Source: Lettere 2019

Lettere, Laura. "The Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing as an Adaptation of the Chinese Translation of the Buddhacarita." Journal of Chinese Religions 47, no. 2 (2019): 117-152.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

Abstract:

"The Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing 過去現在因果經 (T189) is an account of the life of the Buddha and is considered the source of numerous pictorial representations in China and Japan. It is usually also considered to be a translation by the Indian monk Guṇabhadra who resided in Southern China during the Liu Song 劉宋 dynasty (420–479). The original Indian text on which this translation is based was thought to be lost. In a recent study, Michael Radich [2018a; see separate CBC@ entry] pointed out the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing’s composite nature along with its evident similarities with the Buddhacarita, and advanced the hypothesis that the text is based on other Chinese translations as well as on Indian sources. This study will prove that the Buddhacarita parts of the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing (T189) are consistently derived from the Fo suoxing zan 佛所行贊 (T192), the only Chinese translation of the Buddhacarita in the Chinese Buddhist Canon. The case of the demon Māra’s sisters will show how a misunderstanding of Aśvaghoṣa’s poem spread from the Buddhacarita to its translation (T192) to the re-elaboration of the translation (T189) and to pictorial representations.

"The present work will link the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing (T189) to the biography of its presumed author, showing how the name of Guṇabhadra was associated to a text composed under a demanding patronage and probably without the support of skilled interpreters."

Lettere's principal contention about T189 is that it was based on a Chinese Vorlage, T192, rather than directly upon an Indic source text. Lettere further argues that hapax legomena transcriptions of Indic proper names may be a tell-tale indication that Guṇabhadra himself did indeed have a role in the production of T189. Lettere maintains (134) that the narrative in T192 is often blurred by the absence of deictic expressions; T189 was [thus] probably intended as a kind of commentary on T192, as in several cases, it adjusts the text for the sake of clarity and coherence.

Edit

 Abstract: "The Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing 過去現在因果經 (T189) is an account of the life of the Buddha and is considered the source of numerous pictorial representations in China and Japan. It is usually also considered to be a translation by the Indian monk Gunabhadra who resided in Southern China during the Liu Song 劉宋 dynasty (420–479). The original Indian text on which this translation is based was thought to be lost. In a recent study, Michael Radich [2018a; see separate CBC@ entry] pointed out the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing’s composite nature along with its evident similarities with the Buddhacarita, and advanced the hypothesis that the text is based on other Chinese translations as well as on Indian sources. This study will prove that the Buddhacarita parts of the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing (T189) are consistently derived from the Fo suoxing zan 佛所行贊 (T192), the only Chinese translation of the Buddhacarita in the Chinese Buddhist Canon. The case of the demon Mara’s sisters will show how a misunderstanding of Asvaghosa’s poem spread from the Buddhacarita to its translation (T192) to the re-elaboration of the translation (T189) and to pictorial representations. "The present work will link the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing (T189) to the biography of its presumed author, showing how the name of Gunabhadra was associated to a text composed under a demanding patronage and probably without the support of skilled interpreters." Lettere's principal contention about T189 is that it was based on a Chinese Vorlage, T192, rather than directly upon an Indic source text. Lettere further argues that hapax legomena transcriptions of Indic proper names may be a tell-tale indication that Gunabhadra himself did indeed have a role in the production of T189. Lettere maintains (134) that the narrative in T192 is often blurred by the absence of deictic expressions; T189 was [thus] probably intended as a kind of commentary on T192, as in several cases, it adjusts the text for the sake of clarity and coherence. Gunabhadra 求那跋陀羅 T0189; 過去現在因果經