Florin Deleanu b y

O N E
For more than two hundred years the "meditation sutras"硬部translated by An Shigao (fl. 148-170 C.R.), the first translator of Buddhist scriptures into Chinese, were amongst the major sources of information concerning mental cul-, tivation which sustained the spiritual quest of the early followers of the Noble Path in the Middle Kingdom. (1) Six sutras, out of about seventeen translations which can be ascribed to An Shigao with some certainty, deal mainly with medita¬ tion related topics while various references to spiritual practice are found in most of the remaining texts. (2) Judging from the number of commenteries written on it as well as from the analogies, most of them superficial from the viewpoint of modern scholarship, with the time-honoured interest of the Chinese in bib¬ energetical practices, it seems that it was the Anban shouyi jing (3) (hereafter abbreviated Asj) or Sutra of the Mindfulness of Breathing which occupied the paramount position amongst these texts. As far as textual evidence allows a glimpse into those remote days of Buddhist practice on Chinese soil, it appears that the majority of the Chinese practitioners understood this small meditation treatise in a way more or less different from the original intentions of its Indian or Central Asian authors, with the unavoidable patterns of intertextual- ity, mostly inadequate, which any old civilazation imposes on new cultural sys- tems coming from outside. No matter how poor the understanding of the Chinese was, it is undeniable that the Asj played a major part in supporting the Bud¬ dhist faith by providing its believers with a pattern of verification at a time when information was scarce and the new religion had not yet gained a large following in the Chinese society. The extant version of the Asj, entitled The Greater Sutra of the Mindfulness of Breathing Preached by the Buddha佛説大安紋守意鑑, has two juan巻(4) and appears to be an extremly corrupt text, in ~hich the original Indian treatise was amalgamated with Chinese commentaries that have somehow managed to creep into the text in a manner one could hardly call systematic. However, early biblio- graphical sources like Daoan's 道安Comprehensive Catalogue of Sutras 綾理衆超目録compiled in the 4th century and Sengyou's僧祐Chu sanzang ji ji出三蔵記集(hereafter abbreviated Csjj) or Collection of Notes Concerning the Translation of the Tripitaka, which reflects the situation at the beginning of 6th century, list a Smaller Sutra of [the Mindfulness of] Breathing 小安校都in one juan and a Greater Sutra of [the Mindfulness of] Breathing大安般都also in one juan. (5) A large number of studies touches upon the Asj and its role in early Chinese Buddhism, but few actually bring a substantial contribution to our understanding of the text. (6) And despite many precious hints, no study has given us hitherto a complete history of the textual formation of the Asj. In what follows,I shall attempt to reconstruct, I must admit, on highly hypothetical bases, the history of this text relying on the scanty material that survived to our days. I initially intended to devote this study solely to the origin and history of the Asj. This would have been an enlarged version of my paper On the Compila- tion Process of the Present Text of the Anban shouyi jing Translated by An Shi- gao, published last year in Japanese. (7) However, the recent publication of Prof. Antonino Forte's challenging study An Shigao 安世高and His Descendants (8) enticed me into re-examining the biographical details and historical back- ground of the Parthian translator. I have, therefore, deemed that a digression on An Shigao's life is necessary not only in itself as an attempt to reconstruct the historical facts but also for shedding more light on the process which led to the formation of the Asj. Without the Indian original and Tibetan trans- lations, which usually follow the original quite faithfully, any attempt to in- vestigate the intricate history of the Asj must rely on whatever direct and in¬ direct evidence comes from Chinese historical sources as well as from the pains- taking identification and analysis of what we surmise to be the original text(s) and later interpolations.
I
AN SHIGAO AND HIS HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Asj was translated into Chinese sometime between 150 and 170 C.E. by the Parthian monk An Shigao. If we leave aside the hagiographical elements which flood An Shigao's biography in Chinese sources, we obtain a sketchy picture of his life, which I consider more or less trustworthy. Born as the crown prince J of Parthia 安息園(9) he was a pious Buddhist follower who observed the pre- cepts strictly long before becoming a monk. Since there is no evidence of the existence of Buddhist scriptures translated into Parthian or any Buddhist vest- iges in regions other than those situated in the easternmost parts of the Empire (10) which could benefit from the cultural influence of North-West India and Buddist Central Asia, we are compelled to conclude together with Henri Maspero (11) that An Shigao was not the heir to the Throne of the Parthian Empire, but most probably the son of a king in one of the vassal territories in the eastern parts Parthia. It appears that during the Arsacid period (247 B.C.E.-226 C.R.) Zoroastrian faith continued to play the dominant role and that the cult of Nithra was ' vide spread (12), although the dynasty displayed a generous spirit of tolerance, which allowed, for instance, the Greek and Jewish collonies through- out the Empire to preserve their own religious beliefs. (13) This liberal spirit doubtlessly permitted Buddhism to find its way into the eastern parts of the Parthian territory, an event which happened, most probably, sometime after the beginning of our era (14) and must have been accelerated by the support gained by Buddhism under the Kusanas in Tokharistan. (15) The Parthian Buddhist fol- lowers must have been either residents of those areas or merchants who were con¬ verted during their travels in Central Asia or India. Returning to our story of An Shigao's life, it appears that after his father's death his lack of interest in the worldly affairs and strong aspiration after the Noble Path led him to renounce the Throne in favour of his uncle and choose monkhood instead. I think we have no reasons to doubt An Shigao's genuine spiritual quest but we may also conjencture that the instability of the age could have somehow influenced his decision to give up secular matters, a possib- ility also hinted at by Kang Senghui 藤僧會in his Preface to the Anban shouyi jing 安般庁意継序written by the middle of the 3rd century: [An Shigao] abdicated in favour of his uncle and fled from his home country in a rush. After wandering from place to place, he moved on forward and finally settled in the Capital [of China]. (16) Having to fight difficult wars against the Roman Empire in the West since the beginning of the 2nd century C.E (17) and threatened by the newly risen Ku¬ sana Empire, which during Kaniska's time (?128/130-151C.E.) (18) came to control the whole Central Asia and Northern India, Parthia's destiny was on the wane. According to Daoan, Sengyou and Huijiao (19), An Shigao specialized in Abhi- dharma literature and meditation sutras, a fact equally verifiable from the contents of his translations. He spent a few years travelling in Central Asia and, perhaps, North-West India. Later biographers imply that this was done with the ain of propagating 私fb the Buddhist faith (20), but it appears equally probable that he may have pursued his studies and spiritual practice. He arrived洛陽. Starting, in China in 148 C.E. and spent more than 20 years in Luoyang with the Former Han dynasty China began to show a strong interest in Central Asia for economic as well as political reasons. Trade relations between the Parthian Empire and Han China had dobtlessly existed for a long time and we find information on Parthia in Sima Qian's  司馬遷 Records of the Historian 史記(21) as early as  97 B.C.E. By the middle of the lst century C.E., the roads linking China to Central Asia were cut off, but Ban Chao's  班組expedition in the Western Regions starting in 80 C.E. re-established Han political influence in Eastern Turkestan and re-opened the trade routes. In the 9th year of the Yongyuan 永元era (97 C. E.), Ban Chao sent Gan Ying甘英on a mission to the Roman Empire. Gan Ying crossed Parthia and reached the Western Sea西遊in Tiaozhi様文, a land situated at more than 40,000 /i or 16,600 kilometres away from Yumen 玉門and Yangguang  왜왜in the western extremity of Han China. (22) There Parthian traders convinced him to desist from trying to reach the Roman Empire due to the length and dangers of a voyage on the Western Sea. (23) From the end of the 1st century C.E. on contacts between Parthia and China grow. The 2nd century C.E. saw a real boom of interest in Central Asian merchandise and cultural products at the Han Court as well as amongst the Chinese aristocracy. ' (24) Doubtlessly, together with silk and other exotic products, the prestige of China as a great power and culture must have reached Central Asia and Parthia. Seen against this background of growing economic and cultural contacts, An Shi- gao's decision to go to China has nothing extraordinary in it, although it is hard to know his exact motivation in choosing the Middle Kingdom. It may be that he was persuaded by Central Asian merchants residing in China that their Bud- dhist community in Luoyang, most probably, including some Chinese converts, too, needed a spiritual guide in that remote land, which could also offer promising chances for the noble purpose of missionary activities. Or it may be, as Kang Senghui, quoted above, suggests, that he was wandering as a refugee from place to place and, finally, joined a caravan heading along one of the Silk Road routes for the Chinese capital. We know very little about his activities in Luoyang. It seems that he learned Chinese not long after his arrival there (25), which allowed him to supervise his translations and to communicate directly with his followers and potential converts. The early Buddhist community in Luoyang consisted, most probably, of merchants and residents of Central Asian origin as well as a few Chinese believers.(26) Despite all inherent misunderstandings, Buddhism had been known for many decades on Chinese soil and we have no reasons to doubt that the exotic faith attracted the interest of a certain number of people, amongst whom we find members of the gentry. The only disciple of An Shigao on whom we have some precise information is Yan Fotiao 殿佛調, whose Preface to the Passages Concerning the Ten Wise Precepts of the Novice 沙羽十慧章句序fortunately survives today.(27) He appears to be the first Chinese to have become a Buddhist monk (28) as his name参調(var. í調), * biust-deu (var. , * biou-deu) in Han pro- nunciation (29), which is a phonetic transcription of Buddha-deva (30), and the fact that he is called acarya阿祇梨seem to suggest. We know that ordination procedure (upasaapad-karsan) requires ten monks, usually three acaryas and seven bhiksus acting as witnesses三師七理. However, when performed in remote areas where it is difficult to assemble ten monks, a minimum of four bhiksus are ne-, cessary to ordain a monk. (31) An Shigao, undoubtly Yan's master (upädhyäya), needed, therefore, at least, three other bhiksus, which hints at the possibility that the Buddhist community in Luoyang at the middle of the 2nd century C.E. may have been larger than most historians have assumed hitherto and that and it may have included other foreign monks whose names, unfortunately, did not survive to later epochs. As far as Yan Fotiao is concerned, it seems that he was a member of the gentry. Not only that he writes in good style but his allusion to the Chinese classics (32) suggests that he had a sound education. He have all the reasons to believe that Yan was one of the close collaborators and editors, to use a modern term, of An Shigao's translations into Chinese, which he apparently did orally and written as well. (33) Pei Changfang's 費長房  Notes on the Three Treaures over the Conturies歴代三賞記(34) gives us the exact years for some of An Shigao's translations, but information coming from this source should be taken more than cus grano salis. As for the rest, legendary details blur our grasp of historical events. He may have left the capital for the South of China, as our sources indicate, and such a decision could have been motivated by the beginning of the turbulent events that would practically disrupt the life of the North for decades or, simply, because he intended to make new converts in that part of the Empire. We know that, apart from Luoyang, there existed other Buddhist centres in the East and South. (35) Later biographers describe the violent conditions of his death as a karmic retribution and place it in Kuaiji® s (36), in present Zhe¬ jiang, which was a Buddhist centre during the Later Han dynasty. It is possible that the Parthian monk died an unnatural death and this could have led to inter- preting the tragic event in Buddhist terms. Anyway, since Yan Fotiao writes about the great misfortune of losing his acarya和上(37), it seems that An Shi- gao died on Chinese soil This is the general picture of An Shigao's life provided by Buddhist sources and no modern scholar has questioned its basic details until very recently when Prof. Antonino Forte advanced a totally different hypothesis based on new his ¬ torical and epigraphical evidence. According to Prof. Forte, An Shigao was a Parthian "attending son" ή子or "hostage son"賀子 at the Han Court and some of his descendents appear later on in Chinese history playing more or less import- ant political roles. In religious matters. An Shigao was a lay Mahayanist fol- lower and, through his position, he may have been behind the Buddhist ceremonies with which the Luoyang imperial Court seems to have been associated. All later Buddhist literature appears to Prof. Forte a "tendency to idealize the person- to work in a kind of association between his life and Sakyamuni's age, and life. (38) It is beyond any doubt that the new sources revealed by Prof. Forte will become important reference materials for any future discussion of early Chinese Buddhist history and that his reconstruction of the events remains a possibil- ity, but I would contend that these documents cannot be adduced as a conclusive proof for rejecting An Shigao's traditional biography. Here are my reasons for questioning Prof. Forte's hypothesis: (1) It is very doubtful that the Parthian Empire would have had any reasons to send one of its princes as a hostage to such a distant country, which apart from trade relations, had no major relevance to its politics. According to Lien¬ sheng Yang, such external hostages, who appear frequently throughout Chinese traditional history, were "taken by a powerful state from a weak state, by a suzerain from its vassal states or dependent tribes". (39) China and Parthia had never been in such a relation of dependence. According to the History of the Forser Han Dynasty 漢書, "Parthia did not belong to the General-Protector [of the Western Regions]都護". (40) In another context, after mentioning the fact that 376 leaders from 50 lands in the Vestern Regions received official seals印線conferred by the Han dynasty in order to atract these territories within its sphere of influence as vassal states, it adds: However, lands like Sogdia  陳居, Tukhāra大月氏, Parthia安息, Gandhāra周斉(41), Arachosia 烏弋(42), being extremely remote, were not s anongst these [vassal lands]. When they sent tribute, [the Han Court] bestowed rewards 報on each of them (43), but they were neither con- trolled nor ruled [by the Chinese Empire]. (44) The History of the Later Han Dynasty 後漢書equally mentions Parthia as an independent country: In the sixth year [of the Yongyuan 氷元era, i.e., 94 C.E.], Ban Chao attacked and defeated Yanqi焉者. (45) Thereupon, more than fifty states sent hostages and became vassal countries. [However,] Tiaozhi様支(46), Parthia安息and all the other countries up to the sea shore (47) at 40,000 Ii [away from China] sent tribute making use of many inter- preters [to convey their messages to the Han Court]. (48) It is obvious that there is a clear-cut distinction between vassal states which sent hostages and countries situtated outside the Chinese sphere of in- fluence that gave tribute, which, anyway, meant nothing more than conveying the intention of these countries to establish relations with the Middle Kingdom. In most of the cases, these "tributes" were nothing more than exotic presents such as the lion and the "big bird" sent by the Emperor of Parthia in 101 C.E. (49). Prof. Forte further argues that the appellation安Q世高or Shigao, Marquis of An, which first appears in an anonymous Preface to the Iharmapada sutra 法句經序(50), is not a mere form of respectful address (51), but a title "applied to him because of his aristocratic origins and which served to assign to him a precise status in the Chinese society." (52) It is true that one of the titles which the Chinese Court conferred upon military leaders and nobles of non-Chinese peoples for their services or as a means to contol them. ' (53) However, even if we suppose that An Shigao had been a "hostage son" and had been conferred a title, one would expect the History of the Later Han Dynasty pr any other major historical source to mention this unusual presence which would have meant a lot for China's political prestige in Central and Western Asia. Not only that An Shigao's name does not appear in such documents, but we find no mention whatsoever in official Chinese histories of Parthians being granted titles or honours. (54) (2) An Shigao first appears mentioned as a Parthian "attending son" at the Han Court in the biographies of An Tong安同(d. 429) and his son An Yuan安原(d. 435) recorded in the History of the Hei Dynasty魏書(55) and the History of the Northern Dynasties 北史(56). Next we find him in the Compendium of Surnames Compiled in the Yuanhe Ers 元和姓算(57), the New History of the Tang DynastyW唐書(58), and the Comprehensive Description [of Institutions]通志(59), in the genealogy of the Grand Minister Li Baoyu 李抱玉(704-777). The problem is that the latter does not mention An Tong and An Yuan amongst Li Baoyu's ancestors, although both lineages claim to spring from the same An Shigao. One may argue that we have here two branches of the same clan but it seems to me unusual for Li Baoyu's genealogists to omit An Tong who was by no means a minor figure in the epoch.(60) It is true that the funerary inscription on stele of An Zhongjing安忠敬(661-726). Li Baoyu's father, written by Zhang Yue奨説(667-730) mentions An Tong by his posthumous name Gaoyang 高陽as part of the same genealogy. (61) However, we can surmise that Zhang Yue, a fine poet and man of letters, was aware of the An Tong's genealogy recorded in the History of the Wei Dynasty and the History of the Northern Dynasties and considered it appropriate to include him in the same lineage with that of An Zhongjing. On the other hand, we may assume that all other sources based their genealogical descriptions on Li Bao- yu's family traditions which regarded An Shigao as their ancestor and ignored the fact that a similar claim had been made centuries ago by An Tong's fanily. I would contend that we have here two different families originating from Parthia who tried to add more weight and dignity to their history by tracing back their genealogies to An Shigao, the Parthian monk of princely origin. (62) Needless to say that it is impossible to decide whether such genealogies were , "doctored" in order to upgrade the family status or whether they vere based on a dim memory circulating amongst naturalized Parthian families which retained An Shigao's name and noble origin but lost any trace of his activity as a Buddhist missionary. This is basically my interpretation of these newly revealed sources and I hope that the discussion below will further confirm this conclusion. (3) The literary and epigraphical evidence discovered by Prof. Forte gives condradictory information concerning the actual place where An Shigao and his descendents settled in China. The sources are divided between Liaodong 遼東, in the South of modern Liaoning, and Liangzhou 涼州, in modern Gansu. Prof. Forte succeeds in arranging all the details into a coherent picture which is plausible as long as we accept the fundamental presupposition that An Shigao was indeed a "hostage son" at the Han Court. However, if we base our investigation on the traditional account found in Buddhist sources, as I actually do, the very fact that the sources above speak of two places of original settlement would seem to indicate that we have to deal with two different families claiming a common ancestor. Furthermore, we are confronted with a problem which appears to me to be at least as important. As far as the settlement of the "attending son" himself is regarded, the Compendium of Surnames Compiled in the Yuanhe Era (63) tells us that An Shigao left Luoyang at some stage and settled in the territory涼土, modern Gansu. The inscription on the stele of'An Lingjie says, of Liang "In the Han years the 'son in attendance' first settled in the region of the Crows' Fortress烏城" (64), in Gansu. (65) We remember, however, that all Bud- dhist sources indicate that An Shigao left for the South of China on a route which included Mount Lu蔵山in Jiangxi (66), Canton 廣州, and Kuaiji倉程in Zhejiang. To be sure, I do not suggest that we have to accept all the details found in Buddhist sources. On the contrary, the hagiographical accretions which usually characterize their accounts compell the modern researcher to be more than prudent in their interpretation. But even if we go as far as rejecting these exact locations mentioned in the Buddhist sources, there is one geograph- ical element which stands in sharp contrast with the historical documents re- ' vealed by Prof. Forte and this is the fact that while in the former An Shigao leaves Luoyang for the South of China in the latter we find An Shigao, the "attending son", settling down somewhere in Gansu, a north-western region of the Middle Kingdom. It seems to me that it is in the logic of the creation of hagio- graphical accounts, a genre in itself drifting between fiction and history, to keep such structurally "solid" nuclei as geographical elements unless strong altering factors of religious nature or inner coherence act and modify the basic data. And I can think of absolutely no possible reasons which could have made Buddhist authors to choose the South of China other that an authentic tradition recording An Shigao's activity in the region. In other words, there was no im¬ pediment in setting the same hagiographical stories in the West of China if An Shigao really visited or lived in those regions. This brings me once again to the conclusion that the account found in the non-Buddhist sources is either a deliberate creation of the family genealogists or a confusion which resulted in making An Shigao the ancestor of two different clans of Parthian origin. (4) Prof. Forte concludes that early Buddhist authors knew about An Shigao's real origins but they preferred to build the image of a devout monk and create a biography closely resembling Säkyamuni's life. (67) I fail to see, however, what could have been the motivation of these Buddhist authors to alter reality to such a degree. First, a Buddhist "attending prince" at the Han Court, with a potential influence on the fate of his religion on Chinese soil, would have been a major feature of his story which, far from being omitted from his bio- graphy, would have become an element Buddhists of later times could take special pride in. Second, being a lay follower would have not disqualified An Shigao from receiving about the same attention and respect, as the biographies of An Xuan, Zhi Qian, etc. do actually prove. The only notable change would have been that Huijiao could have no longer dedicated him a special chapter in his Gsz and would have included him as a lay follower in the biography of a Han monk. How¬ ever, this would have impaired An Shigao's prestige in no way and works based on different criteria, like the Csjj, could have still honoured him with a chapter of his own. (68) Third, we must not forget that An Shigao was not holding the special position of the first known Buddhist translator and propagator on Chi- nese soil which modern scholarship usually acknowledges. Traditionally, Chinese Buddhists belived that the first missionaries who had brought the Noble Law to the Middle Kingdom had been * Käsyapa Mätanga猛摩腫 and  *Dharmaratna笠法関in the second half of the lst century C.E. (69) Fourth, as far as the biograph- ical similarity between Säkyamuni and An Shigao is regarded, there is nothing so extraordinary about renouncing the Throne and choosing instead the tranquil path of monkhood, especially in times of political and social turbulence. History of religion knows so many other similar cases that there is no need to suppose here the work of hagiographical imagination. Lastly, a few words on Prof. Forte's assumption that An Shigao was behind the Buddhist ceremonies performed at the Han Court. (70) I think that the lack of certain evidence should rather make us share Zürcher's circumspection concerning the possibility of a direct relationship between the Court and the Buddhist com- munity. (71) This leaves, nevertheless, open the possibility that An Shigao or some his followers may have inspired a certain interest in the new "exotic" faith in an indirect manner. The contacts, if they existed at all, must have been superficial and, most probably, were never associated with any serious at¬ tempt of the Court to understand or practice the Buddhist Way. (5) Prof. Forte holds that the earliest Buddhist accounts on An Shigao are too vague and do not necessarily imply that he was a monk. (72) I find it hard to accept that these early authors were trying to "blur" An Shigao's identity in any way. It is true that we find no expression directly pointing at An Shigao's status of pravrajita or monkhood but this is in itself no proof whatsoever that he was an "attending prince" or that these accounts were trying to hide such a reality. On the contrary, the few lines on An Shigao's life which we find in the Prefaces written by early authors like Yan Fotiao (73), Chen Huik慧(fl. begin- ning to middle of 3rd century C.E.) (74), and Kang Senghui (d. 280 C.E.) (75) suggest an intense spiritual quest and dedication which better characterize a › monk than an "attending son" living a busy life at the imperial Court. Take, for instance, the following sentence which is also discussed by Prof. Forte: "[An Shigao] renounced the glory of the Throne and, content with poverty, he de¬ lighted in (or aspired after) the [Buddhist] Path" It is hard to see why an "attending prince" would be described as being "content with poverty", a phrase by far more suitable to describe the life of an ascetic.架道has two possible readings: one is "delight in the Path" (77), read le dzo, an old Chinese term which we first find in the Meng Zi.拡子(78) and used to describe detachment from secular matters and a life dedicated to spiritual joys or strict adherence to one's principles. Incidently, as a Buddhist technical term, it is also used to tanslate priti or the joy of practising the Way, which represents the third of the seven factors of enlightenment (sapta bodhyangani七覧支). The second meaning of 樂道 i.e., "aspiring after or yearnning for the Path", read yao dao, is often used to denote lofty aspirations. As a Buddhist term, it stands for the Sanskrit adhimukts, i.e., "inclined to", or ruci, i.e., "taking pleasure in", "desirous of", "longing for", etc. Whatever its meaning may be,架道seems to suggest an earnest dedication to the Buddhist Teaching, which again makes one think of a monk rather than an upäsaka caught up in the worldly affairs of the Court. (6) Prof. Forte advances "the hypothesis that An Shigao's collaborator An Xuan安玄...received the title of qi durei騎都尉because he was in the staff of the administration of the Marquis An".(79) I an afraid that such a hypothesis is not supported by facts and unless Prof. Forte provides a full account of his surmise, we are bound to say that it betrays a misapprehension of the historical events. There is absolutly no source which mentions the existence of any con¬ tacts between An Shigao and An Xuan, to say nothing of a collaboration relation- ship. As we have already seen, An Xuan collaborated with Yan Fotiao, An Shigao's former disciple, but this happened after An Shigao's death. (80) The dates of- fered by our documents do not encourage either the assumption that there was any relationship between the two Parthians. We remember that An Shigao is said to , have come in 148 C.E. to Luoyang where he remained for more than 20 years after which he left for the South of China, where he died a violent death. However, we must also note that both the Csjj and the Gsz give here a rather contradictory account of the exact details and date. They first say that after some 20 years二十餘年in Luoyang, i.e., around 170 C.E., An Shigao parted with his co- religionists 同學(81) in order to go to Canton. Nevertheless, after only few lines, they state that faced with the unrest at the end of Emperor Ling's reign (168-189). An Shigao took his monk's staff (khakkhara tt) and headed towards the South of the [Yangzi] River江南. (82) As we shall see below, starting with this passage the account of An's life in both works is practically stepping into pure hagiography which, moreover, is affected by some logically inconsistent epis¬ odes. Consequently, I tend to believe that the first date, i.e., sometime around 170, has more historical credibility. But even if we accept the second date, i.e., sometime after 180, there could hardly be any chance that An Shigao and An Xuan ever met. An Xuan's biography, found in the same works cited above, relates that he arrived in Luoyang at the end of Emperor Ling's reign (83) which, if we adopt the first date, places it some 10 years after An Shigao's departure from Luoyang and death in the South of China. Even if we consider the second date to be historically trustworthy, the only point in common between the two is that An Shigao was leaving Luoyang by the time An Xuan was arriving there, which drastically limits the possibility of any contacts, to say nothing of a col¬ laboration between them. The bottom line is, I believe, that if there had been any contacts between An Shigao and An Xuan, Buddhists sources would have not failed to mention it, even if it were in a hagiographical vein. (7) I also find no factual support whatsoever for Prof. Forte's statement that "An Shigao was simply a Great Vehicle adept who was introducing to the Chinese some of the texts of the Small Vehicle which were considered as the basis of the Great Vehicle". (84) Prof. Forte seems to base his hypothesis on the following three assumptions: (A)"Hinayana works are the basis of Mahayana and early translators, even if they belonged to the Great Vehicle, may have felt it necessary to be¬ gin with the basis rather than to introduce at once the later doctrinal developments." (85) Such an over-simplified statement neglects the in¬ mensly complicated historical process which led to the birth of the Great Vehicle as well as the variety of teachings and practices covered by the term "Mahäyäna". It is, of course, undeniable that there were Buddhist schools which made use of doctrines and Abhidharma developments of the tradition they called the "Lesser Vehicle". It is also true that in order to follow the Mahayana philosophical and religious discourse a certain knowledge of the "HInayana" tenets, which was a major target of criticism and re-interpretation, is useful,especially for the scholarly- minded follower. However, it is equally beyond any doubt that Mahayana Buddhists were not sharing the view of modern historian who can speak of "later doctrinal developments" and were firmly believing that their teachings originated with Sakyamuni or others Buddhas, being atemporal truths or, at least, having a history as old as the "HInayana" views. Even if we suppose that An Shigao adopted this extremly doubtful plan suggested by Prof. Forte, it is a matter of great concern and surprise that during more than twenty years of residing and propagating Buddhism in Luoyang the Parthian translator chose only "Hinayana" texts and found no time to introduce a single Mahayana scripture, leaving thus his Chi¬ nese followers with "false ideas" about the nature of the Noble Path. The fact that An Xuan and Yan Fotiao translated a Mahayana sutra,another issue raised by Prof. Forte in favour of his theory (86), is of abso¬ lutely no relevance for An Shigao himself. (B) Early authors like Yan Fotiao (87), Chen Hui (88), and Kang Senghui (89) speak of An Shigao as a Bodhisattva 菩薩 but this proves in no way that An Shigao himself was Mahayana follower. A clear apprehension of the differences between the two Vehicles would come later in the his¬ tory of Chinese Buddhism and we can only subscribe to Zürcher's aptly ' stated view that such an use of the term Bodhisattva "testifies of a - touching optimism and a profound ignorance as to the real meaning of this appeletion". (90) (C) Kang Senghui's statement that An Shigao "gradually exposed the true six [perfections by which one ] crosses [to the further shore of Libera¬ tion] (sat paramitab)"徐乃陳演正真之六度(91), quoted by Prof. Forte as another proof for his theory, is again in no way relevant for An Shigao's doctrinal adherence. If it proves anything at all, this is Kang's own idiosyncrasies closely associated with Jataka stories as proved in his main translation, the Sadpäramitä saggrahasütra六度集超or Collection of Sutras [Containing Stories] of the Six Perfections. (92) As long as we have no text which transmits An Shigao's own creed, no final conclusion can be drawn and any hypothesis concerning this issue has to take into account external factors such as the doctrinal content of his translations, situation of Buddhism in the regions connected with An Shigao's education as a Buddhist follower, and later Chinese sources. Each of these are far from giving a conclusive proof. The translations themselves are to some degree associated with the translator's own doctrinal stance but other criteria, which,personally, with the Sarvästivädins in Wardak, to the West of Kabul.(96)In spite of the dif- ferences and rivalry between the two schools, we must not exclude the possibil- ity of certain contacts and influence especially in the cases of foreign monks like An Shigao travelling from place to place and less connected with factional- ism. Aware or not, An may have been influenced by other schools and this may appear in his choice of texts which were not perfectly "orthodox" from a Sarvas- Homever, we must not forget that An Shigao as well as other tivādin viewpoint. Indian or Central Asian monks were not always carrying translation projects in the modern sense of the word. As Ui also remarks (97), it is doubtful whether An translated only texts he had memorized or brought with him from the Western Regions. He may have picked up some of them on his way through Eastern Turkestan or found some others in China where they could have been brought by Central Asian merchants or monks who had visited the Middle Kingdom before. (98) Obvi- ously, not all these texts belonged to the Sarvastivada orthodoxy but An Shigao may have found that despite some differences, they could serve well the purpose of introducing Buddhist teachings to China. The hypothesis of An's also trans¬ lating texts which he found on his way or in China could also account for the apparently unsystematic character of An Shigao's selection of Jgana阿合scrip- tures. However, although he knew about the existence of Mahäyäna, An does not ap- pear to have been influenced in any way by the teachings of the Great Vehicle. The only translation which clearly reflects this situation (99) is the " Pafica- sadanusasanyah sutra 五十校計鑑or the Sutra of the Fifty Instructions. (100) This is a quite unique scripture compiled sometime at the beginning of the lst century C.E. (101) by Conservative Buddhists as a criticism against the newly risen Mahäyäna movement and thought. Although it does not deny the right of ex- istence of the Mahāyāna, the sutra criticizes many of the Bodhisattva ideals and attempts to subordinate them to the traditional Nirvana and Arhatship goals. For instance, the Buddha admonishes the Bodhisattvas who define their creed as "We wish to lead all people to attain Buddhahood"我欲使人恐得佛道 by asking them I ignore, may have worked with the scholar-monks involved in this noble cause, a fact proved by so many translators in the Buddhist history on Chinese soil who left behind "Hinayana" and Mahayana texts alike or scriptures belonging to different traditions. However, as far as An Shigao is regarded, things appear to be simpler because his translations almost exclusively belong to the Conservat- ive Buddhist tradition or what Mahayana followers would denigrate as the "Lesser Vehicle" (hinayana). To be more precise, doctrinally, most of his translations seem to belong to the Sarvastivada 酸一切有部tradition (93), although we must also note the existence of certain differences from what we may call the clas¬ sical Sarvāstivāda theory. However, their unsystematical character as well as the unclear style of early renderings in Chinese coupled with their long history often plagued by textual deformations do not permit a final conclusion as to the nature of these differences. It may be, as Ui suggests (94), that the texts translated by An Shigao betray the lack of uniformity of the Sarvästiväda tradi- tion itself, a situation also reflected in the different views expounded by various Vaibhäşika masters recorded in the Abhidharma mahävibhäşä śästra大尾ç沙ik and continued by the disputes between the KasmIra and Gandhara schools. Some or parts of An's translations may have originated with such "divergent" groups whose views were not adopted in the classical theory. Or it may be that some differences came through An Shigao's close association with the Yogacarya or masters of spiritual cultivation who were active within the Sarvästiväda tradi¬ tion but sometimes developed their own interpretation and views on the basis of their experiences in the yoga-praxis. (95) An's own interest seems to have been much orientated towards this practical aspect and he may have found it unneces¬ sary for his Chinese followers to know all the details, especially those related to the intricated Abhidharma system. He may have taken therefore the liberty to omit or re-arrange sone parts or details of the originals, making it appear more or less different from the "unabridged" Sarvästiväda texts. Ne must not exclude a third possibility: North-West India was not exclusively dominated by the Sarvästivädins. We find, for instance, the Mahäsämghikas 大衆部living together "How can lead other people to attain Buddhahood when you have not been able to attain it yourselves"自不船得夢何船使他人得佛(102). If this reflects An Shi- gao's own attitude, and I am tempted to believe that the very choice of such a challenging text proves it does, then we have the picture of a Conservative Bud- dhist who although accepts the possibility of other ways, was strongly committed to traditional views and practices. Last but not least, if An Shigao had been a Great Vehicle follower, Chinese sources written in most cases by authors with strong Mahayanist sympathies would have not failed to mention it. Instead, we read that An Shigao was versed in Abhidharma and "dhyana sutras", which is a rather euphemistic way of admitting that he was a "Hinayana" follower. (103) It is hard to draw a final conclusion after the examination of Prof. Forte's hypothesis. Although my interpretation differs in many ways from his reconstruc- tion of An Shigao's biography, I must stress again that I do not deny the im¬ mense importance of his findings. We have, however, to be careful how we "read" these historical and epigraphical sources. All of them are texts compiled cen­ turies after An Shigao's time, the earliest being the History of the Hei Dynasty completed by Hei Shou魏収, styled Boqi伯起,, in the llth month of the 5th year of the Tianbao天保era (554 C.E.). (104) Furthermore, the Compendius of Surnames Compiled in the the Yuanhe Era was already lost by the middle of the 18th century and the present text comes from the Complete Collection of Books Arranged in Four Sections四庫全書whose compilers had to rely on the Great Encyclopaedia of the Yongle Era永樂大典(105) completed in 1407. Such a textual history naturally diminishes the value of the source as we can never distinguish between original information and later interpolations. From a purely chrono- logical viewpoint, the Buddhist sources I have examined here are by far older going back as early as only few years after An Shigao's death and ending with the beginning of the sixth century. Certainly, one can always doubt the validity of the information provided by religious literature and we have noted indeed the existence of hagiographical and apologetical passages. I believe, however, that there is a core of data which reflects more or less reality and religious fic¬ tion is not an all-pervading principle but has its own motivation and rules of accretion. Buddhist accounts could have transmitted, after all, much of the in¬ formation found in the sources revealed by Prof. Forte without being detrimental to An Shigao's place and prestige in the history of the Noble Path on Chinese soil. Instead we find a huge gap of information and apprehension between Bud- dhist sources and historical documents,their only common point being An Shigao's princely origin. My reconstruction of An's life may be criticized of relying too much on Buddhist information and I must indeed adnit that I have given priority to these sources due to chronological reasons and a belief that whatever mysti- fication we find in religious literature must have a motivation which I could ' not detect in the basic data provided by the Buddhist accounts. This leads me to conclude that later historical and epigraphical documents based their informa- tion on family genealogies which mistakenly borrowed An Shigao's name in an ef- fort, deliberate or not, to trace back their origins as early as possible. My surmise is that two families of Parthian origin, bearing therefore the same ethnikon An安, who managed to distinguish themselves and achieve political prestige, had to reinforce their new social position with a noble genealogy.Both claimed that their ancestor was an "attending prince" at the Han Court named An Shigao who happened to bear the same name and lived in the same epoch with the famous Buddhist monk An Shigao, although the genalogical records make no mention whatsoever of An Shigao's glorious achievements as a remarkable translator and propagator of Buddhism in China. It is impossible to determine from our sources whether the families themselves decided to upgrade their origin and therefore picked up a Parthian of princely origin as their ancestor or whether they based themselves on some very incomplete information concerning a Parthian of princely origin who had visited China at the end of the Han dynasty and considered in good faith that this fellow country man must have been their ancestor. After all, we can safely assume that most of the naturalized Parthian families in China came to the Middle Kingdom at the end of the 2nd century and beginning of the 3rd century, a period of unrest and eventual collapse of the Arsacid Empire. We can also surmise that amongst these families of refugees there were also people of noble origin, which naturally increased the chances of the later con¬ fusion. We can go on with our inference and conjencture that such a situation affected somehow the forming legends concerning An Shigao, doubtlessly an "ex- otic" personage who must have strongly appealed to the popular imagination, and contributed to the confused and sometimes contradictory hagiographical details of his biography. Huijiao discusses and eventually rejects four apocryphal ac¬ counts which variously record An Shigao's achievements between 265 and 365 C.E. (106) Both Sengyou and Huijiao include in An Shiagao's biography a very puzzling episode. They first relate that An had visited Canton in a previous life knowing that he would be killed by a young man as a karmic retribution. He was then born as the Crown Prince of Parthia and went again to Canton where he found the man who had killed him in a previous life. Accompanied by his former killer, An went to Kuaiji to be killed again as a form of karmic retribution much to the aston¬ ishment of his companion who devoted then his life to the Buddhist Law.(107)This amounts to saying that An Shigao visited China and died in similar conditions in two consecutive lives.Sengyou goes as far as stating that An had been a Parthian prince in his former life, too.(108) Robert Shih suggests that behind this epis- ode we may have the possibility of another Parthian monk who had visited China before An Shigao. (109) I contend that it is equally possible that the presence of other Parthian monks and lay followers in the decades which followed An's death could have led to confusion and apocryphal stories. A story of karsic re- tribution which An Shigao not only accepts with dignified calm but actually in- volves himself actively and goes to find his own killer, whom he compassionately forgives, is definetely in the logic of hagiographical fiction, especially if we acept the idea that An died a violent death which later Buddhists had to expalin somehow. However, it is not in the logic of hagiographical imagination to repeat a more or less identical episode within the frame of the same account. He have to admit that some external, confusing factors worked on this story and forced their way into An's biography in the form of two episodes of karsic retribution repeated in more or less similar cicumstances. A quotation from the Records of Hount Lu IIIII found in the Comprehensive Description [of Institutions]通志says that "During the Wu dynasty there lived An Gao"具有安高. (110) If this citation is authentic and correct, "e have an- other proof that in the decades following An's death, which also coincides with a period when other Parthian monks and families of refugees came and settled in China, An became not only the hero of some hagiographical stories but also of contradictory apocryphal traditions which retained only few features of the real An Shigao. This eventually opened the way for the confusion which would lead An Tong's and Li Baoyu's clans to consider that their first ancestor in China was' an "attending prince" named An Shigao. Whatever their true motivation might have been, they had only very scarce information about An Shiagao and must have interpreted An's princely origin and his presence on Chinese soil as a "hostage son" or "attending prince" to the Han Court, a practice with a long tradition in China whith which they must have been quite familiar. Had they known An's bril- liant achievements as a Buddhist propagator and translator, they would have un¬ doubtly mentioned them. Even if they had consciously "doctored" An's identity into that of an "attending prince", a few words about their "ancestor's" contri¬ bution to the fate of Buddhism, which enjoyed the protection of most of the dynasties throughout the Chinese Middle Ages, would have been quite useful in consolidating their prestige. I do not claim that my interpretation of the events is complete and perfect. Admittedly, it fails to cover the complexity of the data we are faced with. To give only one detail, there still remains the problem of An's name. Our Buddhist sources tell us that the Parthian monk was named Qing清and styled Shigao世高. The existence of a zi字or style certainly points to a Chinese custom, which is, however, quite unusual for a monk. Zürcher explains it as "honorific appel- letion" "which cannot be taken to mean a 'style' of the Chinese type". (111) The eminent sinologist fails, however, to define what he means by "honorific appel- lation". After all, a zi, which was given to young men to mark their coming of age when they were 20 years old, was performing exactly the role of an "honor- ific appelletion" as using the name & of a person by people other than one's parents, soverign, and teacher was considered impolite. On the other hand, Prof. Forte thinks that since An Shigao was an "attending son", it is natural that he received a style according to the Chinese custom. (112) Since I rejected the pos¬ sibility of An's being an "attending prince" and critically adopted the picture offered by Buddhist sources, I find such an assumption quite questionable. My guess is that Qing was the translation of An actual name 名and Shigao was his法名 given at the time of his ordination. Bagchi's reconstruction Buddist name of Shigao as "Lokottama" seems to me appropriate enough, although it is not sup- ported by textual evidence. (113) I imagine that what happened is that the first Chinese followers, not familiar with the idea of a Buddhist name taken by a monk at his ordination, interpreted this as a Chinese zi and in the good tradition of Chinese biographies asked the Parthian monk his actual name, too. Both were pre¬ served only in Chinese translation (Qing="the Pure One"; Shigao="the Eminent One in the World") without a phonetic transcription which could give us a clue on the original pronunciation. It is intersting to note that Yan Fotiao. An's direct disciple, uses only Shigao, avoiding his master's actual name most probably out of respect.(114) I must admit, nevertheless, that without solid textual evidence the hypothesis that Shigao=Lokottama was An's Buddhist name erroneously equated by his followers with a Chinese zi remains at mere conjectural level. (115) There are still many unsolved problems concerning An Shigao both in his "classical" biography which I adopted here trying, however, to keep the critical perspective of modern scholarship as well as in Prof. Forte's challenging hypo- thesis. One can only hope that future research will reveal new facts regarding the life and work of the first Buddhist translator and known missionary on Chi- nese soil. (To be continued in the next issue) 1. See, for instance, Huijiao's慧皎 Gaoseng zhuan (hereafter abbreviated Gsz) or Biographies of Eminent Honks 高僧情, Juan巻11, Chapter on Meditation習禪: "The practice of meditation has been transmitted since the propagation of the Buddhist Teaching to the East [i.e., the introduction of Buddhism to China]. In earlier days, [An] Shigao and [Zhu] Fahu [生]法護[i.e.Dharmarakşa] trans- lated meditation sutras. Sengguang 僧光, Tanyou 参戦, and so on relied on the teachings [of these sutras] and cultivated their mind, obtaining superior achievements in the end." ( Taish ō Shinshū Daizōkyō大正新修大蔵廻(hereafter ab- breviated T), Vol.50, p.400b). Both Sengyuan and Tanyou, whose biographies are found in the same Gsz (cf.ibid., p.395c and pp. 395c-396b respectively) died at the end of the Taiyuan 太元era (376-396) during the Rastern Jin東番dynasty. The accounts of their lives are full of thaumaturgical details, but nothing con- crete is said about the meditation methods they actually practiced. 2. The exact number of An Shigao's translations has been much debated by traditional and modern bibliographers. It varies from 176 titles given by Pei Changfang費長房in the Lidai sanbao ji歴代三資記, compiled in 597 (cf. T49.50 a-52c), to only four sutras mentioned by E. Zurcher in The Buddhist Conquest of China, E.J.Brill, Leiden, 1972, p.33; p.331 (note 83), or five to six trans- altions as advocated by Ono Genmyo 小野玄妙in General Introduction to Buddhist Scriptures佛典肥論, Appenix別巻to the Great Dictionary of Buddhist Books #ith Explanations佛書解説大辭典, Daitō Shuppan-sha, Tokyo, 1936, pp. 30-32. I find that something around seventeen translations, as suggested by the studies of Otani Shoshin大谷勝真 ("On the Scriptures Translated by An Shigao" 安世高の譯超に鋭いて, Toyō Gakuhō東洋學報, Vol.13. No.4, 1924, pp. 102-139) and Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎("The Saṃyuktāgama and the Ekottarāgama Translated by An Shigao"安世高譚の雑阿含と増一阿含, Bukkrō Kenkyū佛教研究, Vol.1,No.2,1937, pp. 11-50), seems to be the most appropriate number. Apart from the Anban shouyi jing. An Shigao translated the following "dhyana sutras": 1) Sangharaksa's Sutra of the Spiritual Cultivation Stages (Yogacarabhumi- sutra) 道地超, partial translation in one juan, T15.230c-236b. (On its compar- ison with Dharmaraksa's translation, see Paul Demiéville's excellent study "La Yogäcärabhümi de Sangharaksa", Bulletin de l'école Française de Extréme-Orient, Tome 54, Fasc. 2, Paris, 1954, pp.339-436). 2) The Greater Sütra of the Twelve Gates ( * Hahädvädasanaya-sütra) 大十二門起, in one juan, no longer extant. "The twelve gates" are mentioned in the An- ban shouyi jing, too, and refer to the four meditative stages (catväri dhyänäni四禪), four meditative attainments of non-form (catur-arüpya-samäpatti四➤色定), and the four immeasurables (catväry aprasänäni四無貴心). 3) The Smaller Sutra of the Twelve Gates ( * Ksudradvädasanaya-sutra) 小十二門經, in one juan, no longer extant. 4) The Sutra of Meditation Subjects (* Dhyanabhavana dharmasamjaa-sutra)群行法想, in one juan, T15.181b-c. It is a brief text listing thirty medita- tion subjects, mainly associated with the contemplation of the impure (asubha- bhävanä). Ui Hakuju字井伯舞, "A Study on An Shigao, the First Translator and Propagator in the History of Chinese Buddhism"シナ佛教最初の詳細弘傳者安世高の研究. Studies in the History of the Translation of Buddhist Sutras into Chinese譯經史研究, Iwanami shoten, Tokyo, 1971, p.347, suggests that it may be related to a similar text in the Chinese translation of the Ekottaragama (T2.780a-b), which contains indeed two sutras mentioning meditation subjects also found in An's text. I surmise, however, that it is not a translation proper, but a medi- tation aide-mémoire compiled by An on the base of several sources, including the ones cited above.法想in the title should be taken as refering to what Pali texts call kammatthana, i.e., meditation subjects, forty or thirty-eight in num- ber. Hy reconstruction of dharmasamjfia is supported by the fact that the Pali equivalent of T2.780a is entitled Sanna (Anguttara Nikaya,X,56-7), where sanna (Skt. samjñā) is used with a meaning simillar to recollection or mindfulness. 5) The Sütra of the Aggregates, Realms and Sense-fields ( * Skandhadhätvä- yatana-sutra)陰持入器, in two juan, T15.173b-180c. It is a rather unsystematic collection of explantions connected with the categories listed in the title as well as with spiritual cultivation aspects, such as the thirty-seven factors supporting the Awakaning (saptatriasad bodhipaksa三十七道品), tranquility (samatha ik), insight (vipasyanä ff), the four approahes (catvärah pratipannäh四向) and four fruits (catvari phalani四果). It must be noted, however, that the reconstructions above are only tentative and suffer from the deficiency of using Sanskrit instead of GandharT which seems to have been the original language of An Shigao's translations (v. infra) 3. According to the Ven. BhiksunT Huilian観予連, in modern Taiwan 安般守意超is read "Anbo shouyi jing". I found, however, that the "ban"reading of  N is closer to the original pronunciation of安紋*an-puan which is an obvious phon- etic transcription of the Indian änäpäna or "breathing in and out". For the delicate matter of reconstructing the Chinese pronunciation at the end of the Later Han Dynasty, I have mainly relied on the Great Sino-Japanese Dictionary Published by Gakken學研・漢和大字典, ed. Todo Akiyasu藤堂明保, Gakushū Kenkyū- sha, 1978. However, since Todo gives ancient (Zhou-Qin) and middle (Sui-Tang) pronunciations only, leaving out the epoch we are dealing with, I have also  i consulted Ting Pang-hsin 丁邦新, Chinese Phonology of the Hei-Chin Period: Reconstruction of the Finals as Reflected in Poetry魏晋晋韻研究, Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Special Publications, No. 65, Taipei, Republic of China, 1975, whose conclusions, compared to the original Indian words which phonetic transcriptions are supposed to approximate, prove quite useful. However, I am responsible for whatever mistakes which may have resulted from my hazardous attempt of reconstructing the pronunciation used in An Shi¬ gao's translations, which is seriously impaired by the fact that An Shigao's own pronunciation of Gandhari words may have been more or less deformed by the ac¬ cent of his native tongue and that his main collaborator and disciple Yan Potiao was original from Linhuai S ~ (cf. 750.324c), situated in present Anhui Pro- vince安徽省, speaking, therefore, a south-eastern dialect (for Han dialects, cf. Ting, op. cit., p. 262) 4. T15.163a-173a. 5. T55.5c and 6a. 6. Deserving special mention are Ui Hakuju, op.cit. pp.1-467 and Aranaki Noritoshi's荒牧鼻彼"From Indian Buddhism to Chinese Buddhism: The Anban shouyi jing and Its Prefaces by Kang Senghui, Daoan and Xie Fu" インド佛教から中国佛教へ：安紋守意經と藤僧會・道安・謝敷序など, Bukkyō shigaku 佛教史學, Vol.15, No.2, 1971, pp.121-165. 7. デレアヌフロリン、安世高譚『安般守意艦』現行本の成立について、Toyō no shisõ to shükyõ東洋の思想と宗教, No. 9, 1992, pp.48-63. 8. Bukkyō shigaku kenkyū 佛教史學研究, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1992, pp.1-35. 9.安息is usually considered to be a phonetic transcription of Arsak or Arsacid Dynasty that established and ruled the Parthian Empire. However, even if we assume that the original pronunciation was more or less altered in the pro¬ cess of adapting it to the Chinese, it would be unnnatural to use安息*an-siak to approximate "Arsak". I would rather argue that both phonetically and histor- ically it appears more appropriate to consider *an-siak a phonetic transcription of Anthioch, i.e., modern Merv, which was, most probably, the city reached by Zhang Qian's  狭篤messangers around 119 B.C.E. (cf. Sima Qian司馬渡, Records of the Historian史記, Juan 123, Zhonghua shuju, Vol. 10, pp. 3157-3169) and re- garded by them as synonymous with the name of the whole Parthian Empire. Later on the place was called Môuru, i.e., modern Merv, which was transcribed as木篤姊(see, for instance, the History of the Later Han Dynasty後漢書, Juan 88, Zhonghua shuju, Vol. 10, p.2918, which describes it as the Western frontier of the Empire, placing it at 20,000 //, i.e., ca. 8,300 km, away from Luoyang se왜, and calls the whole region "Little Parthia"小安息), but 安息 was already a term too well established to be changed and its etymology must have become, anyway, unclear by that time. Mochizuki Shinko 望月倍予("On An Shigao's Achievements"安世高の事情に就て, first published in 1904 and later included in A Study on Pure Land Buddhiss浄土教之研究, Kanao bunendö, Tokyo, 1922, p. 417) also considers 安息to be a phonetic transcription of "Anthioch". Mochizuki does not elaborate upon the reasons of his his assumption, simply stating that the Chinese took Antioch for the name of the whole country. Incidently, Mochi- zuki ventures to suggest that King  Manqu ( * Muan-k's ust) 満用王, who appears in the History of the Later Han Dynasty (op.cit., p.2918) as sending a lion and a "big  bird" (ostrich?) to the Chinese Court in the 13th year of the Yongyuan era (101 C.E.) may be An Shigao's father (ibid., p. 418). It goes without saying that historical information is too scarce to permit such an identification. 10. The easternomst territories under Parthian control included the western regions of modern Afghanistan and Pakistan. For Buddhist monastic sites in these areas, see Xinru Liu, Ancient India and Ancient China: Trade and Religious Ex- changes, AD 1-600, Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1988, pp.192-4. Buddhist texts and a 8.5 cm statue of a seated Buddha dating from the 1st-2nd centuries C.E. and originating from Gandhära were also discovered in Merv in what appears to be a stupa. Merv is, however, the westernmost Buddhist site in Asia. 11. Taoism and Chinese Religion, Translated by Frank A. Kierman, Jr., The University of Massachusetts Press, 1981, p.404 (English translation of the Le Taoïsme et les religions chinoises, Gallimard, 1971). 12. cf. Nircea Eliade, Istoria credintelor şi ideilor religioase, Traducere de Cezar Baltag, Editura ştiinţifică şi enciclopedică, Bucureşti, 1986, Vol. 2, pp.298-320 (Romanian translation of the Histoire des croyances et des idees religieuses, Payot, Paris, 1978). Étienne Lamotte, History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Saka Era, Translated by Sara Webb-Boin, Universite Catholique de Louvain, Institute Orientaliste Louvain-la-Neuve, 1988, pp.492-494 (English translation of the Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien, des origines a l'ere Saka, Bibliotheque du Nuseon, Louvain, 1958). 13. Lamotte, op. cit., p. 494. 14. G.A. Koshelenko, "The Beginning of Buddhism in Nargiana", in Ariana An- tiqua,X IV, fasc. 1-2, Budapest, 1966, p. 180 (Quoted by B.N. Puri, Buddhism in Centrel Asia, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, 1987, p. 97). 15. cf. P.C. Bagchi, India and China, Calcutta, 1944, p. 30 (Quoted by B.N. Puri, op. cit., p. 97). Both Bagchi and Puri suggest that Buddhism was trans- mitted to Parthia by the Tokharians and that Parthian monks were trained in Tokharestan before proceeding to China. The role of the Tokharians seems to me, however, to be over-emphasized and this leads to overlooking the importance held by the well-established Buddhist centres in North-West India. 16. T55.43b. The sentence翔而後進is not easy to interpert as 翔has both the meaning of "wandering from place to place" and "abiding", "remaining" (cf. Morohashi Tetsuji諸橋激次, Great Sino-Japanese Dictionary大漢和辭典, Daishü- kan shoten, Compact edition, 1976 (1958) Vol. 9, p. 111). However, I found that the former meaning is closer to the basic semantic sphere of 翔, i.e.,"flying", and more appropriate in the context of describing the fate of a refugee. Further- more, if it meant "abiding". one would expect the verb 翔to be followed by a noun phrase specifying the place. 17. cf. History of the World 世界の歴史, Vol.5: The Western Regions and Islam西城とイスラム, ed. by Iwamura Shinobu 岩村忍, Chüõ kõron-sha, 1976 (1968), pp. 141-7. 18. The years of Kanişka's rule have been much debated. I have adopted here the dates advocated by Ogasawara Senshü小笠原宜秀and Oda Yoshihisa小田義久in Compendium of Buddhist History in the Vestern Regions要説・西域佛教史, Hyakka- en, 1986 (1980), p.39, p.110. 19. T55.43c,46a,46b; T55.95a; and T50.323b respectively. 20. T55.95a; T50.323b. Judging from his translations and phonetic trans- criptions, Kasmira and/or Gandhara seem the most probable places where An Shigao received or completed his Buddhist education. Kang Senghui, T55.43b, Sengyou, T55.95a, Huijiao, T50.323a, equally mention the fact that he was well versed in medical sciences. If this not a later Chinese accretion, this detail may also hint at his links to a North-West Indian tradition. We know that Buddhism has shown a favourable attitude towards medical care since its earliest days and many of its missionaries were closely associated to medicine. Taxila, in North- West India, was one of the most renowned centres of medical education in a close symbiotic relationship to the Buddhist church (cf. Kenneth G. Zysk, Asceticism and Healing in Ancient India: Medicine in the Buddhist Monastery, Oxford Univer- sity Press, New York, Oxford, 1991, pp. 46-7). 21. op. cit., p. 3162. 22. The exact location of様支and西海is extremly difficult to determine. The Records of the Historian, op. cit., p. 3163-4. History of the [Forser] Han Dynasty漢書, Juan 96-A, Zhonhua shuju, Vol. 12, p.3888, History of the Later Han Dynasty, op. cit., p. 2918, mention株支as being situated at the West of Parthia. Usually, it is considered that株支stands for the land along the Tigris River (see, for instance, Mochizuki's Great Encyclopaedia of Buddhism ,佛教大群典, ed by Nochizuki Shinkō, Sekai seiten kankō kyōkai, revised edition, 1974, Vol. 1, p. 86), which is indeed phonetically close to the Chinese様文" dög-kieg, and西海represents the Mediterranean Sea. However, things are not so simple and the following translation from the History of the Later Han, op. cit., p. 2918, clearly shows that a precise location is a very delicate task: The capital焼of the country of Tiaozhi 株支園is situated on mountains and has a circumference of more than 40 /i [i.e., ca. 166 km]. It faces the Western Sea西海, whose waters surround it from the South, North and East, making it inaccessible from three directions. It is connected to the land only through its north-western corner. [The climate of] the land is hot and humid.....Turning back to the North and then to the East, one reaches Parthia after more than 60 days of travelling by horse. In later times, [Parthia] made Tiaozhi a vassal country and appointed generals to supervise all its cities. One thing appears quite sure and this is the fact that the Nestern Sea does not denote here the Mediterranean. First, it is impossible to find a peninsula on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean corresponding to the description above. Second, the Parthian merchants who codvince Gan Ying to renounce his plans to reach the Roman Empire tell him: "The sea is vast and those having good winds cross it in three months while those having slow winds need two years. Therefore, all those setting out on a journey on this sea take provisions for three years" (ibid.). It is obvious that if西海had been the Mediterranean Sea, Gan Ying would have already been on territories belonging to the Roman Empire having no need for Parthian merchants as intermediaries and being equally able to take a land route to Rome. Geographically and historically, it seems more appropriate to identify the Western Sea with the Persian Gulf and locate Tiaozhi somewhere on its western shore. The most difficult problem is to determine what the Chinese historiographer meant here by Parthia. If he refered to安息as the whole Parthian Empire, which included both the Tigris and Euphrates in its ter- ritory, then Tiaozhi was situated anywhere from around modern Ad Dammam in Saudi Arabia, in which case Cape Tannurah would correspond geographically to the loca¬ tion of the Tiaozhi capital detailed above, to Oman, where Al Hajar Mountains would fit the description of the capital region as a mountainous one. He know that centres like Gerrha, on the western shore of the Persian Gulf, and Omana, on the shore of the Gulf of Oman, flourished since ancient times. If, however,安息is used  here in its narrow sense of the original homeland of the Parthian tribes in Northern Iran and Southern Turkmenia, then Tiaozhi refers to a region close to the Tigris, corresponding more or less to modern Kuwait. 23. cf. History of the Later Han Dynasty, op. cit., p. 2910, 2918, 2931. 24. cf. Tsukamoto Zenryū 塚本善隆, General History of Chinese Buddhiss中国佛教通史, Shunjü-sha, 1979, Vol.l, p. 68, 81, quoting from the History of the Later Han Dynasty. 25. cf. T55.95a; T50.323b. 26. cf. Zürcher, op. cit., pp. 23-32; Liu, op. cit., pp.139-43; Tang Yong-湯用丹, History of Buddhism during the Han, Hei, Hestern Jin, Eastern tong Jin, Horthern and Southern Dynasties 機機所音南北朝佛教史, Zhonghua shuju, Bei- jing, 1983, Vol.1, pp. 71-3. 27. T55.69c-70a. Tang, op. cit., p. 46, followed by many other modern scholars,considers that十歳in the title is synonymous with "the ten practices of wisdom"+路, i.e., the six steps of the mindfulness of breathing and the Four Noble Truths dealt with in the Anban shouyi jing, and concludes, therefore, that沙潤十慧章句was a commentary to this sUtra. ZUrcher, op. cit., p. 331, note 88, however, aptly remarks that if® sramagera in the title rather suggests that the text was an explanation of the ten precepts for the novice. Since Yan's work is no longer extant, we cannot be certain about its exact nature. However, I agree with Zürcher that a collection of passages on Buddhist precepts for the novice is more likely. There is at least another statement in the brief extant Preface which seems to hint at this possibility. Yan tells that An Shigao translated   , Buddhist scriptures which amount to a few million words, but "I have not heard him expounding in detail the ten practices [leading to] wisdom 十億" (T55.69c). We know that An Shigao concentrated much of his activity on translating and, most probably, teaching meditation theory and practice, which would make it quite unnatural for Yan Fotiao to say that his master did not elaborate on the "ten practices of wisdom" in the sense of the six steps of the mindfulness of breathing and Four Noble Truths. On the other hand, An Shigao apparently did not translate any vinaya text. Sengyou mentions a certain義決律or義決律法行經in one juan no longer extant by his time. The 律 in the title may suggest a text connected.to Buddhist vinaya, but Sengyou cites Daoan who states that the sutra originally belonged to Dirghagama長阿含(T55,6a). The early church in Luo¬ yang, especially after An Shigao's death, must have been in a desperate need for information concerning the rules regulating the life of a novice and this lead Yan Fotiao to compile (translate?) passages concerning the ten precepts which his master had transmitted him. As far as se and its synonym  h are concerned, they were not used in the epoch only with the technical meaning of prajñã. We B in Zhi Qian's X謙(2nd-3rd centuries C.E.) translation of the Arthaka- find vargiya-sutra義足超(corresponding to the Atthaka-vagga in the Suttanipata) used to translate kusala, i.e., "good", "skillful" (cf. Nakamura Hajime中村元, Great Dictionary of Buddhist Technical Teras 佛教語大辭典, Tōkyō shoseki, Compact edition, 1987 (1981), p. 315. Dr. Nakamura only indicates here gatha 783 in the Suttanipäts without giving the equivalent in the Chinese text. I imagine that he refers to T4.177c10 which corresponds indeed to gatha 783. For the Pali text, I consulted The Sutta-Nipata, ed. P.V. Bapat, Bibliotheca Indo-Buddhica No. 75,Sri Satguru Publications,1990(1924),p.119). If現in Yan's text was used with the same meaning, then we can reconstruct the沙郷+橋as śrāṣaṇera daśa kuśala- karmapathäh沙獨十巻業道 or "the ten good [=vise] courses of action for the novice", which is the usual term for the ten precepts. However, this is only a hypothetical remark which, I must admit, is threatened by another statement in the Preface. Here, Yan says, "Wisdom is the foundation of the Nay" 慧者道之本也(T55.69a). It is hard to say whether Yan used "wisdom" in its technical sense of prajñã or with the meaning of Buddhist precepts, which are, after all, a founda¬ tion of the Way (cf.the "three disciplines" (tisrah siksahm學), i.e., morality (sils x), meditation (sasadhix), and wisdom (prajna x)). A last word on the date of Yan's work: it appears that it was written after An Shigao's death, which must have happened sometime after 170 C.E., when he is said to have left Luoyang. He know, however, that later on Yan collaborates with An Xuan 安玄, another Parthian, in the translation of the Ugradattapariprcchä法機種. An Xuan arrived at Luoyang at the end of Emperor Ling's騒帝reign (168-189 C.E.) (cf. T55.96a; T50.325b-c). On the other hand, Yan laments the death of his master and the lack of a spiriual guide, which suggests that the Preface was written before his meeting with An Xuan. As we shall see below, the avoidance of Imperial taboo names is not an absolutely safe criterion but it remains an important element in helping the historian in his work. The Imperial taboo name during Emperor Huan's植帝reign (146-167 C.E.) was志which was supposed to be replaced by意(cf. Chen Xinhui陳新倉, Illustrations of Taboo Names Used Throughout History 史諱學M. Wenshizhe chubanshe, 1987, p.132). Yan, however, uses志in his Preface (T55.70a6), which may hint at the fact that the text was written after Emperor Huan's reign. All these details suggest that Yan Fotiao compiled his work around 180 C.E. ' 28. Tang, op. cit., vol.1, p. 46. 29. The archaic pronunciation of  調is  "dög but sometime after the begin¬ ning of the Common Era -g is vocalized (-g->-u/o_ )(cf. Ting, op. cit., pp. 255- 7). A similar change must have taken place with浮brog → brou. 30. cf. Ui, op. cit., pp. 5-6. 31. cf. Päli Vinayapitakas, ed. by Herman Oldenberg, London, 1879-1883, Mahavagga, IV, 4.1, vol. I, p.319. 32. In his Preface, Yan states that "Ten is the perfection (literally, end) of numbers"十者数之棒(T55.69c). This seems to be a Chinese conception which also appears in such works as the Commentary 麻to the Ḥ hexagram in the Book of Changes, the Commentary 硫to Fourth Year of the Duke Ii 痛公・四年in the Zuozhuan左傳, the explantion of + in the Shuowen jiezi脱文解字. Yan must have been familiar with such interpretations which were part of the education of the learned gentry. 33. T55.69c:成以口解,或以文庫, 34. T49.50a-52c. 35. On Buddhist centres in the Later Han, see mainly Zürcher, op. cit., pp. 26-8, 41; Liu, op. cit., pp. 141-3. 36. T55.95c; T50.323c. 37. T55.70a: "Struck by misfortune, I met with the distress of [losing my] master" w @凶各遺和上要. The basic meanings of愛are "anxity" and "distress", which could allow other readings as well. It is, however, hard to imagine in this context other interpretation than the distress caused by the death of his acarya. For a mere separation, Yan would have had no need for such strong ex¬ pressions. Furthermore, one of the secondary meanings of 変is "mourning". An- other meaning is "illness" but the shole context suggests a parting for ever which is best interpreted as death. Ui, op. cit., p. 6, similarly reads要as meaning death. 38. op. cit., p. 24. 39. "Hostages in Chinese History", Harvard Journal of Asian Studies, No. 15, 1952, p. 507. 40. Op. cit., p. 3889. The post of General-Protector of the Western Regions都護was instituted by the Former Han dynasty. 41.起資is usally interpreted to mean Kashmir. However, its exact location depends on the epoch: from the Han dynasty to the Western Jin dynasty it denotes Gandhära; from the Eastern Jin to the end of the Northern and Southern Dynasties it refers to Kasmira; during the Sui and Tang dynasties it stands for Kapisa and Ghazni region (cf. Odawara & Oda, op. cit., p. 49). 42. Usually written烏七山贈, Arachosia was situated in a region roughly corresponding to the South-West of Afghanistan, North-West of Pakistan, and East of Iran. 43. According to Ven. Bhikşunî Huilian, this refers to the Chinese custom of giving presents in return. 44. op. cit., p. 3928. 45. Karashahr or Yanqi County in modern Xingjiang. 46. See note 22 above. 47. Most likely referring to the Western Sea (see note 22 above). R評refers to the fact that messengers coming from 48. Op. cit., p. 2910. remote regions had to make use of two or more interpreters translating from one language into another until they reached the target language. 49. See note 9 above. 50. T55.50a. 51. It should be noted, however, that the Buddhists themselves perceived this appellation as a respectful form of address. Sengyou clearly says that "An had originally been a member of the royal family and his fame spread abroad. He was therefore called by guests and travellers from the Western Regions 'Marquis An', an appellation which has been in use to our days"(T55.95c). Huijiao, T50. 324a, repeats the same thing in roughly similar words. 52. op. cit., p. 23. 53. cf. Kumagai Shigezo瓶谷故三, "Conferment of Official Ranks and Titles on Non-Chinese Peoples under the Control of the Later Han Dynasty"後漢の異民族統治における官爵授典について, Tōhōgaku東方學(Eastern Studies), No. 80, July 1990, pp. 48-63. 54. cf. Kumagai, op. cit., especially pp. 50-2. 55. Zhonghua shuju, Vol. 3, p. 712. 56. Zhonghua shuju, Vol. 3, p. 751.林寛57. Chubun shuppan-sha, 1976, p. 91. This text compiled by Lin Bao in the 7th year of the Yuanhe元和era (812) has a rather complicated textual history which I shall briefly discuss below. At this point, it is important to note that our text, quoting or mentioning the Records of Mount Lu職山記 (v. ) infra), uses the name An Gao 安高. Cen Zhongmian and Prof. Forte (op.cit., pp. 3-4) consider that the compiler abbreviated An Shigao's name to An Gao in order to avoid the character世which was tabooed during the Tang dynasty. While this remains an interpretation which I do not thoroughly deny, I would like世 was indeed to suggest another possibility which seems to me equally viable. a taboo name 隣 since it appeared in世民, the personal name of Taizong 太宗, the second Tang Emperor (626-649). However, the precise rules and ways of avoid- ance of taboo characters represent a very intricate socio-political phenomenon with great historical variations. According to Chen Xinhui (op. cit., pp. 145- 6), the Tang dynasty was quite generous in its laws concerning the taboo names, although the custom continued to be widely spread. In an edict promulgated in the ninth year of the Nude  武( era (626), when Taizong ascended the Throne, we read : "Avoidance is not necessary if the characters 'shi' th and 'min'民do not immediately succeed each other". An Imperial Edict of the fifth year of the Xianqing 頭腹era (660) makes it clear that using substitute characters in order to avoid taboo names is not necessary when copying the writings of the past. Futhermore, even when taboo names were avoided, the most popular method in the epoch was neither deletion nor substitution of the characters but omitting one or more strokes in the charcter, a practice which actually starts with the Tang dynasty. This rather free attitude towards taboo characters'is clearly re¬ flected in the Buddhist texts of the age, which use both An Shigao and An Gao. For instance, the Buddhist Scriptures Catalogue衆都目録compiled by Jingtai静奏in 665, which is by far closer in time to Taizong's reign, does not seem to be preoccupied with the taboo character 世 and uses An Shigao (T55.186b-187a). Daoxuan道室uses in his Scriptures of Our Teaching in the Great Tang大唐内典, compiled in 664, An Shigao (T55.220c10;222b16,25,28;), Gao (T55.222b22), and An Gao (T55.265b6) apparently without having any specific criteria in mind. Zhi¬ sheng智界, on the other hand, seens to be concerned to some degree with taboo character世, whithout being, however, too rigorous. In his Catalogue of the Buddhist Teaching Compiled in the Kaiyuan Bra開元標教録, completed in 730, ho uses in many instances An Gao and Gao (T55.481a-c(passim);512a26;519a17;524a25; 545c10), which does not mean, however, that he avoids An Shigao completely. Zhi- sheng's attitude is best illustrated in An Shigao's biographical account (T55. 481a-c) which, with the exception of a few final bibliographical remarks, prac¬ tically copies Sengyou's equivalent text in the Csjj but changes in most places Shigao to Gao. Yet this is not an absolute rule. Nost probably in order to avoid any possible confusion, Zhisheng mentions in the beginning that An's style was Shigao (T55.481a2) and  uses the same Shigao even in less important pas- sages (see, for instance, T55.481a29). I think it is obvious now that the avoid- ance of taboo characters during the Tang dynasty was not a very strict practice and we should not be so categorical in viewing An Gao in the Cospendius of Sur- names in the Yuanhe Bra as an abbevation due to the practice of avoiding taboo characters, especially if we suppose that this is a citation dating back to the beginning of the 5th century (cf. note 110 below). We must also note that the abbreviation An Gao occurs as early as the Csjj (cf. T55.1a18), compiled at the beginning of the sixth century, when there was no need whatsoever of avoiding the character世 (for the list of taboo characters during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, cf. Chen Xinhui, op. cit., pp. 138-45). We can only suppose that Sengyou's abbreviation was determined by mere stylistic factors which could have also worked in the case of the Compendium of Surnames Compiled in the Yuan¬ he Era. Let us remark in the end that An Shigao is not the only name abbreviated in Buddhist sources. For example, Daoxuan abbreviates Kang Senghui's name to Kang Hui (T55.265b6), although seng ffi was not a taboo character. 58. cf. Forte, op. cit., pp. 6-7. 59. cf. Forte, op. cit., pp. 8-9. 60. An Tong served under three Emperors of the Former Qin前森dynasty (334- 394) and distinguished himself in both military and civil domains. He was conferred the titles of Marquis of Xinbei新北袋and then Duke of Gaoyang高陽公. He held the posts of Minister of the Left左楠and Right Deputy-Commander of the Guards of the Imperial Palace Gate 右光藤大夫. He was posthumously given , the title of King of Gaoyang 高陽王(cf. History of the Wei Dynasty, op. cit., pp.712-3). Incidently, he seems to have been a devout Buddhist as in his later years, "he spent large fortunes to build temples and stupas on large scale"顔痛財貨、大興寺塔(ibid., p.713). 61. cf. Forte, op. cit., p. 16-8. 62. An Shigao also appears as ancestor of a certain An Lingjie 安令節(645- 704) whose stele inscription has been first revealed and discussed by Prof. Forte (op. cit., pp. 11-6). It is indeed risky to make any assumptions on the origin of this obscure An Lingjie, but I inagine that we have to deal with a branch of either of the two An clans, i.e., An Tong's and Li Baoyu's lineages, or with a third family equally claiming that their ancestor was An Shigao. 63. op. cit., p. 91. 64. cf. Forte, op. cit., p. 13. 65. cf. Prof. Forte's excellent identification of the Crows' Fortress (op. cit., pp. 13-4). See also the Great Dictionary of Chinese Toponyms Old and New中国古今地名大辭典, Shangwu yinshu-guan, Taiwan, 1982 (1931), pp. 731-2, which places Wucheng 烏城in the South of Gulang古漁County, Gansu Province. Prof. Forte suggests here that An Shigao may have been assigned to a defence post on the western border of the Chinese Empire (op. cit., p. 28, note 44). In another place, he says, however, that An Shigao probably tried to escape the disorders in Luoyang and decided to go back to his native country. On his way back, some¬ thing made him give up his plan and he settled in Guzang, in the West of China (op.cit., p.20). Not only that the two hypotheses are contradictory, but even in the case when we accept the theory that An Shigao was an "attending son" at the Han Court, we must question the possibility of a hostage of "barbarian origin" to be assigned a post on the frontier and even more his liberty to leave China of his own free will. 66. An Shigao seems to have been closely associated with Mount Lu. Both Sengyou (T55.95bll-c7) and Huijiao (T50.232b26-c22) record a hagiographical episode of An Shigao's helping a huge serpent find its peace. Huiyuan's Records of Hount Lu, a lost work which survives only in quotations (v. infra), mentions a shrine on the side of lake Gongting宮亭(T51.1025b; also quoted with slight differences in the Annotations to the Haterways Book 水歴注, cf. Forte, op. cit.,p. 4) as well as a Serpent-Village蛇村and Serpent-Hill蛇岡(TS1.1027a), all of them places connected to this episode. Such legendary details can, how- ever, point at the possibility of An's visit to Mount Lu during his peregrina- tions in southern China. Ui, op. cit., p. 15, also accepts the possibility of An Shigao's visit to Mount Lu. On this legendary episode, see also Zürcher, op. cit., p. 208 and Hisayuki Miyakawa 宮川尚志, "Local Cults around Nount Lu at the Time of Sun En's Rebellion", in Facets of Taoist Religion. Essays in Chinese Religion, edited by Holmes Welch and Anna Seidel, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1979, pp.94-6, which gives a full translation of the relevant passage in the Gsz. Incidently, Miyakawa translates sang 解as "huge python" which is, however, questionable since we do not have to deal with a real snake but a legendary creature measuring more than several li (cf. 755.95c8; T50. 323c21). 67. op. cit., p. 24. 68. In the Csjj, An Xuan 安玄(T55.96a) and Zhi Qian (T55.97b-c) have their own biographies despite the fact that they were both lay followers. How¬ ever, the Gsz which, as its title indicates, is dedicated to eminent sonks, includes its account of An Xuan's安玄 life in Lokaksema's文表簿論 biography (cf.T50.324b25-c7) and writes about Zhi QianX鎌and his achievements in Kang Senghui's陳僧會biography (cf.T50.325a-b4). 69. cf. T50.322c-323a and 323a respectively. 70. op. cit., p. 24. 71. op. cit., pp. 36-8. 72. op. cit., pp. 21-2. 73. T55.69c-70a. 74. T33.9b. 75. T55.42c-43c. 76. Chen Hui,Preface to the Sutra of the Aggregates, Realas and Sense-fields絡舟入延序(T33,9b). Prof. Forte discusses it in op. cit., p. 21. 77. This is the reading adopted by Ui, op. cit., p. 8: 道を楽しみ. 78. In Book VI, Jin Xin M心 Part 1, Meng Zi, speaking about the virtuous men of antiquity, says: "They delighted in their own principles, and were obli¬ vious of the power of the princes"樂其道而忘人之勢(James Legge's translation, o in the Chinese Classics, Vol. I Containing The Works of Meacius,Second Edition, Revised, Oxford, 1895 (SMC Publishing Inc., Taipei, 1991, Reprint), p. 452). 79. op. cit., pp. 23-4. The post of cavalary commander騎都尉was instituted by the Emperor Wu of the Former Han dynasty漢武帝(141-87 C.E.C.) in the second year of the Yuanding 元鼎era (115 B.C.E.)(cf. "Examination of Official Posts"酸官考in General Examination of Documents 文獻通考; cf. Morohashi, op. cit., vol. 12, p. 532). In the Later Han dynasty, the post became subordinated to the Commander of the Guards of the Imperial Palace Gate光緑敷and the number of horsemen and chariots he led varied with the epoch (ibid.). It does not appear amongst the titles bestowed by the Chinese Court upon foreign leaders (cf.Kuma¬ gai, op. cit.), which also explains why Chinese histories do not record this particular conferement. Although politically and militarily unimportant, the post was closely related to the defence of the Imperial Palace and the decision of the Han Court to assign it to a non-Chinese, especially one who was neither an aristocrat nor a powerful leader in the Nestern Regions,seems rather strange. The only explanation I can find is that An Xuan, who was a merchant, distin- guished himself in the trade with the West (cf. Csjj,T55.96a:遊買洛陽有功號略都時: Gsz, T50.324b) and probably performed some services to the Court or members of the high bureaucracy, who awarded him with an honorific title that had no¬ thing to do with the actual post as such. 80. see note 27 above. 81. T55.95b1-3; T50.323b16-7. 82. T55.95b10-1; T50.323b25-6. 83. T55.96a11; T50.324b27. 84. op. cit., p. 23. 85. ibid., p. 22. 86. ibid., pp. 22. 87. T55.69c25. 88. T33.9b15-6. Chen Hui calls An Shigao 普見菩薩or All-Seeing Boddhisat- tva, which Dr. Nakamura (op. cit., p.1179) considers to be equivalent to 普現音硬or Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva. Ui, op. cit., p. 8, suggests two readings: (1)替見の菩薩or a Bodhisattva who sees all,替見being here just an epithet which does not point at any specific Bodhisattva, and (2)普見菩薩＝普現菩薩similarly equating this term with Avalokitesvara Bodhisattva. Without more details coming from the author, it is hard to make a decision and we have to conclude that both readings are possible. 89. T55.43b17. 90. op. cit., p. 32. Prof. Forte also quotes this passage but rejects it (op. cit., p. 22-3) 91. T55.43b22-3. 92. T3.1a-52b. Translated sometime between 251-280. 93. Lü Zheng 呂敬, "An Shigao"安世高, in A Brief Exposition on the Origin and Development of Buddhist Philosophy in China中国債學派派略課, Zhonghua shu- ju, 1979, p. 286, thinks that an's "meditation method is more or less in keep- ing with the spirit of the Theravada 上座tradition (especially the Mahisasaka化触school) in basing the factors of Enlightenment道支on the fields of mind- fulness念住". Lü does not indicate the source of his surmise. I assume it comes from a statement in Vasumitra's世友Survey of the Sects 興宗論論(Samayabhedo- paracana cakra), translated by Xuanzang支葉, which says the "All the factors of Enlightenment are included in (sangrhita) [or subordinated to (paryapanna)] [the practice of] the fields of mindfulness"道支省是念住所属(T49.17a7). Without further evidence, Lhis remains a mere hypothesis. The four fields of mindfulness (catvari sarty-upasthanani) have been a major aspect of the Buddhist yoga in many schools. Their importance in the texts translated by An Shigao does not ne- cessarily mean Lhat this is a Hahisaka characteristic. On the other hand, Ha¬ hisasaka communilies were active in North-West India (Gandhara, Uddiyana) (cf. André Bareau, Les Sectes bouddhiques du Petil Véhicule, Saïgon, 1955, p. 40). Ne also know that the Mahisakas were particularly involved in mediation practices (ibid., p. 182) and before becoming a Vijianavadin, asanga adhered to the aahT- sasaka position (cf. Alex Wayman, Analysis of the Sravakabhumi Hanuscript, Univ. of California  Press, 1961. pp. 25-29).The relation between the early yogacarias and Mahisasakas remains to be elucidated, but we cannot exclude the possibility thal some of the elements in An Shigao's translations which are different from the Sarvastivada "orthodoxy" may originate "ith the BahIsasakas. Homever, a safe conclusion will be possible only after a careful study of the non-Sarvästivädin elements in An Shigao's translations in relation to other Buddhist schools. 94. op. cil., pp. 452-3. 95. cf. Nishi Giyü's 西装雄excellent study "The Yogäcärya and Their Role in Schismatic Buddhism"部派佛教に於ける瑜伽師とその役割, Bukkyō kenkyū佛教研究, Vol. 3. No. 1, 1939, pp. 1-48. 96. Lamolle, op. cit., p. 547; Puri, op. cit., p. 103. 97. op. cil., 23. 98. The presence of Buddhist monks on Chinese soil before an Shigao is sug¬ gested by the term 楽門or śramaṇa which appears mentioned in the "Biography of King Ying of Chu"楚王英傳in the History of the Later Han, Juan 32 (op. cit., p.1428) and Zhang Heng's 張衡(78-139 C.E.) "Rhymes of the Hestern Capital"西京駅(Entire Corpus of Horks in Prose of the Three Periods of Antiquity, Qid, Han, Three Kingdoss, and Six Dynasties全上古三代泰漢三國六朝文, edited by Yan Kejun酸可均, Zhonghua shuju, 1983 (1958), Vol. I, p. 764a18). Also cf. Tsukamoto, op. cit., p. 66. 99. While basically agreeing with the fact that An Shigao's translations be¬ long to the Conservative Buddhist tradition, Ui, op. cit., p. 22, believes that some Mahāyāna elements may have found their way in these texts. His assumption is based on the fact that Sengyou mentions amongst An Shigao's translations two scriptures with an obviously Mahayanist title : (1) "The Sutra of the Fifty In- structions五十校計離in one juan, also called the The Sutra of the Fifty In- structions Concerning the Perfection of Hisdom 明度五十校計"(T55.6a); and (2) "The Sutra of the Fourteen Hishes十四意報in one juan. The Old Record 蓋録says [that its title is] the Sutra of the Fourteen Hishes of th Bodhisattva菩薩十四意經. It is no longer extant." (ibid.). To my opinion, we have to do with later additions which are basically unrelated to the content of the sutras thenselves and reflect the growing popularity of the Mahayana ideal amongst Chinese Buddhists. Since the latter text is no longer available, no precise comment can be made on it but as far as the Sutra of the Fifty Instruc¬ tions is concerned, we can be pretty sure that 明度, mhich is an archaic trans- lation for the prajdä-pärasitä, is irrelevant to the content of this scripture which, far from being an elaboration upon the perfection of wisdom, represents a criticism of the Bodhisattva practices and doctrines (v. infra). 100. T13.394b-407a. The Taisho daizokyo includes this sotra in the Mahavai- pulya mahāsaṣnipāta-sūtra大方等大集經as the Section on the Bodhisattvas of the Ten Directions ( * Dasadisibodhisattva-varga 十方菩薩品) translated by Naren- drayasas 那連拠耶舎(490-589). Ui, op. cit., p. 22, p. 450, considers that the sutra was already lost by the time of Daoan and Sengyou, who were not able to consult it,' and its attribution to An Shigao originates with the Notes on the Three Treasures over the Centuries 歴代三賞記, notorious for its unreliable information. However, the Csjj does not record this text as a missing one and there is nothing to suggest that the two monks were unable to consult it dir- ectly. I imagine that Ui made here a confusion with another note in the Csjj. The three editions of the Chinese Tripitaka compiled during the Song, Yuan, and Ming dynasties, the Old Song edition, and the Tempyo Nss. record it, however, as the Sutra of the Fifty Instructions Concerning the Perfection of Fisdom trans- lated by An Shigao (cf.T13, p. 394, notes 4-6), a title which the editors of the Taisho Daizokyo also insert between brackets in the Table of Contents. Otani, op. cit., especially pp. 137-9, Hayashiya, op. cit., p. 21, Fukaura Masafumi深浦IE X, in the Great Dictionary of Buddhist Books with Explanations, op. cit., vol. V, p. 206, Mochizuki's Great Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, vol. IV, p. 3422, Shizutani Masao 静谷正雄, The Formation Process of Early Mahāyāna Buddhism and初期大条佛教の成立過程, Hyakka-en,1974, pp. 233-7, consider that this sütra was translated by An Shigao and was mistakealy included in the Mahävaipulya mahäsam- nipäta-sütra. Fukaura and Mochizuki's Encyclopaedia... convincingly argue that this error dates from the Sui dynasty times when Sengjiu 僧$ arbitrarilly at¬ tached the Sutra of the Fifty Instructions to the original body of scriptures forming the Bahavaipulya mahasaanipata-sutra (on the details of this process and Sengjiu's motivations, see the Great Dictionary of Buddhist Books..., vol. VI, p. 478 as well as hochizuki's Encyclopaedia..., ibid., pp.3422-3). 101. cf. Shizutani's excellent study on this sutra (op. cit., p. 236). 102. T13.396c. 103. See note 19 above. This is not to say that they perceived An Shigao as an exponent of the Lesser Vehicle. On the contrary, we have already seen that many of these authors call him a Bodhisattva. However, most of the early Chinese Buddhists, Daoan included (cf. Sasaki Kentoku佐々木憲徳, History of the Evolu¬ tion of Medition Theory and Practice during the Han, Hei, and Six Dynasties漢数六朝禪観殺展史論, Pitaka, 1978, pp. 89-90), even when aware of theoretical dif- ferences 'between the two Vehicles, did not make a clear-cut distinction between "HInayana" yoga-praxis and Mahayana spiritual cultivation. The content of An Shigao's "dhyana sutras", which is viewed by the modern scholar as part of the Conservative Buddhist tradition, was for many early Chinese Buddhists an ef- ficient way of achieving Mahayana ideals. 104. Some clans later on accused the author of unfairly treating their an- cestors which eventually made Emperor Xiaozhao 茅昭(560-561) and Emperor Hu- cheng武成(561-565) of the Northern Qi Dynasty北海order Wei Shou to revise his work (cf. Explanatory Note to the Edition of the History of the Wei Dynasty, op. cit., vol.l, pp. l-2). 105. cf. The Compendius of Surnames Compiled in the Yuanhe Era, Synopsis 獎要of the Complete Collection of Books Arranged in Four Sections Compiled by Isperial Edict 鉄定四庫全書(in Cospendius of Surnames..., op. cit., pp. 1-2); Brief Annotated Catalogue of the [Complete Collection of Books Arranged in] Four Sections. Hith Additions and Corrections 増訂四庫簡明目線標往, Compiled by Shao部戯版, Continued by Shao Zhang部単, Shanghai guji chuban-she, p. 557. Yichen Prof. Forte, op. cit., p. 4, also touches upon the history of this text. 106. T50.324a-b. Mochizuki, "On An Shigao's Achievements", op. cit., p. 420, and Mochizuki's Encyclopaedia..., op. cit., vol. 1, p. 85 suggest that these apocryphal stories are due to a confusion between An Shigao and An Faqin安法欽, another Parthian monk who is said to have translated Buddhist scriptures at Luo- yang at the end of the 3rd century and beginning of the 4th century. This is a rather enigmatic figure who is ignored altogether by Daoan, Sengyou, Huijiao, being mentioned only in late sources (cf. Zurcher, op. cit., pp.70-1, 423 note 163; Mochizuki's Encyclopaedia... op. cit., vol. 1, p. 93). It is not excluded that this personage was one of the sources of the apocryphal accounts, but I think that this process is by far more complex including confusions with people before and after An Shigao as well as hagiographical accretions. 107. T55.95a27-c16; T50.323b16-324a1. 108. T55.95a28. 109. Biographies des moines éminents ( ao seng tchouan) de Hui-kiao, Tra- duites et annotées par Robert Shih, Première partie: Biographies des premiers traducteurs, Université de Louvain, Institut Orientaliste, Bibliotheque du Nusson, Volume 54, 1968, p. 8, note 24. 110. Prof. Forte thinks that the text should be annended as "During the Han dynasty there lived An Gao"漢有安高(op. cit., p. 9). Although Han dynasty is historically correct, we cannot rule out the possibility that the confusion with the Wu dynasty (222-280) was recorded as such by Huiyuan. Since the Records of Nount Lu by Huiyuan survives only in quotations, it is hard to make any precise comments on its text. Apart from the Compreheasive Descriptions [of Institu- tions], this work is also mentioned in the Annotations to the Materways Book ' (see note 66 above) and the Cospendius of Surnases Cospiled in the Yuanhe Era, (op. cit., p. 91), a text with a complicated history itself, which, furthermore, raises the difficult problem of interpreting the reference to the Records of Nount Lu as a citation from it (蔵山記安高安恵王子入侍: "The Records of Nount Lu [says:]'An Gao was a Parthian prince who came to attend [the Han Court]'") or a mere mention to it ("An [Shi]gao, [who appears] in the Records of Hount Lu, was a Parthian prince prince who came to attend the [Han Court]"). I am inclined to adopt this latter possibility which is also admitted by Prof. Forte, op. cit., p. 4. We also find quotations from the Records of the Nount Lu in the Shi- shuo xin'yu世說新語, the faiping yuian太平御覧, the Yiwen leiju脇文類探, etc. (cf. Zurcher, op. cit., p. 395, note 138). The extant Records of Mount Lu, in five juan, found in 751.1025a-1052a, was written by Chen Shun'yu 陳緑森in the fifth year of the Xining 照明era (1072), and contains a long quotation from Huiyuan's work which, however, does not include any the above citations or men- tions in the Comprehensive Descriptions [of Institutions] and the Compendium of Surnames Compiled in the Yuanhe Era. Ne must say, nevertheless, that the quota- tion found in Chen Shun'wu's work confronts the reader with the problem of de¬ termening its end (cf. Studies on Hui-yuan, Texts and Translations sna研究・連文篇, Research Report of the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies of Kyoto University, ed. by Kimura Bi'ichi木村英一, Söbun-sha, 1960, p. 324, note 1; together with the editors of this study, I followed the text partition adopted by Yan Kejun, op.cit., vol. M, pp.2398b-2399a, which, except for its last para¬ graph, corresponds to T51.1025a17-b29). Chen Shun'wu also uses the Gsz for're¬ lating the episode of An Shigao's preaching to the huge serpent (T51.1027 a; see also note 66 above). 111. op. cit., pp. 32-3. 112. op. cit., p. 23. 113. Le Canon bouddhique en Chine, quoted after Zürcher, op. cit., p. 32. Zürcher criticizes Bagchi's reconstruction for lack of evidence. Since so many names of foreign monks in China have been reconstructed, I see no reasons for J not trying the same thing with "Shigao", admittedly with the prudence dictated by the lack of sufficient information and its unusual zi 字 qualification in Chinese sources . 114. T55.69c26. 115. It would interesting to note that since the Ming明dynasty (1368-1644) monks and nuns have preferred using styles 字, which, according to traditional manners, is the most respectful form of address. It goes without saying that this custom, which partially survives in modern Taiwan, cannot be used as direct evidence for the Han epoch or the Six Dynasties but I think it is illustrative of the way the Chinese have always perceived the usage of styles. I owe this information to the Venerable Bhiksuni Huilian慧残連, whose generous help and advice I sincerely appreciate. (June 1993)