The Relationship between the Cīvaravastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya and Chapter 36 of Yijing’s Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan: A Re-examination
This paper reconsiders the long-held view that Chapter 36 of the Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan or “Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the South Seas” written by the Chinese pilgrim Yijing is a translation of a long passage from the Cīvaravastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya. Through comparing Chapter...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Brill
2022
|
| Dans: |
Indo-Iranian journal
Année: 2022, Volume: 65, Numéro: 1, Pages: 32-84 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Yijing
B Vinayasaṃgraha B Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya B Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan B Buddhist monastic inheritance law B Cīvaravastu |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Résumé: | This paper reconsiders the long-held view that Chapter 36 of the Nanhai jigui neifa zhuan or “Record of the Inner Law Sent Home from the South Seas” written by the Chinese pilgrim Yijing is a translation of a long passage from the Cīvaravastu of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya. Through comparing Chapter 36 with the Gilgit Sanskrit text of the Cīvaravastu, the Tibetan translation of the Cīvaravastu, and Yijing’s translation of the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinayasaṃgraha, this paper reveals, on the one hand, significant differences between Chapter 36 and the extant versions of the Cīvaravastu, and, on the other hand, substantial overlap between Chapter 36 and Yijing’s translation of the Vinayasaṃgraha. It argues that Chapter 36 was not translated from the Cīvaravastu (or at least not from a version of the Cīvaravastu identical with or similar to the Gilgit Sanskrit version), but rather seems to have been composed by Yijing through drawing largely (though not entirely) from the Vinayasaṃgraha. This paper therefore demonstrates anew that Yijing’s travel record cannot be simply taken as his eyewitness report of Buddhist monastic practices in ancient India. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8536 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Indo-Iranian journal
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15728536-06501003 |