quatre fois le Tchoung-young qui en a 3784. Les frais que cette nouvelle publication occasionnera seront donc plus considérables. J'avoue que si je trouvais à placer de suite une cinquantaine d'exemplaires, je serais à même, en rentrant dans une avance, de faire marcher plus rapidement ce nouveau travail. Si la Société voulait favoriser cette entreprise par une souscription, les fonds qui en proviendraient seraient immédiatement employés à l'impression du Yukiao-li. été traduit par Rémusat et publié à Paris, chez Moutardier en 1826. Le texte autographié par Levasseur, et lithographié chez Ratier, fut donné, je dois le dire, avec une écriture et une ponctuation remarquables en 1829 1). Il est intéressant de lire à la suite de l'Avertissement, écrit par l'éditeur ou pour mieux dire le scribe, Levasseur, en Décembre 1829, les deux notes suivantes: «La colonne de droite du titre chinois contient ordinairement le nom et le lieu de la naissance de l'auteur. J'ai pris pour représenter le mot Rouen, ville où je suis Louan. Mon nom est Quelle que soit la décision du Conseil Je suis avec le plus profond respect. J. V. LEVASSEUR traduit par les mots Etchine tseu, qui signifient vassalus, subjectus». «P.S. Sur les conclusions de Mr. Klaproth, rapporteur de la commission nommée pour examiner mon travail, le Conseil de la Société Asiatique a, dans sa séance du 4 Janvier 1830, honoré cet ouvrage d'une souscription de 50 exemplaires». Henri CORDIER. 1) Iu-kiao-li // Roman Chinois, // Traduit par // Mr. Abel-Rémusat, // Professeur de langue chinoise // au Collège de France. // Texte // Autographié et Publié par // J C. V. Levasseur, // Ingénieur Géomètre du Cadastre, Membre // de la Société Asiatique de Paris. //- Edition dans laquelle on donne la forme régulière // des Caractères vulgaires et des variantes. // Paris, 1829. // Lithographie de V. Ratier, Rue des fossés - // St. Germain l'Auxerrois, No. 24. in-8, plié à la chinoise. THE NAME OF "MESSIAH" FOUND IN A BUDDHIST BOOK; THE NESTORIAN MISSIONARY ADAM, PRESBYTER, PAPAS OF CHINA, TRANSLATING A BUDDHIST SÛTRA BY J. TAKAKUSU M. A. Ph. D. The first Nestorian missionary Olopun | who,in 1888, published a new translation and his associates went to China in A.D. 635. Favorably received by Tai-tsung, the then ruling emperor of the T'angDynasty, he was engaged in a mission work in the city of Chang-ngan (Singan-fu). In A.D. 781 that famous nestorian monument with a Syro-chinese inscription, of which a vast literature has been produced in Europe and in America, was erected to commemorate the diffusion of christianity in China. The Syro-chinese composition was made by a persian = of the inscription and a lecture on the monument; he also found a confirmation as to its genuineness from other sources. Now the same Adam King-tsing, who erected the monument,is mentioned again in a Buddhist book, which in a way gives light on the activity of the Nestorian missionaries in China. While I was referring to the Buddhist canonical books of China, the other day, I came across a book called the "Chêng-yüan Sin-ting-Shih-kiâo-muh-luh" missionary, Adam, presbyter and chor-***, i. e. "The 新定釋教目錄,i.e. episcopos, and papas of China, whose chinese name, as the inscription shows, was King-tsing of the Ta-ts'in monastery 大秦寺. New Catalogue of (the books of) the by Yuen-chao 圓照, a priest of of the Western Capital (Si-ngan-fu). For this book see Bodleian Library, Jap. 65DD, Vol. VII, fol. 5 v°. In this I found a passage relating to the Nestorian Missionary which I translate as follows: "Prajña, a Buddhist of Kapisa, N. India 1), travelled through Central India, Ceylon, and the Islands of the Southern Sea (Sumatra, Java etc.) and came to China, for he heard that Mañjuśrî was in China. This monument had long been buried in the ground, until in 1625 it was dug up and the inscription was brought to light. Many facsimiliæ and translations were since produced, the genuineness of the inscription was questioned and once it was almost attributed to a Jesuit fabrication. At last its genuineness was completely established by the two able scholars Mr. Wylie and M. Pauthier, who handled the subject by a series of discussions, based on the concensus of chinese antiquaries and on a great variety of histHe arrived at Canton and came to orical, biographical and topographical the upper province (North) in A.D. 782 notices in its details, and elucidated every He met a relation of his in A.D. 786, point by a fulness of evidence which who came to China before him. He leaves nothing more to be desired. They translated together with King-tsing (= were followed by Dr. Legge of Oxford | Adam) 2), a persian priest of the monas 1)法師梵名般剌若,北天竺境迦畢試國人也。 2) In my translation of I-tsing's Record (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1896) p. 224, "named Adam" ought to have been in brackets, for it is not in the text. We get the name from the Inscription. tery of Tâ-ts'in (Syria), the Satparamita-ESN.* sûtra) from a Hu text, and finished translating seven volumes. But because at that time Prajña was not familiar with the Hu language, nor understood the Chinese language, and 虎名、匪爲福利。錄表 聞奏,意望流行。聖上 濬哲文明、允恭釋典。 as King-tsing (Adam) did not know the✯. Brahma language (sanskrit), nor was versed in the teaching of the Sakya, so 且夫釋氏伽藍大秦 though they pretended to be translating the text, yet they could not, in reality,‡ELA».# obtain a half of its gems (i. e. real meanings). They were seeking vain glory 全乖。景淨應傳彌尸 privately, and wrongly trying their luck. They presented a memorial (to the 訶教。沙門釋子弘闡 Emperor), expecting to get it pro pagated. The Emperor (Te-tsung, A.D..***** 780-804), who was intelligent, wise and accomplished, who revered the canonEER. translated, and found that the principles 涇渭殊流。Vide貞元新 of the Sakya, examined what they had contained in it were obscure and the wording was diffuse. Moreover 2) the Sanghârâma of the Sakya and the monastery of Tâ-ts'in(Syria) differing much in their customs, and their religious practices being entirely opposed to each other, King-tsing (Adam) ought to hand down the teaching of Mi-shi-ho (Messial), and the Sakyaputriya-Sramanas should propagate the sutras of the Buddha. It is to be wished that the boundaries of the doctrines may be made distinct, and the followers may not intermingle. Orthodoxy and heterodoxy are different things just as the rivers King and Wei have a different course". 乃與大秦寺波斯儈 So far the extract from the book of Yuen-chao. As to the identity of Adam with King-tsing there is no doubt whatever, as the parallel texts of the inscription clearly show. contemporary notice of the Nestorian It is very interesting to have this little from a Buddhist source. Christianity of China, as Gibbon remarks in his famous history, in the 7th and 13th century, is invincibly proved by the consent of Chinese, Arabian, Syriac and Latin evidence. In addition to these we have now a reference made by an eye-witness in a Buddhist work. It was under the *****Emperor Te-tsung (A.D. 780—804), 密經譯成七卷。時為 般若不閑胡語、復未 解唐言、景淨不識梵 文、復未明釋教。雖稱 傳譯,未獲半珠。圖竊 that King-tsing (= Adam) had erected the monument, and under the same translating a Buddhist Sûtra. I have took place before the erection of the Emperor, he was recorded to have been some doubt as to whether the translation monument or after it, though from what we have in the above extract, the translation seems to have been made after the inscription 3). 1) The complete chinese title of this book is 大乘理趣六波羅密經。 2) Hereafter the sentences seem to be a part of the imperial Edict. If so, the whole text of the Edict may be found in some book. 3) Prajña came to the upper province in A.D. 782, while the monument was erected in A D. 781 But the year in which they were translating the Buddhist book is not given. But their united work seems to have been stopped by an Edict no doubt as a result of jealousy of Buddhist priests. Té-tsung, the ruling Emperor, was claimed as patron by both Buddhists and Nestorians, and was praised by both sides. It might have been so, as such has often been the case in China as well as in India. If we compare the statements of both sides, we can easily understand the emperor's attitude toward religions of his time. I may find another occasion for entering into this question. Adam on his part seems to have adopted many Buddhist terms in expressing himself. In the inscription we find a number of Buddhistic expressions 1) or ideas, as Dr. Edkins has already remarked. This fact can now be explained as the result of King-tsing's study of Buddhism, for we have the evidence that he was engaged in translating Buddhist works. It is most natural for him to be anxious to get a knowledge of Buddhism in order to learn right religious terms for expressing himself to the people. As to the characters representing 'Messiah', the phonetization is exactly the same as that of the inscription, 'shi' only of 'mi-shi-ho' being a different character of the same sound 2). We should like to know what had become of the book which Adam was translating. That sûtra is indeed preserved in the Buddhist canonical books, but it is ascribed entirely to his colleague Prajña (see no. 1004 Nanjio, catalogue of the Chinese Tripitaka). Whether or not the translation is the same as that which was made by both we cannot tell. For the students of the syro-chinese inscription and of the early missions of China, it may be worth examining this special sûtra, for it may throw some light on the composition of that singular inscription. 1) He used the Buddhistic words for 'monastery', 'priest' etc. 2) I gave these chinese symbols in my I-tsing, p. 224, note. NÉCROLOGIE. G. EUGÈNE SIMON. M. SIMON avait été envoyé en mission en Chine par le Ministère de l'Agriculture en 1860; il avait remonté le Kiang en février 1861, sur le navire anglais qui conduisait l'amiral Hope, le major Sarel, le capitaine Blakiston dans le Haut-Fleuve. C'est dans ce voyage que Simon fit la connaissance de Jean Dupuis, avec lequel il arriva à Han-keou le 11 Mars 1861. Son dernier écrit devait être l'introduction au livre 1) de ce dernier sur les Origines de la question du Tong-king paru il y a quelques semaines. Il remontait dans le Nord en 1862. Puis, en 1863, Simon visitait le Sze-tchouen et rentrait en France l'année suivante. Grâce à M. Drouyn de Lhuys, il put changer de carrière et fut envoyé en 1865 comme consul à Ning-po. Depuis, il fut transféré à Foutcheou, puis à Sydney (Nouvelle-Galles du Sud) qui fut son dernier poste consulaire. Il fut mis ensuite à la retraite et il vient de mourir à St. Georges d'Oléron le 29 Septembre 1896. Pendant son séjour en Chine, Simon s'est occupé spécialement de questions d'agriculture 2) et des sociétés d'argent 3). Il nous a 1) Les Origines de la Question du Tong-king, par Jean Dupuis, Explorateur du Fleuve Rouge. Paris, Augustin Challamel, 1896, in-18, pp. XXXVI-240. 2) Carte agricole générale de l'Empire Chinois, première feuille, par G. Eugène Simou, Consul de France à Ning-po..... Texte: Préface, Légende et Répertoire. 1866. 1 cah. lith, pet. in-fol. de pp. 27 sans les tableaux. Carte agricole générale de l'Empire Chinois. - Texte, Préface, Légende et Répertoire. Par Monsieur G. Eug. Simon, Consul de France à Ning-po. (Journ. N. C. B. R. 43. Soc., N. S., No. IV, Déc. 1867, pp. 209 et seq., Art. X.) L'Agriculture en Chine à propos d'une carte agricole de la Chine par Eugène Simon, Consul de France. (Bull. Soc. de Géog, 6e Sér, II, 1871, pp. 401-423). 3) Note sur les petites Sociétés d'argent en Chine. Par M. Eng. Simon, Consul de France à Ning-po. (Journ. N. C. B. R. As. Soc, No. V, N. S., Déc. 1868, pp. 1 et seq) Sur les Institutions de Crédit en Chine, par Mons. G. Eug. Simon, Consul de France à Fou-Tcheou. (Ibid., No. VI, N. S., 1869-70, pp. 53 et seq.) |