Page Text
________________ 136 JIABS VOL. 9 NO.1 that same text (i.e. the Kosa) after Hui-k'ai's death." I am sorry to insist on the fact that this is stated nowhere in Paramartha's biography. In my review I wrote that Hui-k'ai lectured on the Kosa until his death and that after his death Paramartha continued to lecture on the same text, and I referred to both the HSKC and io Ui. I may add that the same information is given by Demieville in an article mentioned in Diana Paul's bibliography (see Choix d'etudes bouddhiques, p. 21). In her reply, Diana Paul writes that "Ui claims that the biography means to say that Paramartha revised and polished an already completed text, even though the HSKC does not say that." Ui's source is not, of course, Paramartha's biography, but Hui-k'ai's preface to Paramartha's translation of the Kosa (Taisho 1559.29.161b20-22). Diana Paul's third example is her translation of verse VII. It is rather amazing to see that she still does not recognize that her translation is wrong, as has already been pointed out by another reviewer (see Collett Cox's review in the Journal of Asian Studies, 45, 1, p. 126). It is absurd to say that I prefer Hsuan-tsang's translation which reads: "It (i.e. the defiled mind) does not exist for the Arhat, nor in the meditation of cessation, nor on the suprainundane path" (see Ui, p. 411). The eight (not five) points raised in my review represent only a small selection of the critical noles I made while reading Diana Paul's work. I believe that they are sufficient to show the way in which Diana Paul handled her Chinese sources and her "single most important secondary source in (her) analysis of the HSKC." Diana Paul's reply only confirms what I have already said in my review.
| SR No. | 269676 |
| Book Title | Book Reviews |
| Original Sutra Author | N/A |
| Author | J W De Jong |
| Publisher | J W De Jong |
| Publication Year | |
| Total Pages | 7 |
| Language | English |
| Classification | Article |
| File Size | 869 KB |