Paul_1982_Paramartha_8562-8370-1-PB

7/30/2019 Paul_1982_Paramartha_8562-8370-1-PB

1/36

THE JOURNALOF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF

BUDDHIST STUDIES

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFA . K. Narain

University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA

EDITORSL . M. Joshi

Punjabi UniversityPatiala, India

Alexander W. MacdonaldUniversite de Paris X

Nanterre, FranceBardwell Smith

Carleton CollegeNorthjield, Minnesota, USA

Ernst SteinkellnerUniversity of Vienna

Wien, Austriafikido Takasaki

University of TokyoTokyo, Japan

Robert ThurmanAmherst College

Amherst, Massachusetts, USA

*g ****$

Volume 5 1982 Num ber 1


2/36

C O N T E N T S

I . ARTICLESOriginal Purity and the Focus of Early Yogacara by John

P. Keenan 7The Dragon Girl and the Abbess of Mo-Shan: Genderand Sta tus in the Chan Buddhist Tradi t ion by Miriam L . L evering 19The Life and Times of Paramartha (499569) try Diana Y.Paul 37Studies in Traditional Indian Medicine in the Pali Canon: Jlvaka and Ayurveda by Kenneth G.Zy.sk 70

II . S H O R T P A P E R SSa skya panchta's Account of the bSam yas Debate: Histo

ry as Polemic by Roger Jackson 89The Text on the "DharanI Stones from Abhayagiriya": AMinor Contribution to the Study of Mahayana Literature in Ceylon by Gregory Schopen io oA Report on Buddhism in the People 's Republic of Chinaby Alan Sponberg 109

I I I . B OOK R EVIEWS AND NOTIC ESHistoire du Cycle de la Naissance et de la Mort by Yoshiro

Irnaeda 118
http://zy.sk/http://zy.sk/http://zy.sk/


3/36

2. Theravada Medi ta t ion: The Buddhis t Transformat ion byWinston King 121

3. Chinese Buddhism: Aspects of Interaction and Reinter-pre ta t ion by W. Pachow 1244. Buddhism and Society in Southeast Asia by Donald K.

Swearer 1265. Tantra in Tibet and The Yoga of Tibet by Tsong kha pa 127

IV. PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS1. Asoka and B udd hism A Reexam ination by A . L . Ba-

sham 131

V. NOTES AND NEWS1. A rep or t on the 4th Con ferenc e of the IAB S, Universityof Wisconsin, Madison, WI, U.S.A. August 7-9,1981 1442. Constitution and By-Laws of the International Association of Bu ddh ist Studies 153

Contributors 160


4/36

The Life and Times of Paramartha(499-569)

by Diana Y. Paul

An implicit principle of selection is operative in any biography. Inreligious biographies or hagiographies, the selection of biographical facts is especially critical to the e m er gi ng ima ge of th e religiouspersonality.1 In the case of the Kao seng chuan (KSC)2 {Biographiesof Eminent Monks) we have simultaneously the tendency to selectcommon human exper iences that indicate Buddhis t monks areordinary men with shared emotions, ambit ions, and weaknesses;and the tendency to select events that characterize monks asuniquely religious, that is, spiritually eminent. In other words, theKSC and its sequel, the Hsu kao seng chuan (HKSC) (ContinuedBiographies of Eminent Monks) chronicle the lives of those who arerecognized to have exemplified the religious ideals of the Chine seBuddhist monast ic community in the most favorable manner . Parametria 's own biography portrays a saintly scholarly figureagainst the background of the emotionally and politically turbulent events of the sixth century.During this per iod marking the close of the North-South Dynastic Period in China, philosophical schools of Buddhismemerged and f lourished in the wake of Indian missionary-monkswho had gained economic support f rom different Chinese courts.Natural ly, when the imperial hegemony was a stable one, productivity in translation work and major recognition of scholarship wasfar more marked than in troubled periods of polit ical and socialupheaval. The most significant translations and scholarship wereusually effected only when there was financial patronage fromhighly influential state officials.

It is essential to remember that Buddhist "schools" in Chinawere not educational institutions established in terms of organizational hierarc hies and codified d og m a reg ard ed as absolute doctri-37


5/36

nal authority. The historical, political, geographical and economicrealities of the time were critical to the survival of any scholasticendeavor, religious or secular. In the period at the end of theN orth -So uth Dyn asties, in par ticula r, it is especially im po rtan t toinvestigate the personality and influence of the great Indian masters who served as the teachers and translators of innovative religious doctrines to their coteries of Chinese Buddhist disciples.These Indian Buddhist pioneers were not content to translate thescriptural texts solely for scholastic purposes. They were interested in interpreting texts in a way that would allow their Chinesefollowers to analyze their work by writing their own commentaries, thereby tran sfor m ing Bu ddh ism into a culturally acceptablereligion. These In dia n B ud dh ist m onk s also had to adjust to thepolitical and economic challenges of the time.It was during the chaotic times of the Liang and Ch'en Dynasties that Paramartha introduced the philosophical ideas of Yogacara Buddhism to the Chinese eli te in the south. Paramartha wasan Indian Buddhist monk and the first to introduce and disseminate , to any great extent, Yogiicarin philosophical and religioustenets to China, in the Kwangsi and Kwangtung provinces of thesouth. 'This marked the beginning of a period of active interpretation and discussion of some of the most significant texts of theYogacarin or "Consciousness-Only" tradit ion. Paramartha wasrecognized as a major philosopher and exegete of Yogacara Buddhism, exerting considerable influence on the development ofChinese Buddhist thought, from the Liang Dynasty up throughthe middle of the Tang. By providing a systematic and representative collection of core texts for his loyal followers, Paramarthaenabled Chinese Bud dhis t monks to pre pa re the foundat ion forthe classical T'ang Buddhist schools: Hua-yen, whose most notableproponents were Fa-tsang (643-712) and Chih-yen (602-668);and Fa-hsiang, whose primary proponents were Hsiian-tsang(600-664) and his disciple, K'uei-chi (632-682), also known asTzu-en .Largely due to Paramartha 's extensive translations and exegeses, Yo gacara B ud dh ism was to affect C hinese tho ug ht for overthree hundred years . Not only Chan and Hua-yen Buddhists butalso the later neo-Confucians owed a considerable debt to Paramartha 's systematic thought. His works were to be the turningpoint in a long-standing debate among Buddhist scholars concern-38


6/36

ing the phenomenology of mind and the essential character ofhuman nature. He devoted his writings to analyzing the structuresof conscious acts an d th eir relations hip to spiritual enlig hten m ent.If human nature is intrinsically good and destined for enlightenment, he asked, why do human beings refuse to believe and actlike the enligh ten ed be ings they fund am entally are? This ques tion, lying at the heart of Mahayana, is the focus of all of Paramartha's major tracts of writing.

While Paramartha was living, his works were subjected to thevicissitudes of the times, ranging from a period of eminence andrecognition of his brilliant and innovative analyses of Buddhistdoctrine to periods of sporadic but intense persecution. A preliminary investigation of the personality and political life of Paramartha will assist in understanding his place in the history of theevolution of Buddhist thought. He was a religious and philosophical teache r of the reto fore unk now n B udd hist theories. He was apolitical survivor who, though ostracized for the views he bothcherishe d and ha d ho ped to dissem inate, m ana ged to con tinue hiswritingsdespite jealo us B udd hist co urt m onks who plotted hisbanishment from the central sphere of political and religious influence and a lack of highly placed patrons that more economically stable times would have certainly provided.

The specifically religious dimension of Paramartha's life, inaccordance with the overall hagiographical intent of the HKSC, isbrought out in sharp relief from the sparse historical details of hislife before his arrival in China. First, I will attempt a brief reconstruction of the political and religious context of sixth-centuryIndia and its colony Fu na n, where Pa ram arth a resided for sometime. T h e n 1 will sum m arize the political an d eco nom ic unre st insouthern China on the eve of Paramartha's sojourn to Canton,before discussing in detail the biography of Paramartha.

The Historical Background of India and Funan

Paramartha was born in A.D. 499, approximately a hundredand fif ty years after the Yogacarin philosopher Vasubandhu, thesingle Buddhist most influential on Paramartha's intellectual development. At that time the city of Ujjain was no longer part of theGupta empire. The collapse of the Gupta empire would occur in39


7/36

the mid-sixth century, but the glory of the empire had fadedgreatly as the Central Asian tr ibe, the Hunas, had invaded northIndia mu ch earlier th ro ug h the K hyber Pass. T h e demise of thedynasty polit ically fractured the country, and north India revertedto its feudal kingdoms. In the Kathiawar Peninsula, Valabhl separated from Magadha, so that Paramartha's family was part of anauto no m ou s kin gd om , the province of Malwa, of which Ujjain wasthe capital city. There is no evidence that the Gupta empire controlled western Malwa, including Ujjain, except perhaps in theory.1 By 510 both Malwa and Valabhl had regional kings whotheoretically acknowledged the Later Guptas only as the titularheads of state.In western Malwa, north of Ujjain, there were several feudallords during the early l ife of Paramartha. The most important wasKing YaSodharman, whose heroic deeds in battl ing the Huna kingMihirakula,4 son of Toramana, are legendary. We know that Mi-hirakula was an adherent of a Saivite sect of the Brahmanicaltradition and was alleged to have fiercely persecuted the Buddhists.5 Mihirakula and his troops met with Fierce resistance, having been defeated by Yasodharman of Malwa sometime between

527 and 533, according to a Mandasor (Dasapura) inscription, '1 onwhich it is said th at M ihirakula paid o beisance to the feet of Yasodharman. There is some controversy concerning whether Mihirakula pressed on to Magadha to be defeated by NarasimhaguptaBaladitya II.7Even under Mihirakula and the Maitrakas, the provincial rulers were allowed to continue their reign over the people.8 Paramartha ' s contemporar ies , then, dur ing his youth were Mihirakulain Ujjain and Narasimhagupta Baladitya II , a Later Guptan king,in Magadha. Yasodharman of Malwa, who captured Mihirakula inapproximately 532, would have been the reigning power in Ujjainabout the t ime of Paramartha 's departure for foreign lands. SinceParamartha was their contemporary, he must have enjoyed thepatro nag e of both Y asodh arm an an d Baladitya I I in or de r to havethe requisite financial resources for his missionary effort. Since weare not certain of the precise da te when P aram arth a left for C hina,probably around 545, he may have had the patronage of e i therBaladitya II or , more likely, his son, Kumaragupta III , both ofwhom w ere patron s of Buddhism as were most of the Later Gup -tans. The Maitraka ruler Dhruvasena I of Valabhl, the monastic40


8/36

center for Yogacara Buddhism of the type that Paramartha advocated, reigned from at least 525-545 and may have supportedParamartha's missionary efforts as well.According to the HKSC Paramartha set sail at some unknowndate for distant lands to propagate the Buddhist teaching. Theonly coun try na m ed in the HK SC besides China as a place ofmissionary activity is Funan. Funan, at the time of Paramartha,had become a center of international trade, incorporating all ofCambodia, parts of Thailand, and the lower part of the Mekongdelta in Vietnam . Th is region functioned as a trad e zone betweenthe two great empires of India and China and had been a vital

economic colony in India's possession since the first century A.D.Funan had become predominantly Hindu but Buddhis t miss ionary activity during the sixth century must have intensified, since itis said that the Buddhists also had a strong following.It is known that Buddhist monks had already been sent toChina from Funan to translate texts during the imperial reign ofWu of Liang. Samghapala (or Samghabhara) (460-524) resided inChina from 506 until 522. Mandra (or Mandrasena) collaborated

with him.9 Rudravarman, ' son of Jayavarman, had commiss ionedat least six emissaries to China, from 517 until 539. Various presents were sent to the imperial court by Rudravarman, including asandalwood image of the Buddha, Indian pearls, a live rhinoceros,saffron, and a relic of the Buddha (purportedly a twelve-foot-longstrand of hair.)1 1 After he allegedly killed Gunavarman, his halfbrother and r ightful heir to the throne, Rudravarman was in j e o p ardy of being overthrown by native Cambodians. This eventuallybrought the downfall of the Indian colony of Funan.Two facts can be documented with regard to the state ofBuddhism in Funan at the t ime of Paramartha. Firs t , governmentsu pp ort of Bu dd hism was an imp ort an t factor in tra de relationsbetween Fu nan a nd C hina. Param artha 's jou rne y to China was notthe first, since envoys to China from Funan had been relativelyfrequent before his de pa rtu re for Canto n. We know from theHKSC that Emperor Wu of Liang had invited monks such asSamghapala and Mandra from Funan to the imperial court pr iorto Paramar tha 's depar ture for Canton. Second, Rudravarmanmust have been the sovereign at the time Paramartha was engagedin missionary activity in Funan, as he apparently had some interestin Buddhism, for political if not personal reasons. His reign was to41


9/36

come to an abrupt end about the t ime that Paramartha departedfrom Funan.Although Hinduism was the state religion of Funan, the factthat E m pe ro r W u selected Fu nan as a resourc e cen ter for recruiting eminent Buddhist monks suggests that there was considerablemissionary activity by Buddhist monks in Funan during the sixthcentury. By the beginning of the seventh century, however, Buddhism had been banished from Funan. Paramartha may have already suspected that Buddhism was beginning to lose i ts consti tuency in Funan when he accepted the invitation to go to China.

Historical Background of Southern C hina D uring the L ate L iang andEarly Ch'en

The Ta-t 'ung re ign of Emperor Wu of Liang (re igned 502-549) marked the beginning of the fourth decade of his reign. Hewas a m ore fervent Bu ddh ist than any Chinese sovereign beforehim. This fact is reiterated in Paramartha 's biography in theHKSC, where it states that:

. . . the v irtue of E m pe ro r Wu of L iang exten ded over allparts of the land, causing the Three Jewels [of Buddhism] tono urish. . . . T h e em pe ro r wished to t ransmit an d t ransla tethe teachings of the siitras, no less than during the Ch'in Dynasty [Former Ch' in: 351-394; Later Ch' in: 384-417]. In addition, he [wished to have] published materials surpassing innumber those of the days of the Ch'i Dynasty [479-502]. 1 2Emperor Wu had originally been of Taoist persuasion, andhis ties to Taoist alchemists continued even after his conversion toBu ddhism in 504 and his subsequent decrees exert ing pres sure onTaoists to return to the lai ty." He began his reign in a period ofgreat prosperity and economic stability, but closed his reign withindifference toward the national government. Envisioning himselfas an exem plary Bu ddh ist sovereign, he had constructed many

Buddhist temples, the most famous being the T'ung-t 'a i temple,whose construction between 521-527 drained the state treasuriesof enormous sums of money and increased the burden on theeconomy.In the year of T'ung-t 'a i 's completion, Emperor Wu briefly

42


10/36

retired to become a monk. He was sixty-three years old at the time.It is at the T'u ng 't 'ai tem ple tha t he had e ng ag ed in some of hismost noteworthy and controversial Buddhist practices, including"Dharma assemblies" where the subtleties of sutras would be discussed at length, and where he granted amnesty to criminals ormade pronouncements. One of his more unusual pract ices was tosurrender himself as a temple servant for a day in order to raisedonations from wealthy aristocratic families for the temple cof-fers.14 Two instances in which he performed the acts of a templeservant took place in 546 and 547, shortly before Paramartha'sarrival in Nanking. The Inexhaust ible Treasuries he encouragedwere vast collections of cap ital, estim ated to be w orth 10,960,000pieces of gold in 533 .1 5 All these acts were Wu's pious attempts tosave himself and others from unfortunate states of rebirth. Due tothe zealous practices of Emperor Wu he was praised as p'u-sa t'ien-tzu, " T h e bodhisattva and Son of Heaven" and vilified by Confucian historians as a spendthrift who allowed corrupt Buddhistpractices to continue unchecked. He also was criticized for notobserving the penal cod e, by being overly lenient toward prisone rsin accordanc e with his inter pre tation of the Bud dhist ideal of compassion. When circumstances necessitated the execution of criminals, Wu reluctantly gave the command only after burning incenseand invoking the name of the Buddha to eradicate any potentialbad karma he would otherwise incur.

For all of his financial excesses in the name of the Buddhistreligion, Emperor Wu, particularly in the early period of his reign,established social and economic reforms. He exerted himself instabil izing governmental organizations by maintaining t ight control over the Southern Dynastic aristocracy."' However, at the endof the Eastern Chin the firmly established aristocratic families hadlost much of their monopoly over government posts; in their steadrose the "cold men" (han-jen), who were ambit ious commoners,currying favor with local lords. These commoners had the backingof wealthy regional lords and came to dominate others throughgraft and bribery, increasing their own wealth considerably.

The history of the shifts in power during the Southern Dynasties must always take into account the fact that the great landowning regional lords had made alliances with the "cold men" forbusiness, profit, and capital. This economic and political alliancewas to oppress the farmers even more and cause the collapse of43


11/36

the Liang. The aristocratic families who had emigrated from thenorth, taking flight from the Hsien-pei invaders for the safe regions of the south along the Yangtze delta , gained high administrative positions but often possessed no real power. The provincialgovernors, who were princes of the imperial family, always had toaddress the needs of the native southern Chinese clans surrounding them . Often the go vern ors w ere in a weak posit ion with reg ardto protecting their own garrisons, since the military recruits came-from native southern families.The centralized government was politically organized as a system in which each prince moved from one garrison to another,with a m etrop olitan he ad qu arte rs in the capital city of C hien-k 'ang(same as Chien-yeh, referred to in the HKSC, and known today asNanking). Militarily, the Liang Dynasty was not only vulnerable toattack from the foreign rulers of the Toba-Wei house in northChina but also from within its own ranks. By the end of the Liang,oppression of the peasants and farmers had increased but influences and threats from north China had temporarily declined,due to its division into Eastern and Western Wei. The Liangsought to take advantage of this division by increasing militaryintervention. Emperor Wu, late in his career, turned to the "coldfamilies" (han-men) in hope of using the latter's power to gainnorth China . These t rusted men, who had been excel lent government servants and had not antagonized the aristocratic emigres,were given low government posit ions that had real power behindthem, although they were looked down upon by the aristocracybecause of their plebian origins. Countering Emperor Wu's ambit ions were the amb itions of some of the mo re powerful so uth ernChinese clans and emigres from the north who wished to appropriate for themselves the throne of south China. Unlike in theNorthern Dynasties, there was a constant need to strengthen nationalism in the south. In addit ion, the tension between spendingvast sums of money on war and on Buddhist practices were signsof a weakening of the Liang Dynasty. The insufficient increase inthe money supply had been a general tendency since the t ime ofLiu Sung.1 7 Economic recession coupled with a high rate of inflation during the late Liang Dynasty gave many of the "cold families" who were merchants increased prosperity and forced peasants and farmers into more lucrative careers in the mili tary assoldiers for powerful native regional lords.44


12/36

The rise of the notorious rebel Hou Ching 1 8 and the marshaling of forces against Emperor Wu is a long, complicated web ofintrigue that remains controversial among historians. OriginallyHou Ching was a powerful general of the Eastern Wei Dynasty innorth China. He had been a mil i tary aide to Kao Huan, who hadforced Emperor Hsiao-wu to flee west to Ch'ang-an, where he wasassassinated by Yii-wen T'ai in 534. Kao Huan then set up a puppet emperor , Emperor Hsiao Ching, in Loyang in 535, establ ishing the Eastern Wei. In 547, almost thirteen years after the inauguration of the Eastern Wei dynasty, Kao Huan died. His eldestson, Kao Ch'eng (d. 549), did not look so favorably upon his father 's cohort, Hou Ching. Kao Ch'eng was assassinated in 549 by aLiang prisoner of war .10 Kao Ch'eng's younger brother , Kao Yang(529559), succeeded as the military power behind the throne,proclaiming himself emperor (Wen-hsiian) in 550, establishing theNorthern Ch' i . Following a quarrel with Kao Yang, Hou Chingplanned another military campaign, this t ime allying himself withYii-wen T'ai of the Western Wei, Kao Ch'eng's old rival and theHsien-pei power behind the throne in 547. Although Yii-wen T'aiwas uneasy about the al l iance with Hou Ching, he commandedHou Ching to seize the Eastern Wei capital of Loyang. Hou Chingfelt trapped between the two rival forces. In 548, he allied himselfwith Emperor Wu so as to gain his assistance in this crisis.

By this t ime Emperor Wu was well into his dotage and haddelegated the bulk of administrative responsibili t ies to both competent officials and inefficient relatives from his immediate family.Against the will of some of his most trusted advisers, Emperor Wuenfeoffed H ou C hin g as Prince of Ho na n, so as to cause trou blefor both the Eastern and W estern Wei. T hr ou gh ou t the ensuinghostil i t ies precipitated by Hou Ching, Emperor Wu was to be inef-fectual in rallying forces to defend the capital and empire fromthe duplicitous Hou Ching. Assisted by one of Emperor Wu's ownsons, Hou Ching eventually seized the capital city of Nanking onApril 24, 549, after a six-month insurrection in which there waslack of resistance from imperial troops. With dignity befitting animperial authori ty, Emperor Wu received Hou Ching at courtwhen the rebel stormed the palace gates.2 0 Emperor Wu died ofstarvat ion on J u n e 12, 549, while un de r h ouse arrest .

After two-and-a-half years of nominally supporting the rightful heir to the throne, in the seventh month of 551 Hou Ching had45


13/36

the puppet emperor Chien-wen (Hsiao Kang) intoxicated andthen suffocated him and m ur de re d m any of his children . Afterthe three-month interim reign of Hsiao Tung, Emperor Chien-wen's successor, Hou Ching proclaimed himself Emperor of Hanon Jan ua ry 1, 552, and imprisoned Hsiao Tu ng . 2 1 On April 28,552, three months after Hou Ching's ascent to the throne, HouChing was forced to f lee Nanking by troups commanded by thepow erful gen erals W ang Se ng-pien (d. 555)-* and C h'en Pa-hsien(503-559),2* un de r th e orde rs of Hsiao I. On May 26, 552, G eneral Wang Seng-pien killed Hou Ching and displayed his corpse inNanking. His corpse was savagely torn to pieces by the people andeaten, then the bones were set afire. His head was taken to Chiang-ling where emperor (Yuan) allowed the birds to eat it.- '4E m pe ro r L iang's seven th son, Hsiao 1, who had originallybeen enfeoffed as Prince of Hsiang-tung, and who lived inChiang-ling, approximately 450 miles southwest of Nanking, proclaimed himself emperor (Yuan) of the Liang in Chiang-ling onDe cem ber 13, 552.2:> His general, Wang Seng-pien, who hadoverthrown his father's assassin, Hou Ching, was the power behind the restoration of the Liang, and was still in Nanking. Perhaps suspicious of Wang Seng-pien's own political ambitions, thenewly declared Emperor Yuan wisely chose to stay in Chiang-lingbut sent both generals to Nanking. Nearly all the aristocraticemigres who had survived the fall of Nanking sought refugewhere Hsiao I resided.2" Fearing also his younger brother, HsiaoChi, in Sze chua n, H siao 1 had him assassinated by the W esternWei in August 553.2 7 The regions of Szechuan, however, weresacrificed to the Western Wei, led by Yu-wen Tai, in exchange forthe disposal of Hsiao Chi, and the court was maintained inChiang-ling where Hsiao 1 now re side d. This city was seized easilyby the Western Wei a year later, at the close of 554. The WesternWei plotted the death of Hsiao I by taking all Liang functionariesprisoners and leading them to Kuan-chung at the basin of the WeiRiver. Only about two hundred families escaped forced migration.2" Hsiao Ch 'a, the son of Hsiao lu n g , had Hsiao I crush ed todeath while under the security of the Western Wei. On February7, 555, he proclaimed himself emperor (posthumously known asPrince of Yiichang).

Meanwhile, in Nanking both of Emperor Yiian's generals,Wang Seng-pien and Ch'en Pa-hsien, were maneuvering for the46


14/36

ultimate power behind the throne. The succession to the throne ofLiang posed a difficult problem. Hsiao Fang-chih was proclaimedheir apparent by both generals. Later, however, Hsiao Yiian-ming, the la te Emperor Wu's nephew, a repatria ted heir to thethrone l iving in Northern Ch'i , where he had been in exile, wassummoned back from Northern Ch' i by Wang Seng-pien. On July1, 555, he was proclaimed emperor, and Hsiao Fang-chih wasdesignated prince regent, a virtual demotion. This was agreedupon with the Northern Ch'i , and Nanking was securely in theirpossession. This lasted a mere five months before a conflict between Ch'en Pa-hsien and Wang Seng-pien left the slayer of HouChing dead .2 9 Hsiao Yiian-ming, who had been sponsored byW ang Seng-pien, was dep osed and the fifteen-year-old prince regent, Hsiao Fang-chih, Prince of Chin-an, ascended the throne asemperor (posthumously known as Emperor Ching), with thesponsorship of Ch'en Pa-hsien. After an appropriate waiting period of two years with Hsiao Fang-chih as a puppet emperor, Ch'enPa-hsien proclaim ed himself em pe ro r on Novem ber 16, 557, beginning the Ch'en Dynasty.

The Biography of ParamarthaA standard account of his family background and place ofbirth is given in the HKSC,:i


15/36

ery." :,:l It is also said that his beneficent presence was compatiblewith the dispositions of the native people he encountered. Theseare , of course, prerequisites for the ideal missionary-monk.Little more is known of Paramartha's life in India. He was amonk (srdmana) who had gained a considerable religious reputation for scholarship and travel. The biographical record in theHKSC mentions that Emperor Wu of Liang devoutly yearned toextend Buddhism throughout China. During the Ta- t 'ung era(535-546) he ordered his Palace Rear Guard Chang Fan and acontinge nt to accom pany the am bassa dor from F una n (Cambodia)back to his own country.M Emperor Wu wished to invite eminentscholars in Mahayana Buddhism to bring significant sfdras and

sastras to China. At this t ime Paramartha's reputation as a scholarand missionary living in Fu nan presu m ably was br ou gh t to theambassador 's attention, for the ambassador of Funan sent him toEmperor Wu's court in compliance with the imperial order.Little is known of Paramartha's adulthood until his early forties, when he arrived in Canton. He may have resided in Funanfor some length of t ime, ju dg in g from the repu tation he hadgained with the ambassador and, presumably, the government in

general .The first of many documentary discrepancies in the account ofPara m artha 's jo ur ne y to China deals with the facts su rro un di ngthe departure from Funan. According to his official biography inHKSC he was sent to China from Funan and took many texts withhim.*5 It is very clear from historical records, both Buddhist anddynastic, that Emperor Wu of Liang made tremendous effort anddonated large sums of money to make Buddhism prosperous andto seek out Buddhist missionaries. The account in the HKSC isbased upon Pao-kuei 's introduction to the "new" Suvarnaprabhasa-sutra {Hsin-ho chin kuang-ming ching), eighth chuan, preserved in theL i-tai san-pao chi (LTSPC):

Emperor Wu of Liang feared rebirth in the three [unfortunate] destinies and grieved over falling into the four kinds ofgestation [womb, egg, moisture, or spontaneously generated].He [wished to] set sail to rescue the drowning, holding on tothe torch of wisdom, in order to enlighten [others '] delusion.During the Ta- t 'ung per iod the emperor sent a Rear GuardChang Szu to Funan to send back to China invited eminentmonks and Mahayana tdstras and sutras of various kinds. This

48


16/36

country [Funan] then yielded in turning over the westernIndian Dharma Master from Ujjain, namely Paramartha, who,in Liang, was called Chen-ti, and with him, many sutras andsdstras in order to honor the emperor .After the Dharma Master Paramartha had traveled tomany kingdoms he had sett led in Funan. His manner waslively and intelligent and he had relished details in scripturaltexts and profound texts, all of which he had studied. In thefirst year of T'ai-ch'ing (547) he went to the capital and had avisit with the emperor who himself bowed down to him in theJeweled Cloud (Pao-yun) quarters of the palace in reverenceto him, wishing for him to translate sutras and sdstras, relyingupon the foreigner. Opposition from the law made it difficultfor foreigners to be titled.MThe Pao-kuei introduction may be reliable, since the introduction was written in 597, only about sixty years after Param artha was sum m one d from Fun an (in approximately 535 ), , 7 andtwenty-eight years after Paramartha's death, in 569. Pao-kuei 'steacher, Tao-an, had been one of Paramartha's followers, and hisdeath in 581 at the end of the Northern Chou Dynasty came only

thirteen years after Paramartha's. Some of the more recent accounts of Param artha 's em bark ing on his jou rne y to south Chinaclaim that Emperor Wu of Liang commissioned an envoy to go toMagadha, not Funan, to acquire sutras and Dharma Masters. FromMagadha the envoy met the Tripitaka Master Kulanatha, who atfirst adamantly refused to go to China, but eventually boarded aship with his attendant Gautama and many others, bearing a giftof a rosewood statue of the Buddha to be presented at the imperialcourt .M The K'ai-yiian lu (KYL) combines parts of both versions ofthe account , namely, that the Rear Guard Chang Fan (or ChangSzu) had accompanied the Funan ambassador to his own countryan d th en w en t to Magadha."*'' T hi s co m bin ed ac co un t is the mostquestionable of all the sources, since passages are cited verbatimfrom both HKSC and the colophon to the Ch'i-hsin lun, but synthesized.

Of the four historical documents that mention the imperialenvoy, the Ch 'i-hsin lun is allegedly apocryphal and the KYL incorporates portions of the Ch'i-hsin lun. If one rules out these tworecord s as unreliable historical sources, then the re can be no do ub tthat Paramartha was in Funan engaging in missionary activitysome time during the Ta-t 'ung era of the Liang Dynasty.49


17/36

B e s i d e s t h e c o n f l i c t i n g t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e a b o u t F u n a n , t h e y e a ro f d e p a r t u r e r e m a i n s v a g u e in a ll h i s to r i ca l r e c o r d s . P a r a m a r t h a ' so f f i c i a l b iography in the H K SC s im ply s t a t e s tha t dur ing the Ta-t 'ung era , a span of s l ight ly over ten years , the miss ion led by RearG u a r d C h a n g F a n w a s s e n t t o s e e k o u t B u d d h i s t m o n k s a n d s c r i p t u r a l te x t s . A ll o t h e r d o c u m e n t s t h a t i n d i c a t e a t i m e o f d e p a r t u r ef o l l o w t h e H K S C .

W h e n P a r a m a r t h a a r r i v e d i n N a n h a i ( m o d e r n C a n t o n ) o nS ep te m be r 2 5 , 54 6 , it w as the l a st yea r o f the T a- t ' u ng e ra . We m aya s s u m e t h a t h is d e p a r t u r e f r o m F u n a n w a s t o w a r d s th e l a t te r h a l fo f t h e T a - t ' u n g e r a , t h u s g i v i n g a m p l e t r a v e l i n g t i m e t o m a k e t h ej o u r n e y . H a v i n g s t o p p e d a t v a r i o u s p l a c e s a l o n g t h e c o a s t , h e a r r ived a t t h e cap i t a l c ity , C h ien -ye h ( sou th o f m o d e rn N an k in g) ,tw o yea r s l a t e r , i n the in t e rca la ry m onth o f the second yea r o f T ' a i -c h ' i n g ( A u g u s t 2 0 t h r o u g h S e p t e m b e r 1 7, 5 4 8 ) . 4 0 W h e n h e a r r i v e da t c o u r t , t h e e i g h t y - fi v e - y e a r- o l d E m p e r o r W u p r o s t r a t e d h i m s e l fb e f o re P a r a m a r t h a a n e x t r e m e l y r a r e s ho w o f r e v e r e n c e a n dh a d a n a u d i e n c e w i t h h i m i n t h e P a o - y u n t e m p l e . 1 1 At the t ime ofth i s au d i en ce , P a r am ar th a w as a lm os t fifty ye a r s o ld an d an exp er i e n c e d w o r l d t r a v e l e r . W h i l e h a v i n g h i s a u d i e n c e w i th t h e e l d e r l ye m p e r o r , P a r a m a r t h a w a s u n a w a r e o f a n e v e n t t h a t w a s t o a f fe ctbo th h i s m is s iona ry e f fo r t s in C h ina and the roya l pa t ronage o f h i st r a n s l a t i o n w o r k t h e p l o t t i n g o f t h e d o w n f a l l o f t h e L i a n g c o u r tb y t h e T o b a r e b el H o u C h i n g .

A m e r e tw o m o n t h s a ft e r P a r a m a r t h a ' s a r ri v a l in N a n k i n g ,t h e r e b e ll io n h a d c o m m e n c e d a n d E m p e r o r W u ' s p a t r o n a g e w a sa t t e n u a t e d b y t h e i m p e n d i n g p o l i t i c a l c r i s i s . F r o m t h e d a y o f P a r a m a r t h a ' s r e c e p t i o n a t c o u r t u n t i l E m p e r o r W u ' s d e a t h by st a r v a t io n w h i l e u n d e r h o u s e a r r e s t o n J u n e 1 2, 5 4 9 , P a r a m a r t h a w a ss p o n s o r e d , f o r a s c a n t t e n - m o n t h p e r i o d , b y t h e i m p e r i a l c o u r t o fL i a n g , b e f o r e t h e u p r i s i n g o f H o u C h i n g ' s t r o o p s .

A f t er E m p e r o r W u ' s u n f o r t u n a t e d e a t h , P a r a m a r t h a fled t oF u - c h ' u n , i n C h e k i a n g , F u - y a n g d i s t r i c t , a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 5 0 m i l e ss o u t h e a s t o f N a n k i n g , n e a r M t . S i a o . T h e r e h e w a s s p o n s o r e d byL u Y u a n - c h e , t h e r e g i o n a l g o v e r n o r o f F u - c h ' u n a n d a r e c e n tc o n v e r t t o B u d d h i s m . P a r a m a r t h a a t t e m p t e d t o r e s u m e t r a n sl a t ion ac t iv i t i e s . Wi th a s t a f f o f tw en ty accom pl i shed m onks , i nc ludi n g P a o - c h ' i u n g ( 5 0 4 - 5 8 4 ) , 4 2 h e b e g a n t r a n s l a t i n g t h e Shih-ch'i-ti-lun (Treatise on the Seventeen Bodh isattva Stages) in five chiian d u r i n gthe fo ur th yea r o f T ' a i - ch ' ing (550) . T h e t ex t is now lost .1* A c c o r d -50


18/36

ing to the KYL the monks apparently met with difficulties in translating the text, so they stopped work..44 The HKSC states that"although [the political and military situation of] the country hasnot yet been settled, he [Paramartha] transmitted the text with anappendix (or glossary)."4" ' However, "transmitted" does not necessarily indicate that the text was completely committed to writing,so there need not be any contradiction between the sources, HKSCand KYL. Both the older catalog, the LTSPC, and the more recentTa t'ang nei lien lu (NIL) omit any mention of an interruption inthe translation but both catalogs give the same date and place oftranslation as found in the HKSC and KYL.41'

After presumably beginning the translation of the Treatise onth e Seventeen Bodhisattva Stages, Paramartha returned to the capitalcity in the third year of T'ien-pao (552)47 by invitation of noneother than Hou Ching himself. Undoubtedly Hou Ching knew ofParamartha's activities at Governor Lu Yuan-che's , and so summoned him to court. The HKSC laments: "At this time there wascontinuous warfare and famine; the Dharma was close to ruin."4 8In the two and one-half years at Governor Lu Yuan-che's estate,Paramartha had had the solitude to begin the translation work hehad i nte nd ed as his chief pu rpo se in traveling to Ch ina, but he alsoundoubtedly had been concerned about political affairs at court,where the murderer of Emperor Wu now dictated national policy.Even more dispirited must his monastic assistants have been at thestarvation, devastation, and barbarisms in their homeland.4-' Although reasons for stopping the translation of the Treatise on theSeventeen Bodh isattva Stages are not given in any of the records,psychological as well as scholarly difficulties must have affectedthe monks assisting Paramartha in rendering the original text intoChinese.

Paramartha, who had unfortunately found himself in themidst of insurrection, was now summoned to Nanking by HouChing, four years after he had first entered the palace gates underthe sedate reign of Emperor Wu. There is no indication from theHKSC whether Paramartha was reluctant to vis i t Hou Ching. Thetone in his biography is neutral with regard to Paramartha's attitud e toward s H ou Ch ing's invitation. It is intrigu ing to speculateas to the motives behind Hou Ching's invitation to Paramartha. Heevidently desired Buddhist support, as indicated by his immediateorders for the construction of new Buddhis t temples , even though51


19/36

he had burned countless temples before he seized Nanking. 5 0 Perhaps the learned monk was to be used as a symbol of Hou Ching'spurported zeal for the Buddhist path or perhaps, and more l ikely,Ho u C hin g wanted to exploit the prestige of a foreign mo nk afterhis usurpation of the throne and ravaging of the south. Whatbetter way to keep watch on Paramartha and any possible politicalmaneuvers by his wealthy provincial patrons than to keep himunder surveil lance in palace quarters while pretending a desire tolearn the Buddhis t sutras? In any event, Paramartha was not in aposition to refuse Hou Ching's summons, so he left Fu-ch'un forthe capital , where he was duly honored by the rebel.How long Paramartha was in Fu-ch'un is impossible to calculate with certainty but we can surmise that he left Nanking immediately before or after Emperor Wu's death in June, 549. Assuming that ei ther Paramartha or his supporters realized his l ife wasimmediately threatened, he escaped an ignominious death at thehands of Hou Ching. Approximately two and one-half years later,in 552 , he had his aud ience with Ho u Ch ing. The m onk m ust havehad the suspicion that he was in a politically sensitive situation andcertainly must have conducted himself in the rebel's presence with

the subtlest diplomacy. Paramartha did not have to endure thetensions of such circumstances for very long however. Given theone-hundred-twenty-day span of Hou Ching 's re ign, we may est i mate that Paramartha had to endure the unchanneled violence ofhis environment in Hou Ching's palace for no more than fourmonths .3 1During Emperor Yiian 's re ign, which began the Ch'eng-shen g era on D ecem ber 13, 552 , Pa ram arth a settled at the Ch eng -

kuan temple in Nanking. That means that instead of being inChiang-ling with the imperial court of Emperor Yuan, Param arth a decide d to stay in the capital, w here th e real powers, W angSeng-pien and Ch'en Pa-hsien, were aligning their forces. There,with more than twenty monks, including Yiian-ch'an, he translated the Suvarnaprabhasa-sutra.There are some interest ing points of disagreement among therecords. First of all, the HKSC does not mention any specific date

for translating the Suvarnaprabhdsa, only mentioning that Paramartha t ransla ted the text a t the Cheng-kuan temple in Nankingdu rin g E m pe ror Yiian 's re ign, tha t is , du rin g the C h'eng-sh engperiod (552-555). T h e re are two textual dates given in some of the52


20/36

other sources. LTSPC gives the date of the first year, Ch'eng-sheng, namely 552, at the Cheng-kuan temple and also at YangHsiung's residence in the Ch'ang-fan region of Nanking," '* NTLand KYL follow suit, giving the identical time and place of translation.5S The Ku-nien i ching t'u chi (KN) gives the third year ofCh'eng-sheng (554).54 T he T un hu an g m anusc rip t o f t he in troduction to the first chiian of the composite Suvarnaprabhdsa translat ion,5 5 undertaken by Pao-kuei, states that the earlier redaction byPa ram arth a was translated from the second m on th, twenty-fifthday, of the second year Ch'eng-sheng (March 25, 553) unti l thethird m on th, twen tieth day of that same year (April 18). T h us , theLTSPC, NTL, KYL, and KN records would be in error unless weassume that the period del ineated in the Tunhuang manuscript ismuch too brief to translate a sutra seven chiian in length. Given hisusual speed of translating and the turmoil of the uprising of HouChing, i t is more reasonable to assume that Paramartha and hisstaff began the translation during the first year of Ch'eng-sheng(552), and continued to revise and refine the style until probablyAp ril 18 of the following year. T h e KN , which is the only recor d togive third year Ch'eng-sheng, may be ruled out as either an erroror as indicating that further revisions of the translation or subsequent discussion may have taken place in 554. Documentary evidence of two translation sites for the Suvarnaprabhasa-sutra indicates that the translation staff most likely worked on the text firstat the Cheng-kuan temple in 552 and then later worked at YangHsiung's residence in the Ch'ang-fan region of Nanking fromMarch 25, 553, until at least April 8, 553.From Nanking Paramartha t rave led approximate ly th reehundred miles southwest to Yuchang, in the second month, th irdyear of C h'en g-s hen g (M arch 19-April 17, 554). T h e H KS C m entions that this was a return visi t to Yuchang, even though no recording of a first visit to that city is found in any of the existingdocuments . The HKSC could be in e rror and Paramartha mayhave been paying his first visit to Yuchang. The KN supports thisview, stating that Paramartha "went" to Yuchang, not that he retu rn ed the re. Th e KY L, which is based on the HK SC in p art ,follows the latter text exactly. Since Hsiao I (Emperor Yuan) assumed the throne in Chiang-l ing in December, 552. Paramarthamay have visited him before he became emperor in his earlierresidence at Y uch ang . Th is trip would have taken place on his way53


21/36

to the Cheng-kuan temple in Nanking, where the generals Ch 'enPa-hsien and Wang Seng-pien were vying for political power. Paramartha's return trip to Yiichang in 554 would have taken t ime,considering the three-hundred-mile journey involved. At Yii chang he is said to have met the eminent monk Ching-shao (508-583),57 and he visited temples in the immediate vicinity, Shih-hsing and, probably, Hsin-wu.Ui hypothesizes that the first time Paramartha went to Yiich ang was on his way to N ank ing from N anha i (mod ern Can

ton) .5 8 Th at is, after P ara m arth a disem barke d from his ship inCanton on September 25, 546, he stopped at various places in theKwangtung region for two years until his arrival in Nanking,sometim e between Au gust 20 and Sep tem ber 17, 548. O ne of theplaces between Canton and Nanking along the possible waterroutes is Yiichang, about midway between the two great urbancenters. Tang Yung-t 'ung gives the same hypothesis for Para-martha's first purported visit to Yuchang. In any event, Yiichangbecame a refuge for Paramartha on several occasions, for i t reappears in the biography later on.At the Pao-t ' ien temple in Yiichang in 554, Paramartha completed translations of the Mi-lo hsia sheng ching (Sutra of M aitreya'sDescent [from H eaven]) and the Jen wang pan-jo ching (Sutra of thePerfection of Wisdom of the Benevolent King), aided by Hui-hsien andten other monks.


22/36

After having spent a brief period of time in Shih-hsing, Paramartha moved northward, across the Nan-l ing mountain range toNan-k'ang (near modern Kiangsi, district of Kan), protected bythe Grand Guardian Hsiao Po,04 who escorted him across themountains . At that t ime Ouyang Wei was imperial representat iveof Shih-hsing (called Tung Heng-chou under Emperor Yuan) andalso the honorary marquis of that area. We may assume that theuneasy alliance betwe en G ran d G ua rdi an Hsiao Po, an erstwhilefoe of Ouyang Wei's , had been resolved and that Ouyang Wei hadmade amends by this time. Hsiao Po lived in Kwangchow andEmperor Yuan had been troubled by Hsiao Po's power and hadsent troops to replace Hsiao Po as governor of Kwangchow. HsiaoPo led his troop s to Shih-hsing, turn ing back the em per or 's t roopswhile Ouyang Wei closed the gates to his fortress to ward offbattle. Hsiao Po was furious, and seized Ouyang Wei's property,but then returned the wealth on the condition of an oath of allegiance. Hsiao Po then crossed the mountains from Nan-k 'ang,making Ouyang Wei his mil i tary governor.0 5 These events all tookplace after the ninth month of the third year Ch'eng-sheng (October 12-November 10, 554) when Hsiao Po was living in Shih-hsingand had left Kwangchow.Since Hsiao Po had made many trips to oversee the regionaround Shih-hsing, on several occasions explicitly to outmaneuverthe powerful governor Ouyang Wei, he was experienced in crossing the Nan-l ing mountains and could conveniently accompanyParamartha to Nan-k 'ang at the same t ime that he supervised thearea under the guise of assisting a Buddhist monk in his travels.The time of this sojourn across the mountains had to be betweenthe closing months of 554 and the third month of 557 (April 15-May 13) when Hsiao Po was killed.00 In the second month of 557,one month before his death, Hsiao Po, having raised his army inrebell ion against the emperor , crossed the Nan-l ing mountains toNan-k'ang. It was probably at this time that Paramartha was escorted to Nan-k'ang, having spent a good part of the years 555and 556 in Shih-hsing. Dur ing this period , Para m artha " translatedin these various places in a hurried manner without a patron."0 7At Shih-hsing Paramartha is said to have translated the Sui-hsiang

lun chung sh ih-liu ti s/iu (A Commentary on the Sixteen Truth's from th eLaksandnusdra-fdstra [a commentary on the Abhidharma-kosa attributed to Gunamati]) .0 855


23/36

In the third year of Chao-t 'ai (557), 'w at the very close of theLiang Dynasty, Paramartha completed the translation of the W u-shang i ching (Auttardsraya-sutra) (Supreme F oundation Sutra), in theninth m on th, eighth day (Oc tober 16), at the reque st of Liu Wen-t'o, Secretary of Nan-k'ang, P'ing-ku district. This date is found inthe colophon to the Wu-shang i ching preserved in the KYL, whichcriticizes the LTSPC for cataloging this text as a Ch'en translation.70For at least a third t ime Paramartha returned to Yuchang, inthe seventh month of the second year of Yung-ting (July 31-August 29, 558). He also visited Lin-ch'uan (in Kiangsi, directlysouth, approximately forty miles from Yuchang) and Chin-an (inFukien, a port city along the coast, three hundred fifty milessoutheast of Yuchang). First, he stopped at Lin-ch'uan, where hetranslated two treatises by Vasubandhu, Ch ung-pien fen-pieh lun(Madhyantavibhaga)(Discernment of, the Middle and Extremes) and theWei-shih lun (Treatise on Consciousness-Only).71From Lin-ch'uan Paramartha traveled to the port city ofChin-an. At this t ime, the important monks Seng-tsung, Fa-chun,Chih-wen (509-599), Hui-jen, Hui-k'ai, Fa-jen, Hui-kuang, andFa-t 'ai crossed the Ling-nan mountains to have an audience withthe Indian Buddhist missionary. According to Fa-t 'ai 's biography,Paramartha had been traveling in China for more than ten yearswhen he desired to go back to his homeland. At that t ime OuyangWei detained him in Kwangchow.72 According to the same source,Fa-t 'ai, Seng-tsung, Hui-k'ai and others desired to be instructedand w ent to the Chih-chih temp le in Kwangchow for Param artha 'steachings. Hui-kuang's biography also mentions his being instructed at the same time as Seng-tsung, Hui-k'ai, and Fa-chun, butomits any travel across the Ling-nan mountains. According toChih-wen's biography, Chih-wen, Seng-tsung, Fa-chun, and othereminent monks s topped at Chin-an with Paramartha. I t is notclear from the text when this meeting took place, nor if the meeting was the first with Paramartha or a subsequent visit .74 The onlyclear indic ation of a visit to Ch in-a n is at this tim e. Liang -an, whichhas been tentatively identified by Ui as equivalent to Chin-an, wasa point of travel for Paramartha in 563, some five years later.Hence, we can say that these monks who sought the missionary'snew Buddhist teachings met him in either 558 at Chin-an or in563if we accept Ui's identification of Liang-an with Chin-an.7r >56


24/36

Only one translation is associated with Chin-an, Ch'eng lun shih i(A n Explanation of Correct Doctrines), cited in the LTSPC andN T L ,7 (i as translated at the Fo-li tem ple du rin g the Ch'en Dynasty.

Moving from place to place must have been unsettling forhim, for his biography notes that:. . . a l thoug h Pa ram arth a t ransm it ted sutras and sdstras, thepractice of [the Buddhist] religion was deficient and he wasdepressed, for his original objective had not been realized.Furthermore, observing the vicissitudes of the t imes [fordisseminating Buddhism], he desired to sail to Larikasukha(Malaysia). Monks and laity earnestly begged him to promise to stay. He could not escape public opinion and so hestayed in the southeastern regions (nan-yiieh) [of China].T og eth er with his old friends from the preced ing L iangDynasty, he reviewed his translations. Whenever the wordsand the meaning conflicted, these would all be recast andorganized in order to make them consistent throughout[the text] , from beginning to end.7 7

And so he continued to pursue the difficult work of translatingamidst personal depression and the instabil i t ies of Ch'en economicpa t ronage .While Paramartha was in the southeastern regions of Fukienand Kiangsi he commenced translation work on what were to besome of his best known works, many of which are collected in the

Taisho. The Korean Yogacarin master W6nchuk, in his commentary on the Samdhinirmocana, Chieh-shen-mi-ching shu, places thetranslation of the Samdhinirmocana (Chieh-chieh ching) by Paramartha within the Pao-ting era of the Northern Chou (561-565) inthe Ssu-t ' ien-wang temple. He cites an index of Paramartha'sworks that dates the text in the second year T'ien-chia (561) inChien-tsao temple.7 8 In all the sutra catalogs, however, no date orplace of translation is specified other than the general dating ofthe text as a Ch'en Dynasty translation. According to Ui, Hui-k'aigives the dates of translation of the Wei-shih lun (Treatise on Consciousness-Only) as from the fourth month, sixteenth day, in thefourth year T' ien-chia (May 23, 563) unti l the third m on th, fifthday, in the fifth year of T'ien-chia (April 1, 564). T h e Mahdydn-samgraha (Acceptance of Mah dydna) (She ta-sheng lun) was translatedimmediately after the Wei-shih lun, in Ui's opinion, although thisdisagrees with the HKSC, which reverses the order, placing the57


25/36

translation of the Samgraha before the Wci-shih lun. Even thoughthe exact sequence of events is unclear, Fa-t'ai 's biography suggests that the Samgraha was translated at Ouyang Wei's residencein Kwangchow.8" Since Ouyang Wei died in 563, his patronage ofthe Samgraha translation project could have taken place only upthro ug h 5 63, the fourth year of T' ien-chia. Therefore, the Samgraha was probably initially translated before the Wei-shih lun, inagreement with the account in the HKSC, NTL, LTSPC, andKYL.H1 The translation may have been initiated in 561 at theChien-tsao temple, continued at the Ssu-t ' ien-wang temple andeither completed in Ouyang Wei 's res idence in 563 or continuedafter his death when his son, Ouyang Ho, became the financialsponsor of Paramartha 's works.By the fourth year of T'ien-chia (563) Pa ram arth a had gainedprominence throughout southern China and had developed anardent group of disciples, including Hui-k'ai, Seng-tsung, Ching-shao, Fa-k'an, and Fa-t 'ai, who traveled great distances to hear hisnew teachings, particularly those based on the Samp aha:

All prominent monks in Chien-yeh [Nanking]Seng-tsung from Chien-yiian temple in Yang-tu, Fa-chun, Seng-jen, and othershad respectfully heard about the innovativeteaching [of Paramartha] . Therefore, they traveled far southof the Yangtze in order personally to receive his excellentanswers [to their questions] about the new teaching. Paramartha was delighted that they had desired to come to him,and [consequently] translated the Mahdyanasamgraha and other sastras for them, which took a total of two years [to translate]. He again commented on the doctr inal meanings [oftexts], roaming from one place to another , without peace ofmind.*2

Sometime before or in the midst of translating the Samgraha,Paramartha must have grown disheartened at his circumstances ,even tho ug h his ear nes t following of disciples and G ov ern or W angFang-she atte m pte d to boost his m ora le. O n the twenty-fifth day,ninth m on th, of the third year T'ien-chia (N ove mb er 7, 562), according to Ui, or during the ninth month of that same year (Septem be r 17-October 16th), Pa ram art ha again decide d to leave China, setting sail in a small boat from Liang-an to his homeland, butstrong winds and his "fate" drove him back to Canton in the58


26/36

twelfth month (January 10-February 9, 563) after three months atsea. From this ill-fated sea voyage he was invited by O uy an g W ei tolive at the Chih-chih temple in Canton and begin translating hismost important works, the Sarngraha and Wei-shih lun. We do notknow the exact month of Ouyang Wei's death in 563, but we cansay that Paramartha had the economic resources of Ouyang Wei 'sson, Ho, after the father died, as clearly indicated in the HKSC.Ouyang Ho (538-570) apparently was intellectually gifted andcontributed to or actively observed the translation proceedings.After this invitation "Paramartha considered these conditions, realizing that it was impossible to return west."

H:* After 562 , he didnot make any other at tempts to leave China and appeared to haveproceeded at a rapid pace under fairly stable conditions to resumehis work at the Ouyang estate.In the HKSC a bit of hagiography follows the description ofOuyang Ho's pat ronage of Paramar tha and his staff. The Ind ianmissionary apparently had an island retreat off of Canton in thedelta of the Pearl River. The waters were turbulent and the cliffs

jut t ing out toward the water were very steep. Paramartha, however, was believed to be able to cross the wa ters effortlessly, whileOuyang Ho dared not cross the t reacherous waters. On one occasion Paramartha went to visit Ho.Paramartha spread out his sit t ing mat on the water and satcross-legged on it, as if he were riding a boat. He floated oyerthe waters to the shore. When he climbed ashore to greet him[Ouyang HoJ, the sitting mat was not wet, and he spread it outas usual [to sit on]. Other times he would use a lotus leaf as aboat to ride across. There are many examples of such marvels[per ta in ing to Paramar tha] . MAfter live years of intensive translation (of texts such as the

Vajracchedikd, Kuang-i fa-men ch ing, and Abhidharmakosa), ma depossible through the generosity of the Ouyang family, anotherdramatic event occurred in Paramartha's l ife, second only to thefall of Nanking. During the sixth month of the second yearKuang-t'ai or Kuang-ta (July 10-August 8, 568):Paramartha had grown weary of the world and felt extremelyfatigued. It seemed better to him to prepare for an earlyrebirth in a better world. So he went into the mountains north

59


27/36

of Nanhai [Canton] intending to commit suicide. At that t ime,Chih-k'ai [Hui-k'ai] was lecturing on the Abhidharmakoia. O nhearing what had happened, he hurr ied to him [Paramartha] .Monks and laity ran after one another into the countryside[ towards the mou ntains] . T h e g overno r [Ouyang Ho] alsodispatched envoys and guardsmen to restrain him. He [thegovernor] personally prostrated himself [ in front of Paramar tha ] . Only after d etain ing him for th ree days did he [Paramarthaj re turn to his normal s ta te .85

After his attempted suicide, he then stopped at the Wang-yiian temple with his closest disciples Seng-tsung and Hui-k'ai,who had requested that Paramartha be invited to the capital byEmperor Wen. Monks a t cour t. . . who w ere in prestigious positions and had great rep uta tions were afraid of losing [their status] and so memorializedsaying "Those groups of works translated beyond the mountains [in the Kwangtung and Kwangsi regions] mainly expound Idealism ('Consciousness-Only') without sense objects(wu-ch'en wei-shih). Their words are antagonistic to government policy and damaging to the national morale. He shouldnot be allowed in China proper, but relegated to the hinterlands." The emperor agreed. Therefore, the innovative wri tings f rom Nannai remained hidden throughout the Ch 'enDynasty.8"

Then, two months later , on the twelfth day, eighth month of thesecond year of Kuang-t 'ai (Septem ber 18, 568), Pa ram arth a's favorite disciple, Hui-k 'ai , died. Paramartha grieved deeply for himand burned candles and incense with the rest of his disciples in Fa-chun 's room. He continued to t ranslate the Abhidharmakoia, nolonger assisted by Hui-k'ai, but he soon became very sick himself.O n F ebru ary 12, 569, at noo n, five mon ths after Hui-k 'ai 's dea th,Paramartha died at the age of seventy-one. The next day his bodywas crem ated a nd a stupa erected at Ch'ao-ting (near Canton). Onthe thirtee nth day (February 15) Sen g-tsung, Fa-chun, and othe rsreturned to Mt. Lu in Kiangsi to carry on the work of Paramartha.When one looks at the biographical account of Paramartha'scircumstances and compares his situation with the prodigiousamount of translation activity undertaken during those polit icalupheavals, one is struck by the amazing tenacity and endurance60


28/36

with which the seemingly insurmountable obstacles to close anddifficult textual study were overcome.

Now during Paramartha 's t ime in the Liang Dynasty, therewas chaos and anarchy. The response [to crisis] was defeatistand fatalistic. The roads and river ways were seldom traveled.He roamed about as a missionary; in accordance with regionalaffinities he pu rs ue d his co urs e. This resu lted in the fragm entation of the textual collections and the frequent separationfrom some of his translators. 8 7T his would hold tru e, in Para m arth a's case, not only for Liangbut also for the Ch'en Dynasty. Not only is Paramartha portrayedby his biographer as a patient, assiduous monk in a hostile society,bu t he is also rever entially trea ted as a saint, hon or ed as the M asterof the Bodhisattva Precepts," 8 and as one who could perform miracles. Th is may even hin t at the w on der with which the bio gra ph erbeheld Paramartha's voluminous translations, for would i t not besomething of a miracle and a demonstration of a highly disci

plined nature to translate extremely difficult philosophical textswhile being forced to move from place to place? The biographyholds one's interest in another way as well . The mental dejectionof a m onk w ho was com pelled to be a political survivor as well as areclusive missionary scholar is poignant yet realistic. He was notaccustomed to the poli t ical arena of southern Chinese society, andthe con tinua l co nfro ntatio n with variou s state officials frus tratedthe saintly Paramartha to the point of contemplating suicide. Anuneasy but pragmatic alliance between various provincial militarymen such as Ouyang Wei and his son Ho was necessary botheconomically and politically. This was a situation characteristic ofmany Buddhist clergy in southern China, and proved to be therule rather than the except ion.

The wise and stoic Paramartha comes to l ife as a missionary-m on k first an d for em ost, as a politically astu te foreign er seco nda ri ly, and yet also as one whose human relationships reinforced theimage of the bril l iant, culturally adaptable man of spartan andrestrained m an ne r. Tw o interesting anecdotes are preserved in hisb iography:

One day when the weather was bit terly cold, Paramarthawas wearing only thin clothing, and he endured i t without61


29/36

mentioning it all night. Some of his students were seated byhis side. Hui-k'ai and others stood quietly by him in attendance throughout the night . They debated and conversed fora long time, until their voices had become quite loud. At onepoint Pararnartha fell asleep. [Hui-]k'ai quietly covered himwith a garment, but Pararnartha was secretly aware of it andlet it fall to the ground. His stoicism and contentment withlittle was like that. [Hui-]k'ai continued to serve Pararnartha,becoming increasingly close to him as time passed.Another t ime Pararnartha sighed three times from frustratio n. Hui-k'ai asked the reason for this, an d Pa rarn arthareplied: "You and the oth ers are sincere about th e TrueDharma and it is fitting that you should assist in its transmission. Only it grieves me that these are not the times for disseminat ing the Dharma. My purpose in coming here has beenobstructed." [Hui-Jk'ai heard this and was saddened. For along time he wept. Kneeling before Pararnartha he said: "TheGrea t Dharma is cut off from the world, but you have come allthis way to China. The people have no responses [to meetthese times]. Can anything be done to remedy this?"Pararnartha pointed his f inger to the northwest and said:"In that direction there will be a great kingdom, neither toonear nor too far. After we all have died, it [the Dharma] will begreatly p ro sp er ou s, but we shall not see its asc end enc e. This iswhy I sighed deeply."H


30/36

NOTE S1. F r a n k E . R e y n o l d s a n d D o n a l d C a p p s , e d . . The Biographical Process: Stud

ies in the History and Psychology of Religion ( M o u t o n : T h e H a g u e , 1 9 7 6 ), p . 3 .2 . Kao seng chuan ( K S C ) a n d Hsu kao seng chuan ( H K S C ) , T . 2 0 5 9 . 5 0 a n dT . 2 0 6 0 . 5 0 r e s p e c t iv e l y . T h e K S C w a s c o m p i l e d b y H u i - c h a o ( 4 9 7 - 5 5 4 ) o f t h eL i a n g D y n a s t y in a p p r o x i m a t e l y A . D . 5 3 0 . It is a r e c o r d o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 5 7em in en t mo nk s an d 2 43 of t he i r a s s i s t an t s , o r d i s c ip l e s , f rom the yea r s A . D . 67-5 1 9 . T his co l l ec t ion o f b io gra ph i e s s e rve d a s a m od e l and s t a nd a r d fo r a ll subse q u e n t b i o g r a p h i c a l c o ll e c t i o n s . T h e H K S C . i ts i m m e d i a t e s u c c e s s o r , w a s c o m p i l e db y T a o - h s i i a n ( 5 9 6 - 6 6 7 ) o f t h e T a n g D y n a s t y in a p p r o x i m a t e l y A . D . 6 4 5 . It is ar e c o r d of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 4 0 e m i n e n t m o n k s a n d 6 0 of t h e i r a s s i s ta n t s , f r o m A . D .5 2 0 - 6 4 1 . P a r a m a r t h a ' s b i o g r a p h y is i n c l u d e d in H K S C .

3 . S u d h a k a r C h a t t o p a d h y a y a , Early History of North India: From the Fall of theMauryas to the Death of Harsa ( c . 20 0 B . C . -A . D . 650 ) , (Ca l cu t t a : Acad em ic Pub l i sh e r s , 1 9 6 8 ) , p p . 2 2 7 - 2 2 8 .

4. T h e n a m e M i h i r a k u l a i s e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e I r a n i a n n a m e M i t h r a ( S a n s k r i t :Mi t r a ) . He may have been t he f i r s t o f t he Mai t r aka Dynas ty t ha t r u l ed Va l abhTf rom the ea r l y s i x th cen tu ry . (A t l ea s t one scho l a r d i s agrees w i th t ha t v i ew . Cf .] a g a n N a t h , " E a r l y H i s t o r y o f t h e M a i t t a k a s o f V a l a b h i , " Indian Culture, A p r i l1 9 3 9 , p p . 4 0 7 - 4 1 4 . ) H e a s c e n d e d t h e t h r o n e c ir c a 5 1 1 - 5 1 2 . w h e n h e s u c c e e d e d h isf a the r , T o ra m an a , s i nce t he f i f teen th yea r of h i s r e i gn i s r e co rd ed a s 52 0-52 7 ina n e p i g r a p h i c r e c o r d f r o m M a n d a s o r ( D a s a p u r a ) . M u c h o f M i h i r a k u l a ' s l i f e a n dp o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t i e s r e m a i n o b s c u r e . I n b o t h M a n d a s o r s t o n e i n s c r i p t i o n s , d a t e d5 3 3 - 5 3 4 , Y a s o d h a r m a n is d e s c r i b e d a s t h e s u p r e m e s o v e r e i g n o v e r l a n d s t h a t e v e nt h e H u n a s a n d G u p t a n r u l e r s c o u l d n o t c o n q u e r a n d a s t h e o n e t o w h o m M i h i r ak u l a p a i d h o m a g e ( F l e e t . Corpus Inscription urn. 111, 142-15 8) . T he Gw al io r i nsc r i p t io n m e n t i o n s th e f if t e e n th y e a r o f M i h i r a k u l a ' s r e i g n .

5. T h o m a s W a l t e r s , t r . , On Yuan Clnoang's Travels in India ( 6 2 9 - 6 4 5 A . D . ) ,(U m d o n : Roya l As ia t ic Soc i e ty , 190 4) , 1. p . 28 9 .

6 . I f t he f i f t een th yea r o f M ih i r a ku l a ' s r e i gn is 52 0-5 27 an d h e is s a id t oh a v e p a i d h o m a g e to Y a s o d h a r m a n i n 5 3 3 , t h e n h i s r e i g n h a d t o h a v e t e r m i n a t e ds o m e t i m e b e t w e e n 5 2 0 - 5 2 7 a n d 5 3 3 .

7. J ean F i l l i oza t , Political Histoiy of India, t r . by Ph i l i p Spra t t (Ca l cu t t a :1957) , pp . 1 8 0 - 1 8 1 . Y a s o d h a r m a n m a y h a v e p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e w a r a g a i n st M i h i r aku l a a s a vas sal o f Ba l ad i t ya I I . O n a s ep a ra t e occas ion i n 517 Ba l ad i t ya I I mayhave a t t e m pt ed t o wa ge war aga in s t M ih i r a ku l a whi l e t he l a t t e r was in a c on f ron t a t i on i n Ka shm i r . Unsuc ces s fu l a t t ha t t ime . Ba l ad i t ya may have a t t em pt ed a l a t e ra t t a c k i n M a g a d h a a f t e r Y a s o d h a r m a n ' s v i c t o r y . S o m e h i s t o r i a n s d e n y t h a t t h e r ewere two de fea t s o f Mih i r aku l a . See S . R . Goya l , A History of the Imperial (iuptas( A l l a h a b a d : C e n t r a l B o o k D e p o t . 1 9 0 7) , p p . 3 5 0 - 3 5 3 .

8. Fi l l iozat , Political'.History of India, p. 170.9 . T h e m o n k s M a n d r a a n d S a m g h a p a l a h a v e t r a n s l a t i o n s li st ed in t h e Ku-

nien i clung I'u chi ( K N ) , T . 2 1 5 1 . 5 5 . 3 6 4 b 1 4 -2 0 a n d 3 6 4 b 2 1 -c:6 r e s p e c ti v e ly . M a n d r at r a n s l a t e d t h r e e t e x t s ; t h e Pao-yiin ching, Fa-chieh ti liMtigwv fen-pieh clung, Wen-shu -shih-li shuo pan-jo po-lo-mi clung, t o t a l i ng e l even chiian. S a m g h a p a l a t r a n s l a t e d e l e v en t ex t s , i nc lud ing t he A -\ii-waiig clung (Sutra on King A soka), P'u-sa tsang clung, a n d63


31/36

th e Wen-shu-sfuh-li shut) pan-jo po-lo-nn clung (perhaps a collaboration with his fellowcompatriot Mandra). At the end of Paramartha's biography (HKSC,2060 .50.43 la4-6) is ap pe nd ed a note on a Ch'en translation of the Ta-slwng fmo-yiin thing in eight rhiian by a Funan monk nam ed S ubodhi . The note mentions thatSub odh i's text is slightly differ ent from the L iang translation by Man dra in sevenchiian. Subodhi's translation is also listed in the KN, 365c.2-5. In Samghapala'sbiography (HKSC, 426a3-bl2) i t says that the monks Mandra and Samghapalacollaborated on all three of the texts that the KN attributes to Mandra. There is noseparate biography for Mandra in HKSC.

10. King Jayavarman and his son Rudravannan, who was the last king ofFunan, are mentioned in the Liang shu, eh. 54, pp. 789-790. Cf. (Jeorge Coedes,Les Flats Hindouises d'Indochine (Paris: 1948), for the details of the rise and declineof Rudravarman's power, (pp. 104-105).

11. L iang shu. eh. 54, p. 790. Also described in Louis Malleret, l.'Archeologiedu Delta du Mekong, vol. Il l : La Culture du Fou-nan (Paris: Ecole Francais d'Ex-trme-Orient, 1962), Publications de l 'Ecole Franchise d'Extremc-Orient, p. 369;Ramesh Chandra Majumdar , Kambuja-desa: A n A ncient Hindu Colony in Cambodia(Madras: 1944), p. 34.

12. HKS C, 2 060 . 50 . 42 9c l l -12 , 20-21 .13. See Michel Strickmann, "On the Alchemy of T'ao Hung-ching," espe

cially pp. 155-158 in Facets of Taoism: Essays in Chinese Religion, Holmes Welch andAnna Seidel (eds.), (Yale University Press, 1979).

14. From the t ime of Southern Ch' i the pract ice of "abandoning the body"(she-shen) became prominent among the rul ing class . However, Wu of Liang wasthe first emperor to engage in this practice. Emperor Wu "abandoned his body"four t imes: In 527 w hen h e was sixty-four ye ars of age he became a temp le servantat the T'ung-t 'ai tem ple and gra nted am nesty to prison ers. This lasted for fourdays. In 52 9 he again p erfo rm ed this practice at the T'ung-t'ai tem ple, this time asa temple craftsman in a commoner 's garment . He lectured on the Niwdna-sutraand ransomed himself for one million copper cash. This lasted seventeen days.The third "abandonment of the body" took place in 546 at both the Fa-chia andT'ung-t 'ai temples, lasting thirty-seven days. The last occurrence was a year later(547), and lasted forty-three days. Wu was criticized: "In the first year of T'ai-ch ' ing, Emperor Wu, by abandoning his body . . . forgot he was Emperor underHeaven." See Mori Mikisaburo, Ryo no butei(Kyoto: 1956), pp . 144-148, 166-169,for further discussion of Emperor Wu's zeal in undertaking this practice andaristocratic opposition to Wu's actions. The idea of this practice was given to Wufrom Samghapala's translation of the Sutra on King As'oka (T.2043.50).

15. Emperor Wu's donat ions to the Inexhaust ible Treasury of T'ung-t 'aitemple alone were estimated to be valued at 10,960,000. Cf. Kenneth Ch'en,Buddhism in Ch ina: A Historical Survey (Princ eton University Press: 1964). p. 126.

16. See Miyakawa Hisayuki, Rikuchoshi kenkyii (Tokyo: 1956), Ch apter 9, pp.138-143, for an analysis of the downfall of Liang and the rise to power of Ch'enPa-hsien.

17. Kawakatsu Yoshio, "La decadence de 1'aristocratie chinoise sous les Dynasties du Sud," Acta Asiatica, XXI (1971), pp. 32-38.

64


32/36

18. Cf. Hou (thing's biography, L iang shu, ch. 50, pp. 833-857; Nan shift, rh .80, pp. 1993-2018 (Peking; Chung-hua shu-chii. 1975).

19. Miyakawa, Rikuchdsln' krnfati, p. 147.20. For an analysis of* the factors co ntr ibu ting to Ho u C hing 's upris ing, see

two articles by Kawakatsu Yoshio: "Kokei no ran to N'ancho no kahei keizai" inTdho gakuho, XXXII (1902), pp. 09-118, and "La decadence de I 'aristocralie chin-oise sous les Dynasties du Sud," Acta Asiatica, XXI (1971), pp. 13-38.

21. Nan shift, ch . 80, p. 2010.22. See Wang Seng-pien's biography in the L iang shu, ch. 45, pp. 023-030.23. See Ch'en Pa-hsien's biography, Ch'en sh u (Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii ,

1972), pp. 1-43.24. See Liang shu, ch. 50, p. 802, and Nan shift, ch. 80. p. 2010, for vivid

descriptions of" Hou Ching's death and the destruction of his corpse; also see Liangshu, ch. 5, p. 125.25. L iang shu, ch. 5, p. 131.

20. See Kawakatsu, "La decadence de Taristocratie chinoise," p. 18.27. L iang shu, ch. 5, p. 133.28. C.hou shu, compiled by Ling-hu Te-fen (583-000) in 50 ch . (Peking:

Chung-hua shu-chii, 1971), ch . 2, p. 30.29. L iang shu, ch. 0, pp. 143-144.30. T.2000.50.429cO-43!aO. All biographical data on Paramartha is based

upon the HKSC account of his life, unless otherwise noted.31. One of the seven sacred cities in the Hindu tradition. It is l(x:ated in

northwestern India, in the Malwa province (present-day Madhya Pradesh), twentymiles west of the Chambal River and approximately 250 miles west of ValabhT.

32. The Bharadvaja gotra is mentioned by Taranatha in his History of Buddhism in India (edited by Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya, Simla, Indian Institute ofAdvanced Study, 1970) as a "vicious" family having one member mentioned as "agreat expert in magic" (p. 23). It is also found in the Saddliarnwfmndarika (18.5), tr.Leon Hu rvitz (Colum bia Univ ersity, 1970), p. 1 3, as a gotra of the Buddha Can-drasuryapradlpa and in Pali l i terature as Bharadvaja. A governor (parivrdjakamaharaja) named Samksobha is mentioned in a Khoh copper plate inscriptiondated 528-529 as belonging to the Bharadvaja gotra, in the northern regions of(iodavarl, directly south of Malwa. See John Faithfull Fleet, Corpus InscriptionumIndicarum (Calcutta: 1888), vol. Il l, pp . 112-110. The Hlraha dagalli cop per plateinscription of Sivask and hava rma n, dated m id-fourth c entury A.D., also m entionsthe Bharadvaja gotra. Cf. Dines Chandra Sircar, ed., Select Inscriptions Bearing onIndian History and Civilization (Calcutta: 1905), I, p. 400. Cf. preface to She ta-shenglun, T . 1593.31.112c4 for designation of Param arth a's gotra as Bharadvaja.

33. T.20G0.50.429c 10-11.34. T.2060.50.429cl2-13. The imperial escort of the Funan ambassador

back to his own country probably took place early in the Ta-t 'ung era. See Liangshu, ch. 3, p. 79 (Peking: Chung-hua shu-chii, 1973), where a Funan envoy ismentioned as having brought tr ibute to the emperor in the autumn, seventhmonth, of the first year Ta-t 'ung (535).

35. HKS C, 2 000.50.429c 12-10.

65


33/36

36. LTSPC, 2034.49.106a3-12.37. See note 34 for tentative dating.38. Ta-sheng ch'i-hsin lun (CHL), f. 1666.32.575a 17-22. The CHL and its

colophon allegedly by Chih-k'ai (also known as Hui-k'ai), is probably an apocryphal text, not translated by Paramartha.39. KYL, 2154.55.538b24-27.

40. LTSPC, citing Pao-kuei's introduction to the Suvarnaprabhasa, gives thedate , "the firs! year of Tai-ch'ing," 547. Cf T.2034.49.106aI0. According to UiHakuju, Indo tetsugaku kenkyii (To kyo : 1930), VI, 13, this must be a scribe's er ro rsince all other sources give "the second year of Tai-ch'ing."

41. The only citation for Pao-yiin tien in the palace of Emperor VVu of Liangis in Par am artha's biography. How ever, a Chung-yiin lien is mentioned in thebiographies of T'an-lu an (HK SC, 2060.50.47()a29). Pao-ch'iung (479a20), Seng-ta(553a7), and Hui-yun (650bl7) as the place where Emperor Wu of Liang invitedthem to lecture on Buddhist doctrine. In Seng-ming's biography (693b et passim)miraculous Buddhist statues are housed in the Chung-yiin lien. The Pao-yiin tienmay be a scribe's error for Ch ung-yiin lien, or the palace temple's name may havebeen changed during the Late Liang to Pao-yiin, perhaps renaming the palacetemple after the sulra translated by Mandra and Samghapala of Liang. The emperor himself lectured on sutras and eminent monks attended his sermons at theCh ung-yiin tien. Cf. Liang shu, ch. 3, p. 96.

42 . The biography of Pao-ch'iung is recorded in the HKSC (478c6-479c20),but does not mention the Sh ih-ch 'i ti-lun or Paramartha .

43. T h e Treatise on t/ie Seventeen IiodhLsattva Stages (Shih-ch'i ti-lun) was acommentary on a sulra by the same name. According to Paramartha's biographyof the Yogacarin master, Vasubandhu (T.2049.50.188cl3-16). Maitreya descended from the twila heaven and lectured on the Sutra of the Seventeen liodhisallvaStages for Asanga's edification.

44. KYL, 2154 .55 .538bl l -14 .45. HKSC, 2060.50.429c25.46. NTL, 2149.55.266a24-25 and LTSPC, 2034.49.99a4. The LTSPC also

gives the same date and place of translation for Ta-sheng rh 'i-ksin lun, which isalmost certainly not one of Paramartha's translations. The KN also lists this text(364c 12-14). According to Hsiian-tsang, in his Yu-clua lun chi, ch. 1(1.182 8.42.311 b) the translation d ate is given as the tenth m onth (October 26-November 25) of the fourth year Tai-ch'ing (550), rather than simply "the fourthyear of T'ai-ch'ing." Hsiian-tsang also identifies this text with the first part of theYogdalryabhumi.

47. In the year 552 Liang was in the fust year of Ch'eng-sheng but theHKSC is using Northern Ch'i 's Dynastic regnal titles. Some manuscripts noted inth e Taisho (p. 429) use T'ai-pao or Ta-pao, but Ta-pao lasted only one year. If ithad continued, the year 552 would have corresponded to the third year of Ta-pao.

48. HKSC, 2060.50.429c26-27.49. There is a story of a monk who starved for over a year, to the verge of

de ath . This perio d of ruin and lack of food cam e at the end of Liang, when HouCh ing set out to take over south Ch ina. Even when s om eon e offered him a bowl of66


34/36

rice with just the slightest trace of" pork hidden in it, he would not violate hisvegetarianism and eat it, although "his stomach burned like fire." (HKSC,2060.50.480a4-7).

50. According to Seng-ta's biography (HKSC, 2060.50.553a 12) Hou Chingbuilt two temples, Shan-ming and T'ien-kuan, but no other mention of these twotemples occurs in the HKSC. In Tan-yin's biography (6()8c6-10) Hou Chingbuilds two temples, one to the mountain spirits (shen-lisien) and later, after hisinsurrection, the Ta-yen tem ple, in Yeh-tung. Th er e is a wealth ofinform ation inSeng-ming's biography concerning Hou Ching's revolt (especially 692b21-693b2 4), involving m iraculou s Bu ddh ist statues with halos and fortune-tellingpowers. These miracles also occur in the Chung-yun lien during Late Liang andearly Ch'en after the death of Hou Ching.

51. An interesting prediction about Hou Ching by a Buddhist monk isretold in the Nan shih, ch. 80, where it says that he will come to a violent death.Emperor W'u is then said to have analyzed the name Hou Ching by breaking thetwo Chinese characters into six characters meaning: "a petty man who will beem pe ror for one hu nd re d days." Hou C hing's reign was one hun dre d twentydays.

52. LTS PC, 2034.49.98c22 . The Che ng-kua n temple was also a translationsite for Samghapala, a monk from Funan invited to China by VVu of Liang (HKSC,2060.50.426a 13).

53. N I L , 2149.55.266a22; KYL, 2154.55.538a27.54. KN,2151 .55 .364c l3 .55. Ui cites a Tunhuang manuscript of the composite translation of the

Suvarnaprabhdsa (T.664) by Pao-kuei. See Indo tetxugaku kenkyii, VI, pp. Hi-18.Othe r siilra catalogs claim that the Suvarnprabhasa was translated by Paramarthaduring the Ch'en Dynasty; for example, Fa-ching's catalog (T.2146.55.115al8)and Ching-t'ai 's catalog (1.2147.55.1821)6).

56. Ui, Indo tetsugaku kenkyu, VI. p. 18.57. Ui, Indo lelsugaku kenkyu, VI. p. 19, but does not give a reference for ibis

information. See Ching-shao's biography, HKSC, 2060.5().480a7-9. While Ching-shao met Paramartha in Yuchang, it is not clear which trip to Yuchang is meant.Ui says Ching-shao was forty-seven and Paramartha fifty-six (according to theChinese way of calculating age). This would indicate that Paramartha met Ching-shao in 554.

58. Ui, Indo tetsugaku kenkyu, VI, p. 19.59. Tang Yung- l 'ung , Han Wei L iang-chin Nan-pei-ch'ao Fo-chiao shih

(Shanghai: 1938), pp. 855-867.60. LTSPC. 2034.49.98c24-99a3.al0. There is no listing for either the Mi-lo

ksia shetig ching or ihe Jen wang pan-jo ching and its commentary in the HKSC.61. Chin g-shao 's biogra phy is listed in the HK SC, 2 060.5 0.479 c21 -480 cl.

Ching-shao was a famous Liang scholar who enjoyed the patronage of EmperorChien-weu and the princes of Shao-ling and Yiieh-yang.

62 . LTSPC , 2034.49.99al(); N I L , 2149.55.266b3.63. The Chiu shih i-c/n is listed in LTSPC, 2034.49.99a 11, as a translation in

the third year, T'ai-ch'ing (549). which is unlikely, given Hou Ching's rebelliondu ring that year and Par am artha 's flight to Fu-ch'un. If there was a comm entary67
http://2034.49.98c24-99a3.al0/http://2034.49.98c24-99a3.al0/


35/36

by that nam e, it probably w as trans lated in 554, after Pa ram art ha left Yiichang.Also listed in NTL (2149.55.266b6) with information identical to LTSPC, it is notlisted in the HKSC or KYL.

64. L iang shu, ch . 6, p. 147. Hsiao Po is given the title Grand Guardian in thetwelfth month of 556.65. See Ouyang Wei's biography, Ch'en shu, ch. 9, pp. 157-159, for the

relationship between Ouyang Wei and Hsiao Po.66. Liang shu, ch. 6, pp. 146-147.67. HKSC, 2060.50a 1-2.68. This text is listed in LTSPC, 2034.49.88a20, without any translation

date or attribution to Gunamati. Another text attributed to Gunamati, entit led theSui-ksiang lun, is listed in the LTSPC (88a8). Both are catalogued under Ch'enDynastic translations. The Commentary on the Sixteen Truths was either translatedearlier than the Ch'en in Shih-hsing, that is, in 555 or 556, or the place of translation is incorrect. The NTL, KN, and KYL all give Gunamati 's Sui-ksiang lun as aCh'en translation (2149.55.273b25; 2151.365a2; 2154.545cl9). Probably The Commentary on the Sixteen Truths corresponds to the extant translation in the Taishd thatis entitled simply the Sui-lisiajig lun. This text would not be the same as Gunamati's, which is lost. Ui Hakuju (Indo tetsugaku kenkyii, VI, p. 97) does not take aposition on whether the two texts Sui-hsiang lun and Sui-ksiang lun chung shih liu tish u were translated in Ch'en or in Liang, the latter at Shih-hsing. Probably the textnow listed in the Taishd is the Late Liang translation at Shih-hsing. The text, nowlost, attributed to Gunamati, was the referred text from the Ch'en Dynasty.69. T h e Wu-shang i ching is a Liang translation, even though the LTSPC(T.2034.49.87cl3) states i t is a Ch'en translation, completed during the secondyear of Yu ng- ting. Th e KYL criticizes the LT SPC datin g, since the re was no thirdyear of Chao-t 'ai during the second year of Yung-ting. This regnal date would beequivalent to second year T'ai-p'ing and first year Yung-ting. However, on theeighth day, ninth month of Chao-t 'ai , Yung-ting had not been established nor hadthe Ch'en Dynasty. See KYL, 2154 .55.5 38b l-2; 546 c25; 596c22-27 (citation fromWu-sharig i ching colophon).

70. KYL, 21 54.5 5.53 8bl-2 . Th e LTSP C claims the text is a Ch'en translation, completed in the second year Yung-ting (558), at the Ching-t'u temple inNan-k'ang (2034.49.87c 13). The NTL agrees with the LTSPC (2149.55.273a29).T h e coloph on is pres erve d in par t in the KYL (596c20-27). T he KYL criticizes thedating methods of the LTSPC, which catalogs texts only up to the fifth year ofCh 'eng -sh en g (556), the year that Liang was com ing to an end . The fifth yearCh'eng-sheng corresponds to the second year Chao-t 'ai . In the ninth month ofthat year the reign was cha ng ed to T'a i-p'in g. In the tenth m on th of the followingyear (557), the Ch'en Dynasty was established. Therefore, the KYL argues, October 16, 557, was still within the Liang Dynasty. (Actually, twenty-two days laterCh'en Pa-hsien established his reign, beginning the Yung-ting period.)

71. KYL, 2154.55.545c2,5. No translation dates are given. Also see NTL,2149.55.273bl5,c7 (lists Wei-shih lun wen-i ho), and LTSPC, 2034.49.88a3,l2 (sameinformation as NTL).

72. Cf. Fa-t 'ai 's biography, HKSC, 2060.50.43la9-12.73. HKSC, 2060.50.503b22-23.

68


36/36

74. HKS C, 2060.50.609b 19-21.75. Ui Hakuju, Indo lelsugaku kenkyu, VI, pp. 24-25.76. LTSPC, 2034 .49 .88al3 ; NTL, '2149 .55 .273c8 .77. HKSC, 206().5().430a3.78. Chieh-shen-mi-ching shu, ZZ.34.299b5-12.79. Ui claims that Hui-k'ai gives these dates in his colophon to the She la-

shrug lun, but no such information is found in the colophon preserved in theTaisho; cf. Indo lelsugaku kenkyu, VI, pp. 24-26.

80. Fa-t 'ai 's biography, HKSC. 2060.50.c7-9.81. LTSPC, 2034.49.87c21; NTL, 2149.55.2731)8; KYL, 2154.55.545b24.82. HKSC, 2060.5().430a8-9.83. HK SC, 2060.50.430a 18-19.84. HKSC, 2060.50.430a23-27.85. HKSC, 2060.50.430a27-b3.86. HKSC , 2060.50.430b4-7.87. HKSC, 2060.50.430bl6-1988. Hui-k'ai 's introduction to Sh* ta-sheng lun, T. 1593.31.112c22.89. HKSC , 2060.50.430c2-13.90. Th is resear ch is pa rt of" an on goi ng project an d forth com ing book,

Philosophy of Mind in Sixth-Century Ch ina: Paramartlia's Evolution of Consciousness(Chuan shift lun).

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	mahabodhisattva
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Paul_1982_Paramartha_8562-8370-1-PB

Documents