先说“神秀偈”。
虽然不能说神秀的修炼已达到大圆所形容的“染体悉净”的华严境界，却不至于像《坛经》写的连“门”也没入。《观心论》云：“心者，万法之根本也。一切诸法，唯心所生。若能了心，万行具备。”《大乘无生方便门》云：“如来有入道大方便，一念净心，顿超佛地”，“佛心清净，离有离无”，“离心心如，离色色如，心色具如，即是觉满，觉满即是如来”，“所言觉义，谓心体离念。离念相者，等虚空界，无所不遍，法界一相，即是如来平等法身。”还有，“一切佛法，自心本有，将心外求，舍父逃走。”如果把这些句子单独挑出来，一时还真不好分清是慧能说的，还是神秀说的。特别是“色心俱离，即无一物，是大菩提树”，与“本来无一物，何处惹尘埃”如出一辙。
慧能和神秀都不注重外在的形式，把“禅”引向内在心灵的自觉自悟。慧能说：“本性自有般若之智，自用智慧观照，不假文字。”神秀说：“因荃得鱼，得鱼忘筌，因言求言，得意忘言。即称念佛，云名须行念佛之体，若心无实，口诵空言，徒念虚功，有何成益？”慧能“定慧等”，于一切能所、善恶、染净种种对立之中，顿悟本心。神秀教人“观心”，“专念以息想，极力以摄心”，同时也说“悟在须臾，何须皓首”，“发慧之后，一切皆如”，确有不少门人“豁然自证，禅珠独照”，“皆证佛心也”。如何“慧”，如何“见性”，二人有分歧；在“见性”之后，“慧”的层面上，二人是相通的。慧能不主张“看心看净”，是担心人“不见自性本净”，“却生净妄”，并非反对“净心”，所以他又说“僧者，净也。”神秀要人“净心”，在让人“净心”前先强调：“一切相总不得取，所以《金刚经》云：凡所有相，皆是虚妄。看心若净，名净心地。”“净心”非“净心”，是“名”“净心”，也在破除人的“净妄”。慧能和神秀毕竟有共同的师承和思想渊源，一起行进在佛教中国化的行列之中。慧能吸纳了老庄、玄学思想，扫荡身心内外的所有形式，迈出了彻底中国化的最后的一大步。神秀尽管恪守师训，踏踏实实修行。但他不仅精通“三乘经论，四分律义”，而且学兼“老庄玄旨，书易大义”，不能不受儒道学说、江表玄风的熏染。据《楞伽师资记》记载，武则天问他“依何典诰。”他回答“依《文殊说般若经》‘一行三昧。’”他的理论基础是“如来藏”思想，堂奥之内是般若经典即色即空、离相离念的无差别境界。《大乘无生方便门》说，“五阴是世界，心处于世界。如虚空，虚空是心，心如是智；如莲花，莲花是色，色如是慧。”《大乘北宗论》说，“有智有慧曰生死，无智无慧曰涅槃”、“有作有为曰生死，无作无为曰涅槃。”无染无净，无因无果，一切皆如。由于种种因素，神秀思想中的这部分内容被忽略了、掩盖了、曲解了。
所以，如果说，“‘身是菩提树，心如明镜台。时时勤拂拭，莫使有尘埃’这二十个字确实浓缩了神秀一系的基本思想，” 是把神秀的思想简单化、表面化了。
再看“慧能偈”。
人们往往视“佛性”为“本体”，但佛教的“本体”是一种“非本体”的“本体”。慧能时时处处开导人“见性成佛”，但若要明心见性，必须“离两边”、“离四相”（有、无、非有非无、亦有亦无）。《坛经》云：“佛性非常非无常，是故不断，名为不二??????佛性非善非不善，是名不二??????不二之性，是名佛性。”慧能以般若之自性，将佛家诸宗所传之法界、八识、三身、四智，及一切修行工夫，摄归于“本心自性”之内。又言此中无自性之可见，无涅槃之可受，亦无空之可著。“出外，于相离相；入内，于空离空。著空，即惟长无明；著相，即惟长邪见。”慧能要人“无相、无念、无住”，离言相、破对待，以超越有限，契心本体。“于境上心不染曰无念，于自念上常离诸境，不于境上生心。”一方面，“无者，无诸尘劳之心；念者，念其如本性。”另一方面，“入于本性之真空，而此空亦不可得，而不可著。”慧能又说，“于诸法上念念不住，即无缚也。”念念不住，“即念念外不住境而无相，亦内不住于自性，于自性能无念，而只本真如自性以起念；则无住之义，可通摄过去、未来、现在之三际之断，与内外二边之断；所谓二边三际断也。”
“二边三际断”，就是离一切差别境，破除对事物外相的执着，即超越二元对立的相状。不仅要离相，而且要离空，通过这一特殊的双谴否定性思维渠道，觉悟大千世界，实现其绝对的超越精神。
用非空非有、真空妙有的般若中道佛性思想来验证慧能的“嗣法三偈”，则前两首失于“有”，第三首堕于“空”。
“菩提本无树，明镜亦无台。佛性常清净，何处有尘埃。”前二句以“无”破神秀的“有”，第三句又立了一个“常清净”的“佛性”；不仅欲遮弥显，反而双峰相峙，落于二边。
可能作者意识到了这个破绽，才又写一首含蓄平和的偈子，“心是菩提树，身为明镜台。明镜本清净，何处染尘埃。”菩提为“本心”之觉，明镜是“本心”之照。“本心”自清净，不会染尘埃。二偈并用，力图消弭第一首偈子中“空”和“有”的二元对立。转了一大圈，又回到了神秀的“身是菩提树，心如明镜台”的起点，只是更突出“心”的意义。
花费九牛二虎之力，反反复复仅说明了一点：佛性是清净的，不必“时时勤拂拭”；反不如《坛经》中说的“恶至于善，尽皆不取不舍，亦不染著，心如虚空”，简明扼要，直截了当。
“菩提本无树，明镜亦非台。本来无一物，何处惹尘埃”，字字珠玑，矢矢中的。痛快则痛快，与慧能的思想却大相径庭，不过与“佛教就是四大皆空”的世俗之见相投。世人多溺于染、逐于物，此偈如警世之钟，故尔广受欢迎，持久流传。
“无相颂”，纷纷“著相”，非“有”即“空”。想写“好偈”，实属不易。直到近代，还有一个“虎禅师”，作了一首“呈心偈”，欲一试身手：“身是菩提树，心如明镜台，尘埃即无物，无物即尘埃。”和大圆为神秀作的偈子一样，字面意义无可挑剔，惟斧琢痕迹太浓。因为，“禅是一种意境；一种力图摆脱思维羁绊，超越相对，涵盖相对，游行自在的意境” ；一种扑朔迷离、幽冥玄密、只能以心传心而不可言诠的神秘意境。这里，倒是印证了铃木大拙的一句话：“禅是非理性的，并超乎我们的智性理解。”
主要参考文献：
1， 慧能著，郭朋校释《坛经校释》，中华书局，1983年。
2， 汤用彤《汤用彤全集》第二卷，河北人民出版社，2000年。
3， 任继愈《汉唐佛教思想论集》，人民出版社，1998年。
4， 印顺《中国禅宗史》，江西人民出版社，1999年。
5， 麻天祥《20世纪中国佛学问题》，湖南教育出版社，2001年。
6， 麻天祥《中国宗教哲学史》，人民出版社，2006年。
7， 麻天祥《中国禅宗思想史》，湖南教育出版社，1997年。
8， 葛兆光《中国禅思想史》，北京大学出版社，1995年。
9， 高令印《中国禅学通史》，宗教文化出版社，2004年。
10，广东新兴国恩寺《<六祖坛经>研究》（共五册），中国大百科全书出版社，2003年。
3. 《略论佛教思想现代化的开创者霍韬晦先生对佛教思想的新诠释》 袁尚华
禅宗史研究与中央中心主义――以胡适的神会创始说为例
邢东风
　　在中国，现代意义上的禅宗史研究始于胡适。他根据新发现的文献资料重新勾画禅宗的历史，并从外来宗教中国化的角度解释佛教的演变，为中国现代的禅宗史研究奠定了最基本的思考模式，其影响至今不绝 。胡适的禅宗史研究虽然富有创新意义，但是他的研究结论也引来诸多争议，其中在南宗禅创始人问题上的神会创始说就是一个典型例子。迄今为止，大多数人都不赞成胡适的看法，关于谁是南宗创始人的问题似乎也已没有继续争论的必要。但是与此相连的另一个问题却值得思考，即为什么胡适根据新的文献资料、运用新的研究方法，却得出难以令人信服的结论？这个问题已有学者进行过探讨 ，不过本文对这个问题的思考兴趣并不在于追究胡适禅宗史研究的方法和结论是否正确，而在于寻求他在研究过程中自觉不自觉地运用的某些观念，并审视些观念在中国禅宗史及佛教史的研究中是否适当。
如果仔细考察胡适关于神会创始说的论述，可以发现他在得出这一结论的过程中，有某种理念性的因素支配了他的证据抉择与结论走向，那就是重视政治-文化中心地区以及受到皇权支持的佛教派系与人物、忽视政治文化边缘地区的佛教派系和人物，以政治-文化上的中心作为思考坐标，去看待和解释禅宗史上的人物与事件。这样的观念时隐时现地贯穿于胡适的禅宗史研究中，它象一支无形的标尺，成为胡适衡量禅宗史人物的主次轻重以及评判禅宗历史事件的准绳。神会创始说就是建立在这样的理念基础之上的“新观点”。
胡适的神会创始说最早发表在《荷泽大师神会传》一文。该文作于1929年，刊载在1930
年亚东图书馆出版的《荷泽大师神会遗集》卷首。敦煌写本神会资料的发现，使胡适感到神会在禅宗史上是一位被埋没了千年之久的 “最伟大”人物 ，并进而重新审视究竟谁是南宗禅的创始人。为了证明神会在禅宗史上占有重要的地位，胡适首先想到的是把神会与体现禅宗教义的最重要的经典――《坛经》――联系起来。在他看来，只要弄清《坛经》的作者问题，那么南宗的真正创始人是谁便不言自明。为了说明神会是南宗的创始人，他从三个方面来证明神会是《坛经》的作者∶一是敦煌本《坛经》中记有慧能临终时的“悬记”，其内容是预言慧能死后二十余年将有人出来，定佛教是非，竖立宗旨 ；二是韦处厚的《兴福寺大义禅师碑铭》里说神会的“习徒”“竟成坛经传宗” ；三是“坛经中有许多部分和新发见的神会语录完全相同”，例如定慧等、论坐禅、辟当时的禅学、论金刚经、无念等等 。根据这些证据，他得出结论说∶“南宗的急先锋，北宗的毁灭者，新禅学的建立者，坛经的作者，――这是我们的神会。在中国佛教史上，没有第二个人有这样伟大的功勋，永久的影响” 。
在以上几项证据中，胡适认为第三项是“是最重要的证据” ，并强调说∶“我信坛经的主要部分是神会所作，我的根据完全是考据学所谓‘内证’” 。后来在他在晚年的口述自传中对这一点说得更加清楚∶“但是我以〔禅宗〕内部的资料，证明它是神会的伪托！根据我的考据，神会实是《坛经》的作者，因为《坛经》中的许多观念都和我在巴黎发现的《神会和尚语录》及其他有关文献，不谋而合” 。胡适特别提示他用以证明《坛经》为神会所作的方法是考据学的“内证”，表现了他对自己所用方法的充分自信。
在治学方法上，胡适一直对考据学情有独钟，认为考据学是中国传统学术中最接近西方校勘学的方法。他在晚年的口述自传中曾总结对考据学的看法，说他早在1917年的博士论文里就已开始运用这种方法，1934年则明确指出中国传统的考据学方法与现代西方的校勘学方法之间的许多共同之处，“其中最重要的一点也是根据最早的版本来校对。最早的版本也就是最接近原著的版本” 。根据这个回顾来看，胡适用来证明神会创始说的考据学“内证”，正是他一贯重视的研究方法在禅宗史研究领域中的贯彻。也正是因为胡适在《神会和尚遗集》里运用了新发现的最早的文献资料、运用了与西方校勘学具有共通性的考据学方法、得出了新的禅宗史结论，所以一直对自己的这项研究感到自豪，认为“这本书的问世实在是对重治中国禅宗史的一个里程碑” 。
胡适用新发现的最古的资料得出禅宗史的看法，确实令人耳目一新；而他对自己所用方法的提示，也颇具唬人之效，因而使很多人即便不赞成他的观点，也不敢轻易怀疑他的方法。但是，是否根据《坛经》与神会语录具有共同之处的情况就可以断定前者是依据后者写成的呢？答案是未必如此。因为这两个文本中出现了相同的内容，既可能是由于前者采用了后者而造成的结果，也可能是由于后者因袭了前者。在没有其他佐证的情况下，无论断定造成这种情况的原因是其中的哪一个，正确的概率都只有一半。胡适的结论就是如此，他没有考虑到可能导致两个文件内容相同的多种原因，所以他的考证并不充分，他的结论也过于轻率。实际上，如果仅仅从这两个文献的内容比较来看，很难简单地断定究竟孰者早出孰者后成。即使到目前为止，也还没有什么文献资料可以直接证明它们当中哪一个形成得更早。但是考虑到神会是慧能弟子的事实，以及中国历史上思想大师的弟子后学们继承和发挥师说的常见情况，应该说作为弟子资料的神会语录继承师说的可能性更大，或者说这样判断更合乎情理。
当然，胡适的考证并非全错，他通过“内证”揭示了神会语录和《坛经》之间的一致之处，到此为止，他的证明无可辩驳。但是，如果仅仅根据这样的“内证”就直接判断两个文件孰先孰后的话，那么就会出现两种截然相反的结论；而且由于两种结论都有成立的理由，所以如果要主张其中一方的话，就须要排除另一方成立的可能，并为自己的主张提供充分的佐证。然而胡适的结论并不能排除相反结论成立的可能，尽管他为自己的结论提供了一些佐证，但是那些佐证都经不住推敲，例如《坛经》中的“悬记”很可能是神会一系的纂入，韦处厚的《碑铭》也不能证明神会一系伪造了《坛经》 。这就意味着胡适的神会创始说在从证据到结论的推演过程中出现了一个巨大的跳跃，或者说他在面临两种可能的结论选择时，轻率冒进地选择了其中的一种。这在一向主张“大胆假设，小心求证”的胡适来说，显得颇为不可思议。很显然，胡适结论的支撑点绝不仅仅在于文献考证，而应该是在文献证据之外还有别的因素决定了他的结论走向。
那么，除了文献考证之外，究竟是什么因素决定了他作出这样的结论呢？或者说是什么因素导致他的研究中出现了跳跃呢？这是胡适的神会创始说中一个值得深究的问题。
对于这样的问题，其实早有学者从不同的角度进行过探讨。例如任继愈就曾指出，胡适之所以抬高神会的地位，除了因为他企图炫耀自己的新发现之外，还因为他欣赏神会的政治性格、政治策略以及神会的宗教观 。由于任氏此说是从政治批判的角度观察胡适的禅宗史研究，于是也更敏锐地注意到胡适的研究中与政治相关的各种因素。葛兆光也曾直接探讨过为什么胡适根据新的资料和新的研究方法却得出无法令人信服的结论的问题，认为其原因在于胡适的疑古观念的作祟 。这些探讨其实都涉及到影响胡适作出神会创始说结论的观念因素，但是都没有切中真正的要害。任说的分析虽然非常具体，但毕竟超出了胡适学术性理念的范围，而且这种非学术性的动机很难从胡适的研究中得到有力的证明；葛说的分析虽然也适用于胡适的禅宗史研究，但疑古观念贯串于胡适的诸多研究领域之中，并不是他的禅宗史研究中独有的学术理念，以此说明胡适提出神会创始说的原因，未免显得笼统。要弄清导致胡适提出神会创始说的原因，考察的范围除了他自己提出的资料证据之外，还应该包括作为研究者的胡适本人的观念因素。但是，这个观念不应该是笼统的，而应该是具体的，或者说是与胡适的禅宗史研究直接关联的因素；它虽然是具体的，但是又应该只限于学术性观念的范围，因为超出这个范围的纯私人动机是很难得到证明的。
如果对胡适禅宗史研究的整个过程稍加留意，就可以发现直接影响他作出这种结论的一个主要因素是他心目中一直抱有一种观念，即重视中心佛教及人物的地位和作用，而轻视边缘地区佛教及人物的地位和作用。为了方便，我们姑且把这种观念称为中央中心主义。当然，胡适自己并未明确提出这样的概念，而且这种意识在他的研究中也未必达到十分自觉的程度，但是透过他关于慧能与神会的评价，可以清楚地看出这一观念在经常在隐隐制约着他对二人地位的估价。
这种观念在《荷泽大师神会传》中还不显露，可是在胡适后来的著作中则越来越明显。早在1928年，他在《答汤用彤教授书》中就曾对慧能和神会作过这样的评价∶
慧能在当日确有革命之功。……慧能在当时并不出名，其人不过南方一派的大师而已。至神会北上，与正统派挑战，自称正统，并说其师有传衣为信，于是始有法统之争。北宗神秀已死，死无对证，而神会之辩才又足以夺人，故北宗的权威大动摇，不得已乃出于压迫的手段，故有卢奕的弹劾。神会放逐三次，名声更大，安、史乱后，北宗遂倒，神会遂成第七祖。
在这里，他一方面肯定慧能在当时“确有革命之功” ，另一方面又指出慧能的知名度不高以及作为“南方一派的大师”的地域性局限，特别是“其人不过南方一派的大师而已”一句，显然带有轻蔑的口气。与此相对，他通过简要地列举神会北上与北宗斗争的经过来代替对神会的评价，其中值得注意的是神会与正统派挑战、自称正统、北宗权威动摇以及神会成为第七祖等几项，从中不难看出胡适对“正统”、“权威”、“第七祖”的重视。只要把这些词语和关于慧能的评价相对照，神会和慧能在胡适心目中的位置不言自明。
由此可知，胡适在评判神会与慧能的地位时，是以他们的知名度和正统性为评判尺度的，而知名度的高低以及是否具有正统性，又是和当事人所在的地域是否处在当时的政治-文化中心地区以及当事人与皇权关系的远近程度相关联的。如果把这个评价标准表述得清楚明白一些的话，那就是谁在当时的政治-文化中心地区谁就具有较高的知名度，谁与皇权的关系密切谁就具有正统性。这样说来，在神会北伐之前，自然是北宗具有较高的知名度并具有正统性，而南宗则相反；在神会北伐之后，自然是神会具有较高的知名度并具有正统性，而慧能则不及神会。后来胡适在1934年所作的《中国禅学的发展》讲演里，更清楚地把皇权对神会地位的认可作为神会北伐成功的标志 ，以后在他晚年的口述自传中分析神会被忽略的原因时又提到“南宗的地位最后被朝廷肯定为禅宗正统――甚至也可以说是整个佛教的正统” 。似乎不管是宗派也好还是人物也好，谁要是能得到皇权的支持和认可，其宗教地位就是“正统”，其历史作用就更加重要。
胡适在晚年的口述自传里对自己的禅宗史研究作了回顾和总结，在论及慧能与神会的地位之时，更明显地透露出中央中心主义的立场∶
神会显然是把他那不识字的师傅抬举到名满天下的第一功臣。
慧能――如实有其人的话――显然也不过是仅仅知名一方的一位区域性的和尚，在当地传授一种简化佛教。他的影响也只限于当时广东北部韶州一带。他底教义北传实是神会一个人把他宣扬起来的。神会为他拼命，并冒着杀头的危险，经过数十年的奋斗，最后才把这位南方文盲和尚的教义传入中原！
神会死后〔很多年，终于〕被追封为“禅宗七祖”。因此他那位不识字的师傅，广东籍的慧能和尚也就间接被公认为正统的“禅宗六祖”了。
神会和尚成其革命大业，便是公开的直接的向这声威显赫的北派禅宗挑战。最后终于战胜北派而受封为“七祖”，并把他的师傅也连带升为“六祖”。所以神会实在是个大毁灭者，他推翻了北派禅宗；他也是个大奠基者，他奠立了南派禅宗，并做了该宗的真正的开山之祖。这就是佛教中的禅宗！
在这些关于慧能与神会的对比评价中，有以下几点值得注意∶
一是胡适反复强调慧能是一个“不识字的师傅”或“文盲和尚”，是神会把慧能的教义传入中原，于是慧能才得以“名满天下”。这一评价实际上是根据慧能与神会的文化教养水准作出的判断。胡适虽然没有明言神会的文化水平高于慧能，但他作为神会研究的专家，当然比谁都清楚神会兼通儒、道、佛的各种典籍 ，既然说不识字的慧能是靠了神会才得以名扬天下，那就意味着慧能自身本来不具备这种资格，而只有博通经论的神会才具备这一条件。一句话，只有具备文化优势的人才可以发生全国性的影响。
二是他明确提出慧能是“一位区域性的和尚”，是神会把慧能的教义传入“中原”。关于慧能的地方性，胡适在此之前用“南方”这一含意具体的方位词来概括，在这里则改用更具概括性的“区域性”一词。尽管这个词汇的具体所指依然是“广东北部韶关一带”，但是它又相对于唐代政治和宗教中心地区的“中原”而言，因而这一用语的严格意义是指区别于作为全国中心地带的地方性。这一词语的使用，表明胡适已经比较自觉地从中央和地方的地位差异的视角来判断神会与慧能的地位。众所周知，所谓“中原”并不是一个单纯的自然地理概念，而是指当时政治文化的中心地带，也是皇权的所在地，于是当胡适把“区域性”和“中原”对照使用的时候，这两个词的对举便不仅仅意味着它们所代表的地域范围的差异，而是更意味着它们所体现的政治文化上的位势差异。具体地说，“区域性”除了是指地域范围的局限性之外，还兼有局部性、边缘性、从属性乃至非正统性等意味；与此相对、“中原”除了指以河南为中心的黄河中下游地区以外，还兼指具有全国性、中心性、统率性乃至正统性的地区。胡适把慧能定义为“区域性的和尚”，实际上也就把慧能限定为处在边缘位置、只具有局部性影响、不具备全国的正统性的人物；而他强调神会挺进“中原”并取代了北宗的位置，就意味着神会是占据了中心位置、具有全国性影响和正统性的人物。很显然，慧能和神会所处的政治-文化地理位置的位势差异，是胡适确定他们在禅宗史上的地位的基本坐标。然而，“区域性”和“中原”（或可称为“中心性”）在政治文化上的位势差异实际上来自这两个词所代表的地域与中央政权的远近关系，所以根据宗教人物所在的政治-文化地理位置来判断他们的重要程度，这本身既是传统的大一统观念作祟的表现，也是一种用政治化的观点审视宗教现象的片面理解。
三是他明确断定慧能六祖地位的确立是由神会成为七祖而连带产生的后果，而神会“革命大业”的成功――即“推翻了北派禅宗”、“奠立了南派禅宗”――的标志就在于皇家承认了其七祖地位。在胡适心目中，似乎皇权的认可乃是一项至关重要的因素∶如果神会不被皇家封为禅宗七祖，那么师以徒显的慧能既不能被公认为禅宗六祖，北宗也不会失去原有的正统性，南宗也不会取得正统地位。这样的思考表明，胡适实际上把皇权的干预看作禅宗内部事务变化的主要决定因素，把来自皇权的评价作为判断禅宗正统的标致。
透过上述关于慧能与神会的对比评价，可以看出在胡适的心目中其实已经预设了一个禅宗克里斯马的标准，即有文化、处在政治文化的中心地带、得到皇权的认可和支持。在他看来，只有具备这些条件的人物，才可能具有“名满天下”的知名度，才可能取得宗派斗争的成功，才可能获得宗教上的正统性，因而其历史作用和地位也才更为重要。从这样的标准来看，具备上述条件的恰恰是神会而不是慧能，所以神会才应该是禅宗的真正的克里斯马，他的作用和地位也应该比慧能更重要；既然神会比慧能重要，那么当发现两者的语录具有相同的观点时，那就很自然地认为神会才有这些观点的发明权或著作权了。
在胡适设定的禅宗克里斯马的要素中，既然排除了“区域性”，那么剩下的自然就是和区域性相反的中央性或中心性。中心性不仅占据地理上的优势，而且具有文化和政治权利上的强势。在胡适的眼里，慧能不过是偏居一隅的“广东佬”、“文盲”、“不识字的和尚”，因而他无法理解这种与中央无缘的“区域性的和尚”竟然可以成为风靡全国的一大宗派的精神领袖的历史事实。恰恰是这种中央高于地方、中心性优于区域性的观念预设，决定了胡适在神会与慧能的地位评价以及《坛经》著作权归属问题上的判断走向。
胡适从中央中心主义的立场理解禅宗的历史，以为只有占据了政治-文化中心强势的派系和人物才可以算得禅宗的“正宗”，于是所谓的新资料和新方法，在他的禅宗史研究中只不过是受这种观念支配的证明工具而已，建立在这种观念基础上的神会创始说自然也就漏洞百出。再退一步说，即使假设胡适的神会创始说没有漏洞，或者说历史实事真的如胡适所说的那样，即《坛经》的作者和南宗的创立者是神会而非慧能，也不等于中央中心主义的观念适合于禅宗史和佛教史的研究。其理由在于∶
第一，按照胡适的说法，神会是《坛经》的作者和南宗的创立者，他在禅宗史上的伟大“功绩” 被归结给了所谓“区域性的和尚”慧能而遭到埋没，原因在于神会的门下没有出现大师 ，以及湖南、江西的禅宗在八、九世纪发展起来之后便“改写历史”，“日子久了，神会之名就渐被遗忘，甚至完全不提了” 。这样的解释实在过于肤浅。事实上，且不说神会有无写作《坛经》和创立南宗的历史功绩，他作为慧能的重要弟子，北上“中原”批判北宗，使来自边鄙的南宗教法打入中心佛教圈的地盘，如此地位和业绩，在禅宗史上已经足够辉煌。尽管如此，他的语录资料还是失传了。失传这一实事本身只能表明他的语录资料没有受到足够的重视，从这个意义上说，神会身后的命运的确有欠公平。但是，假设当初神会的门下出现过一两位大师而将他的语录保存下来，难道他的语录就一定会成为禅宗的法宝吗？如果把神会和差不多同时代的马祖道一、石头希迁相比，神会的语录相当多，然而却被“遗忘”，马祖和希迁的语录很少，可是却法脉旺盛，传承不绝。两相对照，反差如此强烈，究其原因，无非是神会打入中心佛教圈内，这本身就注定了他根本不可能建立起具有足够规模的自己的教团组织，因此他的门下也不可能出现什么大师；而江西的马祖和湖南的希迁则山高皇帝远，恰恰是这样一些在胡适看来和慧能一样不起眼的“区域性和尚”，可以在远离政治-文化中心圈的边缘地带获得广阔的生存空间，建立起规模庞大的教团组织和传法根据地。对于依山傍野而居、生在草边林下的禅宗信徒来说，作为理想的宗教领袖化身的祖师，自然应当是远离魏阙而身在江湖的大师，如果有机会让他们在慧能与神会两者之间选择的话，那么当然是慧能更有资格成为禅宗祖师。因此，如果神会的历史“功绩”真的被埋没了话，那么与其说是禅宗的一种“改写”或“遗忘”，还不如说是他们的一种历史选择。在胡适心目中因具有“中央性”或“中心性”而应作为正统性的存在，在南宗的心目中并不受到承认，至少在神会、马祖的时代是如此。
第二，就南宗的总体来说，他们明显地持有一种反主流意识，例如慧能传记资料中的南北平等说和佛法向南说表现了不承认北方中心佛教的权威和以南方佛教为中心的地方意识，慧能拒诏说、神会语录中关于神会及其弟子对北宗的批判、南宗的达磨与粱武帝对话说以及选佛优于选官说等等，则表现了南宗对皇权保持疏离的立场，对依附皇权的中心佛教势力采取批判的态度，并将宗教价值置于政治价值之上 。这种反主流意识含有与政治-文化中心势力拉开距离、通过保持自身的所谓“边缘性”以维护宗教的自主性与纯洁性的意味。从唐代佛教的发展大势来看，随着中唐以后中央政权的力量削弱和地方政权势力的增强，那些原来位于政治-文化的中心地区、与中央政权保持着密切关系的佛教宗派相继衰落；与此相反，在远离唐朝政治-文化中心的地区，特别是在长江以南，南宗禅获得了广阔的发展空间，规模日益壮大，子孙不断繁衍，其势力范围由当初的岭南逐渐蔓延到各地，而且持久不衰。两相对照，不难看出作为地方佛教的南宗对于当时的社会条件有着更好的适应能力。就南宗禅发展壮大的轨迹来说，它实际上走过了一条类似于“农村包围城市”的道路，即南宗的教团最初扎根在远离政治文化中心的各个地方，然后逐渐向外延伸，最终覆盖全国而成为中国佛教的主流。因为有相对稳定的地缘关系为依托，他们可以获得更为持久的生存资源，而不至于轻易随着中央政权的势力摇摆而大起大落；与皇权的疏远，固然使他们难以享受朝廷的恩宠和优厚的援助，但同时也造就了他们维持自身生存与发展的顽强能力，而且可以避免过多层次的政治权力干扰，从而更多地保持宗教上的独立自主以及对广大信众的亲和力。总之，南宗的发展壮大并不是依靠政治-文化中心势力的扶持，而是依托于胡适所谓的“区域性”资源，因此中央中心主义的观念并不符合禅宗史的实事。
第三，在禅宗以外的场合，如果就慧远和玄奘的典型事例来看，可知不在政治-文化中心地区的佛教照样可以成为事实上的佛教中心，而依附皇权的中心佛教势力则不仅丧失宗教上的独立自主性，而且难以获得持久的生命力 。从中国佛教的总体来看，在国土广大地域辽远的中国，实际上从来不曾形成过完全统一的佛教组织，由皇权扶植的中心佛教表面上居于全国佛教的统率地位，其实它的象征性意义往往超过了它的统摄机能，至少在政治-文化中心以外的地区，广大信众的心目中真正认可的往往只是与他们有着一定地缘关系的教团及其宗教领袖，至于说到中心佛教对地方佛教或非主流佛教发生的影响，其实际的情况比之宣传吹嘘的情况往往要大打折扣。如此说来，即使在大一统的政治格局之下，中心佛教也不足以代表中国佛教的全局，它只不过是中国佛教的一个部分而已，而且在其看似庄严恢弘的表面形式之下，大多不过是些为了利益而奉旨作成的官样文章，未必包含着多少具有真正的宗教性价值的成分，而真正维系中国佛教整体存在的主要力量乃是分散在各个地区、以当地高僧大德为核心的地方性教团势力。尽管各地的教团之间以及他们与中心佛教势力乃至国家政权之间也会发生种种联系，但是各地的教团从经济来源到组织运作基本上都是各自为政，他们的生存主要依赖于自身所在地区的地缘关系。这样的传统甚至在近现代的中国佛教中也还一直延续，例如近代史上太虚大师曾为建立全国统一的佛教组织而不懈努力 ，结果在一些山头大寺的阻力之下而告失败，而现代佛教史上的星云大师则避开当初台湾的中心佛教势力，依托于宜兰和高雄等地方信徒的支持 ，由星星之火发展为燎原之势，终于使佛光山的教团遍布世界五大洲。二人的经验刚好从正反两个方面证明了地方性佛教的生命力。中心性佛教和地方性佛教在历史上的命运遭际体现了前者的脆弱和后者的顽强，通过这两类佛教的对比观察可以认清中国佛教史上的一个重要事实，即中心佛教往往由于过多的政治介入而降低自身的宗教价值和丧失独立自主，地方性佛教则与之相反。因此，无论就禅宗来说，还是就中国佛教的整体而言，维系中国佛教存在的主体力量乃是分布在各个地方的地方性教团势力，而不是皇权摆布之下的中心佛教势力。所以说中央中心主义的观念在总体上也不符合中国佛教史的实际。
第四，宗教领袖不同于皇帝，宗教势力不同于政治权力，宗教的教团组织也不同于国家的行政机构，禅宗自不例外。在中国历史上，皇权是政治权力的中心，中心权力的推行依靠国家强制力量而实现，地方服从中央，下级服从上级，因此中央中心主义的观念大致符合中国古代的政治格局。但是禅宗作为一种“方外”的宗教势力，虽然不可能完全隔绝于世俗社会和国家政权之外，但是它原本就持有一种否认或逃避世俗价值的倾向，因此世俗社会的价值观，在禅宗中未必都被认可，其教团组织大多也在不同程度上疏离于国家权力的约束，教团内部虽然可以下级服从上级，但是对世俗权力却往往保持适当的张力，未必如行政机构那样对上必须绝对服从；祖师及教团领袖的地位一般不能单靠政治强权那样的权力来维持，而是至少还需要具备克里斯马式人物的特殊人格魅力，如道行的高尚、组织才能、运营能力、领导艺术、对信众的亲和力、等等，这样才可能得到广大信众的自愿拥护，而文化教养的水准往往并不重要；教团与教团之间、特别是不同地区的大教团之间，并不存在上下从属和依赖的关系。总之，在独裁专制的皇权体制之下是“天无二日，国无二主”，但是在佛门之内相对说来较为“众生平等”，因此由皇权册封的所谓“正宗”，未必能获得信众的真心认可，饱读经论的三藏大师，大多不能成为教团的领袖，以出入宫廷为荣的佛门政客，尽管可以荣耀一时，但是很快就会被人遗忘，甚至遭人唾弃，而不受皇恩、远在山林的高僧大德，永远都是真心求佛向道者的理想楷模。因此，用政治化的中央中心主义观念来解释中国佛教特别是禅宗的问题，显得总是格格不入。
在中国现代的佛教研究领域，政治化的中央中心主义观念除了表现在胡适的禅宗史研究之外，也存在于在其他宗派或人物的研究当中。从胡适的教训可知，在考察中国佛教的场合，应当首先将佛教还原为综合的社会性现象，而单一的政治化的中央中心主义观念则应当抛弃。
4. 王芳
? 地域佛教与地域佛学研究
再续小西天的佛教文化薪火——近现代西域佛教研究的回顾与展望
廖肇羽 贾东
提 要：任何人欲深入探讨西域历史与社会，宗教问题无法回避。本文简要回顾西域佛教兴衰流变，叙述晚清以降学者有关西域佛教的研究和译介成果，涉及丝路交通开拓引发的佛教东渐，文献匮乏导致过度依赖石窟壁画，宗教差异背景下如何面对文化多元诸问题。探讨西域佛教在特定地区，如何由传统向现代进 行创造性转化，以重燃西域佛教火种。
关键词：西域佛教 区位优势 沧桑梵韵 文明交融 田野调查
Extending Again the Buddhism Civilization of the Ancient India
——Reviewing and prospecting the Western Regions Buddhism researching in modern times
Liao zhaoyu Jia dong
(Institute of Xiyu Culture，Tarim University，Alar，Xinjiang，843300)
Abstract: Religious tradition is unable to avoid for any one who penetrate into the history and society of the Western Regions. From a brief review of the vicissitude and deformation of the Western Regions Buddhism, the thesis narrated the studying achievements of the Western Regions Buddhism. It touched upon the Buddhism flowing east in the Silk Road opening up, excessively relying on the fresco in rock cave caused by deficient document, how to face up to multicivilization in religion diversity background, and so on. The author tried his best to approach the Western Regions Buddhism how to transform from tradition to contemporary in specific region. And it is for the Western Regions Buddhism’s springing up once more.
Key words: the Western Regions Buddhism，regional superiority，Buddhist charm experiencing many vicissitudes，civilization blending，fields investigating
西域历史文化博大精深，宗教演绎又纷繁复杂，成为深入探究西域历史与社会的精神前提。然而，迄今为止的西域学术研究，宗教环节极为薄弱，佛教更不例外。因为后世崛起的伊斯兰教取代源远流长的佛教并占据绝对优势，人们由此虔奉清真，沧桑梵韵局促在不该遗忘的历史角落。底蕴深厚的佛教文化因自然和人为双重因素渐趋消歇，近代西方列强劫掠塞外佛教遗存雪上添霜，当今民众文物保护意识淡薄且伴有难以平抑的功利主义倾向，所有这一切使得西域佛教文化遗产抢救显得格外迫切。
虽然泛泛而谈的西域佛教研究成果频繁面世，但体大思精、评判高下的学术专著尚未出现，个别甚至阐述故事加猜测，论证空疏而荒唐，至于“辨章学术，考镜源流”的西域佛教学史更遥遥不可期。正缘于此，简要评述近现代西域佛教研究以抛砖引玉，吸引更多海内外学人共同推进该项世界性学术已提到新的历史日程上。本文展览式回顾西域佛教兴衰流变，叙述晚清以降学者有关西域佛教的研究和译介成果，涉及西域佛教文明范围、东渐问题、社会影响及重要人物，不过，限于学识和功力，难免挂一漏万，措词不当，尚祁方家指正。
人文地理与文化西域
西域正好位于闻名遐迩的丝绸之路中枢地段，其灿烂辉煌文明成果很大程度上取决于区位优势，特定的地理环境与丝绸之路是探讨中西文化交汇的先决条件，也是西域佛教文化研究首先需要界定的文明空间。“西域”本是古代中原就地理知识所及，对西北边陲的泛称，意为“（中国）西部疆域”，在世界文明史上影响极其深远。先秦《山海经》、《穆天子传》未有其名，却有其实，寄托着莽荒神秘的沧桑情感。《史记?大宛列传》记载：“匈奴奇兵时时遮击使西国者”，清徐松在《汉书西域传补注》（卷上）则说：“古音国读如域，《广雅?释诂》：‘域，国也’……此城郭国，界中国之西，故曰西域” ，西国即为西域，作者笔墨又南跨昆仑、西越葱岭（帕米尔） 、北逾巴尔喀什湖，开历代正史西域传之先河。当时人们还把河西走廊包括在内，故《史记?骠骑列传》说：“骠骑将军去病率师攻匈奴西域王浑邪，王及厥众萌咸相犇”，而匈奴浑邪王正游牧河西走廊的张掖、武威一带。《汉书?王莽传》还援引王莽奏议说：“今西域良原等复举地为臣妾……请受良原等所献地为西海郡”，西羌人首领良原率众游牧青海湖附近，王莽所设西海郡就在今青海海晏，也就是说西汉末青海西部仍属西域范围。不过《汉书?西域传》还是把西域作为一个地理概念固定下来：“西域以孝武时始通”，并圈定范围：“匈奴之西，乌孙之南。南北有大山，中央有河，东西六千余里，南北千余里。东则接汉，阨以玉门、阳关，西则限以葱岭”，相当于今天环塔里木地区，具体论述却远远超出这个范围，而包括天山以北乌孙游牧之地和葱岭以西直至中西亚，即当时中央王朝郡县辖区以西，又能进行有效管辖的地域，此后地域界限相对稳定，演变方向也很清晰。
历代正史及相关文献频繁为西域树碑立传，记录范围随时代不同而略有变化，李唐、西辽、蒙元范围较两汉更为广阔。唐代在敦煌以西，天山南北，中亚 、西亚，乃至北非、东欧部分地区广置都督府与州，分别由安西、北庭、濛池等都护府管辖，其中吐鲁番、哈密等地仿行中原的郡县制与租庸调制。蒙元阿姆河、锡尔河之间的河中，以及两河下游的咸海，阿姆河以南的呼罗珊诸地区都纳入西域地理范围。满清则略有收缩，乾隆年间《西域图志》界定西域：“其地在肃州（酒泉）嘉峪关外，东南接肃州，东北至喀尔喀（蒙古），西接葱岭，北抵俄罗斯，南接番藏（青海、西藏），轮广二万余里”，即巴尔喀什湖以东以南广大地区，而到新疆建省，又被列强宰割了五十多万平方公里。
乾隆年间，西域同时也被称作新疆，而当时全国有好几个同类名词。1872年，署湖南巡抚王文韶的奏折说：雍正年间，“创建六厅，曰古州（榕江），曰台拱（台江），曰清江（剑河），曰都江（三都水族自治县），曰丹江（雷山），曰八寨（丹寨），谓之新疆” ，指的是改革土司制度，设立新行政机构的少数民族地区。与“改土归流”类似，在平定准噶尔和大小和卓叛乱以后，清政府对维吾尔地区伯克制进行了重大改革，使其纳入清朝地方官制轨道。乾隆二十四年（1759年），陕甘总督杨应琚在一份奏折中说：“新疆效用武职人数，……遇有辟展（鄯善）等处差务，陆续委用” 。第二年五月，乾隆也说：“……然现在新疆垦种，实无劳民之事。……西陲戡定，回部悉平，朕之初念，岂务为好大喜功，今亦不过辑其旧部，复其本业而已，又安肯转事劳民动众” 。或许为了区别同时存在的几个新疆，于是把西北边陲称为“西域新疆”，乾隆二十九年（1764年），乾隆在答复有关增纂《大清一统志》事宜时说：“至西域新疆，拓地两万余里，除新设安西一府及哈密、巴里坤、乌鲁木齐设有道、府、州、县、提督、总兵等官，应即附入甘肃省内。其伊犁、叶尔羌、和阗等处，现有总管将军及办事大臣驻扎者，亦与内地无殊，应将西域新疆另纂在甘肃之后” 。但很长时期更多文献仍称西域，比如《钦定西域图志》、椿园七十一《西域闻见录》、徐松《西域水道记》、龚自珍《西域置行省议》。左宗棠率军收复故土，再次提出在新疆建省问题：“他族逼处，故土新归” ，至光绪十年（1884年）“新疆”正式成为省名并沿用至今。西域是佛教东渐“桥头堡”，但新疆不能等同西域，新疆佛教演变史自然不能与西域佛教演变史等量齐观，这个问题后面还要反复阐释。
西域是一个地理范围，又是一个人文概念，与历史有着密切联系。诚然，中央王朝凿空西域开初是为了摆脱政治困境，可后来最为繁盛的倒是文化融合，主观动机与客观效果发生了绝妙错位。佛教史上的西域系印度佛教兴起之后，由陆路东传中原所经地区，大致涉及葱岭以西的大月氏(阿姆河流域)、安息（伊朗高原东北、里海东南）、康居(哈萨克斯坦南部及锡尔河中下游)、犍陀罗(巴基斯坦白沙瓦及其毗邻阿富汗东部)、罽宾（卡菲里斯坦至喀布尔河中下游之间河谷平原）、迦湿弥罗（克什米尔)，葱岭以东的于阗（和田）、疏勒(喀什)、龟兹(阿克苏)、高昌(吐鲁番)，以及西域文化与河西文化临界点的敦煌，葱岭以西又以犍陀罗与迦湿弥罗最为重要。总体说来，西域是一个举足轻重的中介地：印度→西域?中原，此处梳理西域演变史，并不显得多余。它幅员辽阔给文明活动提供了足够的空间，局部地区出现野蛮浩劫，则在其它区域茁壮成长，于是空间与时间出现了能量替换，西域文化得以千年万年绵延不绝。与此同时，活动地域的广袤无垠造就了吞吐四方的精神规模，各大文明在此汇聚融合，形成百川归海的雄浑气象，佛教因此在西域得到了长足发展。
西域文明滋生地属亚非欧结合部，近现代历史巨变，导致认知范围全面紧缩，极大地局限了研究者眼光，国内学人干脆以新疆代西域。伴随而来的地区行政划分，新疆、甘肃、青海、西藏各据一方，文化区域进一步条块分割，造成后人视野紊乱，大西域与小西域的范围也游移不定。就西域佛教研究而论，文明活动面积的肢解直接导致视野广度不足，随之而来研究深度大打折扣，因此迫切需要确立一个“文化西域”的概念，以超越狭隘的政治囹圄，从历史的深层处推进学理研究。或许这是一种巨大的文化幻想，但文化西域可以突破狭隘的地域观念和种族观念，而且通过文化的大力拓展可了解西域智慧，从多元角度将西域传统所具有的精神资源发扬光大。
不像中道崩殂的巴比伦、埃及、希腊－罗马文明，及近世才崛起的俄罗斯、美国文明，西域思想长河古今一贯，经过长期发展，它从涓涓细流，汇成中国主流文化一部分。在多元精神文明氛围下茁壮成长才能让它有再生力量，该项研究自然应从大处着眼，宏观审视整个西域，小处着手，微观把握具体难题。本文所论佛教对西域范围采取一个相对折衷方案，涉及丝路交通开拓引发的佛教东渐，文献匮乏导致过度依赖石窟壁画，宗教差异背景下如何面对文化多元等内容用意正在于此。
西风古道与佛教东渐
西域佛教源于印度，究竟何时传入，与西域固有传统文化相结合史无明证，仅能根据文献和考古资料做大致推断。对西域佛教及其艺术进行追本溯源，必然要涉及印度佛教史及其文化演变，好在印度佛教是中国学术界有着悠久历史的传统课题。这里首先要提及的是西藏佛教觉囊派大德高僧觉囊巴?多罗那它（1575-1634）著、张建木译《印度佛教史》（四川民族，1988），该著完成于1603年，自问世后一直被推崇为研究印度佛教史权威著作，目前是藏文汉译。吕澂《印度佛教史略》（商务印书馆，1924）和《佛教史表》（上海佛学书局）、《印度佛学源流略讲》（上海人民，1979）为印度佛教史翘楚之作。后者以时间为序，立足汉藏文献，对勘巴利文三藏，以及现存有关梵文原典，系统阐述印度佛学不同阶段学说特点和变化。巫白慧特立独行，用英文写作《印度哲学与佛教》（中国佛教文化研究所，1994)，为大陆治佛学者撰写的第一本英文佛教史论著，介绍了印度佛学史上的种姓制度、《奥义书》、龙树哲学、现代中国印度哲学研究和今日中国佛教概况。[英]埃利奥特著、李荣熙译《印度教与佛教史纲》（第一册，商务印书馆，1982）对印度教与佛教的起源、发展、教义等作了系统介绍，对印度教与佛教之间差别作了客观阐述。[英]渥德尔著、王世安译《印度佛教史》（商务印书馆，1987）提到贵霜时期苏罗娑和犍陀罗两个学派之间已经有些交互影响，尔后犍陀罗艺术优势逐渐上升，后传播到中原。[日]佐佐木教悟（1915－）等著、杨曾文、姚长寿合译《印度佛教史概说》（复旦大学，1989）探讨了印度佛教产生、传播、发展、灭亡的流变史，分析各阶段佛教特点。论文方面，段晴《戒日王的宗教政策》，方广锠《关于印度初期佛教研究的几个问题》，立论各自不同，成就平分秋色。朱锡强《印度佛教的传播对古代亚洲国际交往的影响》探讨了印度佛教传播对古代亚洲各国政治、经济、文化诸方面影响。
印度佛教艺术也得到热情关注，常任侠编著《印度与东南亚美术发展史》（上海人民美术，1980）探讨了印度史前及上古艺术、古代和中世纪的佛教艺术；常任侠、罗照辉《从中国典籍看印度阿育王时期的艺术》运用众多汉文史料，对印度阿育王时期的佛教艺术及其特点进行探讨；王钺《印度造型艺术的外来因素问题》从欧亚大陆东西方文化交流的角度，探讨了诞生于印度河和恒河流域的印度造型艺术的外来因素问题，其中包括巴比伦、波斯、希腊、塞人等在不同时期对其造成的影响，指出举世闻名的印度造型艺术尤其是佛教造型艺术渗透了大量外来因素，其辉煌成就是亚欧大陆东西文化交流的硕果。译文主要有：[印]M.N.德什班德著《印度佛教石窟壁画的主要特征》、[印]M.C.约什著《印度岩刻佛教建筑概观》、[印]P.贝纳尔吉著《阿旃陀?巴米扬?吐鲁番与敦煌间的文化联系》都由杨富学译，[日]宫治昭著、顾虹译，蔡伟堂校《印度佛传美术的三种类型》均有可资参考内容。
两汉之交佛教传入中原汉地，所经由路径目前有陆路传入说、海路传入说和川滇缅印道传入说（时间最晚），而经西域陆路向中原传播时，恰逢当地人口稀少、物质匮乏，不足以支持佛教寺院大面积存在，于是继续东传，在人口相对密集、财力雄厚的汉地全面兴盛。西域由此成为佛教北传必经之地，在佛教东渐史上占有重要地位，对汉传佛教、藏传佛教在许多方面都产生过巨大影响。
二十世纪上半叶，诸多论著对佛教在西域假途而过，进入中原众说纷纭，莫衷一是。传统学者梁启超率先介入，撰写外国来华僧考、中外佛教交流分期论文，在《佛学研究十八篇》（中华书局，1989影印本）的《佛教之初输入》、《佛教与西域》、《又佛教与西域》三篇文章中，考证佛教在西域传播发展状况，否定西域陆路传播说，提出佛教从海路传入内地之说。黄文弼《罗布淖尔考古记?佛教传入鄯善与西方文化输入问题》（中国西北科学考察团，1948）对西域的疏勒、于阗等地佛教传入年代问题进行考证，认为晚于中原。此论二十世纪后半叶仍有余波，吴焯《佛教东传与中国佛教艺术》（浙江人民，1991）从文化传播学角度论述佛教传入，其论文《从考古遗存看佛教传入西域的时间》从考古学角度进行论证，认为佛教传入西域较内地晚，最初在西域只是“过路”。宋肃瀛在《试论佛教在新疆的始传》则从文献角度进行论证，呼应吴焯的“跳跃式传播”。
另有大批学者则认为以上持论有欠公允，故予以修正，认定佛教最早经由西域传入中原。汤用彤《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》（中华书局，1983）考证佛教入华、永平求法诸传说、《四十二章经》，强调佛教东渐伊始经西域之大月氏、康居、安息的陆路交通。季羡林最初在《浮屠与佛》论文中提出佛教没有经过西域媒介，而从印度跳跃式进入中原，后在《再谈浮屠与佛》一文对以前所持观点进行修正，认为印度佛教分两阶段，经由大夏（后为大月氏）和塔里木河流域传入中原。吕澂《中国佛学源流略讲》（中华书局，1979）、任继愈主编《中国佛教史》（1～3卷，中国社会科学，1985～1988）、郭朋《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教》（齐鲁书社，1986）和《中国佛教简史》（福建人民，1990）等均持类似观点。
海内外学者探讨佛教是否经由西域东渐中原人言言殊，其重点与差异恰恰在于佛教传入时间、经由途径与地区。七十年代以来，国内学术界对西域开展历史、语言、民族、宗教、艺术、考古等多学科综合研究以来，早期佛教东渐问题又取得新的进展。陈恩志《佛教自有秦传入中国说》一文算得上标新立异，认为至迟到秦代已经发生佛教东渐，并阐述佛教传入之标准、东渐时代背景、在塔里木盆地的兴起，佛教经西域传入中原的时间、途径。
塞外辽阔的土地上草原、戈壁、荒漠相互错杂，不便通行，又有高山横亘其间，道路崎岖艰险，加上小国林立，匈奴打压，故汉通西域之前该地难与外界沟通，处于封闭和半封闭状态，东西方文明很是隔膜。中西交通仅限于局部地区，尽管绵延久远的玉石之路早已有了相当发展，但其规模与影响仍大受局限，故长时间挣扎在封闭与开放之间。西汉以降，中央王朝大规模经略西北边陲，西域无边热土与中原血脉相连，逐步纳入华夏领土框架内，官方使团和民间商人频繁往来。西域都护府设立后全面治理塔里木盆地 ，并控制了天山以北，葱岭以西大部分地区，天山南北、葱岭东西和地中海沿岸各主要交通陆续由此对接联网，最终贯通中西全线。绿洲丝绸之路为中西政治、经济、文化交流大动脉，交通态势深受当时历史条件影响，且文化思想交流后来居上，像极联合国教科文组织标举的“丝绸之路是对话之路”，印度佛教东渐和中国佛教回流正与丝路畅通密不可分。虽然绿洲丝路在近古被渐渐遗忘，湮没于历史和传说中，但是在中古和上古时期却确立起了独一无二的历史地位，今天要将经济、文化、宗教密切相关的整个西北腹地一并考虑，仍不可回避历史上与丝绸之路的密切相连。事实上，开放的丝绸之路带给西域海纳百川的文化气度，西风古道一直是解析西域佛教众多相关问题的关键因素，贺昌群（1903—1973）《古代西域交通与法显印度巡礼》（湖北人民，1956）曾对此多方探讨。
另一方面，西域地处东西南北交通要冲，种族部族关系复杂，依据考古发掘其文明肇始于公元前2000年，游牧部族不断迁徙和绿洲政权频繁更迭，使民族、政治和宗教更紧密联系起来。环塔里木位于天山南部，南缘昆仑山、喀喇昆仑山、帕米尔和北缘天山形成“C”字形地理结构，像巨人伸长双臂拱卫盆地，对中原大地敞开胸怀，华夏各部族也很早挺进腹地，形成丝绸之路前文化时期的玉石之路。远古时代，西域对中原来说终究是个遥远的纷争之地，随着历史发展它后来逐步成为地缘政治、经济、文化的冲突地带，但无核心部族，又受各自利益、宗教信仰矛盾困扰，彼此关系紧张，管理混乱，面对这么一个整合不足的战略空间，中央王朝反应不足与反应过度都弊多利少。中央王朝长时间将不少西域诸国当作藩属，纳入地方官制轨道，相当于中原诸侯国，各自境域跟相应地理单元相吻合，中原诸族向来把中华当作一个整体来考虑，依据“与邻为善”理念经略大西北，挺进大西域，走向亚非欧。历代中央王朝则以该战略思想驾驭中原与西域关系，使得农耕与游牧等不同文明体系相互交融，在良性竞争中求得共同的安全与繁荣。
中央王朝政治开放，经济繁荣，文化昌盛，乐观豪迈的气派风范对周边各部族产生了很强吸引力，亚非欧许多国家使臣、商人、学者纷至沓来，形成一个巨大文化圈。中央政府具有连接不同区域携手共进的雄厚实力，成为地区整合的中枢，出于地缘现实和未来发展的战略思考，也致力于西域地区融合，协调各方关系。西汉积极开边拓土，经略西北边陲，原来一度分散的西域很快趋于统一，心向中原，塞外出现了社会稳定、经济发展和文化繁荣新局面，佛教随后流播西域，东汉时沿丝路南北道弥漫塔里木盆地。西域是历代中央王朝构建西北地缘战略的重要舞台和坚实依托，塞内外互相碰撞交流，取长补短，而且依靠丝绸之路红线相牵，促进了东西方繁荣与发展，谱写了人类历史上无比灿烂辉煌的历史篇章。十九世纪，三次访华的普鲁士舆地学和地质学家李希霍芬在《中国亲程旅行记》(1877－1912 年)中首用“丝绸之路”，当初仅指称古代世界从中原经今新疆而抵中亚、南亚的陆上通道，后来指示范围逐步扩大，囊括联结亚非欧的陆海交通总线，最后演化为东西方多领域交流代名词。这条具有历史意义的国际通道打破了来自北方游牧民族地缘遏制的强大阻力，把中华文化、印度文化、波斯－阿拉伯文化、希腊－罗马文化连接起来，彼此交汇碰撞，促进了深层次的交流对话。丝路畅通为各种宗教传播大开方便之门，汉唐时期随着丝绸之路空前兴盛，包括佛教在内的形形色色文明成果东渐西传不断融合发展，不仅留下了那个时代心态开放、傲视苍穹的进取精神，而且为后世留下了举世闻名的文化遗产。自此西域不再封闭，对中央政府而言不再茫远，而且中原文明西进，西方文明东渐的桥梁价值凸显。从严格历史学或地理学意义上考察，历史上的西域事实上是中华文明开放进取，互通共荣的另一种说法，毋庸置疑，在佛教传入中原过程中，两汉的西域治理起了催化作用。
汉文化不仅兼容并蓄接纳各地区各民族先进文化，而且慷慨地向外输出自己独特文明成果和优秀文化人才，推动人类文明进程，有力促进社会环境和民族心理的开放，使西域文明臻于繁荣。西域一直作为亚非欧几大文明圈的枢纽出现，东西方文明交流频繁展开，推动彼此深刻互动，成了一个具有世界性影响的文明福地。作为西域核心部分的环塔里木尤其灿烂辉煌，是人类文明汇集之地，而在这众多文化中，宗教无疑具有举足轻重的分量。由于西域复杂的部族关系和特殊的地理位置，决定了该地区宗教信仰多种并存，此消彼长，除了原始的萨满教，佛教、道教、祆教、摩尼教、景教、伊斯兰教先后传入，神灵之路折射出精粹的宗教哲学思想，遗留至今的古迹和经书仍回响着天路余音。
阿育王是佛教史上有名的护法天王，他持续派遣布教师四出弘法，比如摩诃勒弃多在安息、康居，末阐提在犍陀罗、迦湿弥罗，以至于中国佛教徒在自己疆土上为他建庙立像，遥祭所带来的繁荣局面，李海波《试论阿育王在佛教史上的地位》即在探讨阿育王为佛教传播与发展推波助澜的功德，兼说明当时佛教在西域传播的道路已被打通。宗教借助造像艺术传播，艺术也借助宗教信仰复活，论及于此，犍陀罗不可回避。犍陀罗先为大夏国所有，1世纪大月氏人贵霜王国（中国史籍习惯上称之为月氏）取而代之，5世纪中叶匈奴入侵后逐渐走向衰落。人们通常认为公元前3世纪左右发源于恒河流域的佛教已经传入犍陀罗，但七世纪玄奘到来时败相尽显，依据《大唐西域记》卷二记载：“伽蓝十余所，摧残荒废，芜漫萧条”，且已臣属他国。不过历史上犍陀罗艺术向四面八方传播，牵涉到印度佛教向西域早期移植问题。晁华山《从古代遗存看贵霜王朝佛教放射状外传的四重环带——兼论中国早期佛教遗存》结合古代遗存特点，论证了贵霜王朝时期佛教呈放射状向周围传播的“四重环带说”，即以犍陀罗和迦湿弥罗为中心，按照传播地区远近形成同心圆式的四重佛教文化环带。R?E?埃墨利克著、殷睛译《中亚的佛教》简要概述佛教在西域地区的传播及信仰状况，[德]弗兰兹?伯恩哈德著、姚崇新译《犍陀罗语与佛教在中亚的传播》认定犍陀罗语是佛教在西域初传的媒介，也是印度文化自西北经西域进入中原的媒介，并指出犍陀罗语在佛教传播方言的优越地位持续了相当长的时间。
公元前后，发源天竺的佛教在天山以南的于阗找到适合文化土壤，迅速扩展到疏勒、龟兹、鄯善，后又传入高昌，流播西域全境。1892年，法国格林勒在和田发现梵文《法句经》断简，被确定至少是2世纪的写本。1890年，英国鲍尔在库车附近发现梵文写经，经英国学者霍宁考证，断定是4～5世纪的梵文《孔雀王咒经》古写本。魏晋隋唐直至两宋，西域佛教传播和影响如日中天，梵呗不绝，洞窟密集，佛教文化渗入民众心灵深处，辉煌景象一直持续到10世纪以后。自公元前2世纪初传至公元15世纪衰败，西域早期佛教在长达1700余年的漫长岁月中，经历了传入、发展、鼎盛乃至没落衰亡的过程。清末民初，在各国考察队纷纷来华之前，不少朝野人士手中拥有多少不等的出土文献材料。流放伊犁的祁韵士（1751—1815）在《西陲竹枝词?龟兹》已经注意到龟兹出土的唐人写经：“轮回经写唐人笔，佛洞穷宠石壁奇”，但还没有太留意它们的学术价值。20世纪初，一些中国学者对于硕果累累的西方中亚史研究成果逐步重视，罗振玉（1866—1940）刊布并考释了一些有关西域的重要文书，如《慧超往五天竺国传》；王国维（1877—1927）利用他提出的二重证据法，写出了一系列重要的西域佛教论文，比如《高昌宁朔将军麴斌造寺碑跋》（1919，见《王国维全集》）；陈寅恪（1890—1969）《大乘稻芊经随听疏跋》（1927）、《有相夫人生天因缘曲跋》（1927）、 《童受〈喻鬘论〉梵文残本跋》（1927）、《忏悔灭罪金光明经冥报传跋》（1928）、《须达起精舍因缘曲跋》（1928）为西域佛教史研究大有补益（以上均收入《金明馆丛稿初编》及《二编》）。无可否认，在罗振玉、王国维、陈寅恪的史学研究中，西域佛教研究只是其中很少一部分，等20世纪下半叶，情况大有改观，研究视角不断扩散。陈戈《汉唐时期新疆佛教流行情况述略》探讨了佛教传入塔里木盆地的时间、流行情况、不同教派及其原因，陈世良《关于佛教初传龟兹》认为佛教初传龟兹在汉武帝时期。耿世民《佛教在古代新疆和突厥、回鹘人中的传播》简要论述佛教在新疆传播、兴衰以及回鹘文佛经的保存状况，认为佛教早在贵霜王朝丘就却时期即已传入南疆和田地区。
西域文化的繁荣发展始终绕不开中原汉文化的强大影响，西域佛教也无法回避中原汉学的浸渍。印度佛教传入西域，两汉之际再传入中原，从此佛教徒和士大夫译经注疏，探究义理绵延不绝，经魏晋南北朝僧俗二界诸家的努力至隋唐始臻极盛，成为世界佛学中心。当权者的提倡、普通大众的信仰及寺院经济独立发展，为制定独特的宗教轨范制度，据有特定的势力范围提供了前提条件。只是经过长期发展，已是派别众多，经典浩繁，且多歧义，当时要建立佛教宗派，自然离不开“判教”以弥合佛教不同时期各类经典的矛盾，消解各派对同一经典理解上长期存在的分歧，从而建立一以贯之的理论体系。大师们长期独立地钻研佛法，演化为别开生面的理论，同一派别佛教僧侣思想遗产和物质遗产世代相承，及先后出现的各种不同判教，发展到隋唐时代就有了许多大的佛教宗派。思想方面独树一帜，组织方面自立门户，只是中原汉文化有深厚的中庸文化背景，较好地控制并消解了印度佛教的极端主义，使不同的派别、互异的经典得到系统组织，各给一个相当地位。从南朝末年开始，一些佛教学派渐和特定的世俗统治集团相依托，结合日益发展巩固的寺院经济，学派最终演化为宗派，此后逐步壮大。
中原汉学底蕴深厚，擅长学理思辨，佛教逐步华化，有求佛法者纷至沓来，致使佛法不断回流，造成西域“汉风窟”随处可见。喀拉墩古城佛寺佛殿的平面为方形，在两层殿墙的中央以方木构筑方框，内填沙土，筑成方形基座，除佛殿外，有院门、僧院和僧房，在僧房还发现的一批汉文木简。交河故城曾出土泥塑头像壁画及题记残块、泥塑装饰饰件、陶、木、石、铜器、开元通宝和汉文纸文书等。在北庭高昌回鹘佛寺洞龛中回鹘文和汉文墨书题记，随处可见，但大部均漫漶。特别是1999年库车阿格乡发现的阿艾石窟，是盛唐时期汉文化在新疆传播的典型代表。壁画间存9处汉文题记，壁画中人物丰腴肥硕，与敦煌汉风浓厚的人物形象相似，与唐代中原以丰满为美的时尚有着密切关系。清理研究者初步定为，此窟是唐代中期开凿的礼拜堂性质的方形窟，是由唐安西都护府的驻军官兵及其家属开凿。1983年中国学者马雍参加巴基斯坦政府组织的沿喀拉昆仑公路的科学考察活动，对公路沿线的石刻汉文题记做了研究，后发表在《南亚研究》1984年1期《巴基斯坦北部所见“大魏”使者的岩刻题记》也算一大佐证。
文化大师与沧桑梵韵
事在人为，人以事显，西域佛教史本身是中国佛教史重要组成部分，而在西域佛教史研究中必然涉及杰出历史人物，这主要包括历代中央王朝和南亚各国之间互派的使臣以及致力于传教求法的僧侣。在古代交通极为不便状况下，漫长旅程使得使臣和僧侣深入了解沿途政治、经济、文化各方面情形，有的将沿途所见，缀以成书，成为后世研究西域佛教史不可或缺的宝贵史料。
佛教初兴，便有印度僧人东来传法，后来由西域向中原传教弘法的胡僧也络绎不绝，其中尤以大月氏、安息居多，如月支之支娄迦谶、支曜，安息之安世高、昙无谛，康居之康巨、康孟详，罽宾之僧伽跋澄、昙摩耶舍，龟玆之帛延、佛图澄。刘欣如《贵霜时期东渐佛教的特色》简述早期佛教的传播方式和变异形态，着重分析促使僧侣克服千难万险东来传法的动力，试图从一个侧面了解和分析在佛教东传这个宏伟历史进程中一些奇特现象。吴焯则在20世纪80年代，对梁代僧迦佛陀、吉底、俱摩罗菩提三位画师的史料做了辩证。被称为中国佛教史上“四大译师”之一的鸠摩罗什（343～413年）生于龟兹，年少时曾随其母到罽宾等地学习佛法，后返回龟兹成为著名大乘学者，终老于东晋十六国时期后秦。对于他的生平及贡献，许多中国佛教史研究论著都有相当多的篇幅加以评述，如任继愈《中国佛教史》、郭朋《隋唐佛教》（齐鲁书社，1979）和《鸠摩罗什评传》（齐鲁书社，1982）、汤用彤《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》。论文有梁启超《又佛教与西域》研究东汉至隋唐东来传教的僧人国籍等情况；马雍《东汉后期中亚人来华考》结合《高僧传》有关资料，分析东汉后期中亚人来华热潮，并探讨重要的佛教僧徒、商贾、贵族、游客等生平和事迹；此外胡戟《龟兹名僧鸠摩罗什传》，丁明夷《鸠摩罗什与龟兹佛教艺术》、陈世良《鸠摩罗什年表考略》可了解该时期中原、西域与南亚等地文化交流状况。
东来弘法和西行巡礼相得益彰，而中央政府派遣使臣的历史可追溯至西汉。张骞凿空西域，又派副使到达南亚身毒（印度），东汉班超、班勇父子经营西域多年，他们对佛教东传都起了穿针引线作用，但基于当时佛教自身发展态势有限，跟佛教难有太深因缘。西域佛乡终究深深感染着中原诸地，成为不少求法者圣地，民众传说中的小西天，魏晋以后中原僧人为了寻求真谛，西行求法者日众，朱士行就是一个杰出代表，更有不少高僧前赴后继直捣黄龙，成就最大者当属法显、玄奘。梁启超在《千五百年前之中国留学生》对魏晋隋唐众多僧人加入求法行列作过精辟论述，考证魏晋以降中原西行求法僧侣动机、经行路线、主要事迹及成就、著述。
三国时颖川(今河南许昌)朱士行不入流俗，品格超凡，首开远赴西域求经壮举，梁僧祐《出三藏记集》卷十三《朱士行传》说他:“少怀远悟，脱落尘俗，出家以后，便以大法为己任”，“志业精粹，气韵明烈，坚正方直，劝沮不能移焉”。魏甘露五年(260年)他踏上西行求法征途，出雍州，过阳关，穿沙漠，闯戈壁，历经九死一生，最终到达西域佛国于阗，苦心研读佛经，遣徒送经回汉地之后，自己继续滞留于阗，以八十高龄圆寂它乡。于阗接近佛教源头印度，香火十分鼎盛，后来许多僧人都到于阗求经学法，或取道于阗赴葱岭以西，朱士行实为后世西行求法铺就了道路。
东晋高僧法显（约342～423年）赴印度求取佛经归国，义熙十二年（416年）前后写成游记《佛国记》，涉及中印之间水陆交通各方面状况，以及当时印度笈多帝国超日王时期国家制度、社会生活、风土人情、宗教派别，是研究古代中印关系史、西域佛教史和印度历史文化重要资料。早在19世纪，法国学者雷慕沙（1788—1832）遗作《法显传?佛国记》（Paris　1836）译注本几乎荟萃了当时国外有关西域史的全部知识。20世纪中国学术界已经重视对法显及其《佛国记》研究，早期研究著作有丁谦《晋释法显佛国记地理考证》（丹徒陈氏横山草堂丛书本，1915）从历史地理角度进行考证；岑仲勉《佛游天竺记考释》（上海商务印书馆，1934）对欧洲人、日本人的研究进行订补；汤用彤《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》对法显本人的评价颇为精当，[日]足六喜六著、张小柳、何健民译《法显传考证》（国立编译馆，1937）也颇为引人注目。80年代以来，法显及《佛国记》研究取得新进展，章巽《法显传校注》（上海古籍，1985）依据版本比较全，校核水准比较高，详述了法显大师的业绩，其注释则在参考中外各家观点基础上提出自己见解。季羡林《法显》（江西教育，1998）、靳生禾《旅行家法显》（中华书局，1980）、谢方《法显》（天津新蕾，1993）均有一定参考价值。
唐代王玄策曾作为政府使节三次造访印度，成为中印文化交流史上重要人物，学术界对他着力特多。王玄策生卒年不详，才干奇绝，极富传奇色彩，初唐所撰回忆录《中天竺行记》为亲历亲见之记载，奇幻绝伦，史料价值自不待言，可惜不为时人所重，完本宋以后佚，散逸残篇见于唐释道世《法苑珠林》、唐释道宣《释迦方志》，活跃的史实能从《旧唐书》、《新唐书》的《西域传》中搜寻。20世纪以来中外学术界对他的生平及史迹给予高度评价，先有柳诒徵《王玄策事迹》，冯承钧《王玄策事辑》，[法]列维著、冯承钧译《王玄策使印度记》（中华书局，1957），50年代以后，则有陆庆夫《论王玄策对中印交通的贡献》和《关于王玄策史迹研究的几点商榷》，莫任南《王玄策第二次奉使印度考》，阴松生《王玄策出使印度、尼泊尔诸问题》等论文。所有这些研究中，当数孙修身最为全面，专著《王玄策事迹钩沉》以时间为序，按事件分类，对王玄策事迹及其贡献进行详尽考证评价，而对1990年6月发现于西藏的《大唐天竺使出铭》，孙修身《〈大唐天竺使出铭〉的研究》不失为考释王玄策研究史料的佳作。需要补充一句的是，林梅村《〈大唐天竺使出铭〉校释》结合考古材料和语言研究成果，可供进一步研究参考。
同时代的玄奘大师（600～664年）是后世学人更为关注的焦点，《大唐西域记》由玄奘法师口述，门人辩机笔受编撰，共12卷。记述玄奘本人赴印度求法经历，对当时西域、南亚、西亚城邦和地区人文地理、风俗习惯、宗教信仰、语言文字、文学艺术等方面叙述也颇为详细，迄今为止仍是研究西域、南亚史地以及中外关系史方面极其重要文献。19世纪，法国学者雷慕沙的弟子儒莲（1797—1873）翻译了玄奘的《大唐西域记》（Paris ，1857—1858）和慧立、彦悰的《大慈恩寺三藏法师传》（Paris， 1853）。当今学者对玄奘及其《大唐西域记》的研究主要包括玄奘生平、佛学思想、西行取经译经活动，印度与西域等地历史地理、佛教发展状况等。二十世纪上半叶，孙毓修、苏渊雷、杨非、习之、赵宗桂等人对玄奘西行活动及其在印度求法生涯均有简要研究，丁谦的《释辩机大唐西域记地理考证二卷、五印度疆域风俗制度考略一卷》（丹徒陈氏横山草堂丛书本，1913）及《大唐西域记地理考证二卷附录一卷、印度风俗总记一卷》（蓬莱轩地理学丛书本，1915）则集中对《大唐西域记》进行研究。下半叶，就玄奘专题研究日渐增多，比如马佩主编《玄奘研究》（河南大学，1997），黄珅《玄奘西行》（上海古籍，1996），黄心川、葛黔君主编《玄奘研究文集》（中州古籍，1995），陈扬炯《玄奘评传》（京华，1995），吴恩扬《玄奘》（天津新蕾，1993）等。特别值得一提的是，杨廷福关于玄奘生平事迹研究的成果较多，所著《唐僧取经》（中华书局，1981）与《玄奘》（上海人民，1985）简要通俗，另外两部研究性著作《玄奘论集》（齐鲁书社，1986）和《玄奘年谱》（中华书局，1988）不可小觑，其中《玄奘年谱》根据有关古籍将玄奘的生平事迹按年代列出，对一些有争议的问题加以详细考订，同时列出与玄奘有关的国内外大师、佛教诸流派、有关人物事迹等。《大唐西域记》的校译、导读及研究此时成为关注重点：章巽校点《大唐西域记》（上海人民，1977），向达辑《大唐西域记古本三种》（中华书局，1981），周连宽著《大唐西域记史地研究丛稿》（中华书局，1984），章巽、芮传明著《大唐西域记导读》，季羡林等译注《大唐西域记今译》（陕西人民，1985），芮传明译注《大唐西域记全译》（贵州人民，1995），周国林注译《大唐西域记》（岳麓书社，1999）等。季羡林等人的《大唐西域记校注》（中华书局，1985）在吸收中外学者研究成果基础上，对原著进行全面校勘，对书中涉及到的地名、人名、族名、典章、名物等进行了注释和考证，提出了一些新观点，前言对中印时代背景、玄奘家世、西行求法动机、在印度活动情况、归国后所从事译经弘法活动及其影响等方面作了全面总结，对该书作了客观评价。
高僧义净（公元635～713年）西行求法走的是海路，与本专题不甚相干，但他撰写的《大唐西域求法高僧传》记述包括作者在内的唐初赴印度求法僧人经历，反映了公元七世纪南亚、南海历史、地理、文化、宗教等方面情况，是中西交通史和佛教史的宝贵资料，目前国内王邦维对该书研究和校注具有较高的学术价值。唐末五代，由于中国内乱以及佛教自身发展状况，求法之事暂告消歇。北宋初年，佛教一度复兴，传经求法又盛极一时。受极端主义左右，九世纪后，佛教在印度渐趋衰微，汉地佛教界和印度极少来往，东来弘法和西行巡礼的僧侣人数日渐减少。唯独西藏地区和印度来往密切，重心就由汉传转移到藏传，并导致后来藏传佛教在西域续接早期佛教文化香火。正缘于此，明成祖永乐年间，西域派使臣向明朝“年年进贡，岁岁来朝”，陈诚身负重任，先后五次出使西域也没有显露与佛教过从甚密迹象，所撰《西域行程记》和《西域番国志》（中华书局，1991）记述从肃州起程后的行程和所经丝绸之路的具体路线，介绍沿途山川城堡、风土人情、婚丧习俗等社会情况，却与佛教甚为隔膜。
佛教自境外传入伊始，大德高僧便与翻译活动结下了不解之缘，导致了中华翻译史上第一次高潮，而且西域译经高僧的足迹和他们的翻译成果遍及中原，影响了华夏几千年的思想史、哲学史、文化史。佛教东传路径，多为冰雪覆盖的崇山峻岭，或风沙弥漫的沙漠戈壁，在那遥远的时代，交通简陋，路途艰辛难以言喻，而中原外交使节、佛教高僧广泛活跃于西域，一方面吸收西域各民族佛教精华，一方面传播中原华夏文化，促使民族、宗教不断交流融和，导致四方归化，在文化史上影响深远。
佛教遗址与艺术宝库
地处东西方交通枢纽的西域不仅在早期佛教传播过程中起过特殊作用，而且在漫长的历史进程中不断汲取诸民族文化精华，形成极富特色的佛教艺术。从3世纪以来，阿富汗兴都库什山，斯库鲁阿布上游巴米羊摩崖石窟开始兴建；东汉至西晋，库车森木塞姆、拜城克孜尔、鄯善吐峪沟、库车库木吐拉、焉耆锡克沁、库车克孜尔尕哈等千佛洞陆续开凿。目前西域历史古迹中佛教遗存占有重要地位，从寺庙的建立、石窟的开凿，到音乐舞蹈、绘画雕塑样样卓然独立，尤其在塔里木河流域演绎为风华绝代的艺术长廓。大致情况是，在塔里木盆地片片绿洲上，特别是南缘营造了许多寺院、佛塔（叶城西南80公里左右的棋盘乡参差不齐十几个佛窟终究是个特例），而在北缘即天山山脉沟谷中，开凿了座座石窟，它们在许多方面对中原佛教产生过巨大影响。
两汉西域丝路主要是塔克拉玛干的南北二道，隋唐发展为天山南北的三道，隋裴矩在《西域图记》中说：“发自敦煌，至于西海，凡有三道，各有襟带”。天山南北的丝路佛教重镇主要是塔克拉玛干南缘揭盘陀(塔什库尔干)、于阗、鄯善（若羌）一片受佛教艺术熏陶的地区，在且末沿车尔臣河上溯到达罗布泊，它的东北向就是楼兰；北缘地带由西向东依次是疏勒、龟兹、焉耆，向东北上行又是高昌；天山以北分别是庭州（吉木萨尔）、伊吾（哈密）。佛教东渐，受沿途政治、经济、文化影响，与印度原始佛教风貌渐行渐远，其寺庙塔窟建筑经历了一个西域化过程，形制及建筑方法结合本地特色多有创新，而其精致成熟则是在环塔里木地区完成。该地寺庙塔窟等佛教建筑介乎葱岭以西与中原汉地之间，实用与审美都呈现“过渡”状态，具有多方面价值，但随着佛教衰弱，环境恶化，它们跟村落城镇一道湮没于风沙尘埃，现仅能从残存遗迹和文献记载寻觅历史踪迹。
历史上，西域曾是古刹遍地，半城塔影，帕米尔以东、天山以南的佛教人文遗迹尤其壮观。洛浦热瓦克寺，中间为覆钵式佛塔，塔四周筑墙，墙内外贴塑一排排佛或菩萨立像，寺院围着塔建筑，院墙之间形成右旋礼诵回廊，建筑格局仍有印度遗风。近年发现的玉珑喀什河西岸买力克阿瓦提佛寺、克里雅河下游喀拉墩古城周围两座已被严重破坏的小型佛寺、尼雅遗址佛教寺院，时代大约都在东汉，因其时代较早而弥足珍贵，对丝路南道佛教文化研究具有重大意义。交河故城现存佛教建筑是从4～5世纪的车师王国，历经北朝隋唐，一直到回鹘时期陆续修建和维修而保存至今，城内佛寺遍布，佛堂林立，佛塔相望。高昌回鹘佛寺还越过崇山峻岭，分布于天山以北，吉木萨尔的北庭佛寺遗址是高昌回鹘在其陪都建造的王家寺院，气势雄伟，塑像精美，为研究北庭和高昌地区回鹘佛教寺院形制和塑像壁画等提供了极为宝贵资料，孙秉根、孟凡人、陈戈合撰的考古报告《北庭高昌回鹘佛寺遗址》（辽宁美术，1991）对此多有论述。丝路南道策勒丹丹乌里克、民丰尼雅、若羌米兰、楼兰等地夯土佛教建筑，以佛塔为中心，而寺塔一体，将异域佛教文化与土著民族文化巧妙融合，又不时惊现中原艺术特色。如今喀什莫尔、洛浦热瓦克、楼兰、尼雅、安迪尔和高昌、交河故城等遗址佛塔保存得相对可以，并可洞察佛塔形制、规模、结构、功能诸方面不断完善的轨迹。
汉传佛教石窟大约始凿于3世纪，盛行于5～8世纪，16世纪以后开凿的数量就较少了，主要分布在天山南部（古代西域）、甘肃西部（古代河西）、黄河流域和长江流域。单就塔里木河流域来说，现存的龟兹石窟群以克孜尔、库木吐拉为代表，包括森木赛姆、玛扎伯赫、克孜尔尕哈、温巴什、台台尔、吐乎拉克艾肯等石窟；高昌石窟群以吐峪沟、柏孜克里克为代表，包括雅尔湖、奇康、拜西哈尔、胜金口、大小桃儿沟等石窟；还有焉耆的锡克沁（七个星明屋）等石窟。这三大石窟群具有举足轻重历史地位，文化内涵丰富多彩：一方面，数量庞大，分布区域辽阔，成为中国石窟的重要组成部分；另一方面，由建筑、绘画、雕塑组成博大精深、绚丽夺目的综合性佛教艺术殿堂，为世界瞩目；此外，表现出强烈的地域和民族特色，远古时代塔里木盆地就有人类生息，并有较高文化，这是南疆石窟艺术的根基。佛教本身包容的印度文化形态和思想观念，又在本土地理、人文、历史因素基础上吸收印度、希腊、波斯等艺术成分，成为研究东西方经济文化交流的形象资料。
综观西域文明史，佛教寺庙构建、石窟开凿、音乐舞蹈、绘画雕塑不断汲取诸部族文明成果，形成了极富地域特色的文化景观，在中国文化艺术史乃至世纪文化艺术史上都占有重要地位。50年代末，民丰县境内出土有东汉蜡染佛教人物像棉布，上身半裸，双手持一物，物上有葡萄，项上有串珠，头部后有多层圆光，造像艺术已非常高超。尼雅遗址佛教寺院遗址中发现的木雕像，在一长方体木块上，正背两面用浮雕技法各刻一个站立菩萨形象，上用墨线勾勒出菩萨五官、手指及穿着服饰衣褶，线条流畅，人物刻画非常形象逼真，显示了高超技法。喀拉墩古城两座佛寺在平整、抹光粘土质墙壁表层再施一层石膏，然后绘画，所绘制佛陀肖像、图案化花朵和植物，总体风格与健陀罗相似。丝路中道洞窟主体建筑有中心柱窟、方形窟、带侧道的方形窟和大像窟，壁画有本生故事、佛传故事、因缘故事，或庄严清净，或轻灵飘逸，蕴含着深邃人生哲理和扶世济世伦理教化色彩。窟顶（藻井、天井、人字披）、龛座（龛楣、莲座）、中央龛柱、背光（项光、身光）、服饰和壁画边缘的莲花、云纹、卷叶、人物、鸟兽等自由舒卷，灿烂饱满。画面常绘有秀丽山水花木，辉煌楼阁亭台、水榭雕栏，空中祥云缭绕，优雅轻盈飞天播洒着满天缤纷香花。总而言之，该地菩萨圣殿庄严肃穆而又温馨宁静，利于广结佛缘，而且表现出从犍陀罗到塔里木佛教艺术的发展历程。
佛教艺术传入西域腹地塔里木地区，建筑、绘画、雕塑、音乐、文学各个领域明显受到帕西影响，在吸取本土特色基础上融合外来文化，经过长时间去粗取精，逐渐形成独特艺术风格。学术界对西域佛教艺术研究关注重点首先在追根溯源：常任侠著《丝绸之路与西域文化艺术》（上海文艺，1981），共分四编，一编总论丝路开拓、西域交通、经济文化交流概貌，二、三、四编分别专论音乐、舞蹈、杂技艺术的东渐，并穷本溯源，一一勾勒各类艺术渊源、演变、发展和影响。论文方面：罗照辉《印度犍陀罗艺术对中国审美观念的影响》即从绘画、雕塑、发髻、崇尚莲花的佛教象征意义等方面探讨犍陀罗艺术审美观念的影响，张玉兰《巴基斯坦部落地区的佛教文化古迹》对向以“佛教艺术殿堂”闻名于世的犍陀罗佛教文化古迹及其所表现文化特征进行探讨，王惠民《古代印度宾头卢信仰的产生及其东传》对释迦牟尼弟子之一宾头卢信仰在印度的产生及东传以及敦煌宾头卢信仰的特点进行探讨。杨瑞琳《中国佛教艺术演变略谈》一文从雕刻、绘画和建筑等方面谈印度佛教对中国艺术影响，其中对西域佛教艺术有所涉及。陈传席《中国早期佛教艺术样式的四次变革及其原因》认为最早传入中国的佛教艺术都是天竺式，并将其按时间顺序分成四个阶段，分析其变革原因。
其次着力考察历史交往在文化形态演变中的作用，探讨佛教寺庙、石窟建筑、佛像、雕刻、壁画等艺术遗存及其与印度、希腊和中国中原诸文化因素关系。[英]约翰?马歇尔著、王冀青译《犍陀罗佛教艺术》（甘肃教育，1989）探讨了犍陀罗佛教艺术形成、特点、对外传播及影响等方面内容。李涛《佛教与佛教艺术》（西安交通大学，1989）分“佛教篇”与“佛教艺术篇”两部分，结合考古资料（尤其是中国部分），深入浅出介绍佛教创立与教义、佛教寺院制度与仪轨，并分析印度佛教艺术和中国佛教寺院建筑、造像题材、石窟艺术关联。韩翔、朱英荣《龟兹石窟》（新疆大学，1990）探讨了龟兹石窟诞生的地质条件、历史分期以及龟兹石窟建筑、雕塑、绘画和文字等内容，分析龟兹石窟与中原、犍陀罗、波斯、印度、希腊文化之间关系。吴焯《佛教东传与中国佛教艺术》（浙江人民，1991）循佛教产生、演变，逐渐东渐以及最终与本土文化相融合主线，论述西域佛教艺术，并介绍中国佛教和佛教艺术与印度及佛教传播路线上其他外来文化联系。全书资料丰富，论证充分，时有新解。国家文物局教育处《佛教石窟考古概要》（文物，1993）概述中国石窟寺考古状况，笔力集中于新疆、陕甘宁、华北与南方地区石窟；探讨印度佛教的起源、早期佛教建筑与浮雕、密教的寺院与造像，以及犍陀罗、巴米扬石窟、克什米尔、阿姆河流域的佛寺、造像、岩画与题记、遗址。穆舜英、祁小山、张平《中国新疆古代艺术》（新疆美术，1995）从艺术角度全面审视新疆古代文物，对其所揭示的文化内涵、东西文化交流所带来的影响均有涉及，有助于了解新疆古代文化艺术的发展与演变，以及东方与西方、南亚与内陆欧亚古代文化艺术交流状况。学术论文涉及面就更为广阔，但集中反映在塔里木盆地的人文荟萃现象，对于研究希腊、罗马、南亚与西域、中原艺术交流大有补益。朱云宝《丝绸之路上的佛塔》论述丝绸之路上佛塔的形制和功用演变，及印度佛教对西域的影响，彭树智《历史交往的丰厚馈赠——论阿富汗地区的犍陀罗艺术》一文着重从艺术性上审视犍陀罗的希腊－印度佛教艺术，欧阳友徽《古代中印文化交流的一个例证——目连传说的演变》探讨伴随佛教而流传到西域及中原地区的印度目连传说演变史，侯灿《新疆在汉魏时期中西文化交流中的地位的几个问题》着重论述汉魏时期帕米尔以西文化在塔里木河流域绿洲地区的传播、影响以及发展状况，涉及贵霜时期佉卢文的影响、婆罗迷文的东传及其发展、犍陀罗艺术的影响与传播。邱陵《新疆米兰佛寺壁画：“有翼天使”》分析米兰佛寺“有翼天使”壁画的发现与再发现、表现形式和艺术风格、成画年代及人文背景，认定希腊化的佛教艺术通过贵霜人传入塔里木盆地。羊毅勇《尼雅遗址所反映的中外文化交流》探讨尼雅遗址所反映的西域土著文化因素，中原汉文化和印度文化影响。顺便插一句，学术界探讨西域佛教与中原文化的内在亲和性，指的就是印度佛教经西域传入中原，又回流到西域带来文化的多元互动，在库木吐拉、天山大峡谷等地所形成的“汉风窟”即是佐证。
西域，尤其是其核心地域塔里木盆地，佛教文化遗存数量庞大，却不像敦煌遗留大量文献，因此佛塔、寺院、石窟、壁画为学者聚焦所在。［法］莫尼克?玛雅尔(1939 —) 女士长期从事丝路西域的佛教艺术研究，《西域的石窟与古建筑》(1983 年) 是研究丝路建筑与装饰艺术的代表作。温玉成《中国石窟与文化艺术》（上海人民，1993）全面论述中国石窟艺术，西域石窟建筑、雕塑、绘画内容也不少。晁华山《佛陀之光——印度与中亚佛教胜迹》（文物，2001）以佛教发展史为纲，叙述各历史时期印度与中亚佛寺、造像特点。黄文昆《佛教初传与早期中国佛教艺术》认为大体在贵霜王朝迦腻色迦时期，佛教经由攀越葱岭的沙碛之路向东传播，但一开始并未直接与印度沟通，而是以月氏、安息等为中介，该文还描述早期中国佛教艺术在各地所呈现不同特点。具体到塔里木河流域，常书鸿《新疆石窟艺术》（中共中央党校，1996）以一个画家眼光探讨了龟兹、焉耆、高昌石窟的分布情况、创造年代以及艺术特点等问题，而龟兹石窟的探讨是重中之重，朱英荣《龟兹石窟综述》主要对克孜尔石窟的内容、特点、兴衰等方面进行了探讨。近期，王征则以画家眼光，探讨龟兹石窟的断代，弥补了德国格伦威德尔等人论述的缺陷。在塔里木河流域，菱形构图虽非龟兹佛教艺术独有，却是其笼罩全局的重大特色。它源于龟兹源远流长艺术传统，因此在早期并不很明显，后在佛教教义与画面布局双重因素推动下，5～6世纪成为壁画构图主导形式，每个菱格中画着不同本生故事、因缘故事、佛传故事，将有限的穹顶与窟壁开拓成一个大千世界，扩大了绘画艺术表现空间的层次和深度，宁强《从印度到中国——某些本生故事构图形式的比较》就以此为根基比较印度和新疆某些本生故事构图形式不同特点。诚然，一种艺术类型无论影响有多大，都会在其传播伸展过程中，受当地自然条件限制、被当地文化传统改造，逐步走向本地化。斯塔维斯基著、路远译《古代中亚艺术》（陕西旅游，1992），普加琴科娃、列穆佩著，陈继周、李琪译《中亚古代艺术》（新疆美术摄影，1994），马里奥?布萨格里等著，许建英、何汉民译《中亚佛教艺术》（新疆美术摄影，1992），三部关于西域古代造型艺术译著均从艺术考古角度论及东西文化对该区域艺术形成、发展及流派、风格的影响，却得出相似结论：西域艺术在不同阶段，先后移植和模仿过波斯、古希腊、罗马、印度和中国中原的艺术，但其结果是通过融会贯通，进入创造新阶段；之后又经过双向交融与相互渗透，形成了文化上的所谓“双向回授”。朱英荣《龟兹文化与犍陀罗文化》就中外学术界颇有争议的龟兹佛教文化性质问题进行了探讨，指出虽然龟兹文化曾受到犍陀罗文化影响，但并不是简单照搬其观念、风格、技巧，艺术处理方法上将外来文化的融合改造与本地区的文化传统与艺术风格结合起来，从而造就了独具特色的“龟兹风”。这里还要提到黄文弼（1893—1966）的重要成果，1927～1935年，他是中瑞西北科学考察团的中方成员，曾先后三次前往新疆做考古调查和发掘，足迹遍及塔里木盆地周边重要遗址，重点发掘了罗布泊地区、吐鲁番盆地，以及库车、和田墓葬、城址、寺院、石窟。野外考古工作结束后撰写专题论文，出版了现代科学游记《罗布淖尔考古记》（北平研究院，1948），后来整理出版的《吐鲁番考古记》（科学，1958）、《塔里木盆地考古记》（科学，1958）都涉及不少西域佛教内容。
环塔里木龟兹、高昌、焉耆三大石窟群气势雄伟森严，民族风味浓厚，兼容并包印度、波斯、希腊、中原汉文化等内容，由敦煌石窟而上溯塔里木，或从塔里木下追敦煌都是合乎历史逻辑的延伸。敦煌石窟艺术传自印度，途径西域，从内容到形式，必然有多种因素和风格特点。马德《敦煌莫高窟史研究》（甘肃教育，1996）着力探讨西域文化与河西文化交汇点的敦煌，在深入研究敦煌文献中的造像功德记及其它有关文书基础上，运用石窟考古学上的崖面使用理论，结合供养人题记及史籍等多方面的相关资料，考出了一批洞窟年代和施主，对佛教石窟建筑起源、莫高窟佛教活动的社会性等问题多有创见。刘永增《敦煌莫高窟隋代涅槃变相图与古代印度、中亚涅槃图像之比较研究》通过比较古代印度、中亚以及隋代莫高窟涅槃图的特点，指出莫高窟隋代涅槃图的基本形式继承了犍陀罗以及中亚地区的基本特征。樊锦诗《简谈佛教故事画的民族特色》从敦煌壁画艺术产生、发展、繁盛的历程角度，探讨了佛教故事画在佛教传播过程中，如何从内容到形式一步步走向民族化。
西域佛教文化既反映本源宗教思想，又不失地域特点和民族个性，从而使其宗教艺术散发出经久不衰魅力，至今仍是佛香梵音萦绕。因此，西域佛教艺术不啻是一种令人瞠目结舌的艺术结晶，也是促使佛教事业在其领地蓬勃轰烈的重大因素，在弘扬佛法经义，惠及众生黎民中起了关键性作用。
宗教差异与文化突围
当今人们，尤其是佛教徒用一种超然而客观的角度回看西域佛教灿烂辉煌的历史时，会不由自主产生出悲凉或是说无奈的情愫。然而，西域自古以来就是一个多种宗教并存的地区，即便佛教占据半壁江山，畅行无阻时，也不是唯一宗教，萨满教、祆教、摩尼教、道教和景教各有自己的信徒。沿丝绸之路东西传播的宗教本身承载着不同宗教哲思的文化方式，各个文明又会有某些声气相通的共同准则，此消彼长态势恰好突破了宗教差异对文化的限制，而所孕育的影响能量既烛照过去，又辐射将来。
西汉以来，佛教文化对西域历史进程、文化发展、商贸往来、社会稳定和各民族间互相了解产生了深远影响，环塔里木的于阗、疏勒、龟兹、高昌等都是“千年佛国”，在西域多元文化交融中，佛教文化仅次于中原汉文化与土著文化，而一直处于显赫地位并以各种方式对其他文化进行辐射。两宋时期，中原佛教依然鼎盛，西域早期佛教却逐步衰落，走向宗教信仰多元化，伊斯兰教已经深入今天塔里木盆地的喀什、和田地区，与佛教形成双雄并峙局面，当然龟兹、焉耆、高昌、伊吾、鄯善、吉木萨尔依然是佛教居地。
元明清时代，藏传佛教接上早期佛教文化香火大行其道，如今和静巴伦台黄庙（永安寺），为乾隆年间土尔扈特东归后建立的佛教总庙，是巴州地区最大的综合性喇嘛教寺庙群。伊犁昭苏圣佑庙是清末左翼厄鲁特所建喇嘛教黄教寺院，尽管已是中原汉式传统建筑风格，却不失藏传佛教的宏大气派。论及藏传佛教，青藏高原不可忽略，“法国汉学研究所文库”中的戴密微( 1897 —1979 ) 《吐蕃僧诤记》(1952 )对此追溯久远。察合台后王统治时期，出于权力争斗目的，改宗伊斯兰教，以兵力行教，马蹄所至，早期佛教尽为所灭，伊斯兰教在西域形成第二个传播高潮，甚至发展到掀起宗教狂热，在环塔里木进行“圣战”。除15世纪进入新疆的瓦剌蒙古（西蒙古）信奉喇嘛教外，伊斯兰教成为维吾尔族、哈萨克族、回族、柯尔克孜族、塔吉克族、塔塔尔族、乌孜别克族等民族及察合台蒙古人的共同信仰。佛教在伊斯兰教的攻势和政权更迭下逐渐丧失历史舞台上的主导地位，不过藏传佛教今天仍然是新疆第二大宗教，因此对于西域文化研究有着非常重要的学术价值和现实意义。
缘于历史的种种必然与偶然不断错位，往昔香烟缭绕的佛学盛象蒙尘受辱而为世遗忘，今人仅能对月凭吊沙海古寺废墟，断崖残窟壁画，可仍不能削弱西域为佛教第二故乡的历史文化魅力，学术研究如影随形。受世界东方学研究影响，国内学术界对西域佛教开始做了一些研究，20世纪上半叶达到一定水平，但有关西域佛教史的研究较少，主要是译介成果。[日]羽溪了谛著、贺昌群译《西域之佛教》（商务印书馆，1933）着力从史地角度论述佛教在西域的传播与发展，不过教理方面涉及不多；[日]羽田亨著、钱稻孙译《西域文明概论》（泉寿丛书，1931）对西域佛教的发展状况也有精辟论述，只是西方文明中心论过于明显。蒋维乔《佛学史纲》（中华书局，1935）、《佛学概论》（中华书局，1930）、《中国佛教史》（商务印书馆，1929）和黄忏华《中国佛教史》（长沙商务印书馆，1940）自身研究不足，而均以日本学人著作为蓝本，少有创获。
20世纪下半叶，随着中国佛教史研究取得较大进展，作为中国佛教史重要组成部分的西域佛教史研究受到应有重视。冯承均、张星烺、向达等专治中外关系史的学者充分利用佛教宝藏，作了一些兼顾性的研究。50年代以来，《现代佛学》曾经发表一些有关印度佛教哲学、圣迹及相关佛教历史文化的论文或译文。前文提到的汤用彤、任继愈、吕澂、郭朋的佛教史论著，均有相当篇幅论及西域佛教兴衰，对西域佛教不同于汉地佛教的特点，受域外诸种文化因素影响，以及以独特状貌流传下来的文明特点均发表各自见解。杨富学《回鹘之佛教》（新疆人民，1998）探讨佛教在回鹘中的传播和特点，及回鹘佛教的功德思想、寺庙兴建、寺院经济等内容。魏长洪《西域佛教史》（新疆美术摄影，1998）着重阐述佛教在西域的传播与发展，侧重考察西域佛教自身内在变动，即西域佛教在不同时代和民族中的特点及其消亡状况，以及所形成的多中心、多层次布局和结构。高永久《西域古代民族宗教综论》第三章“西域佛教文化的传播及其发展”利用中外文献，论述贵霜王朝、大月氏人在佛教传播与发展过程中的社会历史文化状况，考述古代塔里木盆地佛教兴衰与发展。论文方面孟凡人《略论高昌回鹘的佛教》认为高昌回鹘始信佛教当在9世纪晚期至10世纪左右，和高昌回鹘兴亡命运与共，并一直延续到15世纪中叶左右；宫静《五至七世纪中叶西域佛教之变迁》概括分析5～7世纪中叶西域佛教变迁状况及原因；羊毅勇《佛教在新疆南部传播路线之管见》结合考古资料与唐宋前后来往于中国与印度的佛教徒行记文献，阐述佛教自印度沿塔克拉玛干南北缘传入南疆的路线问题。所有这些问题可归纳为两个方面：首先，西域佛教既受到帕西文化影响，也深受中原文化熏陶；其次，西域佛教生存演进既受益于文化传播推动力，也得益于自身入乡随俗角色不断转换。
萨满教、道教、祆教、摩尼教、景教都在西域流行过，可作为宗教信仰的佛教本身在西域已经走向没落，沦为尘封的概念，伊斯兰教笼罩天山南北，蒙古族聚居地流行的喇嘛教也被大大忽略，原因自然复杂而微妙。如今人们对西域佛教的认知有许多偏见，加上五四以来思维模式更有许多问题。如果能将从该地过往的宗教历程中整理出当时宗教文化模式，有助于让人们更清晰地理解佛教发展脉络与内在精神，体验其过往曾有的宗教状况，并突破宗教差异对文化的限制，应该算是一种进步。
中原汉民族历来重视历史记载，佛教传入中原，僧俗二界将西天佛典译出，并一直保存下来，西行使节僧人遗留的众多游记又以翔实记载，丰富了西域及南亚政治、经济、文化和宗教等原始资料，此外，官方史书和笔记杂书中也杂有不少佛教掌故。历史流变中，印度大部分梵文佛典或焚于连绵战火，或毁于潮湿气候，中国佛教史料正可弥补其不足，以至于印度史学家辛哈和班纳吉说：“不利用中国的历史资料，要编一部完整的佛教史是不可能的。” 在西域历史上，由于文化交流、民族迁徙、政权更迭频繁，各土著居民又不重文献记载，致使本地留存史料不多。由于缺乏史料记载，西域佛教史不易理清，正如贺昌群在《西域之佛教?译者序》所说：“西域诸国和古代印度一样，都没有什么历史记载遗留下来，只有中国和希腊的文献中有些记录，中华正史的外国传和汉、晋、南北朝、唐、宋的西行求法僧徒的游记，这些正史记载和僧徒记行与近百年来在印度、中亚和新疆一带新发现的资料和遗物互相参证，古代西域史以及西域的佛教活动，才得渐次明了。”
迄今为止，海内外有关西域佛教的研究成果，主要依赖于汉文文献，以及周边较大文明遗留下来的文字材料，如波斯文、希腊－拉丁文、阿拉伯文史料，19世纪末20世纪初以后，中国西北地区考古对西域佛教史研究攸关重要，先是西方列强争先恐后所派考察队以坚忍不拔毅力深入西域这片古老土地发掘古代城堡、寺院、石窟、墓葬，随后东西方学者在正规渠道支持下不断在西域探险考察。他们所发掘许多珍贵文物及西域古代语文，如龟兹语、于阗语、吐火罗语、粟特语等写就的佛典断片流落到世界各地，补充了其它资料的缺环，成为研究东西方，包括佛教文化的第一手资料，特别是敦煌藏经洞和吐鲁番石窟与墓葬出土的各种文献材料，为西域历史、宗教、民族等方面研究提供了全新资讯，揭示了该地区伊斯兰化以前部分文化面貌。比如在敦煌发现的吐蕃文文献中，宗教文献所占比重最大，其中尤以佛教文献为多。后来《法国汉学研究所文库》出版的沙畹( 1865 —1918)《汉文三藏中的500 个故事与寓言》(1932 )与这些新出土文献大有关系。
近年来，西域佛教一些零散而珍贵的文史资料得到搜集和整理，俾于学界。比如上海古籍出版社近几年积极与国外合作，耗费巨资出版的《俄藏敦煌文献》、《俄藏敦煌艺术品》、《法藏敦煌西域文献》；官方史书和各地方志书、墓碑、碑刻、谱系（家谱和传教谱系）、档案记载和有关报刊的文章等得到了集中和出版；甘肃图书馆编的《西北民族宗教史料文摘》、新疆社会科学院宗教研究所编的《新疆宗教研究资料》（内部参考资料）逐步汇集。此外，尽管西域有多种文字已不再使用，它所记载的文献甚至残片却为我们研究佛教历史发展、文化渊源、相互关系提供了重要依据，为促进西域佛教研究的进一步深入，部分学者对民文与外文资料进行了适量翻译。
综上所述，近现代意义的西域佛教研究伴随乾隆以来的西北舆地学兴起，海内外学者在西域佛教研究方面所涉及的领域非常广泛，并逐步走向繁荣：要么从西域的大视野宏观审视，要么就某一个地区如龟兹或高昌以小见大；要么追踪丝路佛教的传播功效，要么摸索佛教艺术的历史流变，总之涉及到各个方面内容，为进一步研究奠定了坚实基础。然而，一旦涉足该领域，研究不足之处随处可见，比如研究视界的狭窄、研究方法的单一等，若加以细究，发现传播路线、思想流派、兴衰历程，及与其它宗教关系等重大问题还没有深入其里，甚至还有盲区，在前人研究基础上做综合系统考察，还是一项艰巨任务。所有这些需要不断更新改进研究观念，综合运用多学科的方法与手段，推动西域佛教研究向深度和广度发展。
在先秦相对封闭条件下，西域与中原主要表现为各自独立发展背景中的友好交流，周穆王西巡与西王母瑶池相会神话，就是这种友好交往的生动反映。秦汉以降，西域一度是虎狼威逼中原的边防前线，中央王朝基于传统的“亲仁善邻，国之宝也”，以及“远交近和”的战略与外交文化，以博大开放胸襟，采撷异域文化精华。世界各地文明成果，包括佛教，通过丝绸之路传入西域又传入中原，为中华文明提供了丰富营养，同时也把灿烂的中华文明传播到世界各地。通过影响当地文化来保持中央政府在当地战略利益，保持了西域各族与中原的依存关系，维护国家安全。李泽厚在《美的历程》（文物，1981）中谈到盛唐之音的形成时，曾说过下面一段话：
一方面，南北文化交流溶合，使汉魏旧学(北朝)与齐梁新声(南朝)相互取长补短，推陈出新；另一方面，中外贸易交通发达，“丝绸之路”引进来的不只是“胡商”会集，而且也带来了异国的礼俗、服装、音乐、美术以至各种宗教。“胡酒”、“胡姬”、“胡帽”、“胡乐”……是盛极一时的长安风尚。这是空前的古今中外的大交流大溶合。无所畏惧无所顾忌地引进和吸取，无所束缚无所留恋地创造和革新，打破框框、突破传统，这就是“盛唐之音”的社会氛围和思想基础。
西域历史本身是风迎八方、应变融会，西域佛教发展的历史背景、运行的社会经济条件及所依赖的文化结构和潜藏的思想体系，既不同于印度，也不同于中原。西域文化虽然是作为中华主体文化的一个子系统，内涵外延却丰富异常，要从文化层面对西域佛教作一番剖析，必须明确它在中国文化中的位置，分析它在中国文化这一大体系中的优势与弱势，以便正确地把握它的将来及对中国文化的影响。西域佛教研究不仅需要丰富的佛学知识作根基，而且需要历史学、民俗学和艺术学等多个学科背景知识，以进一步拓展西域文化的研究领域，开阔视野，同时充分利用田野调查法获取信息，参照文献数据，进行严密的考证和系统论述，以求最大限度达到对佛教在西域兴衰的真实认识。诚然，不同学科之间的沟通，交叉文化的沟通向来知易行难，要寻觅西域佛教与其他文明声气相通的基点，获得超越性的文化突围，就需要以交融互动性为标准，不拘泥于地缘因素。
如今西域佛教对芸芸众生意味着陌生而奇异的世界本身，成为人们永远不枯竭的想象源泉，作为现代意义的学术研究，无疑应该探索其历史遗迹及这些遗迹背后蕴含的文化精神。当今重建文化丝绸之路，打通亚非欧大陆桥，以前所未有的魄力和勇气保护不断消失的重要佛教历史遗迹及其文物，摆脱与其它文明冲突的魔咒，实现共存共荣，已成为关系国运昌盛的重要一环。能否重新审视和反省，把西域佛教相关状况与古今流变做个全面理解，从学理上重振西域佛教研究盛况，就更是一项紧迫而艰巨课题。由于环塔里木是佛教与世界上其它文化碰撞融合最复杂最激烈的地域，有必要专门对该地区佛教源流进行全面而系统研究和论述，以进一步打开世界文明的大门。对于佛教在现代社会面临的挑战和承担的责任等问题，对于个人人格的充分体现和完成，也有一系列的会议和论著对此进行探讨，这显现了深沉的文化忧虑和文化关怀意向。为了培养全部的人格发展，重视批判精神的发展，解决现代化中的传统文化精神问题，必然要不遗余力开发意义非凡的传统资源。
中原很多佛教遗址包括某些细微处，人们都比较熟悉，而亲临西域的人并不多，众多保存完好的被称为极有价值的文物流散在世界各地，其佛教就显得神秘莫测。环塔里木地区如于阗、高昌、龟兹、疏勒等地当年都是佛教的修行重地，历史文献数据记载和文化遗存也较丰富，重新整理尚未被完整处理的史料，使实物数据同文献数据相互契证，进一步澄清史实特别是当年的修行现状都非常重要。以往学者在自然环境和人为条件都非常恶劣的情况下开始了最早的考古发掘和学术研究，塔里木大学西域文化研究所各位研究人员则利用本校得天独厚的地缘优势，持续在南疆进行西域佛教领域的田野调查。研究人员乘着越野车，扛着摄像机，同时配备有照相机、卫星定位系统、录音笔，做了大量笔录及相应的调查报告。诚然，研究者游荡在西域佛教遗址前有时会怅然若失，而巨大的遗憾无法弥补，并力图去把握一些复杂的情感。
西域佛教研究是一项连续不断的工作，要不断地积累才有发展，积累就要有人去做，就要着重培养专门人材，而人的开拓创新意识受到各种条件的约束，置身其中才可以真正体验那无比的艰辛和压力。无论荒山峻岭，还是沙漠沼泽，一旦有人走过，便会有路，因此西域佛教昌明路在脚下与脚在路上只能相互推动。自古不谋万世者，不足谋一时；不谋全局者，不足谋一域，相反的结论便是，如果西域佛教研究取得突破，整个西域文化学术研究就拓展了一个新局面，如果有些文物和遗迹还能保护，还能被以某种方式重建，就应当在我们可做的因缘下尽力。与此同时，热切期望严肃的、充满探索精神的西域佛教论著早日不断面世。
【参考文献】
[日]羽田亨著、耿世民译：《西域文明概论》，中华书局，2005年9月。
[日]羽溪了谛著、贺昌群译：《西域之佛教》，商务印书馆，1933年初版，1999年再版。
蒋维乔：《中国佛教史》， 商务印书馆，1929年。
黄忏华：《中国佛教史》，长沙商务印书馆，1940年。
吕澄: 《中国佛学源流略讲》,中华书局，1979年。
《印度佛学源流略讲》，上海世纪出版集团2002年9月。
汤用彤：《隋唐佛教史稿》，中华书局1982年。
《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教史》，北京大学出版社1997年9月。
郭朋:《汉魏两晋南北朝佛教》, 齐鲁书社，1986年。
《中国佛教简史》, 福建人民出版社，1990年。
任继愈主编：《中国佛教史》（一、二、三卷），中国社会科学出版社1988年5月。
高永久：《西域古代民族宗教综论》， 高等教育出版社，1997年。
杨富学：《回鹘之佛教》，“西域佛教研究丛书”，新疆人民出版社，1998年8月。
魏长洪：《西域佛教史》，“西域文化研究文库”，新疆美术摄影出版社，1998年10月。
陈兵、邓子美：《20世纪的中国佛教》，民族出版社2000年11月。
梁启超：《佛学研究十八篇》，上海古籍出版社2001年9月。
李进新：《新疆宗教演变史》，新疆人民出版社2003年10月。
佛源主编：《大乘佛教与当代社会》，东方出版社2003年12月。
陈世明、吴福环：《二十四史两汉时期西域史料校注》，新疆大学出版社2003年10月。
[英]约翰?马歇尔著，王冀青译：《犍陀罗佛教艺术》，甘肃教育出版社，1989年。
[德]克林凯特著，赵崇民译：《丝绸古道上的文化》， 新疆美术摄影出版社，1994年。
常任侠:《丝绸之路与西域文化艺术》, 上海文艺出版社，1981年。
《新疆艺术》编辑部：《丝绸之路造型艺术》和《丝绸之路乐舞艺术》，新疆人民出版社，1985年。
李涛:《佛教与佛教艺术》, 西安交通大学出版社，1989年。
韩翔、朱英荣：《龟兹石窟》，新疆大学出版社，1990年版。
吴焯：《佛教东传与中国佛教艺术》， 浙江人民出版社，1991年。
霍旭初：《龟兹艺术研究》， 新疆人民出版社，1994年。
穆舜英、祁小山、张平：《中国新疆古代艺术》， 新疆美术出版社，1995年。
常书鸿：《新疆石窟艺术》，中共中央党校出版社，1996年。
周菁葆、邱陵：《丝绸之路宗教文化》，新疆人民出版社1996年8 月。
周菁葆：《丝绸之路艺术研究》，新疆人民出版社1996年8 月。
苏北海：《丝绸之路与龟兹历史文化》，新疆人民出版社1996年8 月。
贾应逸、祁小山：《印度到中国新疆的佛教艺术》，甘肃教育出版社2002年9月。
[唐]慧立、彦悰撰，孙毓棠、谢方点校：《大慈恩寺三藏法师传》，中华书局，1983年。
[梁]慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：《高僧传》，中华书局，1992年。
杨廷福：《唐僧取经》，中华书局，1981年。
《玄奘论集》，齐鲁书社，1986年。
《玄奘年谱》，中华书局，1988年。
郭朋：《鸠摩罗什评传》， 收入《中国古代著名哲学家评传》续编二，齐鲁书社，1982年。
章巽：《法显传校注》，上海古籍出版社，1985年。
季羡林等：《大唐西域记校注》，中华书局，1985年。
王邦维：《大唐西域求法高僧传校注》，中华书局，1988年。
《南海寄归内法传校注》， 中华书局，1995年。
吴恩扬：《玄奘》， 天津新蕾出版社，1993年。
黄心川、葛黔君主编：《玄奘研究文集》，中州古籍出版社1995年。
陈扬炯：《玄奘评传》，京华出版社，1995年。
黄珅：《玄奘西行》，上海古籍出版社，1996年。
马佩主编：《玄奘研究》，河南大学出版社，1997年。
孙修身：《王玄策事迹钩沉》，新疆人民出版社，1998年。
张力生：《玄奘法师年谱》，宗教文化出版社2000年9月。
杨富学：《回鹘之佛教》，新疆人民出版社，1998年。
SOCIALLY-ENGAGED BUDDHISM, CIVIL SOCIETY AND CIVILITY IN TAIWAN
David C. Schak
Abstract: In Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam claimed that mainstream Protestants, through their volunteer work and assistance to the wider community, played an important role in US civil society. This paper will report on on-going research testing whether socially-engaged Buddhists, whose activities are similar to those of mainstream Protestants have played a similar role in the growth of Taiwan's civil society. It will also, based on observations of Taiwan society over a forty-plus year period, examine a nexus between civil society and civility, and argue that a prima facie case can be made for the proposition that the spirit of socially-engaged Buddhism is highly conducive to a norm of civility.
For the last three years I have been involved in a project exploring the relationship between Taiwan's socially-engaged Buddhism on one hand and social capital, civil society, and democratisation on the other. A question that has tangentially arisen out of this research and other events in Taiwan is whether democratisation and civil society also bring about 'civility.' By civility I mean civil public deportment which consists of 1) regarding others, including strangers, as consociates with whom a moral bond as fellow human beings exists, and 2) protecting public facilities and caring for public space as an amenity in which all are stakeholders. In a society in which people act with civility, they do not rubbish public spaces; they are genial, courteous, even pleasant to strangers on the street and on the road. Respecting others, they queue. Rather than seeing themselves only as part of a small in-group and others parts of other groups to which nothing is owed, nothing expected and which may even have malevolent intent, they behave as if they see themselves as a part of the wider society in which all others are relatively equal fellow human beings. In a society of perfect civility, people would have a sense of altruism.
This question is presaged by a 1960s public discourse in Taiwan (discussed in detail below) which pitted renqingwei (人情味), 'the human touch,' against gondexin (公德心), 'public morality,' and which overlaps in several areas with what I have called civility. In this discourse, the human touch was said to be much in evidence while public morality hardly existed; people treated the public space and those in it as if it were a no-man's-land and they were anonymous strangers. The human touch among zijiren (自己人), 'significant others' is still strong, but behaviour in the public space has become dramatically more civil in the past fifteen or so years. In this paper I will explicate these changes and present a case that 1) in Taiwan, at least, the deepening of democracy and civil society are, indeed, correlated with a palpable rise in the general level of civility; and 2) although it is not the sole factory, there is every reason to believe that the rise of socially-engaged Buddhism is a positive factor in this rise.
Civility
Many peoples have idealised versions of society in which people are morally guided, honest, polite and pleasant to each other, in a word societies in which civility reigns. In the United States, this is epitomised in such notions as Small-Town America—towns with broad streets lined with elm trees in which everyone knows and is concerned about everyone else, towns with an atmosphere of cordiality. In Australia, it is an egalitarian society in which fairness and justice reign. China, too, has versions of such a society. Older versions include a society in which people were guided by Confucian moral and civil prescripts, or one in which all were in tune with Dao of Laozi and Zhuangzi. A newer version, supplied by Chinese Marxism, is the creation of the 'new socialist man' (社會主義新人類), personified by Lei Feng. Such societies exist only in the realm of ideals, however. No real-world society has ever achieved such geniality. Indeed, Chinese described society as 'man-eat-man.'
Academic works on civility or closely related topics generally either equate it with civil society (e.g. many of the papers in Hefner 1998, Weller's paper the exception) or to manners (e.g. Carter 1998). I see civility as different from both of these. Civil society is structural and functional while civility reflects a particular world view and the behaviour that world view implies. However, civil society is related to civility to the extent that it fosters social capital, in particular what Putnam calls bridging social capital (Putnam 2000). Manners has a historical link with deference and stratification (Elias 2000); civility, as I use it here, reflects a view of the self as a single individual living among myriad others in society and behaving toward them, individually and as a whole, in a considerate manner without regard to station in life.
I am well aware that I cannot argue my thesis in a positivist mode: evidence of civility is 'soft' and impressionistic. However, I believe that I can make strong indicative prima facie arguments. In doing so I will first define civil society and briefly examine how it is used in this study. I will follow with sections on socially-engaged Buddhism, its origins, the activities in which it engages, and how these contribute to civil society and civility. Finally I will examine civil society in Taiwan and show how Taiwan has become a much more 'civil' society in the past fifteen years.
Civil Society
Civil society arose during the commercialisation of northwestern European society and generally refers to an autonomous level of associations intermediate between the state and families or the grass roots which, not necessarily exclusively, provide a venue for groups of people to express and take collective action in pursuit of their interests. Through such actions these groups may affect the governance of society. Although generally viewed as supportive of democracy, not all groups or all actions of groups are—for example, groups which would limit the rights of particular sectors of the population.
There are presently two major perspectives of civil society, neo-Tocquevillian and neo-Gramscian or New Left (Alagappa 2004). Both view civil society as important for democracy. However, the latter sees it as a protector of the local and the ordinary citizen from the excesses of government and the market, while the former sees it as a space in which social capital is generated through participation in voluntary associations, creating reciprocity and trust between people and enhancing the quality of community life. This is especially emphasised in the work of Robert Putnam (1993, 1996, 2000), on which my Taiwan Buddhism project was based.
There are some who have argued that civil society is a Western notion which is not applicable, at least not in its original form, to Asian societies (e.g. Hann & Dunn 1996). While it is true that it originated in eighteenth-century Europe, despite cultural and historical differences and the Asian Democracy discourse, there is ample evidence that many find it attractive and applicable to Asian societies (see, e.g. Schak and Hudson 2003, Alagappa 2004). One way to interpret civil society is as an expression of self-determination, the desire for which, I believe, is near universal in humankind. Its applicability should not be interpreted, however, as claiming that civil society is the same in Europe, America, Australia, and in the various Asian societies; even within the West, each society provides an at least slightly different context for its growth and development.
Socially-Engaged Buddhism
The Buddhism I am examining in Taiwan is what is called socially-engaged Buddhism (人間佛教). Until the last twenty to thirty years, when the Dalai Lama became prominent and people became aware of Tibetan Buddhism, most in the West associated Buddhism with the Hinayana of Sri Lanka and Thailand and so thought of it as a 'world denying' religion which held that life is suffering because we have desires and to eliminate suffering, we must renounce these desires. For many, that has meant either an ascetic life in society or a society-renouncing life as a monastic. This is not simply a Western misunderstanding. In China, Buddhism was largely monastic during the Ming and Qing Dynasties, and it would not be surprising if many in China and Hong Kong had a similar image of Buddhism. That would probably have also been the case in Taiwan even forty years ago but no longer. Buddhist social activism is now commonplace and well known in Taiwan.
Socially-engaged Buddhism arose through the thought of Ven Taixu (太虛; 1889-1947) and his disciple, Ven Yinshun (印順;1906-2005). As a young monk, Ven Taixu was very critical of Buddhism as he saw it in the early twentieth century. He felt that the Buddhist clergy were a generally poorly educated lot who regarded Buddhism as essentially an occupation and who charged people for performing ceremonies and rituals, especially funerals. He also accused them of being aloof from the people they were supposed to assist. He advocated reforms which included better educating the monastics and getting them to serve the people rather than merely live off them. Realising that the sangha would never reform itself without pressure, he also advocated strong lay organisations in the various Buddhist orders.
Theologically, he argued that the Pure Land was not in some Western Paradise but was right here, this earth and this society, and that it was the responsibility of all, both clergy and laity, to purify themselves and society to make this so. Thus, Buddhists needed to be in the world, to serve people and serve society. He referred to this as socially-engaged Buddhism.
In China he and his followers met with limited, success. Although he was able to meet face to face with then President Chiang Kai-shek, he was trying to reform Buddhism and make it relevant to Chinese society during the May Fourth period when, especially among China's modern and governing elite, religion was held to be superstition and merited government repression rather than government support (Laliberté 1999:40). The Japanese invasion further frustrated his efforts. He died in 1947 with only a modicum of achievement.
However, his brand of Buddhism was brought to Taiwan by Ven Yinshun and Ven Xingyun (星雲). Ven Xingyun, who went on to found Foguangshan, was then a young monk who had studied in a monastery which followed Taixu's teachings. Ven Yinshun was a scholar and a highly respected figure rather than an organiser, however, he was very influential on the development of Buddhism in Taiwan. He also made a few changes: whereas Ven Taixu had most often used the term rensheng fojiao (人生佛教) Ven Yinshun adopted renjian fojiao, giving it a more Pure Land flavour. Moreover, whereas Ven Taixu entered into the political realm in his attempts to secure state support for Buddhist education and social service, Ven Yinshun completely eschewed politics.
The state of Taiwan Buddhism in 1950 was quite poor. It is doubtful that it had ever been very strong; Taiwan had been a neglected part of Fujian province until the 1880s (Jiang 2000), and in the late Qing, those wanting to be ordained had to travel to Fujian because there was no one with the authority to ordain them in Taiwan. Buddhism existed largely as an element of folk religion, Buddhist deities such as Guanyin being worshipped along with folk deities such as Mazu. It suffered further with colonisation, especially in the 1930s when the Japanese brought in the kōminka (皇民化) program and tried to replace Chinese Buddhism with Japanese Buddhism.
However, beginning in the 1950s, Buddhism—on its own rather than being part of folk religion—has enjoyed remarkable growth. Around 1951, the young Ven Xingyun (星雲) began to teach in a folk temple in Ilan. Through his skill in preaching and innovativeness in using various media to spread his message he attracted a large following, large enough that in 1967 he was able to build a large monastery, Foguangshan (佛光山), in rural Gaoxiong. A year earlier, Ven Zhengyan (證嚴) had founded the Buddhist Compassionate Relief and Merit Association (佛教慈濟功德會; hereafter Ciji) in Hualian. Although it was a much smaller group at the time, and although it was and is still formally registered as a social welfare organisation rather than a Buddhist group, it has become by far the largest Buddhist organisation in Taiwan. As government controls over forming civil groups were relaxed, then abandoned, in the 1980s, other groups formed. The four others included in this study are Fagushan (法鼓山), Zhongtai Chansi (中台禪寺), Lingjiushan (靈鷲山) and Fuzhi (福智).
These six groups are all Buddhist and claim not to be in competition with each other. Instead, each group has its own unique set of characteristics, its own 'Dharma path,' and believers need to choose the one that is right for them. Foguangshan is a comprehensive group with equal emphasis on study, meditation, chanting and service. Ciji is completely devoted to service, holding that the way to self-cultivation is through helping others; other than the messages in Ven Zhengyan's sermonettes, it leaves study and other Buddhist practice up to individual members. Fagushan and Zhongtai Chansi both focus on meditation, though Fagushan has increased service, chanting and study in recent years. Lingjiushan and Fuzhi have strong links with Tibetan Buddhism. Fuzhi's unique characteristic is that it attracts members by holding classes on the Extensive and Orderly Treatise on Perfect Wisdom (菩提道第次廣論) by Tibetan monk Tsong-kha-ba (宗客巴; Sumatikīrti) and lets others find it rather than engaging in publicity to expand itself. Lingjiushan engages in the four activities of Foguangshan, but it also has a strong emphasis on world peace and ecumenism. All groups have large lay followings—Foguangshan even has a separate lay organisation, the Buddhist Light International Association—and only one, Zhongtai Chansi, encourages monastic life.
Judging by their growth, these groups have had a spectacular impact on Taiwan society. Ven Xingyun attracted a sufficient number of followers over a sixteen year period to build Foguangshan and has since added schools, including three universities, and several welfare institutions. Foguangshan now claims a membership of over one million (Jiang 2000:79), about half of whom live abroad. Ciji began very small, having only 293 members in 1968 and only 8000 in 1986. Growth took off after Ven Zhengyan announced that Ciji was going to build a hospital it reached 102,000 in 1987 then doubling each year to 1991. It claimed four million members in 1994, and now claims five million. The other groups formed in the 1980s and have grown rapidly, especially since democratisation. Fagushan claims 480,000, Zhongtai Chansi, according to a Zhongtai nun, has well in excess of 200,000, Lingjiushan claims 100,000 active members, and the smallest, Fuzhi, claims 100,000, 20,000 of whom are active. Although, these numbers are probably on the high side, in a random survey early this century over twelve per cent of the adult population self-identified as Buddhist (Zhang 2002), a large proportion of whom would be affiliated with one of these groups.
Their influence is also felt elsewhere. Both Foguangshan and Ciji have satellite TV channels, and Ven Shengyan, the founder of Fagushan, also appears frequently on weekend TV. Foguangshan, in addition, also has a daily newspaper. The four larger groups have very active publishing houses. Lingjiushan runs a Museum of World Religions (世界宗教博物館); located in a suburb of Taibei, it attracts large numbers of visitors, including school groups.
What probably makes the most impact, however, is the way Ciji mobilises members to act during natural disasters. Its members arrived on the scene of the September 11, 1999 earthquake well before anyone else, including government rescuers, and its uniformed volunteers were seen by the entire nation through television news coverage of the event and its aftermath. It has also contributed to disaster relief abroad through Taiwanese members working in various countries.
Buddhists contribute to civility in Taiwan through their social engagement, which graphically demonstrates their application of the chief Buddhist principle, compassion toward all living things. Socially-engaged Buddhists list four areas of activity in society: education, culture, social relief and medical. A fifth important area is environmental protection. The extent to which they are socially engaged varies among the six groups as do the areas in which they are active. However, all the studied groups claim activity in at least one of the above areas.
All of the groups provide education, Foguangshan and Ciji from pre-school through post-graduate. Fuzhi and Zhongtai Chansi have started primary-secondary institutions with plans to extend them, and Fagushan has a university cum Buddhology Institution. Lingjiushan contemplated establishing a university but was advised against it because of the surfeit of universities in Taiwan. It is exploring endowing a university abroad with a Peace Studies unit, however, and its Museum of World Religions is very educational. Culture generally refers to the activities of the publishing houses, and the groups regard their publications on Buddhism also to be about Chinese culture. Lingjiushan's museum also transmits culture, as do the many large and small art museums at Foguangshan temples.
Ciji and Foguangshan are active in providing medical services. Foguangshan early on established mobile clinics to go to more remote areas to serve the poor. It also provides medical care to those in its old-age homes. Ciji has recently completed its second hospital, both of which are in under-serviced areas. It also has a medical school and a nursing school, and it operates a large bone marrow bank. When it opened its first hospital, it established a policy not to require an entry deposit (which would deny access to treatment to many of the poor), a practice most other hospitals have since adopted. Several groups have periodic blood drives, and Ciji also has an organ donation program.
Ciji and Foguangshan also lead in social services. Foguangshan runs an orphanage, homes for the lone and the ill elderly, and a cemetery which provides free of charge places where the bones of the lone poor can be housed. It also runs a prison program aimed at drug addicts in the belief that they can kick their habits if they accept Buddhism. Ciji distributes relief monthly goods to the poor, and is heavily involved in disaster relief, both in Taiwan and abroad. Fagushan and Lingjiushan have programs targeting particular groups in their local areas.
All groups claim engagement in environmental protection. Ciji and Foguangshan are both heavily involved in recycling programs. They also require students at their schools to supply their own containers and utensils in the cafeterias and encourage this practice in others to reduce throw-aways. Ciji and Lingjiushan have periodic activities to clean up rubbish in local areas. Lingjiushan also holds special international activities on environmental issues. Fuzhi has an organic agriculture foundation which promotes the growing of organic foods. It provides a market for organic agricultural products through its health food shops.
Thus, the contributions of socially-engaged Buddhists to Taiwan society are many. I will take up their contributions to civility below.
Taiwan's Civil Society and Governance
Civil society development in Taiwan was hindered for a long time, first by the authoritarianism of the Japanese colonial government and then by a state corporatist policy which placed all legal organisations under state-level umbrella bodies of the Guomindang regime, especially before 1975 when Chiang Kai-shek died. Under Chiang Ching-kuo, the government began to relax its control on society, making it possible for opposition groups to find a bit of room to manoeuvre. Toward the end of the 1970s, the dangwai (黨外), a non-Guomindang group of politicians, began to organise and contest elections, which led to democratisation in the late 1980s. An autonomous civil society began to develop in the 1980s as demonstrations and protests, especially over environmental, labour and economic issues increased. Women's groups, religious groups and a consumers movement were also established. Formal democratisation took off after the younger Chiang's death in 1988, and in 1989, the legislature revised the Civil Assemblies Law (人民團體法), which allowed citizens to establish organisations independent from government. From slightly over 6000 groups in 1989, the number increased to over 18,000 in 2001 (Fan 2004:176).
Close to one-third of these groups focus on social welfare and charity; there are also large numbers of groups dedicated to business, education and culture and sports. A very interesting set exist to promote their local communities, organising school and adult projects to look into local history and customs. Through writings, exhibitions and performances, they involve a much wider public which creates community identity and enhances social networks and social capital. Similar results are achieved through the establishment of adult education colleges. These college often have a local focus, e.g. one in southern Taiwan with a project on renewing agriculture. These attract a wide mixture of students, from those with little education to those with advanced degrees (Fan 2004:181-85). The government has, since the 1990s, supported and encouraged community projects and community identity.
The 'Human Touch' vs 'Public Morality' Discourse
As mentioned above, this discourse was touched off about forty years ago when what was said to be a letter written by a foreign student appeared the Central Daily News. The letter stated that people in Taiwan displayed the human touch in abundance, but they had little sense of public morality. People did not queue. Public service clerks were often rude and put on airs. There was no pride in public spaces, which were littered and dirty. Buildings were constructed with no aesthetic considerations, and garish signs protruded from the sides. Footpaths were tiled, but the tiles were slippery when wet and many were broken or missing altogether; moreover, footpath space was often reduced by goods in front of shops, hawkers or parked motorcycles, or they were appropriated by construction sites and made completely impassable. Traffic laws were rarely enforced, making public roads a sort of jungle of survival for the more daring or brazen. Pedestrians had to proceed with great caution, not only in crossing a road but even walking on the footpath when crossing the outlet of a small alleyway from which a taxi might suddenly exit without stopping. Regarding others in the public space, inattention ruled. Signs on public busses were routinely ignored; those prohibiting smoking noticeably by bus drivers, and those urging passengers to give up seats to pregnant women, women with small children or the elderly especially by older men who seemed to think that the Confucian favouring of male and age privileged them.
A campaign ensued, largely through the media. Specified complaints included:
? Not queuing; breaking into line;
? Pedestrians and drivers going against red lights;
? Discarding rubbish and fruit peelings, urinating and spitting in public places;
? Causing public toilets to be unclean;
? Making noise late at night on the streets from driving practice or manufacture;
? Smoking in non-smoking areas;
? Not properly restraining one=s dogs and causing a danger to others;
? Playing one=s radio too loudly and disturbing neighbours;
? Driving at night without lights on;
Improvements called for included:
? Public bus drivers to start and stop smoothly;
? Drivers to observe road rules;
? Shoppers to ask for an official docket when buying goods;
? Shop and bus attendants to treat customers in a courteous, friendly manner;
? Removing or covering the shoes while taking public transport and holding a child in order to keep the seat clean;
? Enthusiastically helping people who ask directions;
? Protecting public property.
Little resulted from the campaign, however; like so many other top-down campaigns initiated during the pre-democratisation period, people paid little attention because they knew the campaign would soon finish and be forgotten, and things would go on as normal.
The Creation of Civility
Civility can exist under a variety of conditions. It can be found in the set of conditions Scott describes as a 'moral economy,' in which there are high levels of reciprocity in a community as a form of social insurance, i.e. people help each other with the idea that they will or may need help from others at some future date (1974). 'Will' refers to certainties such as assistance at the funeral of a parent; 'may' refers to uncertainties such as illness or debilitating accident. Such communities are generally small-scale, homogeneous face communities, in Scott's case, peasant villages in Vietnam. A larger scale example was the 19th C English working class, which enjoyed enhanced solidarity because of its klass für sich consciousness in opposition to other classes (Thompson 1968).
However, looking at civility in an entire society, in which there are differences in income, education, occupation, religion and ethnicity such that neither homogeneity nor opposition to another element of society can explain civility, we must look for other conditions which can assist to create or nurture civility. At the level of social interaction, some level of solidarity is necessary. This is unlikely to occur if:
? there is a police state, especially if it has numerous undercover agents spying on the domestic population;
? people feel that society is unfair and unjust;
? people do not feel safe from crime, especially that which threatens personal safety;
? there are ethnic or religious rifts in society which create out-groups 'undeserving' of civil treatment;
Conditions likely to enhance civility are having a positive feeling toward others and being happy with their society. This can be assisted by:
? prominent examples of people or groups showing concern for others, e.g. through philanthropy, which can create a virtuous cycle;
? governments which meet citizen needs and are regarded as efficient, responsive, fair, concerned with improving society and honest can increase satisfaction with government and with life in general;
? the development of a culture of obedience to road rules and courtesy to other drivers (moreover the existence of such encourages its continuance);
? an overall contentment with life and with the outlook for the future should reduce feelings of zero-sum competition with others and enhance camaraderie.
Civility in terms of caring for the physical public realm is improved by:
? people being well off enough that they become unwilling to continue to sacrifice either the natural or the adjacent environment for economic growth;
? the existence of public places which people enjoy visiting such as malls, parks, nature reserves, scenic drives, mountain trails, water recreation areas, and hot springs;
? public education campaigns including reminders not to litter, public waste disposal facilities, and enforcement of anti-littering/defacing regulations;
? something like a 'no broken windows' policy such as keeping the public space clean and in good repair.
Civility in Taiwan
As democratisation has deepened in Taiwan, the level of civility has gradually improved. Although not everyone is civil and there are still plenty of breaches of civility and public morality, the changes are palpable. Traffic is less chaotic. Egregious speeding is much less common. Drivers are less aggressive, more likely to give way to other drivers and less likely to cut into someone else's lane. They are generally content not to try to make four lanes on a road when the lines on the road indicate that there are only three, and they generally stop for pedestrians in zebra-crossings.
People now queue. Smoking on busses, in lifts, and in designated no-smoking area is rarely if ever seen. Moreover, even where people can smoke, e.g. in private restaurant rooms, they tend to hold a burning cigarette behind them so as not to subject non-smokers at their table to their smoke. The streets are cleaner as are other public spaces such as public parks. The new underground railway in Taibei is a model of good public behaviour--people queue, let others off before trying to squeeze on, frequently give their seats to the elderly, children, women with children or carrying a lot of packages, or those physically impaired. They scrupulously obey the no-smoking, food, beverage or chewing gum rules.
There are now more public use facilities and architecture. In addition people have cars and more leisure time which enables them to visit tourist and recreation areas both in the vicinity of where they live as well as in other parts of Taiwan. There are malls, pubs, coffee shops, parks, hiking areas, interesting restaurants with newly developed cuisines, even all-night bookstores where people can read before they buy. There are also public events such as fun runs and outdoor photo displays. Two initially political monuments in Taibei, the Sun Yat-sen and Chiang Kai-shek Memorials, have become much more user-friendly, especially the latter, and all sorts of events are now held there.
The way people treat others has improved. Whether to strangers on the street or, especially, to visitors to government offices, treatment is, on the whole, friendly and helpful. The recent experience of an Australian friend who accompanied his adopted daughter to seek information about her birth family in Taibei, illustrates this. They had a few leads, but they also had to do a lot of searching, and people they would ask directions or discuss the matter with were ready to lend a hand. They found one sister who gave them the name and last known address of another sister. As that sister had moved, they had to go to the relevant District Office in Taipei to try to find where she had gone.
Taiwanese cities are divided into administrative districts, each of which has an office. One function of the District Office has been to keep records of those living in the district, where they lived, where they had come from, and where they moved if they left. Thirty years ago, these offices were cramped and somewhat ramshackle, and the clerks seemed to go out of their way to be officious, condescending and unhelpful. However, my friend's experience was very different and quite the opposite of what it was in the 1960s when he adopted his daughter. He was overwhelmed with the willingness of the clerks to help and with the general atmosphere of service. He and his daughter were there for an entire afternoon while clerks traipsed up and down several flights and looked in box after box of old records trying to find the wanted address, all the while maintaining a very pleasant demeanour.
This was not just special treatment for foreigners. New District Offices with greatly improved physical facilities have been built in recent years. In the one my friend visited (others are very similar) the bottom floor was a large, open space with windows for visitors seeking various services on the sides. For the visitors, instead of having to stand in line in a cramped, un-air-conditioned space as in the past, there were chairs and benches and racks of newspapers and magazines. There were even nicely dressed local women wearing sashes with 'volunteer' written on them, who served tea to those waiting. Since by far the majority of visitors to District Offices are local residents, it is obvious that this service level is meant for them. This service ethic appears to be the result of a concerted effort on the part of government to create and promote it and the willingness of public servants to follow it.
Forces for Change
A number of things have happened in Taiwan which have arguably contributed to these changes in behaviour and environment. First, Taiwan is now a relatively prosperous country with an estimated 2005 per capita GDP of US$26,700, (eighty-seven per cent that of Japan). People have been willing to trade more income for more leisure since the 1980s, and governments have money for public recreational facilities and for local community functions, historical research and other activities aimed to create community identity and amity. Moreover, with a Gini coefficient of 0.326 (2000), income is distributed relatively equally, although less so than in the 1980s. The 1999 home ownership rate was close to eighty-five per cent. Education levels have risen greatly, most born in the 1960s and later having completed senior middle school and 34.8 per cent of the work force now having university level or above. Moreover, many Taiwanese have spent considerable amounts of time abroad as students or employees and thus have alternate perspectives on society enabling them to reinterpret traditional Chinese virtues in ways which support civility.
Second, Taiwan has democratised, which has meant that 1) Taiwan people no longer have to fear their government, and 2) they expect more outputs, i.e. more public outputs rather than patronage which and to have more inputs regarding those outputs. As mentioned above, the bureaucracy has changed. While Taiwan was still ruled by an authoritarian government, officials and police were essentially unchecked and could act as they pleased toward the public. But with people now able to talk to their local representatives or air grievances on talk-back radio, public servants are much more friendly and helpful.
Democratisation has also brought about a good deal more populist politics. One manifestation of this is the evolution of the image and political style of political leaders. Chiang Kai-shek's image, e.g. that depicted in the film that accompanied the singing of the national anthem before each movie showing, was one of a military man (often dressed in his uniform), aloof, distant, and wielding commanding power. There was not a hint of softness or closeness to the people. His son Chiang Ching-kuo's image was much softer, often seen in a jacket rather than a suit coat (he was not in the military), sometimes talking to an ordinary Taiwanese farmer working in his fields. Lee Teng-hui, whose regime brought in many of the fundamental changes which democratised Taiwan, had a very familiar style reflecting this democratising role. Chen Shui-bian's style is very folksy, never saying 'I,' instead referring to himself in his heavily Taiwanese- accented Mandarin by a familiar nickname, 'A-bian,' and making a virtue of his own very humble roots. As mayors of the two largest cities (Taibei and Gaoxiong), Ma Ying-jeou and Hsieh Ch'ang-t'ing, were frequently seen singing or dancing with various constituency groups. Politically, Taiwan has become somewhat like a welfare state, with citizens demanding more and more of government, and making loud protests when any entitlement is reduced or abolished.
Third, There has also been a rise in 'consciousness,' and identity, most conspicuously among women and the various major language groups in Taiwan. The woman's movement was initially largely inspired by women's movements in Western countries and initially took on a more feminist, equality of power stance. However, that stance produced a backlash, with many women rejecting 'feminism' (nüxing zhuyi), which they interpret as anti-male, and more recently the movement has focussed on protecting and assisting women in their areas of disadvantage, especially women such as divorcees, single mothers and those suffering abuse.
A Taiwan consciousness movement has flourished since the beginning of the non-party (dangwai) movement (see Jacobs 2006). It accelerated with the lifting of martial law and democratisation, which also made possible the production of cultural products representing the history and customs of Taiwan as a whole as well as from Taiwan's various locales. This movement was a reaction to the suppression of Taiwan identity by the Guomindang government and virtually exploded onto the scene when the controls were lifted. A Hakka movement has also sprung up, the Hakka being a minority Taiwanese group that has felt oppressed by the dominant Hoklo speakers, including the granting of a license to a Hakka TV channel, and there is also government support to preserve aboriginal languages and cultures. There has also been much greater recognition of Taiwan's aboriginal groups, including efforts to keep their languages alive. These movements have increased people's senses of ethnic identity and history and expanded perspectives from their own limited groups of significant others to a wider society.
While such movements, focussing sectors of the population, may be seen as divisive, they can also be seen as equalising formerly subordinate groups with the dominant group and as broadening people's social networks and identifying with a wider circle of people. Moreover, being able to express identities is empowering and is a far cry from the former government suppression of local identities.
There have also been efforts to organise local communities, which have especially had an impact in urban areas where locales are more often neighbourhoods, anonymous strangers who have nothing more in common than residential proximity. Prior to democratisation, the government had made efforts to organise communities, but these were top-down efforts administered by public servants who were outsiders and were working to government mandates. However, in the 1990s, spontaneous grass-roots community organisations have begun to spring up. Many found it difficult to overcome the inertia of urban disinterest and inaction, but some succeed well beyond their original aims (Sheng 1995). The government played a role in this; the Council for Cultural Affairs provided grants to local communities to help them create community identity by researching local history or special characteristics, stage community festivals and the like. But these efforts relied on local efforts and were facilitative rather than government initiated, moreover while some communities applied for and accepted government grants, others wanted no government links and succeeded on their own.
Fourth, physically, there are now many more 'nice' public spaces and facilities than before, there has also been an improvement in homes, and there is also an increase in local tourism. There is an increasing sense of environmentalism; many of the protest movements in the 1980s and 1990s were over environmental problems, and there is a much greater awareness of the importance of the environment in creating a pleasant living atmosphere. These should give people a sense of stakeholdership and a reason to feel pride in their local areas, which should also be an incentive to keep such spaces and facilities looking nice.
Fifth, I would argue that Taiwan's socially-engaged Buddhism contributes in two ways. At a general level, Buddhism's primary moral value is compassion, compassion for all creatures, which certainly includes other people. Moreover, Buddhism is a universal religion, in contrast with the very localised nature of traditional folk religion, focussing as it does on the efficacy of the local joss in the local temple. This universalism is also manifested in the ecumenical nature of Taiwan's socially-engaged Buddhist groups. They not only recognise each other as followers of different dharma paths rather than rivals, but also recognise not only the strains of Buddhism found in Japan, Tibet, Thailand and Sri Lanka, but also other faiths. For example, while providing relief and assistance after the earthquake in Turkey, Ciji volunteers helped a local community rebuild its mosque; and Foguangshan teamed up with Methodists and Mormons cooperated in a project to help needy families in the Los Angeles area.
In a similar spirit, despite the much greater sub-group consciousness referred to above, within the Buddhist groups, ethnic differences—Hoklo, Hakka, Mainlander—are ignored. Of the six groups, the founders of five are Mainlanders; only Ciji's Ven Zhengyan is Taiwanese. But the Taiwanese-Mainlander ratio in the groups is almost identical and is very close to their proportions in Taiwan's population. Moreover, whether a sermon is delivered in Mandarin or Hoklo seems not to cause members dissatisfaction. In short, in Buddhism, all are simply humans.
At a more tangible and grounded level, Buddhism not only preaches compassion, but through the services groups perform it also practices it at a very practical and publicly visible level. In addition to disaster relief various of the groups engage in social welfare projects assisting the poor, orphans, the elderly, children in single-parent households and others; they also sponsor periodic blood donation drives, and Ciji has established a bone marrow bank. The three larger groups are engaged in recycling, environmental cleanup and programs and education aimed at reducing resource use. Ciji and Foguangshan provide medical services, and in Ciji hospitals, no entry deposit is charged, providing the poor with access to quality medical care. Moreover, not only do the groups perform these services, they also provide very concrete examples of compassionate concern for others to see.
Finally, the Buddhist groups, in the manner of other organisations and movements mentioned above, also broaden people's social capital networks and horizons, putting them into contact with a diversity of others they would be unlikely to know otherwise. Moreover, whether the link is causal or associational, a random survey I had conducted in Taiwan shows that members of the three largest groups (for which numbers were sufficient for statistical significance) shows that they are more likely than the general public to participate in social groups other than the Buddhist groups (p<0.001), donate money to a social group (p<0.01), volunteer for a social group (p<0.05), and participate in an environmental protection group or activity (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION
Civility is a very complex and somewhat fuzzy notion. That aside, the difference between Taiwan society of the 1960s and 1980s and that of the present is palpable. It is now a kinder, more harmonious society, a society which overall displays a considerably higher concern for other people and for the public realm. Many factors have brought about these changes, but very important among them is the role played by socially-engaged Buddhism in providing outlets for the compassion and concern of those who choose to participate in it and an example to others.
Beyond the Monastic Walls: Major Trends and Perspectives in Studies in the Functional Dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism in Last One Hundred Years
BIRENDRA NATH PRASAD
In a significant section of Indian Historiography, in which Buddhism is regarded as an individualistic soteriology of World Renouncers, a stultifying quagmire surfaces quite frequently: What Buddhism actually did in Indian History?Thus N.N.Bhattachrya, one of the acknowledged authorities on Indian Religions, laments that “even after decades of research, there is no serious study of what Buddhism actually did in Indian History. To what extent could it transform the caste-based social order, patriarchal structure, and what was its relationship with the state?” In the same book, it has been asked, rather contemptuously: “did it (Buddhism) existed outside the monastery”. His judgment is quite unequivocal that it was just one of the philosophical systems of India, hence it could have hardly done anything beyond the monastic walls. Within the monastery too, it was just an individualistic soteriology, a moksha sastra.
If he reflects one extreme of perceptions of Buddhism and the role of the Sangha within that , and it must be added that they have been built upon the researches of the previous century; another extreme is provided by the ideologues of Navayana(neo-Buddhism in India). In this schema of things, Buddhist monasteries promote ‘Capitalism’ and are the centers for organizing resistance and rebellion against political tyrannies whereas the Brahamanas and their temples stand for active collaboration with the ruling powers for the oppression of the downtrodden. Should we try to explore any middle way between these two extreme positions? It may be noted that genesis of both extremes lies in the researches on the natures and functions of Buddhist Monachism. Writing in early 1840s, Koppen, a close friend of Karl Marx, has declared the Buddha to be the greatest revolutionary, the greatest liberator of the oppressed mankind has produced so far, and the greatest political innovator of his age and he was severely denounced by his contemporary scholars who accused him of unnecessarily temporalising an ‘otherworldly’, ‘individualistic soteriology’ par excellence. The latter view, due to a variety of factors, seems to have prevailed in the studies in Indian Monastic Buddhism, but that in no way means that it is the correct view or that it is the only correct view.
Any attempt of surveying the ‘functional dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism in the last one hundred years’ may not be an easy task, given the fact that almost any book on Early Indian History is likely to contain some paragraphs on Buddhism and at least some lines on Buddhist monasteries. This enormity notwithstanding, there are actually very few studies in the functional dimensions of the same: here at least N.N.Bhattachrya appears to be alarmingly true. Though there is no dearth of studies on art and architecture of Buddhist monasteries, it is the high time that studies on Buddhist Monasticism in India must move beyond purely Art Historical domain and they should be studied with reference to wider societal processes, in their interactions with other societal institutions. The present essay, based upon the survey of existing literature, would attempt to ask certain fundamental questions: what did Buddhist monasteries actually do in Indian Socio-economic history in general, and in the institutional evolution of Indian Buddhism in particular? Can we think of Indian Buddhism without monks and monasteries? In the case of Tantric Buddhism of Kathamandu Valley at least, this has in deed propounded to be the case. But can this be generalized for India ; even when we concede that the Buddha’s first two disciples were traders from Kalinga, the collective body of the monks, the Sangha was a later addenda; and even when contemporary ‘ Protestant Buddhism’ is gradually rendering Monachism less central to Buddhism than what it has earlier been in many Theravada countries. ?The contemporary Navayana movement in India treats monasticism as unnecessary, and expects its monks not to be a ‘perfected being’ but as a kind of social activist. To what extent does it reflect the earlier theory and praxis , if we concede to the fact that no vision just descends from the blue ; in some way it is a continuation of earlier processes?
The skepticism notwithstanding, the core thesis of the present Survey would generally follow the line of argument of most of the earlier scholars and would treat the Sangha as the institutional nucleus of Buddhism , the very cradle of the faith, the very prism through which much of the history of Buddhism in India is reflected , but Sangha not as an ideal retreat from the world to pursue nirvanic goals only, but in a dynamic interaction with other Societal Institutions, acting and reacting with them, influencing them and getting influenced by them in turn. The present essay does not purport to be an all-inclusive, exhaustive and chronological survey of available literature on Indian Monastic Buddhism. It would rather endeavor to see how its institutional evolution has been tracked in the historical ‘constructs’; particularly its evolution as a consequence of its interactions with other Societal institutions and its functional roles in the periods of (a) formative phases of Buddhism to the last phases of reign of Ashoka when it spreads out of its mid- Gangetic core.(B).The process by which Buddhism spreads out of the original tracts of Purutthima and the role of the Sangha in that process and the mutations it might have undergone in the process.(C)Evolution of Mahayana and the changing functional role of the monasteries.(D)Early Medieval mutations : retardation, retraction, decline and ‘disappearance’ of the faith from India, and the extent to which alleged changed roles of the monasteries were responsible for this process. The Essay shall end with a retrospective look at the researches in the functional dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism in the last one hundred years, and would try to chart out some of the prospects for future researches.
At the very outset, some clarifications are necessary. The present study will treat Buddhism as just one of the Traditions of India, always in close interaction with other Traditions, hence will frequently employ insights from studies in institutions of other religious systems of India. ‘India’ in this essay will basically cover the present geographical areas of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Such a diverse land mass as India consisted of many eco-zones, supporting diverse material cultures and cultures and much of its cultural personality has crystallized as result of the encounters between different ecozones. It has noted elsewhere by me that cultural communications involving great cultural transformations are communications of continuums and not communications of ruptures or disjunctures. Due to this it will be difficult for us to visualize Buddhism, with its institutional nucleus in the Sangha as a Mid- Gangetic Great Tradition swooping down over other parts of India and imprinting its Dhamma on a credulous Tabula Rasa .Rather what Lopez has propounded for the process of spread of Buddhism outside India can be applied to the process of spread of Buddhism within India as well. And any study of this process will have to take in to account the tremendous geographical variations within India. Long ago, Arthur Geddes has visualized much of the unfolding of Indian History as a result of continuous interactions between its core ‘grain land’,viz. the Upper and Middle Gangetic Valley and its ‘ grass lands’ and ‘forest lands’; with the latter two in a continuous flux as a result of interactions with the material culture and cultures of the ‘grainlands’. The thing to be stressed is that Buddhism appears to be the first Institutional Religion of the ‘grain lands’ to penetrate the ‘grasslands’ and ‘forestlands’ in the Indian Peninsula, Northwestern regions and the swampy jungles of Eastern India. How does the role of the Sangha mutates across this variegated space? How did relate to the existing economic and cultic system as it moved out of its Middle Gangetic Core? Did it offer any economic incentive to induce this integration? In a nutshell we need to see the roles of the Sangha beyond the monastic walls, and beyond the norms of the Vinaya. The present Essay is a humble attempt in that direction.
Much of the stereotypes we encounter in the perceptions of the nature, functions and evolution of Indian Monastic Buddhism have their genesis in the way most of the early Buddhologists of Europe , the representatives of Post Industrial Revolution European mind, imbued with a “Protestant Ethics” and under the heavy intellectual influence of Hegel and Gibbon, have perceived the genesis and decline of Indian Buddhism. What they encountered in India was a tradition dead and spent by then, but before their Indian encounter, they have already seen its institutionalized and living presence in Srilanka , South East Asia and East Asia. The more researches progressed in Indian Buddhism unraveling its multiple mutations across time and space, the more difficult it became to classify it under the common rubric- “ Buddhism”. Yet it was important to re-construct a coherent history of what they believed to be ‘Buddhism’, with a clear chronological beginning, maturation and decline and some explanation for them. For the ‘progressive’, triumphant, Post Industrial Revolution British Intellectualism, Hinduism with its ‘decrepit’, ‘superstitious’ paraphernalia, was the proverbial ‘Other’, in which Buddhism was soon perceived to be some thing like a ‘Protestant Movement’. Soon a schema crystallized in which “original”, ‘primitive” Buddhism constituted of the teachings of the Buddha only, which , as per their perceptions, advocated an eremitical mendicancy ; but soon the eternal ‘lethargy’ of India found its way among the monks leading to the birth of monasticism. This body of monastics, under further influence of existing Indian Traditions, succumbed to superstitions and started worshiping the Buddha as a god in the Mahayana phase. Subsequent monastic ‘corruption’ and ‘sexual profligacy’ in the garb of Tantricism was a total turnaround, stimulating its assimilation within Hinduism.
This approach is discernible in Spance Hardy, though he largely pre-dates British studies on Indian Buddhism. He was a Christian Missionary landing in Srilanka in 1825, and began to study the texts of Buddhism , ‘a religion I was trying to replace’ and its Institutions. Probably he was the first European to recognize the focality of Monasticism in the institutional Evolution of Buddhism. Notwithstanding his ambitious title ‘ Eastern Monachism’, which suggested that he was referring to entire Buddhist Monastic system, his study was based primarily upon informations gathered from the books current among Srilankan Monks (Singhalease versions of the Pali Canon, as well as Buddhist Manuals in Elu,an ancient Ceylonese dialect), and many other texts of post 13th century period, as well as legends current among the populace. The informations he gathered was quite piecemeal, but the judgment he passes are quite unequivocal. Though he had a doubt that “ how much of the system that bears his name was originally propounded by the Buddha himself”, and a skeptic admiration of the genius of the Buddha; “if it is proved that there were other monastic Orders in existence and Gotama was not the institutor of this (monastic) System, it will place in a more striking way his genius in having established an Order that has long survived all contemporary monastic systems , and is a living tradition in many corners of Asia”; he has no doubt about the overall historical character and functions of ‘Eastern Monachism” : ‘ the history of monastic institutions , notwithstanding their claims to our respect and veneration, is confession of failures and defects. Their avowed aim has been the reformation of manners, for the accomplishment of which each succession Order begins in poverty but gradually increasing in wealth becomes alike corrupt and a relaxation of discipline was the consequence. Each new institution arose from the degeneracy of its predecessor, and was an additional proof to all who had eyes to see and minds to understand , that the System had inherent impotency and was utterly incapable to produce the consequences that were desired”. This ‘inherent impotency of the System’ surfaces time and again in writings on Buddhist Monachism. Max Weber, writing around hundred years after Hardy , and attributing Indian failure to undergo the transition to Industrial Capitalism to the structural problems in its religions, had at least some words of praise for Hinduism for its ability to build and sustain a Social Whole however decrepit and rotten that might be, and also for Jainism because ‘it was as exclusive , or perhaps more ,merchant religion as was Judaism in the Occident’ he was bitterly hostile to “ asocial Buddhism, a specifically un -political and anti political status religion, more precisely a ‘religious technology’ of wandering and intellectually- schooled mendicant monk”. Thus “ Early Buddhism of the Pali Canonical Texts was merely a status ethics, more correctly speaking, the technology of contemplative monkhood ”, and “ unlike the later Christian ethic, Buddhist monastic ethic simply does not represent rational , ethical endeavor supported by special ‘ inner worldly’ ethical conducts as channalised in the social Order, but it takes precisely the opposite direction, principally an asocial course. Therefore no true reconciliation between the worldly and monastic ethics by way of ‘ status relativism’ as is the case in the Bhagavata beliefs and Catholicism could ever be consummated with a comparable success”, as “ to change the social Order in this World neither early nor later Buddhism has attempted . The monk was indifferent to the world. Not as in the case of Ancient Christendom because eschatological expectations stamped it so, but the reverse because there was no sort of eschatological expectations”. He concedes that the demands of the laity were primarily responsible for the emergence of Mahayana, and in Mahayana, ‘ the dependency of the monks on the ruling strata was greater and the less world denying they were’, but in his ultimate analysis, what the Mahayana and its monachism performed was that “ first through formalistic prayers and finally through the techniques of the prayer mills and prayer ships hung in the wind of spat-upon idols, it attained a high point of cult –mechanism and joined it to the transformation of the entire world in an immense magical garden”. In this kind of worldview, he asserts , hardly any internal evolution towards Industrial Capitalism is possible. It is however entirely a different thing that when he was composing these words on the historical role and functions of Buddhism in general and its Monachism in particular ; Japan, a country traditionally under heavy Mahayana influence, was effectively competing with Industrial Capitalism of Europe and America , and Buddhism played no insignificant role in her modernization process and “ asocial and indifferent to the world” Theravada Monasticism was playing not an insignificant role in the anti-colonial struggles in Srilanka and South East Asia, and in the modernization of the only independent country in South East Asia, Thailand, role of the Sangha was fundamentally important. But it was hardly a great deal for the school of thought he represented for which ‘ original’ Buddhism is what has been prescribed in the (normative) texts ; how does it interacts with the context and undergoes mutations is hardly their concern . No wonder their experiences of anthropological studies on ‘lived’ Buddhism are that of shock . Spiro , for example, dismays after his observations on the ‘lived’ Buddhism among the peasantry of Burma : “ how can a religion which is materialistic( the doctrine of no soul), atheistic ( no Creator God), nihilistic( all real things are sentient), pessimistic(everything is suffering) and renunciatory( the only solution is to abandon one’s self, family and possessions) be the official religion of so many countries”. Some reasons behind royal patronage to the ‘otherworldly’ Buddhist monks and monasteries , and ‘ anarchic doctrine of Buddhism’ has in deed been proffered by Conze; that it opiates the masses to the tyrannies of the ‘habitual despotic’ rulers of Asia and promotes social status quo with its Karma theory. Needless to say historical Constructs of this sort are reflections of sustained stereotypes Buddhism has to face.
It has been observed and rightly so, in the context of Theravada Buddhism, but can be rightly generalized for the entire Buddhist spectrum with some necessary modifications, that Buddhism contains a hierarchy of teachings and roles and co- exists with other systems in a structured hierarchy. How did the role of the monasteries mutates across the rungs of this hierarchy across time and space and especially on the what has been rightly called, the ‘open frontier between Buddhism and Animism’? It is with these questions that we shall begin our survey.
One of the earliest teachings of the Buddha to the monks, as we are told in the Pali Canon , was that ‘ not two of you would go in the same way’; and that eremitical ideas were very prominent in the earliest phase of Buddhism, as the followers of the Buddha were just among many Parivrajaka communities. Gradually monasticism developed within Buddhism and becomes its defining feature. Generally most of the available Writings on the genesis of Buddhist Monachism have stressed the key role of the institution of Vassa- Vasa (Rainy season retreat for the monks) in the evolution of later sedentarised monasteries. But the practice of rainy season retreat was not confined to Buddhist monks only. Why did monasticism did not develop among other wandering monk communities of that time? Why did monasticism got institutionalized only in the case of Buddhism? Nagasena , in his long dialogue with Milinda ,stresses out that monasticism ensures easy availability of the monks for the laity and thus ensures greater chances for merit making for them, hence the need for sedentary monasticism. In deed ‘demands of the laity inducing institutionalization” has been stressed by many modern scholars as well. Is it that simple? If that be the case, how does the interactions of the Sangha with other societal institutions influences the trajectories of its institutional evolution?
Unfortunately, this quest is hardly discernible in most of early writings on Buddhism. No doubt these scholars have done an immense service to Buddhological studies in its formative phases in India by providing general outline of “Three Jewels” of Buddhism , generally beginning with a narration of the life of the Buddha, then his teachings ,and in the end, some thing like an appendix on a rather static description of the Sangha, which were generally not much different from almost a verbatim reproduction of the injunctions of the Pali Vinaya; with hardly any attempt to see its evolution as an institution in dynamic interaction with its larger societal context. There had been some occasional highlighting of the fact that the Buddhist Sangha was modeled on the political pattern of the Ganasangha states and in that sense, it was fully ‘ democratic’, but hardly any study of factors inducing this alleged interface.
This tendency is discernible the writings on Indian Buddhism from a very early phse to the very recent present : from different writings of T.W. Rhys Davids ( Outlines of Buddhism: A Historical Sketch,1934, Manuel of Buddhism, 1932, Buddhist India, 1903.The last one was an interpretation of Ancient Indian socio-economic history from a Buddhist perspective , which incidentally does not contain a single line on the role and place of monasteries in the same) ; J.H.C.Kern, Manuel of Indian Buddhism, 1896 ; Monier Williams, Buddhism, 1889 ; E.J.Thomas, Life of the Buddha as Legend and History, 1927). More recently, the same attitude is visible in a compendium edited by P.V.Bapat in 1972 to mark the 2500th anniversary of foundation of Buddhism, 2500 Years of Buddhism. It was an attempted holistic survey of different aspects of Buddhism in its entire Asian Spectrum, with contributions from acknowledged authorities. But it doesn’t have a single chapter on the functional dimensions Monastic Buddhism either in India or in any other country. Even N.N.Bhattacharya in his History of Researches on Indian Buddhism (1981) displays the same attitude; and this shows the ( lack of) attention monastic Buddhism enjoys in mainstream Historiography.
This apathy notwithstanding , there have been some remarkable attempts in this direction. Dutt, in his Early Buddhist Monachism, offers a brave departure however rudimentary that may be ,and due to this reason , he demands a greater discussion. What renders his work stand apart from the earlier ‘ handbooks’ is a very sharp understanding of the evolutionary character of the Sangha and the need to study it in conjunction with the larger societal context in interactions with which it evolves. It is at its best when he laments the tendency of ‘straying away from the historian’s point of view’ in the study of Indian Buddhism, exaggerating the evolution of ideas and minimizing the material factors that made that evolution possible and determined its character. He has rightly asserted that “the history of Buddhism can not be viewed apart from the growth and development of the Buddhist Sangha and apart from the organization of monastic life and community, ancient Buddhism is at best an abstraction, a system interesting more to the philosopher than to the historian”. What is even more interesting is the sharper understanding of the evolutionary character of the Sangha. He denies that the Sangha was a fixed type from the very beginning: that most of its laws, if not all laws, were laid down by the Buddha himself ; that its organization was essentially of the same fixed character for the next five hundred years till the origins of the Mahayana; as “ the Sangha was not in a perpetual state of arrested progress nor were its laws like ‘ the laws of the Medes and Persians that altereth not’. The Buddhist Order(The Sangha) , on the other hand had a remarkable capacity for growth, development, variations, adjustments and progress”. Needless to repeat it is the approach we have been trying to emphasize form the very inception. He has also rejected that the entire Pali Vinaya Pitaka was composed in one go (in the Council of Vaisali): they consist in fact “of much earlier and much later materials welded together by a theory. When they are arranged in their proper sequence, they will afford us evidences of an evolution of Buddhist Monachism as reflected in the (Pali) Vinaya Pitaka”. He has noted the tussle between the earlier prominent eremitical mendicancy and the forest monk tradition, and the emerging Monachism and has asserted that the earliest episode of Conflict in the Order between these two Principles is embodied in the story of Devadatta who “seems to have attempted unsuccessfully at a revival of an old mendicant, eremitical Ideal”, but he does not analyze the process or the material factors which allowed the emerging monastic tradition to supercede the earlier forest monk tradition .He has noted the growth of the Buddhist Coenobium by Vassa Vasa---- Avasa- Arama--- Sangharama modal, but again does not offer the analysis of any socio-economic factor entailing this transition.He has noted the absence of notices to Buddhist Monachism in the Greek writings on India till the Second Century AD, and has rightly concluded that for a long time after the Macedonian invasions (4th Century BCE), Buddhist monasteries were neither numerous nor striking enough to attract the notices of foreign writers in India, but in the next chapter, in his reconstruction of communal life at avasa , he goes on almost a verbatim reproduction of the Pali Vinaya and does not address a rather anomalous problem. The injunctions of the Pali Vinaya envisage a fully developed institutionalized Monasticism, but as he has noted in the context of Greek Writings and as supported by archaeology, this kind of fully developed Monachism did not appear in India before the early Kushana period. So how the rules of the Pali Vinaya can be used to reconstruct the situations which apparently did not exist. Besides, he displays a remarkable reluctance to use archaeological data, and insights from Vinayas other than the Pali one and thus leaves much to be desired. Almost a similar approach is visible in his reconstruction of pre- Mahayana Monachism in his later and much larger book, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries in India (1962) though he has used a diverse range of Sources in reconstructing the same from the Mahayana phase onwards. In this monograph, he has noted the gradual metamorphosis in the monasteries and their institutional management from the early centuries of the Common Era, their spread along trade routes to the Deccan and beyond , the mercantile and royal patronage they received , shrinkage of Buddhist space across India from the Gupta period onwards, emergence of ‘ Monastic Universities’ (Nalanda etc) in the Early Medieval Period. He has taken the support systems of the monasteries in to account, but how that support increased or diminished from time to time and what were its consequences on monastic life, and also upon the trajectories of Buddhism in India and its decline , has been only perfunctorily been studied. That in no way reduces the importance of the Work. This being the earliest macro survey of the monastic experience of India will remain as a mandatory reading for any study on the functional dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism.
Reconstruction of the Pre- Mahayana Buddhist Monachism largely on the basis of Pali works is visible in Conze(1951), V.P.Varma (1971) and Richard Gombrich (1994). Conze for example begins with the traditional stereotypes as noted in the previous pages, hardly makes any attempt to see the process of institutionalization of the Sangha or its evolution. He has asserted that the ‘monks are the only Buddhists in the proper sense of the word’, and that ‘the continuity of the monastic organization has been the only constant factor in Buddhism’. But continuity with a change or arrested evolution? This follows from his attitude of taking the Vinaya injunctions to be narrative, not normative, and basing his narrative solely on the basis of the Pali Vinaya. He has noted that the ‘monastic life was regulated by the rules of the Vinaya’. Then he proceeds to discuss three “essentials” of Monastic life- poverty, celibacy and inoffensiveness - with the core thesis that the ‘ Monk possessed no property at all”, but makes no attempt to study the variations of this norm( which he wrongly treats as the universal praxis) across time and space . By his time, the factors behind the very first schism in Sangha (In the Vaisali Council) on the question of possession of private property by the monks, as well as the phenomenon of the evolution of Early Medieval Monastic Landlordism within India and outside were well documented . But that is of hardly any use for him, for he represents a school which believes that ‘real’, ‘authentic’ Buddhism is to be found only in the Pali works.
VP Varma also suffers from the same limitations of exclusive dependency on the Pali Canonical and Semi- Canonical works in his reconstruction of the “Sociology of Buddhist Monasticism”. The impression he has emphasized is that “Early Buddhism was a Creed of Individualism”, which “taught the transitoryness and evanescence of the worldly phenomenon and a retreat from them”. Thus for him monasteries are a retreat and escape from the world. But that contrasts sharply with his own analysis of the social patronage received by the Sangha during its formative phases: from business magnets like Anathpindaka to rulers like Ajatsatru and Prasenjit, and numerous gahapatis .What functional return did the Sangha offer to them?He has noted the differences between the Early Buddhist Monachism and Early Medieval and Medieval Catholic Monachism in some detail, the key difference being that “the Buddhist Sangha is based upon a republican structural modal and it did not have any theocratic head comparable to the Roman Catholic Pope”. He has also noted that Buddhist monasticism, unlike its Christian counterpart, did not develop any doctrine of apostolic succession derived from the personality of the founder, nor was there any ‘sacredotal keeper of the keys to the heaven in the Buddhist Sangha” - a very interesting observation in deed. That notwithstanding, basic objective of the Chapter of offering a sociological analysis of institutional evolution of the Sangha is hardly fulfilled.
Uma Chakravarty on the other hand offers much more astute observations on the institutional evolution of the Sangha in the backdrop of the prevailing socio-economic milieu at the time of the Buddha, and relates the differential patronage to the Sangha to the Political Structure of the Realm. Thus she has noted that the institution of Vassa –Vasa came in to being when peasants started complaining to the Buddha of the damage done to their newly sown crops due to the incessant movements of the monks during the rainy season; that despite being deeply related with the Second Urbanization of the Subcontinent, agrarian similes and metaphors played no less important role in the evolution of the Laws of the Sangha. She has also noted the differential nature of patronage in the Monarchial and Republican Polities during the period of the Buddha. in the Monarchial States based upon individual ownership of Property, the Sangha attracted the patronage of the Cross section of the Society, while in the Republican States, based upon the notion of collective ownership of property in the hands of the ruling Khattiya clan only, the Sangha could not receive any mass patronage , hence the number of monasteries in these regions was less compared to the same in the Monarchial States. She has also noted that the Buddha has modeled his emerging Sangha on the political pattern of the Ganasangha States, which she has noted on a number of occasions, was a ‘vanishing Order’, but has proffered no explanation of why did the Buddha choose to model his emerging Sangha on a ‘ Vanishing Order’. But as whole her approach is quite refreshing. She has also noted that those who joined the Sangha, most of them were from well- to -do families, with the Brahamanas forming the single largest group, followed by the Khattiyas, and only a few ‘low born’ joined it. That is to say, the Sangha was not an avenue for the run away escapists, at least in the days of its genesis.
Gombrich may be taken as the continuation of the tradition of near exclusive dependence on Pali texts for the reconstruction of the evolution of the Sangha ; an ‘institution consciously and carefully designed by the Buddha towards a particular end’. In one of his later writings he has noted the congenital heterogeneity of the Sangha ,as the earliest converts to Buddhism came from different background and due to the rudimentary institutional structure of the Sangha, ‘ many members of the Sangha must have gone on using some of their former terms and concepts’. In the present book, he has focused upon the missionary impulse of the Sangha from the very beginning and its role as the institutional nucleus of Theravada Buddhism—“ the history of Theravada Buddhism, seen from the point of view of the Tradition itself ; what anthropologists call the emic view, is the History of the Sangha. It constitutes the very core of Theravada Buddhism. Theravada Buddhism is a product of Texts composed by, and indeed largely for, monks and nuns. To look for a lay Tradition of Theravada Buddhism is a misunderstanding of the same sort as to look for a low caste Brahamanism: were it lay tradition, it would not be Theravada, the Doctrine of the Elders”. Its doubtful that any religion can be reduced to its Textual Tradition by a near total denial of the larger societal contexts, the role of the laity and continuous interaction between the Text and Context ; an interaction leading to continuous metamorphosis of the Sangha. And of course anthropological studies have proved not only the existence of a thriving lay tradition of the Theravada Buddhism ; the Kammatic Buddhism, and a near ‘Universal weakness of Nibbanic Buddhism everywhere”, but also a much more mundane ‘apotropaic’ Buddhism; the only form which survives its institutional liquidation and later helps in the re- institutionalization of the Sangha: and also the fact that the more normative and text- bookish the Sangha becomes, the more detached are the monasteries from the laity hence they have greater vulnerability for decay and decline.
Gombrich notes that the ever lamented ‘corruption’ (by that he seems basically to mean the accumulation of property by the monks and the Sangha), began in the life time of the Buddha itself, that is, the norms of the Pali Vinaya was not followed in letter and spirit in the earliest days itself; and later the “lay and royal pressure to accept gifts probably accounted for most of Sangha’s recurrent corruption”. But why was the Sangha forced to accept gifts which went beyond its ‘basic doctrines’ and disciplines? He does mention that “the Sangha, in its very early phase had to accommodate to the facts of political power”, and also the fact that ‘the Sangha and hence Buddhism had a particular need of political patronage if it is to flourish-- History has shown time and again that without State support – which need not mean exclusive State support—the Sangha declines from this very reason. The Sangha need the Secular arm of the State to purify itself”. This indeed has been the case in many countries where political consolidation of the ruling elite results in to ecclesiastical centralization and rigid institutionalized hierarchisation of the Sangha ;and the more galactic the Polity turns the greater institutional disarray for the Sangha. His observations are the beginning in the right direction. We need a greater contextual study of the encounters of the Sangha laws and injunctions with secular laws and regulations and the resultant mutations at both ends. But can this study be undertaken by treating the, as it appears, normative Vinaya as narrative? In fact a terrible contradiction exists in his approach of handling the Vinaya (which for him is Pali Vinaya only). At one juncture, he has used the Vinaya to reconstruct ‘how exactly the members of the Sangha were supposed to live’ (emphasis added), but in the very previous page, he has noted that the “Vinaya provides a complete way of life, a rule of conduct for the monks, nuns and novices; it was an attempted guide to monastic rules when the monastic life became radically standardized and simplified”. The last line is more important for us. When the monastic life did became ‘standardized and radically simplified” to entail this kind of normative uniformity? As has been noted earlier, it was not before a considerably later period. So can this data be literally used for the formative phases of the Sangha?
This undue emphasis on the norms of the Vinaya in tracing the evolution of the Sangha largely blinds us to the multiple mutations the Sangha undergoes as a part of its localization strategy across time and space, as a part of its ‘translation in to local idioms’; a common feature of the localization strategy of any World Religion. As early as 1951, Frauwallner, noting the close similarity between the Vinayas of different schools, have opined that the an original ‘Proto-Text’ of the extant Vinayas must have existed during the earliest days of the Sangha, and Lamottee has largely corroborated that ‘If remarkable similarities can be discerned in the outlines of the various Vinayas, --and we are thinking particularly of the Pali,Mahisasaka and the Dharmagupta Vinayas—this fact can be explained by a parallel development. Buddhist communities did not live in complete isolation but were interested in the work carried out by their neighbors .It is therefore not very surprising that they worked with the same methods and followed practically the same plan. If nothing is more like one Buddhist Vihara than another Buddhist Vihara, it is normal that various known Vinayas should reveal the close link which connected them”.
Chrls S.Prebish study of early Buddhist Monachism, based largely upon S.Dutta is important for his advocacy of ‘middle way’ regarding the significance of the Vinaya texts in the institutional evolution of the Sangha,between the two extremes propounded by Andre Baraeu and A.C.Banarjee: the first holding that only doctrinal matters were responsible for the emergence of sects, and the latter holding that there was hardly any difference regarding the interpretation of the Dhamma, it was differential interpretation of the Vinaya injunctions which lead to the emergence of sects. Prebish advocates a middle way, but with a propensity towards the greater significance of the Vinaya in the institutional evolution of the Sangha; he has noted that ‘it can not be mere coincidence that the schools with the most developed Vinayas have prospered while the others have dissipated’. But what is the co-relation between different Vinayas, and what is the interaction of the text with the context? He has translated the Sanskrit Vinayas of the Sarvastivadinas and Mulsarvastivadinas in the same book, but it could have been immensely more illuminating had he offered their textual and contextual differences or the lack of that, and factors behind these, with the Pali Vinaya.
Interrelationship between different Vinayas, their similarities or dissimilarities have invited rigorous research. It has been noted that similarity is only between the Vinayas of the individual sects of the two Schools of the First Schism (Sthviravadina and the Mahasanghikas) and not across the Schools. Largely the same thing has been observed in the rules prescribed for the Upostha ceremony in the various Vinayas of the Same School. Agreed that at the level of normative Great Tradition, a uniformity has been envisaged across sects, and may be also across Schools. But how does that translate in to practice?
It may be asserted that despite these brilliant studies on the Vinayas and the reconstruction of Early Buddhist monastic practices in India as per the norms of the Vinayas, there is hardly any study of the process by which Monasticism emerges among an eremitical monk community. Mention must be made of Robin Coningham's brilliant study of the institutionalization process of the Sangha in Srilanka. He has noted that the transition from cave dwelling forest monk tradition to institutionalized, sedentarised and 'domesticated' monasticism was closely related with the process of transition from the Chiefdom Polities to that of loosely centralized Paramount Sovereign ruling over the whole of Srilanka; a process rendering the Sangha and the State increasingly interdependent. At a later stage, the more centralized the Polity became, the greater the temporal assets of the Sangha, ultimately leading to the development of Monastic landlordism. A similar process of the Monastic Tradition superceding the ‘original’ ,Forest Tradition of the formative Phases of Indian Buddhism has in deed been noted by Reginald Ray , but without analyzing the factors and the process behind the gradual establishment of Monasticism as the ‘ Authentic’ Tradition. He begins with a critic of traditional Monastery Centric Buddhist historiography in India in which the monasteries form the prism through which much of History of Indian Buddhism is cast :entailing the construction of a ‘Two Tier Modal’ of Indian Buddhism ,in which the monastics occupy the upper tier and practice a “ Buddhism of Emulation” viz. taking the Buddha as a role modal than as a an object of devotion and veneration; whereas the laity form the lower tier, practicing a “Buddhism of devotion” i.e.,.devotion and reverence to the Buddha and the Sangha. The primary aim of the book is to ‘amplify the voice of forest Buddhism by focusing upon the Forest Saint’, but in the process, he offers certain interesting observations on the nature and functions of Monastic Buddhism in India; its interaction with the laity and with the forest monks. .For him, the Forest Monk tradition is the ‘original Buddhism’ which has been suppressed or at least obscured by the Settled Monasticism. Thus Monastic Buddhism is ‘institutionalized’, ‘regulated’ and ‘ordered’ Buddhism, and was the seat for maintenance and contemplations of the textual tradition . Its proximity to and dependence upon the social, economic and political establishment often compelled it to accept and reinforce the status quo of the societal context. In fact by its emphasis on ‘ order, regulation and scholasticism, Monasticism reflects just as or perhaps even more so a Brahamanistion of the earliest Buddhism. But despite these castigations, he could not deny the interdependence both have developed in course of time. The forest produced the saints but could not retain them, they had to come back to the settled world of monasticism, and become part of the monastic life. Excessive institutionalization and scholasticism on the other hand compelled some of the monastics to the forest’.
No doubt Reginald Ray displays a remarkable scholarship yet he chooses to overlook certain important things. Despite his denials, a substantial influence of S.J.Tambiah’s and Michael Carrithers’s study of Forest Monk Traditions of Thailand and Srilanka respectively is quite discernible on him. Both Tambiah and Carrithers have visualized that the State, The Gramavasina/ Nagarvasina (Village/Town) Monasteries and the aranyavasina (‘Forest Dwelling’) Monasteries together formed a functional matrix , on the modals of the ‘ Core – Periphery’ dialectics ; the State and the Gramavasina/ Nagarvasina Monasteries together forming the ‘core’. In this schema of things, the Forest Monks Tradition functions as the repository of doctrinal and meditational purity, hence the fountainhead of legitimacy whenever the State faces any grave internal or external crisis. Should we visualize a similar role for the Forest Monk Tradition in Indian Buddhism? Moreover when a Nagarvasina/ Gramavasina monk chooses to go to the forest, what is impact of this migration on the Forest society? Do they transmit the ideas and praxis of the Settled Agrarian World or just practice ever higher forms of meditation in a total aloofness from their surrounding world? Ray does not engage these questions; he is content only with the ritual (and spiritual) aspects of this complex matrix. Some interesting generalizations have recently been made, on the basis of archaeological sources, regarding the functional relationship between Buddhist monasteries and Second Urbanization of the Subcontinent. Oldenburg onwards it has been observed that the genesis of Buddhism was deeply related with the Second Urbanization of the Subcontinent , but how did it affect the location of the monastic sites? Erdosy’s Article is illuminating in this aspect. He has pointed out the dependence of the monasteries on the cities and towns. He has convincingly shown that it were only the largest towns and cities, more often , the capital city of emerging Polities in the Gangetic Valley from 6th-5th century BC onwards which were able to support the monasteries. He has noted the spatial distribution pattern of the monasteries , either on the trade routes connecting these cities and towns ;or just outside the cities ( as was the case with Besanagar, Sanchi , and Benaras ,at Saranath) ; or just inside the city (as was the case with Pataliputra and Kausambi); or a rather diffused type, without any obvious concentration but dotting the entire landscape( as was the case with Vaisali, Rajagir, Mathura , Ahichhatra and Tilaurakot). That is, as per his analysis, early Buddhism and its monastic sites were totally dependent upon the resources of the towns and cities. A similar pattern has been noted by D.K.Chakravarty as well in the locational analysis of early monastic sites. James Heitzman is much ore systematic in his analysis of the relationship between the location of the monastic sites, Trade and Empire and the role played by this triad in the spread of the Sangha beyond its Mid- Gangetic core. He has noted that the foundation of the Mauryan Empire and the resultant political and administrative unification of the larger part of the Subcontinent resulted in to a flourishing of long distance trade. Thus in an environment of expanding trade linkages and crystallizing State power, Buddhist monasteries, dependent upon royal and mercantile patronage, flourished in or around important towns or along the trade routes linking them. Based upon the analysis of the locational pattern of the monasteries, he has rejected the earlier modal of D.D.Kosambi of direct participation of the monasteries in trade; nonetheless their indirect contribution to trade has been recognized. He has noted that the monasteries provided ideological support to their royal and mercantile patrons, and the three together formed a mutually supportive matrix. This article largely explains the process of the spread of the Sangha beyond its Mid-Gangetic core to the outlying areas: a process in which trade and traders seems to have played no less important role than the enthusiastic missionary impulse of Ashoka. In deed in a brilliant article, exploring the nature and extent of Ashokan engagements and interventions in the Sangha , it has been observed that in the Schism Edicts ( at Kosambi, Sanchi and Saranath), Ashoka is not concerned with the Schism in the Buddhist Church( The Universal Sangha of Four Quarters) but divisions within local individual Sanghas. This was in line with the contemporary realities, as at that time, the level of organization in Buddhism did not go beyond individual Sanghas. But here too, trade had role in the Ashoka’s concerns of preventing the Sanghabheda; “as a result of the Schism many new competing Sanghas could have come in to being and a possible source of conflict, which in turn interrupts the smooth flow of trade”. The role of Trade in influencing the location of the monasteries has been brilliantly documented in the context of Early Historic Deccan, a theme we shall turn to now.
In the early 1950s, D.D.Kosambi, based upon his observations of direct participation of the Chinese Buddhist monasteries in trade , has propounded a similar monastic participation in India in general and Early Historic Deccan in particular. In his approach, monasteries became totally dependent upon trade and commerce, and their other roles were largely denied. H.P.Ray has largely built on his modal, though with fundamental modifications, in advocating a more dynamic pattern of monastic interactions with the society and economy in Early Historic Period (c.BC300-AD300). Her different wittings on the functional role of monasteries , in the last twenty years or so, show a very remarkable transition : from the earlier emphasis on the dominance of the material factors (trade, agrarian expansion, Secondary State Formation Process in the tribal areas of the Deccan) to the internal dynamics of religion and pilgrimage in determining the fate of monasteries.
The first approach is visible in her ‘Monastery and Guild’ (1986) in which she has emphasized the role of the monasteries as catalytic factors in facilitating the transition from Tribal Chiefdoms to Institutional State in Deccan . She has noted the location of the monasteries in the fertile Upper Godavari and Bhima valleys and their role in both agriculture and trade, as well as the chronological evolution of the functional role of the Satavahana period monasteries. Thus in their earliest phase in Deccan ( around First Century BC) , they probably acted as “ pioneers and as centers providing informations on cropping patterns , distant markets, organization of village settlement and trade” as well as agents for the integrations of the frontier areas for the emerging Polities by assisting in the “establishment of channels of communications in the newly colonized regions and these channels could be then used by the State to enforce its authority”, as well as by “providing anchorage in an environment characterized by changing alignment of social ties”. She has also noted that with increasing trade and commerce, the monasteries could have got involved directly in trade and could have accumulated wealth. Changes in the rock cut architecture in western Deccan and the shift to exclusive royal patronage in the Gupta -Vakataka period has also been noted and she has stressed the need to see these changes in the background of socio-economic mutations and a probable re- alignment in the balance of power between the State, the Monasteries and laity. Her approach of rejecting any unilinear and a priory fixed role of the monasteries is indeed a laudable effort, as well as her approach to see the continuous mutations in their roles as result of their interactions with the other Societal Institutions.
Largely similar arguments have been re- articulated, rather sharply, in some of her next writings. Her analysis of functional dimensions of the monastic complexes at Sanchi and Bharhut follows her earlier modal of ‘frontier integration offered by the monasteries” and their close linkages with the trade routes. She has argued that the Mauryan line of control of minerally rich Deccan passed through these regions. The Mauryan attempts to get the co-operation of the tribal communities of the Deccan perhaps lead to the evolution of a triangular relationship between the State, these tribal communities and the Monasteries which represented the most institutionally developed form of religion that time. She indeed has provided some hints regarding the evolving autonomy of the monasteries vis- a- vis trade and towns. It has been brilliantly noted that initially the monasteries had to be located in either rich agricultural areas or along trade routes where surplus was available to support the monks. Later a considerable change: the simple redistributive and reciprocal relationship between the monasteries and the hinterlands altered with the monasteries constantly acquiring greater wealth and evolving in to independent socio- economic institution; a parallel Order in society”. This helps us understand why some monasteries survive and prosper even after the decline of trade and towns, by becoming deeply embedded in the agrarian structure of a given region.
In her Winds of Change, she has attempted some bold sub-continental generalizations regarding the functional role of the monasteries, though the focus is of course on the Peninsula. She has noted the support provided by the monasteries at different levels, in the phenomenal expansion of trade and commerce in the Early Historical Period. At the ideological level, she argues, Buddhism exhorted the accumulation and re-investment of wealth in trade and commerce; at the societal level, Buddhist monasteries provided status to the traders and other occupational groups; while at the economic level, the monasteries were repositories of information and necessary skills such as writing and medicine. She has noted the role played by the monasteries in agrarian expansion in the Satavahana Deccan, where except one land grant to the Brahamanas all other land grants are in favor of the monasteries. In her subcontinental analysis of the location of the monastic centers, she has noted their concentration along the trade routes or near important towns; though she has assigned the absence of the structural remains of monasteries or stupas in areas such as Bengal, Tamilnadu and Kerala to the problems in generating agrarian surplus capable of supporting resident population of monks. In a nutshell, she has been largely successful in reconstructing the multiple role of the monasteries and their diverse linkages with the wider societal processes.
A fundamental paradigm shift is visible in her study of the monastic complex of Kanheri, located near a suburb of modern Bombay. Kanheri shows a continuous occupation from the First Century AD to the Tenth Century AD, while most of the monastic sites of Western Deccan decline after the Fifth Century AD. She has probed two fundamental question in this Article (1) The position of Kanheri within the monasteries of Western Deccan and (2). The reason behind the continued occupation of Kanheri when other sites in the same region show signs of decline. Based on a study of the votive inscriptions, Copper Plates and ,votive stupas built by the pilgrims, she has pointed out that a combination of two fortuitous factors were responsible for the continued prosperity of Kanheri in contrast to other monastic sites Of Western Deccan : (1) location of important port towns in the close vicinity of Kanheri ( Chaul, Sopora, Kalyan etc) which made possible the continuous flow of mercantile patronage and (2) its wide spread pilgrimage networks, attracting pilgrims from such far off places like Sindh and Gauda (Bengal). Thus maritime trade was important for the fortunes of the site but the role of pilgrimage was no less important.
The autonomy of the monastic centers, vis- a- vis trade and towns has been re-affirmed in her recent writings. It has been observed that in the coastal Andhra where most of the Early Historic monastic sites have been found, a few urban centers have been identified in archaeological records, and here pilgrimage provided an alternate strategy of mobilization of resources for the monasteries. She has also attempted to construct hierarchy within the peninsular monasteries on the basis of their size and longevity, but she has largely ignored their spatial linkages with the landscape. That notwithstanding, its very brave departure .Such hierarchisation have been attempted in the study of Buddhist monasteries outside India, even in the case of Brahamanical temples within India, but this has been a rarity in the studies in Indian monastic Buddhism. Hopefully her attempt would inspire further researches in this area as well as in the re-construction of the Pilgrimage Geography of major and minor monasteries.
Let us come back again to the lower Krishna Godavari delta and see a brilliant study by H.Sarakar on the emergence and growth of Buddhist monasteries in the same and their linkages with the process of Urbanization. The Article begins with a fundamentally important observation that the Buddhist monasteries and the Stupas formed part of a larger social and economic matrix and should not be studied in isolation. He could visualize diverse subsistence bases of the monasteries and their differential strategies in different landscapes in the micro region of Krishna Godavari delta. Thus some monasteries were located near ‘agrarian cities’ such as Bhattiporulu and depended more on agrarian resources ; some were located near port towns and depended more on mercantile patronage ; whereas some monasteries like Nagarjunakonda were located near royal centers, were built and patronized by the ruling strata; and significantly at such centers Buddhist monasteries shared sacred space along with the Brahamanical temples, and they were just one of the institutions from which the ruling strata derived its legitimacy. The core outcome is: even within a single micro region, the monasteries had differential roles across time and space.
As noted earlier, we have a flood of literature on the monastic art and architecture, but hardly any study on their societal implications. Nagaraju’s study of monastic art and architecture in Western Deccan stands as a brilliant contrast. He has observed the phases of monastic architecture in the region and their societal implications. (A) In the earliest phase, mere isolated cells, with hardly any water storage structure ( as they were located in the drier regions of Western Deccan, they had to store water for the use of monks in the non-rainy seasons of the years)- so they represented the phase of Vassa –Vasa in monasticism. (B). From around Second Century BC to the Third- Fourth Century AD,- architecture is more developed, as well as water cisterns , being made with lay patronage , and with this increased availability of water for the resident monks, greater sedentarisation .In this period, monasteries attracted the patronage of the cross section of the society – traders, farmers, artisans as well as royal patrons, and this wide base of patronage was reflected in architectural vibrancy. (C). In the next phase between 4th-7th Century AD, a gradual narrowing down of the patronage base and exclusive dependence on royal patronage has been noted. Based upon the study of cell architecture within the monasteries, emergence of hierarchy within the monk community as well as the functioning of some of the monasteries as Educational Centers has been noted. (D) From 7th century AD onwards, the pattern was fundamentally different: total dependence on royal patronage, emergence of monasteries as owners of big landed estates, further increase in their role as education centers; and within the monastic complex, further differentiation within the monks, with some of them getting deified and sharing the same precinct with the Buddha. His concluding observations are very remarkable - “with land , money , spiritual leadership of the monks and emergence of monasteries as centers for learning we come to a phase in which the Buddhist monasteries began to act as a competitor for power with other sections of the society. We wonder whether this ambition to exercise power without the necessary backing of the social and ideological equipments was responsible for the gradual decline of Buddhism in western India, nay India in general. With the loss of royal; patronage as a result of competition in the power game and the consequent depletion of number of clergy, Buddhism simply disappeared from the scene and the laity gradually assimilated themselves in other religious denominations”. This is a fundamentally important for us in perceiving the more pro-active role of the monasteries – not merely a recipient of social patronage but also a source or center for the interplay of social hegemonies, with monasteries as an institution themselves exercising hegemony, however rudimentary that may be, rather than merely bestowing it to their patrons.
But why only some monasteries attract royal patronage while others fail to do so? Richard. S. Cohen’s study of the Ajanta Complex is very important in understanding this , though the Article appears to be primarily concerned with or much larger issue: localization strategy of the Sangha when it is trying to establish itself a new area ; a process by which the “ Buddha becomes ‘of the place’ by resolving uniquely local problems”. At Ajanta, the Sangha worked at two levels simultaneously .Ajanta monastic complex acted as a stabilizing factor on the troubled frontier region of Vakataka regime hence received a substantial Vakataka patronage. At the cultic level, it offered one of the avenues for the Buddhist cultic integration of the animistic Naga cult; another example of what has been earlier referred to as the “open frontier between Buddhism and animism”, a phenomenon which has started getting documented in the studies of Indian Buddhism.
In the context of Early Historic India, societal networks and interactions of Buddhist monasteries have been studied mostly in terms of the patronage they attracted and the return which they provided to their patrons ; a return which is supposed to be legitimacy and social status. Changing patronage base has also been noted so as its impact on the fortune of the Sangha. Thus both Romila Thapar and Vidya Dehejia have noted that in the Early Historic Period, the main support base of North Indian monasteries came from the individual traders, merchants, artisans, farmers, monks and nuns, and in the context of Sanchi collective patronage from some villages. Royal patronage was of course not absent, but was not so significant. Both have noted dissipating social base of patronage by the beginning of the Gupta period, and both have attributed the decline of Buddhism to this factor.
Xinriu Liu has brilliantly depicted the dynamic relationship between the monasteries and the laity in the Kushana period North and North West India in her Ancient India and Ancient China. Two chapters of the book, “The Monasteries and the laity in Kushana India” and “Further changes in the Indian Buddhist monasteries” are greatly helpful in illuminating the diverse engagements of monasteries with society and economy, as well as the role of these linkages in doctrinal evolution and institutional innovations in Buddhism. Thus it has been noted that due to thriving trade and commerce and resultant increase in the practice of donation to the Sangha , the Sangha got involved in social economy , leading to many innovations. Thus monks owned property and offered donations to the Sangha and like individual monks, the monasteries also accumulated and owned property, not from the land grants by the ruling dynasty (as was the case in Satavahana Deccan) but probably through the patronage of the mercantile community or even through direct participation in trade, though she has proved no evidence for the same. As the value of donations to the Sangha by the laity increased donors came to expect more in return , leading to the emergence of the concept of transfer of merit , and ultimately to the evolution of Mahayana she has also noted the transition to exclusive royal patronage to the Sangha in the Gupta period, lessening monastic interactions with the laity compared to the earlier period, and the monastic attempt to maintain the relationship with the laity by the organization of rituals, ceremonies and their public performances by the monasteries ,and lay participation in the same. In her writings a core argument of near total dependence of the Sangha on trade and commerce is discernible. But what about their role in the agrarian sector? For Satavahana Deccan, monastic involvement with both trade and agriculture has already been discussed. It may not be improper to look for a similar role the monasteries in some other parts of India
As far as the reconstructions of functional relations of the monasteries with the wider societal processes and institutions are concerned, some fundamental paradigm shifts are discernible in recent years. Mention may be made of the works of Gregory Schopen, Julia Shaw and Lars Fogelin. Each of them has unsettled many Sacred Cows in many ways. While Schopen has formulated his generalizations on the basis of a combined use of Archaeological, Epigraphical and Textual Data from Sanskrit Vinaya literature, with a greater propensity towards the use of votive inscriptions, Shaw and Fogelin are primarily interested in the Archaeological Landscape of Monasteries to formulate certain micro generalizations regarding the functional relationship between the monastery and the countryside.
Schopen, in many ways, heralds a brave departure by asking a simple, but fundamentally important question: to what extent, if any, Buddhist Monastic practices in India should be visualized as a derivation or a deviation from the Vinayas in general and the Pali Vinaya in particular? They should be treated as narrative or normative? He has been associated with the Edition, Translation and interpretation of the manuscript remains from Gilgit (mainly the Sanskrit Vinaya of the Mulasaravastivadins) and has noted the its textual and contextual differences with the one in Pali, but some of his most brilliant formulations are based upon interpretations of the Votive inscriptions. His different Papers, written on disparate occasions have been recently reproduced in the form of a book, Bones, Stones and Tools: Collected Papers on the Archaeology, Epigraphy and Text of Monastic Buddhism in India, 1997)
Mention must be made of his forceful criticism of Scholarly obsession with the Pali Vinaya and a near total exclusion of all other sources in the study of monastic Buddhism in India in his ‘ Archaeology and Protestant Presuppositions in the Study of Indian Buddhism’ (reprinted as Second Chapter in ‘Bones, Stones and Tools’). Scholarly preferences for Textual Sources, he tries to show, is influenced by the ‘Protestant Presupposition’ that ‘true religion is to be found only in the Scriptures’. If archaeological and epigraphical data show contrary picture, they are regarded as ‘Perversion’, ‘decadence’ or ‘exception’ and he has tried to prove this with specific examples of sustained continuation of certain perceptions based upon Textual sources even when well known archaeological findings have proved it to be wrong in the early Buddhological scholarly discourse. Textual Sources will expect us to believe that monks were to observe strict poverty (a perception propagated by Rhys Davids etc). He by an in-depth analysis of votive inscriptions, coin and coin mould finds from monasteries, has tried to show that the monks not only inherited their ancestral property (a theme which has been further amplified in his ‘Deaths, Funerals and Division of Property in a Monastic Code’, in Donald S.Lopez, Buddhism in Practice, New Jersey, 1995, pp.473-502), but they themselves were one of the biggest donors to the Sangha.. In his another Article , based upon a combined use of Archaeological and Textual data ,he attempts to show that “all of the Vinayas as we have them fall squarely in the middle period of India Buddhism, between the beginnings of the Common Era and the Year 500 AD. They can not , and do not, tell us what monastic Buddhism ‘originally’ was , but they do provide an almost an overwhelming amount of detail about what it has became by that time” ; a formulation which has been further augmented in his ‘ Doing Business for the Lord : Lending on Interest and Written Loan Contracts in the Mulasarvastivadina Vinaya’, Journal of American Oriental Society, Vol.114, No.4,1994, pp.527-554, in which he has adds a new formulation ; that it is the Mulasaravastivadina Vinaya which is likely to be the mainstream Indian Vinaya as it is the Vinaya which shows a greater interaction with the Brahamanical, larger Indian concerns. By an analysis of donative inscriptions, he has shown that contrary to the Canonical injunctions, it were mainly the monks and nuns and not the laity, who sponsored the production of cultic images. Thus ‘from the very appearance in the inscriptions, Mahayana was a monk-dominated movement’, and ‘ not only was the image cult an overwhelmingly a monastic concern, it was also, on the basis of available sources, a monastically initiated cult’. If his formulations are corroborated by future researches, we can think of a more diversified world of monastic activities : direct participation in trade, lending the monastic money on interest and preparing written Contracts for the same, greater complexities arising out of the interface between the ecclesiastical laws and the secular laws, the problems of management of landed estates of monasteries , which he has shown to have begun quite early than the generally accepted Early Medieval Phase, etc ; and in that case, Early Medieval Mutations in Indian Monastic Buddhism will not appear as ‘Feudal Decadence’ but as natural evolution of an enduring continuum.
Application of Landscape Archaeology in understanding the localization strategies of the Sangha in a particular area has brought certain refreshing paradigm shifts regarding the functional role of the Monasteries. Mention must be made of the works of Julia Shaw and Lars Fogelin. Around the monastic complex of Sanchi, a network of Dams has earlier been noted by Marshall and Cunningham, but they have not been studied in relation to the monastic sites. In her earlier Articles ( Julia Shaw , J.Suitclif, ‘Ancient Irrigation Works in the Sanchi Area : An Archaeological and Hydrological Investigation’, South Asian Studies, London, Vol.17, 2001, pp.55-75, and, Julia Shaw, ‘ Sanchi and its Archaeological Landscape; Buddhist Monasteries, Settlements and Irrigation Work in Central India’ , Antiquity, Vol.74, 2000, pp.775-796),based upon her archaeological survey in the 20 Kilometer radius of the Monastic Complex, Julia Shaw has analyzed the relative positioning of the Monasteries, Dams and , Contemporary Settlements and Cult Spots, to gauge the degree of interaction of the monastic sites with the countryside, particularly their role in irrigation and wet rice agriculture. It has been postulated that the introduction of Wet Rice Agriculture was a concomitant result of the introduction of Buddhism in the Sanchi area, and the monasteries might have taken the pioneering role in making this possible by their active involvement in the construction of the irrigation devices from 3rd -2nd Century BC onwards. In her next Paper, she has offered some ambitious generalizations for the process of religious change for entire South Asia. Based upon a comparative study of the active role of monasteries in Hydraulic Management at Sanchi, Junagarh Complex in Gujarat and dry zones of Srilanka, it has been asserted that “the control of water harvesting and irrigational facilities was not only a means of political legitimacy for local rulers, but also formed a central component of the Buddhist Sangha’s propagation strategies”. This can be largely corroborated for the dry Trans- Vindhyan regions. In the context of the Gangetic Valley, her theory can be accepted only in the sense of a more active role of the Sangha on agrarian frontiers.
Lars Fogelin, in his survey of archaeological landscape of the Thotalikonda monastery, has noted that a single monastery performed multiple roles: functioning as retreats for the monks, offering economic engagements with the mercantile community and religious engagements with the laity. Religious engagement not in terms of the Buddhist doctrines but in the practice and conduct of daily, mundane ritual. Needless to repeat, Shaw and Fogelin largely provide the models for future studies on Indian monastic Buddhism. Our focus should not be on grand generalizations but on the localization strategy of individual monasteries, or a group of monasteries, in a select sub-region.
Its a bit amazing to see the turnaround in Indian Buddhism in the Post- Gupta period, a period when Indian Buddhist missionaries set out to conquer China, Tibet and some parts of South East Asia , yet at the same time, as we are informed by Huen -Tsang, Indian Buddhist communities were anxiously waiting for impending disappearance of Buddhism from India; a phenomenon leading to the Emergence of “Central Buddhist Realms” in many Asian countries who hardly required any spiritual legitimacy from great Buddhist Centers of India. At a time when mahaviharas like Nalanda, Vikramashila ,Ratnagiri and Somapura emerged, the same period was marked by a general retraction of Buddhist space across India and with the Muslim destruction of the these big monasteries , Buddhism disappeared from India as “Buddhism did not exist outside the monastery in India” : thus goes on a popular historiographical construct of the Early Medieval mutations in Indian Buddhism.
As we have noted in the preceding pages, Buddhist monasteries had diverse linkages with society and economy, and they not only consumed social surplus but directly or indirectly contributed to it, and it was due to these diverse linkages that they survived and thrived. If we observe a crisis of bare survival in Indian Buddhism in the Early Medieval Period, genesis factors should not be attributed to some external factors live Islamic invasions .We see the re-appearance and prospering or Buddhist monasteries in Central Asia as late 13th century, lingering of Buddhism in Sindh till 15th century, and its continued survival in Bengal , the seat of biggest Islamisation east of the Indus. So our focus should shift from external factors to the possible faultiness in their linkages with society and economy. “Disappearance” of Buddhism can not be attributed merely to the destruction of the monasteries and the elimination of monks. This is not to deny their role as the institutional nucleus of Buddhism. We have already noted that in Pol Pot Era in Cambodia, amidst a sustained attempt of the communist regime for the physical elimination of the monks and monasteries, Buddhism assumed extreme apotropaic form and after the regime change quickly reorganized and regrouped itself. The same was the case with Jaina temples and monasteries in medieval Gujarat. Why Indian Buddhist monasteries could not regroup themselves after the initial shock and holocaust of Islamic attacks? We hear of monks educated at Nalanda, going to China and Korea in late 13th –Early 14th Century and offering diverse services to the State. Why they could not do the same thing at home? It has also been suggested that one of the fundamental factors in the decline and disappearance of Buddhism in India was due to the “social failure”: that it became confined to the monasteries and offered insufficient cultivation of the laity. It has been in deed pointed out by P.S. Jaini that unlike the Jainas, the Buddhists in India hardly devised any code of conduct for its lay adherent and one of the explanations for this apparent monastic apathy to the laity has been found in the “fact” that “Buddhism has nothing to do with lay people and it was never a social movement”. As we have seen in the previous pages, this generalization is not tenable.
With references to the integrative role of the Brahamanical temples in Early Medieval India it has been rightly asserted that the rapid growth in the number and network of temples in this period was closely linked ,as were the Brahamana dominated Brahmadeyas and agraharas, with the formation of sub-regional and regional kingdoms and their legitimization, consolidation of their resource base and forging of linkages across communities for social integration. As we have seen for the Early Historic Phase, Buddhist monasteries were pioneers in this “forging of linkages across communities for social integration” in a major part of India. Why did they fail to retain their lead in the Early Medieval Period? The Marxist wisdom would attribute it to their failure on the agrarian frontiers and in the detribalization process; a theory which has now become almost axiomatic. Kosambi, one of the earliest propounders of this thesis, explained the gradual triumph of Brahmanism and gradual decay and disappearance of Buddhism due to their differential roles on agrarian frontiers: by 7th century A.D. “the major civilizing function of Buddhism has ended”, and the Brahmin at that time “was a pioneer who could stimulate production, for he had a good working calendar for predicting the times of ploughing, sowing and harvesting. He knew something of new crops and trade possibilities. He was not a drain upon production as had been his sacrificing ancestor or the large Buddhist monasteries”. Early Medieval ‘Parasitical Monasteries consuming agrarian resources without providing anything in return’, have invited the attraction of another Marxist Scholar, R,S.Sharma Andre Wink has added the dimensions of long distance overland and maritime trade as well in explaining this phenomenon: that by the 11th Century AD, Islam replaced Buddhism as the ‘greatest trading religion of Asia’ while the agrarian world within India was gradually lost to the Brahamanas by the Buddhist; and it is this simultaneous loss of agrarian and mercantile space , Wink asserts, which has precipitated the Systemic Crisis within Indian Buddhism. ‘Agrarian failure’ of Buddhism in Early Medieval India may be bit surprising as in the very same centuries, Buddhist monasteries ,by virtue of their institutional management and control over irrigation system and new agrarian technologies , controlled a significant part of agrarian sector in Srilanka and Burma and emerged as the biggest land owners in these two regions. Kosambi, Sharma and Andre Wink are required to be sifted carefully.
At the time of Arab invasion Buddhism did assume a distinct agrarian colour in Sindh. In Maitraka Gujarat, the old matrix of Buddhism and maritime trade continued at Vallabhi, and these monasteries had a very close involvement with the agrarian sector. In Tamilnadu, through the agrarian world was gradually lost to the Brahamanas and Brahamanical temples, Buddhist monastic associations with port towns and maritime trade continued to prosper. In Orissa, the monasteries kept on attracting lay patronage and pilgrimage ,rendering Ratnagiri ‘second only to Bodhagaya as a pilgrimage centre’, and there Buddhist monasteries had a ‘subterranean survival’, resurfacing again in the Mahima Dharma movement. In the case of Early Medieval Bengal a very complex matrix of Buddhism, maritime trade and agrarian expansion developed: a phenomenon we would try to discuss in some detail later. At this juncture, sufficient it would be to assert that it may be ahistorical to homogenize the functional dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism for the Early Medieval Period, rather, for any Period. We need micro studies, with a regional perspective, to be at a better footing to understand the differential localization and socialization pattern of monasteries across the diverse landscapes in India.
Unfortunately, this approach is hardly visible in the available macro studies on Early Medieval Indian Buddhism. Thus K.L.Hazra in his reconstruction of Buddhism as depicted in the writings of Chinese Pilgrims, is more interested in seeing the sectarian affiliations of the monasteries, their arts, doctrines they pursued, but has hardly any concern to see the transition taking place between the periods of Fa-Hain and Huen Tsang and beyond. L.M.Joshi ,in his study of Buddhist Culture in India during the 7th-8th Centuries AD, begins with a promising start and attempts to study certain new themes such as evidences of royal control over ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Sangha; management of their landed estates by the monasteries; inter -monastic hierarchy , basically by drawing inferences from one monk controlling many monasteries. Long before him, S.Dutt has already proposed that Early Medieval Monastic Universities of Bihar and Bengal together formed a hierarchic network; but neither of two had delineated a functional basis, and chronological evolution, of the same. Moreover, Joshi, by his assertion that the pattern of endowments to the monasteries as mentioned by Fa-Hain ‘ could be applied in Toto’ in understanding the same in the 7th-8th centuries, largely refuses to recognize the institutional transitions in the Sangha as per its interactions with geographical and chronological variables.
Ronald Davidson (Indian Esoteric Buddhism: Social History of the Tantric Movement, 2004) on the other hands provides a brilliant contrast and demands a greater treatment. In a significant section of Buddhological Historiography, Early Medieval mutations in Indian Buddhism in its ‘degenerate’ Esoteric, Tantric garb have been perceived to be fundamentally important in its eventual disappearance from India; of course without offering much analysis of the factors which forced Buddhism to take a form somewhat different from its earlier Theravada and Mahayana traditions. It is in this backdrop that importance of Davidson may be properly analysed.He provides a brilliant and powerful counter-rhetoric to this thesis by situating the Early Medieval mutations within Indian Buddhism in the material and social milieu of the Age. His study, based primarily upon the analysis of Buddhist Tantric texts in Sanskrit and their Tibetan and Chinese translations, is a welcome contribution. However, on the part of the author, a reluctance to use art historical, archaeological and epigraphical sources is discernible; and it may not be surprising if reservations remain regarding his methods or interpretations. He has tried to trace the genesis and trajectory of Tantric Buddhism in the backdrop of material mutations and ideological involutions of Early Medieval India; though the feudal factor always seems to be the bedrock in formulating his core arguments.
In the volatile Early Medieval period, Davidson argues, Buddhism had a great distress due to diverse factors : evaporating mercantile patronage due to decline in the long distance trade and Arab domination of the High Seas, rendering it increasingly dependent on Royal, feudal patronage; lessening participation of women in Buddhism, and ultimate disappearance of the order of the nuns within the Sangha; militant Saiva competition; and a serious dent in the “previous Buddhist monopoly of dealing with the Barbarians, outcastes, tribals, and foreigners” by the Bahamans who were now willing to travel great distance in search of land and patronage. All this resulted in to gradual spatial shrinkage of Buddhism, and its contraction to select areas of strength. Coupled with it was the larger intellectual crisis: Buddhist intellectuals of this age developed an agenda of Skepticism, and the epistemology which followed brought it dangerously close to -Brahamanism, resulting in to a creeping realization within Buddhist community of Buddhism being a “Tradition in Duress”. It is here that core arguments of Davidson crystallize: evolution of Esoteric Buddhism was the result of adaptations by a “Tradition in Duress” to the Samanta Feudalism, for its very survival. As a result of this adaptation, Buddhism was forced to feudalize itself, leading to the genesis of Esoteric, Tantric Buddhism. In fact, “Esoteric Buddhism as Sacralised Samanta Feudalism” sums up the core argument of the book, and it is the Saamanta Feudalism, Davidson tries to show, which largely determined the tropes and trajectories of Tantric Buddhism.
Davidson then proceeds to examine the differential but interrelated functions of ‘Institutional Esoterism”, developing within the Monasteries, and “Non—institutional esoterism” of the Siddhas, both developing a symbiotic relationship ultimately. In the centers of institutional esoteric Buddhism, there was a concerted attempt to forge a closer alliance with the royalty to have greater royal patronage, and due to this there was great internalization of Feudal values and ethos not only in the management of their landed estates but also in their very rituals and dogmas. The author has noted that there was a close resemblance between the monastic management of their landed estates, control and administration of ‘branch monasteries’ by the ‘mega-monasteries’ like Nalanda and Feudal management of their landed estates and subordinate samantamandala, an interesting observation in deed.
The other spectrum of Buddhist esoterism was the “Non-institutional esoterism” of the Siddhas ;the non—conformists, who coming from disparate backgrounds and lacking any Pan-Indic Institutional Structure ,borrowed freely from other institutional religions ,yet at the same time, developed most fiery criticism of all of them including institutional Buddhism .The Siddhas gradually made their way to the monasteries; developing a symbiotic relationship with the monks, sharing a common syllabus, ritual vocabulary and a grudging respect for the scriptural compositions and spirituality of each other. Within a remarkably short period (mid 7th to mid 11th century) Esoteric Buddhism produced a voluminous literature, and spread rapidly to Tibet, China and rest of East Asia. And thus Esoteric Buddhism, Davidson concludes, was “a tenacious success”, which ‘stemmed the Saiva tide sweeping up from the South’, influenced the Buddhist Traditions of Tibet, China and rest of Eastern Asia, and “indeed the overwhelming success of the Secret Path i.e. Esoteric Buddhism, has propelled it in to a position where it has become perhaps the least secret of all Buddhist meditative systems”.
However, it is difficult to concur with his concluding observations that Tantric Buddhism, developing within the monasteries, was a ‘tenacious’ and ‘overwhelming’ success. Historical evidences seem to suggest otherwise. The overt aim of the book is to attempt a “social history” of Tantric Buddhism, i.e. Tantric Buddhist pattern of socialization and localization in the Early Medieval landscape. Not long after the evolution and growth of Esoteric Buddhism, Buddhism did disappear from the larger parts of India, and this disappearance can not be solely blamed on “Islamic Iconoclasm”: the assumption may not be invalid that some fundamental fault lines might have crept in Esoteric Buddhist pattern of socialization and regional adaptations. In deed it is in the regions dominated by Tantric Buddhism in the Early Medieval Period; East Bengal and Swat valley, where medieval Islamisation has been most spectacular. It will be definitely a promising area for future research to analyze the possible fault lines in the Tantric Buddhist Patterns of socialization and localization within a regional framework.
Two regions to be studied carefully to understand the Early Medieval Monastic localization and socialization patterns , are Bihar and Bengal, more especially, Bengal. Larger parts of Bengal seem to be hardly touched by Buddhism in the Early Historic Phase and the boundaries of the Madhyadesa ended near Rajamahal during the period immediately after the Buddha. Buddhism seems to be the first institutional religion to penetrate its swampy jungles, with the monasteries forming a very complex matrix with maritime trade and agrarian expansion in the Early Medieval Period and even earlier; yet the Delta offers the most fertile ground for Islamisation in the subsequent Medieval Period : a period when it becomes an “expanding agrarian civilization whose cultural counterpart was the growth of the cult of Allah”; in which rural mosques made of thatch and wood, ‘linked politically to the State and economically to the hinterland’ were functioning as ‘ nucleus of integration’ for integrating various ‘tribal’ communities to the Islamic Great tradition. In the vast landmass of South and Southeast Asia, from the Satluj to the Mekong, eastern Bengal is the only land irreversibly lost by the Indic World. To what extent, if any, Buddhist Monasteries were responsible for leaving this kind of socio-economic and cultural vaccume which was later used by Islam? Yet, to our surprise, why in entire India, Buddhism has a continued survival as a living religion in (South Eastern) Bengal only ? Unfortunately, most of available studies, of the sort of “Buddhism in Ancient Bengal” or “Religion in Ancient Bengal” hardly show even the awareness of this enigma. In this category, we may count the celebrated Bangalir Itihasa,Adiparva , by N.R.Ray ( English translation by J.W.Hood as, History Of Bengali People), Rama Chatterji, Pushpa Niyogi and more recently Chitaranjana Patra. Nearly all of them are concerned with monastic art and architecture, identifications of their locations, occasionally in the land grants the monasteries received. Hardly any of them offer any analysis of the functional role of the monasteries in the society and economy.
B.M.Morrisson stands as a brilliant exception. In his Political Centres and Culture Regions of early Bengal, based upon his analysis of Bengal Inscriptions, he could visualize four sub-regions within the Bengal Delta; with the first three viz. the central, western and northern sectors of the Delta showing evidences for fully developed property relations and stratified society, in fact they “were the heartlands of Brahamanical culture in the Delta”. But the fourth sub-region, Sylhet- Komilla- Chittagong sector ( roughly the region referred to as Samatata in inscriptions) the pattern was fundamentally different. It was more or less a ‘frontier’ society with relatively sparse population and large uncultivated or forested landscape, a society which has just made the transition to State level Polity. Here huge tracts of lands were granted to the Buddhist monasteries or hundreds of Brahamanas. Here Buddhist monasteries were acting as, as it appears, nucleus of integration, aiding and abetting the transition towards a more complex society. We may add here that his study forces us to leave aside macro generalizations regarding the functional role of Buddhist monasteries in Bengal Delta, say for example between Somapura Mahavihara of the Pala Age and Mainamati Complex as they were functioning in different locales and interacting with different socio-economic variables. His Monograph on the Mainamati Complex (Lalmai: A Cultural Centre in Early Bengal, 1974), he has offered an in-depth analysis of the functional role of the same within the Samatata region, as well as the evolution of the monastic complex. Based upon his archaeological survey, he could discover 57 monastic sites within the complex for which hardly any literary data is available. He has proffered an inter-monastic hierarchy within the Complex. He has noted the absence of any Settlement Site in the immediate neighborhood of the Complex or in the countryside, and in their absence, he has done hinterland analysis of the Complex on the basis of inscriptional evidences, to situate it within the Samatata region, and he could visualize that it was the very hub, the very nucleus of the same. To situate it within the larger spatial context, viz. in the Bengal Delta, he has compared the Mainamati sites with other excavated sites of Pre- Muslim Bengal. One may not fully agree with his method that the size of hinterland of a monastery can be estimated by dividing the distance between any two contemporary monastic centers, his approach as a whole is quite refreshing.
The Monastic Complex at Mainamati demands greater research. No doubt it was the political, economic and spiritual nucleus of the Early Medieval Samatata region. In the same region, we see a continued endowments to the monasteries by the newly Sanskritised Tribal Rulers , that is the monasteries were having some role in the tribal State formations and their legitimizations. In the same Centuries, maritime focus of the Bengal Delta shifts towards the East, towards the Chittagong Coast. And Samatata, unlike most other parts of South Asia, shows a continued tradition Silver coinage. What is the role of the monasteries in this complex matrix? In fact a much more intricate linkages between the Early Medieval Bengal monasteries and maritime connections is discernible than what we generally perceive. We see one Mahanavika (‘The Great Mariner’) Buddhagupta of Raktamrtika monastery going to Java; monasteries at the Port town of Tamralipti decline with the decline of the port; whereas they crop up at an emerging inland riverine port cum warehousing settlement, Vangasagarasambhandagarika; and Devaparavata (located somewhere near the Mainamati Complex, but yet to be identified in the ground) itself functioned as a port. But here is a big dilemma for us. When Samatata monasteries were active on the agrarian and maritime frontiers, and were acting as stabilizing factors for the emerging Polities, why do we witness the biggest Islamisation within Bengal in this sub-region only? More importantly, why within Bengal, Buddhism could survive as living tradition in the Medieval period and beyond in Samatata only? Hopefully future researches will unveil some aspects of this vexed problem.
Available studies on Early Medieval Monasteries in Bihar do not offer very encouraging picture. R.C.Prasad (Archaeology of Champa and Vikramashila, 1987), B.M.Kumar (Archaeology of Pataliputra and Nalanda, 1987), and B.N.Mishra ( Nalanda, 1998,In three volumes) do not leave any other impression except being a compendium of available informations. This is most regretful in the context of Misra and Kumar. Misra in his monumental work has devoted two and a half volume to the study of such themes as art and architecture, iconography (one whole volume); reminding us once again the prophetic words of D.K.Chakarvarty – “one should not entertain the idea that nothing more needs to be done at Nalanda. No attempt has been done to study Nalanda as an ancient settlement of which the famous monastery was only a part”. Hopefully this type of study will provide some insights in to the functional relationship between the Monastic Complex of Nalanda and its immediate neighborhood. Reconstruction of its pilgrimage geography can of course be done with a combined use of epigraphical and literary data. R.K.Chaudhury has indeed offered some interesting details about the role of the monks of Vikramashila Mahavihara in the conversion of Tibet to Buddhism in his The University of Vikramashila ( 1975), but he has not analyzed the support system of the monastery or its interactions with the wider socio-economic processes.
In the end mention must be made of a brilliant study of the Tabo Monastery, in Himachal Pradesh by Laxman.S.Thakur, entitled Buddhism in the Western Himalaya: A Study of Tabo Monastery (2001, Delhi). the monastery had its beginnings in 9th-10th centuries and it is continuing as living institution in the high altitude Lahaul and Spiti region of Himachal Pradesh .Though much of his study is concerned with Art Historical themes, he has brilliantly analyzed the alignment trans- Himalayan trade routes and the monastic involvement with that ; pattern of land grants to the monastery and its participation in the peasant economy ; the role played by the monastery in the cultic integration of the Pre- Buddhist Bon religion. He has been largely successful in tracing the variegated functions performed by the Monastery; a multiplicity which ensures its continued survival. We need more studies of individual monasteries in other parts of India.
Concluding Thoughts
What was attempted in the previous pages was in deed a very sketchy outline of the functional dynamics of Buddhist monasteries in India and offering any grand generalization on the basis of this kind of Survey is likely to be invidious. However, some suggestions may of course be offered. It may be safely suggested that it may be ahistorical to reduce the functional dimensions of monasteries to the injunctions of the Vinaya Texts: a better approach may be to see the interactions between the text and context, to analyze the trajectories of the complex functional matrix monasteries have created or were a part thereof. Buddhism was one of the earliest World Religions, yet it has developed remarkable local colours across the vast landmass of Asia. This “localization” process, what has been earlier referred to as ‘translation in the local idiom’, has been well documented in the case of many Asian countries, but it has barely begun in India. Future researches on the functional dimensions of Indian Monastic Buddhism will have to negotiate one core issue: how does the Sangha localize at a particular place, yet retains its supra-local character. To analyze the twist and turns of this Supralocal – Local dialectic, shifting the focus away from the Aryacaturdisa- bhikshusangha, “Universal Sangha of Four Quarters” to the individual monastery may not be a bad idea.
失宠的偶像——20世纪80年代以来日本的佛教研究及其困境
何 燕 生
提要：日本的佛教研究，迄今已有百余年的历史。百余年来，日本出版了被认为是目前最可信赖的《大正新修大藏经》和《望月佛教大辞典》等佛学工具书，反映了日本的佛教研究水准。在学科建制方面，日本将佛教研究确立为相对独立的学科—“佛教学”；“佛教学”，在日本得到了长足的发展，并形成了庞大的学术队伍。如果说19世纪是欧洲“发现”了佛教，并开启了佛教研究的风气之先的话，那么20世纪的佛教研究并不在欧洲，而是在日本。
然而，近一个世纪以来一直独占鳌头并业已成为世界各国佛教研究者试图效仿的、具有“偶像”地位的日本的佛教研究，特别是其以文献学为主流的方法论，在进入20世纪80年代之后，却不断地遭受到批判，日本作为佛教研究的“偶像”形象似乎开始出现了“失宠”的情景。这些批判，有的来自欧美，有的则来自日本国内，在日本佛教学术界产生了较大的反响。本文主要介绍了后者，其中特别对“批判佛教”思潮的主要观点和“佛教作为生活宗教”的言说，进行了评介。通过对这些言说的介绍，本文旨在说明的是：日本的佛教研究，迄今虽然取得了巨大的成就，但在其方法论上，同时还存在着一些问题，面临着从未经历过的困境；如何回应这些问题，走出困境，可以说是摆在当前日本佛教学术研究中的重要课题。
关键词：日本 佛学

返回书籍页