Forte, Antonino. Political Propaganda and Ideology in China at the End of the Seventh Century: An Inquiry into the Nature, Authors, and Function of the Dunhuang Document S.6502 Followed by an Annotated Translation. Second Edition. Kyoto: Scuola Italiana di Studi sull’Asia Orientale, 2005.
| Assertion | Argument | Place in source | Search |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Forte's entire monograph is a study of the authorship, circumstances of composition, and nature of S.6502. On the question of authorship, see esp. Ch. 2, in which he argues that it was the product of a group of "Ten Bhadantas" who were active under Wu Zetian as propagandists and ideologues. Forte's basic contention is that the commentary was part of a strategy to use the *Mahāmegha, and especially a prophecy it contained about a kind of female "wheel-turning king", to legitimate Wu Zetian's rule. |
passim |
Forte's entire monograph is a study of the authorship, circumstances of composition, and nature of S.6502. On the question of authorship, see esp. Ch. 2, in which he argues that it was the product of a group of "Ten Bhadantas" who were active under Wu Zetian as propagandists and ideologues. Forte's basic contention is that the commentary was part of a strategy to use the *Mahamegha, and especially a prophecy it contained about a kind of female "wheel-turning king", to legitimate Wu Zetian's rule. S.6502; Dayun jing Shenhuang shouji yishu 大雲經神皇授記義疏 |
|
Forte summarises a history of scholarship, traditional and modern, on the problem of an interpolation in the Baoyu jing T660. Ming Buddhists were the first to address the possibility of such an interpolation, but applied their suspicions to the wrong passage. In the Ming canon, a long note was inserted to refute the authenticity of this passage. Yabuki regarded this accusation as inconsistent, and Demiéville held that the passage in question was certainly not apocryphal, but had featured in the original Skt. Forte praises the Qing philologist Yu Zhengxie 俞正燮 for correctly noted that Dharmaruci's [= Bodhiruci's] 693 translation agreed with the two earlier translations, with the exception of a "discourse relating to the female [ruler] of China". Yu, Forte writes, showed that this passage (different from the one identified by the Ming scholars) (T660 [XVI] 284b13-c14) was indeed an interpolation, and was followed in modern scholarship by Shigematsu Toshiaki and Aoso Koki. Sakurabe Bunkyō noticed the same passage independently, without suggesting that the prophecy applied to Wu Zetian. These remarks were then lost, and Makita rediscovered the passage for the third time in 1964. In 1971, Shigenoi wrote an article entirely devoted to the interpolation. Forte presents and translates the interpolated passage p. 194-198, and much of his monograph is a study of its significance, in conjunction with the significance of a commentary written upon the text which reflects similar agendas. |
191- |
Forte summarises a history of scholarship, traditional and modern, on the problem of an interpolation in the Baoyu jing T660. Ming Buddhists were the first to address the possibility of such an interpolation, but applied their suspicions to the wrong passage. In the Ming canon, a long note was inserted to refute the authenticity of this passage. Yabuki regarded this accusation as inconsistent, and Demieville held that the passage in question was certainly not apocryphal, but had featured in the original Skt. Forte praises the Qing philologist Yu Zhengxie 俞正燮 for correctly noted that Dharmaruci's [= Bodhiruci's] 693 translation agreed with the two earlier translations, with the exception of a "discourse relating to the female [ruler] of China". Yu, Forte writes, showed that this passage (different from the one identified by the Ming scholars) (T660 [XVI] 284b13-c14) was indeed an interpolation, and was followed in modern scholarship by Shigematsu Toshiaki and Aoso Koki. Sakurabe Bunkyo noticed the same passage independently, without suggesting that the prophecy applied to Wu Zetian. These remarks were then lost, and Makita rediscovered the passage for the third time in 1964. In 1971, Shigenoi wrote an article entirely devoted to the interpolation. Forte presents and translates the interpolated passage p. 194-198, and much of his monograph is a study of its significance, in conjunction with the significance of a commentary written upon the text which reflects similar agendas. T0660; 佛說寶雨經 |