Bodhisattvas of the Forest delves into the socioreligious milieu of the authors, editors, and propagators of the Rastrapalapariprccha-sutra (Questions of Rastrapala), a Buddhist text circulating in India during the first half of the first millennium C.E. In this meticulously researched study, Daniel Boucher first reflects upon the problems that plague historians of Mahayana Buddhism, whose previous efforts to comprehend the tradition have often ignored the social dynamics that motivated some of the innovations of this new literature. Following that is a careful analysis of several motifs found in the Indian text and an examination of the value of the earliest Chinese translation for charting the sutra’s evolution.
The first part of the study looks at the relationship between the bodily glorification of the Buddha and the ascetic career―spanning thousands of lifetimes―that produced it within the socioeconomic world of early medieval Buddhist monasticism. The authors of the Rastrapala sharply criticize their monastic contemporaries for rejecting the rigorous lifestyle of the first Buddhist communities, an ideal that, for the sutra’s authors, self-consciously imitates the disciplines and sacrifices of the Buddha’s own bodhisattva career, the very career that led to his acquisition of bodily perfection. Thus, Boucher reveals the ways in which the authors of the Rastrapala authors co-opted this topos concerning the bodily perfection of the Buddha from the Mainstream tradition to subvert their co-religionists whose behavior they regarded as representing a degenerate version of that tradition.
In Part 2 Boucher focuses on the third-century Chinese translation of the sutra attributed to Dharmaraksa and traces the changes in the translation to the late tenth century. The significance of this translation, Boucher explains, is to be found in the ways it differs from all other witnesses. These differences, which are significant, almost certainly reveal an earlier shape of the sutra before later editors were inspired to alter dramatically the text’s tone and rhetoric. The early Chinese translations, though invaluable in revealing developments in the Indian milieu that led to changes in the text, present particular challenges to the interpreter. It takes an understanding of not only their abstruse idiom, but also the process by which they were rendered from an undetermined Indian language into a Chinese cultural uh_product. One of the signal contributions of this study is Boucher’s skill at identifying the traces left by the process and ability to uncover clues about the nature of the source text as well as the world of the principal recipients.
Bodhisattvas of the Forest concludes with an annotated translation of the Rastrapalapariprccha-sutra based on a new reading of its earliest extant Sanskrit manuscript. The translation takes note of important variants in Chinese and Tibetan versions to correct the many corruptions of the Sanskrit manuscript.
3 有用 西野鱼竿 2022-04-20 01:13:33
老实说很多推论太大胆,得益于Nattier和Schopen的研究,不少观点几乎是在尝试颠覆过去关于大乘佛教兴起与发展的教科书认识.....第一部分主要围绕Rāṣṭrapāla及相关大乘经典中的苦行(具体来说是widerness-dwelling)展开,行文有点啰嗦,其实就是在探讨该经产生的社会经济与教内环境,尤其是僧侣和俗人供养者的关系;第二部分谈竺法护的译经活动,沿袭了作者博士论文,通过对比梵汉... 老实说很多推论太大胆,得益于Nattier和Schopen的研究,不少观点几乎是在尝试颠覆过去关于大乘佛教兴起与发展的教科书认识.....第一部分主要围绕Rāṣṭrapāla及相关大乘经典中的苦行(具体来说是widerness-dwelling)展开,行文有点啰嗦,其实就是在探讨该经产生的社会经济与教内环境,尤其是僧侣和俗人供养者的关系;第二部分谈竺法护的译经活动,沿袭了作者博士论文,通过对比梵汉文本的差异,借助犍陀罗语的重构,指出其国际化译经团队存在的误听、误读、误解等问题,这一小节研究实在过于强悍,给人方法论层面的启发颇多。 (展开)
0 有用 ँ 2018-02-25 19:56:29
0 有用 马洲洋 2019-09-21 09:36:57
还是不错的,至少能做到自圆其说。尤其第三章对社会经济的因素分析非常inspiring。问题就是想要在这种早期历史的论述中建立新的论述实在太难了,毕竟可用材料太少。作者若是能稍退一步,试图调和一下而不这么激进或许会更好
1 有用 kal 2021-05-18 04:22:24
从社会,经济角度分析Mahayana的兴起和发展及其和当时其他主流宗教的对立,强调rastrapala作者坚定的苦行立场,这是贯穿第一部分的主要思路。作者甚至大胆将印度当时的社会宗教状况与早期中国佛教译经活动结合起来。可以看出在不少方面深受schopen影响。但是我不太清楚为什么wildness dwelling还需要在文本中强调patronage,第四章最后一节看得有些迷惑。
1 有用 月兒羊蹄 2021-07-30 20:29:40
第五章和第六章,讲早期汉传佛教译经流程,受益良多,通过对几段Indic text与法护译经词汇之对比,用“口授”的猜想抉出异译,并据此印证了法护不懂汉文的猜想