查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- Persuasion and Entertainment at Once--Kumārajīva's Buddhist Storytelling in His Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra
- 鳩摩羅什譯經方法的探討--以《注維摩詰經》為例
- 杏雨書屋《敦煌秘笈》所見《維摩詰經》及其相關文獻
- 漢譯佛典禪修詞語英譯問題--「總持」與「陀羅尼」詞義辨析與羅什本《維摩詰所說經》相關翻譯考察
- 從文化史觀論「維摩詰經」之意義價值
- 如是我聞:[鳩摩羅什譯]《維摩詰所說經》文本的敘事分析
- 翻譯與創作:邁向佛經翻譯問題的省思
- 淺議維摩詰之形象--以鳩摩羅什譯本為例
- 臺灣外勞身心健康狀態之調查研究
- 藝術文化團體娛樂稅課徵、減免泛論
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | Persuasion and Entertainment at Once--Kumārajīva's Buddhist Storytelling in His Commentary on the Vimalakīrti Sūtra= |
---|---|
作者 | 勞悅強; Lo, Yuet Keung; |
期刊 | 中國文哲研究集刊 |
出版日期 | 20020900 |
卷期 | 21 民91.09 |
頁次 | 頁89-115 |
分類號 | 221.72 |
語文 | eng |
關鍵詞 | 鳩摩羅什; 維摩詰經; 佛教故事演說; 注疏; 口述性; 娛樂; Kumārajīva; Vimalakīrti Sūtra; Buddhist storytelling; Commentary; Orality; Entertainment; |
中文摘要 | 學者研究鳩摩羅什多半僅著重其譯經活動,而甚少注意其對佛經所作之注解。本文將通過對什公僅存的〈維摩詰經注〉的仔細分析,探討佛教翻譯大師鳩摩羅什如何以注疏形式宣講佛教故事。本文將論證什公深明故事演說對宣揚佛家教義之重要性,同時,又指出什公演說故事率多隨機應變,因而所講故事與經文原意未必相關。什公所演說之故事往往刻意出奇,引人入勝,似在娛人,實欲宣教。此外,由於什公本人既不太可能親華撰述,本文又嘗試考察什公注中之故事及其演說方式,從而探究其故事之口述性質。什公之〈維摩詰經注〉根有可能乃其譯講同施之結果,而由其助譯之弟子筆錄成篇。 |
英文摘要 | This paper addresses how Kum raj va (344-413), one of the greatest Buddhist translators in China, practiced his storytelling in the form of philosophical commentary. Through an analysis of his commentary on the famed Buddhist classic Vimalak rti-s tra , this paper will demonstrate that Kum raj va appreciated the virtue of storytelling in religious proselytization and that he told stories throughout his lengthy commentary even when the textual contexts do not seem to call for them. Storytelling was crafted to be entertaining and, in the disarming presence of fun and pleasure, Buddhist osmosis, it was hoped, would materialize. As a secondary issue, this paper also attempts to examine the issue of orality in Kum raj va's commentary. As far as we can surmise, it is unlikely that Kum raj va himself would write his commentary in Chinese, even though he presumably had learned Chinese for more than a decade before he finally arrived in central China in 401. 1 However, virtually no scholar has been curious enough to examine the exact nature of the writing itself in his commentary.2 It, then, appears to be a non-issue to most scholars whether Kum raj va's commentary on the Vimalak rti-s tra was penned down by himself or it was in fact transcribed from an oral delivery. This paper will show that apart from tacit assumption, the commentary was, in all likelihood, delivered orally to a live audience and was probably committed to writing as a record of extemporaneous sermons. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。