Palumbo, Antonello. "Models of Buddhist Kingship in Early Medieval China." In Zhonggu shidai de liyi, zongjiao yu zhidu 中古時代的禮儀、宗教與制度 (New Perspectives on Ritual, Religion and Institution in Medieval China), edited by Yu Xin 余欣, 287-338. Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe 上海古籍出版社, 2012.
| Assertion | Argument | Place in source | Search |
|---|---|---|---|
|
The Da Ayu wang jing 大阿育王經 was labelled “spurious” by Dao’an. Palumbo notes that the text is now lost, but a long excerpt survives in the Shijia pu 釋迦譜 T2040. He adds that the text’s narrative tells of Aśoka and his contest with the Nāgas to gain possession of the Buddha’s relics. |
312 |
The Da Ayu wang jing 大阿育王經 was labelled “spurious” by Dao’an. Palumbo notes that the text is now lost, but a long excerpt survives in the Shijia pu 釋迦譜 T2040. He adds that the text’s narrative tells of Asoka and his contest with the Nagas to gain possession of the Buddha’s relics. Da Ayu wang jing 大阿育王經 |
|
Palumbo argues that the Zhong benqi jing 中本起經 T196 is a revised biography of the Buddha which was originally translated in the second century. T196 “includes three glosses explaining Indic terms ‘in the language of Jin’ 晋言” which Palumbo claims suggests a date after 266. He also states that the terminology of the text resembles that of translations “produced in Southern China after Zhi Qian”. Palumbo identifies “textual overlaps,” in particular with T109 and T210; one line is quoted in Xi Chao’s Feng fa yao, which he thinks suggests that the text was known at the Jin court in the third quarter of the fourth century. |
301, 303. |
Palumbo argues that the Zhong benqi jing 中本起經 T196 is a revised biography of the Buddha which was originally translated in the second century. T196 “includes three glosses explaining Indic terms ‘in the language of Jin’ 晋言” which Palumbo claims suggests a date after 266. He also states that the terminology of the text resembles that of translations “produced in Southern China after Zhi Qian”. Palumbo identifies “textual overlaps,” in particular with T109 and T210; one line is quoted in Xi Chao’s Feng fa yao, which he thinks suggests that the text was known at the Jin court in the third quarter of the fourth century. T0196; 中本起經 |
|
Palumbo writes that the Da zhuangyan lun 大莊嚴論 (Kalpanāmaṇḍitikā) T201 features a “gallery of monarchs” lifted from the recent past, “and fictionalised as devout supporters of the clergy”. He refers to his own article for a full discussion: Palumbo, Antonello. “Lassoed by the Throat: A Buddhist Story on the Avarca King Indravarma in the Zhuangyan lun, A Chinese Version of the Kalpanāmaṇḍitikā Dṛṣṭāntapaṅkti of Kumāralāta” (in preparation at time of publication). |
308 |
Palumbo writes that the Da zhuangyan lun 大莊嚴論 (Kalpanamanditika) T201 features a “gallery of monarchs” lifted from the recent past, “and fictionalised as devout supporters of the clergy”. He refers to his own article for a full discussion: Palumbo, Antonello. “Lassoed by the Throat: A Buddhist Story on the Avarca King Indravarma in the Zhuangyan lun, A Chinese Version of the Kalpanamanditika Drstantapankti of Kumaralata” (in preparation at time of publication). T0201; 大莊嚴論經 |
|
In the Zhude futian jing 諸德福田經 T683 (no Indic counterpart extant) a monk recalls his former life as a “Wheel-Rolling Holy King” who was reborn thirty-six times, “ruling over heavenly and human beings, growing feathers under the soles of his feet, treading the void and roaming.” Palumbo avers that feathers of the feet are reminiscent of a Daoist recasting of the myth. He adds that the “Flying Cakravartan” is thus far unknown in Pāli sources, and suggests the possibility that the figure could be an entirely Chinese elaboration; although one passage in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā does discuss a cakravartin whose feet do not make contact with the earth’s surface. |
302-303 |
In the Zhude futian jing 諸德福田經 T683 (no Indic counterpart extant) a monk recalls his former life as a “Wheel-Rolling Holy King” who was reborn thirty-six times, “ruling over heavenly and human beings, growing feathers under the soles of his feet, treading the void and roaming.” Palumbo avers that feathers of the feet are reminiscent of a Daoist recasting of the myth. He adds that the “Flying Cakravartan” is thus far unknown in Pali sources, and suggests the possibility that the figure could be an entirely Chinese elaboration; although one passage in the Astasahasrika prajnaparamita does discuss a cakravartin whose feet do not make contact with the earth’s surface. T0683; 佛說諸德福田經 |
|
Palumbo suggests the Fenbie gongde lun 分別功德論 T1507, a commentary to the Ekottarikāgama, was “probably” composed in in "the same period and place" as the *Ekottarikāgama, the root text upon which it comments [viz., in Chang'an between 383 and 385 --- MR]. He adds that in the Chu sanzang ji ji, T1507 is listed as an “anonymous translation” from an original which was “implausibly” attributed to Ānanda and Kāśyapa. Since the Gujin yijing tuji (664 or after) the text has been dated to the later Han period. But in 730, in the Kaiyuan Shijiao lu, Zhisheng remarked that the text was a commentary on the first four sections of the Zengyi ahan jing, “seemingly translated by the same person who was also responsible for the scripture’s translation.” Palumbo considers Zhisheng’s attribution “largely correct,” but argues further that there are “stylistic and terminological uses” which suggest that T1507 was most likely authored by Zhu Fonian in China, before Kumārajīva’s 404 translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā. |
313 |
Palumbo suggests the Fenbie gongde lun 分別功德論 T1507, a commentary to the Ekottarikagama, was “probably” composed in in "the same period and place" as the *Ekottarikagama, the root text upon which it comments [viz., in Chang'an between 383 and 385 --- MR]. He adds that in the Chu sanzang ji ji, T1507 is listed as an “anonymous translation” from an original which was “implausibly” attributed to Ananda and Kasyapa. Since the Gujin yijing tuji (664 or after) the text has been dated to the later Han period. But in 730, in the Kaiyuan Shijiao lu, Zhisheng remarked that the text was a commentary on the first four sections of the Zengyi ahan jing, “seemingly translated by the same person who was also responsible for the scripture’s translation.” Palumbo considers Zhisheng’s attribution “largely correct,” but argues further that there are “stylistic and terminological uses” which suggest that T1507 was most likely authored by Zhu Fonian in China, before Kumarajiva’s 404 translation of the Astasahasrika-prajnaparamita. Zhu Fonian 竺佛念 T1507; Zengyi ahan jing shu 增壹阿含經疏; 分別功德論 |
|
The Ayu wang zhuan 阿育王傳 (Aśokarājāvadāna) T2042 appears for the first time in Fei Changfang’s LDSBJ 歷代三寶紀 T2034 where it is attributed to An Faqin 安法欽 in 306. Palumbo argues that this attribution is suspicious, not only due to the text’s mysterious disappearance for three centuries or Changfang’s notorious imprecision, but the translation’s terminology, which resembles that which is only seen after the work of Kumārajīva in the early fifth century; for example, such forms as niepan 涅槃 for Sanskrit nirvāṇa, or the transcription of Aśoka as Ashuqie 阿恕伽. Furthermore, the text contains “extended textual parallels” with the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan 付法藏因緣傳 T2058. Palumbo cites Maspéro, who has previously argued that T2058 was a sixth century “forgery” which lifted text from T2042. However, Palumbo suggests either that the Ayu wang zhuan is based on T2058, or that both texts draw on a common source. Citing Maspero (1911). |
311 |
The Ayu wang zhuan 阿育王傳 (Asokarajavadana) T2042 appears for the first time in Fei Changfang’s LDSBJ 歷代三寶紀 T2034 where it is attributed to An Faqin 安法欽 in 306. Palumbo argues that this attribution is suspicious, not only due to the text’s mysterious disappearance for three centuries or Changfang’s notorious imprecision, but the translation’s terminology, which resembles that which is only seen after the work of Kumarajiva in the early fifth century; for example, such forms as niepan 涅槃 for Sanskrit nirvana, or the transcription of Asoka as Ashuqie 阿恕伽. Furthermore, the text contains “extended textual parallels” with the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan 付法藏因緣傳 T2058. Palumbo cites Maspero, who has previously argued that T2058 was a sixth century “forgery” which lifted text from T2042. However, Palumbo suggests either that the Ayu wang zhuan is based on T2058, or that both texts draw on a common source. Citing Maspero (1911). T2042; 阿育王傳 |
|
Palumbo argues that the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan 付法藏因緣傳 T2058 contains “extended textual parallels” with the Ayu wang zhuan 阿育王傳 (Aśokarājāvadāna) T2042. Palumbo cites Maspéro who has previously argued that T2058 was a sixth century “forgery” which lifted text from T2042. However, Palumbo suggests either that the Ayu wang zhuan is based on T2058, or that both texts draw on a common source. Citing Maspero (1911). |
311 |
Palumbo argues that the Fu fazang yinyuan zhuan 付法藏因緣傳 T2058 contains “extended textual parallels” with the Ayu wang zhuan 阿育王傳 (Asokarajavadana) T2042. Palumbo cites Maspero who has previously argued that T2058 was a sixth century “forgery” which lifted text from T2042. However, Palumbo suggests either that the Ayu wang zhuan is based on T2058, or that both texts draw on a common source. Citing Maspero (1911). T2058; 付法藏因緣傳 |