求那跋摩是佛教史上著名的三藏法师，他学养深厚、持戒精严，禅修已证圣果。这位大师的影响跨越三大佛教文化区，重新研读他的传记对于我们理解佛教的跨文化传播，尤其是仍然晦而不彰的早期爪哇佛教史，会很有启迪。

  讨论爪哇佛教的一大困难，在于相关文字记载的匮乏。唯其如此， 汉文典籍中的相关资料才受到研究者们的普遍重视，即使只鳞片爪的记载也几乎没有逃脱既往研究的视线，很难再有重要的漏网之鱼。因此， 如果要对汉文典籍中爪哇佛教相关资料再作一番检讨，除了在搜集范围上尽可能周赅（既包括对以历代僧传和经录为核心的大藏经资料的全面检索，也包括对正史和历代文人笔记小说等资料的重新梳理）之外，更重要的恐怕是如何从新的视角来解读这些资料，以期让既往研究中晦而不彰的脉络更清晰地呈现出来。

  例如，既往的很多研究都注意到，根据梁代《出三藏记集》、《高僧传》等资料的记载，求那跋摩（guṇavarman）曾于四世纪末、五世纪初驻锡阇婆， 也就是爪哇a，深受当地朝野尊崇，“一国皆从受戒”b，因而可以断定他对于当时爪哇佛教有重要影响。但求那跋摩所带来的佛教义理和实践究竟属于何种性质，它们对爪哇佛教可能产生了怎样的影响，如何在当时中亚和东南亚几大佛教文化圈交流的脉络中去理解其意义，则是既往研究没有深入探究的。毋庸置疑，这些问题对于理解早期爪哇佛教的性质，及其与亚洲其他地区佛教文化圈的互动十分重要。本文力图表明，结合学术界关于5世纪西北印佛教研究的进展，更深入地研读《高僧传·求那跋摩传》，并与其他文献中的相关记载互质互证，我们可以对这些问题作出尝试性的解答。

  求那跋摩传习和弘扬的佛法，究竟属于哪一部派，是什么性质，僧传未直接涉及。由于求那跋摩来自罽宾，而罽宾是说一切有部的大本营，所以迄今为止，学界一般认为求那跋摩是有部僧人c。不过，这一点容有进一步检讨的空间。关于求那跋摩所属部派及其弘扬的佛法性质，有三个线索值得重视：一是求那跋摩译介的经典，二是他在始兴时的画作，三是他所修习的禅法。

  求那跋摩抵达宋都后，所译经籍以律典为主，且均属于法藏部的《四分律》系统d。我们知道，除非是专门深究律典的律师，否则即使是娴于律仪的持律者，一般也只是熟悉本部派的律典。求那跋摩本身的学风是偏重禅修的，而所译律典不出《四分律》系统，可见他与法藏部有很深的渊源，极可能就是法藏部的僧人。

  此外，他“于（祇洹）寺开讲《法华》及《十地》”，应祇洹寺慧义之请“出《菩萨善戒》”，这几种都是大乘经论，可见求那跋摩的学风是大小兼宗的。又，《菩萨善戒经》与《瑜伽师地论·本地分·菩萨地》的内容相当，而出于《华严经》系的《十地经》也与早期唯识学派有很深的渊源（唯识学派的重要创始人世亲曾专门作《十地经论》），由此可以推想求那跋摩对于这一系的思想应该是不陌生的。

  求那跋摩译介的佛典，与他自己的出生地和早年修学经历有密切关系。按照僧传的记载，求那跋摩出身于罽宾的王族，“至年二十出家受戒，洞明九部，博晓四含，诵经百余万言。深达律品，妙入禅要。时号曰三藏法师”e。可见他对于罽宾地区的佛教经典和实际禅修传统有全面深入的了解。梁《高僧传》中的罽宾，所指范围大致是犍陀罗及其周边地区f。而瑜伽行派传说中推尊的创始人弥勒菩萨，与这一地区有密切的关系g。瑜伽行派创立时期的核心人物无著与世亲兄弟，也是出生于犍陀罗境内的富娄沙富罗（Purusapura）。求那跋摩是一个偏重禅修的瑜伽师， 所以对于这一地区酝酿中的瑜伽行派思想十分熟悉也是一件很自然的事情。

  《高僧传》还提到，求那跋摩在始兴灵鹫山寺时，“于（宝月） 殿北壁手自画作罗云像及定光儒童布发之形，像成之后，每夕放光，久之乃歇”。这里的“定光儒童布发之形”，是指释迦牟尼佛前世为儒童菩萨时，解发布地，礼敬定光佛（燃灯佛）的本生谭故事。这一本生谭故事发生在犍陀罗以西的那揭罗曷（nagaraha），也属于魏晋南北朝时期中国佛教界认知中的罽宾范围h。此外，这一本生谭故事在犍陀罗佛教造像艺术中极为流行，可以说是最主要的本生谭造像主题之一i，而且这一类型的定光佛造像正是犍陀罗佛像艺术中最典型的佛菩萨放光类型j。因此，求那跋摩熟悉这一故事并不稀奇。

  值得注意的是，这一本生谭与法藏部有特别密切的关系。它虽是各部派共通的传说，但多数部派并不特别看重，亦不编入三藏。例如罽宾地区势力最大的说一切有部，就不是特别看重这一传说k，唯有法藏部特别重视，在《四分律》中予以大幅收录l。对于定光佛授记的传说，说一切有部本着理性的态度，尊重其价值，但并不以其为圣言量。但这一传说对于大众部和上座部分别说系的大乘化思想演进却极为重要，因为它是大乘佛教确定释尊累劫修行的关键性教理基础，只有确认燃灯佛授记时儒童菩萨得无生法忍这一事实，菩萨为饶益有情而随意往生恶趣、神通示现普度众生，乃至修行的各种行位阶次，才有了理论的根据m。求那跋摩的特别重视“定光儒童布发之形”，也可以有力地佐证他与属于分别说系的法藏部之间的密切关系。

  求那跋摩的遗偈，是汉语佛教文献中绝无仅有的关于禅修进阶次第的详细自述，弥足珍贵，从中我们可以窥见求那跋摩禅修法门的特质。

  限于篇幅，这里不能详细分析其中的禅学思想，但其禅修从不净观入手， 转入白骨观，再修四念处，进修至四善根位，渐观四谛证果，显然符合犍陀罗地区普遍的禅修风气。犍陀罗地区是瑜伽师云集的禅修胜境，这一地区的禅修传统，在实践上重视不净观和数息观，尊之为“二甘露门”。求那跋摩的禅修，从不净观入手，正是犍陀罗地区的传统。而经暖、顶、忍、世第一法，观四谛十六行相而渐见四谛，也恰是该地区主流的禅修路线， 这一点可以从影响该地区最广大的说一切有部诸论书中一再得到验证， 也为当时迅速崛起中的瑜伽行派所强调n。不过，求那跋摩的学风，从他“辞师违众，林栖谷饮，孤行山野，遁迹人世”的行迹看，显然与重视论议的阿毗达磨师有别，仍是偏重禅修、随缘度化的瑜伽师传统o。

  另外，僧传中体现出其精通咒术的特色，既与其部别有关，也很可能与当时正在犍陀罗北部急剧演进中的秘密瑜伽行有关p。按照真谛和玄奘一致的传说，法藏部之所以独立部系，就在于其独特的五藏说，将明咒和菩萨藏分别单独列为一藏q，说明这一派特别重视咒语的修习， 同时也说明该部与佛教密教化的发展有十分密切的关系。而在求那跋摩遗偈中，开篇除了“顶礼三宝”之外，还有顶礼“净戒诸上座”的内容， 也十分引人瞩目。这究竟只是一般的书翰礼仪，还是与后来密教发展出来的四皈依有某种精神气质上的相通性？似乎还有进一步思考的空间。

  此外，求那跋摩认为，“诸论各异端，修行理无二；偏执有是非， 达者无违诤”，强调在禅观实践中融会贯通诸家学说，消弭歧见，这也是瑜伽师们一贯的从禅出教、以禅证教的融贯传统。这一思想，深受中国后世佛教思想家的重视，天台宗祖师智顗、三论宗祖师吉藏、华严宗祖师澄观等，均引此偈阐发圆融会通的旨趣r。求那跋摩的包容精神，也可以从他肯定非二部僧受戒的汉地比丘尼传承的合法性上得到印证s。

  综上所述，求那跋摩的学风，特别是禅修实践方面，既具有鲜明的5世纪初犍陀罗地区的佛教特征，又与该地区主流的说一切有部重视论议的学风不同，而与偏重独立特行、隐遁自修的瑜伽师旧传统合辙，同时有注重咒术的法藏部特征，并且与当时兴起中的瑜伽行派、密教化等新动向呼应，重视在禅观实践层面融会贯通，体现了瑜伽师们一贯的守正出新精神。

  如果这一论断大致成立，那么求那跋摩的南来对于爪哇佛教而言，就不仅意味着大众佛教层面的咒术的流行而已，同样值得关注的，还有犍陀罗地区主流禅法的南来，和西北印新兴的秘密瑜伽行可能的南播。虽然要证成这一可能性还需要更多的证据，但仅仅是这一可能性的存在，就足以引起我们的注意。

  意味深长的是，体现在婆罗浮屠佛教遗址中的诸多重要因素，例如《华严经》、菩萨地、禅观修习、持咒、本生谭故事，在求那跋摩的传记中都出现了。这是否可以让我们设想这样一种可能：婆罗浮屠佛教遗址中体现出来的诸多佛教文化元素，可能早在佛教传入初期就已经存在于爪哇这片土地了。

  求那跋摩从罽宾到阇婆再到中国，他的足迹跨越了三个不同的佛教文化区。一个有趣的现象是，他的形象似乎也在随之转换。在罽宾时，僧传的描述突出了他的身世（“帝室之胤”）、才德（“机见俊达，深有远度，仁爱泛博，崇德务善”、“才明德重”）和远大前程（“年三十当抚临大国，南面称尊；若不乐世荣，当获圣果”）；对于他佛学造诣的刻画是“洞明九部，博晓四含，诵经百余万言。深达律品，妙入禅要。时号曰三藏法师”，是《高僧传》中形容传主佛学造诣的最高等级的措辞；关于他行迹的描述则是“辞师违众，林栖谷饮，孤行山野，遁迹人世”，属于偏重隐世独修的瑜伽师。而在阇婆时期，求那跋摩的主要事迹则是兴慈戒杀，持咒扶伤，尤其是他奇迹般的咒术和医术t，以及由此所致的导化之广（“导化之声播于遐迩，邻国闻风，皆遣使要请”）。在中国，僧传记述的事迹突出了求那跋摩“灵异无方”的神通，“开悟明达” 的见解，“神府自然、妙辩天绝”的口才，但是《高僧传》编撰者最重视的还是他在传译佛典方面的贡献，所以将其传记列入第一科的“译经” 类u。撇开编撰者叙事选择的视角差异不论，从瑜伽师到持咒师再到译经师，求那跋摩形象的变化，也许还折射出不同佛教文化区的不同好尚吧。

  2010年初，袁旔先生邀我就婆罗浮屠或爪哇佛教撰文。之后开始翻检汉籍中吉光片羽的爪哇佛教资料，感觉犹如镜花水月，虽宛然在目， 却又难以真切把握。回想起自己关于爪哇的最初印象，来自少年时期所读的一本奇幻小说《镜花缘》。又，据说中国的花姓源自爪哇，而唐代法门寺舍利晋京时皇室供养的香料，也是来自爪哇的贡品。爰以“镜中花” 为题，以志因缘。遗憾的是，限于时间和篇幅，全面检讨汉语文献中爪哇佛教资料的计划不得不一再收缩，最后仅以关于求那跋摩的再检讨草草收笔。希望将来有机会，能补交一份更满意的答卷。

  a 　关于阇婆是否为爪哇，学术界不无争议。伯希和、沙畹等以为阇婆即是爪哇（Pelliot， Deux Itineraires de Chine en Inde a 1a fin du VIIIe siecle, Bulletin de I’Ecole Fnmcaise de Extreme Orient, IV. p. 225f., 271 f.; Chavannes: Gunavarman，T’oung Pao, Serie Ⅱ , Vol. Ⅴ , p. 193.）。Coomaraswamy 则认为阇婆是室利佛室（Srivijaya，见氏著History of Indian and Indonesian Art, New York 1965, p. 198）， 转引自Rosen,Gunavarman: A Comparative Analysis of the Biographies found in the Chinese Tripitaka, Bulletin of Tibetology, Vol. X, No.1, f24，p.40。晚近的东南亚史著作多以阇婆为爪哇。

  b 　（梁）慧皎撰，汤用彤校注：《高僧传·求那跋摩传》，中华书局，1992 年，第106 页。

  c 　这似乎成为东南亚文化史教科书中的共识，参见［日］青山亨《東南アジア古典文化論·初期王权》，http:// www.tufs.ac.jp/blog/ts/g/aoyama/seaclc-20100513.pdf；再如John Miksic的近作The Buddhist-Hindu Divide in Premodern Southeast Asia（Nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre Working Paper No 1［March 2010］，http://nsc.iseas.edu.sg/documents/working_papers/nscwps001.pdf，p.17）也是以求那跋摩为有部僧人。

  d 　 2003年在日本金刚寺发现的《优婆塞五戒法》可能会被认为是个例外，这一5世纪中期写本的内容属于《十诵律》系统。但落合俊典的研究表明，这是由于抄写者的失误所致。写者的本意是要抄写求那跋摩译的《优婆塞五戒威仪经》，却不慎抄成了《十诵律》的内容。参见［日］落合俊典：《日本の古寫經と中國佛教文獻——天野山金剛寺藏平安後期寫〈優婆塞五戒法〉の成立と流傳を巡って》，《漢字と文化》特集號，京都大学人文研究所，2004年，第10－11页。

  e 　《高僧传·求那跋摩传》，前揭汤用彤校本，第105 页。

  f 　汉文典籍中“罽宾”的确切所指，迄今仍是学术界聚讼纷纭的论题。日本榎本文雄区分了佛教史上译籍和中土撰述中这个词的不同用法，指出译籍中的“罽宾”明确是指迦湿弥罗（今克什米尔），而汉地撰述尤其是《出三藏记集》和《高僧传》中的“罽宾”应是指犍陀罗及其周边地区。这一研究成果在佛教学者当中被广泛接受，本文亦采信此说。参见Enomoto Fumio （榎本文雄）,“A Note on Kashmir as referred to in Chinese Literature: Ji-bin,” in A Study of the Nilamata: Aspect of Hinduism in Ancient Kashmir （ed. Ikari Yasuke（井狩彌介）,Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University, 1994）, p. 357-365. 又，关于中古时期（特别是《高僧传》所记载的）中国求法僧在罽宾地区的朝圣路线和活动范围，参见Shoshin Kuwayama（桑山正进）， “Pilgrimage Route Changes and the Decline of Gandhara,” in Gandharan Buddhism：Archaeology, Art, and Texts （eds. Pia Brancaccio, Kurt A. Behrendt, University of British Columbia Press, 2006）, p.107-134.

  g 　参见释印顺《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》第十二章《罽宾瑜伽师的发展》， 尤其是第三节“大乘瑜伽师”，中华书局，2009 年，第536 － 544 页。

  h 　参见前页注②所引桑山正进论文。

  i 　关于儒童布发礼定光佛主题为犍陀罗佛教造像中最常见的本生谭故事及其表现类型的简要介绍，参见Alexander Peter Bell, Didactic narration: jataka iconography in Dunhuang with a catalogue of jataka representations in China, LIT Verlag Münster, 2000, p.37-38.

  j 　参见Giles Henry Rupert Tillotson, Paradigms of Indian Architecture: Space and Time in Representation and Design, Routledge, 1998, p.92.

  k 　例如说一切有部的《阿毗达磨大毗婆沙论》卷183说：“然灯佛本事，当云何通？……答：此不必须通，所以者何？此非素怛缆、毗奈耶、阿毗达磨所说，但是传说；诸传所说，或然不然。”（《大正藏》第27册，第916页）此外，与说一切有部有关的佛传，如《众许摩诃帝经》、《佛说普曜经》等，也没有编入燃灯佛授记之事。这些均表明，有部尊重流行的燃灯佛授记传说，但并不予以特别的重视。参见释印顺：《原始佛教圣典之集成》第五章第四节（中华书局，2009年，第297－298页）、《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》第五章第二节（中华书局，2009年，第186－187页）等处的相关论述。

  l 　参见《四分律》卷31，《大正藏》第22册，第782－785页。

  m 　关于燃灯佛授记这一本生谭之重要性，以及各部派对此佛传故事重视程度的差异，详见释印顺《初期大乘佛教之起源与开展》，尤其是第三章第一节（中华书局，2009年，第106－107页）、第九章第二节（第501－502页）的相关论述。

  n 　参见释印顺《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》第十二章第一、二节，中华书局， 2009 年，第517 － 536 页。

  o 　在晚近的佛学研究著作中，有些研究者倾向于以人类学研究当代东南亚佛教时采用的林居僧（forest monk）概念，来指称古代印度和中亚佛教传统中的瑜伽师，但从汉语文献所反映的情形来看，瑜伽师的生活环境既可以是城市大僧团，又可以是村镇小僧团，也可以是森林中三五成群或独处的头陀行者，所以本文仍用瑜伽师这一称谓。

  p 　关于当时犍陀罗地区尤其是其北部的急速密教化，参见释印顺《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》第十二章第四节“秘密瑜伽行”，中华书局，2009 年，第545 － 548 页。

  q 　真谛说见澄禅《三论玄义检幽录》所引，《大正藏》第70 册，第465 页中；窥基说见《大乘法苑义林章》卷二，《大正藏》第45 册，第271 页中。

  r 　参见：智顗《法华玄义》卷一（《大正藏》第33册，第691页）、卷八（第784页）；吉藏《法华义疏》卷十（《大正藏》第34册，第597页），吉藏《法华游意》卷一（《大正藏》第34册，第638页），吉藏《三论玄义》卷一（《大正藏》第45册，第4页）；澄观《华严经随疏演义钞》卷八（《大正藏》第36册，第61页）。

  s 　参见《高僧传·求那跋摩传》，前揭汤用彤校本，第109页。

  t 　《高僧传·求那跋摩传》记载了传主在阇婆两次以咒术救治国王脚伤的事迹：“王遇流矢伤脚，跋摩为咒水洗之，信宿平复。王恭信稍殷。”“王后为跋摩立精舍，躬自引材，伤王脚指。跋摩又为咒治，有顷平复。”而兴慈戒杀，则体现在跋摩劝国王抵御敌军时“起慈悲心， 勿兴害念”，以及国王在其劝化下与群臣共约：“愿尽所治内一切断杀”、“愿所有储财赈给贫病”。

  u 　《高僧传·求那跋摩传》对于传主在中国期间的神异事迹着墨颇多，如鸣椎自至、冒雨不沾、履泥不湿，作画放光，为临终者说法安慰使得福报，伏虎，入禅累日不出且神变化作白师子，采华布席而华彩更鲜，入灭时香气芬烈、有物冲天，阇毗时五色焰起、氛氲丽空等。关于传主的“开悟明达”和“妙辩天绝”，也有大段文字详述生动事例。相形之下，关于译经方面则笔墨平淡，与其他方面的记叙构成鲜明对照。这当然有事类和题材的制约，但其中体现的编撰者自身的价值意图和所依凭素材之间的张力，也值得思想史研究者深究。

  One major difficulty in a discussion on the early Javanese Buddhism is the lack of relevant written records. Due to this situation, the relevant materials in Chinese literary have received a lot of attention from researchers. Even a word or two barely escaped researchers’ eyes. So there is hardly any important material out there that has not been studied. In this case, if we want to do a reexamination of the relevant materials relating to Javanese Buddhism in Chinese literary, besides being as comprehensive as we can with regard to gathering information, which includes but is not limited to a thorough search for the Chinese Tripitaka focused on the biographies of the eminent monks and records of sutras, and the utilization of the materials such as historical records and past literary sketches, we should try to interpret these materials from a new perspective in the hope of some unclear threads of thought in the past researches emerging more clearly.

  For example, according to the materials from the Liang version of A Collection of Records on the Emanation of the Chinese Tripitaka（《出三藏记集》） and The Biographies of Eminent Monks（《高僧传》）etc., many researchers in the past have noticed that Gunavarman who was highly revered by both the court and the commonality remained in shepo（阇婆）

  ¸i.e. Yavadvipa, = 2 * GB3 ② at the end of the 4th century and the beginning of the 5th century. “The whole country was ordained as Buddhist believers.” = 3 * GB3 ③ Thus we can be sure that the Javanese Buddhism was influenced greatly by him then.

  However, the researchers in the past did not go deeply into questions such as: what was the nature of the Buddhist doctrines and practice introduced by Gunavarman ？What could be the possible impact of these doctrines and practices on local Buddhism ？ How do we understand its significance in the context of cross cultural exchanges among several Buddhist cultural zones in Central Asia and South Eastern Asia at that time ？

  Undoubtedly these questions are very important for understanding the nature of early Javanese Buddhism and the interactions between the Javanese Buddhism and the other Asian Buddhist cultural circles. This essay strives to demonstrate that we can make some attempts to answer these questions preliminarily by combining the ongoing academic research on Buddhism in Northwestern India in the 5th century and deeper study of Gunavarman’s Biography in the Biographies of the Eminent Monks（《高僧传》）, and references to other relevant documents and records.

  The Biographies of Monks does not offer specific information about the sect to which Gunavarman belonged as well as the nature of his doctrines and practices. Since Gunavarman came from the kingdom of Jibin （or Chi-pin, 罽宾, Gandhāra-Kapisha）where the Sarvâstivāda was headquartered, the general academia still holds that Gunavarman was a Sarvâstivādin monk. = 4 * GB3 ④However, this argument needs further critical examination. There are three ways deserving more attention which can help us to comprehend the sect that Gunavarman belonged to and the nature of the Buddhism that he carried forward: the first one is the Buddhist literature that Gunavarman translated and introduced; the second is the paintings he drew in a temple in Shi xing （始兴, a county in northern Guangdong Province）; and the third is the dhyana that he practiced.

  After Gunavarman arrived at the capital of Song Dynasty，the scriptures he translated were mainly vinaya books, all of which belongs to the Dharmagupta-vinaya system of Dharmaguptaka school. = 5 * GB3 ⑤ Generally speaking, unless one is a specialist in the study of Vinaya books, one can only be familiar with the rules of his own sect even if one is very skillful with the rules and ceremonies. Gunavarman stressed meditation. The Vinaya books he translated did not go beyond Dharmagupta-vinaya system. Both of these facts showed the very close connection between him and Dharmaguptaka school. It is high likely that he was a monk of Dharmaguptaka school.

  Moreover, he lectured on Lotus Sutra（《法华经》）and Daśabhūmika-sūtra（《十地》） at Qihuan Temple（祇洹寺）, and preached Pusa shanjie（《菩萨善戒》）or Bodhisattva Charya Nirdesha on abbot Huiyi’s request at Qihuan Temple. All these are the Mahayana scriptures. From these facts, we can see that Gunavarman took both Mahayana and mainstream Buddhism as his models. Furthermore, the contents of Pusa shanjie are very close, if not matching , to the contents of Chapter of Bodhisattva Stage in The Compendium of Definitions（《本地分》）, which is a central part of Yogacara-bhumi-sastra（《瑜伽师地论》）, a core Mahayana scripture. Also the Daśabhūmika Sūtra that originated from Avatamsaka Sutra has close connection with the early Yogācāra school （Vasubandhu，one of the main founders of the Yogācāra school was recorded to have written a commentary treatise on this sutra, say, Da śabhūmi-vyākhyāna（《十地经论》）. Judging from these, we can presume that Gunavarman was quite familiar with the early Yogācāra thought.

  It can be reasonably deduced that the Buddhist scriptures which Gunavarman translated and introduced had close connection with his birth place and his early career of study and practice. According to the records of his biography, Gunavarman came from a royal family in Jibin（罽宾）, or, Kophen. He “took initiation as a monk when he turned twenty. He understood thoroughly navānga-śāsana, The Four Agamas and chanted sutras of more than a million words. He went deep into the Vinaya books and fully appreciated the subtlety of meditation. He was named at that time tripit4akācārya”. = 6 * GB3 ⑥ This shows that he had a comprehensive and thorough understanding of the whole Buddhist culture including both scriptures and practical meditation tradition in the Jibin area, which according to The Biographies of Eminent Monksroughly included Gandhāra and its surrounding areas. = 7 * GB3 ⑦Moreover, Maitreya, the legendary founder of Yogācāra school, had close connection with this area. = 8 * GB3 ⑧ What’s more, Purusapura, the born place of brothers Asanga and Vasubhandu, both the founding fathers of Yogācāra school, was also within this area. Gunavarman was a Yogin who stressed meditation. Therefore it should be very natural that he was very familiar with the fermenting thought of Yogācāra school in this area.

  Sources of Biographies of Eminent Monks also demonstrated that when Gunavarman was staying in Lingjiushan temple at Shixing County, he “once painted the images of Rahula and the scene of Rutong paying homage to Buddha Dipamkara with his hair spread on the ground on the north wall of Baoyue hall, when the painting was finished, it illuminated every night which didn’t vanish till a long time later.”（于［宝月］殿北壁手自画作罗云像及定光儒童布发之形。像成之后，每夕放光，久之乃歇。）Here he painted the scene that Rutong paid homage to Buddha Dipamkara with his hair spread on the ground’ refers to the famous Jataka story that Rutong Bodhisattva, i.e. māṇava, one of Buddha Sakyamuni’s numerous past incarnations,spread his hair on the ground, and paid homage to Buddha Dipamkara. According to Xuan Zang’s record, this Jataka story took place in Nagarahasa in the west of Gandhara, which also belonged to Jibin area during the time of Wei, Jin, and Southern and Northern Dynasties by Chinese Buddhist community. = 9 * GB3 ⑨ In addition, this story was very popular in Gandhara Buddhist statuary, actually served as one of the dominant themes of Jataka art in this area. = 10 * GB3 ⑩ This Dipamkara’s illumination image was the most typical one among all the illuminating sculptures of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas in Gandhara Buddhist art. ⑪ Therefore, it is not unusual that Gunavarman was familiar with this story.

  What makes sense is that this Jataka story had a close relationship with the Dharmaguptaka school. Although the very Jataka story could almost be traced in the records of all Buddhist schools, yet it was not valued too much by most of them, say nothing of incorporating it into the Tripitaka. For example, the dominant school （ Sarvâstivāda） in Jibin or Kapisa region paid no particular attention to this story. ⑫ Meanwhile, it was Dharmaguptaka be the only school to compile this story into its Tripitaka, which incorporated it in Dharmagupta-vinayain a large scale.⑬ The story of Dipamkara’s assurance （of future enlightenment） to Sakyamuni was respected by the Sarvâstivāda school, but to which based on their reasoning spirit it was not regarded as authority as the word of the Buddha in agamas （avavāda）.However, it played an extremely important role in the evolution of Mahayana thoughts presented in the Mahasamghika school and Vibhajyavādin branches of Sthavira school, because it contributed a lot to one of the key doctrinal foundations of Mahayana Buddhism, which is that the Buddha’s final enlightenment is based on his self-cultivations in many eons. Only the very legend that when Buddha Dipamkara asserted that Rutong Bodhisattva had attained anutpattika-dharma-ks4ānti,the stage of Emptiness of Self and Dharma, be confirmed as an undoubted fact, can it go on to argue the doctrines such as that Bodhisattvas are reborn in hell at will and use superpowers to save sentient beings according to causes and conditions in order to benefit beings, and finally can attain enlightenment through different stages of cultivation. ⑭ The fact that Gunavarman emphasized the importance of the Dipamkara- mān4ava Jataka story can also strengthen our suggestion that he had a close relationship with Dharmaguptaka school which belonged to Vibhajyavādin branches of Sthavira school.

  As far as Gunavarman’s meditative practice is concerned, we don’t know the exact features of his dhyana approaches, but still we can have a glimpse on its nature from his legacy verse, which was quite unique and precious since it provided a detailed description about different stages on meditation from a master of dhyana himself. Due to the word limitation, I cannot have a thorough analysis on his meditation thoughts demonstrated in the verse, but have just explored the attributes of his meditation. Gunavarman’s meditative approach started from aśubhāsmr4ti, or the meditation on impurity, then turned to asthi- sam4jña（the meditation on skeleton）, going further on to catvāri smr4ty-upasthānāni （the four bases of mindfulness）, to the stage of four virtuous roots, say, us4ma-gata, mūrdhāna, ks4ānti, laukikāgradharma, to observe the four noble truths one by one, and finally lead to the attainment of meditative fruit. This style apparently accorded with the mainstream fashion of meditation in Gandhara area which was a wonderful place for yogis. The tradition in this region emphasized on practicing meditation on impurity and meditation on breath, which were highly valued as two amr4tadvāra. That Gunavarman’s meditation started from the meditation of impurity fits exactly in this tradition. None the less the meditative approach, which went through the four virtuous roots to the observation of the sixteen active aspects （s4od4 ā/sa-ākāra） of the Four Noble Truths, was exactly the mainstream meditative tradition in this region, which had been validated repeatedly in the abhidharma treatises of Sarvâstivādin school, ⑮ and was emphasized by the rapidly growing Yogācāra school in this region. Meanwhile, Gunavarman’s cultivation style was obviously different to Abhidharma masters who stress the importance of doctrines and commentaries. On the contrary, his style was more in line with the yogis or dhyayin tradition which laid particular emphasis on meditative practice. ⑯ This was hinted in the description of his early career in his biography that he ‘declined his masters and companions, rested in forests, drank water in valleys, remained solitary in mountains, and escaped from the mundane world.’

  In addition, sources from the biography of eminent monks mention that he was a veteran of mantra or vidyā, which can also be regarded as a hint to the school he belonged to, and as a clue to connect him with the rapid development of esoteric yogic practice in the north of Gandhara then. ⑰ According to the unanimous records of both Tripit4akācārya Paramārtha（真谛） and tripit4akācārya Xuanzang（玄奘）, the very reason that Dharmagupta evolved finally into an independent school from other sects lies in its unique theory of Five Pitakas, which treat Mantra（or vidyā,dhāraṇī） pitaka and Bodhisattva pitaka respectively as independent pitakas like the sutra, vinaya and abhidharma. ⑱ Thus, it’s quite natural to assume that Dharmagupta school paid much attention to the practice of mantras, and contributed intimately to the development of esoteric Buddhism. At the beginning of his legacy verse, there are lines such as “pay homage to the Threes Jewels and senior monks who uphold pure precepts”. Whether it is just a polite expression or it had some spiritual connection with the four refuges which later was initiated by esoteric Buddhism deserves further reflection.

  In addition, Gunavarman hold that “Various arguments might emphasize different points, while the truth finally attained through self-cultivation is one; disputes are caused by partisanship, one who gets to the truth has no quarrels”. He advocated a good understanding between various schools, to refer to each other, and to converge and eliminate differences in meditation practice. This also presents the yogis persistent tradition: Draw the doctrines from meditation practice, and verify the doctrines in meditation experience again. This idea was largely embraced later by the founding fathers of Chinese Buddhist schools such as Zhiyi （the founder of Tiantai school）, Jizang（the founder of Sanlun school, which is a variant of Madhyamika school in China）, Chengguan（one of the founders of Huayan school） etc. They all proclaimed the spirit of tolerance and syncretism by quoting this verse. ⑲ Gunavarman’s tolerant spirit could also be proved by the legacy through whicht he confirmed the legitimacy of Bhiksuni precepts lineage transcended only by Bihksu sangha in China then. ⑳

  In general, Gunavarman’s teaching, especially his style of meditation practice can be summarized as follow: having obvious general features of Gandhara Buddhism in the early 5th century, but having distinct difference to the then dominant Sarvastivada school which pay much more attention to theoretic aspects）, meanwhile was paralleled to the old yogis tradition（ which favors a life style of self-cultivation style in solitary places）, and connected with Dharmaguptaka school （adept at mantra）, and corresponding to the up-growing Yogacara school and emerging esoteric Buddhism. His well-rounded meditation practice embodied the traditional yogis’ spirit—to be innovative while keeping the authenticity of orthodox Buddhist Tradition.

  If this assumption can be accepted, then it will bring us to a broader perspective of Javanese Buddhism in 5th centery, which means not only the popular spreading of mantra/vidyā/dhārāṇī Buddhism among common people, but also the import of the dominant meditation practice of Gandhara region, and brand-new esoteric yogic practice emerged from Northwest India when Gunavarman traveled south to Java. Although these possibilities need more evidences to be justified, only the existence of them deserves high attention.

  Meaningfully enough, many important factors reflected in the Borobudur Buddhist remains, such as visions from Avatamsaka Sutra, Bodhisattva stages,meditation practice, mantras’ recitation, jataka stories, etc. were all recorded in Gunavarman’s biography. Can we audaciouslyassumpt that many Buddhist elements embodied in Borobudur Buddhist remains would have already existed long beore the building of the grand Borobudur stupas, or even at the very beginning period when Buddhism first introduced into this land by Gunavarman ？

  From Jibin（ 罽宾） or Gandhara-Kapisa to Shepo（ 阇婆） or Java, from java to China，Gunavarman’s preaching activities covered three different Buddhist culture zone. It is interesting to point out that his images in Biography were changing accordingly. In Gandhara-Kapisa, sources from Biography of Eminent Monks mentioned his royal family （He was “prince of a kingdom”）, capability and moral （He was “full of knowledge and wisdom, had lofty goal, was benevolent, virtuous and kind-hearted”）, and his glorious future （“At the age of thirty, he could be a king of a great country, be respected by southern countries. If he was not interested in mundane pleasures, he would attain noble realizations.”）; his Buddhist achievement （He “understood thoroughly of navānga-śāsana and The Four Agamas, and chanted sutras of more than a million words. He went deep into the Vinaya books and fully appreciated the subtlety of meditation. He was named at that time as tripit4akācārya”, which was a title only given to the most eminent monks such as Kumarajiva and Xuanzang to descript their unparalleled doctrinal achievement in the Biographies of Eminent Monks.）; his trace （He “declined his masters and companions, rested in forests, drank water in valleys, remained solitary in mountains, and escaped from the mundane world”.） which made him belong to the kind of yogin who escaped from the mundane world for self-cultivation. In Yavadvipa, he was well known as a vertran of mantra and medicine.❶ He proclaimed to stop killing and being compassionate, which later led to his wide-spread popularity beyond Yavadvipa （“His teaching was spread wide. When neighboring countries heard about this, envoys were sent to invite him” to preach dharma）. In China, his record in Biographies of Eminent Monksglamorized his superpower （“possessing supernatural abilities”）, wisdom （“enlightened and knowledgeable”）, and eloquence （“natural and spontaneous in responding, blessed and gifted in rhetoric”）. But out of all, the author of the biography highlighted his contribution to the translation of Buddhist scriptures. Therefore his biography was put in the first of all 10 categories which the compiler of Biographies of Eminent Monks divided his biographees into, say, “Translators of Holy Scriptures”. Put the different perspectives of the compiler aside, the change of Gunavarman’s images from a yogin to an vidyāveteran, and finally to a scripture translator, might reflect preferences of acceptance in different Buddhist culture zones.

  ① 　This study was funded by Buddhist Classical Literature Review Project （2009JJD730006）of Ministry of Education.

  ②　Whether shepo（阇婆） or Yavadvipa is Java is still under controversy in academic circle. Paul Pelliot and Chavannes etc. consider shepo is Java. See Pelliot，Deux Itineraires de Chine en Inde a 1a fin du VIIIe siecle, Bulletin de I’Ecole Fnmcaise de Extreme Orient, IV. p. 225f., 271 f.; Chavannes: Gunavarman， T’oung Pao, Serie Ⅱ , Vol. Ⅴ , p. 193.; while Coomaraswamy argues shepo is Srivijaya. See Srivijaya, History of Indian and Indonesian Art, New York 1965, p. 198，cited from Rosen, Gunavarman: A Comparative Analysis of the Biographies found in the Chinese Tripitaka, Bulletin of Tibetology, Vol. X, No.1, f24，p.40. Most recent works on Southeast Asian history hold that shepo is Java.

  ③　See Gunavarman’s Biography in The Biographies of Eminent Monks（《高僧传》）, written by Huijiao in Liang Dynasty, Tang Yongtong revised version, Zhonghua Book Company, 1992, first edition, p.106.

  ④ 　This seems to be a consensus of Southeast Asian cultural history textbook. See Aoyama, Tōru, 《東南アジア古典文化論·初期王权》，http:// www.tufs.ac.jp/blog/ts/g/aoyama/seaclc-20100513.pdf；John Miksic in his recent work, The Buddhist-Hindu Divide in Premodern Southeast Asia（Nalanda-Sriwijaya Centre Working Paper No 1（March 2010），http://nsc.iseas.edu.sg/documents/working_papers/nscwps001.pdf，p.17）also thinks Gunavarman was a monk belonged to Sarvastivada school.

  ⑤ 　youpose wujie fa（《优婆塞五戒法》） or Five Precepts of Upasaka found in Diamond temple in Japan in 2003 might be regarded an exception. Witten in the middle of five century, this scripture was belonged to Shi-song-lv （《十诵律》）, or Daśa-bhāṇavāra-vinaya, the vinana of Sarvastivadin school. However, Ochiai Toshinori’s study demonstrated that it was a mistake by the transcriber. The original intention was to transcribe Gunavarman’s youpose wujie weiyi jing, but accidentally he transcribed the content of Shi-song-lv. See Ochiai Toshinori，《日本の古寫經と中國佛教文獻——天野山金剛寺藏平安後期寫〈優婆塞五戒法〉の成立と流傳を巡って》，《漢字と文化》特集號，京都大学人文研究所，2004，pp.10-11.

  ⑥ 　See Gunavarman’s Biography in The Biographies of Eminent Monks, p105.

  ⑦ 　For the exact location of Jibin（罽宾） in Chinese classical literatures is still under controversy in academic circle now. Enomoto Fumio points out its different denotations in non-native-Chinese Buddhist translated texts and in native Chinese writings. He argues that “Jibin” is Kapisa （Now kashmir） in non-native-Chinese translations, while in native Chinese writings, according to Chu sanzang jiji（《出三藏记集》）and Gaoseng zhuan （《高僧传》, The Biographies of Eminent Monks）, it refers to Gandhara and its surrounding areas. This conclusion is widely accepted by Buddhist scholars. Here I also agree with him. See Enomoto Fumio, A Note on Kashmir as referred to in Chinese Literature: Ji-bin, in A Study of the Nilamata: Aspect of Hinduism in Ancient Kashmir （ed. Ikari Yasuke, Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University, 1994）, p. 357-365. Beside, for the pilgrimage route and activities’domain of Chinese monks in Jibin in mediaeval time, see Shoshin Kuwayama，Pilgrimage Route Changes and the Decline of Gandhara, in Gandharan Buddhism：

  Archaeology, Art, and Texts （eds. Pia Brancaccio, Kurt A. Behrendt, University of British Columbia Press, 2006）, p.107-134.

  ⑧ 　See Ven. Yinshun,Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda（Shuoyiqieyoubu weizhu de lunshu yu lunshi zhi yanjiu《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》）, Chapter 12, the development of yogins in Jibin Region （Jibin yuqieshi de fazhan, “罽宾瑜伽师的发展”）， and especially section 12.3, the Mahayana Yogins （Dacheng yuqieshi, “大乘瑜伽师”）, Zhonghua Book Company , 2009, page 536-544.

  ⑨ 　See Shoshin Kuwayama’s essay cited in note 2 on p.211 of this book.

  ⑩ 　For a brief introduction about the jataka representations and the subject that Rutong Bodhisattva released his hair and paid homage to Buddha Dipamkara was the most common one in Gandhara Buddhist statuary, see Alexander Peter Bell, Didactic narration: jataka iconography in Dunhuang with a catalogue of jataka representations in China, LIT Verlag Münster, 2000, p.37-38.

  ⑪ 　See Giles Henry Rupert Tillotson, Paradigms of Indian Architecture: Space and Time in Representation and Design, Routledge, 1998, p92.

  ⑫ 　For example, in volume 183 of Abhidharma mahāvibhās4 ā śastra, or Treatise of the Great Commentary on the Abhidharma of Sarvastivada school, it was said that, “The Dipamkara jataka is recorded in neither sutra, viyana, nor abhidharma, it is just a lengend, which is included in some biographical stories of Buddha, while excluded in others.”（Taiso Tripitaka, Vol.27, p. 916）. Besides, the biographical stories of Buddha related to this school such as Zhongxu mohedi jing（《众许摩诃帝经》） and Foshuo puyao jing（《佛说普曜经》） etc. had not incorporated this story of Buddha Dipamkara’s assurance. All these indicate that Sarvastivada did not validate this jataka story as authority as authentic word of Buddha, although they surely respect its up-growing popularity. See Ven. Yinshun,On Formation of Primitive Buddhist Canon （Yuanshi fojiao shengdian zhi jicheng, 《原始佛教圣典之集成》） chapter 5, section5.4, pp. 297 － 298; see also Ven. Yinshun, Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda （Shuoyiqieyoubu weizhu de lunshu yu lunshi zhi yanjiu,《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》）, chapter 5, section5.2, pp.186 － 187, Zhonghua Book Company , 2009.

  ⑬ 　See Dharmagupta-vinaya, volume 31, Taihso Tripitaka, vol. 22, pp. 782 － 785.

  ⑭ 　For the foundamental importance of the jataka story that Buddha Dipamkara promised Rutong Bodhisattva’s future enlightenment in Mahayana doctrine system, and the various attitudes to this story among different Buddhist schools, see details in Ven. Yinshun, On the Origination and Development of early Mahayana Buddhism （Chuqi dacheng fojiao zhi qiyuan yu kaizhan,《初期大乘佛教之起源与开展》）, particularly the discussion in chapter 3, sect3.1, pp. 106-107, and chapter 9, section 9.2, pp. 501-502, Zhonghua Book Company , 2009.

  ⑮ 　See Ven. Yinshun, Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda （Shuoyiqieyoubu weizhu de lunshu yu lunshi zhi yanjiu,《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》）, Charpter 12, section12.1-2, p. 517-536, Zhonghua Book Company, 2009.

  ⑯ 　In recent Buddhist studies, some researchers are inclined to use the term ‘Forest dwelling monk’, adopted by the anthropological study on contemporary Southeast Asian Buddhism, to refer to the yogis in ancient India and Central Asian Buddhist tradition. However, sources from Chinese literatures suggests that the living environment of yogis could either be big Sanghas in cities, small Sanghas in villages and towns, or pint-size groups in forests, and a single self-cultivated monk（so called dhūta-gun4aveteran） even. So I prefer to take the traditional terms such as yogis and dhyayins.

  ⑰ 　As for the rapid development of esoteric Buddhism in northern part of Gandhara region, see Ven. Yinshun, Study of the Abhidharma, Texts and Commentators of the Sarvāstivāda （Shuoyiqieyoubu weizhu de lunshu yu lunshi zhi yanjiu,《说一切有部为主的论书与论师之研究》）, Charpter 12, section12.4, Esoteric Yogic Practice, pp. 545-548, Zhonghua Book Company , 2009.

  ⑱　Paramārtha’s saying was recorded by Chenchan（澄禅） in his work Sanlun xuanyi jianyou lu（《三论玄义检幽录》）,（TaishoTripitaka, vol.70, p. 465）; Xuanzang’s saying was recorded by his primal disciple Kuiji（窥基） in Dacheng fayan yilin zhang（《大乘法苑义林章》）, （TaishoTripitaka, vol.45, p.271）.

  ⑲　For Zhiyi, See Fahua xuanyi（《法华玄义》）, Volume 1 （Taisho Tripitaka, vol.33, p. 691） and volume 8 （P.784）; for Jizang , see Fahua yishu（《法华义疏》）, volume 10 （TaishoTripitaka, vol. 34, p. 597）, and Fahua youyi（《法华游意》）, volume 1 （TaishoTripitaka, vol. 34, p. 638）, Sanlun xuanyi（《三论玄义》）, volume 1 （TaishoTripitaka, vol. 45, p. 4）; for Chengguan, see Huayanjing suishu yanyi chao（《华严经随疏演义钞》）, volume 8 （TaishoTripitaka, vol.36, p. 61）.

  ⑳　See Biography of Gunavarman in The Biographies of Eminent Monks, Tang Yongtong’s revised version, p.109.

  ❶ 　Biography of Gunavarman in The Biographies of Eminent Monks recorded two stories which were about how Gunavarman used his vidyāskills to remedy the feet for the king in Yavadvipa. “The king’s feet was wounded by a fly arrow in the war, Gunavarman washed his feet with mantras-blessed water, the wound recovered overnight. King paid respect to him and was confident to him more.”“later the king built abode for Gunavarman. The king moved the construction material himself and his toes got injured . Gunavarman again used water with vidya to wash the wound. The king got a quick recovery.” In addition, Gunavarman’s compassion was demonstrated repeatedly such as in the following occasions: he persuaded the king to “be compassionate, don’t give rise to a thought of killing”; the king and his ministers made vows together, “May this country stop all kinds of killing”, “May all the savings and belongings are donated to the sick and the poor”.