced by Sarvastivada School in Gandhāra. One reason of such comment was that
the above listed Mahayana scriptures were most from Da Yuezhi, when Sarvastivada
School was also popular in Da Yuezhi, so it is quite possible for Hinayana Buddhism
transmitted along. It is deserving to illustrate that Sarvastivada School was basically
120
克林凯特著，赵崇民译：
《丝绸古道上的文化》
，新疆美术摄影出版社，1994 年，第 172 页。
62
centered in Gandhāra, so Kophen was obviously influenced by it. Another reason is that
grottoes in Kuci area was influenced by Gandhāra art. 耿剑 Geng Jian in 克孜尔佛传
遗迹与犍陀罗关系探讨 made interpretation and comparison about remains of Buddha
biography in Kizil 克 孜 尔 and Gandhāra, such as the comparison of picture
organization and figure constitution, the comparison of image and origin, with the aim
to discuss about the relationship between Kizil 克孜尔 remains of Buddha biography
and Gandhāra, and to get the conclusion that Buddha biography wall painting in Kizil
克孜尔 was once partially and directly influenced by Gandhāra. 121 By comparing
between floating sculpture of Buddha biography in Gandhāra and some images of
Buddha biography wall painting in Kizil 克孜尔, some people think: “there must be
some essential relationship between Gandhāra and Kizil 克 孜 尔 . Due to social
condition, natural condition, etc., there formed two different types of art in Gandhāra
and Kizil 克孜尔, but both were typical models of Buddhist art in specific period”.122
Zhu Yingrong 朱英荣 also thinks: “Culture in Kuci was influenced by culture in
Gandhāra, whose many art notions, art styles, art skills, art handling methods were from
Gandhāra”.123 But culture in Kuci made integration and transformation about culture
in Gandhāra, making it connected together with local culture tradition and art styles.
Man Yingying 满盈盈 thinks: “Art elements in Gandhāra is the earliest and most
important of elements in 克孜尔 Kizil grottoes. It is like a river, inputting into Kuci,
stimulating the prosperity of grottoes art in Kizil 克孜尔. At the beginning of grottoes
art in Kizil 克孜尔, there manifested dependence and reference on Gandhāra art, which
laid solid foundation for the formation of Kuci art. In the later development process,
although Kizil 克孜尔 was integrated with many types of art, 克孜尔 Kizil was still in
favor of Gandhāra’s subjects and narrating methods”.124
121
122
123
124
耿剑：
《克孜尔佛传遗迹与犍陀罗关系探讨》
，
《南京艺术学院学报》2008 年第 5 期，第 40 页。
耿剑：
《犍陀罗佛传浮雕与克孜尔佛传壁画部分图像比较》
，《艺术考古》2005 年第 3 期，第 106 页。
朱英荣：
《龟兹文化与犍陀罗文化》
，
《新疆大学学报》1988 年第 1 期，第 24 页。
满盈盈：
《克孜尔石窟中犍陀罗艺术元素蝉变考》
，
《北京理工大学》2011 年第 2 期，第 149 页。
63
It could be analyzed by the above that from 1 CE to 3 CE, Kophen area did not
become the center of Buddhism transmission in northwest India, and Gandhāra was the
major place for transmitting no matter statue art, Mahayana scriptures, or Sarvastivadin
doctrines. Although in Kophen Mahavibhasa Sastra was compiled successfully, its
influence was still weak, and Gandhāra and the capital were still the transmission center
of Sarvastivada School. Until the end of the third century, Sarvastivada School in
Kophen began to prosper, which might be related with previous comment that
Sarvastivada School was conventional and later 讫利多族 got the power and destroyed
Buddhism. At this period, the major source of Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana
Buddhism in Western Regions was mainly from Da Yuezhi. Especially for Sarvastivada
School in Western Regions, Kophen was not the earliest and direct origin. Sarvastivada
School transmitting line was mainly “from Kophen area (in broad sense centered in
Gandhāra), 125 to Tochar, 安 息 , 康 居 , 葱 岭 , 沙 勒 , 龟 兹 . According to recent
discovery, Kuci area used Tocharian language. Early Hinayana Buddhism was
transmitted to Inland China by this line”. 126 About this point, Ji Xianlin 季羡林
expressed clearly: “The Buddhist faith in Kuci and Yanqi areas was Hinayana
Buddhism at the beginning, especially for Sarvastivada School. It has some inevitability.
Since Buddhism in this area was transmitted from Gandhāra and Gandhāra was famous
for Hinayana Buddhism”.127
1.3Kumārajīva’s Learning about Sarvastivada School
1.3.1Kumārajīva’s Learning about Scriptures of Sarvastivada School
The Buddhist environment of Kuci where Kumārajīva faced in early young ages
was influenced deeply by Sarvastivada School as the leading place. At the period of
Kumārajīva, Hinayana Buddhism in Kuci was mainly influenced by Kophen. Before
Kumārajīva, Kuci had close relationship with Hinayana Buddhism in Kophen. Monk
Zhi Shan from Western Regions also once learned meditation in Kophen. 佛图澄(Fo
Tucheng or Buddhasimha) as the great transmitter in Late Zhao dynasty learned
Hinayana Buddhism from Kophen and transmitted Buddhism in inland China. As it is
印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年 6 月第 1 版，第 6 页。“说到罽宾区，汉晋以来，一向指犍
陀罗，乌仗那一带，贵霜王朝的政治中心。”
126
释印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年 6 月版，第 9 页。或见蓝吉富主编：
《印顺，吕澂佛学
辞典》
，台南：中华佛教百科文献基金会，2000 年，第 1387 页。
127
季羡林：
《鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰》
，
《孔子研究》2005 年第 6 期，第 34
页。
64
125
recorded in Biography of Great Monks: “佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) learned
dharma in Kophen from famous masters, who was regarded as the enlightened one by
Western Regions…The Emperor of Zhao called Hu asked 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or
Buddhasimha), and he advised the king: Your Excellency once was a great trader. In
one temple of Kophen, there was fasting offering ceremony, in which there were sixteen
arahants, and I also went to the ceremony. Then some enlightened one told me: the
donor will die and reborn to be a chicken. Now you have been the king, isn’t that of
your blessing? It is common for a country in wars and battles, why do you complain
about Triple Jewels and arouse the evil thought?” 128 Here mentioned a temple in
Kophen, which implies some information that 佛图澄’s Hinayana teaching came from
Kophen.
Jivaka 耆婆 took Kumārajīva to learn dharma in Kophen, looking for virtuous
masters for further doctrines, which itself illustrates the influence and high status of
Kophen Buddhism to people in Kuci. After Kumārajīva returned to his motherland, he
received full ordination and learned Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 from Vimalākṣa
卑摩罗叉, who was from Kophen.129 At that period, Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉 transmitted
dharma in Kuci and preached Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律, which was popular in
Sarvastivada School in Kophen. This implies the close relationship between Kophen
and Kuci. This also indicates the popularity of Sarvastivadin scriptures like Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 in Kuci area, the origin of which was from Kophen.
One of the characteristics of Hinayana Buddhism lies in the emphasis on
cultivation as well as strict observance of precepts, only by which they regard it possible
to achieve arhathood. In 比丘尼戒本所出本末序, it recorded: “Monks in the temple
all change their rooms, beddings, or temples per three months. If one monk not full of
five ordinated years, he should not sleep even one night without dependent master”. So
is the same case for Bhikkhuni: “Bhikkuni should change rooms, or temples per three
months. Three should not go outside without venerable Bhikkuni. They should follow
more precepts. They should not sleep without dependent masters”.130 This 比丘尼戒
128
129
130
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 9《佛图澄传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 345，350 页。
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 2《卑摩罗叉传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 63 页。
释僧祐著，苏晋仁，萧链子点校：
《出三藏记集》
，中华书局，2000 年，第 410-411 页。
65
本所出本末序 was obtained by Sengchun and Tanchong from Kuci and transmitted to
inland China. This illustrates that at the end of 4 CE, Kuci area also valued highly of
Buddhist precepts. Around 库车 in Xin Jiang, there discovered scripture remains of
波罗提木叉 in Tochar, which illustrates that Sarvastivadin scriptures popular in Kushan
Kingdom was also applied in Kuci area. This remains were just 十诵比丘尼戒本
translated by Kumārajīva.131
At that period, meditation masters included Dharmatara 达 磨 多 罗 and
Buddhasena 佛 大 先 , who both transmitted dharma in Kophen. 修 行 方 便 禅 經
translated by Master Jue Xian systematically introduced their meditation methods, but
only 佛 大 先 Buddhasena’s meditation works is still extant and Dharmatara’s
meditation methods have become secret transmission no longer public. In 修行地不
净观經序第十六, Hui Guan said: “Now schools are popular with doctrines in different
degrees, so it is necessary to find the origin and then to learn. This scripture is called
具足清净法场, transmitted to Kophen, then to 富若蜜罗, who had six supernatural
powers, then to 富若罗. Both were famous in Kophen, who both passed away. Then
佛陀斯那 transmitted the dharma with about 700 followers. 昙摩罗 from Inida
transmitted this dharma to 婆陀羅, who then transmitted the dharma to 佛陀斯那. 佛
陀斯那 felt pity that there was no real disciples to learn the dharma in 旃丹, so he
transmitted the dharma to the east”.
At that period, monks transmitting meditation in Kophen are more than fifteen
people, so meditation must be very popular in Kophen then. 佛陀跋陀羅 received
meditation from Buddhasena 佛大先, and then transmitted meditation to east land.
In Kumārajīva’s translation of scriptures in Chang’an, many of them are from
Kophen area, among which the most outstanding are in meditation and vinaya, such as
131
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，商务艺术馆 1999 年，第 102 页。
66
禅法要 2, 禅經 3, 禅法要解 2, Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 61, and Daśabhāṇavāra Bhikkupratimoksa 十诵比丘戒本 1, etc. Satyasiddhi-śāstra 成实论 was later
translated by Kumārajīva. 坐禅三昧經 translated by Kumārajīva was complied by
collecting Buddhist scholars’ works in meditation, especially from Sarvastivada School,
scholars including Kumārajīva 童受, Vasumitra 世友, 众护(僧伽罗叉), 众军(僧伽斯
那), 近护(沤波崛), Paśva 胁尊者 and Aśvaghoṣa 马鸣, etc.132 At the period of Former
Qin and Latter Qin, there were some monks from Kophen coming to translate scriptures
and deliver dharma, such as Sanghadeva 僧伽提婆, Sanghabhuti 僧伽跋澄, Dharmayaśas 昙摩耶舍, Buddha-yaśas 佛陀耶舍, Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉, and Buddhajiva 佛
驮什, etc. transmitting Abhidharma Sastra 毘曇, Agamas 阿含, Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya
十诵律, and Dharmagupta Vinaya 四分律 etc. to inland China. Then Buddhabhadra 佛
陀跋陀羅 transmitted meditation to inland China. These make meditation and vinaya
gradually step forward systematically.
1.3.2Kumārajīva’s Contact with Thoughts of Sarvastivada School
Kumārajīva learned Hinayana Buddhism from Kophen since he was young, and
then learned further in Kophen and met many masters in Sarvastivada School, which
laid solid foundation for his Buddhist thoughts. Although he later transferred to
Mahayana Buddhism, Sarvastivadin thoughts and notions from Kophen had influenced
his whole life, especially for some activities in Chang’an, which clearly displayed such
characteristics.
In Biography of Great Monks, it mentioned that when Kumārajīva was six years
old, the first Buddhist scripture he learned was Jnanaprasthana-sastra 发智论 by 迦旃
延子. Although Kumārajīva was from Kuci, he was influenced most by Sarvastivada
School from Kophen. It could be known from Biography of Great Monks that
Kumārajīva learned agamas from Bandhadatta 盘头达多. On the way back to Kuci, he
132
吕澂：
《印度佛学渊源略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年 10 月第 1 版，第 59 页。
67
stayed at 莎勒 and made study on the system of Jnanaprasthana-sastra 发智论 and 六
足 论 . These all laid the theoretical foundation for his transference to Mahayana
Buddhism. Enichi Ocho 横超慧日 pointed out: “No matter to translate or to interpret
prajna sutras, right view on Abhidharma of Sarvastivada School is inevitable
prerequisite. In this sense, in China, before Kumārajīva, there had been some passionate
researchers for prajna sutras, such as 东晋支道林 and 符秦道安, etc. However, there
had been no one who treated Abhidharma as learning to grasp. In this sense, Kumārajīva
made study on Sarvastivada School and then learned Mahayana Buddhism, who in the
history of Chinese Buddhism should be regarded as the supreme elite non-comparable
no matter in any aspect”.133
Meanwhile, it should be noticed that although Kumārajīva later transferred to
Mahayana Buddhism, the influence of Hinayana Buddhism was also effective, and
moreover, he was unable to isolate from the contemporary environment where
Hinayana Buddhism was popular. In the period of his translation in Chang’an, though
Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 and Satyasiddhi-śāstra 成实论 belonging to Hinayana
theories, with the aim to transmit dharma, it was necessary to translate in sincerity and
seriousness. Monks from Western Regions were mostly from Kophen, such as his two
masters, Buddhabhadra 佛驮跋陀罗, Dharma-ruci 昙摩流支, Dharma-yaśas 昙摩耶
舍. Therefore, the influence of Sarvastivada School from Kophen is inevitable. Such
influence not only reflects in Buddhist theories, but also in religious practice, in which
there was the thought of monasticism with Sarvastivada School as the center.
133
转引自孙昌武：
《中国文化史上的鸠摩罗什》
，
《南开学报》2009 年第 2 期，第 45 页。
68
Chapter Two: Early Transmission of Da Yuezhi’s Mahayana
Buddhism and Kumārajīva’s Transference of Buddhist Theories
2.1The Arising and Eastern Transmission of Da Yuezhi’s Mahayana
Buddhism
About 100 BCE, Mahayana Buddhist thought firstly arose in 案达罗 Andhra
Kingdom in south India, and later gradually developed to materity in Kushan Kingdom
in the north and Vaisali in the middle, etc. 案达罗 Andhra was the important region for
the arising of prajna thought as well as the forming place for Nagarjuna’s Madhyamika
theories. Kushan Kingdom was the center of early Mahayana Buddhism, in which many
early Mahayana scriptures arose. Vasali in middle Inida was the important place for the
arising of later Mahayana scriptures. The relationship and communication between
them is quite obvious, as is said in prajna sutra: “After the Buddha’s nirvana, this sutra
was developed to the south, then to the west, and to the north”.134 Mahayana scriptures
gradually get perfection and maturity in the process of transmission, while middle India
and north India in the forming process of Mahayana Buddhism played a very important
role.135
2.1.1The Development of 大月氏(Greater Yueh-chih, or Da Yuezhi, or Otsuki)’s
Mahayana Buddhism
The Buddhist development in north India and middle India played an important
role in the entire history of Indian Buddhism, as well as were the most important regions
of Buddhism transmitting to Western Regions and inland China. At that period, Kushan
Kingdom controlled north India and middle India, so study on Buddhism in Kushan
Kingdom is very valuable and meaningful for understanding the development of
Buddhism in early Western Regions and Chinese Buddhism. Early Mahayana scriptures
and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamika theories are the major content of Kumārajīva’s later
《小品般若》
，
《放光般若经》中略去西方。空宗自西传至北方，或在迦腻色迦时。
印顺法师：
《印度佛教思想史》，中华书局，2010 年，第 81,153 页。“初期大乘经的传出，约自公元前
50 年，到公元 200 年，传出也是有先后的。也有思想与初期相同，而传出却在后期。 大概的说：以一切
法空为了义的，是初期大乘。后期大乘经，从公元三世纪起到五世纪末，大多已经传出。大概的说：以一
切法空为不究竟，而应空其所空，有其所有的，是后期大乘。” 或见印顺法师：
《初期大乘佛教之起源与
开展》
，正闻出版社。
69
134
135
scripture translation and transmission of Buddhism. These contents have direct
relationship with the development and east-transmission of Mahayana Buddhism.
Before Da Yuezhi people came to middle Asia, countries in north India mainly had
faith in Sarvastivada School. After Da Yuezhi took up Da Xia, people in different tribes
lived together for hundreds of years. Mutual integration between different ethnic groups
made Da Yuezhi absorb Da Xia’s culture, including Buddhism. Ryotai Hatani 羽溪了
谛 pointed out: “Da Xia, since 亚历山大 expanded to the east, was influenced by Greek
culture. When Da Yuezhi made contact with Da Xia, it gradually became assimilated
with Da Xia’s custom…Before 200 BCE, Da Yuezhi moved to this area and conquered
Da Xia. To the period from 91BCE to 80 CE, Da Yuezhi even entered into Da Xia’s
center and was undoubtedly influenced by Buddhism”.136
Although people in Da Yuezhi converted to Buddhism, north India was still in the
control of Sarvastivada School until the establishment of Kushan Kingdom, and many
kings had faith in Hinayana Buddhism. At this period, Mahayana thoughts was in
increasing accumulation. The arising of Mahayana Buddhism in Kushan Kingdom
came along with Kushan’s expansion to the south, and was affected by Mahayana
prajna thought in the south, also along with the economic development.
At the time of 100 CE, many Buddha stupas and Buddha’s used sainted things
appeared in northwest India, which illustrates the initial formation of Mahayana
Buddhism. 平川彰 Hirakawa Akira thinks: “Buddha stupa originally did not belong to
Sectarian schools. From 100 CE, there appeared Buddha stupa subject to sectarian
schools, but the quantity compared with those non-sectarian stupas was actually a few.
Therefore, if regarding the existence of Mahayana Buddhists, they should treat these
non-sectarian stupas as centers to conduct transmission activities. It is impossible to
verify the existence of Mahayana sangha by investigating tablet inscriptions, in which
there discovered the larger proportion of non-sectarian stupas”.137
From 丘就 and 阎膏珍 to 韦西斯迦, Mahayana Buddhism did not get actual
development, while the real transference happened in Kaniṣka period.138 Mahayana
Buddhism was centered in southeast region of India and was developing to the west.
King Kaniṣka “worshiped orthodox Sarvastivada School on the one hand and on the
other hand, built temples to offer Mahayana monks”.139 In his support, Buddhism in
羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，北京商务印书馆，1999 年，第 49 页。
平川彰著，释显如，李凤媚译：
《印度佛教史》
，台北：商周出版，2004 年，第 311 页。
138
关于贵霜王国诸王世系及在位年代，可参考日本学者羽溪了谛的考证。羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译《西域
之佛教》
，第 69 页。
139
梁启超：
《印度佛教概览》
，载《饮冰室合集》第 9 册，专集第 53, 中华书局 1989 年版，第 1 页。
70
136
137
Kushan presented prosperous development. According to the indication of tablet
inscription in a pottery tin, before King Kaniṣka, Mahasanghika doctrines had
developed in middle Asia.140 At the period of King Kaniṣka, Mahasanghika School
continued to develop extensively. In the 11th year of King Kaniṣka period, one
inscription mentioned the situation of masters in Mahasanghika School.141 This school
with great passion and sincerity developed greatly in quantity of Buddhists and in
power.142 From these, it could be seen that King Kaniṣka supported Mahayana thoughts.
At about 100 CE, there appeared Buddhist scriptures, such as Lotus Sutra, West
Pure Land Sutra, etc., which illustrates that at this period there existed Mahayana
thoughts. In Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), the major function of
Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva was to save sentient beings from suffering prior to his
Buddhahood. Such other-benefit thought and benevolent actions deeply influenced
Buddhist disciples, who no longer need cultivate Hinayana ascetic methods, but
achieved Buddhahood by bowing sincerely to Bodhisattvas. Scriptures for Pure Land
made Buddhists’ thoughts change fundamentally, whose cultivation purposes changed
from simple nirvana to subtle ideal pure land as similar as the Buddha land. Traders
would not feel irrigated about long time ascetic cultivation, but by donation to transfer
merits, they could achieve their goals. Therefore, Buddhist disciples at the period of
Kushan left many offering prayers, the content of which started with blessing for
countries and rulers, then aims of donation, and the last for their own wishes for
relatives both the alive to get blessing and the dead to get away from suffering. 143 In
the prayer, the benefit-oriented thought is nearly as the same as the comment that
offering seven jewels could get great merits in Mahayana Sanskrit scriptures.
In conclusion, there are some points as the reasons for the arising and formation
of Mahayana Buddhism in this period.
Firstly, at the period of King Kaniṣka, Kushan Kingdom has become a great
imperialist country to control middle Asia, north India, and middle India. In order to fit
for the ruling class’ need, the ruler of this country regarded the Buddha as god, thus
expanding the inclusiveness of Buddhism, so that lay Buddhists needless to become a
monk are able to cultivate merits and able to save himself and others, only if they
sincerely believe in the Buddha, all could become Bodhisattvas and Buddhas. This
point shines hope to the oppressed people, who would make efforts for happiness. This
certainly becomes the spiritual tool for the ruling class to control and oppress the people
原载: J. Harmatta, K interpretatsii nadpisey iz Kara-Tepe, in Kara-Tepe, 转引自：B. A. Litvinsky: Outline
History of Buddhism in Centra Asia. In: Kushan Studies in U. S. S. R. p.65.
141
Staya Shrava, Dated Kushana Inscriptions, Delhi, 1993, pp.32-33.
142
P. V. Bapat: 2500 Years of Buddhism, Delhi, reprinted, 1987, p.96.
143
刘欣如：
《古代印度与古代中国》
，牛津大学出版社，1988 年，第 108-111 页。
71
140
with the aim to consolidate their power and management. Just as Ji Xianlin 季羡林 said:
“Hinayana Buddhism was conducive enough for minor countries, but for bigger
countries, such doctrine seems too narrow to meet the need of imperialist
countries…Mahayana ideology is certainly beneficial for larger countries”. 144
According to 付法藏因缘传, it recorded that King Kaniṣka sent armies to invade into
Magadha 摩羯陀, with the aim to ask for 马鸣 Aśvaghoṣa and the Buddha’s bowl. 马
鸣 Aśvaghoṣa at that period was the famous commentator of Mahayana Buddhism,
well-known for argumentative eloquence and writing, who had paid a lot for the
prosperity of Mahayana Buddhism.
Secondly, Kushan Kingdom has extended to middle India, covering over half of
the entire India. After the mergence of 案达罗 Andhra Kingdom in the south in 28 BCE
with 迦恩 kingdom in middle India, Mahasanghika School was firstly transmitted to
middle India, which made Buddhism revive in middle India. 145 When Kushan
Kingdom’s land directly contact 案达罗 Andra Kingdom’s land, the transmission of
prajna thoughts to the north had become the inevitable fact. After prajna thoughts
transmitted to Kushan Kingdom in the north, prajna thoughts became the original
engine for the arising and development of Mahayana Buddhism.
Thirdly, Buddhism, from the time of its arising, had been closely related with
goods economy and city civilization. At the Buddha’s time, life was simple and the
sangha was small, so there was little reliance on donators. However, at the arising period
of Mahayana Buddhism, in mental area, negative life philosophy and idealism
developed to the extreme point. Buddhist temples, due to extensive donation, became
very rich, which aroused the change in monastic organizing forms, developing manners,
and the relationship with lay people.146
Prosperous business trade advanced the process of urbanization in Kushan
Kingdom, which provided convenient conditions for the transmission of Buddhism.
The prosperity of commerce and trade improved the development of handcraft area,
strengthening the power of handcrafters and communities. At that period, business
communities were regarded as the pole of a country’s politics. 147 Yet, no matter
季羡林：
《关于大乘上座部的问题》
， 载《季羡林学术论著自选集》
，北京师范学院出版社，1991 年
版，第 244 页。
145
佛光星云编著：
《佛教历史》
，《星云大师佛学著作集》
，上海辞书出版社，2008 年，第 22 页。
146
刘欣如：
《贵霜时期东渐佛教的特色》
，
《南亚研究》1993 年第 3 期。
147
B. N. Puri: India Under the Kushanas, Bombay, 1965, p.106-107.
72
144
community leaders or normal handcrafters were mostly Buddhists, whose ideology
made non-ignorable influence on the entire country.148 Cities and the society became
rich, so Buddhist sangha also became rich. These Buddhists made donation to temples
and monks to support the development of Buddhism. For example, one rich sculpture
man once donated to the pass way of a stupa in Sanchi, which was one of the most
outstanding sculpture in ancient India.149 At this period, Buddhist temples not only
built temples and towers, but were also able to decorate elegantly for temples and
towers.
The thought of achieving Buddhahood by accumulating merits by donation was
very popular in north India at that period. The compilation of Vimalakirti Sutra is the
direct influence of such thought. In the sutra, the subject was one rich trader, who lived
super mundane life as a lay Buddhist, and achieved the enlightenment goal. What he
represented is the combination of the extreme empty philosophy with the search for
material benefit in actual life.150
After King Kaniṣka Ⅱ, the reference for the development of Buddhism in Kushan
Kingdom was few, but according to the record in Clemens ancient book in Alexandria
city at the beginning of the third century, in Da Xia (subordinated to Da Yuezhi), monks
were deeply professional in philosophy, and Buddhist theories prospered.151 Especially
after the middle of the third century, many people from Yue Zhi came to inland China
to transmit Buddhism. In another record in the book of 攸提比斯, in early days of the
fourth century, in Da Xia country, there were thousands of Brahmins (by the record of
奈孙氏, Brahmins were Buddhist monks). 152 Another record was that many great
monks came to Inland China to transmit Buddhism, which could verify that from King
Kaniṣka Ⅱ to the latter period of the fourth century, Buddhism in Kushan country
continued popularity.
2.1.2Eastern Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism in Early Period
In the first year of Yuanshou period of Ai Emperor in Han Dynasty (2 BCE), Qin
Jingxian 秦景宪(also said as Jing Lu 景卢) received Buddha sutra from the envoy
called Yi Cun from Da Yuezhi, and Buddhism began to transmit in inland China.
Although Chu Lord called Ying believed in Buddhism and Emperor Ming in Han
季羡林：
《商人与佛教》
，载《第十六届国际历史科学大会中国学者论文集》
，中华书局，1985 年，第
97 页。
149
雅诺什 哈尔马塔著，徐文堪，芮传明译：
《中亚文明史》第二卷，第 241 页。
150
梵文本已失，汉译本有鸠摩罗什所译《维摩诘所说经》
，
《大正藏》第 14 册。
151
Lassen: Ind. Alterthumskunde II. S. 1760.
152
Lassen: Ind. Alterthumskunde S. 1956.
73
148
Dynasty dreamed of the golden shining Buddha, Buddhism did not develop universally.
Until the Huan and Ling period in late East Han Dynasty, historical material records
became plentiful. Many great monks from middle Asia and India came to inland China
to transmit dharma and translate scriptures, and Buddhism began to prosper. According
to fascicle one and fascicle two in the History of Chinese Buddhism, Liang Qichao’s
Buddhism and Western Regions (one of eighteen articles in Buddhist studies), Ryotai
Hatani’s Buddhism in Western Regions,153 the comprehensive table is as followed.
Name
Location Time
安世高
安息
支娄迦谶
Da
Yuezhi
Lokakṣema
Main scriptures
Properties
Huan and Ling period in 安般守意經 阴持入經 大 Hinayana
East Han (middle of 3rd
meditation,
century)
十二门經 小十二门經 百 Abhidharma
theory
六十品经, etc.
In the period of Guanghe 般若道行經(Aṣṭasāhasrikā Mahayana
and
Zhongping
of
Bodhisattva
Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra);
Emperor Ling (178-189)
vehicle
Pratyutpanna Samadhi
Sutra 般舟三昧經;
首楞严三昧經 Suragamasamadhi-sutra, etc.
竺佛朔
天
India
Huan
竺 Emperor
Emperor Ling days
安 玄 (with 安息
and 道行般若经 Aṣṭasāhasrikā Mahayana prajna
Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra
Emperor Ling in East Han 法镜經, 十慧經
Dynasty
Mahayana
Bodhisattva
vehicle
Zhongping period of 成具光明經
Emperor Ling (184-189)
Mahayana
Vaipulya
严佛调)
Da
Yuezhi
支曜
康 孟 祥 ， 康居，天 Jian’an period of Emperor 修行本起經，中本起經
Xian (196-220)
Mahayana
竺 大 力 竺
Mahabala
参考任继愈主编：
《中国佛教史》第一，二卷，中国社会科学出版社，1985 年版，书后附录；梁启
超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年版，第 108-110 页；羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，贺昌
群译，第 95-102 页。
74
153
维祇难，竺 天竺
律炎
支谦
India
Da
Yuezhi
The third
year of 法句经, 三摩竭經, 佛医 Hinayana
Huangwu period of Sun
Quan in Wu state of three 經
countries times(224)
From Huangwu period of 大 般 泥 洹 經 , 维 摩 诘 經 ,
Emperor Sun Quan to
Emperor Sun Liang (222- 大明度无极經, 太子瑞应
253)
本起經, 无量门微密特經,
etc.
Covering
Mahayana and
Hinayana
scriptures, 118
fascicles in all
with extant 69
fascicles
(according to 开
元释教录卷二)
康僧会
康巨
支 强 梁 接 Yue Zhi
（正无畏）
帛延
Kuci
10th year of Chiwu in Wu 六度集经, 吴品经,
Mahayana
state, the first year of
Hinayana
Taikang
period
of 注解作序：安般守意, 法
Emperor Wu in West Jin
镜經, 道树經.
(247-280)
The second year of 法华三昧經, 即正法华经
Wufeng
period
of
Emperor Liang in Wu
state (255)
Mahayana
Hua section
Gaoguixianggong period 无量清净平等觉經,
of Wei state (254-260)
Jiaping period of Wei state 僧祇戒心
(249-254)
Hinayana
（法时）
康僧铠
Sanghapala
康居？
Fa
菩 Mahayana (most
from 方广)
萨修行經, 首楞严经, 须
赖經, 除灾患經.
昙 柯 迦 罗 Middle
India
and
The fourth year of Jiaping 郁伽长者所问经, 无量寿 Mahayana
period of Wei state (252)
Aparimitayus Sutra,
Ugraparipṛcchā Sūtra
75
昙谛
安息
Weigaoguixianggong
period of Wei state
安法贤
安息
Wei
dynasty
countries period)
竺法护
Dharmarakṣa
昙无德羯磨
(three 罗摩伽经, 大般涅槃经
Hinayana
Mahayana
Hinayana
and
Yue Zhi From the second year of Extant
86
scriptures Major
(Dun
Taishi period in West Jin including 光 赞 般 若 波 罗 Mahayana;
a
Huang) to Xingyuan period (266little Hinayana
313)
蜜經, 正法华经, 渐备一
切 智 德 經 , 普 曜 經
Lalitavistara Sutra (at that
period translation in all 154
according to 出三藏记集;
175 开元释教录)
聂承远
China
From Taikang period to 越难經, 超日明三昧經
Yongjia period in West Jin
(300-400)
聂道真
China
From Taikang period to 文殊师利般涅槃经, 异出 Mahayana most
Yongjia period in West Jin
and Hinayana a
(300-400)
菩萨本起經, 三曼陀毘陀 few
羅菩萨经, 菩萨受斎經,
无垢施菩萨分别应辩經
竺叔兰，无 He Nan Yuankang period of West 放光般若经
in
Jin (291-299)
叉 China,
Khotan
Mokchala
罗
帛远
China
Yuankang and Yong’an 菩 萨 逝 經 , 菩 萨 修 行 經 ,
period in West Jin (291304)
佛般泥洹經, 贤者五福德
經
强 梁 娄 至 Western
Regions
The second year of 十二游經
Taikang period of West Jin
(281)
76
Mahayana
（法喜）
安法钦
安息
支法度
Yue Zhi
The second year of 道神足无极变化經, 阿育
Taikang period of West Jin
(281-326)
王經
Yongning
period
Emperor Hui (301)
of 逝童子經, 善生子經
Emperor Hui in West Jin
法立
诸德福田經,
Mahayana
Hinayana
and
楼炭經, 法
句譬喻经, 大方等如来藏
經
法炬
Kuci
Emperor Hui in West Jin
优填王经, 楼炭經, 法句 Most Hinayana
譬喻经, 佛说诸德福田經
若罗严
帛尸梨蜜
Western
Regions
West Jin
时非时經
Emperor Yuan in East Jin
大 孔 雀 王 神 咒 经
(317-322)
Mahamayuri
多羅
Vidyarajni
Mixed
Tantric
Sutra, 孔 雀 王 杂 神 咒 经
Srimitrala
大灌顶經, etc.
昙 无 兰 Western
Regions
East Jin (381-395)
采莲违王上佛授决号妙华 Hinayana
(法正)
僧伽提婆
經, 陀邻尼钵經
Kophen
Jianyuan period of Former 阿毗昙八犍度论, 中阿含 Hinayana
Qin (383-384)
經, 增一阿含经, 三法度
论, 阿毗昙心论
迦留陀伽
Western
Regions
17th year of Taiyuan 十二游經
period in East Jin (392)
昙摩持
Western
Regions
15th year of Jianyuan 十诵比丘戒本, 比丘尼大 Hinayana
period of former Qin
(379)
戒
77
with
鸠 摩 罗 佛 Western
Regions
提
僧伽跋澄
Western
Regions
18th year of Jianyuan 四阿含暮抄解
period of former Qin
(382)
Former Qin (381-385)
Hinayana
毗婆沙论, 尊婆须蜜菩萨 Hinayana
所集论, 僧伽罗刹所集经
th
year of Jianyuan 摩诃般若波罗蜜钞經
竺 18
period of former Qin
India
(382)
昙摩蜱
天
昙摩难提
吐火罗
支施仑
Mahayana prajna
Tochar
From 20th year of 中 阿 含 經 , 增 一 阿 含 经 , Hinayana
Jianyuan period of former
Qin to Latter Qin (384- 三法度论, 阿育王息坏目
391)
因缘經, 僧伽罗刹集
Yue Zhi
Former Liang
须赖經
Mahayana
Vaipulya
From the above table, it could known that in late period of East Han Dynasty, most
scriptures translated by Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶 belonged to Mahayana Buddhism, which
illustrates that in the contemporary Kushan Kingdom, after King Kaniṣka, Mahayana
Buddhism developed to the important status, and gradualy in the age of prosperity. Later,
Zhi Yao 支曜, Zhi Qian 支谦, Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, Zhi Dadu 支法度, Zhi Shilun 支
施仑, etc., all came from Da Yuezhi, and their translations were mostly Mahayana
scriptures, especially for Vaipulya, Avatamsaka, Prajna in a large number. This fully
illustrates that at this period, Mahayana scriptures were very popular in Da Yuezhi.
In Buddhist scriptures translated by Lokakṣema, most belonged to Mahayana
types, among which, Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 道行般若经 was collected
into Mahaprajna Sutra, 文殊问菩萨蜀經 and Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra 般舟三昧
經 were collected into Vaipulya sutras, 兜沙經 was collected into Avatamsaka Sutra,
阿弥陀佛国 and 平等觉 were collected into Mahā-ratna-kūṭa-sūtra 大宝积經. These
nearly covered all types of later Mahayana scriptures. This period was about in 100 CE,
at which period, with so many Mahayana scriptures with extensive and complicated
78
contents, this illustrates that Mahayana Buddhism in contemporary period in Da Yuezhi
had developed to high degree. Therefore, this makes it accessible and convenient for a
large number of later Mahayana scripture translations by Zhi Qian 支 谦 . These
scriptures also include Vimalakirti Sutra, scriptures related with Bodhisattvas and quite
many types of mantra sutras. Soon after this, Zhi Jiangliangjie 支疆梁接 came to inland
China by sea translated 法华三昧经 in Jiao Zhou 焦州. In West Jin period, Dharmarakṣa 竺法护 re-translated this sutra and named it as 正法华经. Dharma-rakṣa should
be regarded as the first great monk who made complete and large-scaled scripture
translation in Chinese history. He translated about 159 scriptures, in nearly 309 fascicles,
most of which belonged to Mahayana type. His travel to 36 countries in Western
Regions reflected, at the end of Kushan Kingdom, the development situation of
Mahayana Buddhism in North India, middle Asia and Cong Ling areas. Ryotai Hatani
羽 溪 了 谛 thinks: “In Da Yuezhi, Mahayana scriptures were complete, including
scriptures in types of Avatamsaka, Vaipulya, Prajna, Saddharmapundarika, Nirvana,
while Hinayana scriptures were also complete and popular, so were existent about some
scriptures in vinaya, treatise, Tantric, etc. In simple words, scriptures transmitted to
inland China from Da Yuezhi were more than the above shown here. About
Sarvastivada vinaya transmitted from Da Yuezhi to inland China is not extant, but
according to remains of Sarvastivada pratimoksa discovered near 库车, could be
known that Sarvastivada Bhikkhu pratimoksa had been translated into Da Yuezhi
language, also called Tocharian language…In Da Yuezhi, Hinayana and Mahayana
Buddhism were both popular. Among Mahayana scriptures, scriptures in Ratna-kūṭa
Division 宝积 took the large proportion, next was Vaipulya, Avatamsaka, Prajna,
Saddharmapundarika, and nirvana, etc…In summary, Da Yuezhi was extensive and
broad, so scriputres from different schools were popular in this country, with scriptures
from Vaipulya most popular”.154
According to extant Chinese translated scriptures in China, 平川彰 Hirakawa
Akira thinks: “By discussing about scriptures translated by Lokakṣema, it could be
known that at the end of the first century, in North India, there had existed prajna
thought system, Amitabha thought, Avatamsaka thought system, Amitabha Buddha,
Buddha-contemplation thought, inherent pure in mind nature, Manjusri doctrine,
154
参见羽溪了谛著，贺昌群译：
《西域之佛教》
，第 102-103 页。
79
Pratyutpanna Samadhi 般舟三昧, Suragama Samadhi 首楞严三昧, Ratna-kūṭa(宝积)
thought system, etc. That is to say, except scriptures related with Lotus
Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra) were not included in the translations of Lokakṣema,
other important Mahayana thoughts had appeared in north India at the end of the first
century…By discussing about the translation history in China, it could be known that
there existed various kinds of Mahayana scriptures in Kushan Kingdom in the first
century. With so many Mahayana scriptures, there were also relevant authors and
believers, as well as practitioners, such as cultivating six paramitas and Suragama
Samadhi. Therefore, there were possible some places for cultivation. The teaching is
transmitted from masters to disciples, so there must form the teaching organization. It
is presumed that Mahayana Buddhism in the first century might be in this form”.155
2.2Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism in Western Regions of
Ancient China
2.2.1 Transmission of Mahayana Buddhism to Western Regions
The great transmission of Indian Buddhism to Western Regions should be in the
period of King Kaniṣka. Ji Xianlin 季羡林 considered: “At the beginning of the second
century, King Kaniṣka was in power, and greatly supported Buddhism, and sent monks
to transmit Buddhism around the country. At this period, Buddhism had already been
popular in Kuci, which King Kaniṣka made the transmission to the east stronger, and
Kuci was certain to be influenced. In about the third century and the fourth century,
economy in Kuci prospered, so did the culture. There appeared Buddhist scriptures
written in Brāhmī 婆罗谜字母. In the end of 19th century and the beginning of 20th
century, explorers from the west came to Dun Huang area, dug out ancient remains,
discovered many valuable heritages, including Buddhist scriptures written in Tocharian
language(used in Brāhmī 婆罗谜字母), with complicated content and large quantity.
These valuable heritages made decisive function to study on Buddhism in ancient
Western Regions, including Buddhism in Kuci and Yanqi”.156
In Tarism Basin 塔里木盆地 of China, from the end of 19th century to modern
times, there discovered a large number of Kharoṣṭhī documents, over 1000 pieces in
155
156
平川彰著，释显如，李凤媚译：
《印度佛教史》第 318-322 页。
季羡林：
《佛教传入龟兹和焉有的道路和时间》
，
《社会科学战线》2001 年第 2 期，第 228 页。
80
all. 157 Kharoṣṭhī 佉卢文 once was official language in Kushan Kingdom and was
popular. After the second century, Kharoṣṭhī became the major language applied by
Khotan, Shanshan 鄯善, and Shule 疏勒, Kuci and Xin Jiang, which reflects the deep
influence of Kushan culture on Chinese culture in Western Regions.
A. Stein 斯坦因 collected Sino-Kharosthi Coin 汉怯二体钱, most of which were
from ancient remained cites near He Tian (Hotan 和田). Only a few was popular in 叶
尔羌 or Kuche 库车, etc. In the corn, there were the words “王中之王(King among
kings)”, which illustrates the historical fact that Khotan King inherited the noble
designation of Kushan emperors. The discovery of Sino-Kharosthi Coin 汉怯二体钱
reflects that Khotan culture was influenced both by culture in Kushan and culture in
middle China.
Such history about Kharoṣṭhī brings important information to Buddhist studies.
The date of Kharoṣṭhī materials discovered in Shanshan 鄯善 was between 230 CE and
340 CE. At this period, there were a large quantity of Kharoṣṭhī application in official
authority of Shanshan, such sudden application obviously got severe influence by
outside environment. The source of such influence is people from Kushan who traveled
to Shanshan, one example of which is the phenomenon recorded in Kharoṣṭhī book
sticks that the position of book governor delivered from father to son. 158 In Shanshan,
book governor has the tradition to transmit from father to son, because Kharoṣṭhī
brought by Kushan to Shanshan was absolute strange to local people in Shanshan, who
had no words before, and in face of Kharoṣṭhī, had to depend on Kushan people to write
words.159
The influence of Kushan on Shanshan also presented in the aspect of Buddhism
and Buddhist art. There discovered Buddhist building remained cites and remained
things in some areas, such as 尼雅 remained cite, Mi Lan ancient city, Lou Lan ancient
city and its surrounding cites, etc. These temple remains were with Buddhist towers as
the center. Buddhist remains were mainly about sculptures and wall painting, which
were obviously in Gandhara style. 160 In the above remained cites, there discovered
many wooden furniture remains, decorations, seals, etc., the picture style of which were
157
158
159
160
王炳华：
《贵霜王朝与古代新疆》
，载《西域研究》1991 年第 1 期。
孟凡人：
《楼兰鄯善国简牍年代研究》
，新疆人民出版社，1995 年，第 496 页。
林梅村：
《贵霜大月氏人流寓中国考》
，中国敦煌吐鲁番 1988 年学术讨论会论文。
斯坦因著，向达译：
《斯坦因西域考古记》
，中华书局，1936 年。
81
also Gandhara type. There were Buddhist temple remains and Buddhist art with
Gandhara style in Shanshan 鄯善, the period of which was mainly after the half of the
third century. Therefore, it seems to be regarded that the development of Buddhism and
Buddhist art in Shanshan 鄯善 is mainly related with the situation that some Kushan
people moved to Shanshan 鄯善 after the declination of Kushan Kingdom.161 Huang
Wenbi 黄文弼 also thinks: “In Lou Lan, there discovered wooden book sticks writing
‘fifth year of Taishi in Jin Dynasty 晋泰始五年’, which was the remains of the third
century. In this sense, the transmission of Buddhism to the east by the influence of
Kushan started from the middle of the second century to the beginning of the fourth
century, over 200 hundred years. According to this, it seems affirmative that Buddhism
in Shanshan 鄯善 was transmitted not from Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗, but by people from Da
Yuezhi”.162
Da Yuezhi people’s migration and movement to inland China directly brings the
prosperity and development to Buddhism in Western Regions, including Mahyana
Buddhism and Hinayana Buddhism, which both existed in Kushan Kingdom. However,
from the perspective of the transmission of Mahayana Buddhism, three countries had
to be mentioned, Shache, Khotan and Kuci. Mahayana Buddism in Da Yuezhi was
basically transmitted to Shache firstly, tehn to Khotan 于阗 and Kuci. It is certain that
different transmitting situations bring about different developing futures, which would
give illustration in the latter chapters.
As one of the initial countries to Western Regions to accept Mahayana Buddhism,
Shache firstly presented in the aspect of scripture collection. Shache was located in the
west of Khotan which was called Zi He 子合国 in Biography of Master Fa Xian, and
recorded as Zhu Jubo 朱驹波国 by Hui Sheng, named as Zhu Ju 朱居国 or Zhu Jubo
朱俱波国 in Biographies of Western Regions, such as in Wei Shu 魏书, Bei Shi 北史,
Tang Shu 唐书, etc. In the fascicle 12 of 历代三宝记, 遮拘迦国 mentioned by
Jñānagupta 阇那崛多 and 斫句迦国 mentioned by Master Xuan Zhuang were the same
161
162
孟凡人：
《楼兰鄯善国简牍年代学研究》
，新疆人民出版社，1995 年，第 498 页。
黄文弼：
《西北史地论丛》
，上海人民出版社，1981 年，第 248 页。
82
country name.163 About the materials of Buddhism in Shache, there are three records.
The first record is in fascicle 12 of 历代三宝记: “In the southeast of Khotan, at the
distance of about 2000 Li, there was the country 遮拘迦国. The king believed in
Mahayana Buddhism. When monks came to the country, they would be tested whether
Hinayana or Mahayana. If they learned Hinayana doctrines, they would not be allowed
to stay. If they were Mahayana followers, they would be invited to accept offering. In
one palace, there were three kinds of scriptures, Mahaprajna, Mahāsamghāta,
Avatamsaka, with about 100 thousand verses in all. The king kept the key. When
reading these scriptures, the palace will be open, with decoration with jewels, incense
and flowers, fruit as offering. This attracted many people to enter to worship. In the
southeast of this country, at the distance of about 20 Li, there were mountains, in of
which Mahayana scriptures were set in, such as Avatamsaka, Vaipulya, prajna, etc., 100,
000 verses in all. It was protected by the country generation by generation. It was also
said that there were three arahants in cessation of all emotions concentration, who were
in the cave of the mountain cultivating meditation. By half a month or one month, there
were monks to shave the head for them”.
The second record is in fascicle one of 法华经传记 by Seng Xiang in Tang
Dynasty. It said: At one time, in the palace of Khotan, there was the Lotus
Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra) in Sanskrit, with 6, 500 verses in all. In the southeast,
at the distance of 2, 000 Li, there was a country called 遮拘槃国. The king worshed
Mahayana Buddhism for many lifetimes. When monks entered to this country, they
were tested. If they were Hnayana followers, they would not be allowed to stay. If they
were Mahayana followers, they would be invited to accept offering. In the palace, there
were five divisions of scriptures, such as Avatamsaka, Prajna, Nirvana, etc., 100, 000
verses in all. The king received and held these scriptures, with incense and flowers as
offering. In the southeast, at the distance of more than twenty Li, there were mountains
with some stone caves, in which Mahayana scriptures were enshrined, such as
Avatamsaka, Prajna, Vaipulya, etc., 100, 000 verses in all, protected by the country
generation by generation.
The third record is in fascicle 12 of Records of Western Regions. It said: in the
south of the country, there were great mountains, grass and forest not so many, rivers
running fast. There were stone rooms, where Indian enlightened ones came to rest there
by supernatural power. Due to many arahants in cessation, so there were many stupas.
瓦特尔斯氏以为玄奘所谓斫句迦就是《大方等大集经》卷 55 中的遮居迦。
（see Watters: On Yuan
Chwang, II, p.294）随后又有羽溪了谛的详论。见羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，贺昌群译，商务印书馆，
1999 年版，第 161-164 页。
83
163
Now there are three arahants in the cave, in cessation concentration, with thin body and
long hair. Some monks shaved the hair for them. In this country, there were a lot of
Mahayana scriptures, so where Buddha Dharma transmitted, Mahayana scriptures were
also popular.
No matter Jñānagupta 阇那崛多 coming from Gandhara in north India or Wang
Xuance traveling to the west, 164 both had some deep impression about the large
quantity of Mahayana scriptures in Shache. This illustrates that here is the collecting
place of Mahayana scriptures, including Avatamsaka Sutra, Mahāsamnipātasūtra 大集,
Vaipulya Sutra, Mahā-ratna-kūṭa-sūtra 宝积, Lankavatrara-sutra 楞伽, Sariputra sutra,
Dharani sutra, Mahaprajna, Lotus sutra, etc., in complete and good protection. In the
meanwhile, this also illustrates that this place is the important site for the transmission
of Mahayana Buddhism to the east. Lots of Mahayana scriptures in Middle China have
close relationship with Khotan. However, to some great extent, the source of Mahayana
scriptures in Khotan is directly related with Shache. Shache becomes the medium place
to transmit Mahayana scriptures to Western Regions and Middle China.
From the report given by ancient travelers, 165 some areas are famous for
Mahayana Buddhism, such as Oddiyana 乌仗那, 迦毕试, 那揭罗曷, 呾叉始罗 in
north India, Khotan and 斫句迦 in Xin Jiang. As the saying goes that Nagarjuna went
to Himavān parvataḥ 雪山 to learn Mahayana scriptures from elder Bhikkhu. In 斫句
山 and 陀力, there were some Mahayana scriptures. It could be seen from these sayings
that such mountain areas are related with Mahayana Buddhism. From the perspective
of geography, Mahayana Buddhism was transmitted from Gandhara, Oddiyana 乌仗那,
through Himavān parvataḥ 雪山 and Cong Ling, to the east (the same line for Master
Faxian to the west and Master Xuan Zhuang back to China). In early period (Han, Wei
and Jin dynasties), Mahayana Buddhism was influenced deeply by such areas. 166
Shache became the axis to accept Mahayana Buddhism. Due to Shache’s natural
geographical position, Khotan was obviously affected and Mahayana scriptures were
popular. Between West Jin, East Jin and South and North dynasties, it is recorded
affirmatively that there are some types of Mahayana scriptures transmitted from Khotan.
164
165
166
《法苑珠林》第一百卷云《西域志》乃王玄策等于干封元年（公元 666 年）奉敕所撰。
参考《法显传》
，有关宋云，惠生记载的《洛阳伽蓝记》以及玄奘的《大唐西域记》
。
释印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年版，第 12 页。
84
They are displayed as followed.
(1) Maha-avatamsaka-sutra, sixty fascicles. The fascicle 9 Record of Avatamsaka
Sutra in 出三藏记集, its foreign version obtained by Zhi Faling 支法领 from Khotan,
was translated by Buddhabadhra 佛驮跋陀罗 from north India, finished translation
from the second year of Yuanxi period to the fourteenth year of Yixi period.
(2) Mahaparinirvana Sutra, forty fascicles. According to fascicle 2 of Biography of
Great Monks and fascicle 14 of 出三藏记集, it is the Biography of Dharmakṣema 昙
无谶, in which there recorded that Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 in Kophen got the former
about ten fascicles of Mahaparinirvana Sutra. Later in Khotan, he got other fascicles,
and together he translated forty fascicles of Mahaparinirvana Sutra, which was known
as North version. In Liu Song period, this sutra was compiled into thirty-six fascicles
by Hui Guan, etc., which was known as South version.
(3) 禅要秘密治病經记. In fascicle 2 of Biography of Great Monks, it is recorded that
when 沮渠京声 from North Liang sought dharma in Khotan, he got 禅要秘密治病經
记 granted by Master 佛驮斯那 from India. It was translated into Chinese in the second
year of Xiaojian period in Song country (455, one coutry of South Dynasty) in Zhu
Yuan temple. He translated many scriptures, with quite a few from Khotan.
(4) Prajna scriptures. In the first year of Yuankang period of Wei country (one country
of three countries period, 291), 放光般若 was translated in Luoyang, whose source
version was obtained by Zhu Shixing in the fifth year of Ganlu period (260) in Khotan.
光赞般若 Sutra was translated by Dharma-rakṣa, which was brought to inland China
by 祇多罗 from Khotan in the seventh year of Taikang period (286), which belonged
to the same source version with different translations compared with 放光般若经. As
is recorded in 合放光光赞略解序 of 出三藏记集, both were from Khotan. In
fascicle 9 of 历代三宝记, in the second year of Taiqing period of Emperor Wu in Liang
Dynasty (548), one prince called 月婆首那 from middle Inida, met Gunabhadra 求那
跋陀 in Khotan, who kept the Sanskrit version of 胜天王般若波罗蜜經, and translated
85
this sutra in Tianjia period of Chen country (565, one country of South Dynasty).
(5) 观世音忏悔除罪咒經 and 法华经—提婆达多品. In fascicle 13 of Biography of
Great Monks, it recorded that in the third year of Yuanhui period in Song country (one
country of South dynasty), Master Fa Xian got 观世音灭罪經 in Khotan. In fascicle 2
of 弘赞法华传 and in fascicle 11 of 历代三宝记, it recorded that Master Fa Xian also
got 妙法莲华经—提婆达多品. In fascicle one of 法华经传记, it quoted from Notes
of Western Regions 西域志: there once existed the Sanskrit version of Lotus Sutra in
the palace of Khotan, 6,500 verses in all. This illustrates that before Tang Dynasty, there
were different versions of Lotus Sutra in Khotan.
According to the above illustration, until to the South and North dynasties, types
of Mahayana scriptures in Khotan at least included Lotus Sutra, Prajna, Avatamsaka,
Nirvana, and Tantric, etc.167
At the same period, Buddhism in Kuci in north road was also prosperous, with the
quantity of monks over 10, 000 in total. In Biography of Xi Rong of Jin Shu 晋书—西
戎传, it recorded that in contemporary Kuci, there was a city with threefold walls, in
which there were thousands of Buddhist temples. 168 This not only illustrates the
prosperity of Buddhism, but indicates developed economy and rich life in Kuci, so there
were so many offerings to monks and temples. About the transmission of early
Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci, there are few materials to be left, but by observing the
communication of Buddhism with Inland China, as well as scripture translation by
monks from Kuci, it could be known of some information about the transmission of
Mahayana Buddhism. According to the above table statistics about scripture translation
by monks, it could be clear that although in contemporary Kuci, Hinayana Buddhism
was in priority, there was still the transmission of Mahayana Buddhism. Meanwhile, by
the above table in which there displayed Kuci monks’ participation of scripture
translation, from which the transmission outlook of Mahayana Buddhism in
contemporary inland China was clear to be seen. For example,
帛延：首楞严经 Suragama Sutra, 叉须赖經, 无量清净平等觉經, 菩萨修行經；
帛法祖：正法华经, 光赞般若, 须真天字經
唐秀连：
《龟兹国与西域的大乘佛教—从两汉至鸠摩罗什时代》
，
《中华佛学研究》2006 年第 10 期，台
北：法鼓山中华佛学研究所，第 86-87 页。
168
《晋书—西戎传》
，中华书局，1974 年。
86
167
帛法炬：普曜經 Lalitavistara Sutra；
帛法祖参译：等集三昧經, 菩萨修行經, 菩萨逝經（逝童子经）, 严净佛土經, 郁
迦罗越问菩萨经, 持心梵志經, 善权經, 海龙王經, 并注首楞严经；
白延：上金光首經 如幻三昧經
羌子侯授予法护：不退转法轮經（阿惟越致遮經）
In general, Kuci Buddhists re-translated Mahayana scriptures which were from Da
Yuezhi, among which most belonged to Vaipulya division. 帛 法 祖 could be the
representative, who translated and interpreted twenty-three Mahayana scriptures,
among which over ten scriptures were retranslated. In addition, although 帛延 and 帛
元信 translated not so many scriptures, but as the same type as scriputres translated by
monks from Da Yuezhi. In this sense, Kuci and Da Yuezhi had deep relationship in
Buddhism.169 In fascicle 2 of Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that Kumārajīva
got 放光般若经 in Wangxin temple, which illustrates that at the contemporary Kuci,
there had existed prajna sutras, which were related with Mahayana scriptures in Khotan.
In September of the 18th year of Jianyuan period (382), the king from one tribe called
车师前部, and the king of 鄯善 paid a visit to Qin country, along with whom there
were some great monks as well as Mahayana and Hinayana scriptures, such as 般若,
阿毗昙, 四阿含暮抄, 鼻奈經, etc. It is certain that the Prjana sutra here is different
from 光赞般若经 and 放光般若经 as well as Kumārajīva’s Mahaprajna Sutra, but it
was popular at that period in Western Regions. In the support of Master Dao’an, these
scriptures were translated, and Master Dao’s wrote preface for them.
2.2.2Reasons for Two Different Roads Transmission of Buddhism in Western
Regions
In Biography of Western Regions in Han Shu 汉书—西域传, it recorded that there
唐秀连：
《龟兹国与西域的大乘佛教—从两汉至鸠摩罗什时代》
，
《中华佛学研究》2006 年第 10 期，台
北：法鼓山中华佛学研究所，第 94-96 页。
87
169
were two road lines to Western Regions from Yu Menguan and Yangguan. The first is
from the north of the south mountain near 鄯善 to the west, until to 莎车, which is
called south road, in the west of which, by crossing over Cong Ling, there were Da
Yuezhi and 安息. The second is to follow the north mountain of 车师前, to the west,
until to Shule 疏勒, which is called north road, by crossing over Cong Ling, there were
Dawan 大宛, Kangju 康居, and Yancai 奄蔡焉. The south road and north road might
be the main line from West Han dynasty to Western Regions.
About the road line from (Cao)Wei country (one country of three states period, the
king’s family was cao, so called Cao Wei to distinguish from latter North Wei country
in South and North dynasties), it is generally regarded in Biography of Xi Rong in Wei
Lue 魏略—西戎传 in this way. “From Yu Menguan in Dun Huang to Western Regions,
there were two road lines previously, but now three. From Yu Menguan to the west,
passing by Qiang area 渃羌 to the west, crossing over Cong Ling, passing by Xiandu
县度, to Da Yuezhi, which is called south road. From Yu Menguan to the west, first to
Du Hujing 都护井, then returned to the north of San Longsha 三陇沙, passing by Ju
Lucang 居卢仓, from Sha Xijing 沙西井 to northwest, passing by Long Dui 龙堆, to
ancient Lou Lan 楼兰, then west to Kuci, to Cong Ling 葱岭, which is called middle
road. From northwest of Yu Menguan, passing Heng Keng 横坑, avoid of San Longsha
三陇沙 and Long Dui 龙堆, from Wu Chuanbei 五船北, to Gao Chang 高昌 in the
area of Che Shi 车师, the west, merged with middle road in Kuci, which is the new
road.”
The transmission and development of Buddhism in Western Regions entered into
the initial prosperous stage after the third century. In the process of transmission, there
appeared different development characteristics along with south road and north road.
The south road in Han Dynasty and Tang Dynasty was centered in Khotan, which was
also the important place for Buddhism. The north road was centered in Kuci, a center
for economy, traffic, and Buddhist culture. From the Buddhist relationship between
Western Regions and middle China in Han, Wei and Jin dynasties, Buddhist scriptures
transmitted from Khotan to middle China mainly belonged to Mahayana Buddhism. In
88
Kuci, however, except Kumārajīva, most belonged to Hinayana Buddhism. About the
layout and development of Hinayana Buddhism in Kuci, the previous section had given
detailed illustration, here would not mention again. Mahayana Buddhism in Khotan, if
observing by the obtainment of Mahayana scriptures such as Zhu Shixing getting 放
光般若 in 260, and 祇多密 getting 光赞般若 in 286, etc., these Mahayana scriptures
all illustrate the situation of Buddhism in Khotan. According to Biography of
Kumārajīva in Biography of Great Monks, although there did not mention Buddhism
in Khotan, its neighbor country Shache 莎车 was popular for Mahayana Buddhism. In
addition, according to Biography of Fa Xian and Records of Temples in Luo Yang 洛
阳伽蓝记, there recorded some materials obtained from Song Yun, Hui Shen, and
Master Xuan Zhuang in Records of Travel to Western Regions. Here is the table to make
comparison.
Country
Present
location
Biography of Fa Recods of Temples (518- Records of Western
Xian (399-412) 522) (RT)
Regions (629-645)
(FX)
(RW)
In FX
Ruo Qiang The king followed
County in the dharma. More
鄯善国
Xin Jiang than 4000 monks
In RT
新 疆 若 羌 learned Hinayana.
Lay people and
鄯善城
monks
all
县
In RW
followed
纳 缚 波
Buddhism but a
国
This city was controlled by To
Na
Fubo
Tu Guhun 土谷浑. Now the country, this is the
Lou Lan area.
owner of this city was the
headquarter of the general Xi
Ningxi of Tu Guhun, to
guard against Xi Hu 西胡.
little different
In FX
Hui
There were monks
Minority
over 4000, all in
焉夷国
group
Hinayana.
In RW
autonomo
阿 耆 尼 us county
in
Xin
国
Jiang
The country had no
disciplines,
not
organized. Temples
more than ten,
monks more than
twenty,
learned
Sarvstivada
doctrines, diligent
in vinaya practice,
89
eating mixed three
pure kinds of food,
detained in gradual
teaching.
In FX
于阗国
In RT
于阗国
In RW
He Tian Monks were more No record about the popular
county in than ten thousand, situation.
Xin Jiang most
in The dead (monks) will be
新 疆 和 田 Mahayana. Before cemented, with remains
the gate of each enshrined in a stupa.
县
瞿 萨 旦
那国
FX
子合国
RT
朱驹波
RW
斫句迦
In
the
southwest
of Ye city
of
Xin
house, there was a
small tower for
monks in four
directions to live
The king was
diligent Buddhist.
There
were
thousands
of
monks.
Most
Jiang 新疆
learned Mahayana
叶城西南 doctrines.
People
worshed
Buddha Dharma.
Temples were over
one
hundred.
Monks were over
5000, and learned
Mahayana
doctrines.
People lived in mountains,
rich food. Most eat wheat
flour, not allowing to kill
animals, but allowing meateaters to eat the natural dead
ones. Custom was similar
with Khotan. Words were
similar with Brahmin.
People believed in
Buddhism, favor
for blessing. Scores
of temples, most in
damage.
Monks
over one hundred,
most
learned
Mahayana doctrine.
From the above table, it could be seen that in the south road, Zi He country (also
called Sha Che 子合 or 莎车) together with Khotan constituted the area of Mahayana
Buddhism while the area including Yan Qi 焉耆, Kuci 龟兹 and Shu Le 疏勒 was
centered by Hinayana Buddhism. Of course, such areas were not clearly absolute
Mahayana or Hinayana, which had both of them, with different in proportion only.
Shu Le 疏勒 is the axis of the communication between the east and the west, is
the merging position of the north road and the south road of Xin Jiang 新疆, as well as
the inevitable path for the transmission of Buddhism to inland China. Ryotai Hatani 羽
溪了谛 pointed out: “China’s communication with Da Yuezhi, An Xi 安息 and Kang
Ju 康居 and countries of India all took the north road, with Kuci as the place that must
90
be passed…Due to the close relationship between Kuci and Shu Le, it was reasonable
that Buddhism was transmitted though Shu Le”.170 Huang Wenbi also mentioned that
the early transmission of Buddhism to Xin Jiang and inland China were achieved by
people from Da Yuezhi and An Xi 安息: “It is indeed that the initial Buddhism was
transmitted to Xin Jiang and inland China by following the Wei river 沩水, crossing
over Cong Ling, then divided into two branches. One was to Kuche, Yanqi, Tu Lufan;
one was to Hetian, Qiemo, and Shanshan”. 171 Shu Le, as the important position
connecting the east and west, contacted Buddhism earliestly, which influenced Kuci
and Yanqi in the north road. However, Khotan Buddhism in the south road was also
transmitted through Shu Le, why could there manifest different characteristics in
transmission and development at the same period and the same area?
Firstly, this is closely related with the development background of Indian
Buddhism in northwest area. Buddhism in Da Yuezhi began to develop just after it
conquered Da Xia. As a wandering nation, the initial environment did not fit for the
development of Buddhism. After the establishment of Kushan Kingdom, life gradually
became stable, and agriculture became the major living style. These factors together
with 阎 膏 珍 ’s worship for Brahminism, resulted in the slow development of
Buddhism at that period. To the period of Kaniṣka 迦腻色迦, Buddhism began to
prosper, with commerce and handcraft in fast development, and with more population.
Due to the early period land expansion, the kingdom conquered the entire north India
and even most areas of middle India, directly connecting 案达罗 Andhra Kingdom, so
Mahyana Buddhism transmitted to the north soon. Kaniṣka 迦腻色迦 greatly supported
Buddhism, with Mahayana and Hinayana both in development, who also tried to learn
from King Asoka as a dharma developer. His later generations, though not clear records,
also supported Buddhisma, with Buddhism continuous development and transmission.
Gandhara was the political and economic center region for Kushan Kingdom. Greek
immigraters applied intelligence and skillfulness to statue making, and brough about
the prosperity of art. In this way, Buddhist scriptures along with various forms of art
were transmitted to Western Regions and middle China.
Due to the transmission of Mahayana Buddhism, in some north Indian countries
羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，北京：商务印书馆，1999 年，第 183-184 页。
黄文弼：
《佛教传入鄯善语西方文化的输入问题》
，
《西北史地论丛》
，上海人民出版社，1981 年，第
259-260 页。
91
170
171
subordinated to Da Yuezhi, such as 呾叉始罗, 陀力, 乌苌, etc., as well as in some
middle Inidan countries, such as Magadha 摩羯陀, etc., Mahayana Buddhism gradually
prospered. After the third century, Da Yuezhi began to decline, Magadha 摩羯陀 in
middle India began to arise and established 笈多 Gupta Kingdom, with Mahayana
Buddhism reviving again. Such backgrounds had important influence on the
transmission of Buddhism to Western Regions and middle China.
At the period of Kaniṣka 迦腻色迦, Kophen belonged to Kushan Kingdom, with
Sarvastivada School also in development. According to Records of Western Regions,
after Kaniṣka 迦腻色迦, 讫利多族 regained the power and destroyed Buddhism. To
the third century, Tocharian King 四摩呾罗 conquered Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗, established
temples, assembled monks, and Buddhism revived.172 It might be because of either the
historical reason or the upper Buddhist sangha reason, Hinayana Buddhism was popular
in Kophen, which was different from other countries. Sarvastivada School returned its
previous predormant situation, and Kophen became the Buddhist center of Sarvastivada
School in north India and Western Regions. Temporary prosperity of Meditation and
Vinaya influenced greating to surrounding areas.
Secondly, due to geographical difference between south road and north road, there
arose the acceptance of Buddhist sources from different Inidan areas. Although both
roads belonged to Xin Jiang, there were certain difference between its contact with India
and Middle Asia. For Kuci in the north road, through Shu Le 疏勒 to the west, it is
accessible to directly reach Da Yuezhi, Kang Ju 康居, An Xi 安息 and some middle
Asian countries; or through Shu Le to the south, it is also accessible to reach Kophen.
From Khotan, passing by Zi He (also called 子合，莎车，斫句迦) to the west, it is
accessible to reach Da Yuezhi by the middle road; if to the south, it is accessible to
reach Kophen, 陀力, 乌苌, etc. That is to say, Kuci and Shu Le are much easier to
accept Buddhism from middle Asian countries, while it is much closer to reach India if
from Khotan and Sha Le and then crossing over the snow mountain to the south. In this
sense, it might be in early days, Kuci more possibly accepted Sarvastivadin thoughts
from middle Asian areas, while the earliest Sarvastivadin thought accepted by Khotan
172
《大唐西域记》卷 3，
《大正藏》第 51 册，第 887 页上。
92
was from Kophen. To the period of Kaniṣka 迦腻色迦, both areas were influenced by
Buddhism from Da Yuezhi, along with which Gandhara art and architecture entered
into them. However, Buddhism in Western Regions developed slowly at this period,
and after the third century, Buddhism developed due to the input of Buddhism from Da
Yuezhi. That is to say, between 1 BCE and 1 CE, Buddhism in both south road and
north road belonged to Sarvastivada School. Sha Che, as the front head in the
acceptance of Buddhism, suspended relationship with Kophen, the reasons behind
which migh be the traffic suspension, in addition to political and monastic reasons. In
fascicle 26 of Biography of Famous Monks 名僧传, it recorded: “It is said that in 弗
楼沙 country, there was the Buddha’s bowl, which is now in one temple of Kophen.
Five hundred arahants constantly made offering to the bowl. By passing Liang Zhou in
the air, the bowl stopped and twelve arahants also stopped. After six years, they returned
to Kophen. Some monks felt pity not seeing the bowl, and they crossed over Cong Ling
in order to pay bowing to the bowl, and they reached Kophen. Due to the traffic
hindrance, they detained in Kophen. The king sent scripts writing the words of the
Buddha’s bowl to them, and asked their other wishes. They expressed the wish to make
offering to the sainted Jewel Buddha figure. The king asked to build a gold coated figure,
with the genuine sarira set in the head”.
By 吴焯 Wu Chao’s Buddhist archaeology and picture art analysis, he considered
that Buddhist culture in south road of Tarim Basin mainly accepted the Gandhara style
from northwest India, while in the north road of Tarim Basin, it was obviously different,
such as the similar style between Kuci grottoes and Bamiyan Grottoes. The south road
is through Gandhara to Kaśmira(now called 克什米尔, previous name 迦湿弥罗), and
then to Khotan and Shanshan; the north road is through Bamiyan to 迦毕试, and to
Shu Le and Kuci.173 Buddhist culture was obviously different between south road and
north road in Western Regions.
Thirdly, it is greatly related with the ruling class’ support. According to the
biograph of Kumārajīva, it could be known that in contemporary Kuci, Sarvastivada
School took the predominant position. In 比丘尼戒本所出本末序, it recorded that
there were many temples in Kuci with elegant decorations: “Kuci (龟兹 or 拘夷) had
quite a lot of temples, with elegant decorations, and even in the palace, there enshrined
173
吴焯：
《佛教东传与中国佛教艺术》
，浙江人民出版社，1991 年 6 月。
93
Budhas’ statues, no difference with temples. In one temple called Da Mulan 达慕蓝,
there were 170 monks. In some north mountain temples, such as Zhi Lilan 致隶蓝 with
60 monks, Jian Mulan 剑慕蓝 with 50 monks, Wen Sulan 温宿蓝 with 70 monks.
They were in the management of Fotu Shemi 佛图舌弥(a great monk). As it is recorded
that in temples, monks should change rooms and beddings and even temples per three
months. If monks not full of five ordinated years, they should not live without
dependent masters even for one night. In Wang Xin temple, there were 90 monks. There
was one young monk learning Mahayana theories, with Fotu Shemi 佛图舌弥 as his
master who was specialized in agamas. In A Li temple 阿丽, there were 180 bhikkunis;
in Shu Ruogan 输若干 temple, there were 50 Bhkkhunis; in A Liba temple 阿丽跋,
there were 30 nuns. They all got full ordination from She Mi 舌弥. Bhikkuni should
not be independent from Bhikku. Nuns in these three temples were most royal women
in the east of Cong Ling, for Buddhism to assemble in these temples. They followed
the dharma to restrain themselves and had investigation mechanism”.174
Jian Mu King and Wen Su King were kings from Western Regions, who must give
support to build these temples. The king of Kuci gave more support to Hinayana
Buddhism. Fotu Shemi once was the Hinayana master of Kumārajīva, which implied
the imperial’s high attention to Fotu Shemi allowing Kumārajīva as his student. In
addition, Kumārajīva’s mother also followed Fotu Shemi to learn Hinayana theories.
At that period, Fotu Shemi was in charge of seven temples. Some bhikkunis were royal
Women in the east of Cong Ling, by which it could be seen that Buddhism was in
the great support from royal nobles in Western Regions, as well as that Hinayana
masters had high status in some contries, such as Kuci.
Buddhism in Khotan were both Hinayana and Mahayana prior to the arrival of Zhu
Shixing, with Hinayana in major position. In 260 CE, Zhu Shixing obtained 放光般若
经 in Sanskrit version in Khotan, and wanted to send his disciple Fa Rao to take back
to Luo Yang, but was interrupted by contemporary Hinayana monks, who told the king
that monks from inland China wanted to use Brahmin books to disorder the orthodox
canon and the king did not allow take the sutra to inland China. This sutra later was still
174
《大正藏》第 53 册，第 79 页下。
94
translated in inland China by Mokchala 无 罗 叉 and Zhu Shulan 竺 叔 兰 from
Khotan.175 This indicates that in contemporary Khotan, there was not only Hinayana
sangha, but there also appeared monks who made study on Mahayana doctrines.
Mahayana Buddhism gradually arose.
However, Hinayana Buddhism in Khotan was replaced by Mahayana Buddhism
soon. In the Tibetan version of History of Buddhist Doctrines in Khotan 于阗教法史,
it recorded that from East Jin to South and North dynasties, many areas in Khotan built
hundreds of temples, most of which belonged to Mahayana, such as 赞摩寺, 牛头山
寺, 王新寺, 娑摩帝寺, etc. The establishment of such famous temples reflected the
development of Mahayana Buddhism in this period. Xue Zhengzong 薛正宗 considered
that the declination of Hinayana Buddhism seemed to derive from the threat of religious
power to the king’s power, as well as from Hinayana’s expulsion against the local god
belief with extensive public basis. In order to prohibit the expansion of Hinayana power
and its proness to interfere with political affairs, Yuchi family in Khotan royal system
began to worship Mahayana Buddhism, and Hinayana turned downward. As it is
recorded that there were some famous lords advocating for Mahayana Buddhism, such
as 尉迟毘梨耶, 尉迟信诃, 尉迟讫多, and 尉迟亚伽, who mostly lived in South and
North dynasties, as is seen in Tibetan materials. 尉迟毘梨耶 built 瞿摩帝 temple as
the center of Mahayana Buddhism, which gradually became the national temple by
replacing the status of Hinayana 赞摩 temple. 尉迟信诃 built Xinguo temple, in
Chinese also called Wang Xin temple 王新寺. One secular document was discovered
in the remains cite called 安得悦 sighed by King 尉迟信诃 on 18th Oct., the third
year of his control, at the end of which the full name of the king was: “于阗大王，王
中之王夷那口提婆—尉迟—陀信诃”. Wang Xin temple was under construction for
three generations, and finished in 80 CE. Then, Mahyana Buddhism entered into full
prosperity. 176 About Mahayana easternward path from north India to Khotan,
according to Master Yin Shun’s The Origin and Development of Mahayana Buddhism
175
176
《大唐内典录》卷 2，
《大正藏》第 55 册，第 236 页上。
薛宗正：
《古代于阗与佛法初传》
，
《西北民族研究》2005 年第 2 期，第 28 页。
95
at the Initial Period 初期大乘佛教之起源与开展, he pointed out that it was generally
from Oddhiyana 乌仗那 and 商弥 to Wakhan → then to the east, through Kun Lun
mountain areas to the east → or through Ye Cheng to 叶尔羌, also called 子合 where
Master Fa Xian arrived, or 斫句迦 mentioned by Xuan Zhuang → or through 皮山,
or though the south mountain of Khotan, to reach Khotan, which became the major
areas of Mahayana Buddhism. Khotan and Shache both treated Mahayana Buddhas as
the main belief, and it was obvious that Mahayana in Khotan came from Shache. In late
period of the first century, Khotan King called Guangde 广德 killed Shache King called
Xian 贤 and conquered Shache, who became the hindrance for Xiongnu’s expansion,
so Xiongnu planned to invade into Khotan.177
2.3Kumārajīva’s Acceptance and Development
of Mahayana
Buddhism
2.3.1The Time When Kumārajīva Transferred to Mahayana Buddhism
According to Buddhist historical records and scholars, there were different sayings
about the time and the place which Kumārajīva transferred from Hinayana to Mahayana.
The majority refered to Biography of Great Monks and defined the time of 355 CE,
when Kumārajīva was twelve years old. According to the record in Biography of Great
Monks and 出三藏记集, both confirmed that Kumārajīva firstly contacted Mahayana
thought in Shache. As is recorded in 出三藏记集: “His mother took Kumārajīva back
to Kuci. When they came to the north mountain of Yue Zhi, there was an arahant. When
he saw Kumārajīva and felt him special, telling his mother to protect Kumārajīva well.
If he could not break precepts when he was thirty-five, he would promote Buddha
Dharma and convert immeasurable beings, no difference with 優波毱多. If precepts
were not complete, then he could not be able to achieve that. When they came to Sha
Le, Kumārajīva saw a bowl and put it on the head, and he thought to himself that the
bowl was so big, why it seemed to be light to lift. Then the bowl became too heavy to
lift. The mother asked the reason. He replied that it was due to the mind’s
177
《后汉书》卷 88《西域列传》
，中华书局点校本，1965 年 5 月。第 2925-2926 页。
96
distinguishment, so the bowl feels heavy or light. Kumārajīva in Sha Le recited
Abhidharma doctrines and Akkutaragama 增一阿含. Then he returned to Kuci, wellknown to all countries. Over ten thousand monks in Kuci all respected him. Kumārajīva
learned all kinds of doctrines including four vedas and five penetrative commentaries,
and even clear about non-Buddhist doctrines. Kumārajīva carefully restrained himself
without tiredness. Later he learned Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 from Buddhayasa,
and learned Mahayana doctrines from 须利耶苏摩. Then he sighed that previous
learning about Hinayana was just like a person who did not recognize the gold but
regarded the stone as subtle. So he searched extensively for Mahayana doctrines and
recited Madyamika sastra and Hundred Treatise”.178
In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “When Kumārajīva was twelve years
old, he mother took him back to Kuci. All countries wanted to invite him as the lord,
and Kumārajīva did not care. His mother took him to the north mountain of Yue Zhi,
and one arahant saw Kumārajīva and felt his special…When Kumārajīva went to Sha
Le, he could put the Buddha’s bowl on his head. Then he thought to himself that the
bowl was big and why it was light to lift. Then the bowl became to heavy to life. The
mother asked him the reason. Kumārajīva answered that due to the mind’s
discrimination, the bowl felt heavy or light. They stayed in Sha Le for one year, and he
recited Abhidharma and other doctrines, such as 十门 and 修智, and without others’
teaching, he could penetrate into the subtleness of them. About the questions in
Abhidharma treatises such as 六足, he could felt no obstacles…Then there were two
princes requesting to become monks, with the elder brother called 须利耶跋陀 and the
younger brother called 须利耶苏摩. The younger brother was excellent and specialized
in Mahayana. His elder brother and other masters all treated him as the teacher, and
Kumārajīva also followed him to learn Mahayana. The younger brother preached 阿耨
达經 for Kumārajīva. When he heard that aggregates, bases and realms were all empty
and formless, Kumārajīva asked: for what meaning, this sutra breaks all dharma? The
younger brother answered: dharma like eyes, ears, etc., are not real. Then Kumārajīva
clang to the real existence of eye organ, which according to Mahayana should be not
real. So he studied both Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines, and he understood the
178
《大正藏》第 55 册，第 100 页上。
97
principle, so he specifically studied Mahayana scriptures, such as Vaipulya, etc. Then
he sighed: Hinayana learning was just like that one person did not recognize the gold
and regarded the stone as subtle. Kumārajīva extensively searched for Mahayana
essential meanings, and recited Madyamika Sastra, Hundred Treatise, and Twelve Gates
Treatise, etc.”179
In the process of talking with Buddhayasa, he felt more interested in Mahayana
Buddhism. In Sha Le, Kumārajīva met 须利耶苏摩, who preached 阿耨达經 to
Kumārajīva. Kumārajīva debated with him again and again, deeply impressive in
Mahayana doctrines, so Kumārajīva specifically studied Mahayana. Later, he learned
Madhyamika doctrines, which laid solid foundation for his later Mahayana theories.
After Kumārajīva returned to Kuci, he often preached dharma and developed Mahayana
doctrines. Although it seemed that Kumārajīva learned Mahayana at the young age, if
carefully considering, his real transformation to Mahayana might be afte his adulthood,
or after his full precept ordination. Since Kumārajīva got full ordination at the age of
20 in Kuci, which was still the inheritance of Hinayana masters and rituals, which
indicates that Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts were unable to become independent
yet. Later, by the King’s support and his own profound study, Kumārajīva finaly
became Mahayana master. When his master Bandhudatta 盘头达多 came to Kuci to
persuade Kumārajīva, this should be the beginning of Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts
stepping forward materity.
2.3.2Kumārajīva’s Acceptance of Madhyamaka Theories
According to Biography of Great Monks, after Kumārajīva learned Hinayana
doctrines in Kophen, on his way to Kuci, he met the prince from Sha Che country. He
heard of Nagarjuna and Mahayana theories from this princie called 须利耶苏摩. When
Kumārajīva returned to Kuci, made study for twenty years, and perfected his
philosophical thoughts.
The greatest achievement Kumārajīva obtained in Sha Che was the contact with
Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theories, so that he fulfilled great transference in Buddhist
studies. Moreover, Kumārajīva treated Nagarjuna as the model to pursue his goal.
Influenced by Nagarjuna’s works, Kumārajīva and other translators started their
extensive areas to translate Mahayana scriptures. In Nagarjuna’s works, such as 十住
毗婆沙论 大智度论, there mentioned a large number of Mahayana scriptures, with
179
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 2《鸠摩罗什传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 46, 47 页。
98
which there was no contact before Kumārajīva. From the master-disciple lineage,
Kumārajīva’s position in Three Treatise Sect could be: Nagarjuna—Aryadeva—青目
Pivgalanetra—须利耶苏摩—Kumārajīva.180
Aryadeva transmitted Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory in north India, which
made 青目 Pivgalanetra contact Nagarjuna’s works and made commentaries for them.
How was Nagarjuna’s theory in north India transmitted to Sha Che in Western Regions?
It could be known from Biography of Fa Xian that in Western Regions, only Khotan
and Sha Che believed in Mahayana Buddhism at that period, while other areas nearly
belonged to Hinayana Buddhism, with only 僧伽施国 both in Hinayana and Mahayana
belief. However, Master Fa Xian did not go to Gandhara areas, and according to later
Asanga’s and Vasubandhu’s experiences, there should exist Mahayana Buddhism. That
is to say, Master Fa Xian’s records were not complete. By the above illustration, it could
be presumed that ares in the west and south of Kophen were popular for Mahayana
Buddhism, in which Nagarjuna’s theory could be found. Sha Che’s prince 须利耶苏
摩 just learned Nagarjuna’s theory from these areas and then returned to his motherland.
At that period, Sha Che was the first front area to contact Mahayana thoughts,
from which Mahayana Buddhism was transmitted to Khotan. In general analysis, other
Western Regions in the east of Cong Ling, at the period of Kumārajīva, were mostly
popular for Hinayana Buddhism. The transmission of Mahyana Buddhism moved
slowly due to powerful Hinayana sangha, as well as due to wars between countries in
Western Regions, which to some extent influenced the development of Buddhism. By
analyzing the contemporary situation and years, Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory and
works should be just transmitted to Sha Che, and had not been to the east yet.
On the one hand, due to Kumārajīva’s young age, it was easy for him to accept
fresh things; on the other hand, Mahayana thoughts, especially for Nagarjuna’s
Madhyamaka theory, enabled Kumārajīva to solve all his previous confusion and
doubts, which made his Buddhist thoughts achieve broad development. When he was
in Sha Che, Kumārajīva learned not merely four treatises, he also contacted a large
number of Mahayana scriptures. It should be clear that it is Nagarjuna’s philosophical
theories that truly change Kumārajīva’s thought, rather than some Mahayana scriptures.
To some degree, prior to Nagarjuna’s works, Kumārajīva might contact some
Mahayana scriptures, such as prajna sutra in Kuci, but he knew nothing due to lack of
180
吕澂：
《印度佛学渊源略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年版，第 126 页。
99
philosophical guidance, which was nearly consistent with monks in inland China.
Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 was half century earlier than Kumārajīva, so he did not contact
Madhyamaka theory. It is the history that gave Kumārajīva one opportunity to allow
him to bring Mahayana scriptures to inland China. Meanwhile, due to forty years of
detainment in Kuci and Liang Zhou, Kumārajīva did not contact Mahaparinirvana Sutra.
This reflects the unanimously existing characteristics of historical transcendence and
delay. Therefore, although Kumārajīva’s transmission of prajna theory advanced the
development of Chinese Buddhism, its existing history is rather short, which is replaced
by nirvana thory and other areas related with the mind.
2.3.3Kumārajīva’s Contact with Mahayana Scriptures
Kumārajīva’s initial learning about Mahayana scriptures was in Sha Che. Not far
from Sha Che, there was one country called Shu Le, also called Sha Le in Biography
of Kumārajīva. Sha Che was near to Shu Le. When Kumārajīva in Shu Le heard of
Mahyana Buddhism and decided to go to Sha Che to learn Mahayana doctrines. Both
were important places connecting middle Asia and India, which were also different.
Early Materials about Buddhism in Sha Che were deficient, with only that Kumārajīva
in Sha Che met 须利耶苏摩 and learned 阿耨达經, Madhyamaka treatise, etc. This
illustrates that in contemporary Sha Che, Mahayana Buddhism was popular, and
Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory had entered into this area. In Biography of Fa Xian,
it recorded: “Master Fa Xian walked toward Zi He country, and by twenty-five days,
arrived in the country. The king was diligent and there were more than one thousand
monks, most of whom learned Mahayana doctrines”. From the above literature recordes,
it could be denoted that from 300 CE to 600 CE, Sha Che mainly kept faith in Mahayana
Buddhism. According to travel records of Master Fa Xian and Master Xuan Zhuan,
Khotan as one country in Western Regions also mainly had faith in Mahayana
Buddhsim. Khotan and Sha Che were close to each other, and naturally had close
relationship.
In fascicle two of 出三藏记集, it recorded that there were 35 fascicles of Buddhist
scriptures translated by Kumārajīva. The classification of them are as followed.
Prajna section: Large Prajnaparamita Sutra, Minor Prajnaparamita Sutra, Diamond
Sutra;
法华 section: Vimalakirti Sutra, 持世經, 贤劫經, 首楞严经, 无量寿经,
菩萨藏經,
思益梵天所问经,
称扬诸佛功德經,
100
华首經,
自在王经, 弥勒下生经, 弥勒
成佛經, 诸法无行經, 文殊师利问菩提經, 菩萨呵色欲經；
Madhyamika section: 中论, 大智度论,
十二门论,
百论;
Mahayana Vinaya section: 佛藏經;
Hinayana sutra: 遗教經,
杂譬喻经,
坐禅三昧經,
禅秘要法,
禅法要解,
十
二因缘观經;
Hinayana sastra: Satyasiddhi-śāstra 成实论
Hinayana vinaya: Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十 诵 律 and Daśa-bhāṇavāra Bhikkupratimoksa 十诵比丘戒本.
The above scriptures are greatly related with Kumārajīva’s contact with scriptures
in his experience. There were four major places for him to accept scriptures and learning
Buddhist theories: Kuci, Kophen, Shu Le and Sha Che. The source of scriptures he
learned is very obvious. Hinayana sutras, vinaya, sastras were mainly obtained in Kuci
and Kophen, but they were all derived from Sarvastivada School predominant in Kohen
area. In Vaipulya section, there were nearly fifteen scriptures, with the most scriptures
of all sections, which is also the major part of Kumārajīva’s Mahayana learning. When
his mother left, she told to him: Vaipulya is profound and you should greatly preach the
truth. It might be clear that Mahayana scriptures that Kumārajīva grasped at that period
were mostly Vaipulya scriptures. Through previous analysis, it could be known that
these scriptures were most from Da Yuezhi.181 In early transmission of Buddhism, there
were some famous transmitters, such as Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶 from Da Yuezhi and
Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 from Da Yuezhi. From their translated scriptures, the major
popular scriptures in contemporary Kushan Kingdom included the 宝 严 Sutra of
Rratna-kūṭa 宝 积 section; in Avatamsaka section, there were Dasabhumi Sutra,
Dasavihara Sutra, and 入 法 界 品 (Entering Dharma Realm Chapter of the Flower
Adornment Sutra); in Pure Land type, there were Amitabha Buddha Sutra and
Aksobhya Buddha 阿閦佛; in prajna section, there were Minor Prajna Sutra 小品 and
参见羽溪了谛的大月氏佛典统计表。羽溪了谛著《西域之佛教》
，贺昌群译，商务印书馆，1999 年
版，第 95 页。
101
181
Large Prajna Sutra 大 品 ; in Mahāsamnipāta 大 集 section, there was
Pratyutpanna Samadhi Sutra 般舟三昧經; as well as Vimalakirti Sutra, Lotus Sutra,
and Suramgama-samadhi-sutra 首楞严三昧經, etc. Due to Kumārajīva’s re-translation
of both transmitters’ scriptures, it could be seen that most Mahayana scriptures
translated by Kumārajīva were derived from Da Yuezhi. Master Yin Shun considered:
“Kumārajīva was originally from India, grew up in Kuci, once traveled to learn dharma
in Kophen. Their translated scriptures could be regarded as Mahayana Buddhism in the
period of Da Yuezhi”.182
The source of Buddhist scriptures translated by Kumārajīva and the type of
Buddhism he contacted should come from middle Indian and north Indian areas. The
transmission line could be, from middle Indian and nother Indian areas, initially
transmitted to Sha Che areas, in which there formed the assembling center for
Mahayana scriptures, and then transmitted to Western Regions and inland China. Firstly,
according to 佛 国 记 Biography of Kumārajīva, at the period of Kumārajīva, in
Western Regions, countries that were related with Mahayana Buddhism were only Sha
Che, Sha Le, Zi He and Khotan (Zi He and Sha Le might refer to the same place). Prior
to Kumārajīva, Mahayana Buddhism had been popular in Khotan. In 266, the popularity
of prajna could be seen by 放光般若经 brought back by Zhu Shixing’s disciple. In
inland China, in latter period of East Han dynasty, Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶 had translated
this sutra, who came from Da Yuezhi, so this sutra in Khotan version should come from
Da Yuezhi. Secondly, many scriptures translated by Kumārajīva were as the same as
the scriptures translated by Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 in West Jin dynasty. It is probable for
both versions to come from the same place. The earliest translation of 正法华经, 法华
三昧經 was made by 支强梁接 in 255 (the second year of Wufeng period of Emperor
Liang in Wu country), who was also from Da Yuezhi. However, from the compositon
place of Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), it was from middle Indian area. It
seemed that after the arising of this sutra, it was transmitted to north India, then to
Western Regions. Thirdly, Mahaparinirvana Sutra was translated by Dharmakṣema 昙
无谶, which was not far from Kumārajīva’s period, but Mahaparinirvana Sutra was
182
释印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年版，第 11 页。
102
from Gupta area in middle India. In 300 CE and 400 CE, Asanga and Vasubandha also
came from Gandhara. One of them had faith in Hinayana Buddhism and the other one
in Mahayana Buddhism, which implied that Mahayana Buddhism was popular in
Gandhara area. Later, both of them became Mahayana masters, which implied the
changing trend for the development power of Mahayana and Hinayana in contemporary
middle Indian and north Indian areas. Master Xuan Zhuang heard of such saying in
India: Vasubandhu went to Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗 to learn Mahavibhasa Sastra, and
returned to Gandhara, preached this sastra, with many audience. Each day Vasubandhu
preached, he concluded one verse, and he preached for two years, forming 600 verses.
Although this is a saying, it could be seen that in contemporary Kophen area,
Sarvastivada School was still popular. Fourthly, in 100 CE and 300 CE, Mahayana
Buddhism in Da Yuezhi was gradually in prosperity. From the above table, it could be
seen that no matter in Western Regions or in China, the transmission of Buddhism was
basically from north India and middle Asia, which were in the control of Kushan
Kingdom. From the traveling line of Kumārajīva, it could be observed that Kumārajīva
was from Da Yuezhi area and mainly contacted Vaipuya section of Mahayana Buddhism,
which was consistent with scriptures popular in Da Yuezhi area in the above table.
Sixthly, Sarvastivadin pratimoka remains discovered in Ku Che area was the version
translated by Kumārajīva in Chang’an called 十诵比丘戒本; in addition, German
explorers in middle Asia discovered 弥勒下生经, according to 谟纳氏’s report in
1907, the end words was original Indian language and was translated into 吐火罗
Tocharian language, then translated into Turkey language.183 No matter Dharma-rakṣa
竺法护 or Kumārajīva, their translated Matreya Vyakarana Sutra 弥勒下生经 were
closely related with the version discovered in middle Asia.
In fascicle 2 of Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that when Kumārajīva was
in Wang Xin temple, he obtained 放光般若经, so in contemporary Kuci, there were
prajna scriptures. In Three Kingdoms period, Zhu Shixing obtained this version in
Khotan, which was translatd by 竺叔兰 and Mokchala 无罗叉 in 291. The Khotan
verson and Kuci version had certain connection, while Sha Che and Shu Le were
important areas for such connection to happen. Both versions were transmitted from Da
Yuezhi to Shu Le, then to influence north road and south road. Kumārajīva in Sha Che
参见羽田亨《论汉译之佛典》
，《艺文》第二年四号题：羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，贺昌群译，商务印
书馆 1999 年版，第 103 页。
103
183
accepted Madhyamaka theory, which implied that after the formation of Madhyamaka
theory, it was transmitted in north India, then to Sha Che. From this, it could be seen
that Mahayana Buddhism was transmitted from north Indian area, such as Gandhara
and Oddiyana 乌仗那, then to Big Snow mountain and Cong Ling, then to the east.
This is the same road line for Master Fa Xian to the west and for Master Xuan Zhuang
back to China.
2.3.4Kumārajīva’s Cognition about Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana
Buddhism
Kumārajīva’s attitude to Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism has always been the
debating point for scholars. Such question must be observed from all aspects, rather
than from one aspect. Kumārajīva learned Sarvastivadin thought since he was young,
but later transferred to Mahayana. By biographical materials, it could be understood
clearly that his transference was absolute, so that he criticized severely about Hinayana
Buddhism, but promoted Mahayana Buddhism for his entire life. Therefore, in
Kumārajīva’s personal guiding thoughts of Buddhist theories, he was completely a
Mahayana great monk.
Kumārajīva’s transference to Mahayana theory happened when he met Sha Che’s
prince called 须利耶苏摩. When Kumārajīva contacted Mahayana theory, especially
prajna emptiness theory, he was devoted to Mahayana Buddhism, especially for
Vaipulya. He said happily that Hinayana was just like one person not recognizing the
gold but treating the stone as subtle.184 He regarded the difference between Mahayana
and Hinayana liken to the relationship between the gold and the stone. From this, it
could be seen the happy attitude when Kumārajīva transferred to Mahayana theory.
After his transference, Kumārajīva began to study and develop Mahayana Buddhism.
However, for countries in north road, especially Kuci predominant in Hinayana
Buddhism, Kumārajīva did withdraw but applied the relative active manner. He made
full use of his royal status to start the religious reform movement in cooperation with
Kuci king’s political reform. By such movement, Kumārajīva developed Mahayana
Buddhism fully in Kuci and gradually transmitted to other countries in Western Regions.
When Kumārajīva studied 放光般若经, he manifested strong perseverance fearless
about Hinayana’s provocation. Kumārajīva did not change his Mahayana career due to
frustration, whose aim to Chang’an was to develop Mahayana Buddhism. Therefore,
though he was old, Kumārajīva presented strong spirit and grit, more diligently devoted
184
《大正藏》第 50 册，第 330 页下。
104
to scripture translation career. All these great qualities had direct relationship with
Kumārajīva’s passionate sincerity to Mahayana Buddhism.
About Kumārajīva’s Mahayana and Hinayana thoughts, in Mahaprajnaparamita
Sastra, it clearly put forward: “Buddha Dharma had two types: Mahayana and
Hinayana”.185 Moreover, it said: “Buddha Dharam had two types: Sravaka-praketya,
and Mahayana. Sravaka dharma are minor because it only praised Sravaka theory not
mentioning Bodhisattva theory. Mahayana dharma are large because it mention dharma
of all Bodhisattvas”.186 In Lotus Sutra translated by Kumārajīva, there mentioned the
comparison between three vehicles and one vehicle, and advocated that Mahayana
scriptures were Bodhisattva dharma. Kumārajīva in 大 乘 大 义 章 said: “for five
hundred years, according to differen commentators, there are different classification
about Mahayana and Hinayana”.187 It is obvious that in Kumārajīva’s thought, there is
clear awareness about doctrine classification between Hinayana and Mahayana schools.
However, his most outstanding thought was prajna emptiness theory and despised
Sarvastivadin theory in Hinayana Buddhism.
In 大乘大义章, it said: “Abhidharma and Mahayana dharma are different. Just as
is said by 迦旃延尼子: Illusory things, dreams, the image in the mirror, and the moon
in the water are visible dharma and knowable dharma, bound in three realms, included
by aggregates, bases and realms. In Mahayana dharma, illusory things and the moon in
the water, etc., just confuse the mind and the eyes, without defined and fixed form”.188
“Thirty-four minds, nine unobstructed paths, nine liberated paths are not what the
Buddha said. Why? Because they do not exist in four agamas, Vinaya, Mahayana, and
only Abhidharma scholars claim for them. Those who regarded such teaching as the
Buddha’s teaching shoud examine their origin and branches. Some regarded such
teaching as not what the Buddha said and did not accept them. Since such teaching is
accessible to all normal human beings(normal being could not see the truth), as is said
in Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, there comes the difference between two vehicles and the
Buddha”.189
In 次问修三十二相并答, it said: “About thirty-two thoughts, disciples of 迦旃
延 said so instead of what the Buddha taught”.190 “In 迦旃延’s Abhidharma treatise,
185
186
187
188
189
190
《大智度论》卷 93，
《大正藏》第 25 册，第 711 页中。
《大智度论》卷 28，
《大正藏》第 25 册，第 266 页下。
《鸠摩罗什法师大义》卷上，
《大正藏》第 45 册，第 123 页下。
木村英一编：
《慧远研究—遗文篇》
，东京：创文社，1960（11）
，第 12 页。
《鸠摩罗什法师大义》卷中，
《大正藏》第 45 册，第 131 页上。
木村英一编：
《慧远研究—遗文篇》
，东京：创文社，1960（11）
，第 17 页。
105
untainted dharma had no karmic retribution. Why? In sravaka dharma, there only
mention dharma in three realms and minor nirvana. In Mahayana dharma, in addition
to dharma for ordinary people and minor nirvana, there even covers pure Mahayana
dharma”.191 In 次问四相并答, it said: “Four characters of conditioned dharma were
claimed by disciples of 迦旃延尼子 instead of the Buddha’s teaching. Dharma in
scriptures mainly have two types: conditioned and unconditioned…This is their claim
instead of the Buddha’s teaching, and how to give the reply, just like the mistake made
by others, not in the coverage of their right cognition”.192 When Kumārajīva made
distinction between Mahayana and Hinayana, he mainly meant 迦 旃 延 尼 子 ’s
Abhidharma treatise. Firstly, to show difference in content by examples, Kumārajīva
illustrated that Abhidharma treatise was not what the Buddha taught, without religious
inheritance and sacredness, and looked down upon all Sarvastivadin thoughts.
Meanwhile, he also pointed out the difference between Sarvastivada School and
Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka emptiness, regarded Sarvastivada School as Hinayana, while
prajna thought as Mahayana, distinguishing Abhidharma from Mahayana dharma.
Kumārajīva’s Mahayana thoughts are also displayed in meditative cultivation.
About the cultivation difference between Mahayana and Hinayana, Kumārajīva thought
both are different in essence from the very beginning. Hinayana practitioners started
cultivation by doctrines, such as empty of beings, twelve causes and conditions, etc.
Mahayana practitioners started cultivation from emptiness of self and dharma, direct to
ultimate reality of dharma. As a result, their cultivation fruits are also different.
When Kumārajīva was young, he learned Hinayana meditation, then transferred
to Mahayana. After he arrived to Chang’an, by the request of Master Sengrui, etc., he
translated 坐禅三昧經 and 禅法要解. In Notes of Vimalakirti Sutra, Kumārajīva
emphasized the relationship between concentration and wisdom: “For those who go
forth to become monastic members, there are three dharma: precepts (sila),
concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajna). Precept cultivation could subdue
defilements, reducing their power. Concentration could stop or calm defilements, just
like stones or mountains cutting off the flow. Wisdom could cease defilements”.
Concentration could only subdue defilements and only wisdom could eradicate
defilements to the state of absolute nothingness. The development of Kumārajīva’s
Mahayana meditation was based on his reflection on Hinayana meditation. Hinayana
meditation focused on sitting meditation, restricted within out of meditation and entry
191
192
木村英一编：
《慧远研究—遗文篇》
，东京：创文社，1960（11）
，第 18 页。
木村英一编：
《慧远研究—遗文篇》
，东京：创文社，1960（11）
，第 37 页。
106
into meditation. Mahayana meditation claimed for constant meditation in walking,
standing, sitting, and reclining. “Practitioners’ minds, beyond the seventh abiding, are
constant in concentration, with no difference in motion and motionlessness.” 193
Therefore, in Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, it said: “Bodhisattvas are constant in
meditation”. 194 Master Sengzhao pointed out: “Hinayana practitioners enter into
cessation concentration, with physical body like withered wood, without application
ability. Mahayana Bodhisattvas enter into ultimate reality concentration, forever
cessation of mental wisdom, with physical body extending to realms, playing function
according to context, skillful application without obstacles”.195
The core of Kumārajīva’s Mahayana meditation is ultimate reality, which is
interpreted in 坐禅三昧經: “Ultimate reality of dharma is neither pure nor impure,
neither close nor open, contemplating on all dharama as equal, non-destroyable,
unmovable, thus called ultimate reality of dharma”.196 In Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra,
it said: “Bodhisattva know ultimate reality of dharma, so when they enter into
meditation, their minds are in comfort and ease, without clinging to meditation…If in
ultimate reality of dharma, Bodhisattva contemplates on five obstacles as nothing,
knowing that ultimate reality of five obstacles as the ultimate reality of meditation”.197
In 思维略要法, Kumārajīva made specific interpretation about the contemplative
method of ultimate reality of dharma: “Those who contemplate on ultimate reality of
dharma should know that all dharma arise from causes and conditions. Due to arising
from causes and conditions, it is not free”. 198 Although Kumārajīva’s meditation
methods were derived from Hinayana meditation in Kophen, he could made full use of
Mahayana scriptures to establish the meditaton method of ultimate reality.
Kumārajīva applied Madhyamika negating method to treat all clingings, which
fully illustrates the idea of Mahayana prajna theory. In the first chapter of Vimalakirti
Sutra, it pointed out: “Mahayana mind is the pure land of Bodhisattvas…By skillfulness,
it could benefit all sentient beings, then the Buddha land is pure, wisdom is pure, then
the mind is pure, and all merits are pure”. Due to his such teaching to sentient beings
with bearance and active life value, Kumārajīva is the best practitioner of Mahayana
spirit.
Although Kumārajīva is the active advocate of Mahayana Buddhism, he has
natural relationship with Sarvastivada School. In his early days, what Kumārajīva
193
194
195
196
197
198
《注维摩诘經》卷 5，
《大正藏》第 38 册，第 379 页上。
《大智度论》卷 17，
《大正藏》第 25 册，第 188 页下。
《注维摩诘經》卷 2，
《大正藏》第 38 册，第 344 页下。
《坐禅三昧經》卷下，
《大正藏》第 15 册，第 281 页下。
《大智度论》卷 17，
《大正藏》第 25 册，第 188 页上，189 页中。
《思惟略要法》
，
《大正藏》第 15 册，第 300 页上。
107
learned belonged to Hinayana school, so it is not reasonable to regard Kumārajīva as
the absolute negator of Hinayana Buddhism. If saying that Kumārajīva’s debate with
Hinayana schools in Kuci is for dharma transmission and political need, then after he
came to Chang’an, great changes happened. Because his main activity was to translate
scriptures in the request of Qin authority. In order to put forward scripture translation
career, Kumārajīva had to establish good cooperation relationship with Hinayana
monks. His attitude to Hinayana Buddhism was not extreme. On the one hand, some of
his masters were from Hinayana schools, and he had good relationship with them. on
the other hand, he kept negative toward some of Hinayana theories. Therefore, in face
of translating some Hinayana scriptures in Chang’an, he could be reasonable and
inclusive to finish translation, such as Satyasiddhi-śāstra 成实论 and Daśa-bhāṇavāravinaya 十诵律.
Kumārajīva’s doctrine classification about Mahayana and Hinayana brought great
influence on Chinese Buddhism.
The first one is Madhyamaka prajna theory, which is unique and different from
other doctrines previously transmitted to inland China. Kumārajīva not only pointed
out their difference but also gave philosophical analysis. Under his guidance, his
disciples started the high trend to study prajna theory, including Seng Zhao, Seng Rui,
Dao Sheng, etc. Especially for Master Seng Zhao’s three treatises, they absolute make
a clear demarcation with previous prajna theories transmitted in China and with Chinese
metaphysics, which make Buddhist prajna theory and Chinese Buddhist philosophy
have their own clear systems and step on a path of independent development, no longer
subject to metaphysics.
The second one is about meditation methods, Hinayana meditation methods came
to China earlier, but such methods are lack of Mahayana prajna spirit. Meditation
scriptures translated by Kumārajīva represented the higher achievement of Mahayana
doctrines by comprehensively making meditation method from five schools into
consideration, though lack of specific and feasible contemplation in practice. This
stimulates Chinese Buddhist arena to reflect all kinds of meditation difference in
Buddhism, thus promoting the independent process of Mahayana thought in China.
The last one is about Kumārajīva’s doctrine classification, which lanched new
debates between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism in China. For example, such
debates in South and North dynasties brought about the development of doctrine
classification in theory, and finally established Mahayana ideaology in Chinese
Buddhism. 竺法度 was the disciple of Dharma-yaśas and put forward the idea “There
are no Buddhas in ten directions, with only the Sakyamuni Buddha”, as a result, which
108
was regarded as the extreme view in Buddhist arena and was rejected by Mahayana
major trend. Master Seng You 僧祐 in “doctrine classification by five periods 五时判
教” said: “When the Buddha came to the world to save sentient beings, he would
observe the capacity of them, and set different teachings for them. For example, three
vehicles are set according to different contexts, with five periods to preach dharma,
from gross to subtle, from minor to large, with the aim to show the essence of the
Buddha’s teaching. Now the right dharma was far away, and what people learned
became different, some even clinging to Hinayana, but finally Nirvana Sutra presented
the Buddha Nature”.199
According to Master Seng You, any dharma could be judged by five periods,
whose development extends from gross to subtle, from minor to large. Hinayana
Buddhism was classified as the stage still in ignorance. The notion to develop
Mahayana and to negate Hinayana is very strong, since Master Seng You mentioned
that despising Mahayana would commit the sin of falling into the hell. Kumārajīva’s
scripture translation and transmission make the debate between Mahayana Buddhism
and Sectarian Buddhism continue to influence Chinese Buddhism in the first and
middle of the fifth century. In late period of South and North dynasties, doctrine
classification theories put forward by Master Ji Zang and Master Zhi Yi, etc., further
elevated the status of Mahayana Buddhism, and in Sui and Tang dynasties, eight sects
all belong to Mahayana Buddhism.
2.4 Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transimission in (Kuzu, or 龟兹, or Qiuci,
or Kucina, or Kucha, or Kuche)and His Influence
Kumārajīva in Sha Che contacted Mahayana theory, and he started to pursue and
develop Mahayana career. After he returned to Kuci and further studied Mahayana
scriptures and improved his Buddhist cultivation. Due to the king’s great support,
Kumārajīva gradually became important in Kuci and Mahayana Buddhism began to
prevail, resulted in the great transference for the development of Buddhism in Kuci and
other countries in Western Regions. This provided opportunities for the transmission of
Buddhism to the east.
2.4.1The Completion and Development of Mahayana Buddhism in Kucina
In Sha Che, Kumārajīva contacted Mahayana Buddhism, especially Nagarjuna’s
199
《出三藏记集》卷 5，
《大正藏》第 55 册，第 40 页下。
109
Madhaymaka theory, which provided him basic knowledge about Mahayana thoughts.
However, the real development of his Mahayana thoughts happened when he was in
Kuci. He transmitted Mahayana Buddhism to princes. In Biography of Great Monks, it
recorded that in comtemporary Kuci, Kumārajīva preached emptiness of dharma
without self. Listeners felt sorrow to hear such dharma too late. A lot of people began
to convert to Mahayana Buddhism. At this period, Kumārajīva was only a teenage boy.
When he was twenty, he got full precept ordination, as is recorded in Biography of
Great Monks: “When Kumārajīva was twenty, he received full ordination in the palace,
and learned Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 from Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉”. 200 When
Kumārajīva’s mother left Kuci, Kumārajīva decided to stay in Kuci and to develop
Mahayana, and then lived in Wang Xin temple. In 比 丘 尼 戒 本 所 出本 末 序 , it
recorded: “There were ninety monks in Wang Xin temple. There was one monk learning
Mahayana theory, and was the disciple of She Mi. He was called Kumārajīva, intelligent
and great learning, from She Mi to learn Agamas”.201 At that period, there were many
elegant temples in Kuci, among which there were seven temples in the control of Master
She Mi. In Wang Xin temple, Kumārajīva discovered some Mahayana scriptures, such
prajna sutras, and began to study Mahayana theories.
Along with the improvement of Kumārajīva’s learning, he began to attain high
praise from the king, and his status elevated. Bandhudatta 盘头达多 who once was his
Hinayana master finally converted to Mahayana. When Kumārajīva preached dharma,
even kings kneeled down to listen.202
From the above analysis, it could be seen that Mahayana scriptures in
contemporary Kuci should be not a few, scriptures translated by Kumārajīva in
Chang’an mostly came from Kuci. Even at that period, in the palace, there enshrined
the original version of 放光般若经. Jñānagupta 阇那崛多 in Sui Dynasty, regarded
that the original version of Lotus Sutra translated by Kumārajīva was from Kuci.203 In
Biography of Great Monks, there recorded that Kumārajīva stayed in Kuci for two years
and recited Mahayana scriptures, at the period of which there were Mahayana scriptures
in the palace, which according to Kumārajīva’s translation, might include Vaipulya,
prajna, Lotus Sutra, Tantric, sutras in Ratna-kūṭa section 宝积, etc.
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 2《卑摩罗叉传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 48 页。
《出三藏记集》卷 11，
《丘尼戒本所出本末序》
，
《大正藏》第 65 册，第 79 页下。
202
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 2《卑摩罗叉传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 49 页。
203
隋朝阇那崛多，笈多共译的《添品妙法莲华经》序曰：“昔敦煌沙门竺法护于晋武之世译《正法华》
，
后秦姚兴更请罗什译《妙法莲华》
。考验二译，定非一本。护似多罗之叶，什似龟兹之文。余检经藏，备
见二本，多罗与《正法》符会，龟兹则共《妙法》允同。” （
《大正藏》第 9 册，第 134 页下）
110
200
201
The arising of Kumārajīva’s Mahayana learning came along with debates with
Hinayana Buddhism. When Kumārajīva studied 放光般若经, there presented some
contradiction with Hinayana Buddhism, which Kumārajīva applied a metaphor to
express. A mysterious maya debated with Kumārajīva, in which Kumārajīva expressed
his firm attitude to develop Mahayana Buddhism.204
It also could be seen that in contemporary Kuci, to some degree, Mahayana and
Hinayana were reconcilable with each other and existed unanimously. Although
Kumārajīva transferred to Mahayana, after he received full ordination, he still learned
Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 from Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉. When he was in Wang Xin
temple, although Kumārajīva preached Mahayana and his master She Mi preached
Hinayana, there seemed no contradiction between them. Such reconcilability also
happened in the north Indian area in the west of Cong Ling. Such area in the
management of Sarvastivada School, but Mahayana Buddhism was also popular. Such
co-existent situation lasted from thousands of years. Such situation also existed in Kuci.
Kumārajīva’s Mahayana transmission in Kuci did not prevent the continuous
development of Hinayana in Kuci. Kumārajīva preached dharma in the same area with
his Hinayana masters, between whom there were no contradictions, which could reflect
in the Buddhist art of early 克孜尔 Kizil Grottoes. This properly indicates that Kuci,
in the north road of Silk Road, displayed the characteristics of culture inclusiveness and
absorption. Master Yin Shun pointed out: “Hinayana which was transmitted from
northwest Inida never had conflicts with Mahayana. In Records of Western Regions, it
said: there were five kinds of Vinaya in Oddiyana 乌仗那, where Mahayana was also
popular. The translator Buddhayasa of Si Fen Vinaya was from Kophen, in the
introduction of which, there mention that Dharmakuptaka School (Si Fen Vinaya)
belonged to Mahayana tripitaka in essence (this might be judged and concluded by
Master Dao Xuan). Such development characteristics of Hinayana not obstructing
Mahayana also happened in ancient China and deeply influenced Chinese Mahayana
Buddhism”.205 Meng Nan 孟楠 in Simple Discussion about the Compatiblility of Kuci
Culture and Its Inspiration 略论龟兹文化的兼容性及其启示, pointed out: since Han
Dynasty, Kuci as the important place in the north road of Silk Road, due to convenient
traffic and people’s open attitude, broke through the previous closed and noncommunicative situration between countries in Western Regions, especially after Han
204
205
释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 2《卑摩罗叉传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 48 页。
释印顺：
《中国佛教论集》
，中华书局，2010 年 6 月第 1 版，第 10 页。
111
Dynasty unified Western Regions. Therefore, Kuci absorbed culture from different
regions based on Kuci’s local culture, thus making Kuci’s culture with colorful
characteristics. These colorful cultures included Kuci culture, inland Chinese culture,
Indian culture, Greek culture, and Iran culture, etc.206
Due to Kumārajīva’s transmission of Mahayana Buddhism, as well as the kings’
support from all relevant countries, Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci and neighbor
countries achieved extensive development. Before Kumārajīva arrived in Liang Zhou,
there was obvious Mahayana trend in Kuci and it gradually prevailed, which is shown
in many aspects. According to fascicle 6 of 法华经传记, it recorded: “达磨跋陀, also
called Fa Xian 法贤 in Tang Dynasty, was from Kuci, gifted and professional in tripitaka,
generally familiar with some foregin languages, regarding Hinayana as the supreme,
self-conceited, and slandering Mahayana Buddhists. Then, one monk called 须梨耶
recited 6000 verses of Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), and liberated from all
dharma. He told the profundity of the sutra recitation, and Fa Xian realized his tripitaka
learning as simple and low, so he converted to Mahayana, and followed 须梨耶 to
recite Lotus Sutra, five times each day as the program”.207
According to 羽溪了谛 Ryotai Hatani’s study, “须梨耶 was the Mahayana master
of Kumārajīva, also called 须梨耶苏摩, who elder brother called 须梨耶跋陀 also
learned Mahayana doctrine. 须梨耶苏摩 once in Shu Le preached prajna sutra to
Kumārajīva and later also converted to Mahayana, and even transmitted Lotus Sutra in
Kuci. 达磨跋陀 was from Kuci with splendid knowledge, later met 须利耶苏摩 and
learned from him, then converted to Mahayana. They were originally Hinayana
Buddhists”.208
At least in the period of Kumārajīva staying in Kuci, Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci
took up some status, at the period of which many Mahayana pictures were discovered
in Kuci grottoes. For example, the appearance of Da Xiang grottoes and Zhong Xinzhu
grottoes illustrated the changes of religious worship in content. Da Xiang grottoes,
represented by 47th and 48th caves, expressed the content of Mahayana Buddhism. In
the 47th cave, a lot of Buddha bodies coming from the nirvana Buddha’s head light and
孟楠：
《略论龟兹文化的兼容性及其启示》
，
《龟兹学研究》
，新疆大学出版社 2006 年 9 版，第 337-342
页。
207
《大正藏》第 51 册，
《法华传记》
，第 76 页上。
208
羽溪了谛：
《西域之佛教》
，商务印书馆，1999 年 11 月版，第 191-192 页。
112
206
body light. On the one hand, this expresses Mahayana’s view on nirvana; on the other
hand, this expresses Mahayana’s view on body. In addition, the wall painting of Rocana
Buddha 卢舍那佛 in the 17th cave, and the shrine of the standing Buddha in the 38th
cave, all reflections of Mahayana teaching and cultivation. In temporal sense, the 47 th
cave was built about in the latter of the fourth century, which is not only in conformity
with Carbon-14 Dating (or Radiocarbon Dating, 6 个碳 14 测定), but it is consistent
with the year when Kumārajīva developed Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci. After
Kumārajīva left Kuci, Hinayana regained priority in Kuci and Mahayana turned to
decline.209
The Buddhist situation in Kuci after Kumārajīva left there, due to lack of materials,
is not very clear. But the general trend is the fast declination of Mahayana Buddhism
and the revival of Hinayana Buddhism. Master Fa Xian was a little later than
Kumārajīva, because the time Kumārajīva left Kuci was in 385 while Master Fa Xian
left Chang’an to the west for dharma was in 399, so they did not meet with each other.
About Buddhism in Yan Qi 焉耆, Master Fa Xian said: “There were more than 4000
monks, learning Hinayana doctrines, in well-disciplined order. When monks from Qin
country (inland China) came to Yan Qi, they all did not ever see such disciplines”.
According to this, Ji Xianlin regarded that in contemporary Kuci, it was also Hinayana
with a lot of monks, as it was assumed by records, which must be more than that in
Yanqi.210 霍旭初 Huo Xuchu’s study showed that after Kumārajīva went to the east,
in 克孜尔 Kizil grottoes, there appeared wall paintings of promoting the Buddha’s
super natural power, such as “Lady Sumati requesting the Buddha 须摩提女请佛” and
“subduing six teachers in non-Buddhists 降 服 六 师 外 道 ”, the thought of “only
worshing the Sakya 唯礼释迦” was rather clear and hightlighted. This illustrates that
Hinayana power strengthened after Kumārajīva left Kuci.211 Therefore, when Master
Xuan Zhuang came to Kuci, monks there all learned Hinayana theories. In fascicle one
of Records of Travel to Western Regions, it recorded something about Kuci: “There
were over one hundred temples in Kuci, more than 5000 monks, who learned Hinayana
丁明夷：
《鸠摩罗什与龟兹佛教艺术》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期，第 47-49 页。霍旭初：
《鸠摩
罗什大乘思想的发展及其对龟兹石窟的影响》
，
《敦煌研究》
，1997 年第 3 期，第 56-57 页。
210
季羡林：
《鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰》
，
《孔子研究》2005 年第 6 期，第 40
页。
211
霍旭初：
《鸠摩罗什大乘思想的发展及其对龟兹石窟的影响》，
《敦煌研究》1997 年第 3 期，第 57 页。
113
209
doctrines in Sarvastivada School. Doctrines and Vinaya were from India”.212
This is certainly not absolute. In Sui Dynasty, when 达摩笈多 Dharmagupta went
to Kuci, the Kuci king still believed in Mahayana Buddhism. In fascicle 2 of Continuity
of Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “Arriving in Kuci, staying in Wang Xin
temple for two years, Dharmagupta preached dharma for monks. The king worshiped
Mahayana and got inspired. The king hoped him to stay in Kuci, frequent visit on him.
But Dharmagupta had no intention to stay, with only eager to the east. He secretly went
to Wu Qi 乌耆 and preached dharma for two years, then to Gao Chang 高昌”.213
2.4.2 Kucina King’s Religious Reform and Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transmission
Before Kumārajīva went back to Kuci, Buddhism in Kuci mainly belonged to
Sarvastivada School, based on which Buddhist assembly established. Kings for
generations and noble ministers greatly supported Hinayana development. After
Kumārajīva returned to Kuci, historical changes happened. If Kumārajīva contacted
Mahayana by his interest, then his Mahayana contact in Kuci was a little related with
politics. By the above analysis, it could be known that due to Kumarajva’s transmission
of Mahayana Buddhism, the contemporary Kuci began to transfer to Mahayana, and
Mahayana Buddhism prospered. After Kumārajīva left Kuci, after 吕光 Lű Guang’s
invasion into the west, Mahayana Buddhism began to decline, and Hinayana Buddhism
regained the leading position. Until Prosperous Tang dynasty (the third period of Tang
dynasty), after the influence of Middle China’s Buddhism on Kuci, such situation had
some changes.
It could be found by some analyses that after Kumārajīva learned Mahayana
doctrines, there was one occasion whether the powerful Hinayana in Kuci could bear
Kumārajīva. If not, he might had no future in Kuci. The fact was on the contrary,
because he got the king’s support and even higher than Hinayana masters. Through
religious transference, the king achieved his political reform. Some scholars had
mentioned the existence of such religious reform.214 Kumārajīva’s Hinayana master
called She Mi, who managed seven temples, from which it could imply the powerful
Hinayana status in Kuci. After Kumārajīva returned to Kuci, and got the king’s support,
and his status gradually surpassed his master She Mi, one reason of which resulted from
the king’s support. If the Kuci king started the religious reform and Kumārajīva could
《大正藏》第 51 册，
《法华传记》
，第 870 页上。
《大正藏》第 51 册，
《續高僧传》
，第 434 页下-436 页上。
214
薛宗正《鸠摩罗什彼岸世界的超越历程与此岸世界的复归》
，《西域研究》
，1992 年第 2 期，第 66-70
页。
114
212
213
be regarded as the pioneer of this reform.
Why did the Kuci king start this religious reform? What is the historical
background? These questions remain to be uncovered in the next step.
In Wei, Jin, South and North dynasties, the wars in middle China were frequent
and the ruler had no energy to the west, which resulted in the mergence with each other
in Western Regions. Meanwhile, some wandering tribes, such as 柔然, 高车, 吃哒,
etc., took part in the battles in Western Regions. In Biography of Western Regions of
Han Shu, it recorded: “Kuci country was 7480 Li away from Chang’an, with the houses
of 6, 970, population of 81, 317, soldiers of 21, 076…People can make smelting and
lead. To the east, there was 乌垒 Wu Lei city in the management of Du Hu, at the
distance of 350 Li away from Kuci”. From this introduction, contemporary Kuci
seemed to be a big country. About the area of Kuci, in fascicle 30 of Wei Shu 三国志
—魏书, it recorded: “Gumo 姑墨, Wensu 温宿, and Weitou 尉头 all belonged to Kuci”.
In fascicle 97 of Bei Shi 北史 in Biography of Western Regions, it also recorded:
“Gumo 姑墨 was in the west of Kuci, with the area of 150500 Li, subject to Kuci.
Wensu 温宿 was in the northwest of Gumo 姑墨, with the area of 150550 Li, subject
to Kuci”. From West Han, East Han, Wei, Jin, South and North dynasties, to Sui and
Tang dynasties, it was nearly for one thousand years, Kuci was in predominant power
among north road countries, and influenced deeply on the history of Western Regions.
In Biography of Western Regions of Han Shu, it recorded: “Guang Li criticized
Kuci: other countries all submitted to Han dynasty, why did could Kuci bear such
treatment?” This is the earliest record about the aggressive phenomenon between
coutries in Western Regions. Through severe attack, imperialism was prohibited in
Western Regions. Needless to say, the imperialist conquering phenomenon among
countries in Western Regions disappeared due to the unification of West Han. Once
West Han’s control was weak, such trend would re-arise. In some materials, such as
Biography of Ban Chao of Late Han Shu 后汉书—班超传, Emperor Zhang dismissed
the governor Du Hu and Kuci regained the power again, with Gusu, Wensu, Weitou all
subject to it, which later was conquered by Ban Chao. In Biography of Ban Chao, it
quoted Ban Chao’s letter: kings from Gusu and Wensu were set by Kuci and did not
belong to Kuci heirs, who were in suffering and would finally betray. This implies that
115
such countries just had to subject to Kuci.215
In Wei and Jin period, kingdoms in middle China had no power to control Western
Regions, with severe land aggression. According to Jin Shu 晋书, it recorded that in the
first year of Xian Kang period, Han authority commanded to fight against Kuci and
Shanshan…Lű Guang was sent to fight against Kuci, and Kuci King called Chun fought
againt Lű Guang’s army, with Kuci’s subordinated countries guarding their countries.
It could be known that contemporary Kuci was in power of north road, with other
countries subordinated to Kuci. In the battle, after Kuci King (named Bo Chun) fled
away, the number of surrendered coutries reached over thirty. This seemed to imply that
Kuci was once the conqueror in the east of Cong Ling, which might be helpful to
understand why King Fujian commanded Lű Guang to conquer Kuci with the aim to
communicate with Western Regions.
In fascicle 97 of Jin Shu, it recorded that there was a city with threefold walls, in
which there were more than one thousand temples, with farming and husbandry as the
major living style. Because Kuci was located in the center position of north road and
connected countries of north and south, naturally becoming the important business town
on Silk Road. Prosperous economy promoted the development of Buddhism and the
establishment of temples.
In contemporary period, Sarvastivada School had been the leading role for a long
time, but in Chinese translated scriptures, there also recorded that in Kuci, there were
Mahayana monks. For example, Bo Yan once in Bai Ma temple in Luo Yang transalted
无量清净平等觉經, 须赖經, Suragama Sutra 首楞严经, 上金光首經, etc., and
Qiang Zihou granted Zhu Fahu with 阿维越致遮經, and Bo Yuanxin helped Zhu Fahu
translate 正法华经. No matter Bo Yan, or Bo Yuanxin, they all came from Kuci royal
families, which properly illustrates that Mahayana Buddhism began to be popular in
imperial class. This brought threat and conflicts to them with the contemporary
Hinayana schools. At the period of Kuci King Bo Chun, the palace was elegant like the
god’s dwelling, with luxurious life style, and people liked offering, with wine stored in
houses even thousands of tins, non-corruptible for decades. After Lű Guang conquered
Kuci, he got a lot, such as camels over 20,000 heads, jewels, unique skills, animals over
one thousand pieces, houses over 10, 000 ones.216 In this situation, Kuci king gradually
intended to seek hegemony in Western Regions. However, conservative Hinayana
schools could not be able to meet the need of political management, so religious reform
215
216
余太山：
《两汉魏晋南北朝时期西域的绿洲大国称霸现象》
，《西北史地》1995 年第 4 期，第 3 页。
汤球：
《十六春秋辑补》卷 82，后凉吕光，
《丛书集成初编》，商务印书馆，1937 年版。
116
became imperative. Kumārajīva in such situation got support of the Kuci king.
Kuci king personally went to Wensu to invite Kumārajīva back to Kuci, and
requested Kumārajīva to develop Mahayana Buddhism, with the aim to conduct
political reform by Buddhism. In order to bring convenience to Kumārajīva’s Buddhism
transmission, the Kuci king specifically granted Kumārajīva as the head of Wang Xin
temple. By Kumārajīva’s efforts, Wang Xin temple soon became the stronghold to
develop Mahayana emptiness school. For Kuci in hegemony on north road of Western
Regions, it was necessary for Kuci to put forward such reform and Mahayana thought
to other countries, so there appeared the historical phenomenon that countries in
Western Regions all respected Kumārajīva. When Kumārajīva preached dharma each
year, all kings knelt down aside and allowed Kumārajīva to step on his seat by their
backs. By personal efforts and the king’s support, Kumārajīva’s Mahayana
transmission was unprecentedly successful. Before he came to middle China,
Kumārajīva had become the great monk well-known to areas in Western Regions and
eastern areas.
Kumārajīva’s transmission did not last long in Kuci. Firstly, there was the debate
with Hinyana power, which triggered the political conflict between conservative
authority and the Kuci king, resulted in social disorder. Secondly, Former Qin’s leader
Fu Jian’s aggression to Kuci, he not only attack Kuci but also grabbed Kumārajīva. In
the 13th year of Jian Yuan period (377), Fujian heard about Kumārajīva and sent Lű
Guang to invite him.217 Finally there happened Lű Guang’s invasion to Kuci, killing
Kuci king, and grabing Kumārajīva. This historical event destroyed Kuci’s Mahayana
development, and Hinayana revived after another Kuci king called Bo Zhen got power.
Later, when Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 along with Mahaparinirvana Sutra prepared to
develop in Kuci, he had to turn to Gu Zang 姑臧, due to Kuci so many Hinayana monks
without faith in mahanirvana.218
克孜尔 Kizil Grottoes digged near ancient Kuci, such as the above mentioned cave
47th, 48th, 38th , etc., presented Mahayana thoughts. Such great project, without
governmental support, financial and labor assistance, it is difficult to achieve. These all
show the Kuci king’s support to Kumārajīva’s transmission of Mahayana Buddhism.219
汤球：
《十六春秋辑补》卷 82，后凉吕光，
《丛书集成初编》，商务印书馆，1937 年版，第 678 页。
《大正藏》第 55 册，
《开元释教录》卷 4，第 520 页上。
219
霍旭初：
《鸠摩罗什大乘思想的发展及其对龟兹石窟的影响》，
《敦煌研究》1997 年第 3 期，第 52-56
页。
117
217
218
Chapter Three: Kumārajīva’s Dharma Transmission to Inland
China
3.1The Function of Western Regions on the Transmission of Indian
Buddhism to Inland China in Wei and Jin Dynasties
3.1.1Western Regions as the Important Bridge Connecting Western Culture with
Chinese Culture
Western Regions had naturally become the important bridge to connect the
economic and culture communication between the east and the west, due to little
development in marine transportation, which was located in the middle position of east
Asia, west Asia, and Europe.
Archaeological materials discovered in the east and the west verified that in
Former Qin period, there existed many facts about the communication between the east
and the west.
Hetian jades, which were discovered from a cemetery of Shang dynasty in Anyang
city of Henan province in China, and Chinese bronze mirror and silk (made in about
400 BCE and 300 BCE), which were discovered in the great cemetery of Russia in the
west of Altai Mountain, all display the business activities between the west and the east
on Silk Road. Nomads in the north and northwest played the major roles in the culture
communication between the west and the east, such as Xiongnu, Yuezhi, and Si Jitai,
etc.
About the fifth century BCE, some coutries gradually appeared, such as Shanshan
and Kuci, etc. Han Dynasty defeated Xiongnu and sent Zhang Qian as envoy to Western
Regions, and later established Du Hu admistration of Western Regions, with the aim to
establish direct business communication between China and coutrines in middle Asia,
south Asia, and west Asia. From East Han dynasty to Wei and Jin period, inland China’s
dominion over Western Regions was intermittent, but the east-west communication in
spiritual culture and material culture never suspended.
Western Regions, in the culture and business communication between China and
the west, play the important regional medium function. From Dun Huang in the west
of He Xi Corridor, there divided into two main transportation lines: north road and south
road.
In the north road, from the east to the west, there were some tribes, such as 渠犁,
118
乌垒, 轮台, 龟兹, 姑墨, 温宿, and 疏勒, etc., who all got emancipation from
Xiongnu, and became subject to Han Dynasty. 轮台 and 渠犁 were in the middle of
north road, whose status was important to provide guarantee for the safe and
inobstructed communication in politics and economy, which were also the places to set
up Du Hu of Western Regions. Social culture in Kuci was influenced greatly by culture
in middle China, and developed fast. Kuci not only was located in the center of Western
Regions, but also was strong in military. Ban Chao wrote to Emperor He of Han
Dynasty: “If we can obtain Kuci, then only 1% of countries unconquered in Western
Regions”. In the west of north road, there was Shu Le country. According to Biography
of Western Regions in Han Shu 汉书—西域传, “the population in Shu Le area was 20,
000, with 2000 soldiers, as a big country in Western Regions. Shu Le was the axis to
middle Asian countries outside Cong Ling”.220 In Han Dynasty, She Le belonged to
north road,221 but later Sha Che in south road had a branch path to Shu Le. In East Han
dynasty, in addition to middle road and south road, new north road also had branch path
to Shu Le. In 水经注, it quoted 释氏西域记: “In the east of Cong Ling, there was a
country called 伽舍罗逝, which was small but the inevitable place for countries to
pass”.222
From Dun Huang, areas in the south of Tarim Basin belonged to south road, and
there some countries from east to west, such as 楼兰, 且末, 精绝, 扞弥, 于阗, 皮山,
and 莎车, etc., whose social custom features were similar. In the east of south road,
Lou Lan was a big country, 900 Km from the east to the west. In the history, there were
many explorers, militarists, and travelers, such as Zhang Qian 张骞, Ban Chao 班超,
Fa Xian 法显, Xuan Zhuang 玄奘, Marco Polo 马可波罗, etc., all leaving traces in this
area. In the period of Emperor Zhao, the name of Lou Lan was changed into Shanshan,
formally included into Han Dynasty. 223 In the remained cite of this area, there
discovered mussel shells 蚌贝 and corals 珊瑚, remains of western style wall painting,
coins in Kushan Dynasty, etc., which illustrate the fact Lou Lan absorbed western
220
221
222
223
《后汉书—西域传》
考证岑仲勉：
《汉书西域传地里校译》
，中华书局，1981 年，第 347 页。
王国维校：
《水经注校》卷 2《河水篇》
，上海人民出版社，1984 年。
王国维：
《王国维学术研究论集》
，华东师大出版社，1983 年，第 153 页。
119
culture and promoted eastward. Wang Guowei 王国维 thinks: “The division between
south road and north road was not in Yu Menguan and Yang Guan, but started from Lou
Lan”.224
Khotan was the important position in the middle and west of south road, with the
population of about 20, 000 in West Han dynasty. After south road was put into
operation, agriculture, maniscraft, and commerce prospered, with the population of 80,
000 in East Han dynasty. According to Wei Shu 魏书, Liang Shu 梁书, and Fo Guo Ji
佛国记, etc., in East Han dynasty, there had already existed five big cities in Khotan,
dozens of small cities, very prosperous. Khotan was the first center of silk development
in Western Regions and the most important trade collecting distributing place, in which
there were not only all kinds of goods to goods exchange, but also appeared currency
trade. Stein discovered five Zhu 铢(zhu is the unite of money) and thousands of Jian
Lunqian 剪轮钱 (a kind of metal money). Moreover, some evidence shows that Khotan
itself even made Sino-Kharosthi Coin, which presents the creativity of Khotan people
as well as their culture connection with middle China area.225 Sino-Kharosthi Coin was
the start of ancient self-made currency in Xin Jiang, which illustrates the important
status of ancient Khotan in economic activities of Western Regions. Sha Che was the
big place in the southwest of Tarim Basin. When West Han dynasty conquered Western
Regions, Sha Che actively cooperated with Han dynasty, and made great contribution
in protecting the road that connects Western Regions with Han dynasty.
Western Regions in Han Dynasty had belonged to China, not suspending
relationship for thousands of years. In Han Dynasty, there set Du Hu of Western
Regions, and sent soldiers to keep farming, in which middle China culture was rooted.
In archaeological discoveries, there appeared frequently a large number of Han refined
cloth, bronze mirror, wooden sticks, bronze coins, etc. In Biography of Western Regions
in Han Shu 汉书—西域传, it recorded that Kuci king called Jiang Bin 绛宾 visited
Chang’an many times and stayed there for a long time. This king liked Han clothes and
returned to Kuci, seting many rule and ritual similar to Han. It also recorded that Sha
Che king went to Chang’an and liked China, referring to Chinese law, teaching his sons
that they should serve Han Dynasty without betrayal. It could be seen from this record
that countries in Western Regions had close relationship with middle China. Meanwhile,
Chinese is common to Western Regions. Near Lou Lan, there discovered 700 Chinese
224
225
王国维：
《观堂集林》
，中华书局，1959 年，
《敦煌所出汉简跋十四》
。
夏鼐：
《“和阗”马钱考》
，
《文物》1962 年 7, 8 期。
120
books in Wei, jin, South and North dynasties.226
People in middle China liked unique culture in Western Regions. According to 后
汉书—五行志, it recorded: “Emperor Ling in Han Dynasty liked minority ethnic group
clothes, beds, seats, meals, musical instruments, dance, etc. and royal relatives in the
capital competed for them”. After Zhang Qian as an envoy visited Western Regions, a
lot of traders in Western Regions came to inland China. Xin Yannina 辛延年 as a poet
in East Han dynasty in one poem 羽林郎: “One server from General Huo’s family
depended on the General’s power and made fun of a young girl from Western Regions.
The girl dressed very beautiful clothes and decorations, both in Han sytle and foreign
style”.227 This reflects the mutual absorption, improvement and development between
tow cultures.
Meanwhile, there is the close relationship between Western Regions and middle
Asia, in the aspects of custom, language, culture, economy, producing activities, etc.
Minority ethnic groups from Western Regions to middle Asian area mostly live a
nomadic life. Between them, there were always battles and conflicts due to land
competition. Xiongnu in the north is relative strong ethnic group, who uninterruptedly
invaded into other ethnic groups, resulted in frequent movement of people in such area,
which became one factor to connect cultures and regions between middle Asia and Xin
Jiang area in China. Among these ethnic groups, one typical example is Da Yuezhi in
Han, Wei and Jin period, which played the important role in in the transmission of
culture in India and Western Regions to the east.
The westward movement of Yu Zhi people establishes direct connection between
middle China and middle Asia, and even to the west Asia. In the first century BCE,
Kushan kingdom was founded and absorbed all kinds of culture, thus forming the
combined style of co-existence and integration of all civilizations. Greek geographer
Ptolemy 托勒密, once recorded that travelers along the business road reached middle
Asia, one of whom called Marinus 马利奴斯 said from the ferry of Euphrates River 幼
发拉底河 to Stone Tower 石塔 in middle Aisa, eastward to Seres 塞里斯 country,
southward to India.228 According to Biography of Western Regions in Hou Han Shu 后
226
227
228
刘文锁著：
《新疆历史文物》
，新疆美术摄影出版社，1999 年，第 67-68 页。
沈德潜：
《古诗源》
，中华书局，1977 年，第 60 页。
张星烺编，朱杰勤校订：《中西交通史料汇编》第一册，中华书局，2003 年，第 29-35 页。
121
汉书—西域传, it recorded that people in Han dynasty had many things from western
areas, such as coral 珊瑚 and amber 琥珀. Kushan became the merging place of the
south-north trade road and the east-west trade road. Kushan was located in the essential
place of Silk Road, and played the important function for east-west communication in
economy and culture, and had irreplaceable status in the world ancient history. Kushan
and India is difficult to discuss separately. At the beginning of Kushan kingdom, it had
controlled Kophen area, which was the dwelling place for northern ethnic group to the
south.
The eastward transmission of Buddhism is one great event in the historical
relationship between Kushan and inland China. After Indian Buddhism was transmitted
to Kushan kingdom, at the period of Kaniṣka 迦 腻 色迦 , Buddhism reached the
maximum prosperity, so that Kushan became the biggest place to transmit Buddhism to
Inland China.
3.1.2The Method Transference of Early Indian Buddhism Transmission to Inland
China
Due to Da Yuezhi’s unique status in the communication between China and India.
The early transmission of Buddhism into inland China had close relationship with Da
Yuezhi. In literature materials, it recorded that in 2 BCE, the missionary called Yi Cun
from Da Yuezhi transmitted Buddha’s sutra orally. In the middle of the third century,
about East Han and Three States periods, early Buddhist transmitter in inland China
mostly were monks from Da Yuezhi, Anxi, Kangju, etc. They mostly treated An and
Zhi as the family name, such as Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶 and An Shigao 安世高, etc. That
is to say, they came from Anxi and Da Yuezhi in the east of Iran, which belonged to
Kushan kingdom at that period. However, in early transmission of Buddhism, monks
mainly collected in foreign traders when they lived in China, some of which were
originally traders, so they transmitted Buddhism for personal characteristic. Since they
did not dwell in Western Regions for a long period, they directly moved to inland China,
which made the early transmission of Buddhism to China had certain sense of abrupt
landing from the air. Scholars generally called the transmitting method in this period as
direct transmission. From the perspective of transmission line, the earliest transmission
path is the road connecting to middle Asia, which was almost at the same period with
the prosperous period of the Silk Road which crossed through Europe-Asia continent
and passed Kushan kingdom.
However, the so-called direct transmission did not last long, because from West
122
Jin dynasty, monks in Western Regions came to inland China and gradually became the
main stream. Liang Qichao once said: “Western Regions was the medium to connect
China with India, so it is necessary to illustrate the mutual relationship between these
three places, then to discuss the origin and development of the transmission of Buddhim.
As I have seen that about the relationship between Western Regions and India, the
invasion of Da Yuezhi into India was the most essential. About the relationship between
inland China and Western Regions, the event of five minority ethinic groups disordered
inland China in East Jin Dynasty, and the event of five Liang achieving independence
were most essential”.229 The following is the list of foreign translaters in West Jin and
East Jin dynasties.
1 Translators in West Jin
竺法护 Dharma-rakṣa: Yue Zhi, Biography of Monks: “He was originally from Yu Zhi
and lived in Dun Huang”.
支法度: from Yue Zhi
帛延: Kuci, Biography of Monks: not clear from where.首楞严后记: prince from Kuci
帛 尸 梨 蜜 Srimitrala:Kuci, Biography of Monks: from Western Regions. Now
presumed to be in Kuci.
帛法炬:Kuci, according to 出三藏记集: the family is Bo, from Kuci.
竺叔兰:in 僧传—朱士行传: from Inida, his father avoided from disaster, so moved to
He Nan.
安法钦: An Xi 安息
2 Translators in East Jin
佛图澄(Fo Tucheng, or Buddhasimha): Kuci
僧伽玻澄: Kophen
昙摩难提: Yue Zhi, Biography of Monks: Yuzhi
僧伽提婆: Kophen
229
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年 9 月版，第 92 页。
123
僧伽罗叉: Kophen
昙摩耶舍 Dharma-yaśas: Kophen
鸠摩罗什 Kumārajīva: according to Biography of Monks, father from Inida, mother
from Kuci.
弗若多罗 Puṇyatāra: Kophen
昙摩流支 Dharma-ruci: Biography of Monks: from Western Regions
卑摩罗叉 Vimalākṣa: Kophen
佛陀耶舍 Buddha-yaśas: Kophen
佛驮跋陀罗 Buddhabhadra: India
昙无谶 Dharmakṣema: Middle India, 魏书—释老志: from Kophen.
支道根: Yue Zhi
支施仑: Yue Zhi
昙谛: Kang Ju, see 广弘明集
Before Three States period, dharma transmitters to Inland China were mainly from
middle Asian countries, such as Da Yuezhi, Anxi 安息, Kangju 康居, etc. In the fourth
century to the sixth century, it is the period of direct communication between inland
China and Inidan monks. Chinese monks no longer felt satisfied with dharma
transmitted from Western Regions, so directly sought for dharma to Inida, at which
period the number of Indian monks to inland China increased day by day.
About the reasons to result in such road changes, the first reason is due to the inside
migration of middle Asian people, such as from Yue Zhi, which is the temporary event
instead of long period, so its influence was periodical. Along with the ruining of Kushan
kingdom, such influence gradually decreased. The second reason is the transference of
Buddhist center due to continuity and creativity in the development process of
Buddhism, so Kophen sangha and Western Regions sangha with the regional advantage
gradually appeared. It is certain that such trend is established in the early period with
undeveloped traffic. Along with the development in communication and traffic,
especialy for the open marine road, such trend had to yield to direct transmission. The
third reason is that ethnic groups in Western Regions are not only professional in their
124
own languages, but also familiar with Sanskrit language in Buddhist scriptures, and
even were influenced by Chinese culture, and learned Chinese. Such language
advantage naturally brought great convenience and benefit to the translation of
Buddhist scriptures.
In such period, Kophen in north India became the important source to influence
the development of Chinese Buddhism. Nearly most monks transmitting dharma to
inland China were from Kophen, and Chinese monks seeking dharma from India also
established connection with Kophen area. Liang Qichao 梁启超 also considered: “In
the second period, it was centered in Kophen, Hinayana was established here”.230
The full understanding about this problem should not extremely emphasize the
function of transmission center. In fact, by careful analysis, it could be known that in
such period, who truly contributed and influenced to China were Dharma-rakṣa 竺法
护, Kumārajīva 鸠摩罗什, Dharmakṣema 昙无谶, rather than monks from Kophen or
Hinayana Buddhism. Meanwhile, such period is the major period to accept Mahayana
Buddhism, especially Kumārajīva’s and 昙无谶 Dharmakṣema’s scripture translation
which elevated Mahayana Buddhism to a high peak. Why did there appear such
phenomenon? Although there were some monks seeking dharma from the west in this
period, it was impossible to attain organized and precise Mahayana system due to their
unot understanding about Indian geography, culture, and language, etc., and moreover,
Kophen belonged to Hinayana system after all, though Kophen was comparatively open
in contemporary period. People in inland China might feel fit for Sarvastivadin
meditation and vinaya cultivation, but not fit for Sarvastivadin philosophical doctrines
and relevant faith. Therefore, in dharma transmission, monks from Western Regions
played great function.
In Sui and Tang dynasties, such situation changed to some degree, because the
complete openness to Western Regions and efficient management of central
government made it more convenient for people in inland China to India. At this period,
people in inland China no longer felt satisfied with indirect translated scriptures and
were eager to seek dharma to the west, with Master Xuan Zhuang and Master Yi Jing
as representatives. Meanwhile, direct transmission from India to inland China gradually
increased, which made great contribution to the development of Chinese Buddhism.
230
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年 9 月版，第 99 页。
125
3.1.3 Western Regions’ Buddhism Transmission to Inland China and Its Influence
Starting from the transmission of Buddhism to Western Regions, people in
Western Regions used their own languages to translate all kinds of Sanskrit Buddhist
scriptures, which is the essential point for the entry of Buddhism into China. By
observing the translation history of Buddhist scriptures, a large quantity of Buddhist
scriptures were from Western Regions. The so-called Hu-version or Hu language is not
possible to be regarded as the version of Western Regions only, there might be the
version of middle Asia, as well as versions in ethnic group languages of Western
Regions. This might be verified by Buddhist scriptures written in ancient Khotan
language discovered in Dun Huang area and also by scripture pieces written in Kuci
language discovered in Kuche of Xin Jiang. When great monks in Western Regions
translated Indian Buddhist scriptures into their own languages, they unintentionally put
their own thoughts and local culture features into the translaions, thus forming Buddhist
translated works different from Indian Buddhist thoughts. Not merely this, there were
creations in content in Western Regions. Some scriptures such Avatamsaka Sutra and
Mahāsamnipātasūtra 大集经, formed the version of Western Regions which influenced
inland China deeply. In the transmission process of Inidan Buddhist thoughts to inland
China, great monks in Western Regions made outstanding contribution and sacrifice,
with great monks from Kuci and Khotan as the most famous.
Kuci played the important function in the transmission process of Indian
Buddhism to inland China, which was reflected on no matter in Buddhist languages,
translationg activities or art. Most Indian Buddist culture accepted by inland China are
not direct transmission, but were transmitted through Kuci as the medium. From the
scripture translation and dharma transmission, it could be seen that 佛 图 澄 (Fo
Tucheng or Buddhasimha) and Kumārajīva could be regarded as the great monks in
Western Regions, who deeply influenced the development of Chinese Buddhism in the
early period, who were both from Kuci. From the Buddhist art, it could be seen that
Chinese painting techniques were deeply influenced by Kuci area. From 克孜尔 Kizil
grottoes to Dun Huang grottoes, and even to inland China, there formed a clear
changing clue of Buddhist art. Concave-convex shading technique 凹凸晕染法 in
Western Regions was properly expressed in Kuci grottoes and became popular after
transmitted to middle China. Some musical instruments, such as four-stringed Chinese
lute (琵琶), syrinx(排箫), Kong Hou(stringed instrument 箜篌), were also transmitted
into inland China from Kuci, the wall paintings in grottoes were the best evidences. In
126
the aspect of language used by scripture translation, Ji Xianlin in Correction of Journey
to the West in Great Tang Dynasty 大唐西域记校注 pointed out: the earliest translated
Buddhist scriptures were not direct in Sanskrit or Pali, but firstly translated in many
ancient languages in middle Aisa and Xin Jiang, such as Tocharian 吐火罗(焉耆语龟
兹语), etc. Ji Xianlin said: “By some transliteration of some Buddhist terms, it could
be seen that languages from Kuci and Yanqi played some function, instead of the
language from Khotan. I preferred to the idea that Buddhism was transmitted from north
road of Silk Road to the east”.231
In the early period of Kuci area, Hinayana Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism
were both popular, which was obviously influenced by middle Asia. The following table
is aimed to analyze the Mahayana and Hinayana scripture transmission in contemporary
Kuci.
Name
Year
Bai Yan
The third year of Bai Ma (white 无量清净平等觉經 除灾患經232
Gan Lu period in horse) Temple in
Cao Wei country Luoyang
白延
Place
Buddhist scriptures
(258)
Bo Yan
Fomer Liang
帛延
Bo Fazu
帛法祖
Bo Yuanxin
帛元信
Fa Li and Fa Ju
法立 法炬
Gu Zang (now in 首楞严经 须赖經 金光首經233
Gansu province)
Emperior Hui in
Jin dyansty
惟逮菩萨经
Taikang period Chang’an
of Emperor Wu
in Jin dynasty
West Jin
Chang’an
Assisted Dharma-rakṣa to translate
Mahayana scriputres
渐备經十住胡名并书叙 法句本末經
大方等如来藏經 前世三转經 福田
經 楼炭經 优填王经 恒水经 法海
經 阿阁世王受决經 etc.
季羡林：
《佛教传入龟兹和焉耆的道路和时间》
，
《社会科学战线》2001 年第 2 期，第 229-230 页。
《高僧传》卷 1 本传写作“帛延，不知何人”。
《大唐内典录》，
《开元释教录》皆谓其为“西域人”。因姓
白，白和帛同字，故应为龟兹人。
233
唐代《开元释教录》的作者智升在帛延所译《首楞严经—后记》中将白延和帛延误判为一人。
127
231
232
Bo Shilimiduoluo
帛尸梨蜜多罗
Srimitrala
East Jin
Jianchu temple in 大 孔 雀 王 神 咒 經 (Mahamayuri
Jianye
Vidyarajni Sutra) 大灌顶神咒经 孔
雀王杂神咒234
By the above analysis in the table, in the third century, there were quite many
people from Kuci to translate scriptures in inland China, among whom there were royal
members, monks, lay group, etc. Liang Qichao concluded: “About the number of
people to inland China, in latter Han dynasty and Three States period, people from
Western Regions to inland China were most from 安息 Yue Zhi, 康居, etc.; in West
Jin and East Jin dynasties, most from Kuci and Kophen; in South and North period, half
from coutries in Tibetan area and half from India. In Sui and Tang period, Indian people
took up the large proportion, and there were also some people from the south”. 235
People from Kuci in West Jin and East Jin period came to translate scriptures were in
the largest number, from which it is clear to see the development situation of Buddhism
in Kuci.
Among the great monks to transmit Buddhism to inland China in early period,
those greatly influencing the development of inland Buddhism were not from India, but
佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) and Kumārajīva from Kuci. Although 佛图澄
(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) was not recorded as a translater, he made great
contribution to the transmission of Buddhism in early period in inland China. 佛图澄
(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha), as a great monk from Kuci, transmitted Buddhism in
Latter Zhao in the north and made deep influence on the later development of Buddhism
in China. Master Dao’an and Master Hui Yuan could be regarded as the continual of
such transmission. 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha)
successfully transmitted
Buddhism to crue Shi Le and Shi Hu. From 佛图澄’s transmission activities, it could
be seen that his transmission of Buddhism is mostly related with Kuci culture in
Western Regions.
In order to establish people’s faith in Buddhism, 佛 图 澄 (Fo Tucheng or
《高僧传》卷 1 有其本传。
（梁）释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 29-31
页。
235
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年 9 月版，第 112 页。
128
234
Buddhasimha) applied some methods to transmit Buddhism, such as 预测神咒疗病,
etc. Such methods could be easily seen in traditional methods in India and middle Asia,
which made Shi ruler in Zhao country easy to accept Buddhism. By 佛 图 澄 ’s
transmission, Buddhism developed extensively in the north, and the ruler Shi Hu
ordered: minority ethnic groups, if abandoning sexual misconduct and liking faith in
Buddhism, are all allowed to become Buddhists. From then on, minority ethnic groups
in Zhong Zhou all believed in Buddhism, so that there appeared “After 佛图澄(Fo
Tucheng or Buddhasimha) transmitted Buddhism, people mostly worshiped the Buddha
and built temples, even going forth”.236
Master Dao’an, as the disciple of 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha), took the
important status in the early development history of Chinese Buddhism. His Hinayana
thoughts had great inheriting relationship with 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha).
Master Dao’an went to Xiang Yang and then to Chang’an, who made great contribution
to the contemporary Buddhism transmission and scripture translation, etc. Master
Dao’an’s disciple called Hui Yuan also inherited the lineage of 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or
Buddhasimha). Among the great monks from Kuci, Kumārajīva brought more profound
influence, who Liang Qichao once commented: “For Nagarjuna’s doctrines such as
emptiness were most powerful in China, with Kumārajīva as the leading role, whose
contribution in Buddhist thoughts was very significant…Kumārajīva stayed in inland
China not long, but his influence was great and unconceivable. He had nearly three
thousand disciples, with Seng Rui, Dao Rong, Dao Sheng, Hui Guan as the most famous.
The solid foundation and systematic development of Buddhism started from
Kumārajīva”.237
From 佛图澄’s and Kumārajīva’s events, it could be seen that the pioneer for the
entry of Indian Mahayana Buddhism into inland China was Kuci.
According to M. Lowy’s study 勒威, some early Buddhist concepts were from
Kuci language. 238 Ji Xianlin considered that some words, such as “Buddha”,
“Maitreya”, etc., were translated from Tocharian language, instead of Inidan
language. 239 Such borrowing phenomena were very common in Chinese translated
（梁）释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：《高僧传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 246，352 页。
梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年，第 155-157 页。
238
（德）P. C. Bagchi, India and Central Asia, 柏林，1955 年，第 96, 106, 156, 104 页。
239
陈国光：
《释“和尚”—兼谈中印文化交流初期西域佛教的作用》
，
《西域研究》1995 年第 2 期，第 109
129
236
237
Buddhist scriptures. The deep relationship between Chinese language and Kuci
language properly illustrates the profound influence of Kuci Buddhism on inland China
and the contribution of Kuci Buddhists to the transmission of Buddhism to inland China.
Khotan, as the important town for Western Regions to accept Buddhism, also had
great influence in the transmission process of Buddhism to inland China. Mokchala 無
罗叉 was the great monk from Khotan. In the Cao Wei period (one country of Three
States period), after Zhu Shixing got Large Prajna Sutra 大品般若 in Khotan, he sent
his disciple called Fa Rao to bring the sutra back to Luo Yang. Fa Rao and Wu Luocha
were both from Khotan, who put the sutra in Shui Nan temple in Chen Liu Jun. In the
first first of Yuan Kang period (291), Mokchala 无罗叉 translated 放光般若 in twenty
fascicles.240 祇多罗 was from Khotan. In the 7th year of Tai Kang period in West Jin
dynasty, he brought Large Prajna Sutra 大品般若 to Chang’an, and later Dharma-rakṣa
竺法护 translated this sutra named 光赞般若 Sutra in ten fascicles. 祇多罗 also
translated many sutras, such as 菩萨十住經, 普门品经, 十地經, 普贤观經, 弥勒
所问本愿經, 如幻三昧經, 宝如来三宝經, etc.
In language, ancient Khotan language also greatly influenced inland China, such
as the word upadhyaya 和 尚 , also called 和 上 , which becomes the universal
designation of monks, and develops to Korea and Japan, etc. In north Song dynasty,
Master Zan Ning in his 宋高僧传—满月传 said that upadhyaya 和尚 in Sanskrit was
邬波陀耶, in Khotan called upadhyaya 和尚. From this, it could be seen clearly that
this word is not directly translated from Sanskrit, but derived from ancient Khotan
language. In ancient Shanshan 鄯善, there discovered 佉卢文 Kharoṣṭhī documents,
in which there were relevant recordes about upadhyaya 和尚.241
Early scripture translaters from Western Regions was represented by Dharma-
页。如佉卢文第 511 号关于参加浴佛仪式的祈愿辞就对“有权威的国王，长老及中小和尚”表示了敬意。
240
《大正藏》第 55 册，
《出三藏记集》卷 7，第 47 页下。
241
《浮屠与佛》
，
《再“浮屠”与“佛”》
，这两篇文章皆收入《季羡林文集》
，第七卷。陈国光：
《释“和尚”—兼
谈中印文化交流初期西域佛教的作用》
，
《西域研究》1995 年第 2 期，第 107 页。
130
rakṣa 竺法护, who was from Yue Zhi, moved to Dun Huang, and later Changed his
family name as Zhu 竺, called Fa Hu 法护. To see from the early translation history of
Chinese Buddhism, he should be the first monk who made the large scale translation
about Mahayana Buddhist scriptures, which brought essential influence on the later
development of inland Buddhism, whose storie were recorded in 出三藏记集 and
Biography of Great Monks.
Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 traveled to Western Regions, Dun Huang, Jiu Quan, Liang
Zhou, Chang’an, Luo Yang, etc., and took pains to translate scriptures for nearly fifty
years. According to 出三藏记集, he translated scriptures 154 ones in 309 fascicles in
total, with 95 still extant and 64 abscent. According to 历代三宝记, the number is
different, 210 scriptures with 394 fascicles in total. According to 开元释教录, he
translated 175 scriptures with 354 fascicles in total, still 74 scriptures with 177 fascicles
extant. It could be said that 竺法护 Dharma-rakṣa’s scripture translation surpassed the
quantity of any previous translator’s translation. Most of his translated scriptures
belonged to Mahayana doctrines, with a few Hinayana doctrines. His translations nearly
covered all popular scriptures in Western Regions, so Master Seng You in 出三藏记集
recorded: “The reason for the popular transmission of Buddhist scriptures in China was
due to 竺 法 护 Dharma-rakṣa’s efforts”. From this, it could be seen that the
development of Buddhism in Western Regions greatly influenced the development of
inland Buddhism.
From the perspective of Buddhist art, based on absorbing Indian Buddhist art,
Western Regions formed its own art specialty, to some degree remaining some original
characteristics. In the first century BCE, Buddhism was transmitted northward to Da
Xia, so that Greek art combined with Buddhism formed Gandhara art. Later, Gandhara
art was transmitted to Western Regions by crossing over Cong Ling 葱岭. Buddhist art
in Western Regions achieved unprecedented prosperity in Han, Wei and Jin periods,
which combined with foreign culture and formed characteristic style of Western
Regions. Along with the eastward transmission of Buddhism, inland grottoes and
painting art were influenced greatly. Early Buddhist art, such as Dun Huang grottoes,
Bing Ling temple grottoes, Yun Gang grottoes, etc., clearly had the characteristics of
131
statue wall painting art style in Western Regions. In Wei, Jin, South and North periods,
there came the peak development in the history of Chinese painting. In Dong Wu
country of Three States period, Cao Buxing 曹不兴 initialized the creation of Buddhist
art, who based on copying Buddhist painting models from India and Western Regions,
drew Buddhist wall paintings in the temple for a long period. In 太平广记, it recorded:
“One painter called Cao Buxing applied 5000 Chi long silk to draw an image, skillful
and fast, and finished instantly. Any inch of painting, such as head, face, foot or hand,
had no mistake, which was so difficult that no one could finish except Cao Buxing”. In
宣和画谱, it said that the great painter called Gu Kaizhi 顾恺之 in East Jin dynasty,
often painted the picture of Vimalakirti in Wa Guan temple. When he was drawing the
eyes, he said to the monk that in three days, viewers would offer millions of money,
and it really happened”. In 洛神赋图, it also applied the ink lining method, which
might be related with the painting style in Western Regions.242 For later painters, such
as Zhang Sengyou 张僧繇, Cao Zhongda 曹仲达, and Yang Zihua 杨子华, etc., they
to some degree directly or indirectly absorbed painting style and techniques in Western
Regions, and created famous paintings.
The above facts illustrate that ancient Western Regions not only one origin of
Chinese Buddhism, but also the essential function of anxis and bridge in the Buddhist
culture communication between China and India.
3.1.4 Seeking Dharma to the West in Wei and Jin Periods
In inland China, seeking dharma to the west started soon after the entry of
Buddhism into inland China. Emperor Ming in Han dynasty once sent Can Yin as envoy
to seek scriptures, while the first Chinese monk seeking dharma to the west should be
Zhu Shixing in Three States period, who reached Khotan in Western Regions. From
then on, monks from middle China continuously went to Western Regions. In North
Wei dynasty, Hui Sheng and Song Yun were sent to Western Regions as missionaries,
in whose record, it said: “From Mo Cheng 末城 westward, about 22 Li, there was Han
Mi Cheng 捍弥城 , where later generations built statues and towers in thousand,
decorated with banners and covers in ten thousand. In the banners, there wrote mostly
19th year of Tai He period, the second year of Jing Ming period, the second year of Yan
242
牛克诚：
《色彩的中国绘画》
，长沙：湖南美术出版社，2001 年，第 24 页。
132
Chang period. Only one banner was the period of Yao Xing”.243 Here it recorded that
there were ten thousands of banners in Khotan, half of which belonged Wei banners, so
it is clear to see the large number of inland monks to Khotan. By the initial statistics,
from Wei and Jin period to the north Song dynasty, which is the period of nearly one
thousand years when Indian Buddhism was gradually transmitted to China. As it is
recorded that dharma seekers from inland China to India were nearly 180 in quatity, but
most went to Western Regions by land, from which it could be seen that Western
Regions played the medium function in the Buddhist culture communication between
China and India.244
The following table is the great monks seeking dharma to the west in the period of
Kumārajīva.245
Name
Time
Buddhist activities
reference
th
昙充
15 year of In Kuci, requested dharma from She Mi, 《僧祐录》
（出三藏记集
Jian
Yuan such as Bhikkhuni Pratimoksa, Bhikkuni
Period
full ordination, ritual for two years from 卷 11）
accepting seats to accepting minor
events.
法领
By Master Hui Yuan’s order to cross over Biography of
Great
sand and snow, seeking scriptures for 17 Monks 6 fascicle;
years, then returned.
The
preface
of
Dharmaguptaka Vinaya
僧纯
392 CE
法显
智嚴
宝云
竺道曼
243
244
245
The first year With five people together, passed by Biography of
of Hong Shi Khotan, travelled over 30 countries in Monks fascicle 3.
period
Western Regions, returned by sea.
Great
The beginning Travelled
to
Kophen,
received Biography of
of
Long’an meditation, then returned to east land and Monks, fascicle 3
period
translated scriptures
Great
The beginning Travelled to Khotan and India with Fa Biography of
of
Long’an Xian and Zhi Yan, then returned to Monks, fascicle 3
period
Chang’an.
Great
15th year of Travelled to Kuci for Buddhist scriptures 《僧祐录》卷 11
Jian
Yuan
period
杨衔之（北魏）
：
《洛阳伽蓝记》
，周振甫译著，江苏教育出版社，2006 年，第 186 页。
参考梁启超：
《佛学研究十八篇》
，上海古籍出版社，2001 年，第 24 页。
参考陆庆夫：
《丝绸之路史地研究》
，兰州大学出版社，1999 年，第 247 页。
133
The sixth year With 15 monks, travelled to Western Biography of
of Hong Shi Regions, getting Sanskrit scriptures, then Monks fascicle 3.
period
to the south, translated Nivana Sutra
智猛
Great
Great
法勇（昙 The first year With 25 people, through west river to Biography of
of Yong Chu Gao Chang, to middle India and getting Monks, fascicle 3.
无竭） period
the sanskirt version 观音授记经. Then
returned to Guang Zhou by sea.
In the middle Traveled
慧览
昙学
Kophen,
accepted Biography
of
Great
of
Xuanshi meditation from one Bhikkhu. To Monks, fascicle 11
period
Khotan, and later in Jiankang to transmit
dharma
康法朗
道泰
to
At the end of Traveled to Western
Jin dynasty, scriptures, and returned
the beginning
of
Song
country
in
South dynasty
Regions
for Biography of
Great
Monks, fascicle 4.
In the middle To the right of Cong Ling, to all Biography of
Great
of
Yuanjia countries, got Sanskrit Vibhasa Sastra, Monks, fascicle 3.
period
returned to inland China
In the middle With eight people to seek scriptures. In 《僧祐录》卷 9 （贤愚
of
Yuanjia Khotan heard 贤 愚 经 , in Gaochang
period
经记）
compiled the sutra, and transmitted it to
inland China
Great
沮 渠 良 In the middle Travel to Khotan for dharma, from Biography of
of
Xuanshi Indian master to learn meditation, Monks, fascicle 2.
period
returned to West River and translated
声
scriptures
By analyzing the above table, in Wei and Jin period, most monks went to the west
for dharma, and chose Khotan in the south road, the reasons of which might be in the
following aspects.
Firstly, from the perspective of the roads to the west, in that period, the south road
was easier to achieve Kophen and India, etc. Comparatively, the north road was more
convenient to reach Kuci and even to the west of Cong Ling.
Secondly, the environment of Mahayana Buddhism in Khotan more possibly
attracted Chinese monks’ interest. In Sha Che, in the west of ancient Khotan, near Cong
134
Ling, there stored twelve disvisions of Mahayana scriptures in more than hundred
thousands of verses in the mountain. Zhu Shixing getting 放光般若, Zhi Faling getting
Avatamsaka Sutra, and Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 getting Mahaparinirvana Sutra were all
closely related with Khotan. By observing Chinese translated Mahayana scriptures, the
original versions transmitted from Khotan included Prajna section, Vaipulya section,
Tantric section, so Khotan was actually the source place of Mahayana scriptures in
inland China. 246 Kuci is another important town to influence inland Buddhism. No
matter 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) or Kumārajīva both were from Kuci.
From the aspect of the contributions to great monks’ dharma transmission, Kuci is
indeed the most important country in Western Regions.
Thirdly, there were often fighting phenomena among countries in the west, which
kept not good relationship with dynasties in middle China. However, Khotan in the
south road was relatively stable and united. As is mentioned above, in 捍弥城 Han Mi
city, there were banners in Yao Xing period and Wei country, which displayed the
recognition of countries in the south road to dynasties in middle China. The rebellion
of Kuci is also the historical fact, so there happened the west aggression to Kuci and
Yan Qi.
3.2 The Exploration about Context and Reasons for Kumārajīva
Coming to Inland China
3.2.1 The Development of Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism in Early Ancient
China
The earliest record about the transmission of Buddhism into inland China is about
2 BCE in West Han dynasty, but the transmission process is slow, the reasons of which
is not merely due to the development of traffic and Indian Buddhism, etc., but also
related with the background of Chinese local culture’s acceptance to Buddhism. Such
reasons all influenced the development of Chinese Buddhism in the early period, as
well as the understanding about Mahayana schools and Hinayana schools.
Before Kumārajīva came to inland China, there were not a few Buddhist scriptures
in inland China, both in Mahayana and Hinayana. In general, there were two main
陈国光：
《释“和尚”—兼谈中印文化交流初期西域佛教的作用》
，
《西域研究》1995 年第 2 期，第 107
页。
135
246
trends for the development of Chinese Buddhism: 安世高’s meditation thought and
prajna thought. However, early Chinese Buddhists did not separate them but accepted
them together.
Chinese monks’ unclear view on Mahayana and Hinayana could be known through
early Buddhist scripture translation. Prior to Master Dao’an, there did not appear
Mahayana and Hinayana. Until 384 CE, Master Dao’an in his The Preface of Vibhasa
毗婆沙序 and The Preface of Sutra of Ten Dharma Sentences’ Meaning 十法句义經
mentioned Hinayana, before which there were no relevant records about Hinayana in
any Chinese Buddhist works. It seemed that Chinese Buddhists did not know the
existence of Hinayana.247 Master Dao’an in contemporary period only treated agamas
as Hinayana and was not clear about the real difference between Mahayana and
Hinayana. In the Preface of Vibhasa 毗婆沙序, it said: “To make the preface to be
different from other sutras, with agamas as Hinayana”.248 In the Preface of Ten Dharma
Sentences’ Meaning, it said: “different from this method, there comes Hinayana, such
as four agamas, which is the contribution of Ananda”.249 In this sense, Master Dao’an
regarded that Ananda, after organizing complicated scriptures, treated four agamas as
Hinayana, rather than to understand through thought and faith.
In the meantime, meditation methods translated by 安世高 in the early period and
Sarvastivadin scriptures brought by Kophen monks were regarded as Mahayana
scriptures. For example, in the Preface of 安般守意經序, Kang Senghui considered
that Anabana belonged to Mahayana to save sentient beings from suffering flow. 250
Master Dao’an in the Preface of 阴持入經序, also regarded this sutra as “If one could
achieve verification, then he could eliminate three fetters, getting liberation in this life,
directly concordant with the truth. This was the boat of Mahayana and the path to
nirvana”.251 Master Hui Yuan considered Master Jue Xian’s translation of 修行方便
禅經 as “From 达摩多罗 and Buddhasena 佛大先, excellent monks from Western
Regions mostly practiced meditation and collected meditative materials in sutras, and
周伯勘：
《早期中国佛教的大乘小乘观—兼论道安译經在中国佛教史上的意义》
，
《国立台湾大学历史系
学报》第 16 期，1991 年 8 月出版，第 63 页。
248
道安：
《毗婆沙序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 10，大正藏第 55 册，第 73 页中。
249
道安：
《十法句义经序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 10，大正藏第 55 册，第 70 页上。
250
《出三藏记集》卷 6，大正藏第 55 册，第 743 页上
251
《出三藏记集》卷 6，大正藏第 55 册，第 44-45 页上
136
247
promoted Mahayana Buddhism”.252 周伯勘 analyzed that some records were regarded
as Hinayana while were regarded as Mahayana works in ealy China, which were
focused on meditation and sastra. From this, it could be seen that early Chinese
Buddhists’s ideas toward Mahayana and Hinayana, who were different from later
generations, and formed their own system.253
That is to say, before Kumārajīva came to Chang’an to translate scriptures,
Chinese Buddhist arena had confused knowledge about Mahayana and Hinayana
schools, and in Buddhist works, there never mentioned the difference between
Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines. Master Dao’an and Master Hui Yuan in
contemporary Buddhist arena, studied Mahayana prajna scriptures and emphasized
Abhidharma theories and Hinayana meditation methods. That is to say, they regarded
sutra, vinaya, and sastras transmitted to inland China as the entire unity, without the
notion of doctrine classification between Mahayana and Hinayana. Until Kumārajīva
transmitted Buddhism to inland China, such notion was gradually accepted by inland
monks. But such process was a little slow, even in South and North dynasties, many
great monks still did not pay attention to doctrine classification between Mahayana and
Hinayana.
There are many reasons or factors to result in the above situation in early Chinese
Buddhism, the most important ones of which are mainly three: the development of
Indian Buddhism itself, Chinese people’s acceptance to Indian Buddhism, and
problems about scripture translating monks.
Firstly, in the forming process of early Mahayana scriptures, there was no obvious
opposition to Hinayana thoughts, without heavy air of debate. For example, in prajna
sutras, there were no critiques or negations about Hinayana Buddhism, but in Lotus
Sutra, such doctrine classification appeared conspicuously, which happened later. Even
though the Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra) was translated, because there was
still no theoretical support in Buddhist philosophy, it was impossible to be accepted and
understood by people. Nagarjuna’s three treatises appeared in the middle of the third
century, and were not transmitted to inland China at that period and monks had no
chances to known such theories, so they were vague about concepts and theories in this
aspect.
Secondly, what Chinese monks at that period were interested were not debates and
differences between Mahayana and Hinayana schools. The contemporary development
background of Buddhism was under the entire air of metaphysic learning, so it is the
慧远：
《庐山出修行方便禅經統序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 9，大正藏第 65 册，第 66 页上，此經又名《达
摩多罗禅經》
。智升在《开元释教录》卷 20，大正藏第 55 册，第 696 页，列此经为小乘论。
253
周伯勘：
《早期中国佛教的大乘小乘观》
，
《文史哲学报》第 38 期，国立台湾大学文学院发行，1990 年
12 月出版，第 242 页。
137
252
necessity for the initial development of Chinese philosophy to borrow and combine
metaphysic learning and prajna theory. At this period, the popularity of prajna theory
and the appearance of six families and seven sects all properly illustrated this problem.
What Chinese people were interested was the cosmology thought in prajna theory,
which made the historical mergence between emptiness and nothingness. In the
meantime, they also emphasized Sarvastivadin meditation. Master Dao’an in 安般注
序 said: “Anabana means breath in and breath out, due to which the path is achievable,
and dependent on which, virtues abide in. Therefore, by focusing on breath in and out,
four meditations with concentration could be achieved”. 254 “Meditation focuses on
metaphysical state, and gradually to cessation and tranquility. When choosing the
method, just like a thorn in the hand, if forgetting such essence but eager to verify the
path, isn’t it also difficult?” 255 Master Hui Yuan also promoted 修 行 方 便 禅 經
translated by Jue Xian, and commented: “Subduing all activities to oneness but nonexistent. Penetrating all phenomena into formlessness but existent. Without thought and
action, but act anything, so that such meditation could expel disordered thoughts. If one
could enter into the subtleness, he can reach the essence of the mind”.256 According to
Zhou Bokan 周伯勘, this means: “Sarvastivadin meditation is cultivated through some
basic Buddhist concepts about cosmos and life, such as three realms, four noble truths,
five aggregates, six organs, six consciousness, twelve causes and conditions, etc., to
achieve liberation by understand the truth of the mentioned cosmos and life. This further
enriches theories of metaphysic ‘sitting forgetfulness’. Pratyutpanna Samadhi 般舟三
昧, which was realy combined with Mahayana emptiness, was ignored due to Chinese
Buddhists’ unclearness about the real meaning of prajna”.257
Thirdly, because monks who translated early Buddhist scriptures did not have
profound understanding about the difference between Mahayana and Hinayana, their
translated works could not accurately reflect the true aspect of contemporary thought
development of Indian Buddhism. From An Shigao 安世高, Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶, to
Zhi Qian 支谦, and to Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, there was no introduction about the
道安：
《安般注序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 6，大正藏第 55 册，第 43 页下。
出三藏记集》卷 6，大正藏第 55 册，第 43 页下。
256
慧远：
《庐山修行方便禅經》
，《出三藏记集》卷 9，大正藏第 55 册，第 65 页中。
257
周伯勘：
《早期中国佛教的大乘小乘观》
，
《文史哲学报》第 38 期，国立台湾大学文学院发行，1990 年
12 月出版，第 256 页。
138
254
255
thought difference between Mahayana and Hinayana schools. In the transitting process
of Buddhism, they were still unable to make distinction between the two systems, which
was directly related with their inability to grasp Mahayan and Hinayana doctrines. They
seemed not to further understand Mahayana Buddhism and did not clear about the
difference beween Mahayana and Hinayana schools. According to 平川彰 Hirakawa
Akira’s analysis, in the process of translating Buddhist scriptures into Chinese, many
previous translated scriptures did not have the classification of Mahayana, but the same
version translated in later period were classified into Mahayana, with no difference in
content. For example, 大乘入楞伽经 translated by Sikśananda 实叉难陀 in Tang
dynasty, but two previous versions translated by Gunabhadra 求 那 跋 陀 罗 and
Bodhiruci 菩 提 流 支 respectively were not classified as Mahayana. Many early
Mahayana scriptures were called Vaipulya, such as 大方等大集经, 大方等无想经,
etc. In Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), translated by Kumārajīva, there were
many so-called Mahayana sutras, which were replaced by Vaipulya sutras in Lotus
Sutra translated by Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护.258 It could be seen that in the translation
process of early Mahayana scriptures, there was no clear distinction between Mahayana
and Hinayana schools. In such situation, in 出三藏记集 compiled by Master Seng You
in Liang country (one country of south dynasty), he did not make classification
according to Mahayana and Hinayana tripitaka frame, which was done in this way in
众經目录 compiled by Fa Jing in Sui dynasty. Therefore, Fa Jing commented about 出
三藏记集: “Due to no distinction between Mahayana and Hinayana, treating them as
the similar, tripitaka were mixed together”.259
3.2.2 Early Development of Prajna Sutra Translation and Prajna Theories in Han,
Wei and West Jin Dynasties
From Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶 in the late period of East Han dynasty, translation
activities about prajna theores began. Later, by the efforts of Zhi Qian 支谦, Dharma-
258
259
平川彰：
《初期大乘佛教的研究》
，东京：春秋社，1968 年，第 60-62 页。
《众經目录》卷 7，大正藏第 55 册，第 148-149 页。
139
rakṣa 竺 法 护 , Kumārajīva 罗 什 , Xuan Zhuang 玄 奘 , etc., prajna sutras were
transmitted to inland China from India and Western Regions, among which, the more
influential translations included Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 道 行般若 by
Lokakṣema, 放光般若 by Mokchala 无罗叉, 光赞般若 by Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护,
and 金刚般若 by Kumārajīva, while Mahaprajna-paramita-sutra 大品般若 by Xuan
Zhuang 玄奘 nearly covered all prajna scriptures. In addition, there were other prajna
sutras, such as 文殊说般若 by 曼陀罗仙 in Liang coutry (one country in South
dynasty), 大明度无极經 by 支谦, and 胜天王般若 by 月婆首那. Prajna sutras had
profound influence and meaning to the development of Chinese Buddhism.
Prajna was translated as wisdom in English, and 智慧 in Chinese, which in
Mahayana theory means that only by cultivating wisdom, could people achieve nirvana.
Lű Cheng 吕澂 said: “Prajna means emptiness in nature in the objective aspect while
means great wisdom in the subjective aspect, both of which comined together, there
formed emptiness insight or contemplation”.260
The development of prajna theory in China is a cirtuitous process, which is closely
related with the universal development of Chinese Buddhism. The earliest Chinese
version of prajna sutras is Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 道行般若经 translated
by Lokakṣema and 竺佛朔 in the second year of Guanghe period of Emperor Ling in
East Han dynasty (179 CE). Due to initial translation, there were some mistakes
inevitably, which were noticed by 支谦 and he re-translated this sutra, named 大明
度无极經. Zhi Mindu 支愍度 in 合首楞严经记 made some records about this aspect:
“One Buddhist called Zhi Qian 支谦 or 支越 also translated this sutra, who might think
there were many foreign pronuncitations by previous translator, so re-translated this
sutra. The same points remained while the different points were deleted, so this version
in most versions was the simplest with fewest foreign pronunciations, and popular in
that period over the previous fixed version”.261 Although some inaccurate words and
260
261
吕澂：
《中国佛学源流略讲》
，中华书局，1979 年版，第 46 页。
《出三藏记集》卷 7《合首楞严经记》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 49 页。
140
concepts in Lokakṣema’s translated version were corrected, accurate understanding
about the original text was still impossible to achieve, so there came the travel by Zhu
Shixing to Khotan for original Sanskrit version. Master Dao’an in 放光般若经序 said:
“Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 道行般若经 was composed by copying ninety
chapters of the Buddha’s teaching by a foreign Buddhist, who came to inland China in
the period of Emperor Ling, and translated the sutra into Chinese. The translation
followed the essence of the Buddha’s teaching, without linguistic decoration but
transliterating the sacred teaching, by oral transmission with some difference in
pronunciation of different customs, thus unable to understand the essence if not
understanding the foreign pronunciation. Therefore, when Chinese Buddhists discussed
about this sutra, there were often some obstacles, which were noticed by Zhu Shixing
and he sought for original version in Khotan. Zhu Shixing sent the original version to
仓垣, which was translated called 放光般若 prajna”.262
The Khotan version obtained by Zhu Shixing was translated by Mokchala 无罗叉
and 竺法兰 in 291, with 放光 chapter as the initial chapter, so it was named as 放光
般若经, ninety chapters in all. 放光般若经 and 道行般若经 are not only different in
structure but also different in nature, with 放光般若 as the more popular translated
version. In fact, Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 in 286 had translated 光赞般若经, earlier than
放光般若经, both of which were actually different translations of the same original
version. Master Dao’an made study on both translated versions: “放光般若经 and 光
赞般若经 were different translations of the same original version, both from Khotan.
光赞般若经 was brought to inland China by one Khotan monk called 祇多罗 in the
seventh year of Taikang period. Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 translated this sutra in 25th
November of the same year. 放光般若经 was brought to Luo Yang in the third year of
Taikang by Ru Tan, a disciple of Zhu Shixing remained in Khotan. In May of the first
《出三藏记集》卷 7《道行經序第一》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 47 页。朱士行的西行求法的原因也见于僧
祐的《出三藏记集》卷 13《朱士行传》和慧皎的《高僧传》卷 4《朱士行传》
。
141
262
year of Yuankang period, this sutra was translated. In this sense, 放光般若经 came to
inland China four years earlier than 光赞般若经, but was translated nine years later
than 光赞般若经. 放光般若经 was translated by Mokchala 无罗叉 and 竺叔兰, with
the former reading the sutra in foreign language and the latter translating into
Chinese”.263
In fact, Master Dao’an did not get 光赞般若经 until the first year of Taiyuan
period (376). By comparing 光赞般若经 with 放光般若经, Master Dao’an considered
that 放光般若经 was translated in the simple manner with not too many words by
deleting repetition, so it was easy to read; but due to large deletion, some contents were
lost. About the translation of 光赞般若经, Master Dao’an said that the language
followed Indian style, without decoration, subtle and complicated expression beyond
normal articles. This sutra applied direct translation and followed the original text, often
not consistent with Chinese, too abstruse and difficult to read. In this sense, both
versions have their own advantages but still not satisfactory.
By the above analysis, it could be seen that prajna sutra in East Han period was
different from that in West Jin period in content, which reflected the gradual perfecting
process for prajna sutras even in India as the source place. Because Nagarjuna’s
Madhyamaka theory was formed in 250 or so, early translters in China could not be
able to contact such Mahayana philosophy as the theoretic support, so although in
inland China there were translated versions of prajna sutras, people were still unable to
understand and grasp these sutras. Buddhism in China at the arising stage together with
non-theory-support prajna theory, only had to depend on Chinese local culture and
philosophy to be understood and developed. Therefore, there appeared Meaning-match
Buddhism (Geyi Buddhism) in early period and later Six Families and Seven Sects 六
家七宗.
In West Han period, sutra learning once took the dominant status, but to East Han
period, it gradually became stereotyped and lost vigor. In Wei and Jin period,
Metaphysic learning arose with the aim to save Chinese philosophy but finally vague
and powerless. In the meantime, due to wars and battles year after year, the ordinary
populace and even upper class people aroused the thought of religious need. All these
263
《合放光光赞随略解序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 7，大正藏第 55 册，第 48 页上。
142
provided conditions for the transmission and development of Buddhism in inland China.
Lokakṣema’s translation of Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra 道行般若经 was nearly
unanimous with the popularity of Laozi at the end of Han dynasty. In Three States
period, study on prajna sutra had become an independent theory, called prajna theory,
which was the beginning for Buddhism to enter into upper society in the form of pure
theory. Until West Jin and East Jin period, prajna theory constantly was the explicit
theory in Buddhism. Traveling for monks and elites often took prajna theory as the
condition. Royal families and literati nearly all studied prajna sutras, which had become
the important materials for their metaphysical talks. Sun Chuo 孙绰 in East Jin dynasty
composed 道贤论, comparing seven Taoists with seven virtuous men, and thus made
monks and elites, prajna theory and metaphysical learning well present each other. In
世说新语 and 高僧传, it recorded that monks’ study content not only included Buddhist
scriptures but also included Confucian and Taoist works. Their biggest characteristic is
to apply Buddhism to interpret metaphysical learning and vice verse, as well as to
cultivate both internal and external. Master Dao’an concluded: “Because Taoist
teaching and practice were similar with that in Vaipulya sutras, so it was easy to promote
Buddhism by such similar trend”.264 Master Hui Yuan also considered: “Now by way
of Buddhist and non-Buddhist methods to develop Buddhism, it is clear to know that
their inside principles must be the same”.265
The initial combination between Buddhism and Metaphysical theory resulted in
Meaning-match (Geyi) Buddhism, which was to apply Chinese traditional Confucian
and Taoist concepts to interpret Buddhist concepts and to understand Buddhist doctrines,
with the aim to integrate Chinese and Indian thoughts and to eliminate obtacles in
communication. Because both prajna theory and Metaphysical theory belonged to
ontology as philosophical thinking, so the major problems solved by Geyi Buddhism
were about existence and non-existence, origin and branch, material form and mind,
etc. Influenced by the thinking style of Geyi Buddhism, Metaphysical theory and
Buddhist theory mixed together, so that Buddhist philosophy became vague and impure,
thus there appeared different schools with different prajna theory interpretations. The
so-called Six Families and Seven Sects just appeared under such background, among
which the most influencial schools included Original Nothing Sect (本无宗), 即色宗,
and 心无宗. Although these three schools advocated for their own theories as authentic,
264
265
1 道安：
《毗奈耶序》
，
《大正藏》第 24 册，第 851 页上。
2 慧远：
《三报论》
，
《弘明集》卷五，
《大正藏》第 52 册，第 34 页中。
143
they were all influenced by metaphysical thoughts and methods, thus unable to clearly
interpret the essence of Indian prajna theory, about which Master Seng Zhao in 不真
空论 made precise critiques.
No matter Master Dao’an’s Original Nothing theory or 竺法深 Zhu Fashen’s
Original Nothing theory both derived from Wang Bi’s Original Nothing theory. They
all ascribed the source of things to nothingness, which was obviously influenced by
contemporary traditional culture, such as Taoist theory. Master Dao’an’s disciple
Master Hui Yuan also said: “The nature of Original Nothing is called dharma nature”,
who considered dharma nature as inherent nothingness.266 This point was consistent
with 王弼 Wang Bi’s theory of nothingness.
即色宗 with Zhi Daolin 支道林 as the representative claimed that form was empty.
心无宗 claimed that the mind was empty but things were not empty. They were both
influenced by metaphysical thinking.
3.2.3 Master Dao’an’s Doubt about Chinese Buddhism
Although Master Dao’an still did not get separate from Geyi thought, but his
reforming thought and problems put forward provided direction and path for the further
development of Chinese Buddhism. Master Dao’an later commented about Geyi “The
previous old Geyi mostly disobeyed the principle in theory”.267 Master Dao’an had
realized that Buddhism was influenced by metaphysical theory, and took pains to get
separate from Geyi’s mistakes and pursued the authentic thought and content of Indian
Buddhism, which for Chinese Buddhism was undoubtedly one great breakthrough.
Master Dao’an’s disciple Master Seng Rui said: “In China, although some sutras were
translated, there were little expressions about empty of mind, but many words in the
existence of gods. Some sastras, such as Madhyamaka Sastra and Hundred Treatise,
had not come to China, and in addition, there was no one able to correct some comments,
due to both of which some previous scholars made study on thought extensively and
decisively intended to get verification from Maitreya”.268
The above expression implies that Master Dao’an could not be able to get correct
translated scriptures, so he had doubt about the non-existence in nature and the
existence of gods, and decided to ask Maitreya, which was one important reason for
266
267
268
1 慧远：
《大智论钞序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 10，大正藏第 55 册，第 75 页中。
2《高僧传》卷 5，中华书局，1992 年版，第 195 页。
3《出三藏记集》卷 8，大正藏第 55 册，第 59 页上。
144
Master Dao’an’s faith in Maitreya.
Firstly, Master Dao’an invited many monks from Kophen and Western Regions to
translated scriptures in Chang’an. After Master Dao’an was invited by Fu Jian 苻坚 to
Chang’an, Master Dao’an paid attention to scripture translation, and invited some
foreign scholars to translate scriptures, such as 僧伽跋澄 僧伽提婆 昙摩难提, etc.
He himself also took part in the translation of some scriptures, such as agamas, Vibhasa,
etc. Buddhists in early China inevitably studied and discussed some Sarvastivadin
works because they did not understand that one reason for the schism of Buddhist
schools was due to difference in organization and interpretation of dharma characters.
Master Seng Rui in 毘摩罗诘提经义序 said: “Before 提婆, there were no monks
from India to make scripture translation”.269 Therefore, these great monks were highly
valued by Master Dao’an.
Secondly, Master Dao’an also emphasized scripture translation, and himself took
part in translation and improved translation techniques, which might be against Indian
original thoughts. For example, when Dao Xian translated 比丘大戒, Master Dao’an
considered that words of previous versions were complicated and difficult to understand
the meaning, so the same case of new translations, so Dao Xian asked Changhui to
delete some repetition. Changhui said that such deletion should not be made, because
precepts valued rituals and emphasized previous regulation, so it should be cautious to
make deletion, and vinaya lineage was transmitted generation by generation, so with
one word against the original teaching, it might be dangerous, so ought not to be
changed. Master Dao’an also thought so and said: “Therefore, follow the Sanskrit text,
with words expression in the inversed manner only”.270 In the translation of 上座部
scriptures, Master Dao’an took the advice of Zhao Zheng 赵政: “Previous translaters
mostly regarded ethnic group languages as local accents and tried to change them to
follow customs in inland China, which was not acceptable. Why? People from minority
ethnic groups did not care about accents but focused on the essence of scriptures, why
people in inland China looked down upon textual expression? Therefore, textual
expression should not be changed. Scripture expression had its source, and once
changed, it was the translaters’ faults if unable to express the meaning”.271
Master Dao’an had realized that if making study on prajna without separate from
269
270
271
4《出三藏记集》卷 8，大正藏第 55 册，第 59 页上。
1《比丘大戒序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 11，大正藏第 55 册，第 80 页中。
2《毗婆沙序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 10，大正藏第 55 册，第 73 页下。
145
metaphysical mode, it was impossible to fundamentally understand Indian Buddhist
theories, so he emphasized that scripture translation must maintain the original style.
After one scripture translation, he would make sure the pronunciation and words, and
check the textual 文旬. 272 This is different from previous translation which only
valued correction and writing. Master Dao’an had realized that only by correctly
grasping Buddhist language and basic concepts, Chinese Buddhism could break
through the Geyi dilemma. Such cognitive realization deeply influenced later Buddhists.
From the beginning of the fifth century, there were many Chinese Buddhists
professional in Buddhist original languages. For example, among Kumārajīva’s
disciples, some were skillful in Indian language, who took part in scripture translation
and made fundamental changes for Chinese Buddhism. Until then, Chinese Buddhists
broke through the restricted local thoughts and formally understood Buddhist doctrines.
3.2.4 Former and Latter Qin Authorities’ Worship to Buddhism
In the period of Wei, Jin, South and North dynasties, Buddhism in China developed
fast and a lot of scriptures came to middle China. From upper ruling class to ordinary
populace, Buddhism was welcome and began to prosper. Kumārajīva’s inland
transmission of Buddhism was closely related with political development in middle
China. Du Jiwen 杜继文 once said: “The arising of Buddhism in Han and Wei period
was mainly stimulated by political crisis and culture crisis, but after West Jin and East
Jin, it was more promoted by ethnic group relationship, especially for five minority
ethnic groups’ entry into middle China. In this period, the national relationship was
complicated, with many conflicts, and only Buddhism became the important bridge to
connect different ethnic groups freely”.273 Political authority in East Jin dynasty was
in favor of the south area, and paid attention to southward development of Buddhism.
Most minority ethnic groups believed in Buddhism and finally elevated the historical
development of Buddhism to the peak.
It is certain that not all ethnic groups believed in Buddhism, but in contemporary
powerful countries, they all believed in Buddhism. For example, Shi Hu, Shi Le and Fo
Tucheng in latter Zhao country; Fu Jian and Master Dao’an in former Qin country; Yao
Xing and Kumārajīva in latter Qin country; Juqu Mengxun 渠 沮 蒙 逊 and
Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 in north Liang country, and even including north Wei country,
3《出三藏记集》卷 15，
《道安传》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 109 页上。
4 杜继文：
《中国佛教的多民族性与诸宗派的个性》
，中国社会科学出版社，2008 年 7 月版，第 7, 11
页。
146
272
273
etc. Why did so many political rulers believe in Buddhism? Shi Hu wrote in a document
that it was said that Buddha was a foregn god and should not be worshiped by the king
in China, but he thought he was born in the boundary near middle China and should
worship the Buddha. Due to this, many scholars judged that Shi Hu believed in
Buddhism, which might be discussed further.274 Lű Chunsheng 吕春盛 concluded that
the reasons that kings in ethnic groups actively promoted Buddhism included kings’
personal belief as well as political need. That is to say, Buddhism played important
function in dominating policies of ethnic groups, including providing reasonable
theories for political authority, providing referent policies for rulers, maintaining
people’s emotion in disordered days, providing culture policies to compete with
Chinese culture, etc. In addition, long time dominion by ethnic groups made noth China
area changed from single Chinese culture into multiple sytle society combined with
ethnic groups and Chinese cultures. In such colorful and inclusive society, Buddhism
was easier to extend to the entire society.275
The king of Former Qin was called Fu Jian, whose belief in Buddhism had the political
color, whose final aim was for his political authority. In his view, Master Dao’an and
Kumārajīva were not only great monks, but also magic instruments to control people’s
minds, so his belief in Buddhism had the political characteristics. Fu Jian once said:
“Master Dao’an in Xiang Yang was a magic instrument and I should get him to help
me”.276 After getting the help of Master Dao’an, Fu Jian followed his advice and let
him participated military affairs, so that scholars had doubt about anything inside or
outside Buddhism all asked Master Dao’an, so it was said that if not learning from
Master Dao’an, their learning would not be correct and middle. In 晋书—苻坚载记, it
recorded detailedly about the events between Master Dao’an and Fu Jian.277
By Master Dao’an’s continuous request, Fu Jian was full of respect to Kumārajīva.
In Biography of Great Monks, it said that when Fu Jian heard about Kumārajīva in
Western Regions, and sent missionaries to invit him. In 十六国春秋—前秦录, it
regarded that there would be a sainted sage coming to China, and who can obtain him
will succeed and prosper. When Fu Jian 苻坚 decided to invade to the west, he told Lű
Guang 吕光: “The king should follow the heaven path to manage the country, with
1 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1998 年，第 134 页。萨孟武：
《南北朝佛教流
行的原因》
，收于《中国佛教史论集》
，台北：大乘文化出版社，民国六十六年，第 134-151 页。
275
2 吕春盛：
《五胡政权与佛教发展的关系》
，
《国立台湾大学历史学系学报》
，第 181 页。
276
3《高僧传》卷 5，中华书局，1992 年版，第 181 页。
277
4 房玄龄等《晋书》
，北京：中华书局，1974 年，第 2913 页。
147
274
loving sentient beings as the essence, how could the king desire for the land by
conquesting others? Of course not, because the king holds the heaven path in mind. I
heard that in the west there was one sage called Kumārajīva, who deeply penetrated
into dharma characters and did well in non-Buddhist skills, such as Yin and Yang theory,
and became the patriarch of later generations, so I am eager to want him. The virtuous
and wise sage is the great treasure of a country. If conquering Kuci successfully, we
should offer cities to Kumārajīva”.278 These historical materials fully illustrate that one
important aim of Fu Jian’s conquest to the west is to invite Kumārajīva.
The founder of Latter Qin was Yao Chang 姚苌, who also believed in Buddhism
and his son Yao Xing 姚兴 also supported Buddhism, thus making Chang’an become
the north center of contemporary Chinese Buddhism. Yao Xing was very pleasant after
inviting Kumārajīva to Chang’an. As it is recorded: “Yao Xing treated Kumārajīva as
polite as the national master, which displayed Yao Xing’s supreme appreciation to
Kumārajīva. When talking about dharma, Kumārajīva could preach nearly for the whole
day; when studied the dharma, he could forget tiredness for years”.279 From this, it
could be seen that Buddhism could not only stabilize people’s spiritual life, but could
also meet the ruling class’ need. In general, ethnic groups’ faith and application of
Buddhism made rulers highlight great monks and even start the battle for one great
monk. From Master Dao’an to Kumārajīva, and to Dharmakṣema 昙无谶, it had to say
that such phenomena of fighting for great monks were no longer occasional, and
Kumārajīva coming to Chang’an was also reasonable.
3.2.5 Re-exploration about the Historical Truth of Kumārajīva’s Coming to Inland
China
In the north, Fu Jian, the leader of Di 氐 ethnic group in 357, established Former
Qin. He was an ambitious king, not only unifying most areas in the north, but also
intending to defeat East Jin to unify middle China. What was Fu Jian’s attitude to
Western Regions? In fact, before attacking East Jin, he already had intention and action
to manage Western Regions. In fascicle 95 of Jin Shu 晋书, ir recorded: “Missionaries
were sent to Western Regions and they praised Fu Jian’s power and virtue, and granted
kings in Western Regions with banners, so there were more than ten countries offering
278
279
5《高僧传》卷 2，中华书局，1992 年版，第 49, 50 页。
6《高僧传》卷 2，
《鸠摩罗什传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 52 页。
148
gifts to Fu Jian”.280
In September of the 18th year of Jian Yuan period, Fu Jian sent Lű Guang with 70,
000 soldiers to attack Western Regions. In fascicle 114 of Jin Shu, it recorded: “Fu Jian
appointed Lű Guang as the head missionary with General Jiang Fei and Peng Huang,
and 70, 000 soldiers to attack Western Regions”. 281 In fascicle 122 of Jin Shu, it
recorded: “After Fu Jian conquested Shandong, with powerful military force, so he
intended to conquest Western Regions. Therefore, he sent Lű Guang as Envoy, Jiangfei,
Penghuang, Dujin, Kangsheng as General and 70, 000 soldiers to attack Western
Regions, with Dongfang from Longxi, Guobao from Fengsa, Jiaqian from Wuwei,
Yangying from Hongnong as associate General”.282 The attack was successful due to
the plotted guidance from internal Western Regions, and the military reached Kuci. In
fascicle 122 of Jin Shu, it recorded detailedly about the war affairs: “King Baichun of
Kuci collected jewels and fled, with over thirty subordinated countries surrendering, so
Lű Guang entered their cities”.283 Countries in Western Regions came to subject to Fu
Jian from far away.
One reason of this battle was related with the great monk Kumārajīva in Kuci.
Many scholars think that this is a religious war, a war arising due to a great monk never
happening in Chinese history. It is not deniable to recognize that the aim of the war was
to break through the communication with Western Regions, but under that environment,
such thought was not strong.
Prior to the war, countries in Western Regions did not present traces of betrayal
against middle China. When Fu Jian sent Liang Xi to Western Regions, they all praised
Fu Jian’s virtues, with over ten countries offering gifts to Fu Jian. In fascicle 13 of Jin
Shu, it recorded: “Da Wan 大宛 country offered five hundred kinds of precious horses,
including ferghana horse(汗血), red-neck-hair horse(朱鬣), five-color horse 五色,
phoenix-chest horse 凤膺, scaly-body horse 麟身, etc. Fu Jian said: I recalled that in
Chinese articles, there mentioned the horse who could return to homeland, which was
praised by people. Now the offered horses should be sent back, so as to memorize
previous kings and to follow them. Therefore, Fu Jian ordered to write the poem of
sending back horses, to illustrate no desire to have horses. At that period, people
regarded this as virtuous as previous kings, so there were over four hundred people to
1 见《资治通鉴》卷 13，中华书局点校本，第 443 页。
2《晋书》卷 114《苻坚载记下》
，中华书局点校本，2911 页。
《资治通鉴》记载为“秦王以骁骑吕光为
使持节，都督西域征讨诸军事，与凌江将军姜飞，轻车将军彭晃，将军杜进，康盛等总兵十万，铁骑五
千，以讨西域”。见卷 104，中华书局点校本，第 3301 页。
282
3《晋书》卷 122《吕光载记下》
，中华书局点校本，第 3054 页。
283
4《十六国春秋辑补—后凉录》
149
280
281
offer poems”. It also recorded: “The king of Shanshan and the king of Che Shiqianbu
came to Fu Jian. Da Wan offered horses, Su Shen offered arrows 楛矢, India offered
asbestos cloth 火浣布, Kang Ju, Yu Tian and other countries (62 kings) all offered gifts”.
When Che Shiqianbu king and Shanshan king requested to offer gifts each year,
Fu Jian did not agree due to the distant travel from Western Regions, but agree to offer
gifts every three years, and to pay a visit every nine years, which was made as a lasting
rule. When Fu Jian saw off LűGuang, he said: “Western Regions are wild and barbarian
without polite rites. You lead army to subdue them to show the power of China and guid
them with moral methods, so do not conduct too much military force with cruelty and
aggression”.284 This seems to just imply Fu Jian’s thought to show China’s power and
to conquest Western Regions, rather than severe and extreme cruel measures.
It had to recognize that Fu Jian actually has some Buddhist consideration involved
in this battle. Master Dao’an held admiration for Kumārajīva for a long time, as it is
said: “Master Dao’an previously heard that Kumārajīva was in Western Regions, and
intended to discuss dharma with him, and often advised Fu Jian to invite him”. Master
Seng She 僧涉 was a monk from Western Regions. When in dry season, Fu Jian often
invited him to pray for rain by mantra. 285 In Fu Jian’s mind, Master Dao’an and
Kumārajīva were not only great monks but also elites to assist the management of the
country, from which it is clear to see the important status of Kumārajīva in Fu Jian’s
mind.
To get Kumārajīva was not the only aim of Fu Jian’s conquest to Western Regions,
but the important aim. However, history was often not so simple, which was a
composite combined with complicated factors. It is noticeable that in the process of
westward conquest, the major attacking targets were Kuci and Yanqi, and military
forces were not used in south road countries and other north road countries.286 After
Lű Guang defeated Kuci, he got Kumārajīva. It is also discovered that Fu Jian’s
decision to conquest Western Regions was also related with the advice of 车师前部
Che Shiqianbu King and 鄯善 Shanshan King. In fascicle 114 of Jin Shu, it recorded:
“Che Shiqianbu King called 弥寘 and Shanshan King called 休密驮 visited Fu Jian
284
1《晋书》卷 114《苻坚下》
2《晋书》卷 95：僧涉者，西域人也，不知何姓。少为沙门，苻坚时入长安。虚静服气，不食五谷，日
能行五百里，言未然之事，验若指掌。能以秘咒下神龙，每早，坚常使之咒龙请雨。俄而龙下钵中，天辙
大雨，坚及群臣就钵观之。卒于长安。后大旱移时，苻坚叹曰：“涉公若在，岂忧此乎！”
286
3《出三藏记集》
，
《高僧传》和《晋书》皆有记载。“十九年，即遣骁骑将军吕光将宾伐龟兹及焉耆诸
国”。见苏晋仁，萧链子点校：
《出三藏记集》
，中华书局，2000 年，第 532 页。
150
285
and Fu Jian offered them with official clothes…弥寘 and others requested: although
Da Wan and other countries offered gifts, their loyalty was not pure, so please set
administration 都护 in their countries. If Your Excellency send forces to the west, we
are pleasant to be the guide…There were many military generals from different
countries as the guide for Lű Guang, such as envoys and generals from 鄯善 Shanshan,
散骑 Sanqi, 宁西 Ningxi, 车师前部 Che Shiqianbu, and 平西 Pingxi, etc., as well as
Du Hu of Western Regions”.
In 资治通鉴(Zīzhì Tōngjiàn, A Mirror for the Wise Ruler or Comprehensive
Mirror for Aid in Government), it recorded: “In September of the 18th year of Jian Yuan
period, Che Shiqianbu King and Shanshan King went to Qin and requested to be the
guide to conquest some coutries in Western Regions, and to set up 都护 like Han
dynasty to manage Western Regions”.287 In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded:
“When Fu Jian lived in Guangzhong, Che Shiqianbu King288 and the brother of Kuci
king visited Fu Jian. They met Fu Jian and said that there were many precious treasures
in Western Regions and should sent forces to stabilize that area, and they wish to give
inside assistance…In Febury of the 17th year (381), the two kings requested again. In
September of 18th year (382), Fu Jian sent Lű Guang and other military generals with
70, 000 soldiers to attack Western Regions, including Kuci and Wu Qi,289 etc.
Why did Che Shiqianbu king advise Fu Jian to attack the West many times? What
was the relationship between them? Especially for Kuci king’s brother, he came to
advise the westward attack, too? Why did Che Shiqianbu’s national master also advise
to get the Buddha’s image and Kumārajīva? Is it really true that they did not benefit
people in Kuci? By the following analysis, the answer could be clear.
In fascicle 95 of Jin Shu, it recorded: “There would be two foreign kings visiting
to Fu Jian, one back and one dead here. Truly, Shanshan king and Che Shiqianbu king
visited Fu Jian. On the way back to the west, Shanshan king died in Gu Zang 姑臧”.
In Han dynasty, Kuci was small and weak, but in Wei and Jin period, it developed
fast and became a great country in Western Regions. In fascicle 30 of Wei Shu, it
4《资治通鉴》卷 104，中华书局点校本，3301 页。
5 前部，古地名，全称车师前部。
《史记》称车师为姑师。
《汉书—西域传》称：“车师前国，王治交河
城。去长安八千一百五十里，西南至都护治所八千百七里”，包括今吐鲁番地区一带，交河故城即其王都
城所在处。
289
1 乌耆，即焉耆，位于天山以南，塔里木盆地以北，开都河流经境内。
《汉书—西域传》称：“焉耆国，
王治员渠城，去长安七千三百里。西南至都护治所四百里。” 在今焉耆回族自治县，学界多以焉耆县四十
里城子古城为其都城员渠城遗址。
151
287
288
recorded: “From the middle road to West Regions, countries such as 尉梨, 危须, 山
王 all belonged to Yan Qi; counties such as 姑墨, 温宿, and 尉头 all belonged to
Kuci. Countries such as Zhenzhong 桢中, Shache 莎车, Jieshi 竭石, Qusha 渠沙, Xiye
西夜, Yinai 依耐, Manli 满梨, Yiruo 亿若, Yuling 榆令, Sundu 损毒, Xiuxiu 休修,
and Qin 琴 all belonged to Shu Le”.
After West Han and East Han dynasties, middle China gradually lost control of
Western Regions, and Che Shi country also lost the priority of Han adimistrative
location of 戍己校尉. Che Shi was close to Yan Qi, the former at the contemporary
time had be submitted to the latter, the conflict between which were obvious. Kuci at
that period depended on advantageous natural environment and the axis status of Silk
Road, quickly became the great economic country in Western Regions. In that
competitive environment, Kuci stepped on the path of imperialism. Although this does
not appear in orthodox historical materials, it could be tracked in Buddhist history.
In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that Kumārajīva said in Sha Le country
and Wen Su country: “In Sha Le country, there was a monk called Xi Jian, who said to
the king: Kumārajīva, though a samana, should not be looked down upon, and Your
Excellency should invite him to preach dharma. There would be two advantages: monks
in our country feel ashame of their behavior; Kuci king would come to establish good
relationship with us. Sha Le king agreed and invited Kumārajīva to preach dharma
called 转法轮經. Kuci king really sent envoy to show good relationship…Kumārajīva
was well-known all around. Kuci king personally went to Wen Su country and welcome
Kumārajīva back to Kuci, preaching all dharma and monks from all around respected
him”.
No matter Sha Le or Wen Su, both showed good relationship to Kuci in different
manners, so the status of Kuci in Western Regions was powerful. “Even when
Kumārajīva preached Mahayana doctrines, Kuci king made a golden-lion seat for
him…Countries in Western Regions all admired Kumārajīva’s greatness. When dharma
preaching each year, they would kneel down aside the seat to invite Kumārajīva
stepping onto the seat crossing their backs. It is clear to see their high value on
Kumārajīva”.290 Countries in Western Regions all followed Kuci’s such arrangement.
The contemporary Kuci king called Bo Chun (Bai Chun) was occasionally mentioned
in Chinese historical literature. The Kuci palace was as splendid as Chang’an, people
290
1 汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 48-49 页。
152
living in rich life: luxious and making offering, wine storage in thousands of tins (斛
hu, a unit in ancient times). When Lű Guang defeated Kuci and returned with camels
in over 20, 000 heads, precious jewels, unique skills, rare animals in over one thousand,
and horses in over 10, 000 heads.291 Such richness with ambition made other coutries
envy and dissatisfied. They had to depend on middle China to protect themselves. In
the meantime, inside Kuci, there were also political fights, which were mixed not only
with other coutries’s conflicts but accompanied a religious fight. The opposite side was
just Kuci king’s brother Bo Zhen 帛震, who cooperated with other countries and made
use of religious conflicts to rob the king throne.
In Jin Shu 晋书—吕光载记, it recorded specific war situation of attacking Kuci.
At last, Kuci king Bo Chun fled away, whose brother Bo Zhen became the new king.
Bo Zhen once advised Fu Jian to attack Kuci, who was against Kuci king Bo Chun.
Such conflict inside Kuci was not recorded in the orthodox historical literature, but was
implied in Biography of Great Monks: Kumārajīva’s mother left for Indi and said to
Kuci king that Kuci soon would decline, who went to India and verified Anāgāmin.
Kumārajīva’s mother had observed such dangerous situation, whose words
aroused infinite presumptions from later generations. Shang Yongqi analyzed: “In the
third century and the fourth century, Kuci was prosperous, so Kumārajīva’s mother’s
words seemed non-reasonable. It might also be possible for Kumārajīva’s mother to
feel the political change in ouside and inside situations. About the outside situation,
Qian Liang Zhang authority in Western Regions changed kings frequently since Zhang
Chonghua died in 353, and had no power to manage western coutries. About the inside
situation, Kuci king Bo Chun possibly had the trace of imperialism.292
Lű Guang’s conquest to the west was successful, with his army of 70, 000 soldier
against Kuci 700, 000 soldies. If without inside guidance, the result was unimaginable.
Lű Guang obtained Kumārajīva but did not offer him to Fu Jian. He maltreated
Kumārajīva and let him break precepts and got married. This also implied the religious
conflict. Prior to Kumārajīva’s arrival to Kophen, Kuci was popular with Hinayana
Buddhism. Even in royal families, Hinayana power was in large portion. Ji Xianlin said:
“In Kuci and Yanqi, Buddhist belief was Hinayana from the beginning, which had its
essential aspect. Because Buddhim in such area was transmitted from Gandhara and
Gandhara was a Hinayana country, but not pure Hinayana. In the wall painting of 克
291
292
2 汤球：
《十六国春秋辑补》
，卷 82，后凉吕光。
3 尚永琪：
《鸠摩罗什》
，云南教育出版社，2009 年版，第 26 页。
153
孜尔 Kizil grottoes, there were some Mahayana elements”.293
Kumārajīva’s transference to Mahayana Buddhism was a great event for Kuci
Buddhism, which was challenged by Hinayana Buddhism. Such challenge was rare
recorded in historical literature, with only some implications. After Kumārajīva’s
mother went to India, Kumārajīva lived in Wangxin temple and got 放光般若经. When
he read this sutra, mara came to interfere, which was treated as magic tale instead of
historical evidence. Yet it is not difficult to find that such is a debate between Hinayana
and Mahayana Buddhism.
After Kumārajīva transferred to Mahayana Buddhism, Kuci king invited him back
to Kuci and lived in Wangxin temple. 阿竭耶末帝 as a prince also requested to preach
Vaipuya sutras and transferred to Mahayana Buddhism. Kumārajīva promoted
Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci, and all kings from around countries knelt down when he
preached dharma. This kind of respect is closely related with Kuci king’s order. At that
period, Kuci was popular with Hinayana Buddhism, why did Kuci king greatly support
Mahayana Buddhism? Because land aggressive phenomena were very common in
Western Regions. Kuci’s position stimulated it to become a powerful country to avoid
attack from other countries. However, Hinayana sangha was powerful and prevented
Kuci king’s further development, so religious reform in the environment of political
reform was necessary.
Although Kumārajīva’s promotion of Mahayana Buddhism in cooperation with
Kuci king’s political reform was in temporary fashion, it finally failed. Because the
inside conflict in Kuci royal families lasted for a long time, and the fight for kingship
never stopped. Bo Zhen, Kuci king’s brother, rather betrayed Kuci king for getting the
kingship, and he also colluded with Hinayana power against Mahayana reform. Along
with the Bo Zhen administration in power, Hinayana Buddhism revived, and in later
hundreds of years, Hinayana Buddhism was in dominant status. In 630 or so, Master
Xuan Zhuang stayed in Kuci for two months. In fascicle one of Journey to the West in
Great Tang Dynasty 大唐西域记, it recorded the situation of Buddhism in Kuci: “There
were hundreds of temples, over five thousand monastic members. They learned
Sarvastivada doctrines, such as sutras and vinaya, transmitted from India. What they
learned were original texts, belonged to gradual teaching, and ate three kinds of pure
flesh”. At Kumārajīva period, in Kuci grottoes, there discovered many Mahayana
1 季羡林：
《鸠摩罗什时代及其前后龟兹和焉耆两地的佛教信仰》
，
《孔子研究》2005 年第 6 期，第 34
页。
154
293
Buddhist figures, such as in 克孜尔 Kizil grottoes. In the 38th cave, there stood a
standing Buddha shrine; in the 47th cave, there displayed many Buddhas; in the 17th
cave, there was the wall painting of 卢舍那 Rocana Buddha, etc. Such discoveries in
grottoes reflected that Kumārajīva preached Mahayana Buddhism in Kuci, and
Buddhists came to cultivate Mahayana doctrines from the east and the west of Cong
Ling. However, after Kumārajīva left Kuci, Mahayana Buddhism began to decline, and
Hinayana Buddhism took the priority, which was in conformity with the record in the
historical literature.294
3.3 The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Indian Monks
From the 17th year of Jian Yuan period to the arrival of Kumārajīva to Chang’an,
there were mainly seven foreign monks in Chang’an to translate scriptures: 昙摩持,
Dharmavi 昙摩卑, 僧伽跋澄, Vibhasabuddhalaksa 毘婆沙佛图罗刹, 鸠摩罗佛提,
昙摩难提, and Sanghadeva 僧伽提婆, etc. They mostly came from Kophen area in
India. Contemporary Kophen Buddhism influenced greatly on inland Buddhism. When
Kumārajīva came to Chang’an, foreign monks in Latter Qin period mainly included
Dharma-yaśas 昙摩耶舍, Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗, Dharma-ruci 昙摩流支, Vimalākṣa 卑
摩罗叉, Buddha-yaśas 佛陀耶舍, and Buddhabhadra 佛驮跋陀罗, etc. These great
monks mainly came from Kophen area, thus called India sangha, who cooperated
together with Kumārajīva in Chang’an and promoted the development of scripture
translation in China. However, the relationship among them was different, in good
teamwork, in conflict, or even in rupture. Such historical facts reflect the fights between
Buddhism and politics, between Buddhist internal schools, which deserves our serious
consideration.
3.3.1 Kumārajīva and Sangha in Chang’an
In West Jin period, Luo Yang was the center of inland Buddhism, as well as the
major destination for Indian monks to transmit Buddhism, but Chang’an was also the
important place for Buddhism, where Dharma-rakṣa 竺 法 护 and Bo Yuan 帛 远
294
2 丁明夷：
《鸠摩罗什与龟兹佛教艺术》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期，第 48 页。
155
translated scriptures for a long period and made significant influence. After five ethnic
minories attacked Middle China, monks wandered around. Fomer Qin administration
set up, with Chang’an as the capital. From then on, Buddhism Chang’an began to
prosper and Chang’an gradually became the Buddhist center of the north. Monks were
from outside middle China, especially from Western Regions and India, came to
Chang’an to translate scriptures and transmit Buddhism. Especially, when Master
Dao’an came to Chang’an, a lot of excellent monks professional in Buddhist doctrines
assembled in Chang’an, which made the Sangha in Chang’an expansive in scale.
After Fu Jian established Former Qin, he began to develop Buddhism greatly,
especially inviting Master Dao’an to Chang’an from Xiang Yang, so that the status of
Chang’an was highlighted in Buddhism. Master Dao’an built temples in Chang’an and
received disciples, with monks from all around coming to follow him. The quantity of
monks in Chang’an reached the historical peak. In Wu Chong temple, there were
thousands of monks. The major managing methods are three. Firstly, profound Buddhist
cultivation and Confucian foundation, especially Master Dao’an’s brilliance in
cultivation, which was the important reason for monks to Chang’an. Secondly, Fu Jian’s
political support, who commanded that those who had doubt should make Master
Dao’an as the teacher, applying political power to set up Master Dao’an’s dignity, with
some political sense. Thirdly, in Xiang Yang, Master Dao’an set up monistic rituals:
“about monastic rituals as Buddhist disciplines, there were three items. Firstly, offering
incense and seat as the fixed ritual for dharma preaching; secondly, in daily days,
practicing the Dharma for six periods of time, and prior eating, Chanting is the fixed
ritual; thirdly, setting up rituals for precept recitation, profession, etc. All temples
followed such rules”.295 The contemporary monks included Seng Chun, Hui Chang,
Seng Dao, Seng Rui, Hui Xiang, Hui Song, etc., who laid solid foundation for
Kumārajīva’s establishment of Sangha in Chang’an.
1.The establishment of Chang’an Sangha with Kumārajīva as the center
In the period of Fu Jian, Kumārajīva had been popular around inland China, and
in Latter Qin, inland China’s admiration for Kumārajīva did not decrease, and at last,
Yao Xing obtained Kumārajīva by force. Therefore, Kumārajīva was the admirable
target for all monks no matter in Buddhist achievements or in Vinaya cultivation. Yao
Xing’s political support and political status given to Kumārajīva made Kumārajīva’s
sangha in Chang’an expand fastly.
Kumārajīva’s sangha in Chang’an mainly included monks originally in Chang’an,
monks brought by Kumārajīva from Liang Zhou, as well as monks coming from other
areas. There were many monks originally in Chang’an, some of whom were important
295
1《高僧传》卷 5《释道安》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 183 页。
156
members of Master Dao’an’s sangha with high Buddhist achievement. For monks
coming to Chang’an later, they were excellent intellectual monks all around. Therefore,
Kumārajīva’s sangha constituted excellent monks from all areas around the country.
Such a group provided unprecedented foundation for scripture translation and dharma
transmission, as well as provided important conditions for the transmission of translated
scriptures by Kumārajīva.
When Kumārajīva just came to Chang’an, Yao Xing set up sangha for him, with
nearly 800 monks in the management of Kumārajīva, such as 僧䂮, 法钦, 僧迁, 僧
叡, 道恒, 道标, 道流, and 僧肇, etc. These monks had influential power at that period
in Buddhist arena, who were great monks coming to Chang’an from all areas. It is also
recorded that nearly 3000 diciples accepting dharma from Kumārajīva, which illustrates
that after Kumārajīva came to Chang’an, his disciples reached 3000, a vast data from
original 800 to 3000. This not only shows the expansion of sangha power but also the
expansion of the sangha’s influence on politics and other areas. Even the amount
reached 5000 at last in Chang. In 晋书—姚兴载记, it said: “Now new translated
scriptures were translated by Kumārajīva. Yao Xing converted to Buddhism, and other
ministers all followed. Monks from all areas reached over 5000 in Chang’an. The stupa
was built in 永贵里, setting up 波若台 in middle palace, with meditators in thousand.
Counties were also converted, in which nine of ten houses were Buddhists”.296
Among Kumārajīva’s disciples, there were not a few excellent and famous ones.
Four sainted sages called by later generations, including 道生, 僧肇, 道融, and 僧叡.
In Sui and Tang dynasties, there was a list of eight elites and ten philosophers. Eight
elites included 道 生 , 僧 肇 , 道 融 , 僧 叡 , 道 凭 , 昙 影 , 慧 严 , and 慧 观 . Ten
philosophers included eight elites and 道恒 and 道标. 297 Tang Yongtonh divided
Kumārajīva’s disciples into five types according to their origin. The first type came
from middle Shanhai Guan 关中, including 法和, 僧叡, 昙影, 僧䂮, 慧精, 法钦,
慧斌, 道恒, 道标, 僧导, 僧苞, 僧肇, 昙邕, 佛念, and 道含. The second type came
from the north, including 道融, 慧严, 昙鉴, 昙无成, 昙顺, 僧业, and 慧询. The
296
297
1 唐 房玄龄等撰：
《晋书》卷 117《姚兴载记》
，北京：中华书局，1974 年，第 2985 页。
2 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1998 年，第 288 页。
157
third type came from Lu mountain, including 道生, 慧教, 慧观, 慧安, 道温, 昙翼,
and 道敬. The fourth type came from Jiang Zuo, including 僧弼 and 昙斡. The fifth
type was not clear about the origin, including 慧恭, 宝度, 道恢, 道悰, 僧迁, 道流,
僧嵩, 僧楷, 僧卫, 道凭, 僧因, and 昙咎, etc.298
In Latter Qin, sangha in Chang’an not only gained Yao Xing’s support, but was in
large scale, forming the organization with Kumārajīva and his Buddhist thoughts as the
center.
2.Kumārajīva’s control over the administrative power of Monastic officials
In order to manage numerous monk, Yao Xing set up monastic official regulation,
which was based on Kumārajīva’s sangha in Chang’an, with nominated monks from
the sangha members. This resulted in hegemony of administrative power, with members
from other sangha difficult to enter. It could be said that Kumārajīva’s sangha in
Chang’an was in hegenomous status, which was a kind of threat and expulsion to other
monastic communities.
Prior to Latter Qin, there was no monastic official system in China, but restraint
and regulated by vinaya and leaders’ dignity. Wang Yonghui 王永会 once pointed out:
“Wei and Jin period was the early stage for the transmission of Buddhism to China, but
the formal Sinocized Buddhist sangha had appeared. At that period, Buddhist sangha in
organization was still like that of original Buddhism, dependent on leaders’ cultivation
and moral dignity. In management, it mainly depended on vinaya disciplines, having
autonomous ability by monastic vinaya. In the meantime, in the adjustment and
integration between imperfect self-disciplines and Chinese local thoughts and religious
customs, by contextual adjustment and innovation”.299 Yan Yaozhong 严耀中 also
considered: “The management of sangha is Wei and Jin period mainly depended on
self-awareness, and monastic leaders mostly through their own vinaya cultivation to
promote vinaya observance in the sangha”. 300 However, from Yao Xing’s period,
monastic official system was established. In fascicle 6 of Biography of Great Monks, it
recorded: “僧䂮master, had excellent learning in early young age, was famous to be
regarded as the monastic leader in the country. 僧迁 master, cultivating both meditation
298
299
300
3 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1998 年，第 207 页。
1 王永会：
《中国佛教僧团发展及其管理研究》
，四川大学 2001 博士学位论文，第 20 页。
2 严耀中：
《佛教戒律与中国社会》
，上海：上海古籍出版社，2007 年，第 147 页。
158
and wisdom, was nominated as 悦众, and 法钦 and 慧斌 were in charge of monastic
record 僧录 together. They lived a modest life to cultivate dharma tirelessly, then
Buddhist memebers were in purity. In the seventh year of Hongshi period, the number
of monastic official was ordered to increase, adding thirty members to three kinds of
attendants respectively ( 亲 信 , 伏 身 , 白 从 ). The prosperity of monastic official
regulation 僧正(as the monastic leader) began with 僧䂮”.
From the above record, it could be seen that the central monastic official set by
Yao Qin authority was constituted by 僧主(僧正), 悦众, and 僧录, with 僧主 as the
head place, 悦众 the second place, and 僧录 the third place. In 大宋僧史略, it said:
“The so-called 僧正 means to correct himself and others, and to follow the order.
Because there were no specific dharma in Bhikku rules, such as the horse with no ties,
cow with no ropes, which graduall destroyed the elegant code, so there nominated the
virtuous monk to regulate them by rules in order to correct them, thus called 僧正”.301
It could be seen that the highest monastic official called 僧主(僧正) must be virtuous,
who was in charge of monastic preaching and vinaya obersance. It is also said: “In
Western Regions, monk called dharmadana(羯磨陀那) was translated as 知事 in
Chinese or 悦众, who should know and manage daily things and make the public
pleasant”.302 From this, it could be known that 悦众 must be clear about all regulative
rules about monastic members, temples, and sangha organizations, etc., who mainly
dealt with daily affairs. About 僧录, who might be relevant with making records of
monastic members.303 There was also specific introduction about the wage of monastic
officials: “providing vehicles and servants, with rich offerings…In the seventh year of
Hongshi period (405), adding 30 members to 亲信, 伏身 and 白从 resepctively”. From
this, it could be known that in Latter Qin period, monastic officials were nominated by
the state instead of vacuous positions, which changed from the previous situation that
301
302
303
3《大正藏》
，第 54 册，第 242 页下。
4《大正藏》
，第 54 册，第 242 页中。
5 谢重光：
《中古佛教僧官制度和社会生活》
，北京：商务印书馆，2009 年，第 16 页。
159
depended on great monks’ cultivation and dignity to manage the monastic members, to
the direct control and management by the country. To some degree, this increased the
country’s control over Buddhist sangha and promoted the process of monastic
secularization. It influenced greatly.
3.3.2 The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Dharma-yaśas, Puṇyatāra 弗若
多罗, and Dharma-ruci
1.The relationship between Kumārajīva and Dharma-yaśas
Dharma-yaśas 昙摩耶舍 was from 罟安, and learned from Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗.
He came to Bai Sha temple in Long’an period in Jin dynasty (397-401), professional in
毗婆沙律. In the period of Yixi in Jin dynasty, he came to Chang’an and welcome by
Yao Xing. Dharma-yaśas and Dharmagupta 昙摩崛多 together translated Śariputraarbhidharma-sastra 舍利弗阿毗昙论 in thirty fascicles.304 The translation began in the
ninth year of Hongshi period (407), and in the tenth year of Hongshi (408), the king
ordered to write the Sanskrit version. Because Dharma-yaśas and others were not
familiar with Chinese, and if making the translation by consecutive translation through
another person, they were afraid that he might not understand the scripture meaning, so
they put it aside. The reason for laying aside was recorded in preface of Śariputraarbhidharma-sastra 舍利弗阿毗昙序 by Dao Biao 道标: “Because the scripture was
made long long ago, not in conformity with present language, not understood by people.
If by direct translation, the essential meaning could not be perfect. Until the 16th year
of Hongshi, Dharma-yaśas and others were gradually familiar with Chinese and
continued to translate”.305 By repeated discussion, correction and decoration, in the
17th year of Hongshi (414), the translation was finished. They translated in Shi Yang
temple in Chang’an, with prince Yao Hong 姚 泓 took part in the translation
personally.306
When Dharma-yaśas began to translate, Kumārajīva was in Chang’an. Although
there was no mention about the direct relationship between them, why did it last eight
years to translate a Buddhist scripture? In addition, this Buddhist scripture did not
304
305
306
1《大正藏》第 28 册，第 525 页下。
2《出三藏记集》
，北京：中华书局，1995 年，第 372-373 页。
3《出三藏记集》
，北京：中华书局，1995 年，第 52 页。
160
develop popularly, though it was regarded by Dao Biao to contain profound meaning.
This might be related with Kumārajīva’s sangha. Firstly, the essential content of
Śariputra-arbhidharma-sastra 舍利弗阿毗昙论 was to explain Hinayana dharma in
classification, which were contradictory with Kumārajīva’s Mahayana doctrines to
some degree, so it would not gain support from Kumārajīva’s sangha. Secondly, the
translation center was located in Kumārajīva’s sangha, so Dharma-yaśas and
Dharmagupta 昙摩崛多 might be ignored to some degree, though they had Prince Yao
Hong’s support, so there appeared the above result. Excellent elites in translation were
most in Kumārajīva’s sangha, so that it appeared that Dharma-yaśas continued to
translate after he was familiar with Chinese, which was rare in previous history.
Therefore, this scripture lasted eight years to finish translation, which finished after the
passing away of Kumārajīva. Thirdly, after Dharma-yaśas went to the south area Jiang
Ling 江陵(now Jingzhou in Hu Bei province), he lived in Xi Xin temple and promoted
meditation, with over 300 disciples, the situation of which was opposite with that in
Chang’an. It could be obvious oppression by Kumārajīva’s sangha in Chang’an.
However, Dharma-yaśas did not leave like Buddhabhadra, which illustrated that
Dharma-yaśas’ relationship with Kumārajīva did reach rupture with each other. In the
period of Yuan Jia in Liu Song state (one country of south dynasty), Dharma-yaśas
returned to Western Regions.307
2.The relationship beween Kumārajīva and Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 and Dharmaruci 昙摩流支
The relationship between Kumārajīva and Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 and Dharma-ruci
昙摩流支 was different from that with Dharma-yaśas 昙摩耶舍. Because the former
translated scriptures with Kumārajīva. Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 was from Kophen and
professional in Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律 at the young age. Although Kumārajīva
learned Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya in Kuci and not professional enough to remember the
entire text. He heard about Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 and respected him greatly, and at last
they translated Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya together. Why were they able to cooperate to
1 见（梁）释僧祐撰，苏晋仁，萧辣子点校：
《出三藏记集》，北京：中华书局，1995 年。另释慧皎
撰，汤用彤校注，汤一玄整理：《高僧传》
，北京：中华书局，1992 年。
161
307
translate scriptures? According to Biography of Great Monks, there was some
information. Firstly, Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 gained respect from Yao Xing. In fascicle 2
of Biography of Great Monks, it said that Yao Xing treated him as superior guest.
Secondly, Kumārajīva’s scripture translation were absent in vinaya pitaka, which
postponed the development of dharma transmission to some degree. At that period,
vinaya translation was in necessity for all and for Kumārajīva as well, so over one
hundred monks assembled in Chang’an and invited Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗 to recite the
Sanskrit version of Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律, and Kumārajīva made the Chinese
translaltion. In fascicle 2 of 出三藏记集 , it attributed Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya to
Kumārajīva’s translation, not mentioning Puṇyatāra. In fascicle 8 of 历代三宝记 by
费长房 and 开元释教录 by Zhi Sheng 智升 in Tang dynasty attributed Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya to Kumārajīva’s translation. Puṇyatāra recited the Sanskrit text and
Kumārajīva translated it into Chinese, and Kumārajīva took part in the entire translation
and correction of Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya, so it is reasonable for such attribution.
It is a pity that Puṇyatāra did not finish translating Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya and
passed away due to illness. Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya was very important for Chinese
monks, about which Master Hui Yuan once said: “Those who wanted to learn vinaya
should follow this text, which explained pure and holy doctrines to clean six organs,
and it made learners keep supreme dharma to achieve enlightenment, the profound
wisdom and great virtue of which was highly valued by both human and gods”.
Thererfore, later Master Hui Yuan and Yao Xing invited Dharmaruci to continue the
translation with Kumārajīva. Kumārajīva deeply realized the important function of this
text in the development of Buddhism in inland China, so there expressed: “Though
precise investigation and correction, Kumārajīva still felt the text imperfect”.308 Before
Kumārajīva passed away, he still advised: “For over 300 texts, only Daśa-bhāṇavāravinaya did not delete and contained the original essence, so it must had no mistakes”.
From this, it could be seen that Kumārajīva highly valued the translation of this text. It
also implied the good relationship between Kumārajīva and Puṇyatāra and Dharmaruci.
3.The relationship between Kumārajīva and Dharmaruci and Buddhayasas
Dharmaruci and Buddhayasas were once masters or teachers of Kumārajīva, and
had close relationship with Kumārajīva. They came to the east and followed
308
2《高僧传》卷 2，
《昙摩流支传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 62 页。
162
Kumārajīva, so their relationship with Kumārajīva was different from other foreign
monks. In general, both of them supported Kumārajīva’s translation career and
cooperated with him. Even hearing about Kumārajīva’s precept violation, they only felt
sighed and did not make critiques and generate conflicts.
Dharmaruci was a monk coming from Kophen in Wei and Jin period, transliterated
in Chinese called 无垢眼. When he came to Kuci to preach vinaya, monks from around
areas learned from him, so Kumārajīva also learned vinaya from him. When Kuci was
in disorder, he went to 乌缠(茶). Later, he went to the east and came to Chang’an in
the 8th year of Hongshi (406), welcomed and respected by Kumārajīva. After
Kumārajīva passed away, Dharmaruci moved to Shijian temple 石涧寺, and preached
vinaya, and re-corrected Kumārajīva’s transaltion of Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya,
extending from 58 fascicles to 61 fascicles. Later, Dharmaruci went to Jiang Ling and
made rain retreat in Xin temple, and preached Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya. Many disciples
learned from him since he was professional in Chinese and vinaya prospered. By the
invitation of Hui Guan, he preached the essentials of Vinaya, and Hui Guan made notes
called 杂问律事 in two fascicles, which was sent to the capital, and was respected by
the contemporary Buddhists. Later, he returned to Shi Jian temple. In the 9th year of Yi
Xi period in East Jin dynasty (413), he passed away at the age of 77 or not clear. People
honored him as Blue Eye Vinaya Master (青眼律师).309 Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉 was
good at Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya. If he had come earlier, he would have translated Daśabhāṇavāra-vinaya with Kumārajīva. Even he later went to the south, what he preached
was the vinaya translated by Kumārajīva. This implied the close relationship between
them.
Buddhayasas was the master or teacher of Kumārajīva in Sha Le, the relationship
between them was like friends, who with his whole life followed Kumārajīva. When
Kumārajīva in Sha Le and learned from Buddhayasas, they respected each other. When
Kumārajīva returned, Buddhayasas tried to maintain him. When Buddhayasas heard
about the arrest of Kumārajīva by Lű Guang, he sighed to Sha Le king: “I met
Kumārajīva long time ago, but did not expressed too much, now that he was caught
suddenly, when would meet again”.310 This displayed the good relationship between
them. When Buddhayasas preached dharma in Kuci, Kumārajīva wrote to invite him to
Gu Zang 姑臧, so Buddhayasas followed Kumārajīva later.
309
310
1 传记见《出三藏记集》卷 3，
《高僧传》卷 2，卷 11， 和《开元释教录》卷 3。
2《出三藏记集》
，北京：中华书局，1995 年，第 537 页。
163
After Buddhayasasa reached Gu Zang, he found that Kumārajīva was invited to
Chang’an by Yao Xing. When he heard about Kumārajīva’s precept violation oppressed
by Yao Xing, he sighed again: “Kumārajīva was like good cotton, why made him into
thorns?” Kumārajīva heard about the arrival of Buddhayasas in Gu Zang, he advised
Yao Xing to invite Buddhayasas. At the beginning, Yao Xing did not agree, but later
Yao Xing ordered Kumārajīva to translate scriptures, and Kumārajīva said: “For dharma
preaching, textual meaning must be understandable. I can read the text but unable to
penetrate into the meaning perfectly. Only Buddhayasas, he could profoundly
penetrated into the essence and I wish Your Excellency to invite him here. Buddhayasa
recited the Sanskrit text and I translated. Then the translation would be creditable to
develop for thousands of years”. Just under Kumārajīva’s suggestion, Yao Xing sent to
invite Buddhayasa to Chang’an and welcomed him personally. By the assistance of
Buddhayasas, Kumārajīva finished the translation of Dharmagupta Vinayan in the 12th
year of Hongshi (410), as well as agamas, etc.311 Buddhayasas returned to Kophen
finally but still worried about the scripture translation in middle China, so he obtained
虚空藏经 and asked traders to give monks in Liang Zhou.
From the above facts, it could be seen that Buddhayasa was in good relationship
with Kumārajīva. He was not moved by fame and benefit, which was the important
reason Kumārajīva felt favor for him. It also could be seen that the reasons for
Buddhayasas to receive Yao Xing’s welcome and offering with treasures were mainly
in two aspects. On the one aspect, it is related with Buddhayasas’ Buddhist talent; on
the other aspect, it is also related with Kumārajīva’s assistance. It could be said that
Buddhayasas devoted himself to Kumārajīva’s scripture translation without selfishness,
regret, and complaint.
3.3.3 The Relationship between 佛驮跋陀罗 and Kumārajīva Sangha
Buddhabhadra was from 迦 毘 罗 卫 国 in north India, who was famous in
meditation and vinaya. He learned meditation from Buddhasena 佛大先 in Kophen,
and later came to inland China with Master Zhi Yan, who was Chinese in search of
dharma in the west. When Buddhabhadra heard about that Kumārajīva was in
Chang’an, he paid a visit to Kumārajīva. At that period, Kumārajīva was teaching
meditation and respected by Yao Xing, and Buddhabhadra also taught meditation after
he came to Chang’an.
311
3 据《高僧传》卷 2，中华书局，1992 年版，第 67 页。
《出三藏记集》卷 14 作“四十五卷”。
164
Due to difference in meditation, Buddhabhadra was criticized as lying and
abandoned by monastic officials such 僧䂮and 道恒, etc. He was oppressed to leave
Chang’an. In Lu mountain, Master Hui Yuan invited Buddhabhadra to preach dharma,
where he translated 修行方便禅經. After Master Fa Xian returned to China with
Mahaparinirvana Sutra and other scriptures, he made translation with Buddhabhadra.
Later, Buddhabhadra translated Avatamsaka Sutra brought back by Fa Ling from
Western Regions. Buddhabhadra passed away in the sixth year of Yuan Jia period in
Liu Song (one coutry in south dynasty), at the age of 71.
The affair between Kumārajīva and Buddhabhadra was very important in Chinese
Buddhist history, which could be found in some materials.
About the expulsion of Buddhabhadra by the sangha in Chang’an, in many modern
works, there mentioned or illustrated, with different opinions. The following are some
ideas.
(1) In 中印禅宗史 by 孤峰智灿, it considered that after Buddhabhadra came to
Chang’an, he tried to avoid of secular affairs and made meditation, teaching disciples,
with many Buddhists following him, at the period of which Kumārajīva was supported
by the court and popular. As a result, Kumārajīva’s disciples made up excuses to dispel
Buddhabhadra.312
(2) In 汉 魏 两 晋 南 北 朝 佛 教 史 by Tang Yongtong 汤 用 彤 , it considered that
Buddhabhadra was expelled not merely because of Kumārajīva’s disciples, but the root
reason was Buddhabhadra’s different learning from Kumārajīva.313
(3) In 中 国佛 学源流 略讲 by Lű Cheng 吕 澂, it considered: “Buddhabhadra’s
meditation was different from Kumārajīva’s, so he could not live long in Chang’an and
expelled by Kumārajīva’s disciples from Chang’an with the excuse of violating
precepts”.314
By integrating the above historical materials, it could be concluded as followed in
three aspects.
(1)Difference in schools and meditative methods were the relationship basis
between Kumārajīva and Buddhabhadra.
Firstly, from the experience of them, Buddhabhadra learned dharma mainly in
Kophen, which belonged to Sarvastivada School of Hinayana Buddhism. Although he
translated many Mahayana scriptures, which illustrates that he developed both
312
313
314
1 孤峰智灿著，释印海译，
《中印禅宗史》
，中国佛学院刊印，海潮音社 1972 年版，第 84 页。
2 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1997 年版，第 218 页。
3 吕澂：
《中国佛学源流略讲》
，1995 年版，第 77 页。
165
Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines, basically he belonged to Hinayana Buddhist scholar.
Kumārajīva also learned Sarvastivada doctrines in Kophen, but later transferred from
Hinayana to Mahayana and became the great monk to develop Mahayana Buddhsim.
Especially in Kuci, he had an attitude to criticize Hinayana doctrines. Both belonged to
different schools with different thoughts. The obvious difference between them
appeared in the debate about the meaning of emptiness. In fascicle 2 of Biography of
Great Monks, it said: “At that period, prince Yao Hong wanted to Buddhabhadra’s
preaching, and ordered monks to make a debate in the palace. Kumārajīva and
Buddhabhadra participated. Kumārajīva asked what was emptiness. Buddhabhadra
answered: the material form was constituted by many particles, due to no intrinsic
nature of form, so form was empty. Kumārajīva asked how to negate particles if by
particles to negate form. Buddhabhadra answered: I did not agree with most masters
who just negated the existence of one particle. Kumārajīva asked whether the particle
was permanent. Buddhabhadra answered: due to emptiness of one particle, so emptiness
of all particles; due to emptiness of all particles, so empty of one particle. At that period,
Master Bao Yun 宝云 transalted such words and did not understand the meaning, so
that monastic and lay Buddhists all regarded Buddhabhadra clinging to the permanence
of particles. Later, monks in Chang’an invited Buddhabhadra to make explanation.
Buddhabhadra replied: dharma do not arise by themselves, but arise by the meeting of
conditions; by the condition of one particle, there appeared all particles, and since the
particle has no intrinsic nature, so it is empty. How could say not negating one particle,
but to regard it as permanent and non-empty?”
This event was regarded as one factor of difference between Kumārajīva and
Buddhabhadra recorded in Biography of Great Monk. Tang Yongtong analyzed:
“Buddhabhadra was different from Kumārajīva in view of emptiness. He was
misunderstood due to explanation about particles, which seemed that Buddhabhadra
was not as the same as Kumārajīva’s claim for absolute emptiness”.315
Secondly, there was great difference in meditation between Kumārajīva and
Buddhabhadra. Such difference presents in sectarian lineage and in content. In fascicle
2 of 出三藏记集, it mentioned some sutras about meditation translated by Kumārajīva:
十 二 因缘观經, 禅 法 要解禅要经 , 禅經 坐 禅三昧經 , 禅法要 , which was recorrected in the 9th year of Hongshi period (407).
Xuan Fang 宣方 considered there were three types of meditations translated by
315
1 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1997 年版，第 218 页。
166
Kumārajīva recorded in 僧祐录: 禅經, 禅法要解, 禅法要. The first two are still
extant, present called 坐禅三昧經 禅法要解 collected in the fifteenth set of Taisho
Pitaka. About other sutras, they were regarded as groundless and fake. 316 Tang
Yongtong by reference to 历代三宝记, considered 众家禅要 was 坐禅三昧經.317
According to Master Seng Rui’s record, 众家禅要 was compiled by Kumārajīva
according to meditative methods in different schools, with complicated content, instead
of a translated text.318
众家禅要 compiled by Kumārajīva had five sections, which were copied and
collected from seven sectarian meditation schools, including Mahayana and Hinayana
doctrines. From this, it could be seen that there was no obvious lineage about
Kumārajīva’s meditation, not advocating for origin or essence, about which Hui Guan
expressed his dissatisfaction in 修行地不净观經序: “The essence of meditation sutras
should be paralleled with respective sects. If loss of origin, then branches were not
complete, just like the blind loss of essence, resulted in arrogance and ignorance in
cultivation. Isn’t it horrible…Those that gave up the orign and searched for branches
due to some differences organized their own sects, which were just narrow views. This
only forever existed in darkness, isolated from the truth, isn’t it pitiful?”
This paragraph was interpreted by Lű Cheng 吕澂: about meditation scriptures,
the meaning was profound and abstruse, which must be instructed by masters, or else,
learners might lose the essence and generated arrogance, which might imply that
Kumārajīva’s compilation of meditative methods from seven sects as groundless and
hard to transmission lineage. 319 For meditators, lineage was essential important.
Lineage from the Buddha represented the essence of meditation. Without lineage, only
making efforts on understanding doctrinal meanings would only abandon the essence
and search for branches, so that such mediators would only wander in in darkness. What
Kumārajīva’s meditation lost was lineage, so Hui Guan in 修行地不净观經序 said: if
2 宣方：
《鸠摩罗什所译禅經考辨》
，
《中国哲学史》1998 年第 1 期，第 70 页。
3 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1997 年版，第 216 页。
318
4 僧叡：
《关中出禅經序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 9，大正藏第 55 册，第 65 页上中。文云：“初四十三偈是
鸠摩罗罗陀法师所造，后二十偈是马鸣菩萨所造。其中五门是婆须密，僧伽罗义，漚波崛，僧伽斯那，勒
比丘，马鸣，罗陀禅要中抄集之所出也。六觉中偈是马鸣菩萨修习之，以释六觉也。初观淫，恚，痴相及
三门，皆僧伽罗义之所作也。息门六事，诸论师说也。菩萨习禅法中，后更依《持世經》益《十二因缘》
一卷，
《要解》二卷，别时撰出”。
319
1 吕澂：
《中国佛学源流略讲》
，中华书局，1979 年，第 76 页。
167
316
317
meditators could investigate the essence, follow the teaching, contemplate as it is, then
all states could illuminate, with all in perfect integration and formlessness, and know
the difference between the ordinary and the sainted.
About the meditation lineage of Buddhabhadra, there are several kinds of materials
recorded in Chinese Buddhism.
Firstly, in the preface of 达摩多罗禅經, it mentioned the origin of lineage: after
the nirvana of the Buddha, the meditation lineage was transmitted: 大迦叶→阿难
Ananda→ 末田地→舍那婆斯→優波崛 Upagupta→婆须蜜→僧伽罗叉→达摩多
罗 Dharmatara→不若蜜多罗.
Secondly, Master Hui Yuan and Hui Guan made the preface of 达摩多罗禅經
respectively, in which there mentioned the meditation lineage in Kophen area. Master
Hui Yuan said: “Now the translation was made by 达 摩 多 罗 Dharmatara and
Buddhasena 佛 大 先 , who were from Western Regions, followed the essence of
meditation, collected materials from sutras, and preached Mahayana, with precise and
simple difference”. Hui Guan mentioned: “昙摩多罗 Dharmatara and 佛陀斯那 both
preached this text 达摩多罗禅經. What 佛陀斯那 preached in Kophen was the
beginning of the third fascicle…佛陀斯那 transmitted the text to the east”. From this,
it could be seen that one of 佛大先 Buddhasena’s lineage was from Kophen and
inherited from 富若罗; and one of 佛大先 Buddhasena’s lineage was from India,
inherited from 婆陀羅.
Thirdly, in 出三藏记集, there listed two kinds of lineage: one was recorded by
Sarvastivada School; one was recorded by the 萨婆多部佛陀跋陀罗师宗传承略傳.
Master Yin Shun in 说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究, concluded: “According
to the preface of 达摩多罗禅經, there were two systems of lineage. One lineage was
inherited from 富若罗 to Buddhasena 佛大先, the former was belonged Kophen old
168
lineage from 富若蜜罗, who was the teacher of 富若罗. The other lineage was from
Indian new lineage inherited from 昙摩罗 or called 达磨多罗 Dharmatara, who was
the teacher of 婆陀羅, then 婆陀羅 transmitted to Buddhasena 佛大先. In this new
lineage, Buddhasena 佛大先 was the next lineage of 达磨多罗 Dharmatara. However,
in Kophen old lineage, Buddhasena 佛大先 and Dharmatara 达磨多罗 both learned
from 富若罗. The master-disciple lineage in meditation theory varied greatly in time.
Some might achieve inheritance in fifty years, and some might in five years, or some
might inherit to each other. Such lineage sequence was heard about from Buddhabhadra
or Zhi Yan”.320
The meditation lineage of Buddhabhadra was mainly firstly from Sarvastivadin
meditation taught by Buddhasena 佛 大 先 , then secondly following Mahayana
meditation taught by Dharmatara 达磨多罗 from middle India.
Tang Yongtong analyzed: “Buddhabhadra’s meditation belonged to Sarvastivada
School in Western Regions, inherited from 佛陀斯那, the lineage history of which was
regarded as creditable. Buddhabhadra’s disciples, such as Hui Guan, must feel nonreliable for Kumārajīva’s meditation. Master Hui Yuan made the preface for
Buddhabhadra’s translation of 达摩多罗禅經, and regarded that meditation preaching
was from 达磨多罗 Dharmatara and Buddhasena 佛大先. Kumārajīva preached 马鸣
Aśvaghoṣa’s meditation and not perfect. Therefore, Master Hui Yuan made direct
critiques about Kumārajīva’s meditation teaching. According to Kumārajīva’s
translation of 首楞严经, it is self-advocated as 菩萨禅 meditation for Bodhisattva,
while Buddhabhadra’s meditation belong to Hinayana Sarvastivada School. Due to
different learning systems, it was easy for their disciples to generate different
opinions”.321
In addition, different styles in meditation between Buddhabhadra and Kumārajīva.
Buddhabhadra especially developed meditation in quietness to manifest super power,
which was popular in ordinary people, while Kumārajīva emphasized doctrinal
320
321
1 印顺：
《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》
，中华书局。
2 汤用彤：
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》
，北京大学出版社，1997 年版，第 217 页。
169
meaning and was in favor of pure talk.
(2)Buddhabhadra’s threat to Kumārajīva
Buddhabhadra brought threat to Kumārajīva, which was mainly due to
Kumārajīva’s weakness in meditation and strangeness to the new theory development
of Mahayana Buddhism.
The weak point of Kumārajīva’s meditative methods mainly lies in the imperfect
meditation lineage. Only by understanding the origin of thoughts and theories, would
the application be in full function. Master Seng Rui once mentioned that he inherited
meditation from Kumārajīva, but not clear about the origin of Kumārajīva’s meditation.
Therefore, Hui Guan in 修 行地 不净 观 經序 made critiques about Kumārajīva’s
meditative methods. Master Hui Yuan in 庐山出修行方便禅經統序 also expressed the
same meaning: “Soon after the Buddha’s nirvana, Ananda transmitted dharma to his
disciple 末田地, from 末田地 to 舍那婆斯. This lineage was true and concordant with
each other by heart…later to Upagupta 優波毱多…Now this translation was from
Dharmatara 达磨多罗 and Buddhasena 佛大先”.322 From this, it could be known that
Kumārajīva and Buddhabhadra both emphasized the master-disciple meditation lineage.
Comparatively, Buddhabhadra’s lineage paid more emphasis on the orthodox of
meditation, so expressed uncreditable to Kumārajīva’s lineage.
It seemed that Kumārajīva’s lineage was not only non-orthodox, but also contained
some problems.
About Kumārajīva’s meditation lineage, Master Hui Yuan in 庐山出修行方便禅
經統序, expressed his idea, as was said in the preface of the sutra: “In five families of
meditation, there were some practitioners afraid of the declination of dharma, so they
praised sutras about meditation with the aim to prosper the dharma. There were
countless skillful methods to pursue tranquility, with one essence after all. However,
there were many practitioners to pursue the essence but few to unify the essence and
apply the branches…Mahayana Buddhism came to the east but still few scriptures in
meditation and Abhidharma. People lost control of three karma, so the path to
enlightenment became corrupt. It is due to Kumārajīva who inherited from 马鸣
Aśvaghoṣa that this lineage developed. Although there is some imperfect for the path,
322
3 苏晋仁，萧辣子点校：
《出三藏记集》卷 9 中华书局 2000 年，第 343-345 页。
170
it is just a small pit of the large mountain”.323
From the viewpoint of Master Hui Yuan, Kumārajīva’s contribution to meditation
promotion was non-ignorable, but Kumārajīva’s meditation was mainly from
Aśvaghoṣa 马 鸣 , without perfect penetration and completeness. Although
Kumārajīva’s meditation was not perfect, compared with the entire meditation essence
and spirit, it was just as subtle as the small hole of a large mountain. From this, it could
be seen the attitude of Master Hui Yuan’s attitude to Kumārajīva’s meditation.
About Buddhabhadra’s meditation, Master Hui Yuan expressed in the preface of
庐山出修行方便禅經統序: “Buddhasena 佛大先 considered that it was necessary to
follow the gradual teaching with the aim to purify the origin and draw the branches, so
he opened the sweet dew dharma gate by two methods: interpreting four meanings to
guide the ignorant to enlightenment; distinguishing aggregates, bases and realms to
correct contemplation, promoting dependent arising for self-distinguishment. Then,
search for the supreme by making the origin back to branches. This supreme is neither
the ending nor the ended, thus called endless, to enter into Tathagata’s endless dharma
gate. If not by three vehicles to penetrate into ten stages, who can understand the dharma
body? Attributing the essence to the formless, with tranquil and illuminating
everywhere, thus motion is inseparable from motionlessness”.324
Master Hui Yuan praised Buddhabhadra’s translation about meditation.
Doing meditation was important practice for monks. When Kumārajīva just came
to Chang’an, he began to preach meditation and translate meditation scriptures, which
was in the request of Master Seng Rui, etc., rather than Kumārajīva’s own idea. At that
period, the situation was “thousands of monks doing meditation, counties were
converted and nine of ten houses were Buddhist believers”.325 It could be known that
the contemporary Chinese monks needed meditative methods urgently. However, soon
after Buddhabhadra came to Chang’an, monks following Kumārajīva to learn
meditation decreased sharply, most turning to Buddhabhadra, whose situation could be
expressed: “preaching meditation with hundreds of disciples” and “Buddhabhadra
greatly developed meditation in Chang’an, with monks coming to learn from all areas”.
Even Hui Guan once as the member of Kumārajīva sangha, transferred to
Buddhabhadra to learn meditation. This implies Buddhabhadra’s threat to Kumārajīva
and his sangha in Chang’an, which affected the benefit of Kumārajīva’s sangha and
finally it ended with the establishment of monastic authority with 僧䂮and 道恒 as the
323
324
325
1 苏晋仁，萧辣子点校：
《出三藏记集》卷 9 中华书局 2000 年，第 344 页。
2 苏晋仁，萧辣子点校：
《出三藏记集》卷 9 中华书局 2000 年，第 345 页。
3《晋书》卷 117，
《姚兴载记》上。
171
head, with the excuse of “His words were illusory and unreal. His disciples were
ignorant to make difference. They disobeyed vinaya and could not live with us
together”326 to expel Buddhabhadra out of Chang’an.
Due to the expulsion, disciples following Buddhabhadra to learn meditation had
to hide or flee, within half a day, all dispelling absolutely. This was related with the
oppressive measures made by monastic administrative authority, with 僧䂮as the head.
About the expulsion of Buddhabhadra, the contemporary monks mostly showed mercy
to him. Master Hui Yuan wrote to Yao Xing that the reason for the expulsion of
Buddhabhadra was due to his disciples, and Master Hui Yuan invited Buddhabhadra to
translate scriptures, which positively showed his support to Buddhabhadra. From these
facts, it could be analyzed that there existed severe conflicts between Buddhabhadra
sangha and Kumārajīva sangha, as well as that monastic official authority played
important function in the conflicts.
The Buddhist weakness of Kumārajīva was also reflected on his strangeness to the
new development thoughts in India. Although this is not related with his personal
Buddhist talents, but affects the development of his thoughts. In 385, Kumārajīva
entered into Gu Zang, he was obviously strange to the later development of Buddhism
in Indian and Western Regions. Early Mahayana Buddhism in Western Regions was
centered on prajna doctrines, but in the fifth century, Avatamsaka Sutra and Nirvana
Sutra were popular in Western Regions, which Kumārajīva was not clear. When
Kumārajīva translated the chapter of ten stages in Avatamsaka Sutra, he kept doubted
and hesitated for over one month and did not start writing. This illustrates that he was
strange to Avatamsaka thought. After Buddhabhadra came to Chang’an, Kumārajīva
modestly consulted him, so that they made the decision together and the doctrinal
meanings were defined. Due to his strangeness to Avatamsaka thoughts, it seemed
reansonable to be different from Buddhabhadra.
(3)Buddhabhadra and Kumārajīva’s common character or temper
Kumārajīva’s character or temper was expressed clearly in his biography, which
was well-known fact. After some great monks came to Chang’an, such as Dharmayasas
昙摩耶舍, Puṇyatāra 弗若多罗, Dharmaruci 昙摩流支, Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉 ,
Buddhayasas 佛 陀 耶 舍 , they could keep good cooperative relationship with
Kumārajīva. About Kumārajīva’s precept violation, his two masters were inclusive
while Buddhabhadra could not bear this, which could be one factor for their conflicts.
Buddhabhadra was honest and frank without flattering the royal, so he criticized
326
1《高僧传》卷 2，
《佛陀跋陀罗》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 71 页。
172
Kumārajīva in face “Your scripture interpretation could not be understood by people
but have hight reputation, why?” This implied Buddhabhadra’s dissatisfaction to
Kumārajīva. Buddhabhadra’s such character might be one factor of his expulsion.
Another character for Buddhabhadra was also one factor for his expulsion, which was
recorded in the Biography of Great Monks. When he was in Kophen, it was said that
when he was asked where he came from, Buddhabhadra answered from Tusita to solute
Maitreya, and advocated himself to achieve Anāgāmi. Such self-advocating character
did not change when he was in Chang’an, when he said to disciples: “I saw five hundred
boats sending off together in my hometown”, which was regarded as presenting
supernatural power to confuse the public. This was the direct reason for his expulsion.
Although Master Hui Yuan appealed to mercy for him, it was still inevitable for the
expulsion, which was related with his character, inconsistent with the contemporary
Buddhist environment.
3.4Analysis about the Factors of Kumārajīva’s Success to Translate
Scriptures
About the quantity of Kumārajīva’s translation, there were 35 scriptures with 294
fascicles recorded in 出三藏记集; there were 74 scriptures with 384 fascicles recorded
in 开元释教录; there were 39 scriptures with 313 fascicles recorded in Taisho Pitaka.
To see from the entire translation history in China, translated scriptures by Kumārajīva
were not the most in quantity and types, but played important function as the turning
point for the development of inland Buddhism. Although there were a lot of scriptures
translated previously, most of them ended usage due to Kumārajīva’s excellent retranslation in quality, which made great influence on the later development of Chinese
Buddhism, even later Master Xuan Zhuang and Master Amogha 不空 unable to surpass.
To evaluate from the influential status in the entire Buddhist translation history in
ancient China, Kumārajīva was said to be the first person in Buddhist scripture
translation never known before and never to occur again in the future. According to
Master Seng Zhao’s 什法师诔文, it recoded that Kumārajīva passed away in the 15th
year of Hong Shi period in Latter Qin dynasty (413), and he came to Chang’an in the
third year of Hong Shi period (401), so Kumārajīva might live in Chang’an for twelve
years, from age 58 to age 70. It could be said that Kumārajīva began his translation at
an old age. Although he was old and the time was short, he made brilliant achievements.
Therefore, it is necessary to discuss the reasons for his great achievements. Although
173
there were many scholars having discussed this problem, there was lack of systematic
study and discussion. By precise analysis, the reasons for Kumārajīva’s success could
be discussed from the following aspects: Kumārajīva’s personal quality, outside
support, and the development of inland Buddhism, etc.
3.4.1Sinicized Factors of Kumārajīva Translating Scriptures
In the transmission process of Indian Buddhism in China, scripture translation
played essential function. Translation was the frontier stage for two cultures to contact
by language in literature materials. The quality of scripture translation directly
influenced the transmission and development of Buddhism. For Buddhist scriptures,
most were excellent literary works. In the translation history of Chinese Buddhism,
Kumārajīva, due to his unique and excellent quality in scripture translation, was
honored as the first person in Buddhist translation, and made great influence on Chinese
literature.
The success for Kumārajīva’s scripture translation was not only related with the
ruler’s support, but also was closely related with Kumārajīva’s brilliant personal quality.
Based on his conclusion about the success and failure of previous scripture translation,
he made profound investigation and deep understanding about inland culture, and
finally decided to apply free translation (or paraphrase or indirect translation) and
relevant methods to make re-translation and new translation. His translation
characteristics present mainly in three aspects.
Firstly, transfer from direct translation to indirect translation, to make Chinese
people accurately understand Buddhist thoughts
Kumārajīva’s indirect translation appeared as a reform based on Master Dao’an’s
claim for direct translation, thus called new translation, with previous translation called
old translation. Master Dao’an put forward “五失本” and “三不易”, which actually
emphasized the maintainence of of original Sanskrit expression, not deviating from the
essence. In the preface of 毗婆沙經, Master Dao’an wrote: “It is said that ethnic
minorities did not care about Indian accents in Buddhist scriptures but searched for the
essence of docrines, nor caring about textual expression. Therefore, here the textual
expression should not be changed, but follow the original style. If not clearly
transmitting the true meaning after changes, it is really the translators’ mistakes”. Such
opinions display Master Dao’an’s claim for direct translation. However, five translated
scriptures about agamas held by Master Dao’an did not become popular.
In the preface of Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra 大品经序, Master Seng Rui 僧叡
174
expressed his idea about previous scripture translation: “When Buddhist scriptures
came to inland China, they were translated in the language used in Yao Qin period.
Although translated scriptures followed the translating rules, they actually lost function
for understanding due to careless translation, so that people searched for the meaning
but actually far from the meaning. If not meeting great translators, the translation career
would decline”.327
In Biography of Kumārajīva, there once mentioned: “If changing Sanskrit to Qin
language, the text would lose its beautiful expression. Though obtaining general
meaning, the textual style was different from the original one, just like chewing the rice
to people, not only losing the flavor but also vomitting”. This is to say that Sanskrit
expression was beautiful and could be chanted along with music, and if toughly indirect
translation into Chinese, then the original beautiful rhythm would lose. From this, it
could be seen that Kumārajīva’s understanding about Sanskrit was profound, so he
applied indirect translation instead of direct translation, because the former might lose
textual beautiful expression but the latter would distort Buddhist thoughts. Therefore,
Kumārajīva and his disciples, by serious consideration, expressed the content of
Buddhist doctrines accurately in Chinese, based on not losing original Buddhist essence.
By comparing Kumārajīva’s translation with previous translation, Master Seng Rui
considered: “By examing previous old translated scriptures, they were like wild field
with half crops only in good quality…Yao Qin language was elegant, according to it to
make translation, though not enough beautiful, would correct the previous translations
at least”.328
Kumārajīva’s indirect translation achieved historians’ praise, because he made
some changes of original Buddhist scriptures in order to adapt to Chinese thoughts and
traditional culture, as well as to the need of contemporary Buddhist development.
In fascicle 7 of Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “When Master Seng Rui
compared 竺法护 Dharma-rakṣa’s translation with Kumārajīva’s, Master Seng Rui said:
for example, when Kumārajīva read the translation of ‘天见人，人见天(the heaven
sees the human and the human sees the heaven)’, Kumārajīva said this sentence had the
same meaning with Western Regions, but low quality in language expression. Therefore,
Master Seng Rui translated it as ‘人天交接，两得相见(When human and heaven merge,
they would meet)’, thus achieving praise from Kumārajīva”, which got Kumārajīva’s
praise. In fascicle 2 of Mahavyuha-sutra-sastra 大庄严經論, it said: “诸仙苦修行，亦
327
328
1《出三藏记集》卷 8，
《大品经序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 52 页下。
2《出三藏记集》卷 8，
《大品经序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 54 页下。
175
复得生天(If gods made ascetic cultivation, they would be born in the heaven)”. The
word in the original Sanskrit text refered to the specific name of the Indian ancient god,
but because Chinese people in Qin period were unclear about this god, so Kumārajīva
changed it to all gods (诸仙 due unclear about the god, so replacing the specific god
with all gods, so that Chinese people would understand).329 Hu Shi 胡适 thought that
the reason for Kumārajīva’s scripture translation achieving popularity for thousands of
years was that Kumārajīva was not only able to translate well enough, but he could also
translate scriptures into Chinese language, with the sytle and custom understood by
Chinese people.330
Kumārajīva, by following the thought of not disobeying the middle way, made redefinition and re-translation about a lot of wrong translation in old translated scriptures.
The real intention for his indirect translation was to convey the content and meaning of
the original Buddhist canons more authentically and accurately, so that Chinese people
would understand Buddhist doctrines and theories more exactly correct, thus to change
the abstruse and tough situation of translated scriptures. Hajime Nakamura 中村元
considered that Kumārajīva’s translation did not keep loyal to original texts and added
his own thoughts. Hajime Nakamura 中村元 also said that some words were more
added, such as “filial 孝” and “loyal and filial 忠孝”, etc.331 Specifically speaking,
what Kumārajīva added is not his own thought, but the thoughts and contents that he
understood about Chinese culture. These thoughts and contents are the most profound
manifestation of Kumārajīva’s indirect translation, as well as the important factor for
Kumārajīva’s translation to achieve universal popularity in China.
Secondly, simple words are more adaptable to the application in Chinese culture
Sanskrit Buddhist scriptures paid high attention to style or form, with severe
repetition. In Biography of Kumārajīva, there mentioned the similar meaning: “Indian
custom emphasized greatly the poetic style which is suitable for chanting. When seeing
the king, there would be praise virtue; the ritual of seeing the Buddha was valued highly
on praise by song. Verses in the sutra, all belonged to this style”. The application in
middle China was complicated. Therefore, in Kumārajīva’s scripture translation, it was
3 陈寅恪：
《童寿喻鬓论梵文残本跋》
，
《金明馆丛稿二编》
，《陈寅恪先生文集》第 2 册，台北里仁书
局，1982 年，第 210 页。
330
4 胡适：
《白话文学史》
，上海：上海古籍出版社，1999 年，第 112 页。
331
1 中村元：
《基于现实生活的思考鸠摩罗什译本的特征》
，
《世界宗教研究》1994 年第 2 期。
176
329
an important task whether to delete original scriptures, as well as an efficient method
to differ from other translations. It is certain that this is the universal requirement from
the folk and the rulers in inland China. As is said: When Yao Xing as King of Yao Qin
read this sutra each time, he often regarded it as the dwelling of gods, so he felt irrigated
about the previous translated text that prevented the meaning and principle from
understanding clearly, and often afraid that the essence got lost due to
translation…Prince Yao Hong deeply knew the mistakes of translators”. 332 Due to
rulers’s unsatifaction to old translation, it is urgent to need Kumārajīva’s scripture
translation.
Kumārajīva made great deletion during Buddhist scripture translation, especially
for the translation of verses, which was not merely to consider previous translators’
experience, but more important, was also his understanding about characteristics of
inland monks and people’s thoughts. In Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra 大智度论, such
thought was clearly expressed: “Sanskrit language was complicated, and Kumārajīva
made the text deleted due to people’s favor for simple expression in Qin country”. In
Biography of Great Monks, it recorded the words given by Kumārajīva before he passed
away: “For over 300 fascicles of translated scriptures, only Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十
诵 律 made no deletion”. This sentence verified that in Kumārajīva’s scripture
translation process, deletion was an important task. For example, Mahaprajnaparamita
Sastra contained 3.2 million words nearly one thousand fascicles, and Kumārajīva only
translated one hundred fascicles, with 0.3 million words, taking up 10% of the entire
sastra. In Kumārajīva’s translation, the first chapter had 34 fascicles, with one chapter
in full translation, and other chapters in simple translation. Lű Cheng explained: “It is
because that the first chapter mainly illustrates concepts, characters, etc., which are the
unclear problems for Chinese scholars for years, so Kumārajīva precisely translated this
part, making detailed interpretation as they are. This applies to the need of research, no
longer to walk on the circuitous road, such as Geyi 格义, integrated version 合本,
etc.”333 When Kumārajīva translated Madhyamaka Sastra, the situation was similar:
“Those which are complicated and deviated from essence should be deleted”.334 This
also spent a lot of efforts on deletion.
The deletion and omission done by Kumārajīva was different from that in old
translations, because Kumārajīva made this completely based on profound
understanding and familiar with all the content and meanings of original texts. Although
332
333
334
2《出三藏记集》卷 8，
《大品经序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 52 页下。
3 吕澂：
《中国佛学源流略讲》
，中华书局，1979 年版，2008 年印刷，第 93 页。
4《出三藏记集》卷 11，僧叡《中论序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 76 页下。
177
there were omissions, the entirety and essence of original texts could be still preserved,
achieving “Translated texts are conducted simply, with the essence presented
indirectly”.
Thirdly, highlighting the literary characteristics of Chinese language, increasing
the readability and popularity
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation not merely pursued faithfulness, but also
searched for comprehensibility and elegance, so he could based on the understanding
the application of Sanskrit and Chinese, courageously make selection and omission,
trying to pursue linguistic gracefulness and interest, embellishing words for readability
and popularity. By comparing with Zhi Qian’s and 竺法护 Dharma-rakṣa’s versions
of translated Vimalakirti Sutra, Kumārajīva’s translation was “conducted simply and
presented indirectly, with subtle and profound words to display obviously”. 335
Therefore, Kumārajīva’s translation was popular from ancient times to modern days.
Literary composition could also be one great factor for Kumārajīva’s translating style.
In Lotus Sutra(Saddharmapundarika Sutra), the metaphor of a firing house depicted a
graceful story, which might imply that Indian Buddhist scriptures contained heavy
literary stories, which could be expressed perfectly by Kumārajīva’s translation, thus
more easily to attract Buddhists.
By comparing Kumārajīva’s translation with Master Xuan Zhuang’s translation, it
could be discovered that Master Xuan Zhuang’s translated version was strict and
accurate, and rigid, with heavy academic color. Kumārajīva’s translation was not only
popular but also provided rich imagination for artists’ composition, due to heavy
literariness, popularity and readability, which could be reflected in Buddhist art, such
as statues and wall paintings in some grottoes, such as Kizil 克孜尔, Mo Gaoku 莫高
窟, etc. In Dun Huang grottoes, scripture transference wall paintings relevant with
Vimalakirti Sutra, Lotus Sutra, and Amitabha Sutra, nearly all refered to Kumārajīva’s
version. In north dynasty, the statue of Sakyamuni Buddha and the statue of 多宝佛
Prabhutaratna Buddha sitting together might also come from Lotus Sutra translated by
Kumārajīva.
3.4.2Characteristics of Kumārajīva’s Personal Quality
Kumārajīva’s success in scripture translation is greatly related with his profound
1 僧肇：
《注维摩诘經》
，收录在《大正藏》第 38 册，第 327 页上。苏晋仁，萧辣子点校：
《出三藏记
集》卷 8《维摩诘經序》
，中华书局，2000 年，第 310 页。
178
335
Buddhist achievements, proficiency in Sanskrit and Chinese, as well as his strict and
rigorous personality cultivation in the process of dharma transmission career.
Firstly, Great and profound Buddhist achievements
Profound understanding about Indian Buddhist doctrines, unparalleled eloquency
as well as vast Buddhist knowledge constituted Kumārajīva’s great Buddhist cultivation,
which is the most basic factor for Kumārajīva’s success of scripture translation.
Firstly, Kumārajīva was talented, which could be seen in Biography of Great
Monks. Kumārajīva was born in a noble family, which might belong to Kśatriya 刹帝
利 caste. His mother was the sister of Kuci king. Kumārajīva was superior to others and
was well-known as a magic. When he was seven years old, he could recite one thousand
verses one day. From his early experience, it could be seen that Kumārajīva was indeed
a gifted young monk.
Kumārajīva’s early diligence enabled him to obtain rich Buddhist theories and
knowledge. As a teenage, he had finished learning all Hinayana scriptures, and later he
transferred to Mahayana theories. Strong desire for knowledge and truth made him
dissatisfied with the contemporary Buddhist content, so he continued to learn more.
According to Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “When Kumārajīva was free, he
would read non-Buddhist texts, disciplines and rituals, four Vedas,336 pancavidya, Yinyang and astrology, so that he could tell the future, with words into fact”. Such complex
doctrinal attitude made him better develop his vision. In Sha Le, he learned four Vedas
and five Pancavidya Sastra 五明论. Kumārajīva’s broad knowledge deepened his
understanding about Buddhist thoughts, which laid solid foundation for his Buddhsit
study and scripture translation.
Secondly, great and profound Buddhist achievements also presented his excellent
eloquency. In Kophen, he could subdue non-Buddhists and achieved respect from the
king. In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “Due to Kumārajīva’s talent, he was
well-known to the king, who invited Kumārajīva to debate with non-Buddhists in the
palace. Non-Buddhists looked down upon him by speaking impolitely due to his young
age. Kumārajīva defeated non-Buddhists by discovering their faults and subdued them.
Non-Buddhists felt ashamed and speechless. The king respected Kumārajīva more than
before, providing a lot of offerings. In addition, foreign countries also made offerings,
in which some temples sent five bhkkhus and ten sramanas to make cleaning like his
disciples, from which respect could be seen clearly”.
1 吠陀（Veda）是知识的意思，指集录古代印度婆罗门教知识的文献。四吠陀是《梨俱吠陀》
（颂
诗）
，
《娑摩吠陀》
（歌曲），
《耶柔吠陀》
（祭词），
《阿闼婆吠陀》
（咒语）
。
179
336
When Kumārajīva came to Wen Su country, he debated with a self-advocated
Taoist. At last, the Taoist felt lost and paid homeage to Buddhism. When Kumarajvia
reached Kuci, Hinayana master Bandhudatta tried to persuade Kumārajīva to transfer
to Hinayana. As a result, by Kumārajīva’s argument, Bandhudatta 盘头达多 began to
learn Mahayana dharma and said: “Kumārajīva was my Mahayana teacher and I was
Kumārajīva’s Hinayana teacher”.
By great and profound Buddhist achievements, young Kumārajīva became the fistlisted Mahayana master in India, Western Regions, and inland China. Before he came
to middle China, Kumārajīva was famous so that Master Dao’an wrote to Fu Jian to
invite Kumārajīva to translate scriptures in Chang’an.
Kumārajīva’s learning was brilliant and kept connection with Master Hui Yuan by
letter, letters between whom were compiled as 大乘大义章. By replying to Master Hui
Yuan’s questions, Kumārajīva’s profound Buddhist achievements and understanding
manifested perfectly. Until then, Chinese Buddhist arena began to really accept the
priority of Mahayana doctrines over Hinayana doctrines and their differences. Master
Seng You in 出三藏记集 gave high evaluation to Kumārajīva’s translated works.
Master Seng You said: “Kumārajīva, Master Dao Rong and Master Seng Zhao were
wise enough to understand the profound meaning of scriptures, so Mahayana subtle
linguistic expression could illuminate in China”. Due to Kumārajīva’s great Buddhist
achievements applied to scripture translation, so that Master Dao Rong and Master Seng
Zhao and other Chinese monks could understand the profound philosopyical theory in
Buddhist scriptures.
Thirdly, Kumārajīva’s two times of precept violation were related with his talent.
After Lű Guang acquired Kumārajīva, he did not regard Kumārajīva as talented due to
his young age, so made fun of him as an ordinary person, pressing him to marry Kuci
king’s daughter. Yao Xing considered Kumārajīva: “as talented and super enlightened
with second to none, but he passed away, there was no heir to transmit the dharma seed”.
Therefore, he offered Kumārajīva ten beautiful women and pressed him to accept.
These phenomena were regarded as not only a kind of others’ jealousy, but also a pity
for a monk.
In previous translators, Zhi Qian was from Yue Zhi, due to long time living in
inland China, so he was professional in Sanskrit and Chinese. It is said that he was
skilled in six languages. Zhi Liang who once learned from Lokakṣema 支娄迦谶, was
also in great learning. Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护 was proficient in languages of 36 countries
in Western Regions, so he was a genius in learning languages. Although they have
180
outstanding language ability, they still have some distance compared with Kumarajvia,
which is mainly reflected on doctrinal understanding. Based on profound understanding,
it is probable to make translation with facility and to apply freely. The greatest sign to
differ Kumārajīva from previous translators is his profound understanding about both
Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines as well as his favor of Mahayana Buddhism. It is
certain that the origin of such thought is closely related with its epoch, because previous
translators had no opportunity to contact Nagarjuna’s theories and to develop more
perfect Mahayana scriptures. In addition to this, Kumārajīva’s personal quality is the
greatest factor for his successful and qualified scripture translation in later days. For
Kumārajīva, to understand Indian Buddhism, the key point was to grasp the inside
thought rather than literal accuracy, so he applied the meaning-oriented new translation.
It is just Kumārajīva’s profound understanding about the essential thoughts inside
Buddhism and about the transmission regularity of Buddha Dharma, that make his
translated scriptures develop extensively and lastingly. Master Dao Xuan evaluated
Kumārajīva’s translation: “illuminating the present with no second in the future, can’t
wait admiring, so his translation firstly emphasized the attainment of understanding and
enlightenment, with the aim to obtain the meaningful essence of the Buddha’s last
teaching”.337
Secondly, proficiency in Sanskrit and Chinese and literary talent
Hui Guan in 法华宗要序 said: “Kumārajīva kept the Sanskrit sutra in hand, and
translated it into Chinese, following the local accent without disobeying the essence, so
the benefit of the translation had more than half”.338 Master Seng Rui in 大品经序 said:
“Kumārajīva held the Sanskrit text in hand, translated it into Chinese used in Qin period,
making interpretations in both languages with different pronunciations but mutual
penetrative textual essence”. Kumārajīva’s brilliant ability in language and translation
could be unparalleled and admirable. Therefore, for Kumārajīva’s success, it is based
on this proficiency in Sanskrit and Chinese.
Kumārajīva’s father Kumārāyana 鸠摩罗炎 was from India. Kumārajīva went to
Kophen when he was nine and studied there until twelve years old, then back to Kuci.
Many Kumārajīva’s teachers were from Kophen. It is affirmative that Kumārajīva lived
in an environment related with Sanskrit since he was young, so Kumārajīva directly
absorb Buddhist doctrines through Sanskrit, which is one factor for him to easily
understand profound Buddhist philosophy.
337
338
1《大正藏》第 52 册《史传部》四《道宣律师感通录》
，第 437 页下。
2《出三藏记集》卷 8，
《法华宗要序》
，
《大正藏》第 55 册，第 57 页上。
181
What people discuss most is Kumārajīva’s Chinese level, which is actually an
undoubted fact. Since Kumārajīva lived in Liang Zhou for 17 years, during which he
gradually learned Chinese well. He was Lű Guang’s military advisor in Liang Zhou,
but he did not forget what he had learned and his duty of dharma transmission.
According to Biography of Great Monks, it recorded: “Kumārajīva stayed in Liang
Zhou for years. Lű Gang and his sons did not develop Buddhism, so the profound
meaning inside Buddhism could not be preached…During his 17 years in Liang Zhou,
although dharma transmission did not develop, there were still conditions for
Kumārajīva to learn Chinese and to be familiar with Chinese culture, which made
preparison for his great career in Chang’an”.339 When Kumārajīva detained in Gu Zang,
Master Seng Zhao living in Guan Zhong area specifically went to Gu Zang to learn
from Kumārajīva, as is said: “Later, Kumārajīva reached Gu Zang, and Master Seng
Zhao visited him from afar, and Kumārajīva appreciated him greatly”. 340 Through
Master Seng Zhao, Kumārajīva knew of the development situation of inland Buddhism,
the translation situation of Buddhist scriptures, as well as debates between different
schools. Therefore, it could be seen that when Kumārajīva was in Liang Zhou, he did
not stop Buddhist study, especially focusing on the familiarity and study of previous
scripture translation in China.
Due to familiar with Sanskrit and Chinese, Kumārajīva was deeply aware of the
difficulty of scripture translation. By comparing linguistic styles, Kumārajīva realized
that it was rather difficult to understand words during translating Sanskrit into Chinese.
Based on such awareness, Kumārajīva stepped forward on the path of indirect
translation. In the meantime, Kumārajīva had great literary ability. In fascicle one of
金刚经纂要刊定记, it said: “This sutra was translated by Kumārajīva, with verses pure
and polished, making people delighted to hear, so until now people in temples, no matter
old or young, humble or noble, all held this sutra”.341 There are five translations about
Diamond Sutra, but Kumārajīva’s version was the most popular, from which it could
be seen clearly about his great translation career. He not only emphasized literary
expression in scripture interpretation, but he himself was good at poems. In Biography
of Great Monks, it recorded that Kumārajīva offered poems to Fa He 法和: “心山育明
德，流燕万由延。哀鸯孤桐上，清音彻九天(The mind like the mountain cultivates
bright virtue, thousands of birds wandering around; the grief bird living on the single
tree, with pure voice reaching the highest heaven)”. In Kumārajīva’s 十喻诗, it said:
339
340
341
1 孙昌武：
《中国文化史上的鸠摩罗什》
，
《南开学报》2009 年第 2 期，第 47 页。
2《高僧传》卷 6《僧肇传》
，中华书局，1992 年版，第 249 页。
3《大正藏》第 33 册《金刚经纂要刊定记》卷 1，第 170 页下。
182
“一喻以喻空，空必待此喻；借言以会惫，惫尽无会处；既得出长罗，住此无所
住；若能映斯照，万象无来去(Applying one metaphor to express emptiness, to
understand emptiness must depend on this metaphor; applying one metaphor to express
the emotion, when the emotion ceases, nowhere to express; having got out of the net of
permanence, dwelling in nowhere to dwell; if able to reflect this illumination, one could
realize that all is neither coming nor going)”.342 Another poem written by Kumārajīva
in 答慧远书: “既已舍染乐，心得善摄不；若得不驰散，深入实相不；毕竟空相中，
其心无所乐；若悦禅智慧，是法性无照；虚诳等无实，亦非停心处；仁者所得法，
幸 愿 示 其 要 (Having abandoned tainted pleasure, has the mind embraced the
wholesome dharma? If the mind non-distracted, has it penetrated into ultimate reality?
In absolute ultimate reality, the mind has nothing for pleasure; if joyful for meditation
and wisdom, they are nothing to illuminate in dharma nature; illusions are unreal, they
are also not where the mind should dwell; Your virtuous have obtained the dharma,
wish you to show the essence)”.343 From these poems, it could be seen that the writer
was skillful in the application of Chinese poetic techniques and had large creativity in
poem composition.
Thirdly, Kumārajīva’s awareness to accept inland thought, culture and society
Kumārajīva’s familiarity with inland culture is one non-ignorable factor for his
successful scripture translation. In the period of translating Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra,
he regarded: “Sankrit language was complicated, Kumārajīva made the simple
translation by omitting some parts since people in Qin period liked simple
expression”.344 This illustrate that Kumārajīva knew well of the obstacles and notions
for contemporary people to accept foreign thoughts. Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra was a
huge works with a large number of great works. Kumarajvia only made detailed
translation about Nagarjuna’s interpretation of the first chapter of Mahaprajnaparamita
Sutra, because this contained the philosophical theory confusing Chinese monks
constantly, which met the need for scholars’ research. Based on deep understanding
about original texts, he courageously broke up the Sanskrit grammar frame and made
omission about original texts, applying different translating methods according to
different scriptures. For example, when translating Lotus Sutra, Kumārajīva followed
342
343
344
4 欧阳询：
《艺文类聚》卷 76《内典》上，上海古籍出版社，1965 年版，第 1294 页。
5 释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》卷 6，中华书局，1992 年版，第 217 页。
6 僧叡：
《大智释论序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 74 页。
183
local accent without disobeying the essence. 345 Kumārajīva’s Chinese translated
version expressed the thought essence of original Lotus Sutra quite well with smooth
and fluent words.
Master Dao’an considered that the development of Chinese Buddhism was
difficult to establish without the support of the rulers, which was expressed best by
Kumārajīva. Because Lű Guang did not believe in Buddhism, so that Kumārajīva stayed
for 17 years without the development of scripture translation. Due to this experience,
Kumārajīva understood that it was difficult to develop Buddhism without the support
of rulers in inland China. Therefore, when he was in Chang’an, Kumārajīva especially
paid attention to keeping close relationship with royal families. Profound understanding
about the Chinese culture was the important factor for Kumārajīva’s decision to make
translation reform according to Chinese culture.
Fourthly, personality cultivation in the aspect of persistent search for dharma
development and rigorous pursuit of truth
When Kumārajīva was in Kuci, he received full precept ordination at the age of
twenty and became a famous monk. Before his mother left Kuci, she said to Kumārajīva:
“Vaipulya scriptures are profound teachings, you should preach the truth broadly. The
eastward transmission only depends on you”. Kumārajīva replied: “The great
Bodhisattva path is to benefit others by forgetting one’s own benefit. I must transmit
Mahayana doctrines to enlighten the secular people. Even though the body on the fire
stove, I would have no hatred due to this suffering”. This properly expressed
Kumārajīva’s spirit of self-devotion for dharma transmission. It is clear to observe
Kumārajīva’s devotion to Buddhist dharma development from this point. Although
Kumārajīva stayed in Liang Zhou for 17 years as a military advisor, which was the best
period of life, he did not become negative, but made cultivation everyday, learning
Chinese, with the aim to enter Chang’an as soon as possible to transmit Mahayana
Buddhism, which is the center of Chinese culture.
After the invitation of Yao Xing, Kumārajīva did not care about the long distance
tiredness, and came to Chang’an soon. Kumārajīva lived in Chang’an for 13 years,
translating over 300 fascicles of scriptures, with two fascicles per month. Kumārajīva
devoted himself to scripture translation whole-heartedly. Even at the last moment of his
life, he still worried about the problems about scripture translation, so he said: “(因法
相遇，殊未尽伊心，方复后世，恻怆何言。自以暗昧，谬充传译，凡所出经论三
百余卷，唯十诵一部，未及删繁，存其本旨，必无差失；愿凡所宣译，传流后世，
345
7 慧观：
《法华宗要序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 57 页。
184
咸共弘通；今于众前发诚实誓，若所传无谬者，当使焚身之后，舌不燋烂)”.
Kumārajīva’s attitude about scripture translation is strict and rigorous, so that he
repeatedly made amendments about the translation. For example, when translating
Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, which started translation in April of the fifth year of Hong
Shi period (403), “There might be some difference in Kumārajīva’s translatin from old
translation, which is aimed to correct the meaning”. In April of the sixth year of Hong
Shi period, he made another correction. In December of the seventh year,
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra finished translation, which compared with
Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, Kumārajīva made correction about Mahaprajnaparamita
Sutra again. It is said that there were three times of translation and five times of
correction in the entire translation process. Another example is Hundred Treatise, which
was translated soon after Kumārajīva came to Chang’an. Becasuse he had not been
familiar with the local accent, the readers were confused with the wrong transalted
Chinese text, so in the sixth year of Hong Shi period, Kumārajīva re-translated Hundred
Treatise with two fascicles, which contained right textual meaning and excellent preface
compared with previous translation. Just as is said in Master Seng Zhao’s 维摩诘經序:
“1, 200 intellectual monks in Da temple in Chang’an invited Kumārajīva to retranslate
this sutra. Kumārajīva had super mundane knowledge, could make contemplation on
the true state, and he was familiar with Sanskrit and Chinese, so he could hold the
Sanskrit version in hand and translate the text in Chinese orally, so that monastic and
lay Buddhists listened loyally and piously. One sentence with three times of
examination, with the aim to pursue refinement and remain the sainted meaning. The
new translated text was simple but reached the meaning; its essence was indirectly
translated but manifested perfectly”. For example, about the translation of some
concepts, Kumārajīva made serious consideration. Master Seng Rui in 大品经序 said:
“In Kumārajīva’s translation, correct those having lost pronunciation into Indian
language; define those having wrong Chinese translation by the literal meaning; directly
write those unchangeable original Indian expression; thus, though different names and
concepts used, and mixed Sanskirt and Chinese pronunciation, it is truly due to the
tranlator’s carefulness and seriousness”. From these minor points, it could be seen that
Kumārajīva held rigorous attitude to scripture transaltion.
During scripture translation, Kumārajīva seriously cared about the scriptures he
was not familiar and did not casually start the translation. According to 高僧传—耶舍
传, it recorded that when Kumārajīva translated Dasabhumi-sutra 十住經, due to
unfamiliar with this sutra, it lasted one month to begin the translation since he got the
185
text, and Kumārajīva said to Yao Xing: “Although I once recited the text, I am still not
good at the meaning. Only Buddhayasas could penetrate into the sutra, who is now in
Gu Zang. I plead you to invite him. With one sentence, three times of consideration
would be taken, and then start the translation, which makes the sutra’s subtle and
profound meaning undeclined, and creditable for thousands of years”.
Japanese scholar 谷响 evaluated: “Only such loyal professionalist engaged with
scripture translation, it is possible to translate perfect and excellent, refined creditable
translation works”. Huang Xianian also considered that in Chinese history, intellectual
class with literati as the main stream, emphasized the good tradition of personality
cultivation, which could be reflected on the honest attitude to make scripture transaltion
and interpretation, with Kumārajīva as the representative of such personality power. He
became the great sage and the teacher f later generations. Kumārajīva, by his high virtue
with modesty and pursuit for truth, has been the model for lay and monastic Buddhists
until nowadays.346
3.4.3External Conditions for Successful Scripture Translation
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation in Chang’an presented some difference from
previous translations, the latter of which mostly belonged to personal affairs, even
restricted by financial reasons. Kumārajīva’s scripture translation obviously got support
from the nation, sufficient support not only in money but also in high-level translators.
1.Stable political environment
From An Shigao to Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, and even to Paramārtha 真谛, though
with high personal ability, they were unable to accomplish their wishes by the limitation
of contemporary social environment. In the period of Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, the north
was in war disorder among five ethinic minorities and sixteen countries. In order to
avoid from war turmoil, he took with scriptures travelling around between Du Huang
and Chang’an. In 出三藏记集, it recorded: “From Dun Huang to Chang’an, he made
scripture transmission and translation along the path, and wrote them into Jin Language
(Chinese)”.347 When Paramārtha 真谛 came to China, it was late Liang dynasty. After
he just arrived in Jian Kang, Hou Jing Violation 侯景之乱 occurred soon, after which
346
347
1 黄夏年：
《四十五年来中国大陆鸠摩罗什研究的综述》
，
《佛学研究》1994 年，第 249 页。
2《大正藏》第 55 页，第 97 页下。
186
the south entered into the age of war disorder. Even after a long time of the
establishement of Chen dynasty, the disorder did not stop. Paramārtha 真谛 traveled to
many places. Although there was the royal support, the translation was forced to
suspend by war. At last, he reached Guangzhou with physical exhaustion. Therefore,
Paramārtha 真谛 considered that it was not the proper time for him to transmit dharma.
Comparatively, it was Latter Qin’s prosperous period for Kumārajīva’s dharma
transmission. Yao Chang (Yao Xing’s father) robbed Fu Jian’s kingship and soon there
came to the period of Yao Xing’s dominion, who was talented in both in arts and force,
so the society was stable and the politics was open. He emphasized to apply talented
elites and advocated greatly for Confucian theory and Buddhist theory. Yao Xing was
in power for over 20 years (394-415), including Kumārajīva’s life in Chang’an (401413). It is just because of Yao Xing’s great support and stable external environment that
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation achieved brilliant success.
2. The ruler’s powerful support and the establishment of national translation
platform
The king’s support was the indispensable condition which enabled Kumārajīva to
devote himself to scripture translation whole-heartedly. The main support of
Kumārajīva’s scripture transaltion in Chang’an was from the empire Yao Xing in Latter
Qin, who worshiped triple Gem at the young age and aimed for dharma preaching, so
he greatly supported Buddhism. After Kumārajīva arrived in Chang’an, Yao Xing
treated him as polite as the national master, and admired him greatly. When starting the
dialogue, it would last the whole day, studying the subtle meaning without tiredness for
years.348 The reflective examples of such support are listed in the following.
Firstly, Yao Xing found the national translation platform to support Kumārajīva’s
scripture translation. Yao Xing invited Kumārajīva to live in Xiao Yaoyuan 逍遥园,
which was specially for Kumārajīva to translate scriptures and preach dharma.
Therefore, Xiao Yaoyuan became the famous scripture translation place, which was
located in the north of Chang’an, near Wei River. According to 晋书—姚兴载记, Yao
Xing built the stupa in 永贵里, and set up 般若台 in middle palace. There was the 澄
玄堂 in Xiao Yaoyuan, which was the place for Kumārajīva to preach dharma. These
places were all splendid and magnificent. It could be said that Xiao Yaoyuan was the
348
1《高僧传》卷 2，汤用彤校注本，中华书局 1996 年，第 52 页。
187
pioneer place for scripture translation.
Secondly, Yao Xing provided excellent translators as assistants for Kumārajīva.
Their age ranged from 19 to 70, whose knowledge and aritcles were both in the first
level, as is said “three thousand virtuous monks assembling in one place to accept Yao
Xing’s offering together”.349
Thirdly, Yao Xing often went to Xiao Yaoyuan to take part in scripture translationg
activity. In 晋书—姚兴载记, it recorded: “Yao Xing went to Xiao Yaoyuan and invited
monks to listen to Kumārajīva’s dharma lecture in 澄玄堂…Kumārajīva held the
Sanskrit text, Yao Xing held the old translated text, to make comparison, thus to make
the new translation follow the essence and meaning…Yao Xing admired Buddhist path,
and all ministers followed him”. Thus, the entire court regarded Kumārajīva as the
sainted, all listening to his dharma preaching, inviting Kumārajīva to translate
scriptures, treating Kumārajīva as the teacher. For example, the great general Yao Xian,
left general Yao Song, invited Kumārajīva to preach new translated scriptures many
times. It is due to the ruler’s support that Kumārajīva’s scripture translation obtained
superior conditions, with more and more monks coming to follow him, even to the
amount of over 5000 monks from afar.
3.Strict scripture translation procedure and high-level translators as assistants
About the operating situation of Kumārajīva’s scripture translation platform,
Master Seng Rui once made detailed record in 大品经序 : “Kumārajīva held the
Sanskrit text in hand, read it in Chinese, though in different languages, the textual
essence was integrated. Yao Xing as the king of Yao Qin, respectfully read the old
translated sutra, examined the mistakes, consulted the common translation method,
expressed the Buddhist essence. In addition, Yao Xing together with five hundred
monks detailedly examined the meaning and essence, investigated the translation
whether following the Middle Way, and then wrote the translation down. On 25th,
December of the fifth year of Hong Shi period, the translation finished, and correction
finished on 22nd of April of the next year. Though the translated text was roughly fixed,
to make interpretive commentaries seemed perfect, so the commentary came along to
correct some points in the transalted sutra. After the commentary, the sutra translation
ended”.
Kumārajīva held the scripture translation activity in Chang’an, which is the biggest
translation place in contemporary China, so large in scale that there was never such one
before. By analyzing the scripture translation procedure, the steps include the head
349
2《历代三宝记》卷 8，大正藏第 49 册，第 75 页。
188
translator, language transmitter, Sanskrit meaning verification, version verification,
Chinese meaning verification, script-writing, polishing, and correction, etc.(in Chinese
they mean 译主，度语，证梵义，证义，笔受，润文，校勘). There are clear allocations
in the process of scripture translation, which is the outstanding characteristics of
Kumārajīva’s translation platform. This displays the great improvement of Buddhist
scripture carrer, which is the new memorinium for the transaltion history of Chinese
Buddhist scriptures. In the meantime, this is an obvious sign for Kumārajīva’s new
translation different from previous old translation.350
The achievements Kumārajīva attained in scripture translation are due to his
scripture translation career in Chang’an, and the great help of excellent translators.
Starting from Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, scripture translation career in Chang’an had laid
a solid foundation. To the period of Master Dao’an, Fu Jian provided great support, and
had formed a set of complete scripture translation procedure, and cultivated a lot of
advanced translators. After Kumārajīva came to Chang’an, many great monks having
attended Master Dao’an’s scripture transaltion also took part in Kumārajīva’s
translation activity. These great monks include 法和，僧䂮，僧叡，昙影，僧导, etc.,
who are important elites in Kumārajīva’s scripture translation platform. In the
meanwhile, there are also some monks originally in Chang’an, such as 法领，道标，
道恒，僧肇, as well as some monks from the south, such as 道生，慧叡，慧观, and
some monks from the north, such as 道融，慧严，僧业，慧询, etc., who all participated
Kumārajīva’s scripture translation career, most of whom are intellectual monks selected
from all areas or coming themselves. They are good at textual wording, professional in
doctrinal theory, and have excellent basis of doctrines and literature, who play essential
function for the success of Kumārajīva’s scripture translation.
3.4.4Internal Conditions for the Development of Buddhism
(1)The need for the independent development of Chinese Buddhism
Internal environment in inland China for the development of Buddhism is one
important factor for the success of Kumārajīva’s dharma transmission. Although there
was certain foundation of contemporary Chinese Buddhism, it had not isolated from
obscure situation of the early period. This was reflected on the no difference between
Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism; and on the dependence of Buddhist philosophy on
350
1《苑艺》
：
《鸠摩罗什佛經“新译”初探》
，
《天津师大学报》1984 年第 4 期，第 51 页。
189
Chinese metaphysics, by which there was no clear understanding about Mahayana
prajna thought; and on too many problems related with early scripture transaltion, the
abstruse and profound Buddhist scriptures difficult to become popular.
After Kumārajīva came to Chang’an, there assembled nearly five thousand monks
in a short period, most of whom came spontaneously to listen to dharma preaching and
learn from Kumārajīva. They presented strong vigor for knowledge. After obtaining
Kumārajīva’s translated Lotus Sutra, Master Seng Rui in 法华经序 said: “This sutra
preaching is like dancing in the high by wearing clouds; like climbing the high
mountain to look downward, with over 800 monks understanding the sutra meaning,
who are all elites from all areas”. This reflected the Buddhist development situation in
Contemporary inland China.
Previous great monks applied metaphysical theory to interpret prajna theory, thus
appearing Geyi Buddhism. Master Seng Rui in 毘摩罗诘堤經义疏序 said: “Since the
wisdom wind of Buddhism blew to the east, dharma words flowed by speech, though
preaching and learning, Geyi Buddhism deviated from original doctrine, with theories
of six Buddhist families partial instead of mutual integration”. 351 The aim for
Kumārajīva scripture transaltion is to correct the previous cognition and methods.
Kumārajīva advocated for indirect or free translation to break up the restriction of the
previous old transaltion. When he translated Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, the reason for
his complete translation of the first chapter was to correct inland monks’ wrong
understanding about Buddhist philosophy for a long period, to make Buddhist scholars
free from Geyi’s winding path. This is the important thought conducted in Kumārajīva’s
scripture translation activity, the origin of which was the actual requirement for the
development of Chinese Buddhism.
(2)The reform of indirect translation derived from a lesson of previous scripture
translation and the need of Buddhist arena
In Biography of Great Monks, there made comparison between new translation
and old translation: “In previous translation, there were some translators, such as Zhi
Qian 支谦, Nie Chengyuan 聂承远, Zhu Fonian 竺佛念, Shi Baoyun 释宝云, Zhu
Shulan 竺叔兰, Wu Luocha 无罗叉, etc., who were good at Sanskrit and Chinese and
could translate well. With one reading of textual content, there would be three times of
consideration, with word meaning clear, then applying local authorized business to
make decoration and standard. As it is said: to translate by context could illustrate the
351
1 梁僧祐：
《出三藏记集》卷 8，大正藏第 55 册，第 59 页。
190
right meaning, in which the essence was set. To the period of Kumārajīva, he had broad
and profound learning, further vision, professional in local languages. He disliked Zhi
Qian’s 支谦 and Dharma-rakṣa’s translation, which were old and absurd expression,
not perfect, so Kumārajīva made re-translation by directly reading the Sanskrit version.
As a result, sutras with old translation and new translatin were expressed differently but
with one meaning. At that period, there were excellent monks could understand the
sutra meaning, polish the words, translate by essence, with the aim to enlighten people,
so Kumārajīva’s scripture translation in Chang’an was well-known and praised as the
best of all”.352
This paragraph made evaluation about the translation by previous translators and
Kumārajīva. It is regarded that previous translators were contributing, but Kumārajīva’s
translated version was the best meritorious. The major task for Kumārajīva to Chang’an
was to translate Buddhist scriptures, which was opposite from his original idea to
preach and translate Mahayana doctrines. Even though scripture translation, it mainly
focused on re-translation of previous translated scriptures instead of completely
translating new scriptures. Such feature had been predominant translation activity from
the beginning to the end, which Kumārajīva had to follow. Such feature resulted from
the ruler of Latter Qin as well as from great monks in Chinese Buddhist arena. Further
to say, such feature was the great requirement for translation reform of Buddhist
scriptures. Master Dao’an’s disciple Seng Rui criticized old translated prajna sutra “If
using the old translated version, the doctrinal meaning could be close; if letting the
translated version aside, the doctrinal meaning is still further 求之弥至，失之弥远
(This implies that the old translated version could not let Chinese readers understand
the essence of scriptures, just facial understanding, so when letting the translated
version aside, readers are still not clear about the doctrinal meaning, still far away from
the essence of doctrines)”. Master Seng Rui in 小品经序 concluded: “By examining
the old translation, it is just like the wild field, with only half crops…Sanskrit text is
elegant, though deficient in elegance by Chinese-style translation, it is sufficient to
make correction”. The ruler also advised about old translation, as was recorded: “Yao
Xing considered this new translation as the dwelling of spirit, and disliked old
translation translated by Zhi Qian and Dharma-rakṣa 竺法护, afraid that the essence of
dharma would decline due to translators…Prince Yao Hong deeply knew the
translator’s faults”.353
352
353
2 释慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：
《高僧传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 141 页。
3《大正藏》第 55 册，第 55 页上。
191
No matter in monastic arena or in political arena, there was dissatisfaction about
previous scripture translation, which was the major motivation and source for
Kumārajīva to start reform about translation thoughts and methods. Therefore, in
translation work, Kumārajīva with his disciples made serious consideration again and
again, not only translating the original meaning, but also searching for popular word
expression, and delicate literary color, thus overturning what Master Dao’an considered
old style translation as the theory.
In translation practice, it is necessary to emphasize the selection of free translation
and transliteration cautiously, to avoid from previous shortcomings. Just as Master Seng
Rui said: “In Kumārajīva’s translation, correct those having lost pronunciation into
Indian language; define those having wrong Chinese translation by the literal meaning;
directly write those unchangeable original Indian expression; thus, though different
names and concepts used, and mixed Sanskirt and Chinese pronunciation, it is truly due
to the tranlator’s carefulness and seriousness”.354 Kumārajīva not only made reform
the translation methods but also redefined the names by translateration, giving up
metaphysical terms used in old transation, in order to avoid from the confusion with
Buddhist basic thoughts, thus correcting some old translated concepts, such as changing
阴，入，持 to 众，处，性. Therefore, in Kumārajīva’s translation, there were a lot of
new concepts and transliterated concepts. Proper transliteration not only overcomes the
shortcomings that meanings are difficult to understand, but also enriches Chinese
vocabulary, and meanwhile, remains some foreign color in translation, thus increasing
the beauty of word expression. Kumārajīva tried to improve translation styles,
sometimes deletion or sometimes change, with the aim to pursue simplicity and fluency
of the translated text, such as new translated Diamond Sutra, Lotus Sutra, and
Vimalakirti Sutra, etc., all with literary sense.
Thus, it could be seen that Kumārajīva’s Buddhist thoughts contained both
elements of ancient Indian Buddism and traces of his life in Western Regions. In the
meanwhile, his thoughts were also confined by Yao Xing’s authority and by intellectual
monks’ requirement about metaphysical Buddhism.
(3)Other factors for the popularity of Kumārajīva’s scripture translation
No matter how excellent the translated scripture, if nobody to recite and develop
it, the scripture would not benefit people. Later, intellectual monks once attending
scripture translation with Kumārajīva went to all areas and promoted Mahayana
scriptures translated by Kumārajīva, which is the important requisite for the fast
transmission of scriptures transalted by Kumārajīva.
354
1 僧叡：
《大品經序》
，大正藏第 55 册，第 53 页上。
192
Buddhist scriptures translated by Kumārajīva in Chang’an influenced deeply on
the development of Chinese Buddhism. His translation achieved the integration of
emphasis and completeness, which mainly refered to Mahayana Buddhism, especially
for prajna emptiness thought and Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka philosophy. From the
perspective of scripture scope, the new transalted scriptures involve many important
doctrines of Mahayana Buddhism, such as sutra, vinaya, sastra, and meditation of
Mahayana Buddhism. Therefore, Kumārajīva’s scripture transaltion and dharma
preaching full-fledgely influenced the development of inland Buddhism of China.
Chapter Four: Indian Factors of Kumārajīva’s Life Style and
Their Influence
4.1The Relationship between Kumārajīva and Political Power before
and after His Entering into Inland China
Kumārajīva in his life all made communication with political powers, no matter in
Kuci or in inland China, whose relationship with the rulers was most impressive.
Especially in Chang’an, he delt well with Yao Xiang’s relation, which promoted the
success of his scripture translation and dharma transmission. In general, they benefit
each other. Dependent on Kumārajīva, Yao Xing achieved his political purpose while
Kumārajīva with Yao Xing’s support developed Buddhism. Such subtle relationship
between politics and religion constituted the basic situation of contemporary
development of Buddhism.
4.1.1The Relationship between Politics and Religion in Kumārajīva’s Early Life
The reason for Kumārajīva successfully dealing with the relationship between
politics and religion is greatly related with his original background. Before Kumārajīva
came to Chang’an, Kumārajīva was familiar to deal with rulers. Therefore, Kumārajīva
did not absorb the experience of Master Dao’an, who concluded the experience that not
dedending on rulers, or dharma activities would be difficult to set up. Kumārajīva
became the best practitioner in the aspect of keeping good relationship with rulers.
Kumārajīva grew up in a royal family, advantageous conditions of which promoted
his development. According to Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that when
193
Kumārajīva was nine years old, with his mother he came to Kophen to learn dharma,
and he meet Bandhudatta, who was the cousin of Kophen king. By his efforts and talent,
Kumārajīva was well-known to around countries and people from near and far came to
follow him as the teacher. He was invited to the palace by the Kophen king and debated
with non-Buddhists, and at last, he defeated subdued non-Buddhists and got Kuci king’s
appreciation. The temple Kumārajīva lived was added with five Bhikkus and ten
samanas for service. That is to say, young Kumārajīva had received royal appreciation.
He began to make communication with rulers at the young age.
On the way to Kuci, Kumārajīva arrived in Sha Le. Sha Le king invited him to
preach 转法轮經, at the period of which, Kumārajīva had be involved with politics,
because Sha Le king’s invitation of Kumārajīva was aimed to eliminate monks’
arrogance of his own country, and to establish good relationship with Kuci king. During
his stay in Sha Le, Kumārajīva met Sha Le two princes and contacted Mahayana
Buddhism, so his life made great changes.
After Kumārajīva returned to Kuci, he was ceremoniously welcomed and started
a religious reform and political fight in the support of Kuci king. From the result, it
could be seen that Kumārajīva was the important participator and the last victim.
However, the political fight experience made him easily to cooperate with rulers. Due
to severe inside fight, Kuci king’s religious and political reform cooperating with
Kumārajīva failed at last.
During 17 years’ life in the control of Lű Guang, Kumārajīva was more aware of
the importance to keep good relationship with rulers. Although Kumārajīva did not
accomplish his wish of dharma transmission, he cultivated endurance through Lű
Guang’s insult and military consultation, rather than severe struggle. This illustrates
that Kumārajīva had reached maturity in thought in the aspect of dealing with the
relationship with rulers. This laid solid foundation for later communication with rulers
in Latter Qin administration.
4.1.2 Yao Xing’s Communication with Kumārajīva and His Disciples for Political
Aims
Yao Xing was one open-minded king in the period of East Jin and sixteen countries,
who believed in Buddhism since he was young. As is said in Biography of Great Monks:
“Yao Xing admired triple Gem and was interested in dharma preaching”. 355 In the
historical literature, it recorded: “Yao Xing worshiped triple Gem, greatly promoted
Buddhism, established fasting feast, with incense perfuming and overlapping, making
people attend the fasting and abandon secular affairs to the degree of half people from
355
1《高僧传》卷 2《鸠摩罗什传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 52 页。
194
ten houses”.356 Yao Xing was the prince’s teacher in Fu Jian authority, and actually
was the hostage. After Fu Jian passed away, Yao Xing fled back to his father and was
nominated as the prince. Fu Jian was also a king believing in Buddhism, who in order
to get Master Dao’an started the war to Xiang Yang (379). He established translation
platform for Master Dao’an. In order to get Kumārajīva, he sent Lű Guang to attack
Kuci (382). Yao Xing grew up in such Buddhist environment.
After Kumārajīva arrived in Chang’an, Yao Xing treated him as polite as a national
master, both of whom often talk for a long time. Yao Xing sometimes attended
Kumārajīva’s scripture preaching and translating activities. In 晋书 — 姚兴载记 , it
recorded: “Yao Xing went to Xiao Yaoyuan and invited monks to listen to Kumārajīva’s
dharma lecture in 澄玄堂…Kumārajīva held the Sanskrit text, Yao Xing held the old
translated text, to make comparison, thus to make the new translation follow the essence
and meaning”. In the ruling class, there were people in favor of Buddhism and they
often as the host held the scripture translation activity in Chang’an. According to 出三
藏记集, such activities were listed in the table.
host
translator
time
place
Scripture name
姚旻
竺佛念
391
An Ding
王子法益坏目因缘經
姚嵩
Kumārajīva
404
Chang’an
Hundred Treatise
姚兴
Kumārajīva
404
Xiao Yao yuan
New Mahaprajna sutra
姚兴
Kumārajīva
405
Da temple
Mahaprajnaparamita
Sastra
姚嵩，姚显
Kumārajīva
406
Da temple
New Vimalakirti sutra
姚嵩
Kumārajīva
406
Chang’an
New Lotus sutra
姚显
Kumārajīva
407
Chang’an
自在王經
姚泓
Kumārajīva
408
Chang’an
New
minor
prajnaparamita sutra
姚显
Kumārajīva
411
Chang’an
Satyasiddhi-śāstra
356
2《高僧传》卷 6，中华书局，1992 年，第 240 页。
195
成实论
姚爽
姚兴
Kumārajīva
412
Chang’an
Dharmagupta Vinaya
Dharmagupta,
Dharmayasas
415
Chang’an
Srariputra Abhidharma
Yao Xing not only read scriptures and made meditation by Kumārajīva’s
instruction, but also composed 通三世论 to verify the real existence of three lifetimes,
in order to teach people clear about the causal retribution in Buddhism and the correct
theory of reincarnation, which was sent to Kumārajīva for advice. In fascicle 8 of 历代
三宝记, it recorded similarly: “Yao Xing worshiped Buddha Dharma, made offereing
to three thousand monks constantly in Cao Tang temple, took part in Kumārajīva’s
scripture translation, about which he could make profound study and penetrate into the
essence”. Master Hui Yuan in the south was well-known for virtue and broad learning.
Although Master Hui Yuan was not in the control area of Yao Xing, Yao Xing still
“admired Master Hui Yuan’s virtue and personality, and praised his talent and thought,
wrote to him sincerely, with continuous letters and donations 信饷连 接 ”. When
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra finished translation, Yao Xing sent the translation to Master
Hui Yuan and invited him to make the preface.357 Such communication is not politicaloriented but academic and culture exchange between friends.
Yao Xing believed in Buddhism but not addicted to Buddhism, which is different
from Shi Le and Fu Jian, who had the inclination of clinging to Buddhism.358 As a king,
in the balance of religion and political power, Yao Xing treated the latter as the superior
all the time, making religion in the service of politics.
1.Keep equal worship between Buddhism and Confucianism
Former Qin paid much attention to Confucianism, and in the dominion period of
Fu Jian, Yao Xing was the teacher of the prince, so he had high Confucian cultivation
at an early age. Yao Xing was the later generation of Qiang ethnic minority, but he was
well-cultivated since he was a child. Though in disorder, his learning did not stop.359
When he was the prince, though he was busy with fighting on horse, he still talked
1《高僧传》卷 6，
《慧远传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 52 页。
2 十六国其它许多国王，如后赵的石勒（274-333）
，前秦的苻坚（338-385）等，似乎都有佞佛之嫌，
不妨参见杜继文：
《佛教史》
，江苏人民出版社 2006 年版，第 138-145 页。
359
3 王亚荣：
《长安佛教史论》
，宗教文化出版社，2005 年 8 月版，第 4 页。
196
357
358
about scriptures and books with his teachers; in the management of political affairs, he
still with virtuous elders discussed about the Path and complicated doctrines, which
attracted many intellectuals coming to listen. Leaners all persuaded to learn this, which
made learning Confucian theory popular.360 About Yao Xing’s emphasis on Confucian
theory, as is recorded in the historical literature: “姜龛 from Tianshui, 淳于岐 from
Dongping, and 郭高, etc., were all virtuous elites, professional in theory and practice,
with hundreds of disciples respectively to teach in Chang’an. There were nearly ten
thousand intellectuals coming from afar to learn from them. When Yao Xing was free,
he would invite 姜龛 and others to 东堂 to discuss about the Path and doctrines. 胡
辩 from Liang Zhou, went to Luo Yang at the end of Fu Jian period, where he taught
over one thousand disciples. Yound schoars from Guan Zhong mostly came to request
about the Path. Yao Xing told the general of Guan Zhong: these intellectuals paid a visit
for the Path, and cultivated the Path, so they came and went freely without restriction.
Therefore, scholars were advised to learn Confusian theory and this theory became
popular”.361
In fascicle 117 of 晋书, it recorded Yao Xing’s emphasis on Confucian traditional
ritual system. After his mother passed away, there was a court debate about how to
conduct the mortal service 服丧: 尹纬 claimed for traditional “immediate bury as
aupicious 既葬即吉”; 李篙 agreed with the Han tradition of “white dress in court 素
服临朝” to manifest the filial management of country. Yao Xing took the latter advice,
which illustrates his emphasis and admiration for Confucian traditional thoughts, as
well as his determination to govern the country by Confucian theory. Such managing
attitude and political notion implied that in his later attitude to Buddhism, he treated
Buddhism not as a faithful Buddhist but a literati with broad breast.
2.Making full use of Kumārajīva’s dignity and ability to advance the development
of Buddhism
Yao Xing obtained Kumārajīva by the cost of fight, and helped him to establish
translation platform, with a large number of Mahayana scriptures translated. Yao Xing
attended the translation platform and consulted about scripture translation, learned and
360
361
4《晋书》
《姚兴载记上》
，中华书局本，第 117 卷，第 2975 页。
5《晋书》卷 117，第 2979 页。
197
listened to scripture preaching, which made him improve the Buddhist thought.
Yao Xing made full use of Kumārajīva’s dignity and promoted the transmission
and development of inland Buddhism by scripture translation. Buddhist thoughts began
to inspire the public. Through Buddhism, people got a slice of comfort in war.
Especially in the aspect of stablizing the public, Buddhism played the important
function. In the meantime, by establishing translation platform for Kumārajīva,
nationwide excellent monks assembled in Chang’an, a wanting place for intellectuals.
The outstanding phenomenon was that royal people involved in metaphysical talks
competitively treated intellectual monks as teachers, and intellectual monks became the
theory creator of metaphysical talks, and Buddhit scripture translation platform became
the source place of such theory. Such changes in culture and thought make the
difference between ethnic minorities and Chinese nation shrink unprecedentedly, as
well as make Buddhist theory penetrate into Chinese thoughts and culture.
Contemporary Buddhism developed fast in Guan Zhong, so that Guan Zhong had
become one of three Buddhist centers in the contemporary development of Chinese
Buddhism.362 Scholars from all areas collected in China like the cloud, so Chang’an
became the Buddhist academic research center in the whole country, just as Hui Rui
said: “In Guan Zhong, it was for ten years that Buddha Dharma had been
prosperous”. 363 This made the relationship between ethnic minorities and Chinese
people gradually reduce the gap and become integrated. Yao Xing cultivated and
collected numerous elites to preach Buddha Dharma to people, which to some extent
influenced the secular political dominion. This in the conflict between king’s power
and Buddhist community, stimulated the transformation of Buddhsim to adapt to the
need of traditional religious belief in the society of China.
3.Set up the ruler’s power by developing Buddhism
Yao Xing worshiped Buddhism, which was based on the king-superior thought,
and in the process of his Buddha worship, he thought about the status of the king in
Buddhism, and practiced in religious activities. He wrote articles, such as 通三世论,
was the manifestation of such thought. Yao Xing in 通三世论 said: “The sainted could
see three lifetimes. If it is non-existent, then the sainted could not see. If saying it is
existent, then it is easy to cling to permanence. Though not seen by eyes, the principle
theory is constant there. The principle theory is seen by the sainted, so there is no doubt
1 任继愈：
《中国佛教史》第二卷，中国社会科学出版社，1985 年版，第 3 页”两晋时，中国佛教传播
的中心有三处：长安，凉州，庐山“。
363
2《喻疑》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 5，大正藏第 55 册，第 41 页中。
198
362
about three lifetimes”. In 通三世, Yao Xing emphasized: “Sentient beings experience
three lifetimes, though not seen by eyes, the truth is constant there. The sainted could
know the truth of three lifetimes”.
Why did Yao Xing repeatedly emphasize the real existence of three lifetimes and
verify the existence of three lifetimes? At the initial transmission of Buddhism to China,
Mahayana scriptures and Hinayana scriptures were both translated simultaneously.
However, it is still obscure for people to know the demarcation between them. Hinayana
Sarvastivada School claimed for “the real existence of three lifetimes; the constant
existence of dharma entity”, and considered that three lifetimes and all things and
phenomena have the real entity and real existence. However, Mahayana scriptures, such
as prajna sutra, claimed for emptiness of all dharma, and considered all things and
phenomena as empty and illusory, so were three lifetimes. In the emptiness chapter of
Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra translated by Kumārajīva, it said: “The past lifetime and
things in it are empty; the future and things in the future are empty; the present and
things in the present are empty”. According to this, it is considered that three lifetimes
are non-existent. Such emptiness view that all is empty even became the popular
thought at that period. However, if negating three lifetimes, it is equal to negating
reincarnation and causal retribution, directly threatening the theoretical foundation of
Buddhism. Yao Xing held the view of the real existence of three lifetimes. What he
expressed in 通三世论 was just people’s doubt and attempt to integrate when prajna
emptiness thought was transmitted into China. The verification result by Yao Xing is:
three lifetimes are real existent, though not seen by eyes, once arising by conditions, it
could be seen. It is just like the fire in the wood, and once conditions meet, there arises
the fire.
The thought of real existence of three lifetimes was basically fit for the political
benefit of the ruling class. Doing evil in the past, the retribution came in the present life,
and the future is uncertain. In other words, the difference between social orders, the
ruler and and the ruled, the empire and the ordinary people in present life is determined
by the past life, so it is unuseful to rebell. Ordinary people have to be obedient. Since
Wei, Jin, South and North dynasties, such thought had actually been the stabilizing
device to protect the Chinese feudal society, so is the same case under the background
of war disorder among sixteen countries.364
He Shizhe 贺世哲 pointed out that the statues of three lifetimes Buddhas were
located in Bing Ling temple of West Qin and in Mai Ji mountain of Latter Qin. The
outsanding Buddha is Maitreya Buddha with crossed feet. In addition to this, if no
364
1 杜斗城：
《麦积山的早期三佛窟与姚兴的<通三世论>》
，
《敦煌学辑刊》1997 年第 1 期，第 124 页。
199
reference to masterials, it is difficult to tell the difference of three Buddhas, because
they are equal in height, and have no characteristics. The appearance of such statues is
possible related with the geographical location of two grottoes. Mai Ji mountain and
Bing Ling temple were near Chang’an, the Buddhist thought of which is inevitabley
influenced by Kumārajīva…At that period, Kumārajīva and Yao Xing claimed for three
liftetimes theory. 365 Du Doucheng 杜 斗 城 considered that it was just under the
influence of such thought that the subjects of early grottoes in Mai Ji mountain all chose
three Buddhas, which were in large scale and brand in shape, having the air of the king.
For such large construction, it is impossible to be made by ordinary people and local
governments. Thus, it should be the national project of Latter Qin dynasty. Yao royal
family in Latter Qin derived from Qiang ethnic minority, in the area of Tian Shui in the
south of Long (Shan Xi province), with Chang’an as the capital. Tian Shui is Yao Xing’s
hometown and the conquered place, the status of which is very outstanding, so Yao
Xing sent his brother Yao Song to govern Tian Shui area. Therefore, it is not difficult
to understand the appearance of the large scale three Buddhas in Latter Qin period.366
It is verified by new discovered traces that in Mai Ji mountain, the 90th, 165th, 74th, 78th,
51th grottoes belonged to royal grottoes of Latter Qin. These five grottoes were built
by five rulers of Latter Qin respectively, which were said to be “five shrines of Yao
Qin”.367
4.Establish monastic official system to set Sangha and monks in the scope of
management
One manifestation for Yao Xing to make Buddhism serve politics is the
establishment of monastic official system, subordinated to political authority. Due to
over ten thousand monks and nuns in contemporary Chang’an, in order to manage
Buddhism, Yao Xin established administrative offices to govern monks and nuns in the
whole country. According to fascicle 6 of Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that
since Kumārajīva entered inland China, monks from afar collected in Chang’an, which
were inevitable to result in negative effects. Yao Xing said: “Those illiterate monks and
nuns have not become qualified, so they should bear the suffering without faults. If
making faults without awareness, then the faults increased. It is better to set up monastic
head master to purify the sangha”. Therefore, Yao Xing ordered in written form: “Since
Buddhism was transmitted to the east, there have been more monks and nuns, so
2 贺世哲：
《关于十六国北朝时期的三世佛与三佛造像诸问题》
，
《敦煌研究》1993 年第 1 期，第 3 页。
3 杜斗城：
《麦积山的早期三佛窟与姚兴的<通三世论>》
，
《敦煌学辑刊》2007 年第 1 期，第 124 页。
367
4 考证见夏朗云：
《麦积山石窟早期洞窟最早焚烧痕迹的考察—后秦开窟新证》
，
《敦煌研究》2004 年第
6 期。
《麦积姚秦五龛对云冈昙曜五窟的启示》
，
《2005 年云冈石窟国际学术研讨会论文集》
，文物出版社，
2006 年。
200
365
366
disciplines should be made to avoid from declination. Master Seng Lue 僧䂮was
excellent in learning and virtuous at the young age, who could be national monk head.
Master Seng Qian 僧迁 cultivated both meditation and wisdom and could be 悦众.
Master Fa Qin and Master Hui Bin should be 僧录. They were offered with rich
assets…This is the beginning of Seng Zheng 僧正”. Yao Xing nominated Kumārajīva’s
disciple 僧䂮as the highest monastic official called 僧正; nominated Kumārajīva’s
another disciple Seng Qian 僧迁 as associate head 都维那. Seng Lu 僧录 was set to
govern monastic members, controlling the monastic identies and relevant affairs. Such
Buddhist managing authority is the initial monastic official administration in Chinese
Buddhist histoy. From then on, the monastic official system was formally established
in Chinese feudal society, which represents the superior of empire power over religious
power. In addition, Yao Xing made the order to allow talented monks become lay people,
to help him manage the poltical affairs. This illustrates that Yao Xing supported
Buddhism with the aim to protect his dominating order. Xie Chongguang 谢重光 by
analysis considered that the fundamental aim for Yao Xing establishing monastic
official system was: “By administrative interference, it is aimed to deal with political
and economic problems due to the development of sangha”.368 Therefore, Yao Xing
intended to control Buddhism by establishing monastic official system.
4.1.3Kumārajīva’s Attitude to Yao Xing’s Political Power
Kumārajīva made splendid scripture translation career, which was done in the
direct support of Yao Xing, by whose policy, intellectual monks from all areas
assembling in Chang’an. In fascicle 18 of 历代三宝记, it pointed out: “Three thousand
virtuous monks assembled to obtain offering from Yao Qin’s king Yao Xing”. Without
Yao Xing’s political assistance, scripture translation career could have been not easy to
accomplish unimaginably. The relationship between Kumārajīva and Yao Xing was
rather well. After Kumārajīva arrived in Chang’an, they made Buddhist talks for a long
time.
When Kumārajīva reached Chang’an, he was nearly sixty years old, without time
to waste, so he took pains to translate scriptures and preach scriptures. Due to his
368
1 谢重光：
《中古佛教僧官制度和社会生活》
，北京商务印书馆，2009 年，第 15-16 页。
201
personal frustrated experience, especially 17 years in Liang Zhou, Kumārajīva deeply
realized the principle to develop Buddhism in middle China that without the support of
the king, the dharma development was difficult to start, just as Master Dao’an said. In
the war disorder, ordinary people even could not survive, if without the government’s
help, it was impossible to achieve such large scale scripture translation activity and
dharma development. Therefore, in many affairs, Kumārajīva felt appreciated to Yao
Xing administration.
通三世论 was the letter communication between Yao Xing and Kumārajīva.
Although Yao Xing was not very profound in Buddhist theories, Kumārajīva provided
him much interpretation in theory. Kumārajīva answered Yao Xing’s questions on the
standpoint of Mahayana theory, who by conventional truth agreed with the existence of
three lifetimes, which was not contradictory with prajna theory.
Kumārajīva often talked with his disciple Master Seng Rui about scripture
translation, as is recorded: “When Kumārajīva everytime talked about the foreign
(especially Sanskrit) linguistic style, he would say that India emphasized literary and
grammatical regulation, the pronunciation of which were fit for chanting. When
meeting the king, there must be the virtue praise; when meeting the Buddha, it was
better to praise by chanting, so were the same style of verses in scriptures. However, it
transforming Sanskrit to Qin language (Chinese), the elegant expression lost. Though
obtaining the general ideal, the textual styles were separate. Just like chewing the rice
to people, it not only lost the flavor, but also generated smelling”. Although this
illustrates the difference between Sanskrit and Chinese, it also implies Kumārajīva’s
experience about the complication of scripture translation.
From the perspective of Kumārajīva’s own aspiration, his initial aim seemed to
develop Mahayana theories rather than scripture translation, so he often sighed: “If I
start composing Mahayana Abhidharma, different from 迦旃延子, now in Latter Qin
country, few could understand it, though finishing composition, who I can preach to?”
Later, a foreign monk said: “What Kumārajīva had translate was just one in ten of what
he knew”.369 Kumārajīva once wrote one verse, which was the conclusion about his
life and his personality, and provided meaningful caution for later Buddhists: the mind
cultivates bright virtue, which could perfume extensively; the sorrow bird in the tree,
whose voice penetrating into the highest heaven(Chinese:心山育明德，流熏万由延；
哀鸾孤桐上，清音彻九天).
In his early years, Kumārajīva travelled to learn dharma around Western Regions,
369
1《高僧传》卷 2《鸠摩罗什传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 54 页。
202
and obtained Mahayana essence, popular to countries in Western Regions, honored by
later generations. He was worshiped by Fu Jian but could not meet, and was obtained
by Yao Xing, so what he had learned could be transmitted generation by generation, as
he said: “To make the Buddha Dharma transmit, though suffering, I had no hatred and
regret”. Kumarajive experienced the ups and downs of human life, and until he was old,
his dream came true (When he was in sixties to be invited to Chang’an to develop
Buddhism).
4.2The Indian Origin and Historical Influence of Kumārajīva’s
Precept Violation
Kumārajīva’s precept violation has been the topic attracing scholars’ attention in
ancient times and modern days, in China and abroad. There are three events related with
his precept violation as were recorded. The first event is after Lű Guang’s conquest of
Kuci; the second event is after Kumārajīva’s arrival in Chang’an; the third event is
recorded in 晋书—鸠摩罗什传: “Kumārajīva preached scriptures in Cao Tang temple,
and Yao Xing with ministers, virtuous monks in thousand, attended to listen.
Kumārajīva suddenly stepped down from his high seat and positively asked for
women”.370 Such event is obviously different from that in biography. One is forced to
do and the other is actively to do. After this event, it is said that monks in Chang’an
imitated him one after the another, so that when Kumārajīva preached the dharma, he
had to tell monks not to learn this from him. In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded:
“Every lecture, Kumārajīva often gave a metaphor, just like the lotus in the mud, and
monks should pick the lotus instead of the dirty mud”. His master Buddhayasa heard
about Kumārajīva’s precept violation, and sighed: “Kumārajīva is just like the good
cotton, how could make him in thorny forest?”371 In order to persuade the public and
to avoid monks’ imitation, Kumārajīva resumed supernatural power. He put the bowl
full of needles, and assembled monks to let them see Kumārajīva himself eat needles,
by saying: “If you can the needles, then you can imitate me to marry”. Then, monks felt
shamed and peruasive, and stopped the imitation.
4.2.1Indian Origin of Kumārajīva’s Precept Violation
Kumārajīva’s precept violation resulted from objective reasons and subjective
reasons. Objectively, the loose management in Western Regions was given to precept
370
371
2《晋书》卷 95，第 2501-2502 页。
3《高僧传》卷 2，
《佛陀耶舍传》
，中华书局，1992 年，第 66 页。
203
violation. Kumārajīva’s father was forced to marry after he came to Kuci to develop
Buddhism. This reflected that in contemporary period, there was no strict restriction
about monks’ marriage. Kumārajīva’s father and mother’s story might influence
Kumārajīva. When Kumārajīva was twelve years old, on the way back to Kuci, he met
an arahant, who said to Kumārajīva: “if you could not break the precept when you are
thirty-five, then you can develop Buddha Dharma and convert innumerous sentient
beings, with no difference from 优波崛多. If precepts were not complete, then it would
be impossible and be a famous and talented master only”. In the view of the writer,
Kumārajīva had such inclination in his early years, so that the arahant could make the
prediction. After Kumārajīva came to Chang’an, he was not aware that inland monks
cared much about precept violation, so after the negative effects, he felt regret and made
the explanation. Therefore, for Kumārajīva’s precept violation, there are objective and
subjective factors.
The source of Kumārajīva’s precept violation becomes one point for exploration,
does such precept violation happen in Indian and Western Regions? Firstly, there is
some historical information about precepts in Western Regions. In contemporary Kuci,
Hinayana was predominant, especially Sarvastivada School, with Daśa-bhāṇavāravinaya 十诵律 popular in that area. In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that
Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉 from Kophen: “Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉 was firstly in Kuci and
preached vinayapitaka, with a lot of Buddhists coming to learn from him, and
Kumārajīva was also his student”. Kumārajīva learned Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya 十诵律
from Vimalākṣa 卑摩罗叉. In fascicle 11 of 出三藏记集, it mentioned one Bhikkhu
temple in Kuci: “Monks in the temple all change rooms, beds, and even temples every
three months. Without five years of full ordination, the monk should live without his
master even one night”. In Bhikkhuni temple, it recorded: “Bhikkunis should be selfrestrained by following the dharma, and there was strict investigation system, so they
also changed rooms, beds, and even temples every three months. If not Bhikkuni, nuns
should not go outside fewer than three ones. Without the master, nuns should not live
alone by one night”. It also recorded that nuns in Kuci temples were most from royal
families in the east of Cong Ling, coming from afar for Buddhism. From this, it could
be seen that in contemporary Kuci temples, vinaya precepts were very strict. 克孜尔
Kizil grottoes in Xin Jiang area were the representative of Kuci grottoes, in which the
content included nidāna 因缘, apadāna 譬喻, Jātaka 本生, etc. Li Ruizhe 李瑞哲
204
considered that by analyzing wall painting content, it could reflect Buddhist practice of
three trainings in Hinayana Buddhism. According to the classification of nine divisions
or twelve divisions about Buddhist doctrines, these wall paintings all belonged to
vinaya system, stories about which were drawn in grottoes, which played the function
of strengthening vinaya and meditation. 372 Hinayana vinaya was comparatively
complete in Kuci, but it was still questionable whether monks and nuns observed strictly.
In 克孜尔 Kizil grottoes, the aim of wall paintings was to caution people to observe
vinaya. On the other aspect, if all monastic members could follow vinaya precepts, then
wall paintings seemed not to be necessary to emphasize precepts. Therefore, it could be
presumed that in contemporary Kuci society, vinaya observance was not as strict as was
required.
When Kumārajīva was in Kuci, it was about the fourth or the fifth century, during
which period, Buddhism in Western Regions was deeply influenced by the Buddha
Dharma in Gandhara area and Kophen area. In Western Regions, there was clear area
difference between Mahayana Buddhism and Hinayana Buddhism. The centers of
Mahayana area were Sha Che and Khotan while the centers of Hinayana Sarvastivada
School were Kuci, Yanqi, and Shanshan, etc. No matter in area or in Buddhist origin,
Kuci had close relationship with Shanshan. Some development information in
Shanshan could be obtained from the contemporary Kuci. From the third century to the
fifth century, a kind of language called Kharoṣṭhī 佉卢文 transmitted from Da Yuezhi
was popular in Shanshan. Such linguistic words were also discovered in south road and
north road, which were mainly focused in 尼雅 and 楼兰 in the east of Khotan,
belonging to Shanshan area at that period. In Kuci area, there discovered the oldest
Tocharian scripts, which were formed by the old characters with the same kind of
phenomes, derived from about the sixth century or the fifth century. In north road, the
oldest paper scripts derived from the west (Kuci) and the middle (Yanqi) could be
assumed to be at least the sixth century. 彼诺 said: “During the several centuries after
Buddhism took root in Western Regions, I personally saw a linguistic separation from
the same kind of language. On the one aspect, Sanskrit was regarded as the religious
language in Western Regions, which was achieved by Kushan kingdom, especially 迦
腻色迦 Kaniṣka’s protection of Sarvastivada School, and final translation of Tripitaka
into Sanskrit. On the other aspect, such Hinayana school took the place in Tarim area
372
1 李瑞哲：
《新疆孜尔克石窟壁画内容所反映的戒律问题》
，《西域研究》2008 年第 3 期，第 69 页。
205
and due to other schools’ extension, especially Dharmagupta Buddhists, they used
another kind of language, which was similar to Gandhara language, the usage of which
lasted until the seventh century”.373
Such Kharoṣṭhī 佉 卢 文 literature had many materials related with ancient
Shanshan Buddhism, in which it recorded that monks could marry, live secular life,
inherit assets, manage field, and own land, etc., as well as could trade freely, even eat
flesh and drink alcohol. Some information is listed as followed. (1) Kh.418: “As Master
Buddhavarma claimed: Master Sariputra once raised a daughter, who married this
daughter to another master…”374
(2) Kh.655: Budhosa was the son of the monk Buddhasira.375
(3) Kh.419: Budhila and Budhaya were sons of the monk Athamo.376
(4) Kh.474: In 叶吠 county, a woman married a monk called Samghapala. The king
made a order that the monk Samghapala had wife and children, and if they were legal
and should provide assets. This area allowed monks to marry, have children, and live
together with family members, so it was natural to become the owner of the family.377
(5) Kh.621: The daughter of the monk Sundara went away with a man for marriage.378
(6) Kh.147: On 5th, September, each owner had one share, with 36 owners in the list, at
the end of which there made notes that general Rutraya and monk Jivamitra were ill.379
This obviously displayed that in Shanshan country, monks were legal to be owner of
the family.
From these literature materials, it could be seen that the contemporary monastic
living style in Shanshan country, which implied that precepts in Buddhism were not
observed strictly and seemed to be empty talk.
There are som materials related with monks eating flesh and drinking alcohol.380
(1) In 272 ancient script, it recorded that the king said to the state general: it was said
that tax director and his officers had drunk out all the alcohol.
(2) In 329 ancient script, the king commanded the general: now alcool is popular, so
when the king’s order came to your place, you must bring the alcohol to the palace day
after night, by the end of 5th of April.
1 彼诺著，耿升译，
《西域的吐火罗语写本与佛教文献》
，
《龟兹学研究》第 3 辑，第 26 页。中文载
《法国文学》丛书编辑委员会编，敦煌学专号第 5 辑，中华书局，2000 年版。
374
2 T. Burrow, A Translation of the Kharosthi Documents from Chinese Turkestan, Lodon, 1940, p.84. 王广
智：
《新疆出土佉卢文残卷译文集》
，载《尼雅考古资料》
，新疆文化厅，1988 年，第 183 页。
375
3 T. Burrow, A Translation of the Kharosthi Documents from Chinese Turkestan, Lodon, 1940, p.136.
376
1T. Burrow, A Translation of the Kharosthi Documents from Chinese Turkestan, Lodon, 1940, p.85.
377
2 林梅村：
《沙海古卷—中国所出佉卢文书初集》
，北京文物出版社，1988 年，第 119 页。
378
3 林梅村：
《沙海古卷—中国所出佉卢文书初集》
，北京文物出版社，1988 年，第 141 页。
379
4 林梅村：
《沙海古卷—中国所出佉卢文书初集》
，北京文物出版社，1988 年，第 187-188 页。
380
5 夏雷鸣：
《从佉卢文文书看鄯善国佛教的世俗化》
，
《新疆社会科学》2006 年第 6 期，第 117 页。
206
373
(3) In 652 ancient script, monks sold the land to the general and got the alcohol.
(4) In 345 ancient script, one monk borrowed rice and alcohol from a man called 注瞿
钵.
(5) In 358 ancient script: your temple head was abusing and wasting alcohol and flesh.
Such eating flesh and drinking alcohol custom not only existed in Shanshan, but
also influenced other areas, and even He Xi area (in Shanxi and Wei river’s west 河西
走廊) of Tang Dynasty. In Tang and Song dynasties, monks drank alcohol in Dun
Huang, which was recorded in the literature materials discovered in caves for tripitaka.
(1) In P. 2032 ancient script, in 后晋时代净土寺诸色入破历算会稿, there recorded
that monks ate alcohol.
(2) In P. 2049 ancient script, in 净土寺诸色入破历算会牒, it recorded alcohol was
prepared for monks.
Such similar records were also included in P. 2642, S.1519, S.5039 and S.6452,
etc. Therefore, it could be seen clearly that in Dun Huang area, monks were common
to drink alcohol, which not only existed in Dun Huang area, but also universal in
Ganzhou 甘州, Suzhou 肃州, Guazhou 瓜州 and Khotan area, etc. In S. 4899, it
recorded that alcohol was preserved for monks in Suzhou 肃州. 381 In P. 2629, it
recoded that the general provided one monk from Ganzhou 甘州 and one monk from
Khotan with alcohol.382 In Late Tang and Five dynasties, monks were allowed to join
the soldiers and emissionaries, who were provided with alcohol. This could verify that
monks in Ganzhou 甘州 and Khotan also drink alcohol.
In Buddhist precepts, there was the restraint from eating flesh, but monks in Dun
Huang also had the habit of eating flesh. As is recorded in P. 4909, on the second day
of January, monks were provided with flesh oil. In P.3490, it recorded that during the
temple building, monks were offered fried meat for supper.383
Not merely this, monks in Dun Huang also lived a secular life with the wife and
children. In P.2032, it recorded that the monks was provided with eight inches of cloth
1 唐耕藕，陆宏基编《敦煌社会经济文献真迹释录》第 3 辑，全国图书馆文献缩微复制中心，1990
年，第 184 页。
382
2《敦煌社会经济文献真迹释录》第 3 辑，第 271-276 页。
383
3 谭蝉雪：
《唐宋敦煌岁时佛俗》
，
《敦煌研究》2001 年第 1 期。
207
381
in order to send his dead wife. From this, it coul be seen that monks had wives and
children, and Buddhist regualtion in contemporary Dun Huang area was rather loose.384
In fascicle 2 of 慈恩传, it recorded that Master Xuan Zhuang in Kuci came across
the situation of Buddhism, as is recorded: “There were over ten people from 高昌
became monks in Kuci and lived in one temple…The next day, the king made offering
for them with pure flesh, and the monks refused. This was the rule in gradual Buddhist
teaching, but for Master Xuan Zhuang’s learning of Mahayana teaching, the rule was
different, so they were offered other food”.385
In fascicle 1 of Journey to the West in Great Tang Dynasty 大唐西域记, it recorded
the situation in Yanqi country: “The country had no disciplines, with dharma incomplete.
There were over ten temples, over 2000 monks, learning Sarvastivada
doctrines…Precept observance was pure and diligent, but monks ate pure flesh
restricted in gradual teaching”.386 Yanqi is next to Kuci and both belonged to Hinayana
teaching, and pure flesh and gradual teaching belonged to Hinayana doctrines.
Hinayana vinaya allowed to eat pure flesh,387 while Mahayana vinaya did not allow, as
was recorded in fascicle 4 of Mahaparinirvana Sutra or Lankavatara-sutra 楞伽经,
etc. 388 Therefore, from the viewpoint of Chinese Buddhism, this precept violation
disobeyed the Buddhist spirit, which also existed in India. In fascicle 3 of 慈恩传, it
recorded: “Walking 30 miles to the east, I reached Indrasrasaha Mountain, in the east
of which, there was a temple with a stupa. The temple once followed Hinayana teaching
and allowed to eat pure flesh”. 389 It could be seen that Hinayana such precept
requirement did not the idea in Kuci but originated from India.
In Dun Huang area, there were a lot of 粟特人 in Tang and Song dynasties, who
originally lived in the area of middle Asia and believed in Sarvastivada School, who
4 参见李正宇：
《唐宋时期的敦煌佛教》
，郑炳林主编《敦煌佛教艺术文化论文集》
，兰州大学出版社，
2000 年 7 月。
385
5 孙毓棠，谢方点校：
《大慈恩寺三藏法师传》
，北京，中华书局，1983 年，第 25-26 页。
386
6 季羡林等校注：
《大唐西域记校注》
，北京，中华书局，1985 年，第 48-53 页。
387
7Vinayapitaka, Vol I, p.238. 《南传大藏经》第 3 册，第 417 页；
《五分律》卷 22，大正藏第 22 册，第
149 页。
《四分律》卷 42 大正藏第 22 册，云：“有三种净肉，应食。若不故见，不故闻，不故疑，应
食”。
《十诵律》卷 26，大正藏第 23 册，第 1906 页云：“三种净肉听噉。何等三？若眼不见，耳不闻，心
不疑”。
《慧琳音义》卷 25，大正藏第 45 册云：“三种净肉，一不见杀，二不闻杀，三不疑杀为己杀等”。
388
8《大般涅槃经》卷 4《大正藏》第 12 册，第 386 页上；参见南本：
《大正藏》第 12 册，第 626 页。
《楞伽阿跋多罗宝经》卷 4《大正藏》第 16 册，第 513 页-514 页；
《入楞伽经》卷 8《遮食肉品》
，
《大正
藏》第 16 册，第 561 页上；于阗国三藏法师实叉难陀《大乘入楞伽经》卷 8《断食肉品》
，大正藏第 16
册，第 622 页。
389
1 孙毓棠，谢方点校：
《大慈恩寺三藏法师传》
，北京：中华书局，1983 年，第 73-74 页。
208
384
brought Hinayana thought to Shanshan along with tribe immigration, and at the same
time, brought Shanshan’s Buddhist custom to Dun Huang, etc.
The origin of secularized Shanshan Buddhism was not only related with Kangju
country, but related with the contemporary Kushan kingdom. After the middle of East
Han dynasty, especially in the period of Empire Ling, people from middle Asia
including Yue Zhi, Kangju, Anxi, and north India, continuously moved to inland China,
which became a immigrant trend. In the northwest, from Khotan and Shanshan areas,
there were also many middle Asian people having moved to inland China.390 After this,
Kushan kingdom was in turmoil, so there were a lot of Kushan people moving to inland
China to avoid from wars and disaster.391 Kharoṣṭhī 佉卢文 materials from Shanshan
country were generally between the third century and the fourth century, in which
period Shanshan officials suddenly applied Kharoṣṭhī 佉卢文 in large quantity, which
was obviously influenced by outside environment. The origin of such influence was the
Kushan people having moved to Shanshan country. The comparatively conspicuous
testimony was the father-son official inheriting phenomenon recorded in Kharoṣṭhī 佉
卢文.392 It could be regarded that Buddhism in Da Yuezhi, especially the art style of
Gandhara area, was brought to inland China by Kushan people. Huang Wenbi 黄文弼
also thought: “The eastward of Kushan kingdom’s influence and the transmission of
Buddhism started from the middle of the second century to the early of the fourth
century, over two hundred years continuously. According to this, it seemed affirmative
that it was Shanshan Buddhism rather than Kaśmira 迦湿弥罗 Buddhism that was
transmitted by Da Yuezhi people”. 393 Therefore, it could be sure that the origin of
secularized Shanshan Buddhism should have certain relationship with Kushan kingdom
in the northwest of India.
Kuci and Yanqi, no matte in language and culture, or in Buddhism, had close
relationship with India. In fascicle 1 of Journey to the West in Great Tang Dynasty 大
唐西域记, it recorded: “The language of 阿耆尼 country derived from India…The
country had no disciplines and dharma incomplete. There were over ten temples and
2A.H. 达尼著，I. H. 库雷希主编，
《巴基斯坦简史》
，第一卷，四川人民出版社，1974 年，第 226-227
页。
391
3 马雍：
《东汉后期中亚人来华考》
，
《新疆大学学报》1984 年第 2 期，第 28 页。
392
4 孟凡人：
《楼兰鄯善国简牍年代学研究》
，新疆人民出版社，1995 年，第 496 页。林梅村：
《贵霜大月
氏流域中国考》
，中国敦煌吐鲁番 1988 年学术讨论会论文。
393
5 黄文弼：
《西北史地论丛》
，上海人民出版社，1981 年，第 248 页。
209
390
over 2000 thousand monks learning Hinayana Sarvastivada doctrine. Scripture teaching
and vinaya rituals followed the Indian style, which was used by learners…Kuci
language also derived from India, with some rough changes, with music better than
other countries…There were over one hundred temples and five thousand monks
learning Hinayana Sarvastivada doctrines. Scripture teaching and vinaya rituals derived
from India, and what they learned was just this text”. Although Kuci Buddhism was
mainly influenced by Kophen Hinayana Buddhism, the contemporary Kophen was
subordinated to Kushan kingdom and belonged to the same branch of Hinayana
Sarvastivada School, so Kuci was more or less influenced by the secularized Buddhism
in local India.
To analyze from another aspect, Kumārajīva’s father was from India, who could
agree to marry Kumārajīva’s mother implied that it was free in the observance of
precepts. Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 nearly in the same age with Kumārajīva, had similar
experience with Kumārajīva. In fascicle 99 of Weishu 魏书, it recorded: “A monk called
Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 from Kophen went to Shanshan, and self-claimed to cure
diseases and to make women pregnant more times. He was discovered to have private
affairs with Shanshan king’s sister and fled to Liang Zhou, and was worshiped by King
沮渠蒙遜. Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 taught women the method to be pregnant, so many
women went to learn from him”. Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 also had the problem of precept
violation, rather worse than Kumārajīva. As is recorded that Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 was
from middle India or from Kophen, so his such thought was from India. By the above
two examples, it could be seen that as the prosperous areas of early India, north India
and middle India also actually had the phenomenon of breaking precepts, especially the
precept of restraining from sexual misconduct. Such phenomenon must deeply
influence Kuci, so that Kumārajīva’s mother was actively to marry Kumārajīva’s father
with the hindrance of royal power, which illustrated the precept loosely observed
phenomenon in contemporary Kuci.
It is certain that the degree of precept observance in Western Regions was also
influenced by natural environment. In natural conditions, Western Regions were
encountered with bad environment. Although there was farming, it was in narrow area.
From the scale of population, the number of monks surpassed the normal scope greatly.
In 后汉书 — 西域传 , it recorded that Khotan had the largest population of 80, 000
people, with Kuci not more than Khotan. In Biography of Fa Xian 法显传, it recorded
210
that there were over ten thousand monks in contemporary Khotan. In contemporary
Yanqi, there were 30,000 people, in which there were over 4000 monks as was recorded
in Biography of Fa Xian. In 晋书—西戎传, it recorded that in contemporary Kuci,
there was a city with threefold walls, in which there were over one thousand temples.394
It could indicate that the monastic members reached over ten thousand. With such large
number of monks and nuns, if without laboring or secular activities, political
construction, or military fight, it could be unimaginable. They would not be as the same
as the monks in middle China, so it was inevitable for Buddhism to become secularized.
4.2.2Historical Influence of Kumārajīva’s Precept Violation
Precept violation became the focus of the public, the reasons of which could be in
two aspects. On the one aspect, Kumārajīva was a historical celebrity as well as a monk,
so it is reasonable to follow Buddhist precepts. On the other aspect, as was depicted in
biography, it aroused the later generations’ presumption due to its mysterious character.
Although there were many comments, in conclusion, there might be three kinds. The
first comment considered that the first precept violation was Kumārajīva with his cousin,
and the second precept violation was the requirement of Yao Xing. Such obvious
precept violation severely disobeyed vinaya and belonged to bad phenomenon. People
holding such a view are in large number. The second comment was that Kumārajīva’s
two times of precept violation were both oppressed rather than his own intention, and
Kumārajīva felt shameful for his marriage, so each dharma preaching, he often firstly
mentioned: It was just like the lotus in the mud, so you should pick the lotus rather than
the dirty mud. Master Seng Zhao called that “Kumārajīva was oppressed to accept the
wife and he was only similar to secular people in form”. 395 The third comment
considered that Kumārajīva’s precept violation was the fact, but due to his great
contribution to Buddhism, such fault seemed small and should be forgivable. Such a
view took up the predominant status in great monks of ancient China. In biographies of
Master Seng You or Master Hui Jiao, both held such a view. On the one aspect, they
respected historical facts and must write precept violation in the biography. On the other
aspect, they tried to find reasons for Kumārajīva through many conditions. Master Hui
Jiao in 高僧传序录 said: “Monks in previouos biographies were mostly called famous
monks. Fame came after the true practice. If one monk could practice and get inspired
illumination, then he is great instead of famous. With little virtue but popular at that
time, then he is famous instead of great”. Master Hui Jiao tried to make distinction
394
395
1《晋书—西戎传》
，中华书局，1974 年 11 月。
2《广弘明集》卷 23，僧肇《鸠摩罗什法师诔》
。
211
between great monks and famous monks, and considered that the contribution of
Kumārajīva lied in great learning instead of virtuous action. Kumārajīva could only be
called famous monk rather than great monk. 396 Master Hui Jiao directly criticized
Kumārajīva: “Kumārajīva had the intention of marriage…If observing from the near
trace, it is also a taint of the entire jade (a metaphor liken to great virtue)”. Lu Yang 陆
扬 said: “The reason for Master Seng You and Master Hui Jiao to record Kumārajīva’s
precept violation into their biographies was aimed to caution people of the existence of
the taint in Kumārajīva’s life, and of the deep factors to form such a taint”.397 In the
seventh century, Master Dao Xuan in 道宣律师相感通传 also had his own comment:
“Ask: It is usually said that Kumārajīva failed to follow precepts. Answer: It is
unnecessary to make comment, which could be commented by the ordinary people.
Now Kumarajvia is in the stage of three virtues, with the task to convert people by
conventional methods. Kumārajīva’s scripture translation, with many complements and
omissions, was done by conditions. Therefore, the translation of Mahaprajnaparamita
Sastra was omitted nine of ten parts, so are the similar case of other scripture
translations. After the new translation, if reading sincerely without stop or abandonment,
then auspiciousness arrived, it would be still inspiring and new by generations. By such
interpreting knowledge, the sainted essence could be penetrated. Manjusri Bodhisattva
asked Kumārajīva to delete some excessive points, so different from the previous
version. Couldn’t you slander Kumārajīva due to the difference? You should suddenly
forget the metaphysical meaning, which was not sufficient to express the original
essence”.398
Although Kumārajīva’s precept violation was the historical fact, what people
cared about more was his scripture translation and contribution, as for too many reasons
behind, there are few people to explore. Japanese monks in this aspect absolutely did
not regard Kumārajīva’s precept violation as irreasonable.399 In their eyes, it is very
common for monks to have wives and children, even in modern Japan, so is the same
case.
1 熏风：
《哀鸾孤桐上清音彻九天—翻译家鸠摩罗什的一生》，
《北京社会科学》1990 年第 3 期，第
150-151 页。
397
2 陆扬：
《解读<鸠摩罗什传>：兼谈中国中古早期的佛教文化与史学》
，
《中国学术》2006 年第 23 辑，
商务印书馆，2006 年。
398
3《大正藏》第 52 册，第 437 页-438 页。唐朝僧人僧祥也在他的《法华传记》中引用了道宣的评论，
参看《大正藏》第 51 页，第 52 页。
399
4See Bernard Faure, The Red Thread: Buddhist Approach to Sexuality, Princeton University Press, 2001,
p.191-192.
212
396
4.3Kumārajīva’s Absorption of Indian Magical Method 道术
4.3.1Early Transmitters’ Application of Indian Magical Method
In ancient India, it was a magic developed country, such as five sastras in
pancavidya 五明, mathematics in astronomy 天文书算, medical mantra 医方咒术,
with magic in all kinds. This is social people’s intuitive psychological reflection to
natural phenomena. Many records in Buddhist canons are influenced by such content.
In the transmission of early Buddhism, Buddhists properly made full use of this point.
In Buddhism, Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are embodied with great supernatural
power, so people feel respectful to them, which is one characteristics of Buddhist
development. In 大乘大义章, supernatural power was explained: “The supernatural
power, as is named by power, is beyond the ordinary ability and could make function
unobstructedly”.400 For the ordinary Buddhists, if making cultivation for a long time,
they could also obtain a kind of supernatural and unconceivable power, which was
greatly attractive. In 杂阿含经—弟子说诵第四品, it said: “If Bhikkhu got supernatural
power, freely and wishfully, if wanting the trees to become fire, water, wind, gold, etc.,
these all would come true. Why? Because this tree had the property of water realm, so
the Bhikkhu got supernatural power, freely and wishfully, wanting the tree to become
the gold and other things, they all could come true”.401
Generally in Buddhism, when doing meditation, there appeared unique
phenomena, which is called supernatural power. In Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, it said
that there were five kinds of supernatural powers: knowledge to know the past and the
future, the power to go everywhere freely, the power of heaven eyes, the power of
heaven ears, the wisdom to know others’ mind, etc.402
Just as 俱舍论颂疏论本 said: “There are six kinds of supernatural powers: power
to verify the state, power of heaven eyes, power of heaven ears, power to know others’
mind, power to know the past and the future, the power to eradicate taints. Although
the sixth power was the supreme in Buddhism, the former five could also be obtained
by non-Buddhists”. 403 In 圆 觉 经 大 疏 释 義 钞 , it also pointed out ten kinds of
supernatural powers: “The power to know others’ mind, the power of heaven eyes, the
400
401
402
403
1 慧远撰《大乘义章》卷 20，
《大正藏》第 44 册，第 855 页。
2 求那跋陀罗译《杂阿含经》卷 18，
《中华藏》第 32 册，第 842 页中。
3 鸠摩罗什译《大智度论》卷 5，
《中华藏》第 25 册，第 200 页上。
4 圆晖述《俱舍论颂疏论本》卷 27，
《大正藏》第 30 册，第 967 页。
213
power to know the past, the power to know the future, the power of heaven ears, the
power to extend the body, the power to recognize beings’ voices, the power to go
everywhere, the power to known all dharma concepts, the Samadhi power to cease all
dharma”.404
According to fascicle 85 of Mahā-ratna-kūṭa-sūtra 大宝积经, it said: “At one time,
舍卫城 Śrāvastī king and ministers, brahmins, and the public all respect the Tathagata
deeply, made offering with food, drinks, medicine, beddings, etc. In this city, there was
a magician good at non-Buddhist doctrines, mantras, articrafts, as the best of all
magicians. In Maghada country, except the enlightened people and lay people with right
faith, other people were all deluded and paid homage to him”.
Although this mentioned a magician’s power to delude people, in early
transmission of Buddhism, such supernatural power was universally applied (personal
view). Nagarjuna was the founder of Mahayana philosophy, and in his biography, there
properly illustrated his knowledge of astrology and the magical method, and its function
in the transmission of Buddhism. In Biography of Nagarjuna, it recorded that Nagarjuna
began to learn astronomy, geography, secret magic, and astrology, etc. He also learned
the power to hide the body, which brought him a trouble, but used in dharma
transmission later. When he debated with non-Buddhists, Nagarjuna applied mantra to
generate a six-ivory while elephant, walking over the water, and stepped to the seat.
The elephant used his nose to drop the seat down. As a result, non-Buddhists were
subdued. Such supernatural power was used frequently. When Buddhabhadra learned
dharma in Kophen, as is recorded in the biography: “One practitioner made meditation
in a secluded room and suddenly saw Buddhabhadra appear, asked where he came from.
Buddhabhadra answered that he just went to Tusita heaven and visited Maitreya
Bodhisattva. After the reply, Buddhabhadra disappeared”. By the application of
supernatural power to hide the body, it illustrated that by self-cultivation, people could
acquire the supernatural power.
In 法苑珠林, it recorded: “Just as is said in 大云轮晴雨经: the Buddha said,
about the method of requesting rain and stopping rain, you should listen carefully. The
host should arouse the mind of loving-kindness and compassion to all beings, receive
eight fasting precepts, on the empty ground, seting up the blue curtain and ten blue
banners, purify the ground, coating the platform with cow dung; and then invite the
mantra master to the seat. Lay people should observe eight fasting precepts, and Bhikku
should observe pratimoksa, wear pure robes, burn the high level incense…Put the pure
water into the bottle, set in four directions respectively. Making all kinds of food as
404
5 宗密撰《圆觉经人疏释義钞》卷 4，
《續藏》第 9 册，第 549 页。
214
offereing to the gods, extending fragrant flowers to the platform and in four directions
to apply pure cow dung to draw the dragon…If there was no rain, read this sutra for
one day, two days, and even seven days, with the voice non-stop, the rain must
come”.405
Praying for rain is one common method for great monks in the transmission of
Buddhism, but such method was not created by themselves, but was obtained by
learning Buddhist scriptures. To some extent, this reflected the actual background of
Indian land. In Biography of Great Monks 高僧传—佛图澄, it said: “At one time, it
had been in draught for a long time from January to June. King Shi Hu sent the prince
to pray for the rain, but no response. Shi Hu sent 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha)
to pray and then two white dragons flew to the sky over the platform and the rain came,
and that year was in good harvest for thousands of miles”.406 In Biography of Great
Monks 高僧传— 涉公, it said: “In Chang’an, 涉公 could use mantra to make the
dragon appear, so in draught, Fu Jian often invited him to pray for the rain”. 407
Although in Buddhist scriptures, it recorded some certain mysterious tales, great monks
could be able to predict the weather by his experience, and combined with rituals to
achieve the supernatural effect, thus to achieve the aim of transmitting Buddhism.
At the same of time of learning vinaya, some great monks in order to transmit
Buddhism also learned magic methods and astrology. By investigating the great monks
coming to inland China in early period from India and Western Regions, it could be
known of some situations about them in this aspect. For example, An Shigao 安世高
was famous for broad knowledge, who was able by magic power to predict the weather,
to cure diseases, and to know the birds’ voice.408 He liked to read foreign books and
medical technique, and he was also familiar with Chinese and translated scriptures. The
translated text was clear in doctrinal meaning and right in character writing, logic but
not ostentatious, qualified but not wild…He could penetrate into the principle and
nature, self-knowing his own causes and conditions, with magic power unprecendented
by the secular view. In Guang Zhou, in order to convert sentient beings, An Shigao
made a magic performance at presence and audience all felt unique. 409 In Three
Kingdoms period, Kang Senghui 康僧会 originally from India came to Wu country, as
405
406
407
408
409
1《大正藏》第 53 册，第 761 页下。
2《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 351 页。
3《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 373 页。
4《安般守意經序》
，
《出三藏记集》卷 6, 释僧祐著，中华书局 1995 年版，第 244 页。
5《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 6 页。
215
was said in biography: he could understand tripitaka, read six scriptures, astonomy, etc.
Zhi Qian and Zhi Liang also learned secular techniques. Kang Senghui persuaded King
Sun Quan 孙权 to transmit Buddhism by magic method of 舍利 sarira. Kang Senghui
cleaned the room and made fasting, offering incense to invite the sarira. After 21 days,
the sarira finally appeared, so people admired this, and the king set up the stupa to
enshrine the sarira, which was the beginning of temples, called Jian Chu temple, thus
Buddhism prospered in Jiang Zuo area.410 Dharma-kāla 昙柯迦罗 was professional in
vinaya and four vedas, astrology, and magic methods.411 Vighna 维祇难 was also from
India, stories about whom were recorded in the biography: “At one time, there was a
monk from India, who learned Hinayana doctrines and practiced magical technique.
When he travelled to far areas, it was dark on the path, and he wanted to find a house
to lodge in. This house owner called Vighna 维祇难 was a non-Buddhist and felt
doubted about this monk, so let him sleep outside the door. The monk in the night
applied mantra to let the burning house cease to fire. Then the house owner let the monk
live in the house and made offering to the monk. The owner had faith in Buddhism by
seeing the monk’s magic power and went forth and treated the monk as the teacher,
learning tripitaka and four agamas, and travelling to all countries”.412
维祇难 Vighna’s experience to enter Buddhism is completely due to Hinayana
master’s persuasion by mantra and supernatural power. It could be seen that no matter
Mahayana monks or Hinayana monks, universally grasped some magic methods and
played function in the transmission process of Buddhism. In the biography of
Dharmakṣema 昙无谶, it said: “Dharmakṣema 昙无谶 was from middle India, learned
Hinayana doctrine and pancavidya 五明 at the beginning…He could understand manra
effectively. He was called great mantra master in Western Regions. Later he went to the
mountain with the king. The king was thirsty but unable to get the water, so 昙无谶
Dharmakṣema applied the mantra to make water appear from the stone, and he praised
that it was due to the king’s virtue that made the water appear from the stone. People
hearing about this all praised the king’a virtue. When the rain comes at the proper time,
and the public praised him by chanting. The king felt pleasant for 昙 无 谶
410
411
412
6《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 15 页。
1《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 13 页。
2《高僧传》卷 1，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 21 页。
216
Dharmakṣema’s supernatural power and adored him more than before”.413
The most professional aspect for 昙无谶 Dharmakṣema was mantra, who was
famous as the great mantra master in Western Regions. When he lived in the
government of 渠沮蒙遜, there were many events applied by mantra to show his
supernatural power, and obtained the credit of the ruler. Not merely this, he also got the
admiration of 拓跋焘 from North Wei country, who tried to get him by war. This was
similar with Kumārajīva’s experience.
4.3.2Kumārajīva’s Application of Magical Method
In Biography of Great Monks, it is said that Kumārajīva in Kuci was able to tell
astrology, good or bad, prediction, etc. After he was obtained by Lű Guang, he provided
policies to Lű Guang many times. Such policies were most from Kumārajīva’s
knowledge about magic methods and astrology. When Kumārajīva in Gu Zang, in
fascicle 95 of Jin Shu, it recorded six times of offering policies by him. (1) On the way
back, Lű Guang set the army under the mountain to rest, and Kumārajīva said that it
was better not to stay, but rest othe places. Lű Guang did not follow Kumārajīva’s
advice. Then in the night, it rained and the flood arose suddenly, with thousands of
soldiers dead. Then Lű Guang began to find Kumārajīva’s uniqueness.
This is the event happened on the way for Kumārajīva together with the army. This
mainly involves the geographical situation. Although Lű Guang had a lot of experience
in war, he was not familiar with the geographical environment in Western Regions.
Kumārajīva’s judgement derived from his knowledge about astronomy and geography,
as well as from his experience about the surrounding landscape. From then on,
Kumārajīva got the trust of Lű Guang and became the military and political advisor.
(2) Lű Guang intended to stay in Wang Xi country, and Kumārajīva said: this is
the place full of evil and death, and it is better not to stay. On the way, there must be
blessing place to live. Lű Guang returned to Liang Zhou, and heard about Fu Jian’s
murder by Yao Chang, so he secretly established the administration on the right of the
river (in the west of Yellow River).
In Buddhist scriptures, there were many records about the dangerous places. For
example, the depiction about various hells, there were also depictions about the blessing
places, such as pure land. According to Lű Guang’s character, Kumārajīva judged that
if Lű Guang became the king in Western Regions, it would be the disaster for Kuci and
413
3《高僧传》卷 2，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 76 页。
217
othe countries. Then, coming to Gu Zang, Fu Jian died and Lű Guang established the
country of Latter Liang.
(3) In January of the first year of Tai’an period, there was strong wind in Gu Zang.
Kumārajīva said: this was not the auspicious wind, and there must be traitors, but soon
ruined naturally. Later, 梁谦 and 彭晃 started the rebellion, and both were ruined.
Although these cases have the elements of prediction and exaggeration, they were
actually from Kumārajīva’s judegement and reasoning. In order to get Lű Guang’s trust,
Kumārajīva applied the magic method he learned before. In Buddhist scriptures, there
were many contents related with wind, from which it could be seen that Kumārajīva’s
much knowledge in astonomy and geography was from Buddhist canons.
(4) In the second year of Long Fei period of King Lű Guang, in 张掖 and 临松
areas, 沮渠男成 and 沮渠蒙遜(belonged to one tribe of Xiong Nu, called 卢水胡人)
started the rebellion, and made the general called Duan Ye in Jian Kang as the king. Lű
Guang sent his second son Lű Zuan 吕纂 with 50,000 soldiers to attack them. At the
contemporary period, the rebels were called the disorderly crowds while Lű Zuan was
in good fame and dignity, which had the trend to be completely attack. Lű Guang visited
Kumārajīva. Kumārajīva said: by observing such attack, there seems no benefit. Soon,
Lű Zuan failed in He Li 合梨.
The prediction about this attack seemed more or less Kumārajīva’s strained
interpretation, because there were many wars between Lű Zuan and Ju Qumengxun,
and finally the former defeated the latter.
(5) A official called Zhang Zi 张资 was mild and elegant, whom Lű Guang paid
high value on him. When Zhang Zi was sick, Lű Guang tried his best to treat him. There
was a foreigner called 罗叉, who said he was able to cure Zhang Zi. Lű Guang felt
pleasant and offered 罗叉 with assets. Kumārajīva recognized 罗叉’s deception and
told Zhang Zi: 罗叉 was unable to cure, so you can test it. Zhang Zi used ropes with
five colors and burnt them into ashes, then threw them into water. If the ashes could
become ropes again, the disease could be incurable. Soon, the ashes became the ropes.
The treatment was futil and a few days later, Zhang Zi passed away.
218
These cases reflect the typical magic methods used by Kumārajīva, but more
important, Kumārajīva’s judgement was based on his knowledge. There were many
great monks from India and Western Regions familiar with such knowledge, which
promoted their development of Buddhism. Qi Yu 耆域 was from India. After he came
to inland China, he met 滕永文 in Man Shui temple, as is recorded in the biography:
滕永文 had been sick for years and could not walk. Qi Yu observed him and said that
the disease would be well by reciting mantra and using one cup of pure water and one
branch of poplar for three times. Then, 滕永文 could arise and walk again. Another
story is that there was one person, who was sick and would die. Qi Yu used a bowl on
the patient’s belly, and covered it with white cloth, chanting the mantra for thousands
of times. Then, there was smelling air full of the room, and later, the patient said he
survived again.414
(6) In the second year of Xian Ning period, a pig bore a baby with three heads and
one body. There was a dragon coming from a well and flied to the palace. LűL Zuan
regarded this as auspicious and named the hall as Dragon Flying Hall. Then a black
dragon flied to the Nine Palace door, and Lű Zuan named the door as Dragon Prospering
door. Kumārajīva told Lű Zuan: these are just dragon travelling, who belonged to the
negative type of animals, and they did not appear frequently, but now they appeared
several times, this was abnormal with disaster or rebellion, so virtue should be
cultivated by response to the caution from the heaven. Lű Zuan did not follow.
Kumārajīva also predicted that Hu Nu 胡奴 as the son of Lű Guang’s brother would
kill Lű Zuan. Later, it really happened.
Image prediction means predicting things’ happening or things’ failure or success
by some phenomena, which was common in ancient India and even in ancient China.
In West Han and East Han dynasties, image prediction was popular. In Buddhist
scriptures, there were many contents related with image prediction, which was used by
transmitters in the process of Buddhism transmitted to inland China, as a good point to
fit for Chinese local culture.
Kumārajīva lived in Liang Zhou for 17 years, and Lű Guang did not develop
Buddhism, though treating Kumārajīva as military advisor. Some supernatural events
about Kumārajīva derived from his knowledge as well as from his logical judgement.
In Jin Shu and Dun Huang literature, there recorded another two stories. In fascicle
414
1《高僧传》卷 9，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 365 页。
219
95 of Jin Shu, it said: “When Kumārajīva preached scriptures in Cao Tang temple, Yao
Xing and ministers with thousands of monks listened to the preaching. Yao Xing once
said to Kumārajīva that he should marry and have children, or else, his dharma had
nobody to transmit, so Yao Xing forced Kumārajīva to marry. Kumārajīva later did not
live in the temple, so that many monks imitated him. Kumārajīva filled his bowl with
needles and said to the monks: if you can follow me to eat these needles, you can marry.
After saying this, Kumārajīva swallowed the needles with no difference with food. By
looking at this, monks felt shameful and stopped to marry”.
In Dun Huang literature S. 381, it recorded: “After Kumārajīva came, he lived in
Xiao Yaoyuan, in which there set up a temple called Cao Tang, for scripture translation.
When translating 维摩诘經不思议品, Yao Xing heard about that the particle could
embrace the universe and felt doubted, so Kumārajīva tried to verify. Kumārajīva used
a bottle embracing a mirror without damage. Kumārajīva said to Yao Xing: I am an
ordinary monk and able to embrace a mirror into the bottle, let alone Vimalakirti
Bodhisattva, couldn’t the particle be able to embrace the universe? Yao Xing firmly
believed and bowed down to the feet for gratitude”.
The above two cases were also mentioned in 罗什法师赞 compiled by Shi Jinji.
In S. 6631, P.4597, and P.2680, there recorded: “How great Kumārajīva is! He showed
special and strange even in his mother’s belly. It is recorded that he obtained the
arahantship (the fourth fruit). When he was near 30, he was forced to marry. Lű Guang
looked down upon him and abused him, so Lű Guang’s power soon declined. Yao Xing
admired him and trusted him, so Yao authority prospered. He spent his whole life in
Buddhism, made translation in Cao Tang temple and was buried in Cong Ling (the area
he once lived for 17 years in Gu Zang, now called Wu Wei, where Kumārajīva’s tongue
sarira is buried). He could embrace a mirror into a bottle and could swallow needles
like food. His disciples all made great achievement, such as famous Master Dao Sheng,
Master Seng Zhao, Master Dao Rong, Master Seng Rui. He made great contributions
and honored as the national master of two states (Hou Liang and Yao Qin)”.
In the same fascicle, there was another poem, in which it recorded: “Kumārajīva
was originally born in Western Regions, and in order to develop Buddhism and convert
sentient beings, he travelled to the east (inland China). His students were nearly three
thousand, with four most famous called four sainted monks. He could embrace a mirror
into a bottle so as to dispel Yao Xing’s doubt. He could swallow needles so as to warn
disciples not following his precept violation behavior. He made scripture translation in
Cao Tang temple and was buried at the side of Cong Ling”.
About the event of embracing a mirror into a bottle, it is due to Yao Xing’s doubt
about the content that particles could embrace the universe in Vimalakirti Sutra
220
translated by Kumārajīva, so in order to verify this and let Yao Xing believe,
Kumārajīva applied supernatural power (magic methods) to achieve a bottle embracing
a mirror without damage. About the event of swallowing needles like food, it is due to
Kumārajīva’s aim to stop disciples’ misunderstanding about his marriage, to caution
disciples not following his precept violation behavior, so he had to apply supernatural
power (magic methods). From these cases, it could be seen that Kumārajīva’s attitude
to magic methods is different from 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha): one is
negative and one is positive. It is certain that such different attitudes are greatly related
with their different environments.
4.3.3The Origin of Kumārajīva’s Magical Method
In his early years, Kumārajīva learned Hinayana Buddhism, and later transferred
to Mahayana Buddhism, who was a great monk with both doctrines. At the same time,
he studied a lot of non-Buddhist doctrines and many complicated magic methods, so he
was also a broad learning Buddhist scholar. He had many masters (teachers), some of
whom were recorded in biography, such as 佛 图 舍 弥 , Bandhudatta 盘 头 达 多 ,
Buddhayasas 佛 陀 耶 舍 , 须 利 耶 苏 摩 , Vimalākṣa 卑 摩 罗 叉 , etc., who deeply
influenced his thoughts in different areas. Therefore, Kumārajīva’s knowledge about
magic methods might derive from three aspects.
(1)Kumārajīva’s broad knowledge in Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines
When Kumārajīva was young, he learned Abhidharma, which was the basic
Hinayana theory for liberation. From 9 to 13, he lived in Kophen, and learned from
Bandhudatta about agamas and subdued non-Buddhists, from which it could imply the
high level of his theoretical achievement. When he stayed in Sha Le for one year,
Kumārajīva continued to learn Abhidharma. In Sha Che, he met 须利耶苏摩 and
achieved the transference from Hinayana to Mahayana. Kumārajīva deeply studied
Vaipulya scriputres, especially Nagarjuna’s three treatises. When he returned to Kuci,
based on his previous knowledge, Kumārajīva learned many Mahayana scriptures, such
as prajna sutras.
(2) Magic methods as knowledge he learned from Indian masters
Among Kumārajīva’s masters, many were from Kophen area. Buddhabhadra who
cooperated with him was from middle India. They were great monks good at magic
methods. 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) also learned magic methods from
221
Kophen in India. Therefore, Kumārajīva’s magic methods were also from Indian area.
As is recorded in biography, Buddhayasas was from Kophen, who firstly learned
from non-Buddhists, and when he learned that Kumārajīva was in Gu Zang, he went to
Kumārajīva. As is recorded: “The disciple said: I am afraid that tomorrow people reach
us and we have to return. Buddhayasas fetched a bowl of pure water and put the
medicine into the water, reciting mantra for ten times, and gave the water to disciples
for washing feet. Then, they set off at night. After travelling for hundreds of miles,
Buddhayasas asked the disciple: what do you feel? The disciple answered: just hearing
the wind blowing, with tears in eyes. Buddhayasas used mantra water to wash feet and
then they stopped. The next morning, when people ran for them, there were hundreds
of miles in distance, so unable to reach. They arrived in Gu Zang”.415
If analyzing from Buddhist supernatural power, Buddhayasas’ method could
belonged to the power to go anywhere, just as fast as the bird. In Biography of Great
Monks, there depicted an Indian monk called 犍陀勒: “There is someone good at
walking, he wanted to see the speed of 犍陀勒. He ran with sweat and unable to catch
up with 犍陀勒.416
Buddhabhadra once cooperated with Kumārajīva in Chang’an for scripture
translation, who was from middle India, and later went to Kophen of north India. As is
recorded in biography, “Buddhabhadra often travelled to Kophen with Sanghadatta 僧
伽达多. They lived together for years. Although Sanghadatta 僧伽达多 admired
Buddhabhadra’s talent and wisdom, he was still unable to examine his cultivating
degree. Later, Sanghadatta 僧 伽 达 多 made meditation in a secluded room, and
suddenly saw Buddhabhadra come to him, and he asked where was he from.
Buddhabhadra answered: just went to Tusita heaven and made greetings to Maitreya
Buddha. After the reply, he disappeared. Sanghadatta 僧伽达多 recognized him of a
sainted monk, unable to see his level”. From this, it could be seen that Buddhabhadra
learned the method of hiding the body. In early years, Nagarjuna was professional in
hiding the body. Not merely this, Buddhabhadra was able to make prediction as the
same as Kumārajīva. In Biography of Great Monks, there recorded the story he traveled
to Guang Zhou in China by sea: “Buddhabhadra pointed to the mountain and said: we
can stop here. The shipmaster said: it is difficult to meet the favorable wind, and we
415
416
1《高僧传》卷 2，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 66 页。
2《高僧传》卷 9，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年版，第 369 页。
222
had better not to stop. When they traveled over 200 miles, the wind suddenly turned,
and people realized the magic power of Buddhabhadra and treated him as the master,
following his advice. Later, the wind became favorable, but Buddhabhadra did not
allow them to start. The shipmaster followed. Then, one ship did not know the situation
and went forward, and finally turned over. In the night, Buddhabhadra suddenly let all
ships set off, but no one followed. Only Buddhabhadra himself shipped the boat to start
alone. Then, thieves came and the left ships were all robbed and damaged”.417
佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) and Kumārajīva both were from Kuci to
inland China for dharma transmission. The former was good at to use magic methods
and achieved obvious effects in the transmission of Buddhism. In Jin Shu 晋书, it said:
“佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) learned Buddhism at the young age and was
professional in magic methods. In the fourth year of Yong Jia period, he came to Luo
Yang, and said that he was over one hundred years old. He could achieve selfcultivation without eating for days. He was good at reciting magic mantra and could
send gods and ghosts”.418 When 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) met Shi Le for
the first time, Shi Le asked him about the prediction and telepathy in Buddhism. 佛图
澄 (Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) knew that Shi Le did not understand the deep
Buddhist theory, so he had to use magic methods to convert Shi Le. 佛图澄(Fo
Tucheng or Buddhasimha) said that the Buddhist magic method is far to cultivate but
could be verified by things around. Then 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) got
some water and recited the mantra. Just one moment, there arose one blue lotus,
illuminating and shining, by which Shi Le became convinced, so 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng
or Buddhasimha) had rights to give advice to him about the belief in Buddhism. In this
way, 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) obtained the trust of Shi Le, and everytime
he met military events, he would ask advice from 佛 图 澄 (Fo Tucheng or
Buddhasimha), and all predictions were in effect. Therefore, 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or
Buddhasimha) took the chance to give the advice to build temples and to transmit
417
418
3《高僧传》卷 2，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年 10 月第 1 版，第 70 页。
4 房玄龄《晋书》
，北京：中华书局，1974 年，第 2485 页。
223
Buddhism, and to receive disciples. Then, the phenomenon appeared “In Zhong Zhou,
people from Western Regions and Jin dynasty all believed in Buddhism”.419 佛图澄’s
such magic methods were mostly from Kophen in India. 佛图澄 (Fo Tucheng or
Buddhasimha) learned from the famous master and got Hinayana dharma, and then he
came to middle China to transmit Buddhism. To analyze from 佛图澄’s disciple
Dao’an’s thought, what 佛图澄(Fo Tucheng or Buddhasimha) transmitted belonged to
Sarvastivada School. In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that 佛 图 澄 (Fo
Tucheng or Buddhasimha) applied sesame oil with kermes to extend the hand, and then
things far from one thousand miles could be seen in hand. In Biography of Gunabhadra
求那跋陀罗, there was the similar method. Gunabhadra 求那跋陀罗 was also good at
magic methods and predicted the success of wars many times,420 whose magic methods
were also from India. From the above analysis, it could be known that Kumārajīva’s
such magic methods were mainly from Indian area.
(3) Kumārajīva’s learning about non-Buddhist knowledge
In Biography of Great Monks, it recorded that most of Indian monks had the
experience to learn non-Buddhist knowledge at the young age, which was similar to
Chinese monks, who had the experience to learn Confucian theory and Taoist theory. It
seemed that in local India, some theories such pancavidya 五明, astronomy, mantra,
etc., had become the basic content for people’s daily learning. Tantrism in later
Mahayana Buddhism developed by absorbing the popular mantra in contemporary
society. It could be seen that ancient India was a society of universally popular with
mantra and magic methods. Buddhayasas was from Kophen, the Brahmin caste, who
learned non-Buddhist doctrines at the beginning. Gunabhadra 求 那 跋 陀 罗 was
Brahmin caste and learned pancavidya 五明 at the young age, familiar with astonomy,
maths, mantra, etc. Later, he obtained Samyuktabhidharma-hrdaya-sastra 阿毗昙杂心
论.
Some monks still learned other knowledge, such as prediction, Yin-yang, etc., after
419
420
5《高僧传》卷 9，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年 10 月第 1 版，第 345 页。
6《高僧传》卷 3，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年 10 月第 1 版，第 130-134 页。
224
they learned Buddhist doctrines. 求 那 毘 地 was from middle India, and learned
Buddhism at the young age, whose teacher was the Mahayana master called 僧伽斯
from India. 求那毘地 could be familiar with Mahayana and Hinayana doctrines in
200,000 words, but he still learned non-Buddhist doctrines, astrology, Yin-yang,
prediction, etc. 421 Such habits manifested in many great monks’ experience, from
which it could be known that Kumārajīva’s learning about non-Buddhist doctrines was
not his creation.
Kumārajīva in Shu Le and Sha Che not only contacted Mahayana Buddhism, but
also learned a lot of non-Buddhist knowledge. Such areas were the intersection between
China and the west, in which things from India and middle Asia were transmitted to
Inland China by north road and south road. Here preserved a large quantity of books.
In fascicle 12 of 历代三宝记, and in fascicle 60 of 新合大集经, there recorded some
information about 遮拘迦国: “In the southeast of this country, about over 20 miles,
there were abrupt and dangerous moutains, in which there were enshrined many
Mahayana twelve divisions of scriptures, such as 大集, 华严, 方等, 宝积, 楞伽, 方
广, 舍利弗陀罗尼, 华聚陀罗尼, 都萨罗藏, 摩诃般若, 八部般若, 大雲經, etc., in
one hundred thousand verses. It was the national law to protect these scriptures”. This
area could be seen as the library of Mahayana scriptures. Shu Le located in this area
was popular with Hinayana Buddhism. From the content Kumārajīva learned, it should
include Hinayana scriptures and other scriptures with mixed types. In Biography of
Great Monks, it recorded that Kumārajīva learned non-Buddhist doctrines in Shu Le,
such as 吠陀含多论, four Vedas 四吠陀, pancavidya 五明.422 Such knowledge was
helpful for practitioners to understand scriptures and helpful for the transmission of
Buddhism, which was indispensable knowledge for monks in the transmission process
of Buddhism. In addition, Kumārajīva also learned a lot of knowledge in Yin-yang,
astrology, etc., which helped him to predict changes in the future and played important
function in the transmission of Buddhism.
421
422
1《高僧传》卷 3，释慧皎著，汤用彤校注，中华书局，1992 年 10 月第 1 版，第 138 页。
2（梁）僧祐：
《出三藏记集》
，北京，中华书局，1995 年，卷中，
《鸠摩罗什传》
。
225
Chapter Five: Transmission of Madhyamika School into China
and Its Dialogue with Chinese Having Existed Buddhism
5.1 Indian Origin and Transmission of Madhyamaka Theories
One of the major contents Kumārajīva transmitted in inland China was
Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory, which is the main aspect of Buddhist philosophical
thoughts. In Sha Che, Kumārajīva met 须利耶苏摩 and from then on he contacted
Mahayana philosophical thoughts, which was a new trend in contemporary period.
Such new trend did not develop instantly, but in slow speed, so that when Kumārajīva
arrived in Chang’an after 40 years, it was still a new trend for inland China, representing
the newest development theory of Mahayana Buddhism. It is necessary to explore the
transmission of Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory, especially the transmission to
Western Regions, as well as to explore Kumārajīva’s acceptance about it.
5.1.1 Indian Origin of Madhyamaka Theory
Madhyamika School was originated from Nagarjuna and Ariyadeva, famous for
Madhayamaka thoughts, the doctrines of which mostly were expressed by reference to
prajna sutras, thus called Prajna School. The typical works include Madhyamaka
Treatise, Hundred Treatise, Twelve Gates Treatise, and Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra.
This school claims for the theory of Middle Way with inherent empty of all dharma;
treats “negating the evil and manifesting the correct” as the aim to develop prajna
thoughts; treats Two Truths as the outline to illustrate Mahayana philosophical theory
and the value of the Buddha’s teaching. Three Treatise theory in China is actually the
inheritance and development of Nagarjuna’s and Ariyadeva’s Madhyamaka theories.
According to 三论祖师传集, it treated Sakyamuni Buddha as the first patriarch,
from the second to the sixth patriarch, they included Manjusri, Aśvaghoṣa, Nagarjuna,
Ariyadeva and Rahula. In 三论宗血脉 and 八宗纲要, it treated Manjusri as the first
patriarch, then 马 鸣 Aśvaghoṣa as the second patriarch, Nagarjuna as the third
patriarch. In the beginning of the third century in south India, Nagarjuna prospered
Madhyamaka theory and made Madhyamakakrika and Twelve Gates Treatise,
advocating the Middle Way with no dependence and no attainment, laying the
foundation for this school. Ariyadeva was from south India and received dharma from
226
Nagarjuna, who often made commentaries to negate non-Buddhist and Hinayana
doctrines. Rahula praised prajna empty view. 青目 Pivgalanetra made the narration to
interpret Madhyamakakrika. In addition, 婆 薮 开 士 made notes for Ariyadeva’s
Hundred Treatise. Buddhapala interpreted Madhyamaka Treatise. Asanga made 顺中
论. 安慧 Sthiramati composed 大乘中观释论. 清辨 Bhāviveka made 般若灯论释
and 大乘掌珍论. Dharmapala made 广百论. 月称 Candrakīrti made commentary of
Madhyamaka Treatise and commentary of Hundred Treatise. In India only, there were
over 70 commentaries about Madhyamaka Treatise. From this, it could be known about
the popularity of this sastra. In Master Ji Zang’s 大乘玄论, it said: “The right dharma
period had passed, and now in similar dharma period, there are many dharma
transmitters. Who should be selected to negate the evil and manifest the right? The
answer is to select to four people. The first is the Buddha, who is to make conversion.
The other three are sainted people to assist the Buddha to develop Buddhism, including
马鸣 Aśvaghoṣa, Nagarjuna and Ariyadeva”.423
Three Treatise Sect in China put Sakyamuni Buddha, Manjusri Bodhisattva, and
马鸣 Aśvaghoṣa in the list of patriarch lineage, which is actually a forced interpretation.
Sakyamuni Buddha could be the patriarch of all schools. Three Treatise Sect treated
Manjusri as the patriarch because Consciousness-only School treated Maitreya
Bodhisattva as the patriarch. Master Fa Zang in 十二门论宗致义记 said: “In Nalanda
temple, there were two virtuous commentators: Silabhadra 戒贤 and 智光, both of
whom understood the dharma beyond others and famous to five parts of India, with six
non-Buddhist teachers bowing to them, other schools paying homeage to them, who
belonged to Mahayana scholars…戒贤 Silabhadra inherited dharma from Maitreya,
Asanga, Dharmapala, Nanda, by reference to 解深密经 and Yogacarabhumisastra, etc.
He understood Mahayana dharma characters, extensively distinguishing concepts and
numbers. 智 光 inherited dharma from Manjusri Bodhisattva, Nagarjuna, 青 目
423
1《大正藏》第 45 册，第 69 页。
227
Pivgalanetra and 清辨 Bhāviveka by reference to prajna sutras, Madhyamaka Treatise,
etc. to manifest formless Mahayana doctrine, and to extensively clarify the true
emptiness”.424
Although Manjusri helped the Buddha to develop Buddhism and did not have
school difference, listing Manjusri as the patriarch was because Manjusri’s wisdom was
the first among all bodhisattvas, with great wisdom to represent Manjusri’s virtue, who
was the first inheriter of the Buddha’s Prajna thought. What Manjusri taught was mainly
about the true empty nature. Manjusri recited Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra in front of the
Buddha, and 文殊势利问般若经, from which it could be seen that Manjusri had close
relationship with prajna system. 马鸣 Aśvaghoṣa was related with the revival of
Mahayana Buddhism, so he was listed. In fact, the real founder of Madhyamika School
was Nagarjuna and next was Ariyadeva.
According to Lű Cheng’s presumption, the Indian order that Kumārajīva inherited
was: Nagarjuna, Ariyadeva, 青 目 Pivgalanetra, 须 利 耶 苏 摩 , Kumārajīva. 425
Rahulabhadra was the disciple of Ariyadeva accepted in south Inida, who was the same
period with Nagarjuna. Ariyadeva had many activities in north India, and Kumārajīva’s
lineage was from north India to a large extent. Master Ji Zang in 中论疏 Commentary
of Madhyamaka Sastra said: “Rahula master was at the same period with Nagarjuna. It
is necessary to apply four virtues to illustrate”.426 In fascicle 18 of Mahaprajnaparamita
Sastra, it once quoted Rahula’s “verses of praising prajna”, which at least illustrates
that Rahula was in the same period with Nagarjuna, and even earlier. In 付法藏因缘
传, it said that Rahula was the disciple of Ariyadeva, in which it mentioned Rahula’s
composition of names of ghosts 鬼名书, Nagarjuna, Ariyadeva, and Rahula having
different understandings, which illustrates that Nagarjuna, Ariyadeva, and Rahula are
in the same period, so it deserves discussion about many scholars’ listing Rahula as the
teacher of Nagarjuna.
Nagarjuna was the founder of Mahayana Madhyamika School. he was born in
about the second and the third century of south India, belonging to the Brahmin caste.
When he was young, Nagarjuna learned pancavidya 五明, and converted to Buddhism.
424
425
426
1《大正藏》第 42 册，第 213 页上。
2 吕澂：
《印度佛学渊源略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年版，第 124-126 页。
3《大正藏》第 42 册，第 40 页下。
228
At the beginning, he learned Hinayana doctrines, and met Mahayana scriptures in snow
mountain area, and made aspiration to develop Mahayana Buddhism, who
systematically established Mahayana Madhyamaka theory. Nagarjuna further
developed inherent empty theory in prajna sutras, and put forward Two Truths theory
that all dharma was existent conventionally and non-existent ultimately. Nagarjuna’s
Madhyamaka Sastra is the most important treatise in three treatises, which
outstandingly displays the Middle Way as the important method of verification. In
Biography of Nagarjuna, there mentioned: “Nagarjuna learned skillful ability, astonomy,
geography, astrology, magic methods, familiar with all of them”.427 This illustrates the
broadness of Nagarjuna’s knowledge.
Nagarjuna is famous as the Commentator of Thousand Treatises. Japanese
tripitaka have over 20 treatises; there are over one hundred treatises in Tibetan tripitaka.
But scholars consider that most of them are apocryphal works in the name of Nagarjuna,
and works actually belonging to Nagarjuna were only 13 treatises. Among these works,
Kumārajīva’s translated works include: Madhyamaka Sastra in four fascicles, Twelve
Treatise in one fascicle, Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra in one hundred fascicles, 十住毗
婆沙论 in fourteen fascicles, etc. 回诤论 in one fascicle was translated 毗目智仙
Vimokṣaprajñāṛṣi in the third year of Xinghe period (541). 六十颂如理论 in one
fascicle is extant in Sanskrit version and Chinese version, and the Chinese version was
translated by 施护 in the fourth year of Jingde period (1007). 七十空性论 originally
only had the Tibetan version, and was translated into Chinese by Fa Zun 法尊 in recent
years. 广破论 is only extant in Tibetan version. 大乘二十颂论 in one fascicle was
translated by 施护 in the first year of Da Zhongfu period (1008). 因缘心论颂释 in
one fascicle is extant in Tibetan version and Chinese version, with the Chinese version
discovered in Dun Huang. 菩提资粮论 in six fascicles was translated by Dharmagupta
in the fifth year of Daye period (609). 宝行王正论 in one fascicle is extant in Sanskrit,
Tibetan, and Chinese three versions, with Chinese version translated by Paramārtha 真
谛. 龙树菩萨劝诫王颂 in one fascicle was translated by Yi Jing in Tang dynasty.
Works related with the establishment of Chinese Three Treatise Sect system
427
4 鸠摩罗什译《龙树菩萨传》
，
《大正藏》第 50 册，第 185 页。
229
include Madhyamaka Sastra, Hundred Treatise, and Twelve Gates Treatise. Master Ji
Zang 吉 藏 in 大 乘 玄 论 said: “ 青 目 Pivgalanetra made the interpretation of
Madhyamaka Sastra”.428 It could be known that 青目 Pivgalanetra was in the period
a little earlier than Kumārajīva but quite near, about the fouth century. Master Seng Rui
in the preface of Madhyamaka Sastra said: “Now this sastra was interpreted by 青目
Pivgalanetra in Sanskrit Pingla, who understood dharma but expressed not elegantly,
deleting those points of deviation, absence, complication, repetition. The principle
theory was in conformity with sutras, and the textual expression might not be
perfect”.429
The above clearly points out that Kumārajīva translated the version of
Madhyamaka Sastra interpreted by 青目 Pivgalanetra, in which the wording was not
elegant and fluent, so when Kumārajīva translated this sastra, he made some deletion
and decoration. Why did Kumārajīva choose this version? In the preface of
Madhyamaka Sastra, it said: “In India and other countries, Buddhist scholars all studied
this sastra, with many scholars making commentaries about it”.430 In this sense, the
version with 青目 Pivgalanetra’s interpretation was not only popular in India, but also
transmitted to Western Regions. In Western Regions, Kumārajīva met 须利耶苏摩,
from whom Kumārajīva learned Madhyamaka three treatises.
5.1.2Transmission of Madhyamaka Theory to the North
Nagarjuna was born in the second century or the third century, who was the
founder of Madhyamaka theory. Although there were many literature materials relevant
with his story, the record in Biography of Nagarjuna translated by Kumārajīva was more
creditable, due to close to his period. When Nagarjuna just became a monk, he
contacted Hinayana Buddhism, reciting tripitaka for ninety days and penetrating into
the profound meaning. This stimulated Nagarjuna to search for other scriptures and
development. In Biography of Nagarjuna Bodhisattva, it recorded: “Nagarjuna entered
into snow mountain, in which there was a Buddhist stupa. An old Bhikkhu gave
Nagarjuna Mahayana sutras. After reading them, Nagarjuna felt pleasant. Though
knowing the meaning, Nagarjuna did not completely penetrate into the sutra”. The snow
mountain by a series of investigation, was the snow mountain in north India, near the
428
429
430
1《大正藏》第 45 册，第 30 页下。
2《大正藏》第 30 册，第 1 页上。
3《大正藏》第 30 册，第 1 页上。
230
south part of Nepal. To see from this, Nagarjuna at the very beginning learned
Mahayana scriptures in north Indian area, which was consistent with the development
process of Mahayana Buddhism. According to fascicle 302 of Mahaprajnaparamita
Sutra, it said that Mahayana Buddhism was in the southeast at the beginning, then
tramitted to the south, then to the north and northwest, at last to the northeast. When
Mahayana Buddhism was transmitted to Da Yuezhi area, it achieved prosperity, with
the increase of faithful color. Many Mahayana scriptures related with faith were
compiled in this area. Therefore, Nagarjuna obtained Mahayana scriptures in north
India, which should be reasonable.
About the story of getting scriptures in dragon palace, it is recorded in Biography
of Nagarjuna Bodhisattva: “Big Dragon Bodhisattva saw Nagarjuna’s situation and felt
mercy on him, and took him to the sea. In the dragon palace, there were seven jeweled
boxes with Buddhist scriptures in them. Big Dragon Bodhisattva gave Vaipulya and
other profound Mahayana scriptures to Nagarjuna, who kept reading them for ninety
days, and he could understand more meaning and his mind became penetrative into the
essence. The Bodhisattva recognized his mind and asked: Have you finished the reading?
Nagarjuna answered: there are innumerable scriptures in boxes, and what I have read is
as ten times as the scriptures in Jambudvipa 阎浮提. The Bodhisattva said: scriptures
in my palace is unknowable compared with the scriptures here. Then suddenly
Nagarjuna achieved the one ultimate form of all scriptures, penetrated into non-arising
of dharma, embodied with three bearances. Then the Big Dragon Bodhisattva sent him
back”.
Many scholars held different opinions. Lű Cheng thinks that where Nagarjuna
obtained the scriptures was the location of some dragon group in north India: “The
dragon palace was the location of dragon group in north India…The story about dragon
was common in north India. It was said that the dragon was not in the heaven but in
snow mountain, from which rivers and streams derived, so it was said that the dragon
lived in the pool, which was formed by snow water flowing from the mountain, with
the pool called dragon palace. If saying that Nagarjuna really obtained Mahayana
scriptures from the dragon palace, then this is to say that he got them from the deep
place of the snow mountain in north India”.431
Some scholars also regarded that the dragon palace was at the seaside of south
India; some scholars considered that the dragon palace was Nagarjuna’s own
presumption. From the perspective of the writer, the dragon palace should be the place
of east Indian Maghada close to the sea. As is recorded in Biography of Nagarjuna, after
he learned Mahayana scriptures in snow mountain, he left that place to travel to other
431
1 吕澂：
《印度佛学源流略讲》
，上海人民出版社，2002 年，第 115-117 页。
231
areas for scriptures. He did not get the scriptures in Jambudvipa 阎浮提, but subdued
non-Buddhists, samana Yi Zong. He traveled to search for new scriptures. In
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, Nagarjuna wrote: just like 不可思议解脱經, five hundred
arahants were at the Buddha’s side but did not hear, or occasionally heard but could not
use…There were thousand millions of verses in the Dragon’s places and heavens,
because such dragons and gods had long lifespan and good memory. People in this
world had short lifespan and weak memory, and then even could not read minor
prajnaparamita Sutra, let alone more scriptures…不可思议解脱經 had one hundred
thousand verses, the same amout of 诸佛本起經, 宝云經, 大云經, 法云經, etc.432
Master Fa Zang in 华严经传记 wrote: “This sutra is the dharmabody of Vairocana
Buddha 毗卢遮那佛, located in Ocean Zeal Samadhi 海印三昧 of Lotus Treasure
World Ocean 莲华藏世界海, preached to great bodhisattvas, such as Samantabhadra
普贤菩萨…Paramārtha 真谛 as the tripitaka master said: in Biography of Western
Regions, it recorded: Nagarjuna Bodhisattva went to the dragon palace, seeing three
books of Avatamsaka Sutra. The upper book has verses as many as dusts in tens of
three thousand great thousand worlds; the middle book has 498, 800 verses; the lower
book has 100, 000 verses. The upper book, and the middle book were hidden not to
transmit which could not be held by ordinary people, so the lower book was
transmitted in India”.433
In Biography of Nagarjuna Bodhisattva, it did not definitely mention the name of
Avatamsaka Sutra, but only saying that the dragon king offered Vaipulya and other
profound scriptures. It mentioned Vaipulya sutras, but from works, such as
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, it could be seen that early Avatamsaka Sutra once produced
certain influence to Nagarjuna. That is to say, what Nagarjuna searched in dragon palace
included Avatamsaka Sutra. The location where Avatamsaka Sutra was popular and
made was only possible to presume from the languages applied in scriptures. Ji Xianlin
季羡林 made great achievements in such research, who thinks that those folk languages
were used in east India with Maghada as the center. Such conclusion was given by
reference to King Asoka’s dharma transmission. King Asoka sent people to carve
432
433
2《大正藏》卷 25，
《大智度论》卷 100。
1 法藏：
《华严经传记—部类第一》
，大正藏第 51 册，第 153 页上。
232
Dharmapada in all areas, with the same content, but in different languages. Now it has
become the precious materials for study on ancient Indian languages. By presumption,
the location where Mahayana scriptures were popular and made was in east India.434
In fascicle 51 of 法苑珠林, it quoted some information from 西域志: “One hundred
miles in the east of the caplital of King Prasenajit 波斯匿王, there was a big stupa near
the sea. Inside the big stupa, there was a small stupa, 一丈二尺 decorated with jewels,
shining in the night just like a big cloud of fire. It is said: five hundred years after the
Buddha’s nirvana, Nagarjuna entered into the dragon palace to convert the dragon king,
who offered this jeweled stupa to Nagarjuna. Nagarjuna accepted it and offered it to the
king of this country. The king then set up the big stupa to enshrine it. Since then, people
with some wishes, would bow to the feet and offer incense and flowers, which started
from the ground gradually upward to the stupa and to the sky”.
Master Xuan Zhuang in fascicle 10 of Journey to the West in Great Tang Dynasty
大唐西域记 said: “In the mountain of the southwest of Wu Cha country, there was a
temple with a stupa, which was magical with illumination in fasting days. Pure
Buddhists went to the stupa from near and far areas, offering flowers. There wa a
montain in the northwest of Wu Cha, in which there was a stupa, with the same magic
phenomenon as the first one. Both stupas were built by gods and ghosts, so it was full
of magic”.
Wu Cha country was northeast Indian area located in the south of Nepal, near the
sea, or might belong to Maghada country. 吕 澂 Lű Cheng once pointed out:
“Nagarjuna’s theory finished in north India. It might be possible that the stories might
be written in north India, which were popular in north India and written in his major
works Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra. Ariyadeva’s major activity was also in north
India”.435 From this, it could be seen that Madhyamaka theory had close relationship
with north Indian area.
Nagarjuna later returned to his hometown south India, in which he wrote a lot of
works and made Mahayana Buddhism popular all over India. In the transmission
process, his disciple Ariyadeva made great function. In fascicle 8 of Journey to the West
in Great Tang Dynasty 大唐西域记: “Nagarjuna’s great disciple called Ariyadeva was
wise, cautious, bright and enlightened. He heard about non-Buddhists’ debate winning
over some scholars for twelve years…Ariyadeva thus debated with non-Buddhists and
434
435
2 引自吕澂：
《印度佛学源流略讲》
，上海人民出版社，1979 年，第 89 页。
3 吕澂：
《中国佛学渊源略讲》
，中华书局，1979 年第 1 版，第 95 页。
233
negated them respectively. The king and ministers all felt happy and established this
stupa to memorize his virtue”.
Master Xuan Zhuang once saw this stupa when he went to India. Ariyadeva
continuously negated non-Buddhists in middle India and north India, which promoted
the transmission of Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka theory.
Although Ariyadeva developed Nagarjuna’s philosophy in middle India and north
India, but historically speaking, he did not bring fast transmission and development.
There are mainly three factors.
Firstly, for Buddhist philosophy, it was as popular as the faith among the ordinary
people, with only popular in a few great monks or intellectuals.
Secondly, contemporary Mahayana Buddhism was at the early period, was
squeezed by Hinayana, Brahmins and other non-Buddhists, so the developing step was
not fast. In the period of Master Fa Xian travel to Western Regions, countries inside
Cong Ling and north India were all centered in Hinayana Buddhism, with only a few
countries in Mahayana. Even though Master Fa Xian did not arrive in Gandhara area,
according to Asanga’s and Vasubandhu’s records, there were also debates between
Mahayana and Hinayana, with Hinayana predominant.
Thirdly, the temporal gap between Ariyadeva and Nagarjuna is not large, in Gupta
dynasty, which believed in Brahminism at the beginning. When Master Fa Xian
travelled to India, the Brahmin doctrine was popular, which undoubted did not benefit
the transmission of Buddhism, so at this period, Buddhist philosophy in middle India
and north India developed very slowly, with few opportunities for Nagarjuna’s
Madhyamaka theory transmitted to Western Regions.
5.1.3Translation of Four Treatises in Madhyamika School
Kumārajīva not only translated prajna sutras, but more important, he translated
four treatises in Madhyamika School, systematically introducing the philosophical
development of Indian prajna theory, letting Chinese monks start to formally contact
Indian Buddhist philosophy.
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra was the interpretive commentary of
Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra. Kumārajīva firstly translated the sutra, then the
commentary, but finished correction at the same time. About the translated
Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, in 大智度论记, it said: “Kumārajīva in the third year of
Hongshi period (401) 20th, December, came to Chang’an. In the summer of the fourth
year, he translated the commentary of Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, in Xiao Yaoyuan, and
27th, December of the seventh year finished. He also translated 经本禅經戒律百论禅
234
法要解 in 500, 000 words, together with this commentary 1, 500, 000 words in all.
There were 34 fascicles to interpret one chapter, the other chapters to get essential
meaning in simple words, without broad interpretation. This 100 fascicle commentary
finished, if detailedly interpreting all chapters, then more than 100 fascicles”.436
From this, it could be seen that the translation of Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra and
the translation of Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra were conducted consecutively. Master
Seng Rui in 大 智 释 论 序 said: “The sutra was done and then translated this
commentary”. The author of 大智度论记 treated the compiling time as the last time,
actually sutra first translated and then the commentary. The sutra and the commentary
were compiled into one, so it said they were done at the same time.437
Broadly speaking, Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra was rich in content, embracing
Indian Buddhist thoughts in different periods. In addition, this sastra involves Indian
history, geography, culture, art, etc., providing a lot of background materials of Indian
Buddhism for research, as was known as the encyclopedia of Indian Buddhism.
Deeply speaking, Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra made an absolute exploration about
mahaprajnaparamita by way of the foundamental doctrine of dependent arising with
empty in nature. 大智度 was the indirect meaning translation of mahaprajnaparamita.
The main thread through the entire sastra was mahaprajnaparamita. At the beginning of
this sastra, it pointed out: “Buddha Dharma are like the ocean, with faith to enter, with
wisdom to convert sentient being”. In the process of Buddha Dharma cultivation,
without the instruction of mahaprajnaparamita, people are as dangerous as the blind on
the edge of deep hole. Only by grasping the true meaning of mahaprajnaparamita,
Buddha Dharma is really obtained. In fascicle 100 of Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra, it
said: “Skillfulness is the wisd
sherry shi