Ostasien

Page 1

409 Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 80. Jahrgang 1985 Nr. 4 410 Ostasien tion of the Shih-erh-men-lun. It mainly stems from the translator's insufficient acquaintance with Indian Cheng. Hsueh-li: Nagarjuna's Twelve Gate Treatise, transl., Madhyamika and the achievements of recent conti with Introductory Essays, Comments, and Notes. Dord- nental scholarship. Let me therefore offer but a few recht -- Boston - London: Beidel [1982]. XV, 151 S. 8deg = additional observations on the text and authenticity Studies of Classical India, ed. by B. K. Matilal, J. M. Masson, 5. Lw. hfl. 85.- Bespr. von Chr. Lindtner, of the Shih-erh-men-lun and its place in the history of Naerum (Danemark). Madhyamika literature. In its present form the Shih erh-men-lun is divided into twelve chapters and con Along with the Chung-lun (T. 1564, *Madhya- sists of twenty-six verses with a commentary in promakasastra), and the Pai-lun TA (T. 1569, *Satasa- se. Even though the *Dvadasadvaraka is never menstra or*Sataka) theShih-erh-men-lunt=19H (T. 1568, tioned in Indo-Tibetan sources (unless it is identical * Dvadasanikayasastra, * Dvadasamukhasastra, *Dva- with the sTon pa nid kyi sgo bcu gnis pa listed in the dasadvarasastra, or simply *Dvadasadvaraka) forms IDan dkar ma Catalogue, No. 595) there can be no the textual basis of what in China, Korea and Japan doubt about its Indian origin. Not only are (most of) is commonly known as the "Three Treatise School", its verses taken over from Nagarjuna's Mulamadhya makakarika (MK) and Sunyatasaptati (SS) (see below) lated-more or less freely-from the Sanskrit by the but the prose style is also typical of early Indian celebrated Kumarajiva (344-413 or perhaps 350-409) Madhyamika (cf. e.g. Akutobhaya, Vigrahavyavartaand are usually ascribed to Nagarjuna and Aryadeva, nivitti, Vaidalyaprakarana, Sunyatasaptativstti, etc.). though these attributions pose several problems. The It contains numerous stock-exam "Three Treatises" also had a decisive influence upon from similar Indian sastras and, moreover, quotations other schools of Buddhism than the Madhyamika, from * Saptatisastra (i.e. Ss) and *1 svarasutra-two such as T'ien-t'ai # founded by Hui-wen (550-- texts otherwise unknown in Chinese tradition. Many 577), and Hua-yen founded by Fa-tsang (643, of its polemical passages are unintelligible to a Chinese 712)--who even composed a commentary (T. 1826) to reader not acquainted with the Indian background. the Shih-erh-men-lun. There is also a good deal of According to its own words (op. rec., p. 53) our text Madhyamika influence to be found in the "Pure Land was composed in order to give an introductory sumSchool" (Ch'ing-t'u-Tsung #t ), and, of course, in mary of Mahayanartha (cf. Ratnavali, IV, 81); if it Ch'an though here not so much directly based on the was written by a Chinese (or Serindian) scholar as an San-lun texts themselves. After all Madhyamika has introduction for Chinese readers it would, again, obalways been more of an academic discipline than a viously not contain all these elements only intellipopular movement. Among the most outstanding gible or familiar to an Indian reader. exponents of Madhyamika in China, apart from Kumarajiva himself, are his pupils Seng-jui (353-436) -- 48 baid, the banzas ist ohtu Shih-erh-men-iunt are mainly taken over from the Chung-lun (which is cited by its title) and Seng-chao (374-414) and, above all, Chi-tsang usang or, more precisely, from MK and Ss. Compare the following (549-623)-a student of the Indian translator concordance and note that Kumarajiva often translates Paramartha (500-569)-whose scholastic works deal- more ad sensum than ad verbum so that in a few cases the identification remains uncertain. The commentary is often ing with the Three Treatises, the Two Truths, etc. very useful for identifying the sources of the verses. The are of particular importance. An indication of this is list is a revision of the one proposed by Richard H. Robinthe fact that in the course of time more than fifty son (Early Madhyamika in India and China, Madison 1967, commentaries to his magnum opus, the San-lun- p. 32): * 1. (=I.i) 159c 24+ MK, I, 3 ? hsuan-i = X(T. 1852) were composed in Japan (cf. 2. (=I.ii) 160 a 22 IS, 8 Buddhist Text Information, 25 (1980)). Since these 3. (=II.i) 1606 18+MK, I, 7 three texts are of a great historical and philosophical (=III.i) 16 26 3+ MK, I, 11 importance, and since only two of them, the Chung-lun (=III.ii) 16268-MK, I, 2 6. i =III.iii) 1626 23+MK, I, 12 (M. Walleser, Die Mittlere Lehre des Nagarjuna, nach 7. (=IV.i) 162c 3+ SS, 30 ? der chinesischen Version ubertragen, Heidelberg 1912) 8. (=IV.2) 162c 12+MK, VII, 1 and the Pai-lun (see G. Tucci, Pre-Dinnaga Buddhist 9. i =IV.3) 162c 23 -- MK, VII, 4 texts on logic from Chinese sources, Baroda 1929), have =IV.4) 16 3 a 1+MK, VII, 5 (=IV.5) 163 a 5+MK, VII, 6 been generally accessible to Western readers, the i=IV.6) 16 3 a 12 + MK, VII, 7 appearance of an English version of the Shih-erh-men- 13. =IV.7) 163 a 18-MK, VII, 9 lun obviously fills a long-felt lacuna in Mahayana 4. (=IV.8) 16 3 a 27-MK, VII, 10 studies. Under these circumstances Hsueh-li Cheng 15. (=IV.9) 16 36 2+MK, VII, 11 16. (=IV.10) 1636 9+ MK, VII, 12 deserves credit for providing us with a version of the i=IV.11) 16 36 16+ MK, VII, 13 "Twelve Gate Treatise" which not only stays very 18. 1 =V.1) 163c 16MK, V, 4 close to the Chinese but also (main the (=VI.1) 164 a 10+MK, II, 21 ? subject or predicate when not explicitly expressed in 20. =VII.1) 1646 27+ SS, 19 21. (=VIII.1) 16 5 a 10+ MK, XIII, 3 the Chinese) comes out in a clear, readable and, on the 22. (=IX.1) 1656 28+ ? whole (see below), accurate English. The utility of his 23. (=X.1) 1650 10+MK, XII, 1 translation has been enhanced by comments, notes i=X.2) 1650 24MK, I, 13 and three concise introductory essays dealing with 25. (=XI.1) 16 60 21 + SS, 6? 26. (=XII.1) 167 a 23+ SS, 5? "Nagarjuna and the Spread of His Teachings", "Sanlun Approaches to Emptiness", and "The Nature and The Shih-erh-men-lun sets out to prove Sunyata Value of the Text". (pudgaladharmanairatmya) through twelve gates, i.e. In spite of these merits it cannot be denied that from twelve important angles. Accordingly each there is a general weakness throughout this presenta- chapteris formed as a critical examination (parikna) of: 17. dan