Lidiya V. Stezhenskaya

The article presents a historical and bibliographic sketch of the manuscript “Translation of the Sacred Book of the Foyan Sect called Fo niu jin gang jing, meaning The Adamant Book, or The Adamant-like Book of Foy’s Teaching” by Hieromonk (later Archimandrite) Daniil (Dmitry Petrovich Sivillov, 1798-1877), stored in the Department of Manuscripts and Rare Books (15322, II/44, l. 1-3 vol.) of Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University. The manuscript is an unfinished draft translation from Kumarajiva’s (early 5th century) Chinese version of the canonical Buddhist Diamond Sutra. This translation, done in Beijing around 1828, precedes the German translation of the Diamond Sutra from Tibetan by Russian academician J.I. Schmidt published in 1837, hence ought to be seen as the first attempt of this sutra translation into a European language. The bibliographic descriptions of the manuscript by A.I. Artemiev (1882, 1884), J. von Gottwald (1884), Henri Cordier (1893, 1904), A.A. Petrov (1937) and P.E. Skachkov (1977) are discussed. Erroneous transcription fo niu for fo shuo (‘Buddha speaks’) in the title of the Chinese original; the obsolete Russian ‘adamant’ for ‘diamond’ as well as the obsolete ‘Fo’ and ‘Foy’ for the name of Buddha are pointed out in particular. A.I. Artemyev’s bibliographic description undertaken between 1844 and 1851 is valued as the original one, while all the others must have been the secondary follow-ups. A.I. Artemyev had provided dating of the manuscript based on the filigree (watermark) of its paper. Although The Diamond Sutra is of prime importance for Buddhism, Fr. Daniil’s translation has been overlooked by historiographers. Unpublished works on Buddhism by Fr. Daniel, along with the works of J.I. Schmidt, J.S. Kowalewski, and some other scholars, provide a basis for revising the historiography of Russian Buddhology, highlighting its initial or preliminary stage in the first half of the 19th century.

A new interpretation is proposed for a passage from the Mushi (The Oath on the Field of Mu) chapter of the Zhou Shu (Zhou Scriptures) section of the ancient Chinese Shangshu (Esteemed Book), or Shujing (Canon of Scriptures). The passage contains a speech by the Zhou king Wu-wang before the decisive battle with the Shang army, calling on the Zhou army to advance a few steps and then halt, to strike several times and then halt. In its literal form, this passage seems logically inconsistent. Liu Qiyu has provided criticism of the traditional interpretations of the passage and proposed to read this passage as a description of a war dance, performed immediately before the battle. The author, drawing on Zhouli (The Rites of Zhou) and other sources, corroborates the traditional explanation as a description of the rhythmic movement of troops, suggests the figurative nature of the passage, attributing this to the stylistic features of the text and proposing an analogy in the description of the actions of the Zhou troops with the process of writing the character wu (militantness), consisting of elements zhi (foot, stop) and ge (axe). The number of steps and strikes corresponds to the number of seven strokes in the character wu in its ancient writing in zhuan (seal) script. This proposal is based on the discussion by Zhuang-wang, the ruler of the Chu kingdom, on the composition of the character wu and the concept of militantness, consisting of seven virtues, presented in Zuo’s Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Chronicle (Chunqiu Zuo zhuan). The need to interpret the passage under consideration with the assumption of its euphemistic nature supports the opinion that the text of Mushi was recorded relatively late in the Eastern Zhou period.

Liu Xie’s (465/466–520/522) treatise Wen xin diao long of 50 chapters presents the traditional literary theory, literary criticism and history of Ancient and Early Medieval literature of China in the most systematic and complete form. Its first complete Western translation into English by Vincent Yu-chung Shih (施友忠, Shi Yuzhong, 1902–2001) was published as late as in 1959. This presentation examines the 1959–1961 book reviews by the foreign literary experts on the Shih’s translation. They contain diverse assessments, suggestions and criticism of the first foreign-language edition of Wen xin diao long, which is an important resource for developing the parameters of a complete scientific edition of the forthcoming Russian translation of the treatise. The reviewers did not object to the choice of Liu Xie’s treatise as a source text. The courage of the translator who took up such a difficult task was lauded. The comments concerned the structure of the book (Introduction, translation text, Notes, Glossary, Index), the execution of the translation, the content of the Introduction and the scientific apparatus of the book. Vincent Shi’s translation became a significant event in the study of Wen xin diao long in the international sinology. The reviews pointed out objective difficulties, many of which remain relevant to this day and are associated with a lack of translations and knowledge of ancient and early medieval Chinese literature. The end of the 20th — beginning of the 21st witnessed appearance of the seven new translations of the treatise into European languages, which had to refer to Vincent Shih’s translation, to challenge him or agree with him both in the matters of translation proper and in the matters of the publication setup.