Ven.

Buddhabhadra and His

Contributions in Buddhism in
5th Century China
Vijay Kumar Manandhar
Tribhuvan University, Nepal

Introduction
NEPAL AND CHINA have a long history of
cultural and political relations. Historically, political
relations between the two countries go back to the seventh
century CE. During this period, official contacts between
the Nepalese Court and the T’ang dynasty were maintained
through the exchange of political missions. However,
official contacts between the two countries began in the
fifth century CE through cultural delegations. Buddhism
seems to have been the most important factor in the
relationship between these two countries in ancient times.
It is probable that the Chinese were anxious to explore the
birthplace of the Buddha and its environs. Interestingly,
Buddhism still has a certain place in Sino-Nepalese
relations. Here it should be mentioned that one of the most
significant events in the history of Nepal-China cultural
relations was the introduction of Buddhism into China
during the Eastern Han Dynasty around the second
century CE. Gradually, Buddhism spread to all parts of
 454

China. After their rise to the power in the fourth century

CE, the Emperors of the Eastern Tsin Dynasty worked to
promote Buddhist ideals by constructing monasteries. The
fifth century CE was also a remarkable period in the
history of Nepal-China cultural relations as it witnessed a
marshalling of activities designed to promote Buddhism on
the part of Nepalese and Chinese monk-scholars. It should
be pointed out that following the introduction of
Buddhism in China, the Buddhist community faced several
problems – 1
– the translation of Buddhist texts with their highly
technical terminology,
– confusion caused by erroneous translation of the
Buddhist texts,
– the misunderstanding of subtle and mystic ideas in
Buddhist philosophy, and
– lack of disciplinary codes for monastic life.
As a result, the Chinese monk-scholars were
prompted to undertake hazardous voyages to the Buddhist
holy lands in Nepal and India to collect more complete and
purer sources in order to enrich the Buddhist literature in
their homeland. This led to the visits of renowned pilgrims
turned monk-scholars Fa-hsien and Hsüan-tsang to Nepal
and India in search of genuine Buddhist texts, true
doctrines and to pay homage to the Buddhist holy places.
1
Lahiri, Chinese Monks in India, pp. XIX-XXI.
 455

Some of the important features of Nepal-China

relations were that they were established by the selfless
Buddhist monk-scholars of both Nepal and China, who
promised to carry the message of love and compassion,
which Buddha delivered for the sake of emancipation from
suffering. The cultural intercourse between the two
countries was mainly initiated by the Chinese. Here it
should be pointed out that there were prominent Nepalese
Buddhist scholars who rendered valuable services in the
propagation of Buddhism in China. Buddhabhadra’s visit
th
to China in the 5 century was the first by a Nepalese
monk. Besides him, two other Nepalese Buddhist scholars
Vimoksasena2 and Subhakarasimha3 also went to China in
the sixth and eighth centuries respectively, and contributed
to the spread of Buddhism in China by translating
Buddhist texts into Chinese. Unfortunately, the Nepalese
have not recorded the great accomplishments of the
prominent Nepalese Buddhist scholar Buddhabhadra and
others who went to China with a purely missionary spirit
and whose names are interwoven with the history of

2
Bagchi, India and China, pp. 45 and 220; Manandhar, A
Comprehensive History of Nepal-China Relations, p. 47.
3
Chou Yi-liang, ‘Tantrism in China’, pp. 251-272; Bagchi, India and
China, pp. 52-53 and 218; Watt, ‘Tantric Buddhism in China’, pp.
399-400; Ch’en, Buddhism in China, p. 334; Upadhyaya,
‘Vajrayana: Dharma, Darshan Aur Jeevan-Darshan’, pp. 56-57;
Manandhar, A Comprehensive History of Nepal-China Relations,
pp. 47-49.
 456

Buddhism in China. Buddhabhadra was indeed the

torchbearer of Nepalese civilization abroad. Significantly,
the Chinese have not only preserved the name of this
prominent Nepalese Buddhist scholar, but also have
preserved the records of the Chinese Buddhist monk-
scholars Fa-hsien, Hsuan-tsang, Seng-tsai4 and others who
went to Nepal in different times. Until now, the name of
Seng-tsai has not received due attention from scholars. This
monk of the Tsin Dynasty (265-420 CE) not only visited
Nepal but also wrote Wuo-Kuo-Shih (Matters Concerning
the Foreign Kingdoms). Apart from the fragments of his
works which are included in the Shui-Ching-Chu
(Commentary on the Water Classic), there are some
quotations in the Yuan-Chien-lei-an (The Ch’ing
Encyclopaedia of 1710) as well. His work provides us with
an interesting historical description of Kapilvastu, the
hometown of the Buddha, including an important source of
information on the topography of Lumbini, the birthplace
of the Buddha. Seng-tsai’s work is older than the account
of Fa-hsien. These source materials of spiritual and cultural
intercourse between the two countries have not yet been
fully explored. So, some of the most prominent figures who
immortalized Nepal-China relations are Fa-hsien, Hsüan-
tsang, Wang Hsuan-Tse, Buddhabhadra and Arniko.

4
Petech, Northern India According to the Shui-Ching-Chu, pp. 6
and 33-40.
 457

Among them, Buddhabhadra, who made an enormous

contribution to Chinese Buddhism, has not yet received the
proper attention from scholars that he deserves either. As
such, an attempt is made here to deal with the invaluable
contributions of Buddhabhadra to Buddhism in fifth
century China.
Parentage and Early Life
The discovery of four monuments called the Black
Dragon Spring in Yanchow near Nanking in the Kiangsu
province of China has revealed that a Buddhist scholar,
5
Buddhabhadra Shakya visited China in the fifth century
CE. Buddhist historians in general hold two different views
about his nationality. One group regards him as a Nepalese
Buddhist scholar. Indeed, there are a few Buddhist
scholars, particularly historians, who recognize him as a
Buddhist master from Nepal. There are both Nepalese 6
7
and foreign scholars in this group who regard him as a

5
Shaha, Heroes and Builders of Nepal, p. 41; Shaha, ‘Nepal, Tibet
and China’, p. 15.
6
Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 19; K. C., The Judicial Customs of
Nepal, p.138; Singh, Buddhism in Nepal, p. 37; Ratna, Buddhism
and Nepal, p .5; Pandey, ‘Promoting Nepal-China Cultural
Cooperation’, p. 54; Shaha, Heroes and Builders., p. 41; Shaha,
‘Nepal, Tibet and China’, p. 15; Manandhar, A Comprehensive
History of Nepal-China Relations, p. 22; Bhattarai, Chin Ra
Tyasasita Nepalko Sambandha, p. 65; Nepal, Nepal Nirukta, pp.
155-156; Acharya, Chin, Tibbat Ra Nepal, p. 11; Joshi, Kalakar
Arniko, p. 2.
7
Ghoble, China-Nepal Relations and India, p. 17; Dutt, Buddhist
Monks and Monasteries of India, p. 307; Welch, Buddhism Under
 458

Nepalese. However, the second group of historians holds

the view that supports the idea that Buddhabhadra was an
Indian scholar.8 Whatever Buddhist historians believe
about the birthplace of the Buddhist Master, historical
evidence supports the fact that Buddhabhadra was a
Nepalese scholar. In fact, Buddhabhadra was not only
probably the first Nepalese to go to China and to devote
his entire life to serving the Chinese people through the
Buddhist mission, but also one of the great Buddhist
scholars of Nepal who worked for the promotion of
Buddhism in Kashmir and China.

Mao, p. 172; Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. II, p.

400; Huang Sheng-Chang, ‘China and Nepal’, p. 8; Chao Pu-Chu,
Buddhism in China, p. 6; Wang Hung -wi, ‘Chin-Nepal Maitri’, p.
86; Report of the Fourth World Buddhist Conference, p. 93.
8
Nehru, The Discovery of India, p. 193; Puri, Buddhism in Central
Asia, p.123; Majumdar, The Classical Age, pp. 610 and 614;
Sankrityayan, Baudha Sanskriti, p. 55; Upadhyaya, Brihattar
Bharat, p. 163; Nariman, Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism, p.
263; Kaul, Buddhist Savants of Kashmir, pp. 74-75; Das, Indian
Pandits in the Land of Snow, p. 32; Bagchi, India and China, p.99 ;
Beal (ed.), Buddhist Records of the Western World, p. XII; Fujita,
‘The Textual Origins of The Kuan Wu-ling-Shou Ching’, p. 157;
Keown, A Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 42; The Seeker’s Glossary
of Buddhism, p. 90; Bokshchanin, ‘Sino-Indian Relations from
Ancient Times’, p. 121; Kohn, The Shambhala Dictionary of
Buddhism and Zen, p. 30; Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism,
p. 57; Chin Keh-mu, A Short History of Sino-Indian Friendship, p.
81; Chou Hsiang-kuang, Chini Baudha Dharmaka Itihas, p. 55;
The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 57.
 459

The Chinese transliteration of Buddhabhadra’s

name is Fo-t’o-po-t’o-lo9 and was translated as Chueh-
hsien.10 Although his family was originally from
Kapilvastu, the hometown of The Buddha, they had settled
in Nagarahara (the modern Jalalabad in Afghanistan) where
Buddhabhadra was born in 358 CE11 According to one
tradition, he is said to have been born at Kapilvastu 12 as a
member of the Shakya family which claimed descent from
King Amåtodäna, an uncle of the Buddha .13 Having lost his
father and mother when he was three and five respectively,
Buddhabhadra, along with his grandparents, moved from
Nagarahara to Kapilvastu, but unfortunately, his

9
Bagchi, India and China, p. 331; Beal. Buddhist Records of the
Western World, p. XII; Puri, Buddhism in Central Asia, p. 62.
10
Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, p. 66; Joshi,
Kalakar Arniko, p. 3; Wang Hung -wi, ‘Chin-Nepal Maitri’, p. 86;
Ikeda, The Flower of Chinese Buddhism, p. 81.
11
Bagchi, India and China, p. 44; Puri, Buddhism in Central Asia,
p.122; Majumdar, The Classical Age , p. 610; Bhattarai, Chin Ra
Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, p. 66. But some writers have
wrongly stated that Buddhabhadra was born in Kashmir. See:
Bowker (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of World Religion, p. 169;
Kohn, The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, p. 30.
12
Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. II, p. 400; Huang
Sheng-Chang, ‘China and Nepal’, p. 8. Interestingly some writers
have noted that Buddhabhadra was born in Kapilavastu in
northern India. See Fujita, 'The Textual Origins of the Kuan Wu-
ling-Shou Ching’, p. 157; The Seeker’s Glossary, p. 90.
13
Das, Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow, p. 32; Majumdar, The
Classical Age, p. 610; Bagchi, India and China, p.205 and Puri,
Buddhism in Central Asia, p. 66; Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest
of China, Vol. II, p. 400.
 460

grandparents also died soon after. Thus left an orphan at an

early age, he was taken care of by some kindhearted people
and admitted to the Buddhist order. From his childhood,
he had taken an interest in Buddhism. By the time he
completed his studies around the age of seventeen, he had
acquired profound knowledge of it.14 It was said that even
at an early age, he read a thousand words of the scriptures
daily. It was also said that once his fellow-student
Sanghadatta, whilst lost in meditation, saw Buddhabhadra
appear suddenly, and when asked whence he came,
Buddhabhadra said he had been to the Tuñitä heaven to see
Maitreya.15 His teachers also gave him a very good and in-
depth knowledge of Buddhism. Due to his devotion to
Buddhism, and as he became a very talented and learned
Buddhist scholar, Buddhabhadra became famous in China.
While visiting several Buddhist holy places and Vihäras, he
came into contact with many Buddhist scholars. During his
visits to various Buddhist Vihäras, he happened to reach
Mauthyan Tholo Vihära in Kashmir. At the request of the
head of the Vihära, Buddhabhadra remained there and
started giving lessons on Buddhism. He proved to be a
talented Buddhist scholar. He stayed in Kashmir for

14
Bagchi, India and China, p. 44; Puri, Buddhism in
Central Asia, p. 122 and Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita
Nepal Ko Sambandha, p. 66.
15
Das, Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow, p. 32.
 461

sometime. He was a Buddhist monk of higher knowledge

of Buddhism.
Chinese Monks’ Invitation to China
At that time, Kashmir was one of the most
important centers of Buddhist Sanskrit learning and the
centre of the Sarvästivädins.16 Through their activities,
Kashmir became the centre of Buddhist philosophical
studies. Buddhabhadra belonged to this school, which was
flourishing, in Kashmir.17 He was also a disciple of the
famous Dhyäna Master Buddhasena. During this period,
Nepal’s widespread reputation as the birthplace of the
Buddha was attracting the Chinese monks, who defied the
difficulties of climate and terrain in their scholastic zeal and
religious fervour. Fifth century China witnessed the visit of
several prominent Buddhist Chinese monk-scholars to
Nepal and India, the holy lands of the Buddhists, for
religious purposes. Fa-hsein, the noted Buddhist monk-
scholar from Shanshi province, was one of the earliest
Chinese pilgrims to visit Nepal and India. Intent on
making a thorough study of Buddhism by procuring
authentic Buddhist texts on monastic discipline (Vinaya)
and searching for famous Buddhist scholars to bring back
to China, Fa-hsien, at the advanced age of sixty-five, along
with Chinese monks Hui-Ching, Tao-Cheng, Hui-ying,

16
Lahiri, Chinese Monks in India, p. 27.
17
Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. I, p. 223.
 462

Hui-Wei and others left Ch’ang-an in 399 CE and set out

for India.18 At that time, there were two important routes
from China to India: one, the over-land route through the
Gobi desert, the plains and mountains of Central Asia and
the Himalaya, and the other, the sea route from the port of
Kuang-chou through the South China sea into the Indian
ocean.19 As for Fa-hsien, he traveled overland through
Dunhuang, Khotan and the Himalayas, a long, hard
journey full of peril.20 In India, he studied for some years
and personally copied the Buddhist scriptures. Although he
visited the western parts of Nepal, Kapilvastu and
Lumbini, the hometown and birthplace of the Buddha
respectively, in 405 CE, he did not mention anything about
Nepal in his short account entitled Fo-Kuo-Chi (A Record
of Buddhist Kingdoms),21 the first highly reliable Chinese
account of these countries and the oldest surviving travel
book in Chinese literature. From India, he went to Ceylon,
where he studied Buddhism for two years. After visiting
more than thirty countries, he returned to China in 414

18
Fa-hsien, A Record of the Buddhist Countries, pp. 50-51; Chin
Keh-mu, A Short History of Sino-Indian Friendship, pp. 63-65;
Wang Hung -wi, ‘Chin-Nepal Maitri’, p. 86.
19
Lahiri, Chinese Monks in India, p. XIX.
20
Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 118.
21
Legge, A Record of Buddhist Kingdoms ..., passim; Giles, The
Travels of Fa-hsien (399-414 A.D, passim; Needham, Science and
Civilisation in China, p. 207; Jan Yuan-Hua, ‘Fa-hsien’, pp. 245-
246; Keyes, ‘Buddhist Pilgrimage in South and Southeast Asia’, p.
348.
 463

CE. He collected volumes of Buddhist texts. Fa-hsien was a

great Chinese Buddhist scholar and a pilgrim whose
contribution to China’s Buddhist history is of immense
significance. He carried back to China his collection of
Buddhist manuscripts, images and paintings.22 Fa-hsien’s
account, in which he recorded his journey, has been
preserved complete, and translated into French and
English. It provides valuable reference materials for the
study of ancient Kapilvastu and Lumbiné as well as other
matters.23 Although his account is mainly that of pilgrim
interested in religious matters, Fa-hsien nevertheless gives a
good picture of India during the Gupta era, as well as
expressing his dismay by depicting the declining condition
of Lumbiné, Kapilvastu and the surrounding areas. The
importance of Fa-hsien in the history of Sino-Nepalese
relations lies in the fact that not only was he the prominent
Chinese citizen to enter Nepalese territory, but also that he

22
Bagchi, India and China, pp. 61-64; Perkins, Encyclopedia of
China, pp. 47 and 155; Hazra, The Rise and Decline of Buddhism
in India, pp. 77-81; Takakusu, ‘Yuan-Chwang, Fa-hian and I-
Tsing’, p. 843; Dillon, China: A Cultural and Historical Dictionary,
p. 98; Gernet, A History of Chinese Civilization, p. 223; Bapat
(ed.), 2500 Years of Buddhism, pp. 254-261; The Soka Gakkai
Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 174; Keown, A Dictionary of
Buddhism, p. 92; Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, pp. 117-118;
The Seeker’s Glossary…, pp. 205-206; Kohn, The Shambhala
Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, p. 67; Ch’en, Buddhism in
China, pp. 89-92.
23
Pradhan, Lumbiné Kapilawastu Devadaha, p. 23.
 464

helped make the journey of Buddhabhadra, the first

Nepalese Buddhist monk-scholar ever to visit China, a
success. While in India, he is said to have met him, and
decided to translate many of the classic Buddhist texts into
Chinese in collaboration with him. Thus, Fa-hsien can be
given credit for laying the foundation for Nepal-China
relations.
At the time of Fa-hsien’s visit to India, there was
another Buddhist party from China, visiting India
independently of Fa-hsien, with the purpose of studying
Buddhism and searching for famous Buddhist scholars to
bring back to China. The five-member Chinese Buddhist
party consisted of Pao-Yun, Chih-Yen, Sang-Shao, Hwuy-
Keen and Sang-King. Pao-Yun, the leader of this Chinese
delegation,24 was a brilliant scholar who wrote an account
of his travels, which unhappily has vanished. Another,
Chih-Yen, who in three years in India learned more than
others who had studied there for ten years, thereby won
the commendations of his teachers and the admiration of
the Indians as well.25 During the course of their visit, this
party also visited Kashmir, a prestigious Buddhist centre
for learning, where they acquired knowledge of Buddhism.
At the time of their departure, they requested that the
Buddhist community there send a scholar of repute along

24
Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, p. 68.
25
Chin Keh-mu, A Short History of Sino-Indian Friendship, p. 54.
 465

with them to China. The head of the Kashmiri Vihära

strongly recommended the name of Buddhabhadra, stating
that he was not only a descendant of the Buddha, but also
from the land of the Buddha. Moreover, he was a great
scholar of Buddhism. Therefore, the Chinese delegation
invited Buddhabhadra to accompany them to China. At
first, the Nepalese Buddhist scholar was reluctant to go on
the grounds that China was a faraway and completely new
and foreign country. Afterwards, following Chinese
entreaties, Buddhabhadra made the decision to go and
preach the teachings of the Buddha in faraway China.
Chih-Yen was given credit for inviting Buddhabhadra to
China. In fact, Buddhabhadra was a monk of some
distinction, who in later years made invaluable
contributions to the historical development of Chinese
Buddhism by translating Buddhist scriptures into Chinese
and preaching the message of the Buddha.
Arrival in China
Buddhabhadra set out for China with these Chinese
Buddhist monks in 406 CE. They traveled on foot for three
years. This time they did not travel by the old Central
Asian route but by an altogether new route. While making
the over-land journey to China from India, they crossed six
countries and faced many difficulties, and reached Vietnam
via Burma. From there, they continued their journey by
sea. During their sea-journey towards China, it was
 466

reported that Buddhabhadra impressed all his fellow

travelers by successfully foretelling such storms and
encounters with pirates. At last, they reached the port of
Tsing Tao of the Chinese province of Shantung in 409 CE.
But it seems that some writers have mistakenly referred to
Buddhabhadra’s arrival in China as having fallen between
389 and 399 CE.26 From Shantung, they went to Ch’ang-an
(modern Sian in Shen-si province), the then capital of
China as well as an important early centre of Buddhist
activities in northern China. Upon their arrival at the
Chinese capital, they were warmly welcomed by the
Chinese Emperor Yao-Hsing as well as the people of China
and were taken to Ch’ang-an’s biggest monastery. After his
arrival in Ch’ang-an, Buddhabhadra started preaching
Buddhism. He solved a lot of puzzling questions regarding
Buddhism from Chinese monks, who were greatly
convinced by his answers. Due to his scholarship, Chinese
Buddhist scholars as well as laymen were greatly
influenced.
Conflict with Kumarajiva
Kumarajiva, a contemporary of Buddhabhadra, was
a great scholar of his times. He was born of an Indian

26
Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, pp. 68-71;
Das, Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow, p. 32; Bokshchanin,
‘Sino-Indian Relations from ancient Times to the Sixteenth
Century’, p. 121; Majumdar, The Classical Age , pp. 610-611.
 467

father and a Kuchean mother.27 His name is sometimes

transcribed as Ciu-mo-lo-shi or Kiu-mo-lo-che or Kiu-
mo-to-tche-po with the Chinese translation Tang-Cheu.
His father, Kumarayana, came from an illustrious family
but for some reason left the country and after an arduous
journey across the Pamirs arrived in Kucha. Here Jiva, a
princess of the royal family of Kucha fell in love with him
and ultimately married him. Kumarajiva, taking the names
after his father and mother, was the issue of this union.28 He
was born in 344 CE at Karasahr. Soon afterwards, Jiva was
converted to Buddhism and she became a nun. Kumarajiva
began his education in Kucha but when he was nine years
old, his mother took him to Kashmir to give him a
thorough grounding in Buddhist literature and philosophy.
He distinguished himself in both Sarvästivädin and
Mahäyäna studies. In 379 CE, his fame had reached even as
far as China, and the Emperor Fu Chien of the Eastern
Tsin Dynasty sent a delegation to invite him to the court.
Kumarajiva accepted, but on the way back, the Chinese
general who had been sent to fetch him, Lu Kuang, rebelled
and held out against the court in northwestern China for
seventeen years, during which time he held Kumarajiva
captive. While this delay frustrated the court, it gave
Kumarajiva a chance to become very fluent in Chinese

27
Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, p. 238.
28
Puri, Buddhism in Central Asia, p. 116.
 468

language prior to undertaking his translation activities.29

After Lu Kuang’s rebellion was suppressed, Kumarajiva,
originally a Hinayäna advocate, but eventually a proponent
of Mahäyäna, and especially the Mädhyamika treatises of
Nagarjuna, arrived in Ch’ang-an in 401 CE and was greatly
welcomed by Emporer Yao-Hsing of the Later Tsin
Dynasty. During his thirteen years stay at Ch’ang-an, he
headed an extensive translation bureau which rendered a
large number of Buddhist Sanskrit texts into Chinese, and
to which more than eight hundred priests and scholars
were attached.30 It is said that the Chinese Emperor, himself
an ardent disciple of the new religion, held the original
texts in his hand as the translation proceeded and that
during that time more than three hundred volumes were
prepared under the supervision of Kumarajiva. Until his
death in 413 CE, he continued to devote his missionary
zeal and the knowledge he had gained to the propagation of
Buddhism, with the result that a large number of Buddhist
monasteries were established in Northern China.31
Kumarajiva is said to have introduced a new
alphabet and translated some fifty works. He is best known
for his translations of Nagarjuna’s ‘Mulamädhyamika
Kärika’, ‘Dvädasadvära Sästra’, ‘Sukhävatyämåta Vyüha’

29
Keown, A Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 150.
30
Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 159.
31
Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, p. 239.
 469

and ‘Sarvästiväda Pratimokña’. The translations ascribed to

him are ranked as classical Chinese, and his translation of
the Saddharmapuëòarika Sütra remains the most valued
and revered of the Chinese Buddhist scriptures.32 He is
traditionally regarded as the first teacher of Mädhayamika
doctrines in China and the expounder of the Satyasiddhi
School (Cheng-se School) and the Nirvana school (later
absorbed in the Lotus or T'ien-t'ai School). It is beyond
doubt that his works heralded a new epoch in the spread of
Buddhism in China. Due to his thorough knowledge of
Buddhist philosophy, and his command of Sanskrit and
Chinese languages, Kumarajiva was able to bring greater
clarity and distinction to his translations than the earlier
missionaries had done.33 Kumarajiva and his teachings were
held in high esteem in China due to the patronage of the
Chinese court. At the time of the arrival of Buddhabhadra,
Kumarajiva was the arbiter of all things Buddhist.34 It is
said that as soon as Kumarajiva heard that Buddhabhadra
had come to China and was then working at Ch’ang-an, he
immediately started for Ch’ang-an to meet him. They were
probably old acquaintances in Kashmir. Kumarajiva
admitted the superiority of Buddhabhadra and used to
consult the latter so long as he was in Ch’ang-an.35

32
Puri, Buddhism in Central Asia, pp. 120-121.
33
Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, p. 239.
34
Ch’en, Buddhism in China, p. 109.
35
Bagchi, India and China, pp. 44-45.
 470

Afterwards, they came into conflict, some of the important

factors for which they deferred were personality, attitude
towards precepts and meditation as well as doctrinal
preferences.36 Buddhabhadra was also a scholar of repute
and was equally proud of his learning. He was a Buddhist
teacher of independent spirit. That is why he never thought
of paying respects to the Emperor, as was the custom in
those days. He did however establish close contacts with
the Chinese Buddhist teachers.37 Moreover, he was also
gaining popularity as a Buddhist scholar. On the other
hand, Kumarajiva had established himself as a renowned
Buddhist scholar and had the full support of the Imperial
court. However, a powerful rival had appeared in the
person of Buddhabhadra.
Disagreements apparently arose between the two
over some aspects of discipline. Kumarajiva was provided
with royal quarters in Ch’ang-an, and also with the
pleasures of many concubines-conduct that a strict
disciplinarian like Buddhabhadra must have looked upon
with disfavour.38 It is said that when Kumarajiva went to
China in 401 CE, the Chinese Emperor thought that such a
wise person ought to have descendants so that his wisdom

36
‘Some Notes on Perceptions of Pratétyasamutpäda in China from
Kumarajiva to Fa-yao’, www.ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-
JOCP/jc26721htm
37
Bagchi, India and China, p. 45.
38
Ch’en, Buddhism in China , p. 109
 471

would carry on. As such, he gave concubines to

Kumarajiva, and since they were a royal gift, Kumarajiva
had no choice but to accept them. Afterwards, his disciples
asked, ‘Can we have relations with women too?’
Kumarajiva said, ‘Sure, but first, let me show you
something.’ He took a handful of needles and ate them as
easily as they were noodles. When he finished, he said, ‘if
you can do that, then you can have relations with
women.’39 Thus it can be stated that while Kumarajiva was
apparently a monk, his conduct was irregular, for he lived
with many concubines; yet his talent was so appreciated
and his fame so great that his patron and the people
honoured him, despite his neglect of Buddhist discipline
and in spite of attacks heaped upon him.40 It was stated that
Kumarajiva was obliged to confess in a confrontation with
the disciplinarian Buddhabhadra that he was a ‘lotus in the
mud’. The relative weakness in precepts in the Ch’ang-an
Buddhist community was thus understandable.41 It was also
reported that the friction between the two Buddhist
masters was over the issue of the ‘understanding of
emptiness’. The Prince of Tsin, Hung, wanted to hear
Buddhabhadra’s teachings, so he summoned a meeting of
various monks for a discussion at the Eastern Palace. Both
Kumarajiva and Buddhabhadra conversed for several

39
The Seeker’s Glossary of Buddhism, p. 321.
40
Anesaki, ‘Missions (Buddhist)’, p. 701.
41
Whalen Lai, ‘The Three Jewels in China’, p. 291.
 472

rounds. Then Kumarajiva asked, ‘Why are the Dharmas

said to be empty?’ Buddhabhadra answered, ‘Tiny atoms
constitute form; the form has no self-nature. Therefore,
even as there are forms, they are always empty.’ ‘If you so
destroy (both) form and emptiness by reliance on these
atoms, what then destroys the atom?’ ‘There are those who
insist on destroying the individual atoms, but I would not
do so.’ ‘Are you saying that they are permanent?’
Buddhabhadra answered, ‘By the one atom are the various
atoms emptied. By the various atoms is the one atom
emptied.’ At the time, Pao-yun who translated this
sentence did not fully understand the meaning, and the
monks and laymen in attendance thought Buddhabhadra to
be proposing permanency for the atoms. Some days later,
the learned monks of Ch’ang-an invited Buddhabhadra to
speak where he said, ‘The Dharmas are not caused by
themselves; they are born of the confluence of conditions.
Conditioned by the one atom are the various atoms. The
atom has no self-nature; it is therefore empty. Can it still be
said that the one atom is not destroyed, that it is permanent
and not empty?’ This would seem to be the real intention
in his previous exchange. It seems that Kumarajiva reacted
to Buddhabhadra because the latter reminded him of his
former attachment to the atom theory of reality. There are
scholars who think that perhaps Buddhabhadra still carried
that legacy. However, Buddhabhadra was clearly not trying
 473

to reduce reality to eternal atoms. He would, as

Kumarajiva’s leadoff remark recognizes, ‘destroy (both)
form and emptiness (or: the thesis that form is empty).’
Instead, he was showing how one atom can destroy as well
as establish all the other atoms and vice-versa. This would
suggest that he had in mind the worldview of the
Avataàsaka Sütra, which he translated later. Kumarajiva’s
understanding of emptiness was from the standpoint of one
systematically negating the realist’s misperception of
phenomenal realities as somehow real. For Kumarajiva, all
forms and names were indeed empty. Buddhabhadra
however, seemed to operate on a different level, what might
be called the more noumenal.
Thus, it seems that doctrinal differences (since
Buddhabhadra was a Sarvästiväda adherent) were also
responsible partly for this lack of friendship between the
two Buddhist masters. In contrast to Kumarajiva,
Buddhabhadra observed austere rules of monastic life and
instructed his followers in discipline and in meditation.42 At
that time, Chinese Buddhism would then issue forth from
the Sütra oriented followers of Kumarajiva and the
meditation orientation of Buddhabhadra’s followers.
Buddhabhadra greatly disfavoured the lifestyle of

42
Anesaki, ‘Missions (Buddhist)’, p. 701.
 474

Kumarajiva and the community of his followers. He never

liked their excessive involvement with the royal court.43
Expulsion from Ch’ang-an
In this way, Buddhabhadra came into conflict with
the ‘official’ monks of Kumarajiva’s school who were
sponsored by the Later Tsin court. The followers of
Kumarajiva fabricated charges against Buddhabhadra. It is
said that some people, who became very jealous of
Buddhabhadra’s learning and popularity, tried to defame
him by fabricating certain charges.44 Afterwards, when the
truth was revealed, they repented. This resulted in the
expulsion of Buddhabhadra from Ch’ang-an. In 410 CE,
Buddhabhadra along with his forty disciples took refuge in
the south,45 where Tao-an’s disciples were living, secluded
in a monastery on Mount Lu-shan, in modern Chiang-hsi
province. The leader of the group was Hui-yuan, the noted
Chinese monk-scholar,46 and its members were monks,
poets and philosophers who were disgusted with the
troubles of the world and devoted themselves to meditation
and conversation with one another. Hui-yuan was a native
of Lou-fan, in Shansi. His early years were spent in the
study of Confucian and Taoist doctrines. He was converted

43
Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 77.
44
Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, p… 72.
45
Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. I, p. 223;
Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism, p. 57.
46
The Seeker’s Glossary…, p. 276.
 475

to Buddhism when he was twenty years old. Later, he

became the most brilliant disciple of Tao-an. He also
became a very famous Buddhist Master and expositor of
Buddhist teachings. He founded the Tung-lin monastery
on Lu-shan in Central China and it became the most
famous centre of Buddhism in South China. Here
Buddhabhadra was not only warmly welcomed for his
reputation as a Dhyäna master but also found its men more
congenial than the Buddhists of the north, and instructed
them further in the secrets of Buddhist mental training. In
this group of thinkers, one can witness Chinese Buddhism
quite acclimatized to the native soil, especially to the poetic
and transcendental mood of the southern Chinese, and
preparing for further union of Buddhist meditation with
Chinese quietism. It was on this ground that a definite
school of meditation, known as Shan-no (Dhyäna), later
established itself and further impressed on Buddhism the
poetry of the valley of the Yang-tze. Although the
followers of the Shan-no school trace their origin to
Bodhidharma, who was believed to have come to China by
sea in 520 CE, the further source was to be found in the
group of recluses at Lu-shan who had warmly welcomed
Buddhabhadra. After all, one can assign the foundation of
Chinese Buddhism, relatively apart from foreign
missionaries, to Tao-an and Hui-yuan. Yet, parallel with
this native movement, missionary work was proceeding,
 476

both in the north and the south.47 Lu-shan was a famous

mountain, and a community there was a centre of Buddhist
activity in the late 4th century and after. Also known as
Mount Lu, it was a large mountain encompassing many
peaks and scenic views, located along the Chiu River near
its juncture with the Yangtze River in Kiangsi province.
Hui-yuan (334-416 CE) was a disciple of early Chinese
Buddhist scholar Tao-an (312-385 CE) and was the
inspiration of the White Lotus Society and also father of
the Chinese Pure Land School of Buddhism. Although
schooled in the Confucian and Taoist Classics, Hui-yuan
ran a school for monks and scholars.48 In 381 CE, he went
to Lu-shan, which was a solitary mountain spot,
picturesque and eminently suited as a place of retirement
for the Buddhist monks. In 386 CE, the governor of the
province built a monastery for Hui-yuan at Lu-shan.49 Hui-
yuan developed it into an important centre for Buddhism.
Among his two major contributions, in 402 CE, along with
one hundred and twenty three of his disciples, he
established the White Lotus Society, a group devoted to
meditation on the figure of Amitäbha and attaining rebirth
in the Pure Land (Sukhävati). As such, he is considered the
founder of Chinese Pure Land Buddhism.50 Next, he gave

47
Anesaki, ‘Missions (Buddhist)’, p. 701.
48
Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 138.
49
Bagchi, India and China, p. 99.
50
Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, pp. 138-139.
 477

invitation to many famous translators to come and pursue

activities in his Tung-lin monastery. In Lu-shan, Hui-yuan
is said to have asked Buddhabhadra to bring out one of the
scriptures in which he had specialized. It is said that the
scripture was a short Hinayäna Dhyäna-treatise with a
slight Mahayanistic admixture, commonly ascribed to
Dharmatrata.51
It is interesting to note that Hui-yuan himself stated
in his preface to the eulogy on the Buddha-shadow that he
had the good fortune to meet a Dhyäna-master from
Kashmir and a monk from the south well versed in the
Vinaya who were able to give a detailed description of the
shadow, whereupon he had it painted after their
indications. According to the epilogue to these hymns, the
solemn inauguration of the Chapel in which the image had
been placed (it seems to have been a painting on silk and
not a mural) took place on 27 May 412 CE. This date
indicates that the ‘Vinaya Master from Kashmir’ was no
one else than Buddhabhadra who had stayed at Lu-shan
during that period, a fact which throws an interesting light
upon the real function of this painting.52 Here it should be
mentioned that Buddhabhadra was among other things the
translator of the Kuan Fo San-Mei (Hai) Ching, a Sütra
which, as the title indicated, was mainly devoted to the

51
Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. I, p. 223.
52
Ibid., p. 224.
 478

Buddhänusmåti Samädhi, precisely the kind of mental

concentration who was so much popular among Hui-
yuan’s followers. According to a rather late and very
unreliable source this scripture was translated during the
Sung Period, hence after 420 CE, but even if this is true,
Buddhabhadra may have orally transmitted some of its
contents to Hui-yuan during his stay at Lu-shan. One can
find in the seventh Chuan of the Kuan Fo San-Mei Ching a
long passage dealing with the miracle of the shadow,
followed by a highly interesting description of the
‘Contemplation of the Buddha’s shadow’ intended for the
use of those disciples of the Buddha who ‘after the
Buddha’s decease ... desire to know (the appearance of) the
Buddha in a sitting posture.’ Detailed rules were given how
to effect the visualization of the Buddha- body with all its
marks and tokens of supernatural power-a form of
concentration, which ‘eliminates the sins committed during
the lives of a hundred thousand Kalpas. Importantly
enough as Buddhabhadra himself had come from
Nagrahara, he must have been well acquainted with local
traditions concerning the original image and the way in
which it was adored or used as an object of contemplation
in its original or proper place. Thus, it can be concluded
that the replica made at Hui-Yuan’s order in 412 CE at Lu-
shan, far from being a mere pictorial representation of the
 479

Buddha had a very concrete function, closely connected

with the practice of Buddhänusmåti.53
In this way, we see that in Lu shan, Buddhabhadra
worked closely with Hui-yuan. In 410-411 CE, Hui-yuan
was stated to have written a letter to Emperor Yao-Hsing
in order to clarify the case of the expulsion of
Buddhabhadra from Ch’ang-an.54 He had even personally
appealed to the Emperor asking him to revoke the verdict
of the unjust expulsion of the Dhyäna master in 410 CE
from Ch’ang-an. After remaining around two years in Lu-
shan, in 412 CE, along with his disciples, eventually
Buddhabhadra went to southern capital city Chien-K’ang
(modern Nanking) where he continued his work in
meditation and translation. Upon his arrival in China in
414 CE, Fa-hsien was baffled by the dispute between
Buddhabhadra and Kumarajiva. Therefore, he proceeded to
Nanking in order to assuage Buddhabhadra. Later, he was
successful in persuading the Nepalese scholar to return to
the capital at Ch’ang-an, where he was warmly welcomed
by the Chinese Emperor.55 After remaining for some time
in Ch’ang-an, along with Fa-hsien, Buddhabhadra once
again returned to Nanking, where he became the senior
translator at Tao Chang Ssu monastery, giving guidance to

53
Ibid., pp. 224-225.
54
Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. II, p. 397.
55
Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko Sambandha, p. 75.
 480

more than a hundred monks engaged in putting the

Buddhist scriptures into Chinese. This monastery was the
main centre of such work in China.56 While in Nanking,
collaborating with Fa-hsien, Buddhabhadra started the
project of editing and translating Buddhist texts from
Sanskrit into Chinese language.57 Fa-hsien had brought
many Classic Buddhist texts from India. It is to be noted
that by that time, Buddhabhadra had acquired a profound
knowledge of the Chinese language. Even after Fa-hsien’s
death in 420 CE, Buddhabhadra was engaged in translation
projects. He continued his activities until his death at the
age of seventy-one in 429 CE.
Contributions of the Buddhist Master
Fifteen of Buddhabhadra’s translation works are
said to have been preserved in China until now. Between
398 to 421 CE, he translated those works at two different
places, Lu-shan and Nanking. Importantly enough, he
translated most of the texts while living in Tao Ch’ang Ssu
monastery in Yang chou in Nanking. The fact that such a
great literary activity was initiated in the Tao Chang Ssu
monastery supports the idea that the monastery was one of
the main centers of Buddhist activities in China in the fifth

56
Huang Sheng-Chang, ‘China and Nepal’, pp. 8-9.
57
Ibid.; Legge, A Record of Buddhist Kingdoms, pp. 2-3.
 481

century CE. The translation works of Buddhabhadra have

been listed in the following catalogues.58
1. Bussho Kaisetsu Daijiten (prepared by G. Ono)
2. Comparative Analytical Catalogue of the Kanjur
Division of the Tibetan Buddhist Canon (Otani
University)
3. Complete Catalouge of Tibetan Buddhist Canon H.
Ui et. al. (ed.), Tohoku University.
4. Tibetan Tripitaka (Cone edition)
5. Hanguk Taejanggyong (Korean Tripitaka).
6. Koryo Taejanggyong (reprint of Haein Xylograph)
7. Tibetan Tripitaka (Lhasa edition)
8. Nanjio Catalogue
9. Tibetan Tripitaka (Peking edition)
10. Tibetan Tripitaka (Sde-dge edition)
11. Tibetan Tripitaka (Snar-than edition)
12. Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo (Taisho Tripitaka)
It is reported that Kumarajiva acknowledged
Buddhabhadra’s superiority and whenever he had doubts,
he always sought Buddhabhadra’s explanation.59
Buddhabhadra assisted Kumarajiva in the translation of
Buddhist scriptures.60 In 416-418 CE, along with Fa-hsien

58
Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Cannon, pp. xx-xxiii.
59
Puri, Buddhism in Central Asia, p. 123.
60
The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, p. 57.
 482

in Tao Ch’ang Ssu monastery, Buddhabhadra translated the

Mahäsäìghika Vinaya (Mo ho seng Ch’i liu) in forty
volumes (fascicles), which Fa-hsien had brought from a
monastery in Päöaliputra. 61 The general plan of the work
was similar to that of other Vinayapitakas but it was much
richer than many of the works in anecdotal element
throwing light on the social and economic history of
northern India.62 The most noted work, which he translated
into Chinese in collaboration with Fa-shien, was the
Mahäparinirväëa Sütra (Ta-pan nieh-p’an ching)63 in six
volumes from 416 to 418 CE. Besides that, the translation
bearing the title of Tsa O-pi-t’an hsin-lun was also ascribed

61
Hirakawa, ‘Buddhist Literature: Survey of Texts’, p. 512. Nanjio
(comp.), A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 247; Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism, p. 124; Nariman,
Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism, p. 263; Chou Hsiang-
kuang, Chini Baudha Dharmaka Itihas, p. 80; Sankrityayan,
Baudha Sanskriti, p. 297; Bagchi, India and China, p. 129; Prebish,
The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 118; Keown, A Dictionary of
Buddhism, p. 42; Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 20; Joshi, Kalakar
Arniko, p. 69. ‘Other Translators in The Period of Disunity’,
www.buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/archive/nutshell/teach/
teach50htm;‘Buddhabhadra,’ www.kr.ks.yahoo.com/service/wiki_
know/know_view.html?tnum=1650.
62
Bagchi, India and China, p. 129.
63
Joshi, Kalakar Arniko, pp. 2-3; The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of
Buddhism, pp. 174 and 381; and Chou Hsiang-kuang, Chini
Baudha Dharmaka Itihas, p. 80; Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism,
p. 118; Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 20; Keown, A Dictionary of
Buddhism, p. 196; Dharmakñema, The Great Parinirväëa Sütra,
(Eng. tr. Charles Patton), pp. 2-4; www. villa.lakes.com/cdpatton/
Dharma/Canon/T0375(1-6).
 483

to Buddhabhadra and Fa-hsien, but the book has been

lost.64 Collaborating with Pao-yun, Buddhabhadra
translated the Larger Sukhävativyuha Sütra (Wu-liang-
shou-ching).65 Another most extensive work, was the
translation of the Avataàsaka Sütra (Ta-fang Kuang-fo
hua-yen ching) with thirty-six thousand verses in sixty
fascicles and thirty-four chapters and divided into eight
assemblies or scenes held at seven different locations from
417 to 420 CE. 66 It is said that he started the translation of
64
Jan Yuan-Hua, ‘Fa-hsien’, p. 246.
65
Fujita, ‘The Textual Origins of The Kuan Wu-ling-Shou Ching’,
pp. 152, 157 and 160.
66
Nanjio, A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 33; Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 20; Dumoulin, A
History of Zen Buddhism, p. 58; Hirakawa, ‘Buddhist Literature’,
p. 519. Mukherjee, Indian Literature Abroad (China), p. 23;
Fujieda, ‘The Tun-huang Manuscript’, p. 123; Tucci, The Religions
of Tibet, p. 270; Gimello, ‘Hua-yen’, p. 486; Weinstein, ‘Schools of
Buddhism: Chinese Buddhism’, p. 483; Gomez, ‘The Avataàsaka
Sütra’, p. 160; Bokenkamp, ‘Stages of Transcendence: The Bhumi
Concept in Taoist Scripture’, p. 124; Dev, Bouddha Dharma
Darshan, p. 151; Joshi, Kalakar Arniko, p. 47; Chou Hsiang-kuang,
Chini Baudha Dharmaka Itihas, p. 72; Ch’en, Buddhism in China,
p. 313; Zurcher, The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. I, p. 407;
Bagchi, India and China, p. 205; Keown, A Dictionary of
Buddhism, p. 42; Prebish, The A to Z of Buddhism, p. 58; Puri,
Buddhism in Central Asia, p. 111; Bapat, 2500 Years of Buddhism,
p. 124; The Seeker’s Glossary… , p. 91; Thapa , Newar Buddhism,
p. 20; Fujita, ‘The Textual Origins of The Kuan Wu-ling-Shou
Ching’, pp. 157 and 162; Bhattarai, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko
Sambandha, p. 76; Chou Hsiang-kuang, Chini Baudha Dharmaka
Itihas., p. 80; Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Canon, p. 43;
Dutt, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India., p. 307; The Soka
Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, pp. 57 and 207; Kohn, The
Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, p. 30; Upadhyaya,
 484

this Sanskrit manuscript in 418 and completed it in 422 CE

in Tao Chang Ssu monastery in Yang chou.67 This work is
highly metaphysical and has been said to represent the
highest level of Mahäyäna thought. Buddhabhadra also
translated the Yogäcärabhümé Sütra (Ta-mo-to-lo-ch’an-
ching) in two fascicles from 398 to 421 CE in Lu-shan in
Yang Tu.68 Another translation of Buddhabhadra was that
of the Tathägatagarbha Sütra (Ta fang ten-ju lai tsang
Ching) in one fascicle in 420 CE during the Eastern Tsin
Dynasty.69 He also translated the Buddhayäna
Samädhisägara Sütra (Kuan fo san-mei hai Ching) from 420
to 423 CE in Yang Chou.70 His other translated works were
the Anantamukha Sädhakadhäraëé Sütra (Ch’u Sheng wu

Brihattar Bharat, p. 56; Also browse - ‘Other Translators in the

Period of Disunity’, www.buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/archive/
nutshell/teach50.htm; ‘Hua-yen Sect’, www.buddhistdoor.com/
bdoor/ archive/nutshell /teach/teach65htm;‘History of Zen in
China’, www.texts.com/ bud/rosa03htm; ‘Buddhabhadra’, www.
cyberspacei.com/jesusi/inlight/religion/Buddhism/buddhismh/
htm; and ‘Buddhabhadra’, www.dreamwiz.com/jimung/ songchol
file/3folder/file3-12.htm.
67
Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Canon, p. 43.
68
Ibid., p. 355; ‘Other Translators in the Period of Disunity’, www.
buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/archive/nutshell/teach50.htm
69
Ibid , p. 129; Joshi, Kalakar Arniko, p. 47; Nanjio, A Catalogue of
the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist Tripitaka, p. 95;
Hirakawa, ‘Buddhist Literature’, p. 519; Thapa, Newar Buddhism,
p. 20.
70
Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Canon, p. 140; Nanjio, A
Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist Tripitaka, p.
104 and Fujita, ‘The Textual Origins of Kuan Wu-ling- Shou
Ching’, p. 157.
 485

liang men Ch’ih Ching) in the first year of Yuan Hsi of the
Eastern Tsin Dynasty in 419 CE in Yang Tu.71 Similarly, he
also translated the Bhadracaryäpraëidhäna (Wen Shu shih li
fa yuan ching) during the second year of Yuan Hsi of the
Eastern Tsin Dynasty in 420 CE in Tao-Ch’ang Ssu
monastery, 72 Dhyäna Sütra (Ta mo to lo Shan Kin) during
the Eastern Tsin Dynasty,73 Samantabhadra Praëidhäna
Bhadracari and the Maïjuçré Praëidhänotpäda Sütra (Wan-
shu-sh-li-fa-yuen-Ching)74 in 420 CE. Buddhabhadra also
translated several other Buddhist texts, which include the
Mahäsäìghikabhikñuëi Vinaya (Mo ho seng ch'i pi ch'iu ni
chien pen) during the Eastern Tsin dynasty in 414 CE 75 and
the Pratimokña Säìghika Vinayamälä (Po lo thi mu kha san

71
Nanjio, A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 90; Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Cannon, p.
119; Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 20.
72
Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Cannon, p. 361; Thapa,
Newar Buddhism, p. 20.
73
Nanjio, A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 300; Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism, p. 58;
‘History of Zen in China’, www.sacredtexts/com/bud/rosa03.htm;
‘Buddhabhadra’,www.daekaksaofcanada.com/sub03/sub03_08.htm
74
Nanjio, A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 297; Chou Hsiang-kuang, Chini Baudha Dharmaka
Itihas , p. 80.
75
Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Canon, p. 329; Nanjio, A
Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist Tripitaka, p.
253; Thapa, Newar Buddhism, p. 20.
 486

khi kie pan or Mo ho seng ch’i lu ta pi Ch’iu Chienpen)76

during the second year of Luang-An of Eastern Tsin
dynasty and the second year of Yung Ch’u Liu of Sung
dynasty (398-421 CE). Besides Fa-hsien and Pao-yun,
other Chinese monks such as Hui-yuan, Fa-Yeh and a host
of other monks were also engaged in Buddhabhadra’s
translation projects. Buddhabhadra’s works have been
mentioned in Samuel Beal’s catalogue of the Chinese
Tripitaka as well.
It is said that Buddhabhadra was a well-known
Ch’an Master who gave a course of lectures on the
Dhyäna Sütra for the first time in 413 CE, and it was
through his instructions that many native Dhyäna
practitioners were produced of which Chi Yen and Huan
Kao became well known. Even Hui-yuan, the founder of
the White Lotus Society and the Chinese Pure Land
Buddhism practiced Dhyäna with the help of his
instructions. Buddhabhadra’s translations of the
Avataàsaka Sütra and Dhyäna Sütra may be said without
exaggeration to have laid the very cornerstone for
Dhyäna ideology in China. Moreover, through his
efforts, the Ch’an School dedicated to the meditation
teachings of his teacher Buddhasena, one of the most

76
Nanjio, A Catalogue of the Chinese Translations of the Buddhist
Tripitaka, p. 253; Lancaster and Park, Korean Buddhist Canon, p.
330.
 487

famous Masters of Dhyäna, was propagated throughout

the region south of Yangtze. Buddhabhadra is also
credited with having taught the Chinese monks to wear
monk robes baring one shoulder, to sit on hard ground
and to eat only one meal a day before noon.77 He also
studied Chinese martial arts Wushu or Kung Fu. He was
joined by two disciples, Seng Chou and Hui Gaung. The
two studied under Buddhabhadra and in time honed their
Wushu skills.78 Thus, he worked tirelessly to expound the
Dharma to the Chinese intellectuals. In this way, by
spending twenty-one years in China, he laid a strong
foundation for the propagation of Buddhism. His works
made him a renowned Buddhist Master in China. Very
recently, the tomb of Ven. Buddhabhadra has been
discovered in China.79
Conclusion
We havs seen that the most important contribution
made by Buddhabhadra was to the propagation of
Buddhism in China and the work of translation. His
efforts constitute a glorious chapter in the history of
mutual exchange among Buddhist cultures. He was one
of those important scholars who were instrumental in

77
Lai, ‘The Three Jewels in China’, p. 290.
78
‘Hua-Yen Sect’, www. buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/archive/nutshell
/teach65.htm
79
Bhattarai, ‘Dharmacharya Buddhabhadra (Chueh-hsien)’, Buddha
Jayanti Golden Jubilee Souvenir, p. 24.
 488

introducing Buddhist texts into China. He made an

outstanding contribution by propagating Buddhism in
China through his translation works. He also happened
to be one of the prominent Buddhist monk-scholars who
were invited to stay in the large monasteries of China. He
was indeed a person of exceptional status, and his career
was exemplary. He was a contemporary of another
prominent scholar, Kumarajiva. Though fifteen years
younger than Kumarajiva, Buddhabhadra surpassed him
in reputed virtue and insight, enjoying among his Chinese
contemporaries the highest esteem because of his
miraculous powers.80 He was indeed one of the most
prominent translators, comparable to Kumarajiva. His
works heralded a new epoch in the spread of Buddhism
in China. With his deep knowledge of Buddhist
philosophy and his command of Sanskrit and Chinese
languages, Buddhabhadra was able to translate fifteen
Buddhist scriptures in one hundred and seventeen
separate volumes. His important translated works still
bear testimony to his profound erudition.81
Buddhabhadra not only assisted Kumarajiva in his
translation works but also whenever Kumarajiva had any
doubts, Buddhabhadra was always consulted for an
explanation. His arrival in China marked a turning point

80
Dumoulin, A History of Zen Buddhism, p. 57.
81
Bagchi, India and China, p. 45.
 489

in the early history of Chinese Buddhism. His

contribution to the development of Buddhism in China
was not simply that of a translator. He involved many
native Chinese monks in the translation process and also
fostered many disciples. Buddhabhadra’s translation
works belong to three major categories of Chinese
Buddhist scriptural writings: Sütra, Vinaya, and treatises
and commentaries. Although not all the texts translated
by Buddhabhadra were of equal importance or had equal
appeal, a surprising number of them came to be regarded
as basic scriptures of East Asian Buddhism. Some of the
works translated by him became the fundamental
Buddhist texts most commonly studied during the fifth
century in China.
The outcome of Buddhabhadra’s works in
partnership with Fa-hsien was to contribute to establish
certain kind of spiritual relations between Nepal and
China. For this reason, he can be regarded as one of the
most important Nepalese to contribute to the
propagation of Buddhism in China. He is glowing
example of the efforts made by Nepalese Buddhist
Masters to spread Buddhism in China.
We observe in this scenario a Sino-Nepalese
intellectual joint venture in the creation of the new
spiritual order. It should be noted that for a long time
Buddhism played the role of a great medium of a cultural
 490

exchange between other countries in the region and

China. The monk-scholars from Nepal and China made
outstanding contributions to the friendly intercourse
between the two countries. The accounts of Fa-hsien and
Hsüan-tsang have always been held in high esteem by the
Buddhist historians as a valuable source for the study of
some historical aspects of ancient Nepal. Likewise, in
view of his invaluable contributions, along with other
Buddhist monks from Central Asian states and India,
Buddhabhadra can be undoubtedly regarded as one of the
most important figures in the history of the development
and expansion of Buddhism in China.
References
1. Acharya, Babu Ram, Chin Tibbat Ra Nepal, (China,
Tibet and Nepal), Kathmandu: Shree Krishna Acharya,
2059 VE.
2. Anesaki, M., ‘Missions (Buddhist)’ in James Hastings
(ed.), Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. VIII,
New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1916.
3. Bagchi, P.C., India and China: A Thousand Years of
Cultural Relations, Connecticut: Greenwood Press,
1971.
4. Bapat, P. V. (ed.), 2500 Years of Buddhism, Delhi:
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, 1959.
5. Beal, Samuel (ed.), Buddhist Records of the Western
World, Delhi: Oriental Book, 1983.
 491
6. Bhattarai, Niranjan, Chin Ra Tyasasita Nepal Ko
Sambandha (China and her relations with Nepal),
Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy, 2018 VE.
7. Bhattarai, Niranjan, ‘Dharmacharya Buddhabhadra
(Chueh-hsien)’, Buddha Jayanti Golden Jubilee
Souvenir, Lalitpur: Bhäñkarvarëa Mahävihära, 2006.
8. Bokenkamp, Stephen R., ‘Stages of Transcendence: The
Bhumi Concept in Taoist Scripture’ in Robert E.
Buswell (ed.), Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, Delhi: Sri
Satguru Publications, 1992.
9. Bokshchanin, A. A., ‘Sino-Indian Relations from
ancient Times to the Sixteenth Century’ in S. L.
Tikhvinsky (ed.), China and Her Neighbours: From
Ancient Times to the Middle Ages, Moscow: Progress
Publishers, 1981.
10. Bowker, John (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of World
Religion, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
11. ‘Buddhabhadra’,www.kr.ks.yahoo.com/service/wiki_k
now/know_view. html?tnum=1650.
12. ‘Buddhabhadra’,ww.dreamwiz.com/jimung/songchol_f
ile/3folder/file3-12.htm. htm.
13. ‘Buddhabhadra’,www.cyberspacei.com/jesusi/inlight/
religion/Buddhism/ buddhismh/htm.
14. Chao Pu-Chu, Buddhism in China, Peking: Chinese
Buddhist Association, 1957.
15. Ch’en, Kenneth, Buddhism in China: A Historical
Survey, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1964.
 492
16. Chin Keh-mu, A Short History of Sino-Indian
Friendship, Calcutta: 1981.
17. Chou Hsiang-kuang, Chini Baudha Dharmaka Itihas
(History of Chinese Buddhism) (Hindi tr. Atman),
Allahabad: Bharati Bhandar, 2013 VE.
18. Chou Yi-liang, ‘Tantrism in China’, Harvard Journal of
Asiatic Studies, Vol. 8, March 1944-March 1945.
19. Das, S. C., Indian Pandits in the Land of Snow,
Calcutta: K. L. Mukhopadhya, 1965
20. Dev, Acharya Narendra, Bouddha Dharma Darshan
(Buddhist Religion – Philosophy), Patna: Bihar
Räñtrabhäsa Pariñad, 1956.
21. Dharmakñema, The Great Parinirväëa Sütra Redacted
from the Chinese tr. by Hui-yen, Hui-kuan, and Hsieh
Ling-yun T375.12.605a- 852b), (Eng. tr. Charles D.
Patton), 1999, www.
villa.lakes.com/cdpatton/Dharma/Canon/ T0375(1-6).
22. Dillon, Michael, China: A Cultural and Historical
Dictionary, Surrey: Curzon Press, 1998.
23. Dumoulin, Henerich, A History of Zen Buddhism (Eng.
tr. Paul Peachey), Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.
24. Dutt, Sukumar, Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of
India, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1988.
25. Fa-hsien, A Record of the Buddhist Countries, Peking:
Chinese Buddhist Association, 1957.
26. Fujieda, Akira, ‘The Tun-huang Manuscript’, Essays on
the Sources for Chinese History, Canberra: Australian
National University Press, 1973.
 493
27. Fujita, Kotatsu (Eng. tr. Kenneth K. Tanaka), ‘The
Textual Origins of The Kuan Wu-ling-Shou Ching: A
Canonical Scripture of Pure Land Buddhism’ in Robert
E. Buswell (ed.), Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, Delhi:
Sri Satguru Publications, 1992.
28. Gernet, Jacques, A History of Chinese Civilization
(Eng. tr. J. R. Foster), Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1982.
29. Ghoble, T. R., China-Nepal Relations and India, New
Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications, 1986.
30. Giles, H. A., The Travels of Fa-hsien (399-414 A.D.) or
Record of the Buddhistic Kingdoms, Delhi: Indological
Book House, 1972.
31. Gimello, Robert M., ‘Hua-yen’, in Mircea Eliade (ed.),
The Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 6, New York:
Macmillian Publishing Co., 1987.
32. Gomez, Luis O., ‘The Avataàsaka Sütra’ in Takeuchi
Yoshinori (ed.), Buddhist Spirituality: Indian, Southeast
Asian, Tibetan and Early Chinese, NY: Crossroads,
1994.
33. Hazra, Kanai Lal, The Rise and Decline of Buddhism in
India, New Delhi; Munshiram Manohar Lal, 1998.
34. Hirakawa, Akira (Eng. tr. Paul Groner), ‘Buddhist
Literature: Survey of Texts’ in Mircea Eliade (ed.), The
Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 2, New York: Macmillan
Publishing, 1987.
35. ‘History of Zen in China’,
www.texts.com/bud/rosa03htm.
 494
36. ‘Hua-yen Sect’, www.buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/
archive/nutshell/teach/ teach65htm.
37. Huang Sheng-Chang, ‘China and Nepal’, People’s
China, May 1, 1956.
38. Ikeda, Daisaku, The Flower of Chinese Buddhism,
Tokyo: Whitehall, 1989.
39. Jan Yuan-Hua,’ Fa-hsien’ in Mircea Eliade (ed.), The
Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. V, New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., 1987.
40. Joshi,Satya Mohan, Kalakar Arniko (Architect
Arniko), Kathmandu: Bijay Gajananda Vaidya, 2044
VE.
41. K.C., Kaiser Bahadur, The Judicial Customs of Nepal,
Part I, Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar, 1971.
42. Kaul, Advaitavandini, Buddhist Savants of Kashmir:
Their Contribution Abroad, Kashmir: Utpal
Publications, 1987.
43. Keown, Damien, A Dictionary of Buddhism, Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2003.
44. Keyes, Charles F., ‘Buddhist Pilgrimage in South and
Southeast Asia’ in Mircea Eliade (ed.), The Encyclopedia
of Religion, Vol. V, New York: Macmillan Publishing,
1987.
45. Kohn, Michael H., The Shambhala Dictionary of
Buddhism and Zen, Boston: Shambhala, 1991.
46. Lai, Whalen, ‘The Three Jewels in China’ in Takeuchi
Yoshinori (ed.), Buddhist Spirituality: Indian, Southeast
 495
Asian, Tibetan and Early Chinese, New York:
Crossroad, 1994.
47. Lahiri, Latika, Chinese Monks in India, Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 1995.
48. Lancaster, Lewis and Park Sung Bae, Korean Buddhist
Cannon: A Descriptive Catalogue, Berkeley: University
of California, 1979.
49. Legge, James, A Record of Buddhist Kingdoms; Being
an Account by the Chinese Monk Fa-hsien of His
Travels in India and Ceylon (A.D. 399-414) in search of
the Buddhist Book of Discipline, New York: Paragon
Book, 1965.
50. Majumdar, R. C., The Classical Age, Bombay:
Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, 1962.
51. Manandhar, Vijay Kumar, A Comprehensive History of
Nepal-China Relations up to 1955 A.D., Vol. I, New
Delhi: Adroit Publishers, 2004.
52. Mukherjee, Probhat Kumar, Indian Literature Abroad
(China), Calcutta: 1928.
53. Nanjio, Bunyiu (comp.), A Catalogue of the Chinese
Translations of the Buddhist Tripitaka-The Sacred
Canon of the Buddhists in China and Japan, Delhi:
Classics India Publications, 1989.
54. Nariman, J. K., Literary History of Sanskrit Buddhism,
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1972.
55. Needham, Joseph, Science and Civilisation in China,
Vol. I, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954.
 496
56. Nehru, Jawaharlal, The Discovery of India, London:
Meridian Books, 1960.
57. Nepal, Jnanmani, Nepal Nirukta (Nepal Identified),
Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy, 2041 VE.
58. ‘Other Translators in the Period of Disunity’,www.
buddhistdoor.com/bdoor/archive/nutshell/teach/teach5
0. htm.
59. Pandey, Nishchal N., ‘Promoting Nepal-China
Cultural Cooperation’ in Nischal N. Pandey (ed.),
Nepal-China Relations, Kathmandu: Institute of
Foreign Affairs, 2005.
60. Perkins, Dorothy, Encyclopedia of China: The Essential
Reference to China, Its History and Culture, New
York: A Roundtable Press Book, 1998.
61. Petech, Luciano, Northern India According to the Shui-
Ching-Chu, Rome: Institute Poligrafico Dello Stato
Piazza Verdi, 1955.
62. Pradhan, Bhuwan Lal, Lumbiné Kapilawastu
Devadaha, Kathmandu: RCNAS, n. d.
63. Prebish, Charles S., The A to Z of Buddhism, New
Delhi: Vision Books, 2003.
64. Puri, B. N., Buddhism in Central Asia, Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass, 2000.
65. Ratna, Kuladharma, Buddhism and Nepal, Kathmandu:
Dharmodaya Sabha, n. d.
66. Report of the Fourth World Buddhist Conference of the
th
World Fellowship of Buddhists, Kathmandu, Nepal, 15
 497
to 21st November, 1956, Kathmandu: Dharmodaya
Sabha, n. d.
67. Sankrityayan, Rahul, Baudha Sanskriti (Buddhist
Culture), Calcutta: Adhunik Pustak Bhawan, n. d.
68. Shaha, Rishikesh, ‘Nepal, Tibet and China’, The Nepal
Council of World Affairs, June 1970.
69. Shaha, Rishikesh, Heroes and Builders of Nepal,
London: Oxford University Press, 1965.
70. Singh, Harishchandra L., Buddhism in Nepal: A Brief
Historical Introduction, Lalitpur: Satish Singh, 1990.
71. Some Notes on Perceptions of Pratétyasamutpäda in
China from Kumarajiva to Fa-yao’,
www.ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/ FULLTEXT/JR-
JOCP/jc26721htm.
72. Takakusu, J., ‘Yuan-Chwang, Fa-hian and I-Tsing’ in
James Hastings (ed.), The Encyclopaedia of Religion
and Ethics, Vol. XII, New York: Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1916.
73. Thapa, Shanker, Newar Buddhism: History, Scholarship
and Literature, Lalitpur: Nagarjuna Publication, 2005.
74. The Seeker’s Glossary of Buddhism, Taipei: CBBEF,
1998.
75. The Soka Gakkai Dictionary of Buddhism, Tokyo: Soka
Gakkai, 2002.
76. Tucci, Giuseppe, The Religions of Tibet, Delhi: Allied
Publishers, 1980.
77. Upadhyaya, Bhagwatsharan, Brihattar Bharat, (Greater
India), Delhi: Rajpal and Sons, 1986.
 498
78. Upadhyaya, Jagannath, ‘Vajrayana: Dharma, Darshan
Aur Jeevan-Darshan, (Vajrayana: Religion-Philosophy
and Vision), Dhih, No. 24, 1997, Sarnath.
79. Wang Hung-wi, ‘Chin-Nepal Maitri, Prachin Tara
Naulo Utsah Sahitko’ (Ancient China-Nepal Ties but
with New Enthusiasm), Smarika (Souvenir),
Kathmandu: Nepal Chin Maitri Sangh, 2041 VE.
80. Watt, Paul B., ‘Tantric Buddhism in China’ in Takeuchi
Yoshinori (ed.), Buddhist Spirituality: Indian, Southeast
Asian, Tibetan and Early Chinese, NY: Crossroad,
1994.
81. Weinstein, Stanley, ‘Schools of Buddhism: Chinese
Buddhism’ in Mircea Eliade (ed.), The Encyclopedia of
Religion, Vol. 2, New York: Macmillian Publishing,
1987.
82. Welch, Holmes, Buddhism Under Mao, Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1972.
83. Zurcher, E., The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. I,
Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972.
84. Zurcher, E., The Buddhist Conquest of China, Vol. II,
Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972.

***